Q: We’re here to talk with you today about a couple of important things going on in your life these days, Congressman. First, let’s begin with your parity bill. What exactly is that all about?
A: This is legislation that Paul Wellstone started back in 1995 to provide greater access to treatment for people with mental illness and chemical addiction. To knock down the discriminatory barriers created by insurance companies—higher co-payments and higher deductibles, limited treatment stays—conditions that don’t exist … for coverage of physical diseases. We’re trying to equal the playing field. In other words, treat diseases of the brain the same as diseases of the body. And after working for 12 long years on this legislation, I am very grateful that we finally got the legislation through the House of Representatives in March.
Q: You are working on this bill with someone else, aren’t you?
A: Patrick Kennedy and I have worked together. We held 14 field hearings around the country from Minnesota to Rhode Island, from New York to California, from Michigan to Texas. We went everywhere and heard from the American people about the crying need for this legislation.
Q: Will this affect many people?
A: When you think that there are 54 million Americans suffering the ravages of mental illness in America, 26 million suffering from chemical addiction, you know we’ve got to get more people access to treatment and that’s what this bill does.
Q: What does this mean to the person on the street, exactly?
A: Our legislation treats diseases of the brain the same as diseases of the body. All we are doing is telling the insurance companies to quit discriminating against people with mental illness and addiction. There are people in health plans who are being discriminated against right now. For example, health plans are not providing more than seven days of treatment for chemical dependency. Any professional in the field will tell you nobody can get on the road to recovery from heroin addiction or alcohol addiction in seven days. The insurance companies are discriminating. They don’t do that for diabetes or heart disease or any other physical disease. All we are doing is telling the insurance companies to quit discriminating against people with mental illness and addiction.
Q: Can this affect the Alcoholics Anonymous 30-day programs now offered?
A: In 1956 the American Medical Association categorized alcoholism as a disease. They say it’s a chronic fatal disease if it goes untreated, which is true, and as a recovering alcoholic myself who has attended meetings now for almost 27 years, I’ve seen too many people leave the program and die. I’ve seen too many deaths. Last year in America alone, 170,000 people died as a direct result of alcoholism—as a direct result. That doesn’t count those that died from liver failure attributable to alcoholism or heart disease attributable to alcoholism or brain impairment attributed to alcoholism. So this is, as far as I am concerned, and the statistics bear me out, America’s No. 1 public health problem. Addiction and mental illness. And we’re not dealing with either, as we should, as a nation. We don’t have a strategy to address this.
Q: Is this bill the definitive answer to the problem?
A: This is only part of the Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Treatment Equity Act that we passed in March. We’ve also got to increase Medicare parity for our senior citizens. There’s an amazingly strong correlation between increasing age and increasing alcoholism. People get lonely and bored and turn to the bottle, they turn to alcohol. Third, we’ve got to address Medicaid funding … not enough people on Medicaid—indigent people—are able to get into treatment. Fourth, we’ve got to do something about the uninsured. People without insurance … they are making too much money to qualify for Medicaid but not enough to buy insurance. Forty-seven million Americans don’t have access to mental health treatment. Also those in our VA.
Q: What about the VA? What is happening there for our soldiers?
A: One of the biggest tragedies I can recall is this young Marine lance corporal who comes home from serving us proudly in Iraq. He is suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), alcoholism and depression. He went to the VA to get into treatment. They said, “You’re on a waiting list. You can maybe get in in two or three months. You’re number 26 or 27 on a waiting list.” Four days later Jonathan Schulze was found hanging from an electrical cord in his apartment. There are too many suicides from returning veterans. We’ve got to address the veterans’ treatment needs as well as [those of] our current troops serving in the war on terror. And finally, we’ve got to provide more treatment in our jails and prisons. Ninety-eight percent of people are going to get out of prison at some point—2 percent are lifers—and if we don’t deal with our underlying problem, we’re never going to decrease crime over the long term in America because drugs, alcohol and crime are so tied together.
Q: Chuck Hodges is a supervisor at Hennepin County dealing with medical assistance for seniors. His teams handle about 25,000 cases. Each team oversees 3,500 people on medical assistance. There are only four to six people per team. What can be done to help Chuck to help all those he is serving at the county level?
A: Well, the federal government should do more in partnership with county and local governments to deal with this problem. Instead, the Bush administration has gone the opposite way and is cutting back some of the medical assistance that is so important to people in need. I’m also concerned about cuts to law enforcement education and prevention programs.
Q: Any specific cuts?
A: For example, the administration wants to cut Byrne grants. Byrne grants are used to enforce the drug laws. Without the Byrne money, the local police forces don’t have the resources—the buy money—to make the buys and therefore prosecute the cases. So we need to do more at the federal level to support efforts like Chuck’s as well as local law enforcement.
Q: What does John Q. Public do about reaching out to his government for help?
A: John Q. Public sees his member of Congress—U.S. senator—at a town hall meeting and asks, “Will you support this increased funding to deal with addiction and mental illness in America? And if you don’t … I’m not going to vote for ya’!”
Q: Does it all come down to votes?
A: Well, no. I’d like to think that … I’ve tried to do the right thing. Vote my district, vote my conscience. Lord knows I haven’t always voted my party. I have the seventh-most independent voting record of any Republican in Congress, and I’m proud of that because I think it reflects Minnesota values and Minnesota voters’ wishes. It certainly reflects the wishes of the 3rd District, and I stay in very close touch with my constituents.
