This is a rush transcript from "Fox News Sunday," September 27, 2015. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: I’m Chris Wallace.
Today, the former front-runner of the Republican Party, Governor Jeb Bush, on regaining momentum after the summer of the outsider.
WALLACE: Let's talk about where you stand in this race.
We'll go inside his campaign in his home state of Florida.
JEB BUSH, R-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Como estan?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The next president of the United States.
BUSH: How are you doing?
WALLACE: And ask about these controversial remarks.
BUSH: Our message is one of hope and aspiration. It isn't one of division and get in line and we'll take care of you with free stuff.
WALLACE: Jeb Bush in his first Sunday interview in four months. It's a "Fox News Sunday" exclusive.
Then, House Speaker John Boehner stuns Congress, announcing his retirement.
REP. JOHN BOEHNER, R-OHIO, SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: It’s the right time to do it, and frankly, I’m entirely comfortable doing it.
WALLACE: We'll talk with two leading Republican Congressman Tom Cole and Mick Mulvaney, who are sharply divided over Boehner and whether to force a government shutdown.
Plus, our Sunday panel weighs in on the winners and losers in a new Fox poll.
And our power player of the week, standing up to hurricane force winds.
All, right now, on "Fox News Sunday."
WALLACE: And hello again from Fox News in Washington.
It's been a remarkable week in politics. John Boehner shocking Washington with his surprise resignation the day after Pope Francis lectured Congress about working together for the common good. We'll get to all of that in a few minutes, but first, our exclusive interview with former Florida Governor Jeb Bush.
Since launching his campaign, Bush has gone from front-runner to the middle of the pack. Now, he seems to be regaining his momentum.
We traveled to his home base in Florida to catch up with him.
WALLACE: Jeb Bush took us to a park in the little Havana section of Miami, where people who fled Cuba decades ago come to play their traditional game of dominos.
They greeted him like an old friend, conversing comfortably in their language, which has become an issue in this campaign.
On the one hand, they speak Spanish, but they’re good assimilated Americans, too.
BUSH: Well, it's American life. The first generation comes, they sacrifice for their children, and their children end up becoming as American as anybody else.
(SPEAKING FOREIGN LANGUAGE)
WALLACE: Then we went to a Bush field office to discuss a campaign that has been much tougher for the former governor that many expected.
Let's start with some news. You made some comments late this week that stirred up some controversy about how Republicans should reach out to African-American voters.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BUSH: Our message is of hope and aspiration. It isn't one of division, and get in line and we'll take care of you with free stuff.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: People are comparing that to what Mitt Romney --
BUSH: Oh, no.
WALLACE: -- said in 2012 about free stuff. And the implication that they're drawing is that you think all some people want is government handouts.
BUSH: No, to the contrary, I think we need to make our case to African-American voters and all voters that an aspirational message, fixing a few big complex things, will allow people to rise up. That's what people want. They don't want free stuff. That was my whole point.
You know, the left argues all the time taking things out of context.
What we've heard is 6 million more people are in poverty today than the day that Barack Obama got elected president. Six million more people. Two thousand less dollars in Americans' families in the -- in disposable income.
This -- this idea that you can regulate and tax and spend your way to prosperity has failed. We spend a trillion dollars a year on poverty programs. And the net result is the percentage of people in poverty has remained the same.
We should try something different, which is to give people the capacity to achieve earned success, fix our schools, fix our economy, lessen the crime rates in the big urban areas and I think people in poverty could be lifted up.
WALLACE: John Boehner is stepping down as speaker of the House. Is that a good or bad thing for conservatives?
BUSH: Well, we'll see how it plays out. I think what we need is a conservative president that can work with the Congress. We wouldn't have these problems if you had a president that actually would commit to passing a budget, would commit to a -- you know, repealing Obamacare, reforming our taxes.
WALLACE: But --
WALLACE: -- respectfully, sir, what about Boehner stepping down?
BUSH: I don't know. We'll have to see how it plays out. I admire John Boehner greatly. He's a great public service.
He left at the apex of his -- of his time in service to this -- to the country with the pope speaking in Congress. I think people are going to miss him in the long run, because he's a -- he's a person that is focused on solving problems.
WALLACE: So you don't think, as some conservatives argue, that he was part of the problem in Washington?
WALLACE: Let's talk about where you stand in this race. You're now running fourth nationally, with almost 10 percent, down from July, when you were leading with almost 18 percent. In New Hampshire, which most consider your strongest at the early primaries. You're now fifth at 7 percent, down from a lead of 17 percent in April.
I know you say -- and I know you're going to say now -- it's a marathon. But why do you think you've fallen back?
BUSH: Look, it is a marathon and we just started advertising. I'm confident we get good response. We've got a great ground game in these early states. I'm confident I can win New Hampshire for sure. I'm going to work really hard at it.
And once -- once people see my -- the proposals we've put out in terms of taxes and regulation, an energy proposal that's going to come out in a couple of days, all these things, I think, give people a sense that things can get better for this country.
And then I tell the Jeb story, which is a story of accomplishment here in Florida, where we cut taxes, reduced the size of government, reform the things that really were important for people in the state. We led the nation in job growth seven out of eight years.
All of that story is important to tell, as well.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, R-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: But we need, Jeb, to build a wall --
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: I was sitting right across from you in the Fox debate. And as Donald Trump was talking, I could see you sometimes shaking your head like I can't believe I'm losing to this guy.
