Congressman Barney Frank

Barney Frank’s State of the Union

Interview 2: Congressman Barney Frank


United States Congressman Barney Frank is inarguably one of the most powerful, and effective, legislators in the House of Representatives. What’s arguable is whether he’s a good guy or a bad guy. Like so much in Washington, the answer usually comes down to party lines. Democrats tend to love him. Many Republicans don’t. But unique in an era of vitriolic partisan politics, even many of Frank’s detractors have praised his intelligence and eloquence. Former Republican Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson called Frank “scary-smart.” Republican Dana Rohrabacher described him as “fair,” which is high praise coming from one of the most conservative House members. He has many admirers in and out of the beltway. Surveys of Capitol Hill staffers named him the “brainiest” and “most eloquent” member of the House. In a New Yorker profile of Frank, journalist Jeffrey Toobin wrote that in Congress Frank plays the “role of wise guy and wise man.” And a new biography of Frank describes him as “arguably the most unique and fascinating, certainly the most entertaining political figure in Washington.”

Over the thirty years since he was first elected to Congress, Frank has been an advocate for the poor; has worked on many fronts to improve education and healthcare; was Bill Clinton’s staunchest defender throughout the Monica Lewinsky scandal; pushed for the legalization of marijuana; hammered away at both Bush administrations for their wars in Iraq, and he’s done more for gay rights than any other politician. While he’d been at the center of many national debates, and instrumental in the passing significant legislation, he was never as prominent as he was in 2007 when he became chairman of the powerful House Financial Services Committee, which oversees the nation’s financial institutions, including banks, securities, insurance, and housing industries. Frank was on the hottest seat in the country, because his chairmanship coincided with America’s worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.

Few Americans need to be reminded of the economic calamities of the past half decade. As HFS chairman, Frank was charged with working with the administration, Congress, economists, and others to figure out how the disaster happened, and–most importantly–how to fix it and prevent it from happening again.

Frank worked with the Bush administration and, after the election of 2008, the Obama administration, to develop, hone, and get passed bailouts and other emergency measures. For his efforts he received a great deal of praise–the documentary Inside Job singles Frank out as one of the few heroes of the financial crisis–but he also was targeted, especially for his past defense of the government-backed mortgage giants Fannie May and Freddie Mac that all but collapsed. The attacks were virulent, no more so than the one from a raging Bill O’Reilly, when Frank was a guest on the O’Reilly Factor. In the exchange, immortalized in a popular You Tube video, O’Reilly outdid himself even by his normal bombastic standards, shrieking at Frank, calling him a coward. Frank, when he could get a word in edgewise, chided O’Reilly’s “stupidity” and charged that he was “too dumb” to understand complex economics.

The highlight of Frank’s chairmanship was when, in close collaboration with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, he pushed through historic financial reform legislation that bears his and a Senate colleague’s names. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act increases oversight of and regulations for banks and other financial institutions and creates a new agency to protect consumers from practices that helped lead to foreclosures and bankruptcies. Many economists praised Dodd-Frank, saying that it could prevent a similar financial crisis in the future. If it survives.

After the midterm elections of 2010, when the Republicans took over Congress, Frank lost his chairmanship. The Republican led Congress has Dodd-Frank in its sites. Without control of the Senate, never mind the White House, it’s unlikely that the Republicans could repeal the law, but they have the power to defund, and therefore nullify, many of its provisions. Now Frank is leading Democrats’ efforts to protect the reforms–as he describes it, “to mitigate the damage the Republicans can do.”

Frank, from Bayonne, New Jersey, served in the Massachusetts state legislature until he became a US Congressman in 1981. One of his first campaign slogans played off his famous frumpiness: “Neatness isn’t everything.” Apparently not, because he has won every election since then. Frank came out of the closet as the first openly gay member of Congress in 1987 and he and others predicted that it could end his political career. However, Frank handily won the next election with his largest margin to date. Since then he’s been an outspoken advocate for gay rights. He was the driving force that led, this year, to the repeal of the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy.

