Taiwan representative to U.S., Jamieson Greer, more — Face the Nation Full Broadcast - May 17, 2026

[0:01] I'm Margaret Brennan in Washington, and this week on Face the Nation, back in the U.S., [0:06] following a whirlwind diplomatic mission to China, President Trump faces backlash here [0:11] at home when it comes to inflation and the economy. [0:15] While the reviews for the president's trip to China and details about the deliverables [0:19] from the meeting of the world's two biggest economic superpowers are still coming in, [0:25] it's Mr. Trump's efforts on the domestic economy and inflation that are getting panned at home. [0:32] Asked about the extent to which Americans' financial situations were motivating his Iran deal-making, [0:37] the response didn't do much to reassure them. [0:40] Not even a little bit. I don't think about American financial situation. [0:45] I don't think about anybody. I think about one thing. [0:48] You cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon. [0:51] Those remarks, plus new numbers showing the fastest increase in the inflation rate in three years, [0:56] have Republicans increasingly concerned about the party's chances in the midterm elections. [1:01] We'll hear from the president's top trade representative, Jamison Greer, [1:05] plus Taiwan's representative to the U.S., [1:08] as well as the heads of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus in the House, [1:13] Pennsylvania Republican Brian Fitzpatrick and New York Democrat Tom Swasey. [1:18] Plus, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates will also be with us. [1:23] It's all just ahead on Face the Nation. Good morning and welcome to Face the Nation. [1:43] President Trump's grip on his party has tightened with Saturday's defeat of Louisiana Senator Bill Cassidy [1:49] in a three-way Republican primary. Cassidy voted to impeach Mr. Trump after the January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol. [1:57] And as a doctor, Cassidy has been outspoken about some of the administration's health policies. [2:03] In turn, Trump endorsed one of his opponents and has been openly critical of Cassidy. [2:09] There will now be a runoff for a seat that is a safe Republican one. [2:13] But this is a midterm year when a president's record is a top factor nationally. [2:19] Our CBS News poll out this morning says that seven in ten Americans say they are frustrated [2:24] or even angry with the administration's approach to the economy. [2:28] Two-thirds say Trump's policies are making the economy worse, at least in the short term. [2:33] And only 27 percent say they approve of his handling of inflation. [2:39] That marks a new low for the president in our CBS News polling. [2:43] We begin this morning with a top member of the president's economic team, [2:47] United States Trade Representative, Jameson Greer. [2:51] Good morning to you, Ambassador. [2:52] Good morning. Good to be here. [2:54] It isn't just a matter of sentiment. [2:57] Gas is at an average of $4.51 a gallon. [3:01] Americans have spent $45 billion more on fuel since the war began versus a year ago. [3:07] The stock market's up, but lower-income Americans are pulling back on their spending. [3:13] The New York Fed reports households earning less than $125,000 a year [3:17] are fueling up their cars less often. [3:19] How do you provide relief to the average American? [3:23] Well, we know that no one wants to see higher gas prices at the same time the president's [3:29] balancing foreign policy considerations. [3:31] We know that, in addition to wanting to have low gas prices, we don't want our children or [3:37] grandchildren to inherit a world where Iran has a nuclear weapon. [3:40] So the president's focused on affordability in as many ways that he can. [3:44] He's bringing jobs back to America. [3:46] We're focused on getting wages up to offset any kind of increase in prices. [3:51] And we're seeing prices go down for staples like dairy, cheese, flour, et cetera. [3:55] So we're very focused on this. [3:57] The president's focused on it. [3:58] And we look forward to seeing those prices come down soon as the operations wrap up in [4:03] the Gulf. [4:04] But we have no timeframe for that at this point. [4:08] Let me ask you about what you were just working on in Asia. [4:12] China said it agreed with the United States to establish a board of investment to consider [4:17] Chinese investment here in the U.S. and to establish bilateral boards of trade to discuss [4:22] tariffs. [4:23] Which products are going to be affected by that board? [4:27] Are these items outside the current investigations that you are conducting? [4:30] So when we think about the board of trade, we're thinking about how to manage economic relations [4:36] between the U.S. and China. [4:37] These are two economies that are quite different. [4:39] And we're focused on trade and nonsensitive goods. [4:42] When you talk about sensitive goods, you know, the most high-tech stuff, you know, things [4:46] that can be used for military uses, those are things that those are national security issues. [4:50] So we're looking to discuss things like sales of agricultural goods to China, energy goods, [4:56] Boeing's, medical devices. [4:57] When we talk about the kinds of things we want to be importing from China, there are a number [5:01] of things. [5:02] There can be consumer goods, maybe low-tech items. [5:04] And so we look at those types of areas where we should be trading. [5:08] On the investment side, the board of investment is really about discussing key issues in U.S.