Full transcript of "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan," March 30, 2025
On this "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" broadcast, moderated by Margaret Brennan:
- CBS News director of electios and surveys Anthony Salvanto
- Shawn Fain, president of United Auto Workers
- Sen. Mark Warner, Democrat of Virginia
- Rep. Jodey Arrington, Republican of Texas
- Sue Gordon, Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence in first Trump administration, and Ret. Gen. Frank McKenzie
Click here to browse full transcripts from 2025 of "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan."
MAJOR GARRETT: I'm Major Garrett in Washington.
And today on Face the Nation: The administration navigates a mistake of its own making, communicating attack plans against targets in Yemen on an unsecure app while a journalist accidentally invited into the chat room looked on.
President Trump says this week will be tariff week. The markets have been down, and consumer confidence sliding.
These warning signs have not dampened spring in the nation's capital, but concerns about the direction of the U.S. economy persist. The president of the United Auto Workers, Shawn Fain, will tell us about tariffs and the auto industries.
And House Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington will preview congressional Republican plans to cut taxes and spending.
Plus: Mr. Trump's top national security officials are on the defensive after sharing those military attack plans. The White House says the raid in Yemen was a success, and that's all that matters.
(Begin VT)
PETE HEGSETH (U.S. Defense Secretary): There's no units, no locations, no routes, no flight paths, no sources, no methods, no classified information.
(End VT)
MAJOR GARRETT: But even some Republicans call the episode a mistake.
We will hear what the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Mark Warner, thinks and get analysis from a former top intelligence official during Trump's first term, Sue Gordon, and the former head of Central Command, General Frank McKenzie.
It's all just ahead on Face the Nation.
Good morning, everyone. Welcome to Face the Nation. Margaret is off this week.
We begin with what's expected to be tariff week and the impact on an already somewhat jittery economy, which could be significant. Retaliatory tariffs on countries who have imposed their own tariffs on U.S. goods are planned for Wednesday. And, on Thursday, the president says he will impose a 25 percent tariff on all foreign-made vehicles coming into the U.S.
These and other tariffs are in addition to those already imposed on some of our closest allies, like Canada and Mexico. Of course, there are tariffs on China as well.
Our new CBS News poll reflects some of that underlying economic anxiety.
So we bring in our executive director of elections and surveys, Anthony Salvanto.
Anthony, I'm going to be very scientific here. On the economy, what gives?
ANTHONY SALVANTO: Well, we know…
(LAUGHTER)
ANTHONY SALVANTO: We – good morning, Major.
We know that people still say the economy is bad. We know that prices and inflation are the top reason they give for why. So, in this poll, we find that the president's approval for specifically handling the economy and inflation are both ticked down.
Now, let's talk about these tariffs, because, look, it's early in the administration. So I think the key gauge is, what do people think he's trying to do? And here we see a mismatch. They think he's putting too much focus on trying to put in tariffs, and not enough focus on trying to lower prices.
Now, the mismatch there is, the administration argues, well, that will have positive impact, right? So I asked, what do you think will happen when tariffs go into effect? People think in the short term that it'll raise prices, but also in the long term there's a lot of people who think tariffs will raise prices.
So the administration hasn't quite connected the dots on that argument yet. Now, what happens next is, you get people think, with uncertainty in the stock market, that his policies are having a negative effect there. I should add this. He does not entirely own this economy yet, speaking of it being early, right?
Who's to blame for inflation, right? And, that, he shares with Joe Biden still. But one of the things to watch going forward is expectations. Coming in to the administration, before he took office, a lot of people thought the Trump's policies would make them financially better off.
You ask that question today, and far fewer Americans think that. Even far fewer Republicans think that. And that expectations game is key.
MAJOR GARRETT: In the data, there's still some buoyancy for the president. He's not collapsing by any stretch the imagination.
And it appears one of the reasons is satisfaction with aggressiveness on immigration.
ANTHONY SALVANTO: Absolutely right.
This is a story about balance. And the things that are going well in the public mind for him is his handling of immigration, which is still net positive, and his deportation program is still net positive and popular. People say, well, they don't think it'd be OK if there are legal residents who were mistakenly detained in this program, although there are some in his base who do.
But you look at other aspects of this, like cuts to the federal work force. That continues to be split. But you then also see a majority of saying – people saying, well, that might impact programs that they care about. Even some – even over a third of Republicans think that may happen, again, a key measure to watch.
And, look, in terms of how this ties back then to that uncertainty in the economy, that could have an impact worth watching too.
MAJOR GARRETT: One of the conversations certainly that has become more intense in the last couple of weeks here in Washington is a clash for the administration, sometimes it looks intentionally, with Congress on executive powers and with the courts on executive powers.
Do we have any data that talks about where the country is about what looks like something that is really getting to be confrontational?