Last year Frank, who is 71, said he was considering retiring from Congress, but in early 2011 he announced that he will seek reelection in 2012 because he “has unfinished business, including doing what I can to make sure the Republicans don’t dismantle financial regulations and thereby set us up for another economic catastrophe.” Given this and numerous other pressing national and international issues at which Frank is at the epicenter, we decided to go back to him for what is his second Playboy Interview. (The first was in 1999, not long after the Clinton impeachment by the House.) We tapped Contributing Editor David Sheff, who conducted our earlier interview, for the assignment. Here’s Sheff’s report:

“This is the first time Playboy has gone back to a politician for a second interview, in part because they never last that long in office. Many Congressional seats are like those in a game of musical chairs, but not Frank’s. Since our first interview, his power as a Congressman has increased. He hasn’t slowed—quite the opposite. I spent a typical day with him that was filled with nonstop committee hearings, meetings with colleagues and constituents, and interviews with the CNBC and the BBC, all sandwiched between Congressional votes. Frank says that it isn’t as much fun in Congress now that the Republicans are in power, but there’s a part of him thrives in a familiar role as outsider and opposition. ‘I’m used to being in the minority,’ he once said. ‘I’m a left-handed, gay Jew.’”

PLAYBOY: After the 2010 midterm elections, which ended the recent years when your party held the White House, Senate, and House, is your job less fun?

FRANK: It’s not less fun, but it is less stressful. There’s more work being chairman. Getting the reform bill was a lot of work because it was substantive and complex. There were many interests fighting against you, but it was very important for country. The stress level was very high. There wasn’t a lot of sleep. When I was chairman, there were 71 members of the committee. When I was going to bed at night the number I was thinking of was 36, the number needed to win every vote. It was juggling, debating, deal making. It continued even after we completed the bill because we had to then replicate it in order to work it out with the Senate. There’s still a lot to do, of course, but it’s different. For now it’s about counterpunching. They set the agenda and we respond.

PLAYBOY: Are you satisfied with your tenure as chairman?

FRANK: We accomplished a lot of important things at a moment when the country was in economic collapse. We reversed things. Now our job is to protect what we can so it doesn’t happen again.

PLAYBOY: What could make it happen again?

FRANK: The financial reform bill that we passed has in place protections that will prevent the excesses that caused the crisis. It provides regulations and consumer protections. It’s all threatened by the Republicans who want to dismantle it by defunding it.

PLAYBOY: The Republicans argue that your bill is detrimental to the economy and a job killer.

FRANK: It’s the same old thing they always say even though it’s been discredited. Most sane people, including economists, agree that the collapse was a result of a lack of regulations. But the Republicans don’t want regulation. They say the free market is always right, that government is always wrong. They don’t want any regulation whatsoever, but that’s what us got us in this mess in the first place.

PLAYBOY: Specifically what provisions of financial reform are threatened?

FRANK: The Republicans are trying to re-deregulate by reducing funding to the SEC, which has new responsibilities for investor protection, and reducing funding for the commodity future trading commission. They want to defund these commissions, which are in place to regulate hedge funds and derivatives. They also want to reduce funding for the consumer protection bureau. I’m less worried about the consumer protection provisions, because the Republicans will probably stay away from most of them because it will look to bad if they go after consumers. Americans wanted credit card reform. But the other two–there’s been all this talk about the shadow banking system that is part of what caused the economic crash. We succeeded in finding ways to end it, but the Republicans want it back. I think of the old radio show: What evil lurks in the hearts of men? The shadow knows… What evil lurks in the heart of their shadow financial system? We were trying to do away with it, but the Republicans are working to be sure that it stays how it was that caused the mess in the first place.

PLAYBOY: Besides losing the Democratic majority in the house, how else have things changed with the new Congress, especially as it includes members of the tea party?

FRANK: The Republicans are trying to hold their side together, which is very difficult because the leadership has to make the tea party types happy. It isn’t easy for them. They aren’t able to move forward in ways they’d want to because of the instability inherent in that dynamic.

PLAYBOY: Ten years ago, when asked about the overall caliber of members of Congress, you said that Americans were by and large well represented, that our elected representatives were “a smart group.” Is that still true?

FRANK: I’d say it’s a little less smart. There are people around now who got elected to the house who wouldn’t have in the past.

PLAYBOY: Why? Many people see the election as a referendum on your party and President Obama. The bottom line is that the public didn’t like what you guys did.