Q: How do you do that?
A: I have had regular town meetings all 18 years I have been in office. I send out questionnaires and newsletters on a regular basis. We receive 1,000 pieces of mail every week, and we try to answer every single one of them. And I’m home every weekend. I’ve commuted for 18 years, so I know what the people are thinking in my district. I am not a Washingtonian. I’m a Minnesotan and that’s who I will always be.
Q: The 3rd District is a hot congressional district.
A: It’s the greatest district! It’s wonderful people! People who have a strong work ethic and value education and environmental protection. They care about people in need, they take the Lord’s admonition seriously that we have to reach out and help the least amongst us. They are fiscally conservative, but they’ll spend money for good roads, good bridges, good schools, clean environment. They want a bang for their buck, for their tax dollars, and that’s what I’ve tried to give ’em.
Q: You were a state senator for many years before you became a congressman, weren’t you?
A: That helped very much, those 10 years that I had in the state Senate, because, really, the legislative process at the state level is not much different from the legislative process in Washington. So the training I had on the job as a state senator really helped make it a smooth transition as a member of Congress.
Q: Whom did you run against in your first congressional campaign? Can you recall it?
A: Oh, sure I can! It’s like it happened yesterday! I ran against my good friend Louis DeMars. And we are good friends! He’s one heck of a guy! And I think the world of him.
Q: Louis commented to me about that campaign. He said that he didn’t raise enough money. He said to me that after begging for money for only two months, he felt like scum.
A: (Laughing) Fundraising is a tough part of politics. Beggin’ for money is never fun. But it’s a necessary part of running a campaign. I spent a lot of time raising money. No question about it. Which every first candidate has to do.
Q: How much did you raise? Louis said that that you need to raise $2 million?
A: I know it was in excess of a million and a half dollars. I am not exactly sure. Nowadays it is about two to three million dollars.
Q: You followed Bill Frenzel in this congressional office. Do you know him well?
A: Yes. I’m grateful to say Bill Frenzel has been a great mentor, a great predecessor. I think the world of Bill Frenzel. He’s been my mentor not only as a candidate but also as an office holder. For all 28 years, Bill Frenzel has been there to help me with complex tax issues. Nobody knows taxes better than Frenzel—tax policy. With trade issues, they used to call him Mr. Trade in Congress. Bill Frenzel is one of the most wonderful people in the world. Next to my own family, there’s nobody I’m closer to than Bill Frenzel.
Q: I heard that former senator Rudy Boschwitz helped you in the past too. What did Rudy do for you?
A: I recall Rudy Boschwitz. (smiling) He and Vin Weber helped me a lot as well, especially at my first endorsing convention. There were, I think, nine of us running for the endorsement at one time, when Bill Frenzel announced his retirement. And that was probably the toughest campaign in my life, getting that Republican endorsement in 1990.
Q: Rudy made a comment on your departure from Congress. “For nearly 40 years, the 3rd District has been represented by two very fine congressmen, Bill Frenzel and Jim Ramstad, both of whom had important roles in Congress on the Ways and Means Committee, and both of whom were most effective for their constituents, and both of whom left a distinguished trail for Erik Paulsen to follow.”
A: Well, Rudy’s very kind. He was a great senator and a good friend. Also, we can’t forget Clark MacGregor, who preceded Bill Frenzel and served this district so well for 10 years. And I just feel very humbled to follow truly great men like Clark MacGregor and Bill Frenzel.
Q: So with all the support in the past and this wonderful career, let’s go to the next point that we need to address and ask, why on earth are you planning to leave office?
A: As I said when I announced that I wasn’t going to run this year, I’m taking a sabbatical, Mesa. I’m taking a sabbatical from public office but not from public service. My life is public service and it’s not going to change. I am going to continue working with young people who are having addiction problems. Problems with alcohol and drugs. I am going to do some teaching, I think, for a while. Serve on several boards of treatment centers. So I am still going to be busy. And I certainly haven’t ruled out another run at some point for some kind of office.
Q: What kind of office?
A: Who knows? Maybe the local dog catcher’s position will be coming up. (Smiling)
Q: Mayor?
A: No, no … I just haven’t ruled out a run. You know, as a recovering alcoholic, it’s really essential that I live one day at a time, and so today I don’t have any plans to run for any office.
Q: That sounds like a guy with a commitment issue, not an alcoholic issue. Seriously, you know the positions available out there. I would think with your voting record—very compassionate, very caring toward people—you would lean toward a county commissioner position.
A: Well, I don’t think so. Again, I probably … well, let me just leave it at that.
Q: You’ve got something in mind. (smiling)
A: No, I don’t. I honestly don’t. I have no office in mind, believe me.
Q: How long would you wait to run again?
A: I have no idea, and I might never run again—the probability is I won’t run again. But it’s always possible. I’m just saying I’m not ruling anything out and I’m not ruling anything in.
Q: You could stay in one more term. These are historical elections coming up for the presidency. You could remain in this position one more term. Why not one more term?
A: Well … I want to stay until mental health parity and addiction parity become law, until that legislation becomes law. And we’ve got a tough conference committee ahead of us with the Senate. Their bill is significantly weaker and lets the insurance companies constitute what defines mental illness. Right now I have no plans for re-election.
Q: People will miss you. Have they been saying, “Hey, what’s the matter with you? Snap out of it!"
