Face the Nation: Wirth, Crow, Warnock

[0:00] President Trump met with oil executives this past Tuesday at the White House, and we spoke to one of the attendees, the chairman and CEO of Chevron, Mike Wirth, a few days prior to that meeting, and we asked him to describe the global energy shock we're all experiencing. [0:14] The way I would frame it is the energy system has lost an incredible amount of flexibility. The global economy consumes about 100 million barrels of oil every day. A barrel is 42 gallons. About 20 percent of that moves through the Strait of Hormuz, so that's been significantly disrupted. [0:35] Normally, the energy system has shock absorbers in it, so we have inventory in tanks at facilities. We've got inventory on the water in ships. We've got inventory in strategic reserves. [0:50] All of those have been pulled down over the last couple of months as these events have unfolded, and what it's done is it's taken those shock absorbers and made them much less effective in the system. [1:00] And so disruptions normally are met by moving these inventories around, and price response can be muted. As the shock absorbers are withdrawn, the shocks translate a little bit more directly. [1:14] And so I think what he's referring to is we're in a period where there's been significant supply taken out of the system, and we are facing this upward pressure on prices and volatility that has manifested itself thus far and likely to continue. [1:32] If there is an actual negotiated end to the war, do prices come down, or is just a truce enough to give relief? [1:40] Well, what's really needed is for flow to resume through the Strait of Hormuz. You can't take 20% of the energy out of the system, and some of it's finding its way around to the Red Sea. [1:50] But there's still a substantial amount of world energy supply that is not able to flow. And so that's the key thing, is to restore that flow. [1:58] It allows markets to begin to rebuild these inventories. It allows us to get products to where they're needed and to alleviate some of the pressure. [2:07] But that all will take time. It's a world where we get logistics of ships and pipelines and moving things around to markets around the world. [2:15] And so that's why I say I think it's going to be with us for some time, because even if the Strait were to open today, [2:21] getting supplies to where they're needed and resuming the normal functioning of the system is going to take some time. [2:28] It's not just the Strait. Twelve refiners in the Middle East were hit by a missile or a drone attack, according to Clearview Energy. [2:36] So the infrastructure itself has been damaged. How long does it take to get production back as well? [2:42] Well, it's going to take, in some cases, weeks and months, in some cases, years. [2:48] There have been oil fields that have been just shut in because there's no place to store the oil. [2:53] Sometimes these fields, it's not like turning the tap on your faucet. [2:58] These are complex reservoirs with a lot of subsurface dynamics. So those have to be brought back carefully. [3:03] There has been damage to upstream, midstream and downstream infrastructure like refineries. [3:08] When it comes to the price, when we look at what's happening out there on the markets, that's one thing. [3:15] That's traders placing bets. The American people are looking at the cost when they, you know, gas up their car. [3:23] When will things return to pre-February 28th and the start of this conflict? [3:28] Yeah, it's one of the things I've learned in over 40 years in this industry is predicting price is extremely difficult, even in normal times. [3:35] Markets can surprise you. This is not a normal time. [3:38] The dynamics that are affecting supply are quite unusual. [3:43] The potential for that to flow through into the economy and maybe slow demand is, I think, increasing. [3:50] People use less gas, you're saying, because of the higher price? [3:52] Certain parts of the world, it's not just gas. It's LPG for cooking in South Asia. [3:58] It is jet fuel in Europe. A number of products are becoming very short in supply. [4:03] Behavior changes in a couple of ways. One, people will use less energy. [4:08] Second one is people will hoard energy. Back in the 70s, I recall during the embargo of the U.S., in my family, we would drive around with a car as full as we possibly could. [4:21] Normally, people drive around, they're comfortable with a half a tank or a quarter tank of gas. [4:25] And so you'll see people will hold on to supplies that otherwise they might not, they may use less. [4:31] And so predicting both demand and supply in a market that's this dynamic is very difficult. [4:37] I think the key thing is, as I said before, the shock absorbers are being drained out of