FRANK: The problem was that at the time of the election the economy was weak. Things had been progressing, getting better, but then we were hit by the crisis in Greece. It was bad timing. Also we were punished because of the bailouts, which made people very angry. The bailouts began under Bush, of course, but people’s memory is short. There was a perception that the rich were getting richer while everyone else was suffering. To me it’s ironic, because the Republicans support the executive salaries that people rightfully hate. They don’t want to tax the rich. People support the Republicans against their own interests, but people are angry, which I understand. So it was a combination of the bad economy and anger by the people because the people who caused the bad economy appeared to be getting rewarded during that period.

PLAYBOY: In retrospect, were the bailouts the right strategy?

FRANK: The strategy has been vindicated. Each one. AIG, TARP, the banks, the car companies. There was a problem big it would have been impossible to fix it overnight and there was no one solution, but we stopped things from getting as bad as they could have. The entire economy was at risk of complete collapse and we stopped that.

PLAYBOY: Republicans now say financial reform, plus the healthcare bill, will cost jobs at a time when unemployment is still high.

FRANK: It’s nonsense. It’s the same right-wing ideology. It’s Republican mantra, but nothing we did will cost jobs.

PLAYBOY: You said that you understand voter anger. Do you understand the reaction that led to a Congress in which 35 newly elected members have never held any political office whatsoever? People were fed up.

FRANK: Yes, and when things aren’t going well, Americans want change.

PLAYBOY: What’s the impact of all those untested and inexperienced Congressmen and women in the House?

FRANK: I haven’t felt an impact yet. The ones who have are the Republican leadership. They’ve had to pull back and adopt positions they never would have. They haven’t been able to effectively maintain control. Republican leadership needs to build itself to the point that they can exercise some restraint on their own extremist members. I don’t know if they’ll be able to. In my opinion, the extremism is destructive because there’s no room for compromise—or never mind compromise, there’s no room for civil debate. The big difference is that many of these people don’t believe the differences we have are legitimate disagreements between reasonable people. It used to be that way. Now the Republicans have to take a far more angry tone. There’s no working together. They don’t accept give and take. Moderate Republicans have to worry about appearing moderate; they have to hate us.

PLAYBOY: Are you saying that moderate Republicans aren’t being honest about own their position and that their rhetoric is only to placate the extreme right?

FRANK: For some, it’s legitimate. For some, it’s posturing. At Ted Kennedy’s funeral, Orin Hatch boasted in almost unseemly fashion about what a great friend he was. He told all these stories in which he was the hero. Now he’s repudiating the notion that he can work with Democrats.

PLAYBOY: There’s always been anger and divisive politics. Are things worse now?

FRANK: It’s been worse since when Newt Gingrich took over the Republicans. He realized that the party wasn’t going to make inroads the way they were going, so it was very calculated. He said, We’re never going to win until we demonize the democrats. Stop saying they’re honorable people with whom we disagree and start saying they’re bad people. Evil people.

PLAYBOY: You were embroiled in the battles then as they manifested in Gingrich’s and other Republicans’ attempt to impeach President Clinton for the Monica Lewinsky scandal. You supported Clinton. Looking back, how do you assess that time?

FRANK: It was one of the most ludicrous times in the history of Washington, when Congress spent all of its time and money on the President’s sex life rather than addressing the nation’s very real problems.

PLAYBOY: At the time you famously said that you were unable to complete reading the report by special prosecutor Kevin Starr on his investigation into President Clinton’s relationship with Monica Lewinsky because it was “too much reading about heterosexual sex.”

FRANK: It was an embarrassing time for the country. The angry vitriolic thing has been going on since then, a focus on things that don’t matter, but are a distraction and get people angry. It’s manipulative and counterproductive. As a result, we have a Congress in which many people don’t want to find things we can agree on, which means that there will be a stalemate. They took advantage of the climate in America. Now we have all these angry people representing other angry people. Rather than working together to fix things, to repair things, the Republicans are just using that anger to try to dismantle the progress we made that helped pull us out of the recession.

PLAYBOY: Part of the Republicans’ criticism of you and your fellow Democrats is that your solutions to the economic problem–new regulations, new and expanded regulatory agencies–involve spending money we don’t have.

FRANK: We have the money to fund the bill. And I’d argue that we can’t afford not.