ANTHONY SALVANTO: In terms of judicial review, like you mentioned, the majority people say, yes, judges should have the ability to review a president's actions, but there is some talk on the right as well, should they try to impeach judges who rule against the president?
And while most people don't say so, there is a bulk of Republicans who would favor such efforts. And that's, again, part of this larger push, especially from his base, on items like this. Look, other things, DEI – ending DEI programs, marginally popular, but not cutting off funding to organizations that still go ahead and practice it.
MAJOR GARRETT: One of the interesting factors in all of these is where independents are. And independents are a little bit more troubled about the confrontation, executive powers, than Republicans.
ANTHONY SALVANTO: They are.
And, again, this speaks to our current politics, which is, are you pushing for things that the base wants? One of the things about the Republican base right now is that they say that those immigration efforts are just important in their evaluations as the economy is, and that sets up one of the key differences here.
MAJOR GARRETT: Anthony Salvanto, always a pleasure. Thank you.
ANTHONY SALVANTO: Thanks, Major.
MAJOR GARRETT: Late Friday, we spoke with the president of the United Auto Workers union, Shawn Fain, and we asked him about the impact of those new 25 percent tariffs on foreign-made cars and auto parts imports.
(Begin VT)
SHAWN FAIN (President, United Auto Workers): We've seen over 90,000 manufacturing facilities leave the United States.
We've seen, in the Big Three alone, in the last 20-plus years, 65 plants have closed. You know, and so, look, tariffs aren't the total solution. Tariffs are a tool in the toolbox to get these companies to do the right thing. And the intent behind it is to bring jobs back here and, you know, invest in the American workers.
If they're going to bring jobs back here, you know, they need to be life- sustaining jobs, where people can make a good wage, a living wage, have adequate health care and have a retirement security, and not have to work seven days a week or multiple jobs just a scrape to get by paycheck to paycheck.
MAJOR GARRETT: Do you have assurances from the Trump administration as you dialogue with it about those things you just laid out, not just jobs, but a substantial wage, health care and the like?
SHAWN FAIN: Every time we speak, we talk about bringing jobs back, about bringing the manufacturing base back in this country, you know.
But, you know, it doesn't do any good if they're going to locate them in places and they're not going to have the opportunity to have a union, you know. And so, naturally, we have concerns. We have great concerns after – after what happened last night.
You know, with the stroke of a marker, you know, Trump eliminated bargaining – or eliminated contracts for 700,000 federal workers. We have concerns with what's going on with our higher education sector that we represent. We have members who are being detained, you know, their right to free speech being violated.
We have workers at the National Institute of Health that provide vital research, and that – that is for the betterment of the people. So, you know, we have big concerns with that. So, naturally, yes, every time we talk about trade, talk about tariffs, it's an integral part of that. These have to be good-paying union jobs.
MAJOR GARRETT: I will get back to the tariffs and autos in a second.
But since you brought up this executive order, it regards an effort by the Trump administration, through the president, to stop or certainly dramatically slow collective bargaining for federal workers. Randy Erwin, who is currently the president of the National Federation of the Federal Employees, called it the biggest assault on collective bargaining he has ever seen.
Do you agree with those sentiments?
SHAWN FAIN: Exactly, I mean, spot on.
Look, I remember when I was 12 years old when Reagan busted the PATCO workers. You know, that was a massive issue back then. And we've heard a lot of people talk about the labor…
MAJOR GARRETT: The air traffic controllers union, yes.
SHAWN FAIN: Yes, yes.
Look, this is 100 times worse than PATCO ever dreamed of being, when you're talking, you know, 700,000 people, their contracts just being taken away. Free speech is under attack. Unions are under attack. You look at the changes to the NLRB, you look at the situation at the Department of Labor, Department of Education, you know, Veterans Affairs, I mean, why are all these things under attack, Medicare, Social Security?
It's because, you know, billionaires want more tax cuts for themselves, and that we – it's been proven time and again that's not what works for America. That's not good for the American people. The working-class people in America, they want their fair share. They're not asking to be rich. They just want a decent standard of living.
MAJOR GARRETT: So for those listening to you, Shawn, do you want them to conclude, well, if we get the tariffs and there are a few more auto jobs, it's worth all the other things you just talked about, Medicaid, free speech, collective bargaining? Is that a deal that's worth them taking?
SHAWN FAIN: Not at all.
Let me be clear about this, you know, because I think this is being misconstrued here. Look, there's been no change in where we stand politically as a union and where – you know, what our stance is.
We have expectations. Endorsements are earned, but at the end of the day, like, we're not – you know, we're not partisan to any one – any one party here. We expect, no matter what party someone comes from, to stand up for what we believe in.