But recently, as -- starting with the second debate, you've become more assertive, more aggressive.
And my question is, do you think in some way, Trump is actually -- is making you a better candidate, because he's making you fight harder?
BUSH: Campaigns are about getting better each and every day, whether it's Donald Trump or you or anybody else, candidates have to get better. And that's what I intend to do.
But I'm running the heart campaign, running with heart, and we're making great progress. These polls really don't matter. They don't -- they don't filter out the people that aren't going to vote, it's just, I know it's an obsession because it kind of frames the debate for people for that week.
But I'm in it for the long haul.
WALLACE: You've also evolved when it comes to your family. Early on, you talked a lot about yourself and distancing yourself in terms of your identity from your family's. And that seems to have evolved.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BUSH: I’m my own man. My views are shaped by my own thinking in my own experiences.
I am a Bush. I happened to two really good presidents develop relationship with other candidates.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: Governor, a question, why the change?
BUSH: It isn't a change. It's not a contradiction to say that I'm my own man. I have a record, a record of accomplishment. If people look at Florida during my tenure and people -- most people say that it is -- it is the most conservative reform-minded record in the last generation of time.
I've got to go tell that story. And I'm proud of being George H.W. Bush's son and I'm certainly proud of my brother.
I don't find it a contradiction at all.
There are parts of my brother's tenure and my dad's tenure that I'm extraordinarily proud of. And foreign policy would be part of that.
The problem today is we have a president who doesn't believe America's presence and leadership in the world is working. That's what I'm posting up against. It's the failed policies of the -- of the Obama/Clinton/Kerry foreign policy that is creating a really unstable and dangerous world.
WALLACE: You have put out a detailed tax plan. And let's drill down.
You want three tax brackets, 10 percent, 25 percent and 28 percent, a cap on tax deductions, except for charity, at 2 percent of gross income. Lower the top corporate tax rate from 35 to 20 percent, almost double the standard deduction.
Briefly, what's the thinking?
BUSH: The thinking is we need to create high, sustained economic growth to lift people out of poverty and to give people a pay raise for the first time in a long while. So reducing the corporate tax rate and fully expensing capital investment will create a renaissance of -- of investment in our own country in -- on Main Street, in the real economy, and that's what we need to be focused on.
And lowering rates for people to give them more money in their pockets is a great idea.
Look, we'll curb government spending, but the dynamic effect of higher growth would generate far more revenue than any of the most exotic tax plans that are being proposed on the left.
I mean, Bernie Sanders has proposed $19 trillion of new spending over 10 years and it's September of the year before the election.
Hillary Clinton has already proposed higher taxes and more spending and regulation.
I think we need to move in a different direction, which is limit government's power and shift power away from the Washington. And cutting taxes has the dual benefit of increased economic activity and also shifting power back to our communities.
WALLACE: There are two major criticisms of your tax plan so far.
First of all, the argument that -- and you gave your tax plan to four conservative economists who said that it would increase the deficit between $1 trillion and $3 trillion over the next 10 years. Now, Ronald Reagan proposed something roughly similar, big tax cuts -- back in 1980. And he argued that the dynamic effect, the word you used, would be that it would -- the growth would end up paying for the revenue loss.
You know what your dad called that.
Is this your version of voodoo economics?
BUSH: No, look, we -- the dynamic effect of -- of -- of tax policy that creates economic growth narrows the spending -- the deficit that you're describing.
But first of all, it's not -- it's not the government's money, it's the people's money. And if we can allow people to have more money, clearly, that's going to create economic growth.
But we're also going to have to fix the regulatory mess in Washington, DC, embrace the energy revolution in our midst and have a commitment to -- to reduce the -- the growth of spending, which ultimately means we have to preserve and protect entitlements for those that have it, but fix it going over the long haul.
WALLACE: But whether it was Ronald Reagan's tax cuts or your brother's tax cuts, they did add greatly to the deficit.
BUSH: That not -- they didn't as greatly as -- as the static thinkers on the left think. They created a dynamic effect of high growth. And that's what we need. If we think that if -- if people think 2 percent growth is OK, then we'll have more people living in poverty and disposable income for the middle class will continue to decline.
We have to jump-start the economy so that people can have more money to make decisions for themselves.
WALLACE: Then there's another complaint, and that is the issue of who benefits. The Tax Foundation says the middle class would see after tax income increase 2.9 percent. But the top 1 percent would get a boost of 11.6 percent.
An analysis of your tax returns for the last six years, which you have released to the public, the last six years indicates that you would save, under your tax plan, $3 million.
Does Jeb Bush need a $3 million tax cut?
BUSH: Look, the benefit of this goes disproportionately to the middle class. If you look at what the middle class pays today compared to what they would pay in our tax plan --
WALLACE: But they get a 2.9 percent increase in after tax income --
BUSH: Because higher income people pay more taxes right now and proportionally, everybody will get a benefit. But proportionally, they'll pay more in with my plan than what they pay today.
WALLACE: Well, I mean forgive me, sir, but -- but 2.9 seems like it's less than 11.6.
BUSH: The simple fact is 1 percent of people pay 40 percent of all the taxes. And so, of course, tax cuts for everybody is going to generate more for people that are paying a lot more. I mean that's just the way it is.
WALLACE: In the time we have left, let's do a lightning round -- quick questions, quick answers.
You say the next president should defund Planned Parenthood.
When you say the next president, does that mean that you're against a conceivable government shutdown in order to force this president?