PLAYBOY: Along with the financial reforms, Republicans also want to kill President Obama’s healthcare bill. Will they succeed?

FRANK: I don’t think they’ll get away with it. By 2012 and the next election, important provisions of healthcare will have kicked in and people will see that the catastrophes they’ve warned about haven’t happened. Reality will refute the prejudice. People will see they’re beneficiaries. A pilot stopped me a few days ago in an airport and thanked me. He said, “My son has healthcare now. Don’t let them take it away.” More and more people will experience the change first hand

PLAYBOY: Like with financial reforms, the Republicans claim that America can’t afford the healthcare bill. They continue to cite the budget and deficit.

FRANK: If they’re really concerned about the budget and deficit, they should join me to cut the defense budget. It needs massive reductions. We can save at least $150 billion a year.

PLAYBOY: It’s a familiar split between the two parties. Isn’t it unlikely that Republicans will cut the defense budget?

FRANK: Actually at this point they may come on board. The tea partiers want to trim government spending and they don’t want America to be the world’s police, so maybe there’s hope. It’s something we agree on.

PLAYBOY: Does it surprise you to have an issue on which you and the tea party Republicans may agree?

FRANK: Well, there’s a problem with their take on this, which is that some of it comes from xenophobia. They’d cut economic assistance to poor children if they aren’t American. However, there’s still agreement that spending tens of billions of dollars nation building doesn’t work or make sense. There’s agreement that we’re spending far too much on defense. It’s inarguable that we’re way over committed.

PLAYBOY: How would you cut defense spending?

FRANK: We don’t need to be in Western Europe anymore. They don’t need us to defend them. From who? There’s no threat. Even if there was, they’re wealthy enough to do it on their own. I’d cut way back on our nuclear arsenal. Our nuclear capabilities are ridiculous. We’re overloaded in nuclear weapons and the Soviet Union isn’t a threat anymore. Generally we’re greatly overcommitted throughout the world. Yes, South Korea is a problem and we should stay there, but we don’t need troops in Japan. Why? We are still trying to be the world’s policeman and have no business do so. It gets us into trouble and we can’t afford it.

PLAYBOY: What would you do about the threat of a nuclear Iran?

FRANK: It’s a problem, but the Iranians know that if they were to use nuclear weapons we would retaliate heavily. We have a hundred times more weapons than we need to do that.

PLAYBOY: How would cuts impact the war on terrorism?

FRANK: The biggest threat now is terrorism, yes. It’s a real threat. They do want to kill us. But it’s not expensive to fight terrorism. You don’t win with nuclear submarines. I wish you did. If you did, we’d win, because they don’t have any.

PLAYBOY: Do you agree that we need military presence in countries to prevent them from becoming havens for terrorists?

FRANK: The problem is that we can’t plug every hole. It’s impossible. If we get the terrorists out of Afghanistan, they can go to Pakistan. If they aren’t in Pakistan, they can go to Yemen. If not in Yemen, Somalia. If not Somalia, the Ethiopia. If not there, Syria, Lebanon. Anywhere else. It doesn’t make sense.

PLAYBOY: What then would you have us do?

FRANK: Bring the troops home, bring the money home, and do the best we can to protect ourselves. We can do a lot with that money. That will make a stronger.

PLAYBOY: How exactly should we fight terrorism?

FRANK: Not by occupying countries. Not by invading them. The more than trillion dollars we spent in Iraq was our biggest mistake not just because of all that wasted money, but because we create terrorists when we try this nation building thing. The biggest mistake any president ever made was Bush invading Iraq. His argument was that it was going to stabilize the Middle East and intimidate radicals, but all it did was create more radicals. Iran was strengthened. The terrorists were. Fighting terrorism is important, but it’s a different kind of fight: targeted, precise. It’s also much less expensive.

PLAYBOY: Politicians always seem to be unwilling to cut defense because they are afraid they’ll seem weak.

FRANK: Yes, and it’s the biggest constraint on Democrats because they’re especially afraid of being accused of being weak. That’s my one big criticism of Obama, that he’s bought into that.

PLAYBOY: Isn’t it true that another reason politicians are loath to cut defense is that it creates jobs and defense contractors are a powerful lobby?