the system, which means there's this upward pressure on price because supply is getting tighter and the ability to resupply is getting more difficult. [4:51] And that increases the likelihood of volatility as well. [4:54] So we can't say that gas prices have peaked, for example. [4:58] I think it's very hard to say that because you have to make a bunch of assumptions about that. [5:02] And it depends on what you assume. [5:05] We'll be back with more of our conversation with Chevron CEO Mike Wirth in a moment. [5:09] Stay with us. [5:15] Welcome back to Face the Nation. [5:17] Here's more now of our conversation with Chevron CEO Mike Wirth. [5:21] We're reading about airports running out of jet fuel. [5:25] What's the reality there? [5:26] What is the supply and what does that mean for Americans who might want to travel? [5:30] Yeah, inventories of jet fuel in certain parts of the world were at seasonally relatively low levels before the conflict began. [5:38] The Middle East refiners are significant exporters of jet fuel. [5:42] Particularly to Europe, where 75% of Europe's imported jet fuel tends to come from those refineries. [5:47] It's not flowing today. [5:49] So we are seeing jet fuel tighten very quickly in Europe, in Asia. [5:54] And we're seeing airlines announced adjustments to their flight schedules. [5:58] We're seeing it flow through into fares. [6:00] I think that's one of the first places it'll be felt most broadly. [6:03] I mean, we've seen some upward pressure on gasoline prices now. [6:06] I think aviation is clearly an area where it's going to probably get worse over the next few weeks. [6:12] Get worse over the next few weeks. [6:13] But that still, that has a lag effect. [6:15] I mean, what you're saying is if you're buying a trip to Europe, expect to pay a heck of a lot more, even if it's months from now. [6:23] Yeah, again, I can't predict how the airlines are going to price their product. [6:28] But I think the upward pressure that they're seeing on prices and the tightness in the market is likely to lead to further route optimization. [6:37] And so flights may not be as abundant as they otherwise would have been. [6:42] I think planes will probably be more full than they would have been. [6:45] And yes, fares could be higher. [6:47] You're saying we don't know enough to actually make hard predictions. [6:51] That's what I hear you saying. [6:52] Yeah, it's, you know, there's a kind of an old axiom that, you know, I can tell you the price. [6:56] I just can't tell you when. [6:58] It's just, it's very difficult to predict these things because markets are dynamic. [7:02] They can respond to things that we don't anticipate. [7:06] And the one reality is that these shock absorbers are not as effective as you get down to lower levels of inventory. [7:14] And so I think that's going to be with us for a period of time. [7:17] So the longer the conflict or this period we're in without resolution, it's going to continue to weigh. [7:23] I think it can extend these market effects. [7:26] Can you just turn on production at a moment's notice? [7:31] What difference does this make to you? [7:33] Yeah, you can't turn on production at a moment's notice. [7:37] It takes engineering. [7:39] It takes supply chains. [7:40] It takes contracts and workers moving and being mobilized. [7:43] So it takes time to bring new production into the market. [7:46] Our company had record production in the U.S. last year, 2 million barrels a day, a million barrels a day in the Permian. [7:52] We're going to grow 7% to 10% again this year. [7:55] So we do have plans underway to deliver more oil to the market. [7:59] So the energy industry famously was at odds with the last administration and vice versa. [8:07] In this administration, are you and your fellow CEOs calling the White House and saying you're being too optimistic? [8:17] Are you telling them how much strain there is right now? [8:21] Well, one thing I will say is this is an administration that engages the business community very regularly. [8:27] And it's across the board from all different departments within the government. [8:33] They seek dialogue. [8:34] They seek input. [8:35] And they're available and accessible in a way that I think is very, very good, particularly at a time like this. [8:41] We engage in discussions with them on a regular basis about the situation. [8:45] I had discussions as recently as today about the things we're doing to try to ensure reliable supplies into U.S. markets. [8:52] And so, yes, we speak on a fairly regular basis. [8:54] But you feel you can be honest and say, because the president is telling the American people gas prices aren't that high. [9:02] His cabinet is telling the American people that prices are about to come down. [9:05] You're telling me that's