Full interview: Governors Andy Beshear, Mike DeWine, Laura Kelly and Mike Braun

[0:00] Every year, America's governors gather here in Washington, and we're joined now by [0:05] Kansas Democrat Laura Kelly, Kentucky Democrat Andy Beshear, Ohio Republican Mike DeWine, [0:12] and Indiana Republican Mike Braun. Thank you all for being here and having a bipartisan [0:16] conversation. They are rare these days, and we enjoy them. There's so much to talk about, [0:21] but I need to start on this big decision from the Supreme Court because it has a huge impact [0:27] on the economy, including in many of your states. It was a 6-3 ruling from the court that [0:33] President Trump exceeded his authority when he imposed tariffs on certain items by using this [0:37] 1977 law. A dozen states and a handful of small businesses had sued over these tariffs, which is [0:44] how it ended up in the courts in the first place. So let me start with you, Governor Kelly. What [0:51] impact will this have on your state? Do you know yet? I don't know the specifics, but I'm [0:56] hopeful and optimistic that it will settle some of the issues that we have, particularly in our [1:01] agricultural industry. You know, they've been hit very, very hard by these tariffs, and I'm hoping [1:06] that this court decision will reverse some of those and allow them to get back to business again. [1:13] Governor Beshear, Kentucky Bourbon had been hit hard by those retaliatory tariffs. [1:17] Does this ruling do much for that industry or more broadly for your state? [1:21] I hope so. Tariffs are a tax on the American people. We've seen studies that show that 90% of [1:26] these tariffs are being borne by American business. Those are all in our states as well as our people. [1:32] We've seen parts of the economy slow down because of it. It can add 30% more cost to a major new [1:39] construction project, which could slow down new jobs coming to our communities. Bourbon's been hit [1:45] hard, and now this is the second straight time. And this is from a state where both of our U.S. senators [1:52] and this governor, despite being in different parties, are all against tariffs. [1:57] Governor Braun, for you, what are you seeing out in Indiana? Because we checked the stats, [2:02] and it looked like your auto and machinery manufacturing have lagged a bit. [2:05] The Indiana Business Review says your farmers were hit hard by retaliatory tariffs. [2:10] Is this going to bring relief? [2:12] So Indiana's, along with Wisconsin, the two biggest states per capita manufacturing. So [2:19] tariffs would have been a plus due to the industries that have been kind of hollowed out. You look at Gary, [2:25] Indiana. That was the second largest city in Indiana. Steel goes overseas. I think the key is trade has to be fair [2:35] and free. And from the Marshall Plan through rebuilding the global economy, we did some things that got that out of [2:45] balance. I mean, we were in a trillion dollar, give or take, annual deficit and trade, two trillion on our [2:52] fiscal account. And that turns into a detonation. So ideally, through reciprocity, you get things down [3:00] and even, free and fair, and get back on an even playing field. Over those 40, 50 years, it got imbalanced, [3:09] and I think that's where Trump was coming from. But the court said he overreached. Well, that's a [3:14] constitutional issue, and you're going to have to deal with it. Yes, but in your state, though, you said [3:20] you believed this theory that it might actually help bring back some of those manufacturing jobs. Did you see that it did any of [3:27] that? Yes, it was starting. I mean, the amount of investment that's coming back to this country that [3:32] whooshed out of it, that created chronic trade deficits, that needs to be rectified. And you can do [3:40] that through tariffs. You can do it through trade negotiations. And we were going the wrong way for a [3:46] long time. So you think this is a negative? I think there are going to be other ways to continue what's already [3:53] occurred. It'll be interesting with the countries they've already done deals with, whether they'll [3:58] try to renege. Right. I got a feeling a lot of them will stay put with the trade deals they put in [4:03] place. Governor DeWine, for you in Ohio, the Cleveland Fed said the tariffs drove price increases [4:09] across multiple sectors in your state, including in manufacturing and including in retail. Do you [4:16] believe their analysis or do you believe the president's analysis? Well, first of all, Margaret, [4:19] I don't think we know what's going to happen. Now, after this ruling? You know, look, the president, [4:24] I'm sure, is going to look for any way he can to basically go back and do this. He pretty much said [4:29] that, right? One