A: (Smiling) I still hear it every day. I was at the Eden Prairie Republican Convention and Plymouth–Wayzata Convention … and I was literally mobbed by friends and supporters who asked me to run again. It’s very humbling. And very gratifying to know that people appreciate the work that I’ve done. They don’t agree with me on all my votes—nobody does—not even my dad (smiling) … we go ’round and ’round sometimes. But that’s politics and that’s life. I just feel like I’m the luckiest guy in the world to have represented this district and to have made so many friends over the last 28 years in public office. I’ve gotten to know people from all walks of life. People I wouldn’t have become friends with but for my work in public service.
Q: Your voting record has raised some questions about you. You vote against your party.
A: Well … I’m a moderate. I’m a pragmatist. I believe that we need to work in a bipartisan way in Congress to get things done. I didn’t go down there to be part of a debating society. I went down there to work with both sides to get things done. And, uh, … unfortunately, my biggest regret is the increased partisanship in the Congress, the polarization and the lack of bipartisan collaboration. It gets worse every year. And nonetheless I’ve stood my ground despite pressure from my leadership on many close and tough votes. And I have voted my district consistent with my conscience.
Q: What kind of votes?
A: For education funding, for environmental protection measures, for a woman’s right to choose, for stem cell research, for legal services for the poor. I’ve been the chief Republican sponsor, since I got there, of the amendment that we offer every year on the appropriations bill to increase funding for legal services for indigent people.
They have a right to equal justice just as people who can afford lawyers.
And, in fact, one of the greatest honors I’ve gotten was from the American Bar Association when they presented me with their Equal Justice for All award. That meant a lot. We’ve got to fight for the little person who doesn’t have the means to hire Ronnie Meshbesher (smiles) or some of my other friends in the legal fraternity.
Q: When need be, Ronnie works pretty cheap for people, though. (Smiling)
A: Ron’s done a lot of pro bono work. I realize that. The Minnesota Bar has been tremendous. Of all the states, the Minnesota Bar leads in the pro bono hours and percent of pro bono work and percent of firms that do pro bono work. Right now Jim Volling, a good friend of mine, is doing work on a criminal appeal for a young man who grew up in Bloomington. I met his mother on a flight. She’s a flight attendant. And I’m absolutely convinced that this young man, Kent LeBere, was wrongly convicted of murder in Colorado, and Jim Volling of the Faegre & Benson firm is working on his appeal pro bono to see that justice is served in Kent’s case. And so the Minnesota Bar has been tremendous in terms of legal services. And it’s been a pleasure to work with them … to work with people like Jerry Lane, Bruce Beneke and Nancy Kleeman. Those people have been just great at the legal aid office.
Q: Back to your voting record …
A: Yeah … on being a moderate. A maverick, if you will. I have been called a lot of things worse than that. (Smiles)
Q: Like what?
A: Well, you know some of the right-wingers on the radio like to call me a RINO, a Republican in name only. That’s not true because I believe in the Republican philosophy, the basic philosophy.
I’ve voted with small business on their legislation. I voted for the tax cuts of ’01 and ’03. I’ve had a consistently conservative record on fiscal issues and a moderate record on social issues and that’s right where my district is. I think my record proves that you can be balanced and be successful. I have a conservative fiscal record and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce supports me year in and year out. The National Federation of Independent Businesses has supported me every election. And so have the Sierra Club and the League of Conservation Voters and Education Minnesota. All the environmental groups that endorse. I think my record proves that it’s not 'either/or.' That we need to have a more balanced approach to governing. That’s what I mean by working in a bipartisan, pragmatic and common-sense way. We’ve got to have balance. And that’s what I think the art of politics is all about—finding common ground.
Q: Is there an art of Republican politics?
A: You know … Ronald Reagan, whom I admired deeply … said it best when he said those who agree with us 80 percent of the time are friends and allies. Not 20 percent enemies. And Reagan … he always looked to tried to find that 80 percent of common ground and that is why he was so successful. And he did it in a cheerful way. Not like some of these people nowadays yellin’ and screamin’ on talk radio and cursing and condemning somebody that doesn’t agree with them. That’s not the way politics should be, and it is certainly not Minnesota[n].
Q: I want to mention Governor Tim Pawlenty. A fellow Minnesota Republican getting a lot of national attention these days. He also sent a comment about your departure from the Congress:
“Jim Ramstad has been a tremendous public servant in our state for nearly 30 years. He is one of our nation’s most thoughtful, hardworking and effective leaders. In particular, Jim’s tireless and passionate work on behalf of individuals suffering from addiction has positively affected the lives of families across the country. Above and beyond his outstanding record in the Minnesota legislature and the U.S. Congress, his personal story of faith and hope has given thousands of people a shot at a new life through recovery from addiction. He’s walked the talk and led many to freedom.”
A: That is very kind of the governor. The governor has a big heart for people in need, people with addiction and people suffering from mental illness. And he’s been a great friend ever since I met him in 1978 in Dave Durenburger’s basement when he was a young student working for Durenburger on his first campaign and I was working for my predecessor Bill Frenzel on that ’78 campaign. I knew then that Pawlenty was going places. And I think his star is going to rise even further come convention time. That is my hope.
Q: Did you have anything to do with Minnesota being selected for the Republican National Convention?