not that certain at all. [9:09] Well, yeah, I'm telling you that the risks kind of skew to the upside right now. [9:14] And they know that. [9:15] And the opportunity is for us to, you know, see flow, resume through the strait, and then at the same time pursue these policies, [9:22] which I think the administration really does have as a priority to continue to encourage investment in infrastructure and our economy. [9:30] The IMF director recently told us that this is going to last likely through 2026. [9:35] You would say that's a fair assessment? [9:39] Well, this is a significant shock to the system. [9:41] It is reorienting trade flows, logistics, ships. [9:47] The entire system is in a state of disequilibrium right now that has emerged over the last several weeks. [9:55] And as we get to a resolution at some point in time to establish a new equilibrium means you're going to have to resume flows. [10:03] You're going to have to restart fields to our earlier discussion. [10:06] You're going to have to get ships repositioned in places that are optimal to establish supply. [10:11] So it will take some time. [10:12] It's not a light switch, as you said. [10:15] And the full conversation was taped on April 23rd. [10:18] It's available on our YouTube page, on our website, facethenation.com. [10:22] We'll be right back. [10:23] We go now to Colorado Democratic Congressman Jason Crowe, who's joining us from Sedona, Arizona, where he's attending the McCain Institute Forum. [10:32] Good morning to you. [10:34] Hi. [10:34] Good morning, Margaret. [10:35] So I want to ask you about some developing news. [10:38] We learned late Friday that there was a decision made by Secretary Hegseth, and the two Republican chairs of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees are objecting to it. [10:49] They are very concerned by Hegseth's order to withdraw a U.S. brigade from Germany. [10:55] They said it was not coordinated with Congress. [10:57] And yesterday, President Trump said on top of the 5,000 that was announced, he wants to pull even more troops out of Germany. [11:05] What is the effect of doing so? [11:07] Well, first of all, it's not just a lack of coordination or just Congress's preference that we want this to be on. [11:14] This is law. [11:14] There's actually law in place that both the House and the Senate passed on a bipartisan basis that sets certain conditions for movement of our troops around Europe. [11:23] And we passed these laws out of grave concern for rhetoric by this administration in the past that they were going to draw down our presence in Europe, [11:31] which is one of the most important troop footprints we have in the world that helps secure Europe, helps secure our economy, [11:37] helps protect the hundreds of thousands of American citizens who live and work on the continent. [11:43] So we are enforcing the law and the requirements. [11:46] Second is it appears as though this decision was made because Donald Trump was upset by a comment made by the German chancellor. [11:55] Like he is getting emotional and angry about this. [11:59] And he's making really consequential troop decision, troop movement decisions based behind, you know, [12:05] being upset by the comments of a foreign leader, which is no way to run a foreign policy. [12:09] So we're looking into it and we're going to make sure that any movements, if they do occur, are actually in our interests. [12:16] You were talking about the chancellor of Germany saying that a whole nation is being humiliated by the Iranian leadership. [12:21] I mean, that's a pretty strong statement from an ally. [12:26] But in regard to pulling troops out of that country, we'll still have at least 30,000 troops or so in Germany. [12:36] Isn't that still within the legal framework? [12:38] I believe that the floor is set to 76,000 in Europe, but the president can go below it if he certifies to Congress. [12:44] It's in the national interest. [12:46] Why do you think there is a violation? [12:49] Well, that's exactly the assessment we have to go through. [12:52] You know, what we know is that the president is making a decision based upon a comment that he didn't like by a foreign leader. [12:58] So that alone is very concerning to us. [13:00] It should be concerning to every American that you have the president of the United States, a commander-in-chief who's going to move thousands of troops around just to get back at a foreign leader for a comment that he doesn't like. [13:11] But I'm not presumptively against troop movements. [13:14] Like if we need to move troops or brigades around to respond to national security issues, we should by all means do that. [13:20] That's the prerogative of the commander-in-chief. [13:22] When I was in the military, you know, we would move forces around