
McLeod Lecture: Former governors say trust, compromise key to their successes
Building trust by being honest with people and being willing to compromise are key attributes of being successful in government.
That was the message Tuesday night during the McLeod Lecture — part of McNeese's Banners cultural series — which featured former governors John Bel Edwards, a Democrat, and Charlie Baker, a Republican.
Baker is now president of the NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association), and Edwards is practicing law with the Fishman Haygood firm of Louisiana, focusing on renewable energy matters.
During the their time leading their states, both worked with majority legislative bodies of the opposing parties. On Tuesday both shared lessons learned on how to cross the aisle to bring people with opposing views together.
Party affiliation
Baker said he grew up in a home with a divided party affiliation — his father was a Republican and his mother is a Democrat.
'They used to debate the issues at our dinner table on Sundays and I used to have friends who would come over just to watch,' Baker said with a laugh. 'Basically, if you were going to sit at the table you had to play. My parents weren't fighting they were just having conversation so I grew up with this perspective that the two people I love most didn't vote for the same people, agreed sometimes and didn't agree a lot of times, but I never thought it was a contest or a fight.'
Baker said he ultimately became a Republican because when he became old enough, the presidential choices were Ronald Regan and Jimmy Carter.
'Reagan was my candidate of choice in that election,' he said. 'Then over the years I got involved in state politics and supporting a number of Republican candidates — including two Republican governors I worked for in their cabinets.'
Edwards also attributes his party affiliation to his parents' influence.
'My dad was a sheriff, like his dad and his grandfather and his great-grandfather, and my mother was a charity hospital nurse,' Edwards said. 'They were both very much Democrats. That just wasn't debated at all.'
Edwards said there are a number of Republicans who believe the government is always bad, it cannot work and it cannot be fixed.
'If you put those people in charge of government, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and you see exactly what we're seeing now in Washington,' he said. 'I just cannot be a Republican even though my party has oftentimes found considerable fault with me.'
Relationships
Baker served as the governor of Massachusetts from 2015 to 2023 and held cabinet positions under two of the state's previous governors.
'I knew a ton of people based on my time in state government and I had real relationships,' Baker said. 'I had professional relationships, personal relationships, and I worked with these people on all kinds of issues. They might have been Republican or Democrat, but I never really looked at them that way. I looked at them as a person I knew.'
These types of relationships give local and state governments 'a little bit of an edge' over the federal government.
'It's easier and, I think, more traditional to have relationships — personal ones — with a lot of people you work with,' he said. 'You're just around each other all the time. That makes a big difference, in my mind, of how we got things done.'
Edwards agrees.
'Personal relationships make all the difference in the world and it's still the case in Louisiana that you can have good, personal relationships with people in the other party,' Edwards said. 'The biggest impediment to having personal relationships with people of the other party is if you ever develop contempt for people just because they are in the other party. If you have contempt for somebody, you have no interest in sitting down with them. You don't care what they think. You don't really want their support for what they're trying to do. Trying to avoid that level of contempt, I think, is one of the most important things.'
Baker said there were a lot of people he worked with while in government that he could trust. He hopes they felt the same of him.
'I could tell them exactly what I thought, why I was trying to get something done and I could say to them, 'I can help you on this. I cannot help you with that. I'm willing to do this. I'm not willing to do that.' I wasn't playing games. If you want someone to help you do something hard and it's challenging and difficult, if you don't trust the people you're trying to do this with your chances for success are not going to be very high.'
Trust is a currency in and of itself, Baker said.
Bipartisanship
During the entirety of Edwards' time in the governor's mansion, the Republican Party had the majority in the House and the Senate.
'I'm very comfortable and happy by what we were actually able to do — all of it on a bipartisanship basis,' he said. 'But some folks would go home after the session and brag about not just what we accomplished but what they voted against. They were always in the minority, though. It didn't matter if they thought it was something good for the state, if I proposed it and if it was going to happen on my watch they would just as soon not have it.'
Those are the people he didn't spend a lot of time with, Edwards said, because he knew he wouldn't win an argument.
'The time you spend with them trying is time you're not spending with those people you might be able to influence,' he said.
Edwards said he tried during his term to not emulate in Baton Rouge what was happening in Washington, D.C.