FRANK: It’s not the main problem. The problem is the ideology. “America has to be strong.” Yeah, it does, but we don’t have to waste money. A high-ranking general told a friend, “We gear up for a threat and then we never undo it, and then we gear up for the next threat…” That’s how we got where we are and no one’s willing to take it on. As I said, though, that may change now. We need the money for other things.

PLAYBOY: You said that your one criticism of Obama is his refusal to cut defense, which in his last budget remained at similar levels as is in the past. How has he done on other fronts? How you rate his presidency so far?

FRANK: He’s done a good job. He’s got a lot done. Working through the financial reform bill is huge. It was very, very hard. I think there was a great collaboration with him and I’m pleased by that. Healthcare is very important. I’m not a foreign policy expert, but I think he’s doing a good job there, too.

PLAYBOY: How do you respond to critics his handling of the revolution in Egypt as it unfolded?

FRANK: Actually I think he was very good. He played it as he should have. My complaint isn’t about the way he handled it, it’s about our general view that we have anything to say about it in the first place. It’s important to keep remembering that it was their business and not ours. My view is it’s not ours to handle. We’re not in charge. It’s part of the whole overreach of America that says that we’re supposed to decide what’s going to happen in Egypt. Why do we set ourselves up as if we have influence? We had no influence on what happened. We have to deflate expectations that that we can solve everyone’s problems.

PLAYBOY: Post-Mubarak, are you worried that Egypt could follow Iran and become another Islamic fundamentalist state?

FRANK: It’s a concern. The relationship with Israel is a concern, too. However, the new government is accountable to people in a way it never was there. They will be judged by most people on how they handle the economy. They have to improve it. That’s what most people want. To do that, they have to keep military expenses down. If they were to escalate hostilities, it would be bad for their economy. Also we have some common interests. One is that Iran is hostile and any Egyptian government should be worried about a nuclear Iran. We also both have a common concern about Hamas, which is on Egypt’s border. But yes, it’s risk. We support democracy, but it can produce terrible radicalism. What we should be trying to do is work with these people. That doesn’t mean telling them what we thing they should do. It means we should work with them in ways that will encourage a benign democracy. In the meantime, we have a lot to do at home and we should be working to solve domestic problems.

PLAYBOY: A domestic problem that you’ve frequently addressed is the lack of housing for the poor. Do you acknowledge that it was the government’s encouragement and support for people to buy homes that set many up to take on mortgages they couldn’t afford?

FRANK: I’ve always pushed for rental housing. It was Clinton and Bush who were pushing home ownership, but I’ve always been skeptical of it. The American dream is supposedly owning a home, but I think the American dream is having a place to live in that you can afford. People were sold a bill of goods. They were told that if you owned a home you’d get rich as the house appreciated, but that’s not what’s been happening. For many people, renting is a better alternative.

PLAYBOY: Larry Summers, who was one of the president’s main economic advisers, argued that renting doesn’t help people. People need pride of ownership. He said, “People don’t wash rented cars.”

FRANK: Cars and houses are different, but people do wash leased cars. I think we should have spent this time building quality and affordable rental housing rather than getting people into homes they couldn’t afford.

PLAYBOY: The entity that helped many Americans buy homes that they couldn’t afford were the government’s lending institutions, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, which were under your purview as chairman. You were attacked for telling Americans that Freddie and Fannie were in good shape even as they were on the brink of collapse. At the time you said they “were not endangering the fiscal health of the country.” How do you respond to the charges that you are partly responsible to people who lost fortunes by investing in Freddie and Fannie?

FRANK: When I said they were in reasonable shape, I thought they were, but I was too sanguine then. I made a mistake. But when I said that we were in the minority in Congress. I had no influence over anything. It didn’t matter what I said. When it did matter, the next year, when we were in power, I changed my position.

PLAYBOY: Do you accept any responsibility?

FRANK: Responsibility for what? I wasn’t in power then.

PLAYBOY: Bill O’Reilly attacked you on this. He said you were blaming everyone else. He called you a coward.

FRANK: He had no interest in a discussion about what really happened. It’s what he does.

PLAYBOY: Why would you agree to be on his show?

FRANK: If you don’t go on he says those things unrefuted, but I wouldn’t do it again.

He suffered for that behavior and apologized.