A: I cannot take credit at all for that. In fact, I fell off of my chair when I heard the news over the … actually, we got a call from the White House saying that Minnesota had just been chosen and the story was breaking. And I thought they were kidding. I just did not think we would get the Republican Convention. But I am just delighted that we did get it. It means $50 to $100 million in revenues, and our economy can use it now, as we all know. We’re in kind of a slump as the nation is. Also, it brings a lot of attention, a lot of focus to the great state of Minnesota.
Q: Who is responsible for bringing the Republican Convention here then?
A: Tim Pawlenty and Norm Coleman really deserve the credit for bringing the convention here. And Ron Carey, too, as party chairman.
Q: This is a truly historic presidential election. Is it affecting life in Washington?
A: It’s dominating life in Congress, or at least the legislation in Congress. Yes, there’s no question … once the presidential process got started in earnest, presidential politics took over in Congress. It was no longer the House Democrat agenda or the House Republican agenda but rather it was the presidential candidate’s agenda. I think you’re going to see that the rest of the year. Precious little will get done, unfortunately. Because politics will dominate. The Democrats are having a harder time, obviously, choosing their nominee, but you’ll see the Republicans falling in line with John McCain’s position on a lot of issues. And I think that will dominate our caucus’s agenda.
Q: Specifically what kind of votes?
A: I think you’re going to see them vote on withdrawing our troops, consistent with Senator Clinton’s and Senator Obama’s positions on Iraq. I think you’re going to see votes … more votes on canceling the Bush tax cuts, on not extending the tax cuts, which are to expire in 2008 and some in 2010, including the marriage tax penalty relief, the child tax credit relief. I think that would be very unfortunate … what it would be is about a $2 trillion tax increase for the American people if we cancel and don’t extend that tax relief. But I think you’re going to see the presidential candidates’ agendas dominating the congressional agenda for the rest of the year.
Q: McCain was left for dead as a candidate, revived and then sent Romney and the others to the curb. He is now the Republican candidate. Are you backing him?
A: I’ve always liked John McCain and respected him for his independence, for his being a maverick and for voting his conscience and not being afraid to take on people within his own party when he thinks they are wrong. And certainly not being afraid of taking on the big special interests. I don’t agree with McCain on immigration reform, his proposal for amnesty, for example. I do agree with his position on campaign finance reform. I don’t agree with his position on the Bush tax cuts. I voted for them. But, again, I agree with John McCain on a heck of a lot more issues than I would ever agree with Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. So, uh, certainly at least 80 percent of the issues I am sure I am going to agree with John McCain, whereas probably closer to 20 percent with Hillary and Obama.
Q: So you’re sticking with John McCain, eh?
A: Oh, yes. I’m sticking with John McCain. And I like Cindy McCain, his wife, even better!
Q: Hey! You’re a married man. You have a wife now. You know, you shocked everyone; how long have you been married?
A: Well, we got married … uh … three years ago this October. October 16. I can even remember the date. (Smiles)
Q: Lots of us lost bets when that happened! But you found Miss Right.
A: She’s a wonderful woman. She’s an accomplished woman in her own right. She’s got a big heart and cares a lot about people and she’s a good family person. And our values are the same. We value faith, family and friends. Isn’t that what it’s all about? And I’m just very happy that Kathryn and I were able to find each other.
Q: How did you find each other?
A: Our sisters lined us up on a blind date.
Q: A blind date? Oh, you have to tell us about this.
A: Our sisters thought we might be able to hit it off for at least one date.
Q: Where was that date?
A: Lucia’s.
Q: What did you like about her first?
A: She was just very warm and friendly and just very attractive and smart. I could tell she was smart. And … uh … she had a lot higher paying job than I did too. That’s always a good thing. (Laughs) And she has a strong work ethic.
Q: What does she do in this high-paying job, Jim?
A: She works as hard [as] or harder than I do. She’s a partner in an executive recruiting firm in Minneapolis. One of the top three in the world. She travels at least a day a week to New York or San Francisco or Dallas or Chicago. You know, that’s a tough business. A very demanding business. And she is very good at it.
Q: So your family liked her first and then you caught on.
A: That’s right. My family liked her first.
Q: And you are a parent now too.
A: That’s right. Our daughter Christen is in her junior year at Colorado College, doing very well. She’s president of her sorority, she’s playing intramural sports and, most importantly, doing very well in school.
Q: You know I waited five months for this interview because of your busy schedule. And things just kept popping up for me about Jim Ramstad. I even have something for you from one of your buddies on the Minnesota Vikings.
A: You really did your homework.
Q: I have something for you (hands Jim an autographed photo of Bob Lurtzema that reads, "Do you still play basketball?")
A: Oh, from Lurtz. Oh man! ‘Do I still play basketball' … you know what that was in reference to … Bob Lurtzema. Lurtz was good enough … when I was a state senator, we arranged a basketball game between some of the local public officials and the Minnesota Vikings basketball team, the football players from the Vikings who played basketball for charity in the winter and for fun. And Lurtz, Stu Voigt, Joe Senser, Ricky Young and Scott Studwell and some of my other friends from the Vikings at the time came out to Wayzata High School. And I got there late. I was at the Capitol that day. And I didn’t stretch and so I went right into the game. After a couple of minutes and the first time up the court, I got a rebound and came down and severed … tore … completely tore my Achilles tendon. And that’s why Lurtz says in this picture, 'Do you still play basketball?' because he remembers me being carried off the court, having surgery the next day, from our mutual friend, the Vikings team doctor, David Fisher, and then being in a cast and on crutches for six months.