-China [5:13] investment policy. [5:15] It's not really an investment program, but it's to try to almost be like a firefighter [5:19] and put out issues when they arise between the two countries. [5:23] So really this just seems a message of stability, because you were already discussing a lot of [5:26] these things on a bilateral basis, right? [5:28] I mean, what's new? [5:31] So we have never had a board of trade or a board of investment before. [5:35] We've always had an ad-hoc approach with China and the United States, which I think is actually [5:40] challenging. [5:41] I think it's more important to formalize these relations. [5:44] The United States has a host of tariffs, import controls, export controls on China. [5:49] China has a number of non-tariff barriers that have been in place for a long time, other [5:55] challenges they impose to block our imports and things like that. [5:58] It's much better to discuss these in a formalized way between our government and their government. [6:04] In addition to this, we saw China over the past couple of days reduce a host of non-tariff [6:08] barriers on agricultural products, such as beef and poultry, et cetera. [6:13] And so we've seen them already starting to do things to facilitate imports from the United [6:17] States. [6:18] Well, I'll come back to some of those in a moment, but I want to ask you about tariffs. [6:21] The president said to reporters he did not discuss tariffs with Xi Jinping at all. [6:27] Are we in an indefinite trade truce, or are you looking at bringing that tariff rate back [6:33] to where it was before the Supreme Court ruling? [6:36] Well, the Chinese know, and that's part of our deal, that the United States can elevate [6:43] tariffs to the higher level that we had at the time of what we call the Busan deal in [6:47] October, when President Xi and President Trump met. [6:50] During the Supreme Court case in February, about 10 percentage points were knocked off [6:55] the tariff rate for China. [6:57] We believe under our deal that we are able to elevate that again. [7:01] The president is exploring different tools that he has. [7:04] I don't want to prejudge a lot of the investigations that are happening. [7:07] The Chinese know, just like many other countries we're dealing with, that we're going to have [7:10] a certain level of tariff to control our imports, but that we also expect market opening. [7:15] Okay. [7:16] But the last time you were here, after that Supreme Court decision, you said that when [7:20] some of these tariffs expire in July, that you would expect to roll out new tariffs after [7:26] the end of these investigations under authority 301. [7:29] So are you saying now that you no longer expect tariffs to come into place after July? [7:35] Well, I think I was careful to tell you because my general counsel always tells me to say this. [7:41] I can't prejudge the outcomes of those investigations, those investigations, [7:44] if they find on tariff barriers or unfair trading practices, they can authorize the president to [7:50] take actions like tariffs, like fees on services, like quotas, things like that. [7:55] So we'll certainly be presenting the president with those options if those investigations show [8:00] what we think they might show, which is that there's a huge problem with overcapacity in [8:04] China and other countries. [8:05] So we'll get back to you on the findings in those investigations when they conclude. [8:10] Okay. [8:10] We did see China on Saturday release a statement confirming some of the deals with the U.S., [8:16] but it was pretty vague. [8:17] There was no mention of the promise to buy 750 Boeing planes that President Trump told reporters [8:23] about if the first 200 go well. China said there was a guarantee by the U.S. to supply [8:28] aircraft engines, but it didn't mention the 400 and 450 GE engines that the president announced. [8:35] GE hasn't commented either. So how locked in are these agreements? [8:41] So the 200 Boeings, those are locked in. There's obviously a future to have more Boeings. The reality [8:49] is this is the first major purchase by China in almost 10 years of Boeings or orders, rather. [8:55] So that's going forward. And like the president said, you know, when and if Boeing delivers, [9:01] there's a lot of upside there. With respect to some of the other details, [9:05] we're finalizing a fact sheet that we'll hopefully get out very soon so we can be [9:10] clearer about the double-digit increase in agricultural purchases we expect from the Chinese [9:14] and some of the other things that happened and were agreed to during the visit. [9:17] Okay. And I know GE is meeting with China today, but we haven't seen anything from them on the [9:24] aircraft engines. On the ag products, the conservative Wall Street Journal editorial board [9:29] questioned whether the summit achieved any of the stated wins. Because of how vague these things have [9:34] been, they said, Mr. Trump boasted about fantastic Chinese purchases of U.S. soybeans and aircraft, [9:39] but China didn't confirm the sales. And by our count, this is the second time China has bought [9:44] the same American soybeans, or is it the third? They're kind of arguing you're playing a shell [9:50] game here with like re-announcing past deals on past agreements to purchase over a period of time. [9:58] Can you answer these conservative skeptics with any specifics? [10:02] So first of all, we've had a deal in place with the Chinese since October [10:07] that they would buy 25 million metric tons of soybeans each year for the rest of the president's [10:12] administration. So that deal is still in force. What we expect with the new purchase agreements, [10:18] where the specific number will be announced very soon, double-digit purchases of aggregate [10:23] agricultural products. When I say aggregate, I mean everything else. That could be soybeans, [10:28] that could be beef, that could be grains, that could be dairy products, all kinds of things. [10:34] So we have the existing soybean deal that they may be referring to. And then over on top of that, [10:40] we have these agricultural products as well. And all of that will be facilitated [10:45] by Board of Trade discussions with the