PLAYBOY: Whether it’s O’Reilly on the right, or Lawrence O’Donnell on the left, do you worry that political discourse has given way to shouting matches?

FRANK: I do. The climate has gotten meaner and no one listens to each other. Politics has gotten meaner. The polarization isn’t good. It divides us and we don’t come together, which means we can’t effectively solve problems.

PLAYBOY: How has the Internet affected discourse?

FRANK: You can’t make mistakes now. There’s no room for mistakes because everything will be out there instantly.

PLAYBOY: Sometimes politicians seem to forget that everything will be out there. For example, what was your reaction when your colleague, Congressman Chris Lee, was exposed after sending a picture of himself with his shirt off to a girl he met on Craigslist?

FRANK: Well, sometimes people bring it on themselves by their stupidity. The Internet isn’t forgiving. There’s a lot of good in the technology, but there are dangers.

PLAYBOY: Do some come in the form of Wikileaks?

FRANK: Yes, and I’m very concerned about it. There’s a need for people to able to talk to each other in private. I’m especially concerned about the leaked diplomatic cables. Diplomats have to make candid assessments that are private. Releasing them was a great unfairness. People were put at risk. I was amused that Mr. Assange was upset because some of his people are publishing a book about him, revealing his secrets. He said it was unfair, invading his privacy.

PLAYBOY: How else has the Internet changed politics?

FRANK: There’s good there. People know more and can be involved. It’s also been part of a worrying trend, which is a merging of opinion and journalism. It’s harder to find objective journalism. It’s harder to find what we used to call real news in the middle of shouting matches and gossip. Journalists should be skeptical. That’s their jobs. In many cases now, it’s about advocating for one side or the other. Also now the competition to find the worse news. Bad news sells, apparently. And the worse the better.

PLAYBOY: Let’s move on to some other issues. You were instrumental in the repeal this year of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Is the final nail in the coffin?

FRANK: Absolutely, and it’s something I’m very proud of. The Speaker and Senate majority leader essentially put me in charge of the strategy to get it through. It was very hard to do and it’s an important bill.

PLAYBOY: After the repeal, a journalist asked about the problems the bill will cause because openly gay men will be taking showers with straight men. You said, “Well, we’re not dry cleaned.”

FRANK: I borrowed that from Alfred Hitchcock. After Psycho, a man complained to him that after the famous show scene, his wife no longer takes showers. Hitchcock said, “Have her dry cleaned.” The fact is, after all the fuss about Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, there’s been no great backlash against its repeal. As we go forward, people will see that it has had absolutely no negative effect whatsoever, and it will be an issue of the past. There’s always all these predictions of horrible things that will happen, but repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell will have no negative consequences at all. We haven’t weakened anything. Gay and Lesbians in the military will serve with distinction along with the other soldiers.

PLAYBOY: After repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, is the legalization of gay marriage next?

FRANK: I don’t see any change there. I don’t see Congress doing anything about it.

PLAYBOY: Congress already passed the Defense of Marriage Act. States may allow same-sex marriage, but the federal government won’t recognize them.

FRANK: There are lawsuits against that that will, I think, win, because the federal government can’t discriminate. Beyond that I don’t see anything about gay marriage happening on a federal level. More and more states will go that way, though. When they do, then people will see, like with healthcare and like with the repeal of don’t ask, don’t tell, that there are no negative consequences. In places that have gay marriage there have been none of the negative consequences that people warned us about. Zero. The divorce rate hasn’t gone up. There have been no calamities. Marriage hasn’t lost it’s meaning. Same-sex marriage as a divisive issue is losing its steam. Overall I think antigay prejudice is on its way out.

PLAYBOY: Even from the religious right? There continue to be virulent attacks.

FRANK: But they aren’t taken seriously. It’s changing. It’s just evolution.

PLAYBOY: What’s behind the evolution?

FRANK: People are out. More and more people know people who are gay, people have gay friends and relatives, because it’s not kept in the closet anywhere near as much s it used to be.

PLAYBOY: There still are antigay sentiments expressed, often from the conservative right and especially Christian right. There are still hate crimes against gays.