Q: Six months?
A: Yes. So this is a picture I’ll treasure. He’s a great guy and he’s been a great friend for a long time. Used to come to all my fundraisers and help me a lot in my political career.
Q: Those guys love you. They are longtime friends of yours, aren’t they?
A: Well, I don’t have any better friends than Stu Voigt or Joe Senser or Bob Stein. I mean, those guys were there from day one … I mean, Stu was there along with Studwell, Ricky Young and Bob Stein … that very first campaign going door to door, they would come out after practice in the afternoons during the week and go door to door, and they’d come out when they had a home game, and they would come out sometimes on Saturdays. They’d always come to my rallies. They were my friends first. And they wanted to help me get elected. And we had a lot of fun doing it too.
Q: What kind of fun?
A: I remember the time the big tackle … Steve Riley, who’s from USC … I never forget the time we had a cookout on Big Island and “Riles,” being a California guy, didn’t exactly know how to roast a pig. And so he almost burned my cabin down. The fire started in the woods, and fortunately we had enough fire extinguishers and enough buckets to get water from the lake to put out the fire, or otherwise Big Island would probably be gone now.
Q: Well, those guys could run fast.
A: They could … they could. Sometimes they had to. (Smiles) We had a lot of fun.
Q: Those former Vikings are a great group of guys.
A: Yeah ... and you know we’ve still had that kickoff party. All 12 of my campaigns that Joe Senser and the other guys … now ex-Vikings have hosted. Virtually every campaign … my three campaigns for the state Senate, my nine for Congress … we’ve started every single campaign with a kickoff party at Joe Senser’s restaurant. Actually, the first one was before it was built … we did those at the Medina Ballroom, but once Senser’s restaurant went up we’ve done the parties … these kickoff parties there. It’s become our annual event. And I think we’ll still have to do it even though I’m not running again. Just because they are such good times with good friends.
Q: Joe has a restaurant bar. Is that hard for you as a recovering alcoholic?
A: No. No. It is for some of my fellow recovering friends. They have trouble being in bars. It’s never been a problem for me. I had my last drink on July 31, 1981, when I ended up in jail. And I went into treatment as soon as I got back from Sioux Falls. In fact, ironically, I went down to Sioux Falls to help the Vikings raise money for youth sports in there. Neal Graff was then backup quarterback to Fran Tarkenton and he had retired from football and moved to Sioux Falls and he asked us … about four or five of his former teammates and me to come down and speak at a dinner … a roast to raise money for youth sports ’cause the school officials were canceling some of the sports … they were not going to fund it. So I went down to Sioux Falls with some of my buddies from the Vikings. And uh … I am the one that got roasted … in the wrong way.
Q: Must have been a hard time for you?
A: But … you know, it was a blessing. It was God’s way of bringing me to my knees and making me realize that I really was an alcoholic. I had been abusing alcohol for 12 long and painful years. I finally realized in that jail cell when I woke up the next morning. I don’t remember what happened because I don’t remember much of the night before, because I was in an alcoholic black-out. But it was God’s way of saying, “Jim Ramstad, get down on your knees. You need help. You need me in your life and you need treatment.” And you know, I had access to treatment. And that’s one of the reasons. It is only because of access to treatment and the grace of God and the support and love of family and other recovering friends that I have been able to stay sober for almost 27 years. But too many people in America don’t have access to treatment. That’s what this fight is all about for parity. That is what Paul Wellstone’s fight was all about. That is what Patrick Kennedy’s fight is all about. That’s what my fight is all about. To see that other people have the same access to treatment that Patrick Kennedy and I, who are in federal employees’ health plans, have. That is all we are saying—that members of Congress … if it’s good enough for them it’s good enough for the American people. And that is what this fight is all about.
Q: Were you always a rough drunk?
A: Yeah … I was a terrible drunk …
Q: An angry drunk?
A: I don’t know about angry. But I did some really stupid things. I … uh … was a binge drinker. I drank almost exclusively on the weekends. I never drank … very rarely drank during the week … but on the weekends, believe me, I made up for it. And uh … throughout the 12 years I abused alcohol … I didn’t start drinking until my senior year, spring quarter, at the University of Minnesota. I didn’t drink all through college. I didn’t have any desire to drink. I started at a restaurant in Minneapolis my spring quarter senior year.
Q: Where?
A: I was at the Waikiki Room (Leamington Hotel, Minneapolis) with my girlfriend at the time and with another friend. And uh … like most alcoholics … I loved the feeling I got from the alcohol, what happened to me that night. And I couldn’t wait to do it again. And, you know, I got inebriated the first time I drank. I could just never have one beer or one glass of wine, and that’s another thing that defines me as an alcoholic. But I’m just grateful that I’ve been able to be on the road of recovery since July 31, ’81, and the good Lord has been good to me. Like I said, that access to treatment saved my life … ’cause I wouldn’t be here today if I … that hadn’t happened. And if I hadn’t been 'outed' as an alcoholic, I wouldn’t be here today … I was drinking such quantities, I know I would be dead.
Q: What were you drinking?
A: Mostly beer. Occasionally wine. I was a beer drinker. Nothin’ fancy.
Q: How do you stay in such great shape now with this busy schedule?