Baker said if there were other legislators in government who wouldn't support something he was passionate about, he would find someone else to sponsor the legislation.
'I'm perfectly happy with someone else taking all the credit because at the end of the day I don't care that much about that. I care whether that item actually makes it,' he said.
Weather woes
Baker was sworn in on Jan. 4 and during his first press conference on Jan. 20 he unveiled his budget plan.
'One of the questions I got asked at the press conference was if I put enough money in for snow removal. I said, 'It's 50 degrees outside. There's no snow on the ground. It's almost the end of January. I think we'll be fine.' On Jan. 28 it started snowing and it snowed 38 days in a row and the temperature never got above 25.'
His approach during that time was to host press conferences three times a day to give updates.
'We did everything we could to give people guidance on what we were doing and why we were doing it and one thing people said after was they appreciated that we brought local folks to talk about particular problems in their communities and we didn't make it seem like it was about us,' he said.
Baker also called mayors and asked what they needed — and had it delivered.
'If people see government actually responding quickly and aggressively to the problems that are there and not creating them it helped us make a first impression,' he said.
Edwards said in March of 2016 — when he was governor for just two months — an afternoon storm came in and didn't leave for seven days.
'That was my first disaster and it became a federal disaster declaration,' he said. 'By the time I left office, we had 23 of those. FEMA brought down a special presentation because no other governor has ever had 23 major federal disaster declarations before.'
Edwards said he did his best to communicate effectively, tell the facts as he knew them, and remain calm.
'It's not enough to speak so that you can be understood you're supposed to try to speak so you can't be misunderstood.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Trump's tariffs are making money. That may make them hard to quit.
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'The good news is that Tariffs are bringing Billions of Dollars into the USA!' Trump said on social media shortly after a weak jobs report showed signs of strain in the labor market. Advertisement Over time, analysts expect that the tariffs, if left in place, could be worth more than $2 trillion in additional revenue over the next decade. Economists overwhelmingly hope that doesn't happen and the United States abandons the new trade barriers. But some acknowledge that such a substantial stream of revenue could end up being hard to quit. Advertisement 'I think this is addictive,' said Joao Gomes, an economist at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School. 'I think a source of revenue is very hard to turn away from when the debt and deficit are what they are.' The Port of Baltimore on June 30, 2025. ALYSSA SCHUKAR/NYT Trump has long fantasized about replacing taxes on income with tariffs. He often refers fondly to American fiscal policy in the late 19th century, when there was no income tax and the government relied on tariffs, citing that as a model for the future. And while income and payroll taxes remain by far the most important sources of government revenue, the combination of Trump's tariffs and the latest Republican tax cut does, on the margin, move the United States away from taxing earnings and toward taxing goods. Such a shift is expected to be regressive, meaning that rich Americans will fare better than poorer Americans under the change. That's because cutting taxes on income does, in general, provide the biggest benefit to richer Americans who earn the most income. The recent Republican cut to income taxes and the social safety net is perhaps the most regressive piece of major legislation in decades. Placing new taxes on imported products, however, is expected to raise the cost of everyday goods. Lower-income Americans spend more of their earnings on those more expensive goods, meaning the tariffs amount to a larger tax increase for them compared with richer Americans. Tariffs have begun to bleed into consumer prices, with many companies saying they will have to start raising prices as a result of added costs. And analysts expect the tariffs to weigh on the performance of the economy overall, which in turn could reduce the amount of traditional income tax revenue the government collects every year. Advertisement 'Is there a better way to raise that amount of revenue? The economic answer is: Yes, there is a better way, there are more efficient ways,' said Ernie Tedeschi, director of economics at the Yale Budget Lab and a former Biden administration official. 'But it's really a political question.' Workers welded steel components together at a Thomas Built Buses plant in High Point, N.C., on July 21, 2025. TRAVIS DOVE/NYT Tedeschi said that future leaders in Washington, whether Republican or Democrat, may be hesitant to roll back the tariffs if that would mean a further addition to the federal debt load, which is already raising alarms on Wall Street. And replacing the tariff revenue with another type of tax increase would require Congress to act, while the tariffs would be a legacy decision made by a previous president. 