Chinese. [10:47] So still not nailed down, just an aggregate agreement. So how many concessions did the U.S. [10:55] make? What were those concessions in order to get this? [10:58] Well, one thing, there are balanced trades here, right? We're trying to get to balance trade with [11:03] the Chinese. For a long time, it's been out of whack. So when you see something like what the Chinese [11:08] said, which I can confirm, about a sale of Boeings accompanied by a sale of aircraft and auto parts [11:14] and spare auto parts, aircraft parts, and those kinds of things, the Chinese want to make sure that [11:20] they have regular access to these kinds of spare items so that they can continue to fly their fleets. [11:25] So that's something we want to do. We are focused on mutually beneficial trade. [11:30] So when you're talking about that kind of thing, what we should be exporting, [11:33] what we should be importing, becomes less a question of concessions and more a question [11:37] of what's mutually beneficial for both of us. That's why we're so focused on non-sensitive trade, [11:41] because that doesn't require concessions. That's about working together, talking about what they [11:47] need, what we want to sell, what we need from them. So we're already seeing it as they've re-registered [11:51] beef facilities where beef facilities expired. They're taking poultry again. They're working [11:56] with us on biotech traits to make sure that those types of products that have [12:02] genetic modification can go into China without any problem. [12:06] China still sells more to the U.S. than it buys, but that difference has decreased by about 31.5%. [12:13] So thank you, Ambassador. [12:16] We turn now to Ambassador Alexander Yu, [12:18] Taiwan's representative to the United States. Ambassador, good to have you here in person. [12:24] There hasn't been a call between an American president and a leader of Taiwan since 1979, [12:32] but President Trump indicated to reporters there might be one coming. Is there a call planned with [12:38] President Lai? Well, we'll see. But President Trump, when he was in Beijing for the last two days, [12:52] he mentioned that he heard a lot about Taiwan. He heard a lot about Taiwan these two days in Beijing, [12:57] but the problem is he heard only their side of the story. He heard the Chinese story, [13:04] or as I would say in Spanish, el cuento chino. [13:06] I think he, if he has time, we'd love to tell him our side of the story, the Taiwan story, [13:14] which is one of resiliency, of staying up against the Chinese aggression. [13:22] This has been going on for 77 years. This is not something that just happened when the DPP, [13:27] their current ruling party in Taiwan, came to power. This has been going on for 77 years, [13:32] since the inception of 1949, when they became a People's Republic. So this is not a recent thing, [13:39] as if we are the ones creating problems. It's China, People's Republic of China creating all [13:42] this problem. [13:43] So no calls scheduled yet? [13:45] Well, the communication between Taiwan and U.S. is constant, is current. [13:52] But I'll leave it to the U.S. to announce anything if it happens. [13:57] It would be a big deal. You did speak to a past president as president-elect. [14:01] Yes, with President Tsai, yeah, in 2015, 16, yes. [14:05] That's right. So China refers to your president as a separatist, in part because Lai has talked [14:10] about being a, quote, practical worker for Taiwan independence. In an interview with Fox News, [14:16] President Trump said he's not looking to have somebody say, let's go be independent because [14:21] the United States is backing us. Does Taiwan have any intention of declaring independence formally [14:27] from China? [14:28] Well, let me first say that President Trump and Secretary Rubio have been very categorical [14:35] during their visit to Beijing, publicly stating that there's no change in the United States' [14:41] longstanding position in Taiwan, which we want to express our appreciation for upholding this position. [14:46] What is meant by Taiwan independence, my president just made a statement recently, just now, [14:54] and it means that Taiwan is independent from the Chinese aggression, from the PRC, actually. [15:02] The formal name of my country is Republic of China, and we're not subordinate to the people of [15:07] Republic of China in any way at all, and that's maintaining our sovereignty, our way of life, our democracy, [15:14] our vibrant economy, our high-tech production. And that is what is mean by independence. We are sovereign, [15:22] independent, away from the Chinese people's Republic of China's attempt to swallow us as one of their own. [15:30] They have never ruled or controlled Taiwan ever. So that is meant by independence. [15:37] Well, President Trump, though, said he wants Taiwan to cool it. He also wanted China to cool it. [15:42] That seems to indicate that perhaps he was listening to Xi Jinping's version of events and might have been persuaded. [15:50] Well, that's why I, you know, if we'd love to, given our part of the story, you know, [15:56] not just listen to cuentos chinos. But I think that's a statement of saying he wants status quo. [16:04] President Trump, that he wants no change in the Taiwan Straits, [16:13] neither through economic or military coercion, and that the peace and stability of the Taiwan [16:18] Straits is good for all parties concerned. And that's the position that Secretary Rubio mentioned [16:24] during his interview. And that's the one that we also long for. We have been a responsible member of [16:29] Taiwan Straits. We want to strive for peace and stability. You know, President Trump doesn't want [16:35] a war 9,500 miles away. We don't want a war. You know, we want peace and stability. We want to [16:41] have our lives going on as, you know, as usual. But we're not the ones creating all this