all the time. [13:27] My point is we actually have to make sure that this is being done according to the risks that our forces are facing, that it's being done on the proper timeline because moving troops and units around is very risky and exposes them to a variety of risks and that it's in the best interest of the United States. [13:44] And right now, sitting here, what we know is that this isn't a decision that's driven by the best interests of our troops and Americans. [13:50] It's a decision based upon the emotion of Donald Trump. [13:54] Do you think the U.S. can end the war or whatever we're in with Iran right now without clearing that Strait of Hormuz? [14:01] Do you expect a return to combat? [14:04] Well, first of all, it's Iran that's blockading the Strait of Hormuz. [14:08] We're blockading their blockade. [14:10] I think the real question that we should all be asking is, does America really want to continue to have conflict in the Middle East for another, you know, 5, 10, 20 years? [14:21] The problem is, is that we have confused as a nation. [14:23] We have confused as a nation tactics versus strategy. [14:29] Most of the conversation around Iran is about tactics. [14:32] Should we blockade? [14:33] How do we counter drones? [14:36] You know, who is moving oil around where? [14:39] What is our strategy? [14:40] Right. [14:40] We spent trillions of dollars in Iraq and Afghanistan to replace the Taliban with the Taliban, in Iraq to replace Saddam Hussein with ISIS. [14:50] We are not good at having off ramps and accomplishing large strategic decisions in the Middle East. [14:57] Right. [14:57] And this is just yet another example of that. [14:59] So let's actually talk strategy and what it is we're trying to accomplish here instead of having a constant discussion around blockades. [15:06] So when Secretary Hegseth was before your committee this week and he was asking for this $1.5 trillion budget request, are Democrats going to say no until they get those answers or do you have to fund the troops who are in harm's way? [15:19] Well, I'm just going to say no regardless of, you know, what's going on in one area because we don't need that money, right? [15:27] The Department of Defense has never passed an audit, never in the history of that department. [15:33] It's the only government agency in the U.S. government that cannot tell us how they're spending money. [15:38] We have already funded munition stockpiles amounts. [15:43] And what I am not going to do is continue the pattern like we continue to Iraq and Afghanistan of throwing good money after bad and constantly funding conflicts that never end and will not end up in a good result for America. [15:57] Right. [15:58] That is exactly what we did in Iraq and Afghanistan. [16:00] And somebody has to say enough is enough. [16:03] Somebody has to step up and say, we're just not going to do it. [16:06] And a president that hasn't told us what the strategy is, hasn't come to Congress for authorization, hasn't even articulated to the American people what he's trying to accomplish, I am not going to write blank checks to have that cycle continue. [16:20] I'm not going to do it. [16:21] I want to ask you about another decision. [16:23] Section 702 is that warrantless surveillance program that's used to collect communications of foreigners abroad, including when they're interacting with Americans. [16:32] Your Democratic colleague, Jim Himes, who is in that powerful position on House intelligence, called it the most important foreign intelligence tool America has. [16:42] He said he has seen no evidence that the Trump administration is misusing it, yet you have voted no on a long-term extension. [16:52] What evidence do you have of abuse or violations of it? [16:55] Well, here's the problem we have. [16:58] Jim Himes is right. [16:59] This is an incredibly important tool that helps prevent terrorist attacks. [17:03] It gives us intelligence on our adversaries. [17:05] It helps protect our troops, which is why I've always supported it. [17:08] But right now, in the last year, we have seen a president that routinely ignores legal decisions. [17:15] You know, they are ignoring more than a third of court rulings against them, routinely violating the law. [17:21] Hell, in February, they actually politicized DOJ and they tried to put me in prison. [17:26] They tried to indict me and other members of Congress simply for stating what the law is and what the obligation of our service members are. [17:32] But your committee chair is begging for it to be extended and saying there's no misuse of it. [17:36] What I am saying is I am not willing to give a very long runway to this administration on a very powerful intelligence tool [17:45] when they have routinely shown to the American people and to us