A: Well … I work out as much as I can. I try to lift weights at least three times a week and run three times a week. And I don’t always do it, but I’m getting better at it. I’m stickin’ with the exercise program now. I am about 10 pounds overweight right now … but they’ll be gone by summer.
Q: You’ve worked through a lot of our generation’s contemporary history in Washington. You’ve probably experienced that incredible handshake of Bill Clinton. It’s amazing.
A: (Laughs) To be charmed by Bill Clinton … he is a charmer. The three most impressive politicians I have met in my lifetime are President John F. Kennedy—who I met when I was in high school at Boys Nation, in that famous picture with Bill Clinton in the Rose Garden with President Kennedy—Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton. Those are the three best … the most charismatic politicians I ever met. One of the most memorable events … something I’ll take to the grave was right after … the night of September 11th, that awful night when our country was attacked by the terrorists … September 11th, 2001. I’ll never forget standing, all of us … members of Congress, Republicans and Democrats, arm in arm on the steps of the Capitol singing “God Bless America” … I get choked up even now … because we were all in harmony. We were terrible singers, but that wasn’t the point; the point was that we were all together showing that Congress was united, just like the country was united, in opposition to what had happened and in support of our great country and our troops and law enforcement and first responders, who acted so bravely that day, and every day, for that matter. That was one of the most memorable events that I can recall.
Q: Were there others?
A: Also, the very first vote I took as a new member of the House was to authorize force on the first Persian Gulf War to get Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait. Very first vote. I just knew what I had read in the papers during the campaign, and I didn’t have the intelligence briefing until I got to Washington, and every day that very first week I was invited to either breakfast or lunch at the White House to meet with Colin Powell and Secretary Cheney, who at the time was Defense Secretary … first President Bush and Colin Powell, who was then the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. I’ll never forget those meetings … getting briefed by the CIA and all the other people. Actually, I thought that’s how Washington worked, that I’d be going down to the White House every other day. And I guess I never had more attention by the White House than that first week. But when I saw all the evidence concerning Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait, it was a no-brainer … the vote … and it passed overwhelmingly in a bipartisan vote to authorize the first Persian Gulf War back in 1991. First vote as a member of Congress.
Q: Were you briefed on the Iraq war as well?
A: I was certainly briefed on the Iraq war. We had the same briefing that every other member of Congress by the then-director of the CIA, who told us that it was a slam-dunk, that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, just like he told many others. Just like he told the president. How wrong George Tenet was. And how wrong our intelligence agencies were. It is certainly going to go down in history as a historic tragedy, I think. And if the vote were held … well, knowing what we know now, there wouldn’t have been a vote to authorize the use of force because it was the weapons of mass destruction that gave the reason to vote for the use of force, and when you take them out of the equation … that is, weapons of mass destruction … we take them out of the equation … there’s no reason to authorize force. We could have deposed Saddam other ways.
Q: In a situation like that, are you very careful not to cast an emotional vote? Are you very careful?
A: Oh yes. I’ve always been careful that I don’t let my emotions tread on my reason. I don’t let my emotions interfere with my reason because my responsibilities are too serious to base my decision making on emotions. My decisions have got to be based on reason … not emotions.
Q: You have many votes on record. Any other truly memorable for you?
A: I’ll also remember probably the saddest vote I’ve ever taken. Impeaching Bill Clinton. ’Cause personally I liked Bill Clinton. I’d known him since we were 17 years old, met him at Boys Nation. We kind of kept in touch over the years. We hosted a reunion of our Boys Nation class when he got to the White House, and worked together on the crime bill … very closely. He helped me get four of my pieces of legislation into the crime bill, including the Jacob Wetterling Child Protection Act, which was really important for Minnesota, and Patty Wetterling had worked her heart out. She came down and we walked up and down the halls pigeon-holing members of Congress to get their support and, uh … so that was an important piece of legislation. And … but after reviewing all of the evidence, and I did I read every piece of grand jury testimony, and as a lawyer there was no other way I could vote. And I remember walking down the steps of the Capitol with tears coming from my eyes. I was very sad. It was a very sad day for the country, I thought.
Q: Happier votes?
A: The happiest day I’ve had legislatively was in March, when we finally, after 12 years, passed the mental health and addiction parity bill. I am still grinning from ear to ear thinking that we actually got it done. And we passed it with a big margin. We actually had 47 Republicans vote for it, which was a very impressive number.
Q: What about some of the people you have helped over the years?
A: The Velazquez family. From Plymouth. Oscar and Shari being reunited … those two little boys … Nico and Rico, who had lost their father because of a wrongful deportation by the immigration service. I probably worked harder on that bill than anything except parity over the years. In fact, that year there were two private bills that were passed out of a thousand that were introduced, and mine was one of them. Because I just wouldn’t take no for an answer. I knew that he was illegally deported by our own government and I knew how much those boys needed him. Those boys needed a father. And that family needed to be together. The happiest day of my life next to … my own wedding … was when I was able to go down to Mexico City and bring Oscar home. I’ll never forget coming back and stepping off that plane at the Minneapolis airport with Oscar and seeing the tears of joy from his little boys and his wife, and seeing all the extended family and hundreds of other people who were fighting for his ability to be reunited with his family. So, you know, that’s why I feel so grateful to have served so many wonderful people and to get some things done that have really made a difference in people’s lives.