BUSH: I'm against a government shutdown. That's not what the democracy -- how democracy works. But it --
WALLACE: What about the argument that hey, look, this is what we need to do to stand up for principles?
BUSH: It would be great. And I defunded Planned Parenthood when I was -- when I was governor. And I think it's abhorrent that 330,000 or 340,000 abortions take place through these clinics. I'm a pro-life governor and I'm -- I'd be a pro-life president.
But it will have no effect on funding for Planned Parenthood. That's the problem in Washington right now. It's so dysfunctional that that's considered a victory. Continue to fund for Planned Parenthood, shut down the government and then cost the taxpayers more.
Better to elect a conservative president that will pledge to do it and work with Congress.
WALLACE: In your 2013 book on immigration, you say that -- that pushing for a "enforce the border first" policy is, in your words, "self-defeating," that you're going to need a path to legalization as part of a compromise if you're going to get anything through Congress.
Is that still your position?
BUSH: I think you can do both, but the first step is to prove that the border is secure. I mean, you could have a conversation about comprehensive reform while you're doing your job. This president committed to comprehensive reform and has done nothing. And he hasn't enforced the border to the satisfaction of anybody that's looked at this issue.
WALLACE: Finally, Governor, you're coming out with a new energy plan this next week.
WALLACE: How about a headline?
BUSH: I think we ought to be all in on energy. We need to create a North American energy strategy, which means approve the XL Pipeline, allow for the export of crude, dramatically improve the licensing of LNG plants, liquefied natural gas.
But it's more difficult to do. Expand the possibilities of leasing on federal lands and waters, particularly where states have an interest in doing so. There's a lot that we can do to create high growth for our -- for our economy, lower utility prices and I'm totally in on this.
And I think -- I think the American people are, as well.
WALLACE: Governor, thank you.
BUSH: Thank you.
WALLACE: Good to talk with you. Let's continue the conversation.
BUSH: You bet.
WALLACE: Up next, the speaker steps down. We'll talk with two leading house Republicans with sharply different views about John Boehner, and how far to go in defunding Planned Parenthood. What Boehner's resignation means for the future of the GOP. That's next.
WALLACE: John Boehner stunned Washington Friday, announcing he'll step down as speaker and leave Congress in a month. The news raises questions about whether a government shutdown will now by avoided and where House Republicans go from here.
Joining me now: two GOP congressmen at the center of the debate. Tom Cole, a member of Boehner's leadership team, and Mick Mulvaney, a founder of the Freedom Caucus, which has sharply critical of Boehner.
Gentlemen, welcome to "Fox News Sunday."
REP. TOM COLE, R-OKLA., APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Good to be here.
WALLACE: Let’s start with how Speaker Boehner described his decision to step down. Here it is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BOEHNER: It's become clear to me this prolonged leadership turmoil would do irreparable harm to the institution.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: Congressman Mulvaney, what was wrong with Boehner as speaker? And did your hard line faction of House Republicans, did you force him out?
REP. MICK MULVANEY R-S.C., FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE: What was wrong -- we stopped being a coequal branch of government.
I had a farmer come into my office a couple weeks ago and tell a story how he had to get down on his knees and beg an EPA regulator regarding some things to do with farm ponds. That's sad where a farmer has to come in and do that stuff. Congress used to be able to fight against that. We used to use the power of the purse to help folks like that against an overreaching administration.
We’ve stopped. We don’t use the power of the purse anymore. The Senate uses the filibuster instead of the power of the purse, and yes, it had to change. It absolutely had to change.
WALLACE: And did you force him out, you and your hard line colleagues?
MULVANEY: I think the 72 percent of Republican primaries voters who didn’t of his job probably forced him out more than anything?
WALLACE: Congressman Cole, your response to that?
COLE: Well, first of all, in terms of the EPA, it's just not true. The budget has been cut by 21 percent. They’re operating at 1989 staffing level. So the power of the purse has been used, and there are restrictions as to what they can do.
In terms of the larger question on the speaker -- look, he's had to fight for four years with a Democratic president, most of the time with a Democratic Senate, yet during that time he brought the deficit down by over a trillion dollars, he made almost all the Bush tax cuts permanent, he got the first real entitlement reform for Medicare and Medicaid. In divided government, that's an extraordinary range of accomplishments.
The sad thing is, we have a lot of Republicans telling honestly Republican voters the problems up here are Republicans. The problem up here is Barack Obama and the Democrats. If we focus on that, we can get something done.
WALLACE: Let me ask you to pick up and respond to that, if you will. Look, I mean, the fact is no matter what you did in the House, there were enough -- first of all, there was a Democratic majority, and there are now enough to sustain a filibuster and you do have Barack Obama as president.
What realistically could he have done more?
MULVANEY: Sure. But we told people give us the Senate and things would be different. We told them back in 2010, give us the House and things will be different. Things are not that different. We're paying more attention to worrying about polls and who is getting blamed for a shutdown, or more attention to the filibuster rules in the Senate than actually helping people and doing what we promised we would do.
We are fighting a war against an administration using 1994 tools when administration used to go through the legislative branch to enact their agenda. This administration goes around. They're going to go around on immigration. They’re going around on Iran. They’re going to go around on climate change.
And unless we are able to pass legislation out of the House and Senate, we are no longer an effective check against the executive branch. So, it is different.