trouble. [16:46] And that's why, you know, it's like we, our house, there's intruders trying to get into our house. [16:53] We're trying to be found by security system. And then they complain, the intruder complains, [16:58] that because we're trying to improve our security system, it's making his job harder. [17:05] Right. [17:07] No, I hear your point. And on paper, President Trump's administration has pledged [17:12] near record amounts of defensive weapons and sales to Taiwan. But the deliveries haven't really been [17:19] happening. And in Beijing, President Trump told Fox he's going to hold on to the latest [17:24] weapons sale that Taiwan sought to purchase this year and use it as a negotiating chip with China. [17:30] What impact will that have on your ability to deter China if you don't get those weapons? [17:35] Well, exactly. If we don't, if we want to prevent a war from happening, I think it's best that Taiwan is [17:44] strong to be able to defend itself. And therefore, we should be able to acquire, to buy the arms that [17:50] we need to have a stronger defense. You know, we also abide, we believe in peace through strength. [17:56] Yeah. [17:57] So actually, it makes more sense for the United States to sell us the armor so we can defend ourselves. [18:04] So you don't have to send your army 9,500 miles away to defend us. [18:09] Well, the so-called six assurances that the United States gave to Taiwan back in the Reagan area [18:17] included a pledge not to cut off arms sales to Taiwan and of no prior consultation with Beijing [18:22] on such sales. But this is what the president told reporters about his discussion with Xi. Take a listen. [18:29] So what am I going to do? I don't want to talk to you about it because I have an agreement that was [18:33] signed in 1982. No, we discussed arms sales too. And what's his request? We discussed to Taiwan, [18:41] you know, the whole thing with the arms sales. It was in great detail, actually. And I'll be making decisions. [18:48] In great detail. Did that violate America's commitment to Taiwan? [18:53] Well, again, but President Trump has also been very clear in saying that he did not agree on anything [19:00] that the Chinese side— But he did say he was going to hold on to those weapons and not give them— [19:03] Yeah, but he didn't say he agreed to anything. So, again, the United States government has been [19:08] consistent throughout all administrations since 1979 in providing arms to Taiwan, [19:14] according to the Taiwan Relations Act, which is selling ours commensurate to the threat that Taiwan [19:20] receives. And past administrations, including President Trump's first term, made considerable [19:25] amounts of sales, including the F-16 box 70s. And also, in his second administration last year, [19:31] he made two sales to Taiwan. And also, again, the last one, also a very considerable amount of money [19:36] on arms sales. So, we believe, again, that having arms sales continue to Taiwan [19:43] is in the interest of the United States and Taiwan to keep peaceful and stable Taiwan Straits. [19:49] Well, we will try to ask the administration for updates on when those deliveries might happen. [19:53] But thank you very much, Ambassador. Face the Nation will be back in a minute. Stay with us. [19:58] And now, with more from our new CBS News poll, President Trump's approval rating has now dropped [20:07] to the lowest level of his second term at 37 percent. And views of the economy have dropped to their [20:13] lowest level in several years. Only 29 percent now say the economy is good. Joining us now with more is [20:20] our executive director of elections and surveys, Anthony Salvato. Anthony, good to have you here. [20:26] Gas is $4.51 and change per gallon. Is this pressure all due to gas prices? [20:34] Uh, gas prices aren't helping. It's not the only thing. I always start with feelings because they're [20:39] so closely connected to people's finances. They tell us they feel stressed. They feel concerned about their [20:45] personal finances and feelings of economic security are down from a year ago. Now, gas prices are [20:53] increasingly, they tell us, weighing, being a financial hardship on them. Overall, though, [20:59] they continue to tell us they don't think their income is keeping pace with inflation. And that's [21:04] something we've been seeing now for years coming out of the pandemic. So, contextually, yes, it's part of [21:11] something larger. The other part of this, though, is uncertainty, which is a top way that people [21:16] describe the overall economy. And the way that relates to gas prices is take, for example, just [21:21] the situation in Iran in the Strait of Hormuz. People tell us day to day, they don't feel like they [21:27] have a clear understanding. They're getting a clear understanding of what's going on there. And of course, [21:33] that is impacting gas prices. That's part of what I mean by uncertainty. But the other part of the big [21:38] picture here, you pull back, you look at the job market, people aren't confident that if they had [21:43] to find another job they could. They even think you hear so much about AI in the news. Structural [21:48] changes. Big structural changes. They think AI is going to start taking jobs. And what it leads to, [21:53] when you look at opportunity, even generational opportunity, there's a lower number who think that [21:59] their opportunities are going to be better than their parents were. How big a risk is the inflation [22:06] problem or at least the price of living, right? Is it going to hurt Republicans? [22:11] So the administration, of course, urges patience, right? Once the war is resolved, etc. [22:17] Well, so I tested, what do you think the president's policies are doing in the economy [22:22] in the short term and the long term? In the short term, you get big numbers who say they're making [22:26] the economy worse. So that's