Q: Exactly what are your views on the immigration issue?
A: I think we have to clearly secure the borders first. We have 12 million immigrants living in this country. It’s costing the taxpayers a lot of money. And it’s just plain wrong to allow this influx of illegals to continue. These illegal immigrants are consuming our health care system. They’re costing us a great deal in terms of our education system. So that’s what we’ve got to do is secure our borders and cut down the flow of illegal immigrants into our country.
Q: What do you think of universal health care? No one talks about a time frame to make anything like that possible either, you know.
A: First of all, I think everybody in America should have health insurance. I think everybody in America should be required to have health insurance. Those people who are indigent, who don’t have the money to buy it, should get refundable tax credits or vouchers, but then they must use that refundable tax credit, that voucher, that money to buy a basic plan. Basic health care coverage for themselves and their families. That would be a lot cheaper than right now having 47 million Americans who are uninsured getting their coverage through emergency rooms, which does cost 15 times more than people in health plans who call their doctor and go to a doctor’s office for treatment. So I believe everybody should be covered. I believe in universal coverage. Mandatory coverage. Through a system of refundable tax credits and vouchers, and I have co-sponsored that legislation for a number of years now and unfortunately we haven’t gotten very far. But I’m hopeful that, too, will come to pass and someday we will have universal coverage. Mandatory coverage as Governor Romney did in Massachusetts with a Democrat legislature. They have mandatory coverage in Massachusetts now, and it is working.
Q: Can’t let you get away without asking about a couple of Republican scandals that have occurred. The sad cases of Mark Foley and, of course, Larry Craig. Did you get a phone call from Larry Craig saying, “Hey, I am in Minnesota in the bathroom at the airport and I’ve got trouble. Help me”?
A: No. I really don’t know Larry Craig. I know Mark Foley, who was on the Ways and Means committee with me. Those are two human tragedies representing human failures. And, you know, Congress is a human institution, and just like other institutions there are going to be people who have problems who manifest those problems like those two did.
Q: The economy is on everyone’s mind these days. Your constituents are a little more affluent, shall we say. Are you feeling the pinch in your district at all?
A: I tell ya’ … a family I have known for 28 years was just foreclosed upon recently in Wayzata. Big house. And I went over there when they called me. And … stood in their driveway. Tears coming down our faces as the sheriff’s deputies were there with trailers moving their furniture out, moving their clothes out. This hits close to home. It’s not just in the lower-income areas, but there are people from all walks of life being affected by this terrible housing crisis. So we need to do more than just that stimulus bill we passed to provide tax rebates and incentives for small businesses to create more jobs. That was a good piece of legislation. I think it will have somewhat of a stimulative effect. I also believe we need to do more to help homeowners now in this crisis, and I think perhaps the proposal to provide tax credits for new homebuyers would help. Or for people who have been foreclosed who are looking for a smaller house. We can’t let this housing crisis spread across the whole nation and envelop the economy because it is going to really, really hurt all of us. When the economy is slow … and I don’t know if we are in a recession or not … I know a recession technically is two consecutive quarters of negative growth and we really haven’t had that yet. But many economists are saying we are in a recession. Whatever we’re in we are in a hurting period for a lot of families … and we need to do something. The federal government needs to do more to make sure the recession is short-lived and doesn’t hurt too many people.
Q: Sadly, behind every one of those foreclosure signs is a family, maybe with children, another generation affected.
A: Well, I mean this family having their house foreclosed just broke my heart. Hardworking, God-fearing people … like I say, I’d known them for 28 years. And to see them riding with their youngest one … their other two are in college … riding over to the motel to sleep … it’s tough. It’s tough to see people lose something they worked their whole life to achieve, and that is the American dream of home ownership.
Q: It is. A home is the next generation of wealth that is passed on. Now it is going from home foreclosures to car payments that people are struggling with. What can we do?
A: We’ve got to get this economy growing again. Hopefully, those tax incentives will allow the small businesses, who are the real engines of economic growth, to create more new jobs in America. What we did in that stimulus package was provide accelerated depreciation so they can buy a new piece of equipment and write it off the first year … bonus depreciation. So that’ll give them more money to expand their business and hire new workers. They’ll have more money remaining after taxes to grow their businesses and create new jobs. I think that’s going to be the biggest help to getting this economy back to growing at a faster, more healthy rate. Also, I think these rebates are going to be helpful and people will spend that money. And generate economic growth. Again, I think we’ve got to do more in terms of allowing people to stay in their houses and helping the housing market. Because really … as goes the housing market, so goes the economy.
Q: You’ve got some large corporations here in Minnesota. You have Northwest Airlines and you have some medical companies in your district. We’ve got Ford in St. Paul looking to close in July 2009. What happens to all of these people? We’ve already lost the NWA maintenance facility. Those are mechanics jobs. The maintenance is spread all over now in Seattle and Boston and other places that they never were before. And they’re talking of a merger with Delta now. A lot of those employees live in your district.