of the dissents certainly said he had the authority to do it. We'll have to see. So I [4:33] don't think anybody knows. It's been mixed for us. I think, you know, for agriculture, particularly [4:39] soybeans, for example, it was not helpful. But we are a manufacturing state. And I think one of the [4:47] things that we learned, all of us who were governors at the time during COVID, is that the supply chains, [4:55] we got to make more. We're not, we're broken. We have to make more things back here in the United [4:59] States. But I think that's a general feeling of the public. So I think as a manufacturing state, [5:07] you know, we're seeing some new investment coming in. It's hard to tell sometimes. Do you attribute it [5:12] to the fact that they now have to be investing more and don't want to have the tariffs or not? [5:17] But my feeling is that we're getting a lot that's coming in because, frankly, because of those [5:21] tariffs. But the administration also says, though, that those manufacturing jobs are going to be [5:26] replaced by robots, right? That we're going through a huge technological shift, that we're moving [5:31] towards non-human manufacturing. But we've been doing that. We've been doing that [5:36] for decades. And for companies to be efficient, they have to do that. But that doesn't mean they're [5:45] not employing people. That doesn't mean they're not selling. So, you know, we want our businesses [5:50] to survive and they will use the new technology. But that's not new. That's been going on for a long [5:56] time. Real quickly, I ran a business for 37 years before I got into the Senate. And technology is [6:02] something we've woven into our own business, distribution, logistics. It creates jobs in [6:08] many ways. What AI is going to do, where you take a lot of the mundane things that just take a lot [6:14] of time, it's hard to tell where it goes. But if it increases productivity, it's going to be a [6:20] blessing. And that's really how you bring prices down in the long run. Let me quickly ask you both, [6:24] since you were in the room at the White House when the president was past this note that the Supreme [6:29] Court had just ruled. Did he give you any sense of what he's going to do next? Was it exactly what [6:35] he said from the White House podium? Or was it different? It was very quick, frankly. You know, [6:41] he expressed his displeasure. He read it first to everyone to express some displeasure. Did two [6:46] questions and then left. Yeah. And said, basically, I have to go out and get ready to give a speech. [6:51] And then he left. Margaret, my hope is that this decision stops the chaos in how these tariffs are [6:57] being implemented because business needs stability, trade needs stability. And if a president can [7:03] wield this authority that he was trying to, then you see the chaos we've seen where we had first [7:08] across the board, then reciprocal tariffs, then industry-specific tariffs. Then we had tariffs [7:13] on a country for non-economic reasons. What this should say is the president has to go to Congress. [7:19] We have former members of Congress here and actually work it through in a thoughtful way. [7:23] And what I would like to see is, I do think there are ways that the president can work around this [7:30] and get where he wants to go on tariffs. I'm hoping, though, that the approach will be, [7:36] what about his tariff policy before it worked, you know, in the manufacturing arena, for instance, [7:43] but where did it not work? And be very careful when you're looking at what impact it has on small [7:49] businesses and agriculture. So I hope whatever comes next is more thoughtful. [7:54] Well, and they're not going away, right? The president did announce on the White House [7:58] podium a 10 percent global tariff above the normal tariffs, and he's talking about these temporary [8:03] authorities. So the story is still developing at this point, no doubt. But is this- [8:09] Is this a story of him potentially defying his own Supreme Court? [8:13] That is a great question that I would love to put to the president and perhaps some members of his [8:19] administration. But on this, broadly speaking, I don't hear one clear view from you that you would [8:25] ask the president to hold off. It sounds like in some ways you, governor, thought maybe the tariffs [8:32] are working in certain sectors. [8:34] I wasn't trying to come across as a proponent of the tariffs at all. No, I, you know, I was probably [8:41] the only Democratic governor who actually signed on to the USMCA, the trade agreement between Canada [8:47] and Mexico and the United States. Those are our two biggest trading partners. That was working really [8:54] well for us. [8:55] That was the first Trump