what's right in front of folks. But there also isn't that much more [22:30] optimism about what happens for the long term. Part of all this uncertainty is that neither of the [22:37] parties, not the Democrats, not the Republicans, are net positive on being seen as having policies [22:43] that help cost of living. So you look at the public and yeah, okay, Democrats have a little bit of an [22:48] edge there, but it's still net negative. And so people are going in the midterms, maybe not feeling [22:53] like there is help out there. Anthony Salvato, always good to talk to you. Thanks. [22:58] We'll be right back. Welcome back to Face the Nation and the co-chairs of the bipartisan House [23:11] Problem Solvers Caucus. Republican Brian Fitzpatrick joins us from Langhorne, [23:16] Pennsylvania. Democrat Tom Swasey from Queens, New York. Good morning to you both gentlemen. [23:21] Good morning. I want to start with you, Congressman Fitzpatrick. You know, CBS estimates that the [23:30] net impact of all this redistricting is that Republicans are going to get roughly [23:35] nine seats, or get them nine seats closer, I should say, to keeping control of the House. [23:41] I mean, presumably that's the outcome the president was looking for here. Why are you concerned that, [23:48] you know, driving towards the majority through these methods is actually a negative for your party? [23:55] It's a terrible thing for our country, Margaret. Gerrymandering is one of the most, [24:01] if not the most corrosive things to our democracy than I can imagine. Tom and I completely agree with [24:07] it. Our entire bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus agrees to it. We met this past week to start taking [24:13] measurable steps to fight back. Because, you know, part of the challenge, Margaret, is, you know, [24:18] much like how elections are conducted, these district lines, it's largely a function of state [24:23] government and state legislative action. The only jurisdictional hook we have on the federal system [24:30] is funding. So particularly the Help America Vote Act, the so-called HAVA funding that passed after the [24:36] Bush v. Gore hanging Chad election, you know, we can tie that money. It's billions of dollars that gets [24:41] sent to the states to carry out their elections. We can tie that funding to certain reforms. And [24:45] one of the things that has to happen, only seven states, by the way, do this [24:49] in America is have independent citizen commissions with computer-generated line drawing assisting them [24:56] to make sure that we have more balanced districts in this country. [24:58] Well, I understand the effort and the intent, but Congressman Swazi, your party's leaders, [25:06] also gerrymandering, and your group, as we just heard from Congressman Fitzpatrick, [25:12] you're supporting efforts to stop it. But it looks like your members are going to be directly [25:17] impacted themselves. About 45 members of your caucus may face redistricting. You've said it's [25:24] going to kill the country. I mean, how does it actually kill the ability to reach across the aisle [25:29] like you gentlemen are doing? What happens is when you create these safe [25:35] seats through gerrymandering is that the only elections that matter are not the general election, [25:40] but the primary. So everybody panders to their base. The Republicans talk to their base, [25:44] the Democrats talk to their base instead of talking to all of their constituents about what they care [25:49] about. And there's a lot of pandering that goes on. So, you know, we're in this battle right [25:54] now, this race to the bottom, and we're going to fight fire with fire. The Democrats are going to [25:57] fight the Republicans. The Republicans are going to fight the Democrats. It's bad for America. [26:02] It's bad for America to have all these safe seats where no politician is incentivized to listen to [26:08] people and to reach across the aisle. So I misspoke. It's 45 members in your caucus. [26:14] More than a dozen of them may be directly impacted. But still, I take your broader point here, [26:21] that it's damaging to the ability to work cross aisle. But I want to ask you, Congressman Fitzpatrick, [26:27] from the Republican perspective, we just saw what happened overnight down in Louisiana, where Senator [26:31] Bill Cassidy lost in this three-way primary. The president himself, the leader of your party, [26:39] who wanted this redistricting, has also been directly involved in some of these primary races, [26:47] picking candidates. He came out hard against Cassidy. He's also now focusing in on Congressman [26:53] Thomas Massey of Kentucky, who has taken votes in opposition to the president, including for the [26:58] release of the Epstein files. I mean, is the message here for Republicans that if you dissent [27:06] from the president, he's going to take you down? Well, it's one of the many reasons, Margaret, why we [27:14] need to open primaries up in all 50 states. Another cause that Tom and I are behind. Over half the states [27:20] in this country have closed primaries, meaning that if you're a registered independent, you are excluded [27:26] from voting in 50% of elections. And let's just put this in a context. You could be a 98-year-old World [27:32] War II veteran who stormed the beaches of Normandy, saved civilization, who registers independent in [27:38] the land of independence, which we're celebrating 250 years of, and in half of the states of this [27:43] country, including, unfortunately, our home state here in Pennsylvania. If you register independent, [27:48] you're told you're not welcome to vote in half of elections. That is insane. And not only is it an [27:53] injustice, Margaret, it has a terrible corrosive effect on the floor of the House. Tom and I see [27:58] it all the time. We call it the vote no, hope yes crowd. They go to the House floor wanting