So, just because we find common ground on tariffs or on trade doesn't mean that everything else goes out the window. It's despicable what happened last night. It's despicable some of the other things that are going on. Like I said, some of our members have been detained. You know, their jobs are being threatened, and it's unacceptable.
So, no, there is no tradeoff here. You know, so we – we continue to do what we do. And we have integrity. When we can – when we can work with a politician on an issue, and we get traction, we're going to work with them. But where we can't, we're going to be just as vocal.
MAJOR GARRETT: Understood.
Let's get back to the tariffs and the auto industry. Peter Navarro, a top adviser to the president on trade, says, currently, automobile manufacturing plants are at about 60 percent capacity. He argues that there's lots of untapped capacity, meaning jobs could be created relatively easy, and you didn't have to need – you wouldn't need to spend two or three or maybe five years building new factories.
Is that your understanding? Is that your belief?
SHAWN FAIN: It's – he's spot on.
Look, we have a situation right now in Warren, Michigan, where 2,000 workers were laid off this past year. They – they built the Ram truck there for years under Stellantis, and Stellantis made a decision to shift that production to Mexico.
They could shift that work back in – in very short order and be producing Ram trucks right back there and put those people back to work. They're – in a situation where they need to build a new plant, yes, that's going to take a couple years. But – but there is plenty of opportunity for these companies to do the right thing and bring work back here overnight, just as quick as they shipped it out of here.
MAJOR GARRETT: How do tariffs make that happen? How do – what is the relationship between a 20 or 25 percent tariff and getting that capacity back up to where you'd like it to see – you'd like to see it?
SHAWN FAIN: Well, because, like everything, the companies abuse the process.
I mean, they – you know, they – they – they're in the pursuit of driving a race to the bottom. I mean, the tariffs are – you know, there was a major promise when NAFTA – and we go back to when NAFTA happened in 1992, the big debate.
And – and Ross Perot talked about the giant sucking sound, that our manufacturing base was going to disappear. He was spot on, you know? And – and we saw what happened in the – in the ensuing 30 years. We have seen 90,000 plants leave.
You know, like I said, we've seen 65 plants in the Big Three close. Look, right now, as we speak, in – in – in Wisconsin, we have a Deere plant threatening to be closed and their work being – being threatened to go to Mexico. We have a heavy truck plant in – at freight – or Volvo and Mack Truck in Pennsylvania being threatened to be taken to Mexico.
There is plenty of opportunity. And I have had companies tell us point blank that they're going to have to bring product back here if those tariffs are implemented.
MAJOR GARRETT: You mentioned NAFTA.
Of course, NAFTA has been replaced by USMCA. And I well remember, and you might remember this, Shawn, January 2020, President Trump in the Rose Garden said the following:
(Begin VT)
DONALD TRUMP (President of the United States): The USMCA is the largest, fairest, most balanced and modern trade agreement ever achieved. The USMCA is estimated to add another 1.2 percent to our GDP and create countless new American jobs.
It will make our blue collar boom.
(End VT)
MAJOR GARRETT: Is USMCA a part of this problem, negotiated by President Trump?
SHAWN FAIN: Well, yes, I mean, USMCA, I mean, obviously there were changes made.
There were – there were some improvements, but it didn't go far enough. There were still a lot of loopholes in it. At the end of the day, it's up for renegotiation next year. So, nothing stops them from – from getting to work.
You know, and we're right here. We're here every day. We've been very open with them about, we want to work with them. We want to find ways to fix the USMCA and – and fix the atrocities of NAFTA that the working class in this country have suffered and the communities in this country have suffered for decades.
MAJOR GARRETT: Shawn, the market research firm Cox Automotive for this year, is projecting 700,000 fewer cars will be produced and sold because of consumer anxiety over sticky inflation, meaning persistent inflation, and nervousness about cost impacts of tariffs.
If 700,000 cars or trucks fewer are being made and sold, how does that help your work force?
SHAWN FAIN: Well, it doesn't.
But, you know, we need to be – we need to take a hard look at this, because those same – the same economists that are saying this now are the same ones in 1992 that said overnight, when NAFTA was created, there would be 400,000 jobs created in America in the first year.
We know what happened there. They got it wrong. And the interesting part to me, all this crying about the effects of – of tariffs, I find it interesting, because, to me, this is just Wall Street. Now that Wall Street's upset about it, it's an issue.
Where was Wall Street when – when all these manufacturing facilities have been leaving the country in the last 30 years?
(End VT)
MAJOR GARRETT: We had hoped to speak to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick today, but the White House declined our request. We do hope to have him on in the near future to discuss tariffs.
Our full conversation with Shawn Fain can be found on our Web site and on our YouTube channel.
We will be right back in a moment.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MAJOR GARRETT: Welcome back.
We are joined now by the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Virginia Democrat Mark Warner.
Senator, always a pleasure. Thanks for coming in.