'Congress may not be excited about taking such a politically risky vote when they didn't have to vote on tariffs in the first place,' Tedeschi said. Some in Washington are already starting to think about how they could spend the tariff revenue. Trump recently floated the possibility of sending Americans a cash rebate for the tariffs, and Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., recently introduced legislation to send $600 to many Americans. 'We have so much money coming in, we're thinking about a little rebate, but the big thing we want to do is pay down debt,' Trump said last month of the tariffs. Democrats, once they return to power, may face a similar temptation to use the tariff revenue to fund a new social program, especially if raising taxes in Congress proves as challenging as it has in the past. As it is, Democrats have been divided over tariffs. Maintaining the status quo may be an easier political option than changing trade policy. Advertisement 'That's a hefty chunk of change,' Tyson Brody, a Democratic strategist, said of the tariffs. 'The way that Democrats are starting to think about it is not that 'these will be impossible to withdraw.' It's: 'Oh, look, there's now going to be a large pot of money to use and reprogram.'' Of course, the tariffs could prove unpopular, and future elected officials may want to take steps that could lower consumer prices. At the same time, the amount of revenue the tariffs generate could decline over time if companies do, in fact, end up bringing back more of their operations to the United States, reducing the number of goods that face the import tax. 'This is clearly not an efficient way to gather revenue,' said Alex Jacquez, a former Biden official and the chief of policy and advocacy at Groundwork Collaborative, a liberal group. 'And I don't think it would be a long-term progressive priority as a way to simply collect revenue.' This article originally appeared in


NBC News
an hour ago
- NBC News
Meet the Press — August 3, 2025 Director of the White House National Economic Council Kevin Hassett, Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Yamiche Alcindor, Susan Glasser, Stephen Hayes, and Symone Sanders Townsend
KRISTEN WELKER: This Sunday: Economic shakeup. After a weak jobs report, President Trump fires the official behind the jobs numbers. PRES. DONALD TRUMP: I believe the numbers were phony just like they were before the election, and there were other times. So, you know what I did. I fired her. SEN. DICK DURBIN: Tells you what he's looking for: blind loyalty. KRISTEN WELKER: As his trade war heats up, disrupting global markets. I'll talk to White House National Economic Advisor Kevin Hassett. Plus, battle lines: Democrats clash over how to fight the Trump presidency. SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR: You can't just pick out a few bills that came out of a committee and say, 'I'm going to stop those.' SEN. CORY BOOKER: It's time for Democrats to have a backbone. It's time for us to fight. It's time for us to draw lines. KRISTEN WELKER: As former Vice President Harris says she's not running for governor of California. FMR. VICE PRES. KAMALA HARRIS: I don't want to go back into the system. I think it's broken. KRISTEN WELKER: And former President Biden warns of the threats he sees ahead. FMR. PRES. JOE BIDEN: Look, folks, you can't sugar coat this. These are dark days. KRISTEN WELKER: I'll talk to Democratic Senator Alex Padilla of California. And: line dancing. Texas Republicans redraw congressional maps that could help flip five Democratic house seats. SEN. JOHN CORNYN: There's nothing more political than redistricting, but that's the nature of the beast. REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES: Republican politicians want to choose their voters. KRISTEN WELKER: Will it help Republicans hold power in the midterms? Joining me for insight and analysis are: NBC News White House Correspondent Yamiche Alcindor; Susan Glasser of the New Yorker; Symone Sanders Townsend, former chief spokeswoman for Vice President Kamala Harris; and Stephen Hayes, Editor of the Dispatch. Welcome to Sunday, it's Meet the Press. ANNOUNCER: From NBC News in Washington, the longest-running show in television history, this is Meet the Press with Kristen Welker. KRISTEN WELKER: Good Sunday morning. With just days to go until President Trump's tariffs take effect for nearly 70 countries around the world, there's uncertainty about the strength of the U.S. economy, following a weaker-than-expected jobs report on Friday. In the wake of that disappointing news, President Trump sent shockwaves across Washington by firing the official in charge of the numbers, Erika McEntarfer, the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, claiming, without any evidence, that the numbers were 'rigged' to make him look bad. [BEGIN TAPE] PRES. DONALD TRUMP: I've had issues with the numbers for