to [28:02] support a policy, knowing that policy is the right thing to do. But because they live in a closed [28:07] primary state and 18% of Americans, 18% of Americans vote in primaries, they're going to the House [28:13] floor thinking about 18% of their electorate instead of 100% of their electorate. So closed primaries, [28:19] coupled with gerrymandering, your previous question, are really, really hurting our country. [28:24] They're causing gridlock on the House floor. Yeah. And it would seem, though, that you are really [28:30] swimming against the tide here, both of you gentlemen. I want to ask you, Congressman Swazi, [28:35] about your- Margaret, can I just make one quick? Yeah, sure. I was going to ask you about your race, [28:38] but go ahead. Let me just make a quick point. I'm in a district that Donald Trump won by 19,000 votes. [28:44] Yeah. Brian's in the- and I'm a Democrat. Brian's in the district as a Republican that Kamala Harris [28:49] won. For me to win my race, I have to listen to everybody. I need the large majority of Democrats [28:55] to vote for me. I need the majority of independents to vote for me. I even need a few Republicans to [29:00] listen to- to vote for me. So I've got to listen to everybody. And that's what's good for America, [29:05] is when their elected officials have to listen to their people. When you do all this gerrymandering [29:10] and create all these safe seats, the politicians in the safe seats, most of the elected officials [29:15] in Congress right now only have to win their primary because they're guaranteed the Republicans [29:20] are going to win the Republican seat, the Democrats are going to win the Democratic seat, [29:22] and then they only listen to their base and they pander to their base. That's contributing to the [29:26] division of our country along with social media, cable news, our foreign adversaries filling our [29:31] social media feeds with a bunch of dreck. Not going to push back on you on those points here, [29:37] sorry. But back to the question I was going to ask you in regard to your race, [29:42] I know that when it comes to people like you have to go out and persuade, [29:47] you believe that Democrats can really make a case on the affordability argument. We've been talking [29:52] about the polling that CBS has done showing how worrisome it is for the president's party. [29:58] But it also shows neither Democrats nor Republicans own the message. It's pretty evenly split. 35% [30:06] say Democrats would be better. It's 31% who think Trump and Republicans who would be. 34% [30:12] neither or not sure. No one's really convinced that either of the parties have an answer here. [30:20] So how do you actually make that an edge? Yeah, there's no question that this is a major problem. [30:26] Affordability is the number one issue in America. Your polling just shows that. And we see prices are [30:30] going up like crazy. Why? Because of the tariffs, because of the war, because of the new data centers, [30:36] and because of all the debt. And we have to propose policies that Democrats and Republicans [30:41] will work together. You know, the tariff issue, the president's supposed to come to Congress, [30:47] the war powers, the president's supposed to come to Congress. Let's work together to actually put [30:51] solutions in place so we can get back to a place in America where everybody, whether you're a left-wing [30:56] progressive or a right-wing conservative, you believe that in return for working hard, you make [31:00] enough money so you can afford to buy a house, educate your kids, pay for health insurance, [31:05] and retire without being scared. We've got to get back to those basic fundamental messages. [31:10] Enough with the finger pointing and the culture wars. Let's focus on the economics of people's lives [31:16] so we can rebuild the middle class and help those folks that are aspiring to the middle class. [31:20] But in some ways that polling, Congressman Fitzpatrick, says people want something different [31:24] from what they're hearing from both of the parties. They're not hearing new ideas. Go ahead. [31:29] Yeah. Over half of the people in this country live paycheck to paycheck. [31:37] A lot of the things that are being discussed inside the state capitals across America, [31:41] inside the U.S. Capitol, is not laser-focused on that all day, every day. You know, yes, [31:45] we have to focus on national security. Yes, we have to focus on foreign policy. We've got to do it all. [31:49] Yeah. [31:49] But we cannot ignore the fact that half of Americans are stressing over their family budgets, [31:55] and that's got to drive the legislative agenda. I believe that it was that reason that, you know, [32:01] President Trump won in 2024. I think that's why Zoran Mandami won in 2025. And I think both parties, [32:07] Margaret, are failing to get that message that we have to focus like a laser on the economy on [32:12] these family budgets and identify the silos. What's causing high energy costs? What's causing high [32:18] child care costs? What's causing high health care costs? Tom and I stepped forward through a discharge [32:23] petition and passed through the House the premium tax credit extension. We're trying to do our part [32:29] to cross the aisle to work in the center to focus on the issues that people really care about, which [32:34] is the kitchen table issues. Well, to that point, President Trump told my colleague Nancy Cordes that [32:39] he endorsed a federal gas tax holiday. I believe it still would have to go before Congress. Would [32:44] would both of you gentlemen vote for that, suspending it? I think, you know, we have to [32:52] consider it's a short-term fix. It's going to affect the, yeah, it's a short-term fix. We really got to [32:59] get to, the president's got to come to Congress to discuss the war and how to, how to move forward to [33:04] get out of, out