that they violate the law and they don't respect the law. [17:51] I will do a short-term extension, and then we will oversee that program, and we will guarantee I will look at it hard every single month. [17:59] And if they're abusing it, if they're strained from the law, then we pull it back. [18:03] But giving them a three-year runway gets rid of all of our leverage. [18:08] If we give them a three-year reauthorization, what are we going to do if a year from now, 18 months from now, [18:13] they start violating the program and abusing it? [18:15] We have no recourse. [18:17] Well, right now it goes until June 12th with this short-term extension. [18:21] Jason Crow, thank you, Congressman, for joining us this morning. [18:24] We'll be back in a moment. [18:24] Last week, in a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court struck down a Louisiana congressional map [18:33] that had been gerrymandered to create a second-majority black district. [18:37] The three liberal justices dissented, saying the ruling would, quote, [18:41] eviscerate a section of the landmark 1965 Voting Rights Act, [18:46] while conservatives in the majority said the decision updated its legal framework. [18:51] Reverend Raphael Warnock, Democratic senator from the state of Georgia, [18:55] joins us this morning from Atlanta. [18:58] Welcome back to the program. [19:00] Good morning. [19:01] So our CBS News legal analysts described this decision as narrowing the application [19:08] of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. [19:10] Effectively, it means it's now going to be harder to bring any lawsuits claiming [19:14] that gerrymandering discriminates along racial lines unless there is proof of that intent. [19:21] Why do you call that a defeat for American democracy? [19:26] Margaret, let's be clear. [19:28] What happened this week is nothing less than a massive and devastating blow, [19:35] not only to our democracy, but particularly to people of color in the South. [19:41] This question about intent is, on its head, misleading, and it ignores our history. [19:48] We had 100 years after the 15th Amendment was passed, which on paper gave black people the [19:56] right to vote, but with supposedly or putatively race-neutral methods for 100 years, [20:04] the right to vote was denied. [20:05] But in more recent history, the Supreme Court, this same conservative Supreme Court, [20:11] hobbled Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act in 2013 with Shelby v. Holder. [20:18] Since then, we've seen the racial turnout gap get wider and wider, not smaller. [20:27] And it has grown twice as fast in the states that used to be under Section 5. [20:33] We will see a devastating impact as a result of this. [20:37] And now more than ever, we've got to stand up and fight for our democracy. [20:41] But as you just said, the Voting Rights Act has been, you know, [20:44] weighed by the court multiple times, including back in 2013. [20:48] But when it was originally written, there were things in place that don't exist now, right? [20:54] There was a poll tax in southern states. [20:58] The law required nine of those states to go get federal approval or preclearance [21:04] before they changed their own voting rules. [21:06] Congress, in the 80s, updated this law. [21:10] Are you of the opinion that the law needs to stand as it was originally written? [21:16] Or does Congress now need to do some work to update it? [21:21] Listen, I know that there are those who are tired of the remedy. [21:26] I'm tired of racism. [21:28] I think it's a strange position to be more concerned about the medicine [21:33] than you are about the malady in that recent history. [21:37] Roberts wrote in 2013 when they gutted Section 5 [21:43] that this racial turnout gap had gone away. [21:48] And Ruth Bader Ginsburg, she said, [21:50] look, getting rid of the protections of the voting rights law in this moment [21:56] is like getting rid of your umbrella in the midst of a rainstorm [22:00] because you're not getting wet. [22:01] And since then, again, since then, [22:03] everybody's entitled to their own opinions. [22:05] You're not entitled to your own facts. [22:07] Since then, the racial voter turnout has grown larger [22:12] and twice as large in the states that were under Section 5. [22:18] And there's a reason for that, Margaret. [22:20] Since they removed the protections of Section 5, [22:24] states that used to play old games, [22:26] they're playing new games. [22:28] They're 21st century Jim Crow tactics in new clothes, [22:33] moving voter polls, closing polls in black and brown communities. [22:37] The data shows that black and brown people spend much longer time [22:42] in longer lines purging people, [22:45] people literally showing up [22:46] and not knowing that