COLE: That's simply not the case. The reality is -- presidents do have authorities to make agreements or run the executive branch. But again, if you actually look at things like making the Bush tax cuts permanent, bringing down the deficit by a trillion dollars, having real entitlement reform, it's a pretty remarkable record of accomplishment and engaging in tactics like that --
WALLACE: Then why did he lose the confidence of Mick Mulvaney and dozens of members of House Republicans?
COLE: I think they have to answer that themselves. But, you know, what I would argue is what have you done that’s accomplished anything? The last time we followed these kind of tactics on the government shutdown October of 2013, we lost. We didn't win. We certainly didn't repeal Obamacare. So, to be successful, go win some elections.
Actually, Jeb Bush had it exactly right in the earlier segment. You get a president -- we don't appropriate money to Planned Parenthood. Presidents appoint secretaries that give money to Planned Parenthood.
WALLACE: OK. So, the question now is what happens when the government -- the budget runs out on midnight on Wednesday. And the conventional wisdom in the wake of Boehner stepping down is that you're going to pass a continuing resolution without defunding Planned Parenthood and kick the can down the road until December. But that the government won't shut down and you won't stop Planned Parenthood.
Congressman Mulvaney, is that the way it's going to come down?
MULVANEY: I think that's exactly what’s going to happen. I think that’s been the plan from the very beginning. One of the reasons I think and Tom and I have had this conversation before, that we fared so poorly two years ago is that our leadership simply didn't believe it. They got themselves back into a shutdown, but we never believe it. We used to go to conference and they would tell us, now, remember, the message is that the Senate shut down, not us. And then, next week, John is on late night television blaming his own conference, his own Republicans for doing it.
So, we didn’t believe it. We don’t believe it now. My guess is we will cut a deal with Democrats, or at least some Republicans will in order to keep the government open next week.
COLE: Well, first of all, look, on Planned Parenthood, there's no money in the short term C.R. for Planned Parenthood. Ninety percent of their money comes from Medicaid, not from anything we’re going to do.
And the remainder is awarded on what are called grants. They're all done in about April. There's none lefts to do this year, literally none.
So, the idea that we're fighting over money for Planned Parenthood is -- it’s a canard. It’s just not true.
WALLACE: Congressman Cole, let me pick up on this with you, because there is some speculation now that with Boehner on his way out, he’s going to be speaker but only for a month more, and frankly the Mick Mulvaneys of the world don't have any control over him anymore, the argument is not only will he cut a deal to extend a C.R., but that he may also do some other things he's been constrained on, like raise the debt limit, like extend the Export/Import Bank, like pass a highway bill. Is he going to do some of that stuff and would you support that?
COLE: It depends on the nature of the deal, always. If you can do what Paul Ryan wants to do on highways, and that is couple it with tax reform, then actually put some money in the system, absolutely I would support that. Ex-Im Bank, we just disagree. I think, and, frankly, many House Republicans support that.
WALLACE: How would you feel if John Boehner works with Democrats because that’s who he’s going to need to pass some of these things that the conservative hard-liners would --
COLE: Anything you want to get done in this period, as long as the president is a Democrat, as long as the Democrats have a filibuster control, everything is going to have to be some sort of compromise. Or you can do nothing. We can just simply wait and hope we win the next election.
WALLACE: Congressman Mulvaney, is this the surrender Congress?
MULVANEY: That’s not what we heard during last election cycle, was it? Give us control of the Senate and things will be different. Give us control of the House and things will be different.
COLE: You didn’t hear that from me.
MULVANEY: No, we didn't hear it from you. But we did hear it from Mitch McConnell. We have overpromised and under-delivered. And that is why I think you see such disaffection amongst the base for the establishment candidates. It’s the reason the outsiders are gaining I think 65 percent --
COLE: We live in an era of divided government and in the system of checks and balances. And if you don't understand that, and you don't --
WALLACE: I want to move this on to, because, Congressman Cole, some presidential candidates celebrated Boehner's resignation. Here’s Senator Ted Cruz.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. TED CRUZ, R-TEXAS, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Yesterday, John Boehner was speaker of the house. Y'all come to town and somehow that changes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: Congressman, what do you think of -- and Cruz isn't the only one, Republican presidential candidates campaigning against GOP leaders, whether it's Boehner or McConnell in Congress?
COLE: Classless, tasteless and counterproductive. This is a guy that for 25 years has a distinguished record in the House.
WALLACE: You're talking about Boehner.
COLE: I’m talking about Boehner. Certainly not talking about Senator Cruz.
And, again, who got real tax cuts, real spending reductions, real entitlement reform in divided government. I would stack his record of accomplishment against any of these people who are being critical of him.
What have they done? Nothing. And they’ve been in the Senate for a few years, by the way.
So, it's pretty easy to defend John Boehner. I think it's pretty hard to defend remarks like we just heard.
MULVANEY: If you add up the five outsiders, Trump, Fiorina, Carson, Paul and Cruz, in South Carolina, I think right now, the polling about 65 percent. Tom, I --
COLE: Do you defend those remarks?
MULVANEY: I don’t -- I don't --
COLE: I thought that was the question.
MULVANEY: I don’t defend the personal attacks.
COLE: This was never about -- this was never about personalities. It's not just Ted Cruz. Carly Fiorina said if we didn't have a team that could defund Planned Parenthood, we should get a new leadership. So, this is pervasive in the party and I think to simply ignore it and say, well, y’all don’t understand the filibuster rule is dismissing huge pieces of our base and I think wrongly so.