of the war and to affect the gas prices. That's the real issue here. The tariffs are [33:10] what are really affecting people's prices. Come to Congress, work with Democrats and Republicans. [33:16] Let's try and move our country forward. Uh, Congress. Yeah, go ahead. [33:21] My, my, yeah, my answer to that question. So we work with a lot with the labor unions. [33:27] They've expressed some concerns about this federal gas tax holiday, that it might raid [33:31] the highway transit fund, which they rely on heavily for all the local infrastructure and national [33:35] infrastructure projects for that matter. So I think the devil is in the detail when we say federal [33:40] gas tax holiday, where is that money coming from? That's really going to be the driving question. [33:44] Yes, we want to do everything possible to lower gas prices, but we don't want to rob [33:48] Peter to pay Paul. So we have to, we have to look at the details here. [33:51] Quickly, before I let you go, uh, Congressman Fitzpatrick, you're a big supporter of Ukraine. [33:55] You did get, um, some additional support for additional assistance when it comes to the house. [34:01] This is like a vote on authorizing new security aid and imposing new sanctions on Russia. [34:07] Even after the house votes, we're hearing in the Senate from leader soon, [34:11] he's got no time to take it up. What do you do next? [34:17] We're going to do everything we can, Margaret, to make sure they find time to take it up [34:20] because our, the heroes that are on the front lines, uh, uh, of the Ukrainian military, uh, [34:26] in Kharkiv and everywhere, everywhere else along, uh, the Eastern coast of Ukraine need our help. [34:31] They need the morale boost. Um, I've been there on the front line several times. [34:35] Uh, I have pledged my unequivocal support for them. Uh, we reached 218 signatures, [34:41] as you know, this week on a massive, massive discharge petition that is far greater than [34:45] even just Russia sanctions. That's a big piece of it, but it's an overall a package to Ukraine. [34:49] So my message to our Ukrainian friends help is on the way. [34:53] All right, gentlemen, thank you for speaking to us in this bipartisan setting. Appreciate it. [34:57] We'll be right back on Friday. We traveled to William and Mary in Williamsburg, [35:04] Virginia to speak with former Defense Secretary Robert Gates. And we began with that warning [35:09] from President Xi that the issue of Taiwan could lead to an extremely dangerous situation, [35:15] if not managed carefully. The U.S. still officially has this [35:19] stance of strategic ambiguity. Um, but do you think the tone needs to shift a little bit from [35:25] the United States, given how strong the Chinese rhetoric is now? [35:30] I think the Chinese rhetoric has often been strong in the past when it comes to [35:35] Taiwan. Whenever we've made an arms sales to Taiwan in the past, the Bush administration, [35:41] the Obama administration, and so on, the Chinese rhetoric gets very, very strong. [35:46] And so I think, I think Xi was reiterating the Chinese position on that. I think it would be [35:53] a mistake to, to change the carefully worded position of the United States with respect to Taiwan. [36:01] Any change at all, the nuances, this is one of those things where the [36:05] experts parse these things down to the tense of the verbs and so on. So I think, I think keeping [36:12] things in the U.S. position as it has been was important. And I think everything I've read so far [36:20] indicates that the president did that. So leave it open to question whether the [36:24] U.S. would militarily come to the defense of Taiwan if China were to move on it. [36:29] Yes. That needs to be an open question. [36:31] Well, on paper, the president has made significant pledges to Taiwan in terms of promised arms sales, [36:38] not delivered on yet. There's another $14 billion in proposed weapons sales that the Trump [36:43] administration has delayed approving. Do you think the president should greenlight that? [36:51] I think he should. I think we should go forward with what we've agreed with Taiwan. One of the concerns [36:58] that I have is even with respect to previous arms sales, there is a huge backlog of weapons that we [37:06] have sold to Taiwan that we have not been able to deliver because we don't have the supplies. And so if [37:15] you're offering another $14 billion, is that just going to be added to the backlog or is there a way [37:20] forward in terms of actually getting these weapons to the Taiwanese? I think one of the, an important [37:26] thing that has happened in recent years is getting the Taiwanese to focus on purchasing the kinds of [37:36] weapons that would be necessary to defend themselves against a Chinese amphibious invasion. And [37:42] the Taiwanese legislature has just finally reached an agreement to fund the purchase of these weapons. [37:51] So I think, I think we should go forward with it. It is in our own way, our counter to President Xi's [37:59] strong statement. Yes, you have your position. We have ours. Secretary Rubio did tell another network [38:06] though, that his belief is that China's preference is to have Taiwan willingly join the People's [38:13] Republic. Do you expect that to be the more likely scenario that there is sort of a slow strangulation [38:21] of Taiwanese democracy by the Communist Party? I think the chances of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan [38:29] are pretty low, particularly over the next several years. And partly because Xi has other, other options [38:38] open to him that include, that involve far less risk. So they have surrounded Taiwan with ships and in the air. [38:49] They have shown their ability to close off maritime and air access to the island. They could create a [38:54] blockade or a quarantine around Taiwan anytime they wanted, what the Taiwanese call an anaconda strategy. [39:01] And it would strangle Taiwan over time. I don't think they want to go in and attack Taiwan. They don't [39:08] want to destroy the very chip factories they want to take over. And then there's cyber. There are all kinds [39:16] of pressures. There isn't one single Chinese general or admiral today that has one day of combat experience. [39:24] The last time these guys fought was 1979 in the North Vietnamese. The Vietnamese gave him a bloody nose. [39:31] He's fired. Xi has fired all these generals. There are now no generals left on the Central Military [39:38] Commission that kind of oversees the whole thing. Let me ask you about what's happening in the Middle East. [39:44] The last time we spoke, last spring, we were just weeks away from that U.S.