their names have been purged from the rolls. [22:49] And the data shows that this disproportionately impacts black and brown citizens. [22:56] And now, as a result of the decision this week, [22:59] they're saying that even when you show up, [23:02] we have given the green light so that politicians can play games with the lines [23:07] so that even when you overcome those barriers and show up, [23:10] your voices will be muted. [23:11] So it sounds like you want to go back to the letter of the law from 1965. [23:16] You want Congress to, once again, [23:18] reinstitute preclearance for these southern states. [23:21] That's what I just heard you lay out. [23:24] Yeah, that was, absolutely. [23:27] Absolutely. [23:27] So when I want to point something out to you, [23:32] which is that the current Congress, statistically, in 2025, [23:36] has a record high number, 66 black members, according to Pew Research, [23:41] including five Republicans, that's the most to ever serve in Congress. [23:47] People will look at that and say, [23:49] we are in a different country than we were, [23:52] as Roberts once argued, as you just pointed out. [23:55] Now that we are in this redistricting arms race [23:58] that both parties are playing with here, [24:00] do you think that will hurt black representation? [24:03] I think that the court sadly poured fuel [24:08] on this redistricting arms race. [24:13] To be clear, you support redistricting that your party is carrying out. [24:18] I do because Donald Trump, [24:23] who is better at dividing us than anybody I know, [24:26] instituted an arms race in redistricting. [24:29] But I actually hate partisan gerrymandering. [24:32] I don't like gerrymandering. [24:33] But we could not unilaterally disarm. [24:35] He's the one who called Texas and said, [24:38] literally, give me six more seats. [24:40] And so California and other states had to respond, Virginia, in kind. [24:44] But the solution to this, really, is to ban partisan gerrymandering. [24:49] Gerrymandering turns our elections on its head [24:52] so that rather than the people picking their politicians [24:56] or their public servants, [24:58] the politicians are picking their voters. [25:00] Right, exactly. [25:01] Which is why I'm asking you how you could support it. [25:03] But I understand you're saying the context of the moment is an emergency. [25:07] Let me ask you. [25:08] Well, we could. [25:09] I have a bill, though, Margaret. [25:11] I have a bill. [25:12] I saw that bill, yes. [25:12] Right now that would get rid of partisan gerrymandering. [25:16] And so far, I've had no Republican takers. [25:18] Well, as we just said, your party is supporting the partisan redistricting [25:23] in places like California and Virginia as well. [25:26] Congressman Byron Donalds of Florida said, [25:28] Democrats do not care about black representation. [25:31] They only care about Democrat representation. [25:34] Here's what Congressman Wesley Hunt of Texas said [25:37] when he was asked about the decision of the four black Republicans to leave Congress. [25:42] I represent a white majority district that President Trump would have won [25:47] by over 20 points, and I won by 25 points the last time I ran. [25:52] I'm being judged not by the color of my skin, but by the content of my character. [25:55] I don't care how many black people are here. [25:57] I want the most qualified people that are here. [25:59] So what do you make of the argument that you just heard there from Congressman Hunt? [26:06] He doesn't understand American history. [26:09] No one, he's quoting the words of Dr. King. [26:11] No one was more committed to a country that embraces all of us than Dr. King. [26:20] But Dr. King, looking at that reality, is the one who is the moral power [26:24] behind the Voting Rights Act of 1965. [26:28] Our covenant as an American people is e pluribus unum, out of many, one. [26:34] And so this notion that representation does not matter, ignores history, [26:39] it ignores the facts, is uninformed. [26:42] Representation does matter. [26:44] When I go to the Senate every week, I bring my story and my experience as a black kid [26:50] who grew up in public housing in Savannah, and so does that white kid who grew up in Appalachia. [26:55] She brings her experience, too. [26:58] And so when we create an increasing monolith, which is what I think is going to happen [27:02] as a result of this decision this week, we hurt the democracy itself, and we make it harder [27:09] to get at a policy, policies that embrace all of our children and give every child a chance. [27:16] Senator, we'll leave it there. [27:16] We'll be right back. [27:19] That's it for us today. [27:20] Thank you all for watching. [27:21] Until next week. [27:23] For Face the Nation, I'm Margaret Brennan.