a long time, but today's – we're doing so well. I believe the numbers were phony, just like they were before the election, and there were other times. So you know what I did? I fired her. [END TAPE] KRISTEN WELKER: The move prompting a backlash on Capitol Hill, with some Republicans expressing concern and Democrats denouncing the president's actions. [BEGIN TAPE] SEN. THOM TILLIS: If she was just fired because the president or whoever decided to fire the director just did it because they didn't like the numbers, they ought to grow up. SEN. CYNTHIA LUMMIS: If the president is firing the statistician because he doesn't like the numbers but they are accurate, then that's a problem. SEN. BERNIE SANDERS: It is the sign of an authoritarian type that when you get information you don't like, rather than deal with the issue, you fire the people who gave you the bad news. SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER: It's classic Donald Trump. When he gets the news he doesn't like, he shoots the messenger. [END TAPE] KRISTEN WELKER: In addition to the lackluster July report, jobs numbers for May and June were also revised downward, leading to the worst three months of job growth since the pandemic. All of it coinciding with Mr. Trump's announcement of sweeping tariffs. As the president's August 1st deadline for tariff deals passed, he signed an executive order locking in rates, set to go into effect August 7th. The United Kingdom will see 10% tariffs, and Japan and the EU will each face 15% tariffs, with those nations having made deals with the White House. While Canada, which has not yet reached terms with will face 35% tariffs on many goods. [BEGIN TAPE] PRES. DONALD TRUMP: Well, they have to pay a fair rate. It's all, it's very simple. PRES. DONALD TRUMP: I love Canada. I have so many friends in Canada. But they've, they've been very poorly led. They've been very, very poorly led. And all we want is fairness for our country. Democrats accusing the president of wreaking havoc on the economy. [BEGIN TAPE] SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL: The tariffs are going to decimate our economy if they are as extreme as the president wants. SEN. TIM KAINE: They're very, very worried about an economy that was the strongest economy in the world, not a perfect one, but it was strongest economy in the world in December of 2024. Now it's got nothing but smoke coming out of it and red lights flashing. [END TAPE] KRISTEN WELKER: And joining me now is the director of the White House National Economic Council, Kevin Hassett. Mr. Hassett, welcome to Meet the Press. KEVIN HASSETT: It's great to be here. Thank you. KRISTEN WELKER: It's great to have you here. Let's start with President Trump's decision to fire the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Erika McEntarfer, who he accused of manipulating job numbers. Mr. Hassett, what evidence does the administration have that she manipulated the jobs numbers? KEVIN HASSETT: Right. Well, what we've seen over the last few years is massive revisions to the jobs numbers. In fact they were extremely reliable, the kind of numbers that you want to guide policy decisions and markets through Covid. And then when Covid happened because response rates went down a lot, then revision rates skyrocketed. So the typical monthly revision often was bigger than the number itself. And now we had a number that just came out, the actual number for the month wasn't so bad. But the two months before were revised down by more than it ever happened since 1968. And in 2015, Alan Greenspan and I were asked to attend a conference at BLS where we were asked to give advice about how to modernize the data. And we warned that if they didn't try to let the data collection and calculation keep up with the data that was happening in the economy that we would have problems like this. And, finally, in the U.K. they had a very similar problem. And in 2023, they had to for a while shut down the data agency of the U.K. for the same kinds of problems. KRISTEN WELKER: But just to be very clear, do you have – does the administration have any evidence that it was 'rigged,' as the president said? And will you be presenting that to the American public? KEVIN HASSETT: Well, the evidence is that there have been a bunch of revisions that could -- KRISTEN WELKER: But hard evidence? KEVIN HASSETT: Well, I mean, the revisions are hard evidence. For example, there was an 818,000 revision making the Joe Biden job record a lot worse that came out after he withdrew from the presidential campaign. There have been a bunch of patterns that could make people wonder. And I think the most important thing for people to know is that it's the president's highest priority that the data be trusted and that people get to the bottom of why these revisions are so unreliable. KRISTEN WELKER: Well, let me ask you about what William Beach, he was the last commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. He was appointed by President Trump. He was sharply critical of this decision to get rid of his successor. I want to read you what he wrote. He says, quote, "These numbers are constructed by