A: Well … yeah … and if the merger happens, we know that headquarters will be in Atlanta for the airlines … Northwest and Delta. And that means 1,100 executive jobs, good-paying jobs, will move away from Minnesota and that’ll be a hit on the economy. No one can deny that. Another business just moved recently, taking a thousand jobs to New York. Macy’s moved the rest of its corporate people to corporate headquarters in New York. What about downtown Minneapolis? Look at the retail that’s closed recently: Polo Ralph Lauren. Saks is downsized. I know Brooks Brothers is closing their store at the Mall of America. All of these concern me because you can’t have a strong economy without strong jobs and without good jobs for people who want to and can work. And so it’s really all about jobs, and I think this election is going to be not only about the Iraq war but I think it’s going to be about jobs. I remember that sign in Bill Clinton’s campaign office in 1992: “It’s the economy, stupid” and I think it’s again … the economy … as well as the war in this election.
Q: Who’s going to do it? Is it going to be the Democrats or the Republicans that will save this economy?
A: Well, I think we’ve got to work in a bipartisan way. I mean the Democrats control both the House and the Senate, and one side can’t do it unilaterally. Republicans and Democrats … need to work together like we did in the stimulus package. That was a very refreshing exercise, to work together in a bipartisan way to get something done for the country.
Q: Well, when you work together now, you work with a woman, Nancy Pelosi. How is it to work with her?
A: I give Nancy Pelosi a lot of credit. She’s a very strong, effective leader. And I happen to like her personally. She’s been very, very good to me. She assured me right after the election that she knows how hard I worked on the parity bill over the years. She remembers 12 years ago when I started the effort in the House. It was kind of a lonely effort for a while because my party would not give me a vote … even though I had a majority of the House as co-sponsors … Republican and Democrat. Let alone a hearing. So I couldn’t get a vote. I got one hearing in 12 years on the bill in a subcommittee. She told me that she was going to prioritize … she realized how important this parity bill was to provide parity and treatment for people with mental illness and addiction and that she was going to give Patrick and me a vote before spring … probably in March. And it happened in March. And so she kept her word and has been very supportive of this legislation. And, again, we don’t agree on a lot of issues. But I really, really like her personally and enjoy working with her.
Q: That’s quite touching.
A: She’s very honest. What you see is what you get. I mean … her word is her bond. And there’s nothing more important in Washington in Congress than knowing … you can trust, whether it’s Republican or Democrat, that you can trust the colleagues you’re working with.
Q: I need to ask this. About your leaving Congress, it just feels like you are perhaps being squeezed out by your party. Is that true? Are you being squeezed out?
A: No. My party … I just read what happened … I know what happened in the state legislature to those six Republicans who opposed the tax ... the gas tax increase to fix the roads and bridges … and voted to override the governor’s veto … that bill. Nothin’ like that has ever happened to me. I’ve never been threatened with losing the best committee assignment you can have in the House. That is Ways and Means. Not once did a leader … when they tried to convince me to vote their way … never was I threatened with committee assignment by Newt Gingrich or Tom Delay or Denny Hastert or John Boehnor … any of our other leaders over the years. Bob Michel in the beginning. Never once. They knew that I went down there … I made it very clear when I went down there that I represent Minnesota … I rep a very special district in Minnesota. And, uh, people were … for the most part fiscally conservative and socially moderate and that’s the way I was. And that I was going to vote my district and vote my conscience and I hoped they understood that. That I wasn’t going to … vote … that I wasn’t down there to be a cheerleader for the Republican party. And to their credit … uh … they haven’t squeezed me out.
Q: So they are honestly not squeezing you out?
A: No. They want me to stay. I think they appreciate that we need House Republican moderates. We’ve been called in almost every newspaper story an endangered species, we moderate Republicans. I didn’t go there to be a cheerleader for the party. To their credit, the Republican leaders haven’t squeezed me out … in fact, they’re beggin’ me to stay. We need moderates in both parties. So I am not being squeezed out. I have never felt that at all. The only even minor hint I have ever gotten was when I broke ranks on the crime bill and supported the ban on assault weapons … the Clinton crime bill back in 1994 … and it was suggested to me that I probably would never be in a leadership position in the Congress. To which I responded … I never want to be in a leadership position because then I couldn’t be independent and vote my district and my conscience. And so that is the only time anybody’s even hinted that it might hurt me politically to be a moderate or a maverick or independent in my votes. I am still a fiscal conservative and a social moderate.
Follow-Up Questions and Answers from Congressman Ramstad
Q: I have seen on your Web site in the photo gallery that Wheelock Whitney is a co-founder of the Johnson Institute. He has done so many good things for Minnesota. Have you always worked with him, or is this the only connection that you have with “Wheels”?
A: No person in Minnesota has done more for people with addiction than Wheelock Whitney. I first got to know Wheelock through politics, as he was one of my strongest supporters in my first campaign in 1980.
Q: Charity work is very important to you, isn’t it?
A: I learned the importance of helping people in need from my family as a young child. Our family has always taken to heart the words of President Kennedy that, “Here on earth, God’s work must truly be our own.”
Q: So what does a guy like Jim Ramstad say after working for nine terms in the U.S. Congress and seeing approval ratings drop to 11 percent and 18 percent by the American people?
A: It saddens me to see Congress so polarized and so bitterly partisan. It’s no surprise the American people hold Congress in such low esteem.
Q: What are some of the important changes or growth in your district that you have seen in these nine years that you hope will continue?
A: Our district’s population has become much more diverse, and economic growth has flourished, especially in the high-tech sector.
Q: So, Jim, since you won’t be flying back and forth to Washington every week anymore at the end of the year, what happens to all of those frequent flier miles?
A: I will have a lot fewer frequent flier miles, that’s for sure!
Back to Articles