Two things here. We're going to talk about the chat room and we're going to talk about the raid. Let's talk about the raid first. Are you glad this administration is taking a more aggressive military posture against the Houthis? And do you believe, if it is successful, it will reopen commercial shipping through the Red Sea?
SENATOR MARK WARNER (D-Virginia): I think we should take more affirmative action. I think the administration is doing the right thing.
I would rather them do it with more of our allies involved, but the fact that Donald Trump's America first is turning quickly into America alone. But the basis of going after Houthis in a stronger, tougher way, I agree with them.
MAJOR GARRETT: The administration argues the Biden administration didn't do enough. Do you agree with that?
SENATOR MARK WARNER: I think the Biden administration took repeated action against the Houthis. I think they could have done more.
MAJOR GARRETT: All right.
Now, let's get to the chat room. What is your experience? Do you use Signal, for example?
SENATOR MARK WARNER: Yes.
Signal is safer than your normal cell phone, because the Chinese through Salt Typhoon have penetrated our traditional cellular networks. Signal is better. But the Chinese, the Russians are trying to go after Signal. They have – they have made – had some successful efforts.
Everyone is warned in the intelligence community, do not use Signal for classified information. It is bright. It is bold. It is a – it is high cyber and hygiene 101 in terms of how to stay safe.
MAJOR GARRETT: One of the things discussed in this chat, which the administration has said is accurate, was a reference to a high-value Houthi target at his girlfriend's house somewhere in Yemen, probably Sanaa, near the capital.
David Martin, my exceptional colleague here at CBS, has reported that the Israelis are furious about this because they believe those who would read that could sort of backward-engineer that and find something out that they shouldn't find out.
Do you agree with that? What do you think the implications of that are?
SENATOR MARK WARNER: I have not seen any of the classified information about this, so I'm basing my knowledge on open-source.
If the Israelis are this mad – and I think they have got a right to be this mad – about classified information being treated sloppily – and this is a pattern. We have seen them expose CIA agents in the first two weeks. We have seen the DOGE boys print the full budget and head counts of a classified agency. So this is not a one-off.
And what happens, if the Israelis are this mad, and the Five Eye partners, our key allies, are upset, will they continue to share information with us if it's treated this sloppily? And if we don't see action taken by this administration, if someone is not held accountable – I believe Secretary Hegseth should resign or be fired.
I think Mike Waltz should resign or be fired. If no action is taken, what message does that send to the work force? Because, Major – Major, I can tell you this. If you are a military officer or a CIA agent and you treated classified information this way, you would be fired, end of story.
MAJOR GARRETT: When Republicans say it was a mistake and they will never make it again, does that satisfy you?
SENATOR MARK WARNER: Baloney. I'd use stronger language, but we're – Sunday morning.
But it's like this is a pattern of sloppiness. I mean, think about the DOGE boys when they print all the savings, and half of the information is just factually wrong.This administration does not treat classified information the appropriate way.
Major, we don't – we have not even seen if the phones that were used, have they been collected? Have they been checked to make sure the bad guys didn't put malware in them? That, again, would be the first action of a serious administration.
I have asked the FBI director whether he's launching an investigation. I have heard nothing back from him.
MAJOR GARRETT: Does it give you any comfort that the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, Roger Wicker, Republican, and the Democrat, Jack Reed, have called for an inspector general investigation? And is that enough?
SENATOR MARK WARNER: I'm glad there's that bipartisan effort. I hope there will be additional ones.
I hope – frankly, I think the Department of Justice needs to look at whether laws have been broken, because, again, put this in context. The director of national intelligence, I think 12, 13 days ago, boldly tweeted out, anybody that leaks information should be pursued to the full extent of the law.
Well, if Tulsi Gabbard believes that, is that just for others? Or does that standard apply to her as well? Where she, frankly, in our hearing, one, refused to acknowledge she was even on the call to start with, wouldn't tell us if her phone, it was hers or the government, and then, at least initially, said there was no classified information at all, when, clearly, if you have got this kind of information about time of an attack, that's classified.
And one of the things I'd love her or Hegseth to do is go down to the Norfolk, Virginia, Beach area. I was there yesterday for a couple town halls. The aircraft carrier Truman is home-ported in Norfolk. I was talking yesterday with friends and family of members who are on the Truman.
Their anger level was so high,because, if that information had gotten out, and the Houthis had been able to redirect their defensive tools, very likely, we would have had American life loss. That could been prevented if you just have – treat classified information appropriately.
MAJOR GARRETT: Talk about something else that is of deep concern to you, because you wrote the law.
Oracle appears to be in deep talks with the administration about some method of acquiring TikTok before the April 5 deadline. It's not clear whether or not China would retain ownership of the ever-important algorithm within TikTok. What do you know? What are your concerns? What's going to happen?