-Israeli strike on the three [39:52] nuclear sites in Iran. You said at that time, it was May, when you were Defense Secretary, you were concerned [39:59] that a strike on the nuclear program would just buy time, a year or two, but it would not solve the problem. [40:06] Do you still believe that? I think the only way that we are likely to get the enriched uranium out of [40:14] Iran and bring about an end to their nuclear aspirations is through a negotiation. [40:25] Is it possible for the president of the United States to walk away and leave this for the Israelis to settle? [40:32] No, I don't think he can walk away. And no, I don't think the Israelis can settle it. [40:39] I don't think, as powerful as they are, they don't have the kind of power the United States has. [40:44] And I think the president seems to have been very consistent, very clear that under no circumstances [40:52] can Iran ever have a nuclear bomb. Well, the only way you get to that objective is resolving this [41:00] issue of the enriched uranium and any future plans for enrichment. I don't think that the nuclear program [41:11] in Iran poses an imminent threat. After all, we bombed it twice. [41:16] But it is a big enough problem that it was clearly not going to be settled in four to six weeks, [41:20] which was the time stamp that the American people were told to expect in terms of the duration of [41:24] conflict. I think that there were some unrealistic expectations. [41:29] Have you heard a clearly articulated sort of center of gravity to this operation, [41:34] an end goal, a strategy? Well, I think some of the justifications have changed over time. [41:40] But one thing, I think there have been a few things that have been consistent from the very beginning. [41:45] One is to eliminate Iran's ability to have a nuclear weapon. Another is to eliminate their [41:56] military capabilities to attack their neighbors. [41:59] The third is to eliminate the capability to support their surrogates, the Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis, [42:08] to sink their navy. I think those have all been articulated as objectives of this operation. [42:16] And although the nuclear program has been dramatically damaged and set back a long time, [42:24] I think those other things, a lot has been accomplished. [42:28] Um, you were CIA director. You were a defense secretary. How do you assess Secretary Hegseth's [42:36] performance? I'm not into talking about my successors, but I will say I want to point to [42:43] something positive that I think is going on. It goes back to something we were talking about earlier. [42:48] I think the leadership in the Pentagon, and especially the deputy secretary and the undersecretary [42:56] involved in acquisition, are doing some very important and overdue things in terms of shaking [43:02] up the bureaucracy in the Pentagon. But he's got this focus on the warrior ethos. I'm sure you've [43:08] heard a lot of what he has announced. He summoned the generals to D.C., told them he's tired of seeing [43:14] fat troops and fat generals. He wants to weigh them twice a year. He ordered a ruthless review [43:19] of the Judge Advocate Court, the military lawyers. He fired most of the inspectors general, saying he [43:26] planned to overhaul the weaponized internal Pentagon watchdog. When you're talking about the things you [43:32] like, would you put any of these things on that list? No, I will say this. I mean, I've fired a fair [43:40] number of generals and senior people myself. The way I handled it was a little differently in the [43:47] respect that I felt that I needed to go in front of the press and explain why I hadn't taken these [43:53] actions. Well, there's not a full Pentagon press corps even present at the Pentagon these days for [44:00] a news conference like that without getting special permission to be on the premises right now. [44:05] He's fired 16 military officials, at least, including the Navy Secretary, the Army Chief of Staff, General [44:12] Randy George. During the Iran War, he pushed out the Admiral at the helm of Southcom, the Chief of Naval [44:18] Operations, the Air Force Vice Chief of Staff, the Head of Defense Intelligence. Do you see those things [44:24] as necessary disruption that ultimately will have a positive impact, or does it concern you? [44:30] Well, it concerns me, but I also have to acknowledge that I don't know the rationale for those changes. [44:38] I don't know why those changes were made. And there may be perfectly justifiable reasons, [44:43] but I just don't know what they are. And you think that that should be explained to the public [44:49] and to the Congress? I think that people, when you have a lot of changes like that, yeah, [44:54] I think there is an obligation to explain, at a minimum to the Congress, the rationale. [45:01] Mm-hmm. The systems don't seem to be operating that way right now. [45:05] No. [45:06] Our full interview with Secretary Gates is available on our website, [45:10] YouTube channel, and our podcast. We'll be right back. [45:17] That's it for us today. Thank you all for watching. For Face the Nation, I'm Margaret Brennan.