administration. [8:56] Exactly. And so, you know, I'd like to get back to doing business that way. But if, you know, just given [9:04] the reality of who's president right now and what likely to come, if we can't go back to that exactly, [9:11] then, you know, then what I said before about let's, if there were any good things that came out of the [9:17] approach he took to tariffs, let's focus on that. But let's not reinsert all of the things that were [9:25] really horrible. [9:26] Margaret, I think you're going to see the president remain a tough negotiator. He'll figure out a way to do that. [9:30] Um, you know, we all believe in free trade, but I think that, uh, we have not let countries run over [9:38] us. It's to some extent in the past. And I think the president was correct in that regard. Did it all [9:44] work out? No, some of them did, maybe some of them did not. But I think that being tough, a negotiator, [9:51] I think the vast majority of the American people want to see a tough negotiator. [9:54] My concern is that these other countries aren't paying the tariffs. We are 90% of all the costs [10:01] borne by American families and American businesses at a time when people struggle just to get by to [10:06] pay the bills at the end of the month. This is adding a thousand dollars plus in costs. [10:11] But on the other hand, in the big picture, you cannot become a debtor nation. Yeah. Because [10:17] you're nursing a chronic trade deficit and fiscal deficit. Isn't that your old job, though? Over [10:23] in Congress? Isn't it? But try getting 60 senators to agree to anything. And we had to do all that [10:28] through reconciliation. Yeah. But where we're headed as a country, and that is my background, [10:34] finance, macroeconomics. We're on a bad business plan because we're turning into a debtor nation [10:41] in our trading account and in our fiscal account. And that wouldn't sell well in Kentucky or Indiana. [10:47] But if we allow a president to do this, he can tax the American people on his own without Congress. [10:53] We're going to talk about this as the story develops. But I want to ask you about another big issue [10:59] many of you are facing. And that is how to deal with immigration and immigration policy [11:04] as it affects your states. Governor Kelly, you're a Democrat. But you did sign a bill to get state [11:11] law enforcement to work with federal authorities when it comes to immigration enforcement. That's [11:16] unusual, as many Democrats or cities and states have what the president refers to as sanctuary city [11:23] policies or policies of not necessarily being aligned in enforcement on detentions. And one of the [11:31] complaints is often that having local authorities involved is a drain on their resources or it's a [11:37] distraction for them. Why isn't that the case in your state? Oh, I didn't say it wasn't. We haven't. [11:44] You think that cooperation is a drain on locals? I think when ICE comes into your state [11:52] state, that it creates some problems and creates some problems for your local law enforcement because [11:58] it's sort of a who's on first, who's in charge here. And I think that's been a problem. My approach [12:05] has always been, you know, when we work with the federal government on anything, whether it's disaster [12:12] relief or with our National Guard, you know, we look for ways to cooperate and partner. That's what we want to [12:21] see, you know, if they're going to come in and try to do enforcement, immigration enforcement in our [12:28] state. Have you had that communication from federal authorities about? No, no, no. I mean, and we have [12:35] had, they've started now. We've seen some ICE in some of our communities. And we are, you know, I mean, [12:44] the whole idea of, you know, picking up criminals who are here illegally is nothing new. That happens [12:54] on an everyday basis and has for years. So we don't have any problem with that. What we would like is [13:01] for ICE to then work with our local law enforcement so that if they want to come into Kansas communities, [13:09] work with us so that we can go after those targeted folks, not sort of what we saw in Minnesota, where [13:17] it's just a free for all. Governor Beshear, in your state, the Republican legislators want to pass a bill [13:24] to force the state to work with ICE, as I understand it. You're not a fan of this idea. Why? We'll see [13:31] what happens in my state legislature, because at the end of, I think, last week, two of our Republican [13:36] senators got up on the Senate floor and talked about how they thought this immigration enforcement [13:41] had gone too far. For me, I believe that border security is national security, and we needed to [13:46] tighten our borders. We also have to