WALLACE: All right. Let's get to the next issue because the king is dead, long live the king. And the question now in Washington is, who’s going to replace John Boehner?
Congressman Cole, you were quoted I think on Friday and said, it would be a quick vote, it’s going to be next Thursday, October 1st, and we're going to move along on this, but now, somehow Republicans, including Peter Roskam, are saying, no, no, let's slow down, let’s have a meeting of the caucus, let’s discuss things.
First of all, timing, and how likely is it the number two man, Kevin McCarthy, the majority leader, will move up?
COLE: Let me answer them in reverse. I don’t think there's much doubt Kevin will be the next speaker of the House and he should. Frankly, he’s had a brilliant career and well-positioned.
In terms of the timing of the vote, to me, quicker is better. You know, why do you want to have a long drawn out family drama? It's not all if we don't know all the players here that are running. It’s not as if we don’t know the issues. I don't think there's a lot to be gained by dragging it out.
WALLACE: Congressman Mulvaney, will McCarthy be the speaker? And is there going to be a change? How many of your members of the harder line conservatives do you think that some will take the top position?
MULVANEY: I think it's fair to say that Kevin has the inside track for the position of being our leader and so forth. I think the important question is, will things change? Will they change for the better or we simply replace Mr. Boehner with somebody else who do the same thing? So the question I think becomes more one of style -- excuse me, substance than of style. I think Kevin is more ground up than top down type of leader. But again, that’s the reason we have elections.
WALLACE: Congressman Mulvaney, Congressman Cole, thank you both. Thanks for coming in today, and, of course, we'll stay on top of this leadership fight.
COLE: Thank you.
MULVANEY: Thank you.
WALLACE: Up next, we’ll bring our Sunday group to discuss what the shake-up means for the GOP.
Plus, plus what would you like to ask the panel about Boehner's resignation and whether Republicans should vote to defund Planned Parenthood, even if it means a government shutdown?
Just go to Facebook or Twitter @FoxNewsSunday, and we may use your question on the air.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BOEHNER: I don't want my members to have to go through this, and I certainly don't want the institution to go through this. Especially when I knew I was thinking about walking out the door anyway.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: Speaker John Boehner's decision to step down, which has raised as many questions here in Washington as it's answered. Time to bring in our Sunday group. Syndicated columnist George Will. Anne Gearan of the "Washington Post." The head of Heritage Action for America, Michael Needham, and Fox News political analyst, Juan Williams.
Michael, you and your group have been bashing Boehner for years, I think you'll agree. So let me get to my bottom line question. Why do you think you're better off without Boehner than you were with him?
MICHAEL NEEDHAM, HERITAGE ACTION FOR AMERICA: Sure. A year ago, one of the senior Republican congressional aides was talking in a fund-raiser of big business groups, and said if you give John Boehner 245 Republicans, we'll take the crazies that you hate and make them irrelevant. Nancy Pelosi does not talk about her base that way. Barack Obama doesn't think about his base that way. Harry Reid does not govern based on that way. And that's the type of leadership that we had over the last couple of years. The reason that Tom Cole can paint that picture of John Boehner's accomplishments that he painted, was for the last five years, conservatives in the House have fought tooth and nail to stop John Boehner on his agenda. A so-called grand bargain with Barack Obama that would raise taxes by hundreds of billions, if not trillions of dollars. Amnesty, which is not what the conservative base wants to do.
We need a Republican leadership that is showing conservative values, is showing how they can make life better for all Americans, and sending it over to the Senate, sending it to the president's desk, so we can have actual conflict and conversation about the different visions the two parties had. That's not what we've had. We've had to fight our own speaker. And that needs to -- and that has ended.
WALLACE: George, is Boehner the problem? And will the next speaker be able to do any more, given the fact that you have 46 Democrats in the Senate, so they can sustain a filibuster, and you've got Barack Obama in the Oval Office?
GEORGE WILL, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: We're going to find out. I think if big changes occur because Boehner is gone, this will be a huge event. It will be an even bigger event if it turns out not much changes. Let me give you an analogy. A Major League Baseball team has trouble, they can't hit, pitch or field the ball. So in the middle of the season, they do the only thing they can do in a hurry, they fire the manager. The next game, the next day, a new manager walks up to deliver the lineup card to the umpires, and it's the same lineup, the same guys who can't catch, pitch or field.
So the question is, is this going to make a difference? I think what we're going to learn here is that it's not the person, it's the plan. This is what Mrs. Roskam is talking about. Conservatives have to ask, would they rather have say, Jeb Hensarling, managing the flow of the House or would they rather have him chairing the Financial Services Committee? The same is true with Paul Ryan, who has taken himself out of this because he's head of Ways & Means.
Peter Roskam, it seems to me, is absolutely right about one thing, deep breath, calm down, and let's see if by making stylistic changes, that is, how you explain and defend what you're doing, you can make the most of the very little running room you've got. But basically I think it's a big event because it's not a big event.
WALLACE: Is that what this is about, stylistic changes?
NEEDHAM: I don't think it is. So far this year, the president of the United States has vetoed two pieces of legislation. So far this year, the biggest fight that we've had in the Senate was between conservatives and their leadership over the Export-Import Bank. That's not what we need.
George is right. This may take more lineup changes. A year and a half, the leadership of the Republican Party was John Boehner and Eric Cantor; six weeks from now neither of them will be in Congress. And if we need more lineup changes to put forth the difference in message that we need to have, then those lineup changes will happen.