SENATOR MARK WARNER: What I know is, I believe there are four bidders. I don't know all of the bidders.
But I can tell you this. If there is a result, no matter how much kind of Trump publicity around this, that suddenly we have got a new owner, if we have got a result, and the algorithm resides in Beijing, it is all a sham, because the ability to manipulate that algorithm to what we see on that TikTok channel – and, again, remember China doesn't offer TikTok to their own young people.
They're getting – we get the crack version, and where you can manipulate information, you can put Chinese propaganda out. And if that algorithm does not move for whatever transfer, then the whole thing's a sham.
MAJOR GARRETT: And it violates the law.
SENATOR MARK WARNER: And it violates the law.
And the irony of this, Major, it was Donald Trump in his first administration that first pointed out the problems with TikTok. Candidly, I didn't fully agree, until I did my own research. And I go, holy heck. Collecting data and this power of a propaganda tool, it should not be available to Americans; 80 percent of the Congress, both parties, agree.
MAJOR GARRETT: Senator Warner, stay right there. We will have more questions for you.
And for you at home, please stay with us. We will be right back.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MAJOR GARRETT: The death toll in Myanmar has exceeded 1,600 since that massive 7.7-magnitude earthquake hit Friday.
Rescue teams are digging through rubble in Myanmar and Thailand and in some cases finding survivors from underneath. The area is still feeling the effects of huge aftershocks this weekend.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MAJOR GARRETT: We will be right back with more from Senator Mark Warner and more Face the Nation.
That's coming up. Please stay with us.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MAJOR GARRETT: Welcome back to Face the Nation.
We return to our conversation with Senator Mark Warner, Democrat of Virginia, vice chair of the Intelligence Committee.
So, the Intelligence Committee released its national threat assessment Tuesday. One of the things it said was, China is going after Greenland's natural resources, saying they, China, will use the same access as a key strategic foothold for advancing China's broader and economic aims in the arctic.
The vice president was there with his wife a couple of days ago. President Trump recently said, 100 percent, America will get Greenland and did not rule out if necessary the possible use of military force in America to do that.
Is Greenland a legitimate strategic issue, point one? Point two, how is this administration pursuing that legitimate interest, if there is one?
SENATOR MARK WARNER: Point one, Greenland has got a lot of rare earth minerals and has enormous value, just as many other places around the world do.
So, legitimate interest and stronger ties with Greenland? Absolutely. The idea that we are going to threaten a military invasion against a population that, at least everything I have read, overwhelmingly, the people in Greenland don't want to become part of America, the – going against Denmark, who is a NATO member who rules Greenland currently, this whole approach that Trump has of treating our allies – I mean, we turn Canada into an enemy.
Our allies as not allies, and suddenly wanting to buddy up with Putin in Russia or with Xi and China, think about it. America two weeks ago, three weeks ago voted with Russia, North Korea, I think it was Belarus, against everyone else who was a democracy, because we wouldn't acknowledge that Putin started the war on Ukraine.
This is a crazy foreign policy. And America is stronger when we have allies. America alone is weaker if we don't have that intelligence sharing, if we don't have these mutual defense pacts.
MAJOR GARRETT: That national threat assessment also had a notable shift, saying that the biggest threat to America was drug cartels, gangs, fentanyl, Islamic terrorists, not Russia and China.
Do you agree?
SENATOR MARK WARNER: I think the threat of drugs is awful, and we need to do more against fentanyl.
I think the long-term strategic technology competition with China is the issue not just of today, but the next 30 years. It's A.I. It's quantum. It's a whole series of biotech as well.
On the question of Russia, here's the remarkable thing. The intelligence assessment said Russia is still an enemy and said Russia is still going to do malign election interference. In that document, they say that. At the very same time, the Trump administration is getting rid of the election threat group inside our intelligence community.
That is a complete contradiction.
MAJOR GARRETT: Very quickly, this threat assessment does not mention climate change. It was there in the previous Trump administration and the Biden administration. Your reaction?
SENATOR MARK WARNER: Denial of science doesn't mean that it's not happening.
One of the reasons why Greenland and the Arctic, because we have had so much ice melt, there are a whole suddenly set of new shipping lanes. You can't deny what is happening. Call it sea level rise. Call it whatever you want. We spend hundreds of millions of dollars raising the piers each year in Norfolk because of sea level rise.
You can't ignore what's happening.
MAJOR GARRETT: Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, thanks very much.
SENATOR MARK WARNER: Thank you, Major.
MAJOR GARRETT: And we will be right back.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MAJOR GARRETT: We turn now to the Republican chairman of the House Budget Committee, Texas Congressman Jodey Arrington, who joins us this morning from New Orleans.
Mr. Chairman, great to see you. Thanks for joining us.