enforce our laws as a nation, but how we do it shows our humanity [13:52] or our lack thereof. Shackling people's legs, putting them in cages that we would not put animals in is [13:59] wrong. Where have you seen that? Well, you see it in the pictures coming out of the alligator [14:03] Alcatraz or other facilities. We read about kids getting sick and not getting the health care they [14:09] need in the Texas facility. But the tactics of ICE show that there is a significant training problem, [14:16] far too aggressive, and there is now an American body count. They believe they can go into an American [14:21] citizen's home with just an administrative warrant. They cannot. So I've called for the retraining of [14:26] all ICE agents. And in the meantime, if they think there's a violent criminal in Kentucky illegally, [14:32] send us his or her name. We'll go get them. You're talking there about administrative versus [14:36] judicial warrants and the ability to enter. Do you then appreciate what's happening here in [14:41] Washington with Democrats cutting off some of that short-term funding for homeland security on [14:48] that issue along with others? I do. And I wish we didn't have to be at this point, [14:51] but we have an American body count. We have at least two ICE agents that are being investigated for [14:56] perjury. We have other Americans that have been injured or hurt that shouldn't have been. I was [15:02] the top law enforcement official in Kentucky. I've never seen a law enforcement agency, state, [15:07] local, or federal, act with the same tactics that ICE does. And these are on our streets. These are in [15:13] our cities. They would argue that the amount of immigration was at such unprecedented levels that [15:20] new operational things had to be adapted. That's what the administration argues, right? That they [15:27] have to do the tough business now. You're not buying it. Watch the videos. This is not how law [15:31] enforcement acts. This is not respecting our rights as Americans. It's wrong. [15:36] Mm-hmm. Governor DeWine, in Ohio, your state has been the focus of the Trump-Vance campaign during [15:46] 2024 and of their administration now, particularly the Haitians that you have, tens of thousands in [15:52] the state of Ohio. You said this week ICE has not been clear on when they're going to surge to your [16:00] state. Did you bring that up when you were at the White House? I did not. I really didn't have the [16:05] opportunity to do that. Look, Margaret, my position has been very clear in regard to TPS for Haitians. [16:13] Temporary protected status. Yes. Which the president is trying to revoke right now. [16:16] Yeah. I think the policy to revoke that is wrong. I think there's a consensus in this country, [16:22] as we all have said. Let's get rid of the violent offenders. Get them out of here. I think there's a [16:27] consensus behind the need to do a good job on the border. And I think the president gets high marks for [16:35] doing that on the border. But once you get beyond that, I don't think there's a consensus for taking [16:41] people who are working, who are supporting their family. And we've kind of seen it in [16:45] almost in a micro way with the Haitian community that's come into Springfield. Springfield is an [16:52] industrial city, manufacturing city that was down. It has been coming back. And frankly, one of the [16:58] reasons it's coming back is because of the Haitians who are working there. These are people who, [17:03] if you talk to the employers, they were filling jobs that were not being able to be filled in any [17:07] other way. So it's been a big boost to the economy. So if one day that TPS is taken away, [17:16] no employer can hire them anymore. And so you got to have all these people who are unemployed. So I [17:20] think the policy there is wrong. If I could just say this, I think that this is a real opportunity for [17:27] the president, uh, in regard to immigration, probably after the election, after the election, [17:33] because nothing's going to get done before the midterms of 2026. That's right. But I think there's [17:37] an opportunity here. He sealed the border. Uh, you know, I was in Congress in the 80s when the Mazzoli [17:44] bill, Simpson bill was passed. Excuse me. I've been through all the arguments. I think there's an [17:50] opportunity here to get reform in legal immigration and make a decision who we really want to come in. [17:56] I'll give you just, if I could just one example. We have our last count, 22,000, uh, foreign students [18:04] in the state of Ohio. We educate them. And then guess what happens? They go back home or they go [18:09] someplace else. We've already educated them. They would be a great asset to the state of Ohio. [18:14] That's the type