WALLACE: I was talking to a top Republican staffer yesterday. He said, look, here's the problem now with Boehner out. The Republicans are split, they own a government shutdown if it happens. We used to have a weak hand, now we have no hand at all, because Barack Obama can sit there and the Democrats can sit there and say, you don't want to raise the debt limit? Fine. You don't want to pass a budget? Fine, you own it.
NEEDHAM: It is accepted that Barack Obama, because he says I will not defund Planned Parenthood, that there is no chance he will blink off his convictions. When a coequal branch of government says I'm sorry, there are not 60 votes in the Senate to fund Planned Parenthood after the barbaric things we have seen them say and do, then everyone is supposed to say, well, Republicans, of course they'll blink off their convictions. Yes, when you have one party that does not hold convictions, or is willing to move off them every time and you have an executive branch that doesn't, the Republicans end up blamed (ph). The Republican needs to -- if you can't win the argument, you don't need to be Lincoln or Churchill, that an organization that has so violated the public trust, that they joke about buying Lamborghinis with baby body parts, and you can't win that argument, what argument can you win?
WALLACE: We asked you for questions for the panel, and we got this from Twitter from Brian Maxwell. He gives this advice to the GOP, "grow a spine, stand their ground, and make Obama and the Democrats shut the government down."
Juan, I've got to say, I hear this a lot from conservatives. Why do Republicans always get the blame when the government gets shut down? Because obviously both sides play a role in it?
JUAN WILLIAMS, FOX NEWS POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, it's an interesting question. And I think you're on target, is it Brian?
WILLIAMS: Brian. But Brian, I think you're blaming all Republicans, and in fact, I would point to Michael at Heritage, Senate Conservative Fund, I would point at the Tea Party caucus.
When you look at the polls, you know, it's about I think 85 percent of people who self-identify as Tea Party members, who say they want no compromise, they want more of what you just heard Michael describe this morning, stand up. And if you attach the name Obama to any idea, well then more Republicans will say, oh, no, we have got to fight Obama. But in general, this lack of compromise is something you see from Republicans. You don't see Democrats say oh, we're going to fight over climate change or minimum wage or immigration. We're going to shut down the government.
WALLACE: They're fighting over the funding of Planned Parenthood.
WILLIAMS: Look, I'm just telling you, you haven't seen it in the past over these issues. That's not typical Democratic Party behavior.
WILLIAMS: Shutdown 2013, shutdown, immigration reform, constant threat of shutdown by Republicans.
NEEDHAM: Juan, can you tell the viewers why it's not a perfectly acceptable compromise to say we're going to cut absolutely no money out of women's health, we're going to take finds that have gone from an organization that I think we can say has violated the public trust--
WILLIAMS: I don't agree with that, Michael.
NEEDHAM: Why is moving money away from Planned Parenthood, which jokes about buying Lamborghinis, with the price that we've negotiated--
WILLIAMS: Michael, we can have a separate conversation--
NEEDHAM: -- and moving it to separate federally funded women's health centers, why is that not a reasonable compromise?
WILLIAMS: First of all, I think this is like a threat to the entire governance of America over this one issue.
NEEDHAM: Moving money from one organization to a different federally funded women's health centers?
WILLIAMS: No, and secondly, in terms of women's health, there simply isn't a structure that would deliver women's health care to low-income people in the way Planned Parenthood does.
NEEDHAM: -- thousands of federally funded women's health care--
WALLACE: I want to (inaudible), into the conversation, and I guess it's so interesting to watch this fight going on, because at a time when Hillary Clinton couldn't be in more trouble and is besieged on the issue of e-mails, how relieved are they that the Republicans are in a circular firing squad?
ANNE GEARAN, WASHINGTON POST: Well, clearly for the Hillary Clinton campaign, any minute that people aren't talking about e-mail and Benghazi is a good minute for her, but the question is, how will she be able to capitalize on it, if at all? Who the speaker of the House is, is not particularly material to her or to really I think to the current state of the 2016 debate.
WALLACE: She can certainly capitalize on the issue of defunding Planned Parenthood.
GEARAN: Absolutely. And they are trying very hard. That is the main thing that they were doing during the last Republican debate, the Democratic -- led by Hillary -- sort of rapid response was all about every single time the Planned Parenthood issue came up, that was the thing they were highlighting.
That's something the Hillary Clinton campaign sees as a base motivator for them, much the same way on the opposite end, and it's a base motivator for the Republican candidates who were talking about it. They see nothing but good in highlighting what Republicans are saying about it.
WALLACE: Michael, it brings up the question, you kind of heard this from Jeb Bush in the first segment, saying instead of focusing on this, and trying to do things that you're not going to be able to do, why not do everything you can to elect a conservative, pro-life president in 2016?
NEEDHAM: We should. And we need to do everything we can to --
WALLACE: But don't you think that some of the things that are being done now are hurting that effort?
NEEDHAM: No, look, I think people have to be confident to go out there and work the polls and walk precincts, and show up and vote, that things are actually going to be delivered.