hundreds of people. They're finalized by about 40 people. These 40 people are very professional people who've served under Republicans and Democrats. And the commissioner does not see these numbers until the Wednesday prior to the release on Friday. By that time, the numbers are completely set into the IT system. They've been programmed. They are simply reported to the commissioner so the commissioner can on Thursday brief the president's economic team. The commissioner doesn't have any hand or any influence or any way of even knowing the data until they are completely done." Isn't this the very definition of shooting the messenger? KEVIN HASSETT: No, absolutely not. I mean, the bottom line is that there were people involved in creating these numbers. And if I were running the BLS and I had a number that was a huge politically important revision, the biggest since 1968, actually revisions should be smaller, right? Because computers are better and so on. Then I would have a really long report explaining exactly what happened. And we didn't get that. We didn't get that. And so right now people, you know, Goldman Sachs, people on Wall Street are wondering, "Where did these revisions come from? And why do they keep happening?" And what we need is a fresh set of eyes over the BLS. And there are great career staffers. One of the top BLS staffers is actually working in the White House to help us understand the jobs numbers. When I saw the jobs revisions, I literally called up that person and said, "I think there's a typo." Because I've been following these numbers all the way back when I worked with Alan Greenspan for something like 40 years. And I've never seen revisions like this. KRISTEN WELKER: But just to be very clear, I mean, 40 people put these numbers together. Is the president planning to fire all 40 people involved in putting these numbers together? KEVIN HASSETT: We're going to try to get the numbers so that they're transparent and reliable. KRISTEN WELKER: President Trump himself was happy to accept the jobs numbers issued under McEntarfer's leadership when the numbers were good. Take a listen to what he said in the past. [BEGIN TAPE] PRES. DONALD TRUMP: The numbers were much better as you know than projected by the media. PRES. DONALD TRUMP: In three months we have created 350,000 jobs. Think of that. PRES. DONALD TRUMP: A lot of jobs are being created. That's what – that's what happened this morning. [END TAPE] KRISTEN WELKER: So is the president prepared to fire anyone who reports data that he disagrees with? KEVIN HASSETT: No, absolutely not. The president wants his own people there so that when we see the numbers, they're more transparent and more reliable. And if there are big changes and big revisions – we expect more big revisions for the jobs data in September, for example – then we want to know why. We want people to explain it to us. KRISTEN WELKER: All right. But bottom line, were the numbers wrong? Do you have any hard evidence that you can present to the American public that these numbers, these revisions that were reported, and there were plenty of revisions under former President Biden including right before the election. Do you have any hard evidence that these numbers were wrong? KEVIN HASSETT: Yes. There is very hard evidence that we're looking at the biggest revision since -- KRISTEN WELKER: Are you going to present those? KEVIN HASSETT: – 1968. KRISTEN WELKER: Are you going to present the evidence -- KEVIN HASSETT: No, if you look at the number itself, it is the evidence. KRISTEN WELKER: But just saying it's an outlier is not evidence, Mr. Hassett. KEVIN HASSETT: It's a historically important outlier. It's something that's unprecedented -- KRISTEN WELKER: Still doesn't -- KEVIN HASSETT: So unprecedented that -- KRISTEN WELKER: It's still not evidence though -- KEVIN HASSETT: – I've been looking at it for 40 years. And I'm like, "It must be a typo." KRISTEN WELKER: Okay. All right. Let's move on to tariffs, the other big news of this week. Are the tariff rates locked in? Or are they still up for negotiation? KEVIN HASSETT: I think these – we have eight deals that cover about 55% of world GDP with our biggest trading partners, the E.U., Japan, Korea, and so on. And I expect that those matters are more or less locked in. Although there'll have to be some, you know, dancing around the edges about exactly what we mean when we do this or that. For the deals that aren't ready yet, they're going to get the reciprocal rates, you know, soon. And then we would expect that there might continue to be negotiations with those countries. KRISTEN WELKER: But for those eight deals that you say are deals that are announced, you're saying 'more or less.' Are they locked in? KEVIN HASSETT: Yes. I mean, the president will decide what the president decides. But the president likes those deals. The Europeans like those deals. And they're absolutely historically wonderful deals. Think about it. We've got Europe agreeing to open their markets to our products so our farmers, our small businessmen can sell stuff in Europe like they never could before. And they're letting us charge a 50% tariff, which