In the last month, the Dow has lost 5.14 percent of its value, the NASDAQ 8 percent, the S&P 6.2 percent. Consumer confidence, as you probably are aware, has dipped a bit in the last couple of months.
How do you account for all of this?
REPRESENTATIVE JODEY ARRINGTON (R-Texas): Well, good morning to you, Major.
First of all, core inflation is down. Mortgage rates are down just a little bit. Food and gas prices are down. So you're going to have fluctuations in – in the financial markets, but we're seeing that the fundamentals are already having an impact on the cost of living, which I think should be job number one of this president.
But you've got the tariffs, which I think are critical for our long-term prosperity, to have that reset, have that fair and reciprocal trade dynamic that doesn't exist today. So, transitioning from the last four years to a new administration with a new economic policy agenda is going to have some adjustments that go with it.
And – but I think, at the end of the day, you're going to have better prospects for growth, you're going to bring down the prices, and you're going to have better prospects for our future, including reducing the debt to GDP, which, as the Budget chairman, I can tell you, is completely unsustainable at this point and could bankrupt our country.
MAJOR GARRETT: Mr. Chairman, one of the top tariff advisers to the president, Peter Navarro, said this morning that tariffs are tax cuts. Are they?
REPRESENTATIVE JODEY ARRINGTON: Well, in the long run, I think having an unfair trade dynamic at the current point is suppressing growth. It's suppressing wages and suppressing job creation.
So it has an adverse impact on our economy. There's no way, Major, to reset the trade dynamic that we've allowed to persist in an unfair way for so long without some disruption. The president has been very transparent about it, and he deployed the same tactics now back in his first administration successfully.
We brought China and others to the table. We had a reset. We had new purchase agreements. We had structural reforms. And we benefited. We had better trade activity. We had better economic activity. And, overall, wages grew and life in the American economy and the quality of life for our fellow Americans was better.
So that transition has to happen. And the only person I have seen in my life and experience in politics with the political courage to do it has been President Trump, and I support him 100 percent.
MAJOR GARRETT: When you think about the budget and the process by which to finance tax cuts, either the existing ones or new ones, you're going to count on tariff revenue, are you not?
REPRESENTATIVE JODEY ARRINGTON: Well, I think we should count on reducing spending that is runaway, bankrupting levels of spending at $2 trillion in annual deficits that will double in the next 10 years.
Half of that $2 trillion is interest on the debt. That will more than double in the next 10 years. So, we have a spending problem. That deficit spending is driving world war levels of debt and will bankrupt the country.
So, I think we should offset the tax cuts with spending reductions and bend that debt to GDP. The revenue from tariffs could do two things, accelerate the reduction of deficit to GDP and do what the president has said he wants to happen in this America first agenda, put our nation on a path to balance.
But it can also provide tariff relief, like he did in the first administration, for farmers in West Texas, for example, with the market facilitation payments that took the sting out of the fallout from the early stages of the trade battles, before we had the reset for reciprocal trade.
So, I think those are better uses of tariff revenue, but I think we've got to bring down spending. If we don't, then I don't know how much longer we have before, as Ray Dalio says, we're going to have an economic heart attack, and it will undermine everything.
MAJOR GARRETT: Let's talk about spending for a second.
As you know, Mr. Chairman, Medicaid is projected to increase 5.2 percent each year for the next 10 years. House Republicans have voted for $880 billion in cuts over 10 years. You and I both know – you don't have to argue with me about it – that it would be a reduction of the future growth, not a pure cut.
But if you lose a service as a Medicaid recipient, that's probably a distinction without a difference. Can you say that, when this all gets done, alterations to Medicaid will not change the way people access that program and the health services they receive from it?
REPRESENTATIVE JODEY ARRINGTON: Major, I will do better.
I think, if we don't make these changes, this program and the federal budget in general is not sustainable, because we're allowing states and local organizations to siphon hundreds of billions of dollars away from the Medicaid beneficiary and the Medicaid program.
We also – this is the one means-tested program that doesn't have work requirements for able-bodied adults. We also have a Medicaid program, because of the Obamacare expansion and the expansion population of able- bodied adults, where the federal government provides 90 cents on every dollar match for that population, but the preponderance of Medicaid beneficiaries, the blind, the disabled, the poor, the sickest among our fellow citizens, get about 60 percent to 65 percent.
So all of the health care system is oriented around the 90 percent, the able-bodied adults, and they're not providing the same access, which is to the – to the traditional Medicaid, which is why the outcomes are going down.
So, there is a lot of ways to reorient the system, to make it more efficient, to root out waste and fraud, and it's well over the $800 billion. It's commonsense, straightforward, and you don't have to touch a dime of the benefits.
MAJOR GARRETT: Mr. Chairman, very quickly, the president told NBC – quote – he "couldn't care less" if foreign automakers raise prices.