of reform I think we need. You're talking about comprehensive immigration [18:16] reform and legal pathways. I think the president has a chance to do something that no president has [18:21] done for four decades. If he, if he would take that opportunity. And I think after the election, [18:25] he'll have a chance. Because you think there's going to be a switch in the political hole. [18:30] No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. However, ever the election comes out, [18:35] I just think the time is now right. Because we've always said you can't, we can't do legal immigration [18:41] because the illegal is such a mess and the border is such a mess. And the president, frankly, [18:44] has fixed the border. So I think it's an opportunity for all of us to go forward. I think it's an [18:49] opportunity for the president to do as sort of a Richard Nixon going to China. [18:52] Yeah. I hear you on that. And we'd all love to talk about policy. [18:57] And we'll see. We'll see. But respectfully, [18:59] the president's not talking about any of what you just laid out, particularly when he's talking [19:02] about Haitians in Ohio. Everyone remembers that campaign with the claim they're eating cats and [19:08] dogs. You're talking about hardworking people who are legally here and continuing to work. [19:14] And my position has been very clear. I'm against them. You are clear. But are you making that clear [19:20] to the president's immigration team? Are you coordinating or anything? Because we hear the [19:26] complaints that Democrats or Republicans are not coordinating. I don't discuss my contacts with [19:30] the president or what I tell the president. But I think it's the administration knows my position on [19:34] this. And I think, you know, if they were there, they would see that this has been good for our [19:41] economy. It's been good for our community. We have people who are fixing up houses, opening up [19:47] restaurants, spending money and filling jobs that couldn't be filled before. They're doing it. We need [19:53] them in Ohio. We're a state that that as far as our influx of people coming into the state, [20:01] last year, 70 percent of those individuals were foreign born. They're giving us vibrancy and helping us. [20:08] And the fact that they're working creates other jobs, frankly. [20:12] Governor Braun, Indiana also had exceptionally high levels of immigration in recent years when we [20:17] checked the data, according to the Census Bureau. Nearly 10 percent of your labor force are immigrants. [20:23] What are the president's policies doing? Are you having a similar experience to Governor DeWine? [20:29] So Indiana, among the pure states, has the lowest unemployment rate. [20:33] And we've got the highest economic growth rate, too. That's due to certain policies. But let's get back to [20:39] the border. It was the same legislative template under the prior administration that encouraged tens of [20:47] millions to come into the country. So just like when we were talking about the trade issues, [20:52] go back to the source of why it occurred. Here, it was bad policy calculated, I think, [20:58] in a very political way to maybe think it's going to benefit you down the road electorally. Put that [21:04] aside. That's a whole other issue. I think, though, just to be clear here, [21:09] you're not talking about illegal people who cannot vote. No, I'm talking about how the census is [21:13] determined, who, how your congressional districts are put together. All I can tell you, it was a mess [21:19] in those four years. And the same legislative template was in place during the Biden administration [21:26] that the Trump administration has used. I think everybody agrees that we've got to have border security. [21:31] And what we're hearing here is that immigration is definitely important, legal immigration. [21:37] Right. And the country was built upon immigrants. And when you're in a state like ours, where you're [21:43] constantly looking for workforce, you need to do it. There was even a conversation in an executive [21:48] session at the NGA about governors getting more involved in work permits and bringing people in, [21:55] coordinated. You know, I think that's a good idea. How would that work? What do you mean? [21:59] Well, that would mean that governors would have some say so, like the dairy industry in our [22:05] own state. Many other industries need certain workforce that generally is coming legally across [22:11] the border. And many now illegal that are not documented. So there's a lot to get fixed. But we've [22:20] got to look at why the problem we're dealing with now occurred in the first place. But just to put a [22:26] button on it, because I don't want us to speak past each other. What Governor