FRANK: Yes, and we have to deal with it. We did get a bill passed to add anti gay and Lesbian crimes so they’re handled as hate crimes. Hate crimes, whether against gays or anyone else, can’t be tolerated. Over all antigay prejudice is diminishing. It’s not going to be used by the far right in the way it was. It just doesn’t work anymore. It doesn’t, but I worry about what will replace it. I think they’re going to increasingly focus on abortion, escalating it as their issue to inflame people. They’ll work on whittling away the right to have an abortion, striking down any federal funding.

PLAYBOY: You’ve said that abortion foes “feel as if life goes from conception to birth.” What did you mean?

FRANK: They say no abortion, but they don’t want to take care of the kids when they’re born. They don’t to help mothers raise their children. They don’t want to feed or educate kids. But they’ll increasingly use abortion as an issue in the coming elections.

PLAYBOY: Looking to the next Presidential election, what’s your take on the likely Republican contenders? Have you been you surprised to hear that your old adversary Newt Gingrich may be running?

FRANK: We Democrats have not lived lives sufficiently pleasing to God to have him be the Republican nominee in 2012.

PLAYBOY: Sarah Palin?

FRANK: Ibid.

PLAYBOY: What’s your impression of Palin?

FRANK: There’s less there than meets the eye.

PLAYBOY: Then to what do you account for her continuing prominence?

FRANK: She presents better than the reality. She does fit the current mood, but there isn’t much substance there.

PLAYBOY: Mitt Romney?


PLAYBOY: Is there anyone who could be a threat to President Obama?

FRANK: Not in the current crop. An American saying goes, You can’t beat somebody with nobody.

PLAYBOY: If he wins reelection, what would you like Obama to push for as a second-term president?

FRANK: The same as now. Financial reform. Protecting healthcare. I’d like him to take on defense. I’d like him to do better helping poor people. It’s another thing I disagree with him on. In his budget he cut things that will hurt the poorest of the poor to show his bonafides as a budget cutter.

PLAYBOY: You’ve been pushing for legalizing marijuana. Can you see the president joining you on that one?

FRANK: That’s not likely, but marijuana is clearly a case where the public is way ahead of the politicians. The current policy is ludicrous. It’s an unfair policy and a wasteful one. It contributes to the illegal trade, the cartels, and the big traffickers. I’m disappointed in some of my liberal friends for not moving on marijuana. It’s generational; changes are coming.

PLAYBOY: What should be done with the war on drugs?

FRANK: All that money should all be spent on prevention and treatment. It doesn’t work and it doesn’t stop people from using and we spend a fortune.

PLAYBOY: After the Tucson massacre, is it likely that there will be new gun control legislation?

FRANK: No. Nothing will change on that. The only thing that could happen is that there may be more monitoring so it’s harder for people to get guns who shouldn’t have them. I hope.

PLAYBOY: Clearly you have a long list of issues about which you still feel strong, yet there was a plan, at least according to some reports, that you would retire after this term. Were they accurate?

FRANK: I thought of stepping down, yes.

PLAYBOY: What changed your mind? You recently announced that you’ll run again.

FRANK: If we’d held the House, maybe I would have retired. I thought it might be a good time. But we lost and there’s too much at stake. I would have felt that I was abandoning the battle when we were under siege.

PLAYBOY: After thirty years in this job, you’ve been through many times when things were going well for the country and many when they were going badly. Is this just another swing of the pendulum, or are you particularly worried now?

FRANK: The threat to public policy is very serious. We had a financial meltdown and were able to stop it. We put in place regulations that could prevent it from happening again. If it does happen again, we don’t know if we’ll be able to stop it. And yet the Republicans are trying to reverse the regulations. They’re inflaming anger rather than seeking rational solutions. They’re at risk of being unable to fix the problems that we need to fix–education, healthcare, the deficit, and many others. Yes, I’m worried.

PLAYBOY: In the New Yorker, Congressman Scott Garrett, a Republican on the Financial Services Committee, was quoted as saying about you, “Barney has a great deal of faith in government to solve people’s problems. The question is, is that faith justified?” Is it?

FRANK: The truth is that I don’t have faith in government solving problems. What I do have faith in is our ability to come together to solve problems. It’s what’s hanging in the balance now. Because there’s no outside entity called government. It’s all of us, collectively and jointly. Will we be able to solve America’s problems? That’s why we’re elected. All I can tell you is that I’ll keep trying.”