Do you care?
REPRESENTATIVE JODEY ARRINGTON: What I care about is that our workers and manufacturers in this country are competing head to head with China and every other competitor country, that we allow their mark – their products to come in our markets open and free, and they don't. They tax our products.
And it's hurting our workers. It's hurting our economic output, and we need a reset. And so there's no way to get to that dynamic, that reciprocal trade arrangement, without the tough negotiation tactics of President Trump.
He was successful in the first term. We didn't create economic chaos. We didn't even have much of inflation. In fact, the economy was roaring. We had more jobs, more people out of poverty. That's what's going to happen. And I support the president. And he has to prove that he is committed to this, and I believe he is.
And I think that's important if we're going to get to the other side of this.
MAJOR GARRETT: House Committee – Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington Arrington of Texas, thanks very much, sir. I appreciate it.
And we will be right back.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MAJOR GARRETT: We want to go back to the situation surrounding the administration and the officials' use of Signal, a messaging app, to discuss military attack plans.
In our new CBS News poll, let's see, three-quarters of Americans say that this was, to them, a serious matter. A total of 76 percent of Americans also said the use of the app to discuss military plans was, to their way of thinking, not appropriate. And that included eight in 10 independents and more than half of Republicans surveyed.
We turn now to Sue Gordon, who served as principal deputy director of national intelligence during the first Trump administration – she is in Austin – and retired Marine Corps General Frank McKenzie, former head of U.S. Central Command. This marks his first official appearance as a CBS News contributor. And he joins us from Tampa, Florida.
Good morning to you both.
Sue, I want to start with you.
Just break this down for our audience. How much of this falls into anything that you would, through your career, understand to be acceptable communications about sensitive or classified information?
SUE GORDON (Former U.S. Principal Deputy of National Intelligence): Well, good morning, Major.
Just top line, without getting into classification guides, there is nothing about the information that has to do with operations that is appropriate for this communications channel, none.
And there are other communications channels that are available for this type of thing. And the risk of loss that comes with uncontrolled communications is profound. So, I don't think we need to argue at any level whether it was appropriate for this path.
Now, we can talk about how that happened. We can talk about what they could have done, and we can talk about what we do next. But on the top line, this isn't what you discuss in those channels.
MAJOR GARRETT: So, when the administration, Sue, says, but nothing bad happened, nobody got to it, so don't worry about it, how do you react to that?
SUE GORDON: One, I'm glad the operation was successful. Yay.
But we have a saying that says that every success is a failure where something went right. And I don't think we should rest on the fact that nothing bad happened this time. We don't know whether that communications path has been penetrated, so we don't know whether state actors that have lots of resources are just sitting and lurking now knowing that we do important things on that.
Certainly, the information that has now come out for any intelligence officer – and I can speak of this with great expertise – that's all super useful for the next time, or for understanding the sources, or understanding how we did the targeting, or understanding how we operate, or what our operational tempo is.
So all of that information is valuable. So, I'm glad the operation was successful. Now we need to deal with the fact that this should not have happened. There is consequence when it does, and you can't be sure that there is no persistent risk that follows it.
MAJOR GARRETT: Frank, this story has forest and trees. And I don't want to lose the forest.
The bigger issue here is, a new tempo, an increased tempo of military operations, some of them day in, day in, day in, day in, out, against the Houthis in Yemen. Evaluate that and its importance in understanding the broader context of this story.
GEN. FRANK MCKENZIE (RET.): Sure, Major. And, first of all, it's great to be with you here today.
I think the larger story here is actually that we have finally begun to strike the Houthis hard. There's an old Neil Young song, and I will lift a line from it, should have been done long ago. Well, now we're beginning to do it, and we're beginning to strike effectively at a pace, a scope and a tempo that, frankly, eluded the last information – the last administration.
And I would argue that we're doing it because, for the first time, we have the political will to employ appropriate military capability against the Houthis. And we want one of two things from the Houthis. We want them either to be deterred from attacking ships that pass through the Bab-el- Mandeb, really means the Suez Canal. That's one condition.
The other condition would be, if they won't – if they won't stop, we want to remove their capability to do it. The second task would be harder. It is within our capability. It will not be a short action. It won't be what would call a single period of darkness. These attacks will have to continue. They may grow in scope and scale.
They're certainly not endless in time. And we need – we need to – we need to fix the problem and move on to other things. I think the fact that we have a second aircraft carrier that's moving to CENTCOM is certainly a sign that this administration is very serious about this requirement. The fact we're moving B-2s into the region similarly signals that.
But I believe, again, for the first time, we're coupling genuine political will to act along with military capability. So it's a unique – it's a unique moment in the theater, and I'm glad to see that this administration is grasping that opportunity.