DeWine was talking about [22:31] was legal immigration and people with legal status, temporary protected status, not people who were [22:37] No, I know that. And I think we all agree on legal immigration. All I'm citing... [22:42] But you would like to keep that temporary protected status? [22:45] Um, if that was something that was aimed at a particular workforce need, yes, it occurred. [22:53] So I think you have to respect it. But I think it was all part of a really kind of chaotic approach [22:59] that allowed a lot of illegal immigration to come across. That's what we're dealing now with ICE [23:04] enforcement. And I'll agree too, that's got to be done in a way that has humanity to it. I think the [23:10] reason Tom Holman went up to Minnesota is maybe that was for that reason. But again... [23:15] To bring humanity? [23:17] To do something other than what we were seeing, to try to [23:20] put some something together that was going to be different from what was occurring there. But again, [23:26] I think you've got to respect why did it happen. And this was due to bad policies in the prior [23:31] administration. That's why we're dealing with all this. [23:33] Just jump in here. You know, I've been governor now for seven years. I was a state senator [23:40] for 14 years. So we're looking over 20 years. Uh, immigration, uh, legal immigration and workforce [23:49] have been issues forever. These are decades old. This didn't start in the Biden administration. [23:54] And, you know, it's not only the Trump administration. And this is just... And I'm... [24:00] I hope you're right, Governor DeWine, that when this election is over, that we can sit down and have [24:06] that really important conversation and get something done so that we do have a common sense, responsible [24:13] immigration policy that meets the needs of our businesses and our communities. [24:19] That's a whole bipartisan agreement on that one. [24:21] That cooler heads prevail and policy making actually happens? [24:25] Yeah, that we actually do the math and get the law right. [24:29] Yeah. Um, I just want to move us along here because you touched something that I want to [24:34] bring to the table as well, which is just the environment we are in, uh, and how difficult it is [24:40] to get things done. Um, Governor Braun, there were at least 12 state senators in Indiana targeted with [24:47] swatting or bomb threats this fall. Uh, and that happened after the president faulted you as well, [24:53] by name, in a social media post for not... I was one of those targets as well. [24:57] You were. Um, and that's why I want to bring it up to you. Um, you were being faulted by him for not [25:02] getting the votes to redistrict your state and carve out a more favorable voting map for Republicans. [25:07] That's because he didn't understand all I could do is call a special session. [25:11] Mm-hmm. Okay. So be clear on that. [25:13] That the president didn't understand Indiana's law? [25:16] Well, I don't think that's the only thing I as governor could do. [25:19] Mm-hmm. And that was to call, which I did. [25:22] Okay. I'm not faulting you, sir. Yeah. [25:24] Um, but are the elected officials, though, who don't deliver the president what he wants? [25:30] Well... [25:30] At risk. I mean, that is difficult for you. You're having to explain that, um... [25:36] I think there's a political consequence to anything that you do. And in this case... [25:40] When it bucks the president. [25:41] Well, in this case, every other state that was requested to do it did it. That doesn't mean that [25:48] the next state has to. But let's look again. I always like to look at the root of the issue. [25:53] The root of the issue is that Massachusetts, which is the same size state we are, for 20 years, [26:00] 60-40, blue-red, we're 60-40 the other way, has gerrymandered to where there isn't a seat in New [26:08] England, the place where there are a lot more electoral votes than the four or five western states [26:14] that hardly have any congressional districts. They've done it. I think what he was looking for [26:19] is an even playing field. And now it's kind of, uh, back and forth. I don't know what we're going [26:25] to end up with. He was looking for a Republican majority. He said it out loud. Because I think if [26:31] you look at it, the other side is gerrymandered more effectively over the years, and that's what he was [26:37] at. And Democrats, no doubt, are gerrymandering as well. I want to give Donald Trump credit. [26:42] He owns his policies. And he just said out loud, um, I want more Republican seats. [26:47] Right. And that's because of this, uh, [26:49] best example cited, New England, been gerrymandered for years. They've been [26:54] faster-footed than we've been on that