We have seen a Republican president with 55 Republicans in the Senate and control of the House in 2005. I don't remember Planned Parenthood being defunded. And so the notion that if we have the Senate and the House, and a Republican president in 2017, all of a sudden we're going to get stuff done, the Republican Congress when President Bush in 2005 wanted to go forward on Social Security reform, boldly, the Republican Congress wouldn't even schedule a vote. And so I think conservatives want to see not just wait and things will be better in 2017; they actually want to see the Congress do the right thing, stick to its principles, and say we're going to shift funds from one women's health organization to another, because we're taking them away from the organization that jokes about buying Lamborghinis with baby body parts.
WALLACE: All right, we have to take a break here. When we come back, new Fox polls on 2016, we'll tell you who's up and who is down. Plus, what do you think? Will the pope's speech to Congress change things in Washington? Let me know on Facebook or Twitter @FoxNewsSunday and use the hashtag, fns.
WALLACE: Hillary Clinton is the big loser and Dr. Ben Carson is the big winner in the latest Fox News poll. The Democratic front-runner's favorable rating hits a new low of 38 percent, in a national survey of voters in both parties. That's down seven points from May. Some 56 percent of voters now say they have an unfavorable opinion of Clinton. Meanwhile, Dr. Carson now has the best net favorable rating among all voters. Some 46 percent say they have a positive view of Carson, that is up 20 points since May. And when it comes to Republican voters, Carson is way ahead of the pack. He has a net positive rating, favorable over unfavorable, a plus 52.
Marco Rubio is plus 35, Donald Trump is plus 12, and Jeb Bush is plus one, meaning as many Republicans view him positively as negatively.
With that, time to bring back our panel. George, where does this Republican race stand right now?
WILL: Well, if you believe as I think it is reasonable to believe, that the Trump phenomenon has passed its apogee, his whole theory was I'm a tough guy, he now seems like a whiner and a crybaby trying to -- wants the government to crack down on Fox because some bad words were used about him; wants to sue makers of t-shirts that are rude to him. I mean, it just doesn't radiate strength any longer.
I think the net favorable/unfavorable you cited is very important, because there are only four with significant net favorables. Two of them, Carson and Fiorina, are probably not going to be nominated. The other two are Rubio and Cruz, and we could see in the net favorables there the shape of the race to come.
WALLACE: Let me just say that the battle between George Will and Donald Trump clearly continues. Donald Trump also spoke to the Values Voters Summit this week, where he took off after Senator Marco Rubio. Let's look at what happened.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: You have this clown Marco Rubio, I've been so nice to him. I've been so nice.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: Yes, they booed him. Michael, do you agree with brother Will that the Trump campaign has passed its apogee, is losing some of its steam?
NEEDHAM: Well, I don't know. Who knows with Donald Trump. What you had a month ago in the Fox News poll, 52 percent of voters supported one of the four outside candidates -- Trump, Carly, Carson and Ted Cruz -- it's now up to 62 percent in the latest Fox News poll. So I think the basic contours of the race continue. This is an inside versus outsider race, and I think one thing that might end up helping Ted Cruz is actually that the House Freedom Caucus, these conservatives in the House, were able to take down John Boehner. It shows that there are people in Washington, D.C. who can fight, there are people in Washington, D.C., showing that kind of outsider impulse. I think that's something that is going to in the end help Ted Cruz.
WALLACE: Is he your candidate?
NEEDHAM: No, I don't have a candidate. But you know, Ted, Marco, Jeb Bush, was exciting, but we need somebody who is an outsider and somebody who is going to come and look a party in the eye that is in the pocket of big business and say it's time for us to fight for conservative voters.
WALLACE: Then there's Hillary Clinton, who I think it's fair to say had another bad week, especially with news that the FBI has apparently recovered some of the so-called private e-mails, 30,000 private emails, that she said she had deleted from her private server. And despite her claims, there were reports that the State Department didn't know that she had a private server. She was asked about that after a meeting at the Des Moines Register. Here she is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HILLARY CLINTON, D-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: All I know is what I have said, and what I have said is it was allowed. The State Department has confirmed that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: Anne, she just can't seem to shake this, can she?
GEARAN: No, and it really is going to stick with her for the entire campaign in one form or another, certainly through the end of this year. There's the monthly e-mail dump from the State Department. We'll have another one of those on Wednesday. And just as a -- as an issue, it has attached itself to her. And no matter how many times she says what I did was allowed, what a lot of people are hearing, and I think your poll bears this out to some degree, is people are going like, what? Didn't she do something bad? It really doesn't get a lot more -- there is a lot more depth to it than that in the perceptions of a lot of Americans.
WALLACE: And there keep turning out these e-mails, like she said she didn't start the private e-mail until March of 2009, now there's a bunch of emails that have come -- conversations she was having in January, with David Petraeus, so I mean, it just feels like it never ends and she hasn't told the full story.
GEARAN: And every time there's one of these tiny moves of the needle, and some small new thing comes out, it, there is, again, there's a perception, wait a minute, why haven't they ripped off the Band-Aid here and gone and told us everything there is to tell. I honestly have no idea how much there is to tell or what the real explanation for the fact that these particular e-mails that were just discovered weren't discovered earlier. Could be a perfectly innocent explanation.
WALLACE: How much concern about the fact -- that may be a little shift, but when you find out that the FBI has recovered 30,000 -- or some of the 30,000 private e-mails, that opens up a real possibility of a can of worms.
GEARAN: Absolutely. That is a real area of potentially risk for her. Because presumably some of those e-mails go to the many other kinds of things that Hillary Clinton is and was and did. Right? She was a named part of a family foundation that did work around the world. She was a former and probably future political candidate. She was a longtime connected Democrat with friends across the party and back -- going back decades, with whom she communicated, as anyone might, but the fact that she was doing it all mixed up with her work email is now a potential area of further scrutiny.