MAJOR GARRETT: Frank, the terminology you just used, deter and degrade, can that be done from a distance, meaning aerial and from shipborne armaments?
GEN. FRANK MCKENZIE (RET.): So, I think we can do a very good job of that. I wouldn't take anything off the table.
Again, when you take things off the table, it tends to give aid and comfort to the enemy. We've done too much of that. I think we should leave everything on the table. And I would also leave on the table, actions against – against Tehran itself.
All paths in this matter lead back to Tehran, and we need to know and understand that. They're the principal supplier for the Houthis. And, right now, Iran is finding it convenient to backpedal and to claim that close relationship. But, in fact, the Houthis exist because of Iranian support, and now to a lesser degree because of Russian support.
And we need to recognize that, and we shouldn't give Iran a free ride on this. And I think we have the capability, actually, right now in Iran's weakened state to threaten them very strongly.
And I will just say one more thing as I close out on this, Major. The first Trump administration did three things that put them in a unique place right now in the region. Number one, that administration struck and killed Qasem Soleimani. That's forgotten in the United States. That's not forgotten in Iran. It displayed American will at a level that has generally been absent in the region.
Second thing is the signing of the Abraham Accords, which gave Israel the opportunity to enter the region diplomatically, economically and, to a degree, culturally. It's going to be a rough road, but I think that's only going to expand.
And, last, the movement of Israel from the European Command into the Central Command has actually enabled the very successful defense of Israel that we've seen over the last few weeks and months, and is a huge step forward.
All of these taken together give this administration a unique opportunity right now and in the months ahead to shape events in the region.
MAJOR GARRETT: Sue, I want to go back to you, because Senator Warner on this program just a few moments ago said he's concerned that those in the Five Eyes community, meaning our top intelligence-sharing allies, will look at the situation – whether it's prosecuted or not, they don't care – as careless, as reckless.
And they might be legitimately encouraged, therefore, to pull back. Working in the Trump administration the first time around, you worked with our partners there. You know what their sentiments are. Do you share those concerns?
GEN. FRANK MCKENZIE (RET.): They may express those concerns. I would argue…
SUE GORDON: I think it's…
MAJOR GARRETT: Frank, this is for Sue. Frank, this is for Sue.
GEN. FRANK MCKENZIE (RET.): I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry.
Sue, please go ahead.
(LAUGHTER)
SUE GORDON: Well, General, anything you have to say is worthwhile, but let me – let me – let me take a run at this.
Listen, our – we count on our allies and partners. And protecting their equities and interests and their sources of information is really important. I – there have been, historically, errors in the past, it's not limited to this one, where you find that – that one partner or another has been unable to protect a partner's information.
I think what's difficult about this one is two things that the administration does need to address. One is, you really do need to tighten down on how you communicate, because my suspicion is that they were just doing something expedient, and I wish someone on the call had said, hold on, if we're going to go down this path, we need to go to a different channel.
But the second thing is the way we're reacting to it, when we suggest that there was nothing to see here. I think that's actually the thing that more needs to be addressed with our partners and allies, to say, yes, we understand that this was not what we should or would have preferred to do, and so to rebuild trust that way.
So it's not that there's not error. The issue is, are you doing things that inspire confidence? And I think that we know that, just from an environmental perspective, our relationships with our allies and partners are a little bit tenuous, at best. So, creating something that causes them to wonder whether we're trustworthy, again, to me, has a huge impact on our ability to advance the things that we want to do.
MAJOR GARRETT: Frank, you're a CBS contributor. I'm going to give you a one-minute time warning on this. Close out with your thoughts about this issue with the Signal chat.
GEN. FRANK MCKENZIE (RET.): So I think Sue was spot on in her – in her analysis.
I would simply argue that I believe the United States remains the indispensable nation in a lot of places. And I think – I'm sure we'll learn from this. I would like to think that it won't be repeated.
But I think, again, it's unfortunate that the Signal chat has really sort of obscured the very good, very real work that's been done in finally addressing a problem that's dragged on far too long, which is Houthi action in the Bab-el-Mandeb to close the – effectively close the Suez Canal.
MAJOR GARRETT: And real quick, Frank, when you looked at this, did it shock you? I mean, like, what, you're talking about that there?
GEN. FRANK MCKENZIE (RET.): I was surprised.
(LAUGHTER)
MAJOR GARRETT: That's it. You're learning the whole TV thing.
Frank McKenzie and Sue Gordon, thank you very, very much. I appreciate it for your time, your expertise and pulling this all out for the audience. Thank you so much.
We'll be right back.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MAJOR GARRETT: That's it for us today. Margaret will be back next week. I'm Major Garrett.
And you can join me for our daily political show, America Decides, on CBS News 24/7 at 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. And you can find it on your Paramount+ and CBS News apps.