issue. And in California as well, jumping in on that. But [26:59] Governor DeWine, um, we're talking about the environment we're in right now. And when I brought up [27:05] the Haitians in your state, I mean, you have also brought national, that has brought national [27:11] attention to Ohio, uh, the president's messaging around this. You've had bond threats you've talked [27:16] about recently. Um, how do you deal with that, uh, with this level of rhetoric and managing that? [27:24] Well, when that came up a year ago, um... But it's continued. [27:28] I understand. I mean, you asked how we deal with it. We deal with it. The schools, the superintendent [27:34] wanted to close the schools, felt he needed to close the schools. They were getting bomb threats [27:38] every day. And so I called him up. I said, what do you need? And we put in the highway patrol in the [27:43] schools. And we kept them in for three weeks. Look, you do what you have to do. That's what all governors [27:49] do. You do what you have to do. We want those kids in school. And that's, that's what we did. [27:53] I mean, the bigger question is, how do we tamp down the rhetoric, uh, from both sides? And how do we, [28:02] you know, get things done? And I think one of the things coming out of the last three days, [28:06] the National Governors Association, whenever we get together, it's pretty clear we're all problem [28:11] solvers. We deal with problems every day. We solve problems, or we try to solve problems every single [28:17] day. And I think, you know, to me, that's where our focus needs to be, but solve the different [28:21] problems that we have. Well, and that's what's interesting in the dynamics both of you have in [28:25] your states as Democrats, but with states that voted overwhelmingly for Trump and states where you're [28:31] dealing across the aisle with Republican controlled, uh, legislatures. How do you govern as a Democrat in [28:39] this environment? And are there lessons? I mean, is that too simplistic to say that there are lessons on [28:43] the state level you can bring to the national level? Well, my, my approach, um, has always been, [28:50] uh, to, uh, go across the aisle, uh, form relationships and, uh, get things done. [28:58] You know, I started, you know, the, the day I walked into the state Senate in 2005, [29:04] I was one of eight Democrats in 32 Republicans. It was very clear to me, if I didn't make some [29:10] friends across the aisle, I was never going to get anything done. And just like, uh, Governor Dubwine [29:14] said, we're problem solvers. We, we get into these jobs because we want to do something. [29:19] And so that was the approach I took then. And I think that's, that's carried over into my time [29:24] as governor. The relationships that I formed, uh, in the legislature, uh, has voted well, uh, [29:31] for my time as governor. I've, I've been able to continue those relationships. And clearly we don't [29:37] agree, uh, on a lot of things, but I think we have enough respect for one another to sit down and to [29:42] listen, uh, and to, uh, not always, but at, at times come to some consensus, um, on legislation. [29:51] Uh, you know, at the times we don't, they, you know, I've, I've worked with the super majority, [29:56] you know, and they can easily override my vetoes. Um, yeah, no, I, I know, but, uh, but even, even [30:04] there, you know, uh, because of the relationships I have, we've been able to, if it comes to that, [30:10] you know, been able to go down and work with some of the Republicans to get them to perhaps sustain [30:15] the vetoes, uh, because it's in the best interest. And I think most legislators, regardless of party, [30:20] uh, really are interested in doing good things. Can you bring this to the national stage, this idea? [30:27] I think governors can. I mean, my approach is to spend 80% of my time on things that matter to [30:32] 100% of the people of Kentucky or the American people. Those are things like your job and whether [30:37] you make enough to support your family, your next doctor's appointment for yourself, your parents, [30:41] or your kids, the roads and bridges you drive, the school you drop your kids off at, or whether you [30:45] feel safe in your community. Those aren't bipartisan issues. They're nonpartisan issues. I'm working [30:50] with both of these governors on building bridges, actual bridges, uh, between our states. You know, [30:55] infrastructure is something that's good for everyone that everyone benefits from. [30:59] And maybe if we all spent 80% of our time on things that matter to 100% of the American people, [31:04] we get a lot more done. Governor, thank you for having this conversation today. [31:10] Thank you very much. It's good to have you all here at the same table.