WALLACE: With all due respect to Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, I don't think there's any question that the most memorable moment of the week here in Washington certainly was when Pope Francis walked down the main aisle of the House in his white robe. I love this picture, looking down on him there. To urge Congress to work together for the common good. And his message could not have been more simple.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
POPE FRANCIS: Do unto others as you will have them do unto you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: The golden rule. Juan, everybody applauded, both sides of the aisle. But is there any chance this could somehow lessen the -- the partisanship, break the fever in Washington?
WILLIAMS: You are such an optimist, Chris.
WALLACE: I asked the question.
WILLIAMS: No. Politicians will use religion and the pope as wedge issues when it's helpful to them. They dismiss it when it's not helpful. In general, what we saw here, I think, is the golden rule. Let's work together, let's have some comity, some unity, let's get something done for the people of the United States and the world. And what you saw in terms of response from many of the Democrats was, you know what? Typically we distance ourselves from the pope on the abortion issues, gay rights, but now we feel more welcoming and more embracing of this pope. On the Republican side, it was the other response, which was, you know what? I think it was Jeb Bush who said on climate change, the pope is wonderful, but he's not a scientist. And on immigration, which was his number one issue, you can see that the Republican base is just out of sync with what the hope has to say. About 22 percent of the United States is Catholic. We've had one Catholic president, Kennedy. One Catholic vice president, Biden, and I'm just astounded that in fact, we have as a nation so embraced this pope on this visit. It's not been the historical record in this country.
WALLACE: George, what struck you about the pope's visit?
WILL: Well, the fact that he was bold in intervening in what he knows is a very divisive issue in this country, on immigration. I happen to think he's right, but I also think it's problematic of have a faith leader of any persuasion and of any origin to intervene as forthrightly in an American debate. The net effect of this I think will be approximately zero.
NEEDHAM: The pope's message was fantastic, and I think there are deep differences between the two parties in terms of how we can best serve, and lift people out of poverty, and that's not something that should be -- we should be ashamed of. There are philosophical differences between the parties.
WALLACE: Thank you, panel. See you next Sunday.
Up next, our power player of the week, trying to stand up to hurricanes-force winds.
WALLACE: It's one of these places around Washington folks here have never heard of, but it turns out it's been doing fascinating work for more than half a century. Here's our power player of the week.
WALLACE: In the 21st century, why do we need wind tunnels? Can't you do all this on computer models?
DR. JEWEL BARLOW, DIRECTOR, GLENN L. MARTIN WIND TUNNEL: Short answer is no.
WALLACE: Dr. Jewel Barlow is director of the Glenn L. Martin Wind Tunnel at the University of Maryland. Since 1949, they have tested everything from plane models to cars to roofing perform in high winds.
And that will tell you how efficient or inefficient it is?
BARLOW: Or whether it will survive in the case of a hurricane.
WALLACE: The week we were there, they watched how safety signs for offshore oil rigs would stand up for one hour to 100-mile-per-hour winds.
BARLOW: What you can find out is whether that particular product will survive in any given wind speed.
WALLACE: Barlow took us inside the wind tunnels. Starting with the giant fan.
BARLOW: There's a 2,000 horsepower electric motor here that drives this guy. It's about 20 feet in diameter. We can generate wind up to 230 miles per hour in the test section.
WALLACE: Then to the test area of the tunnel.
BARLOW: This is where any model that we test, car, plane, whatever, would get mounted in here.
WALLACE: And what are you able to measure on the model?
BARLOW: We are able to measure lift, drag, side force, and the moments that tend to roll it or pitch it or yaw it.
WALLACE: We wanted to get a feel for a wind test. Student Isaac Roberts agreed to participate.
BARLOW: All right. Andrew, give us 50 miles an hour, tropical storm conditions.
WALLACE: He can handle that pretty easily?
BARLOW: Pretty easily, yes.
WALLACE: But it got tougher at 80 miles an hour, a category one hurricane.
BARLOW: Yes, at 80 miles per hour, nobody can stand straight up like this without the tethers.
OK. Let's got to 100, guys. This will be a category 2 hurricane speed.
BARLOW: I can say he's bolder than most people we have seen.
WALLACE: Then they cranked up the fan even higher.
BARLOW: This will be 115 miles per hour, category 3.
WALLACE: We're talking about a serious hurricane at this point.
BARLOW: This is a serious hurricane.
WALLACE: But hurricanes are just part of what they simulate at the wind tunnel. They test car models to make them more aerodynamic, and thus fuel efficient. They even brought in the 2002 Olympic bobsled team.
BARLOW: So they can get into the bobsled and measure the effect of the different tuck positions.
WALLACE: Barlow has been director of the tunnel since 1977. But he reminded me, wind experiments are still more precise than any computer model.
BARLOW: The discovery of new ways to understand airflow is still very fascinating to me. Maybe we're slow learners, but we're still learning.
WALLACE: And that's the challenge of it?
BARLOW: That's the challenge.
WALLACE: Over the years they've tested everything from NASCAR models to the keel on a yacht that won the America's Cup. And Dr. Barlow says the schedule to use the wind tunnel is always packed.
And that's it for today. Have a great week. We'll see you next "Fox News Sunday."
Content and Programming Copyright 2015 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2015 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.