is going to raise maybe about $100 million a year. KRISTEN WELKER: And I think people are curious because they remember that back in April when President Trump first announced these tariffs, he then backtracked when the bond market was spooked. Could a market reaction prompt President Trump to change these tariff rates again? KEVIN HASSETT: The markets have seen what we're doing and celebrated it. And so I don't see how that would happen. KRISTEN WELKER: Okay, but not ruling it out. KEVIN HASSETT: No, I would rule it out. Because these are the final deals. KRISTEN WELKER: All right. Let's talk about prices now. New inflation data released this week shows higher prices on products like household furniture, clothing. You have companies like Adidas, Procter & Gamble, Black and Decker all saying they will increase prices. They cite the tariffs. Prices are already up on some of Amazon's products. As you know, President Trump campaigned on a promise to bring prices down. What is your message to Americans who feel like the president's breaking that promise? KEVIN HASSETT: Well, he's not. In fact every measure of inflation, if you aggregate it, if you look at the top-line numbers, is lower than it's been in five months. And we just had the GDP released this week, which was a healthy 3%. And the most important GDP inflation number said it was 2.1%. And so inflation has come down a lot. That number by the way, the 2.1% was 3.7%. That's the number that President Trump inherited. And so inflation has come down. And inflation has come down for a lot of reasons. But I think the main reason is that we're no longer printing money and sending it to people like the Bidens did. That's a recipe for inflation. KRISTEN WELKER: Okay. Let me ask you about this talk of tariff rebates. The president consistently arguing that consumers don't pay tariffs. If that is the case, Mr. Hassett, why would you issue a rebate? KEVIN HASSETT: Well, what's going to happen, right, is the CBO has estimated that we're going to get $3 trillion more in revenue. And so what Congress is going to do when they see all the revenue is they're going to decide, "What are we going to do with it?" They could use it all to reduce the debt. Or they could give some of it back to consumers. And the president looks forward to working with Congress in the second half of the year to decide on what the best way to use that money is. In fact, we think the CBO estimate of $3 trillion is now pretty low, given the new deals that we've had. KRISTEN WELKER: What do you think Congress should do? Rebates or work to pay down the debt? Because you have, for example, some Republican senators, Senator Rick Scott, "We ought to do everything we can to give money back to the American public. But we've got to first balance our budget." KEVIN HASSETT: Well, I think that there are a lot of people that think that balancing the budget is the top priority for the economy right now. But we're also mindful of the fact that there's a legislative process where people dicker over the details. And so I'm not sure. I can't predict right now which way it's going to end up. KRISTEN WELKER: There's been a lot of focus on Fed chair Jerome Powell, obviously President Trump really pressuring him to lower interest rates, which he did not do. So the question becomes, "Who will replace him once his term ends?" If President Trump taps you to be the next Fed chair, will you accept? Do you want to be? KEVIN HASSETT: You know, I've been working with the president for about eight years. And, you know, as one of his closest economic advisors, of course, we've talked about the Federal Reserve. Right now he's set up an active search with Secretary Bessent. And they're going to go through a list of names. And I'm sure the president will pick the best available person. KRISTEN WELKER: Well, if that's you, will you say yes? KEVIN HASSETT: We'll have to see if he chooses me. But I think that I have the best job in the world. And I – really well placed at the National Economic Council -- KRISTEN WELKER: In general, should a Fed chair take direction from the Oval Office, or from the economic conditions? KEVIN HASSETT: I think that a Fed chair should listen to all the voices, especially their critics, to try to think about, "What am I getting right? What am I getting wrong?" The Fed chair also has a transparency responsibility, which I think that Jay has fallen down on a little bit. That if you're going to come out and say, for example, that you think that tariffs are going to cause inflation, then for goodness sake, you should put out a model that explains how much inflation and why you think that way. Because there are others that disagree. Have a lively academic debate, and if you go to actually put your finger on the scale of 'tariffs cause inflation,' then you need to explain why. I don't think that the Fed or the BLS should be a black box. I think it should be transparent. KRISTEN WELKER: All right. Before I let you go, President Trump has now been in office for more than six months. Is this now the Trump economy? KEVIN HASSETT: I mean, there is definitely a lot of policy yet to happen. We've just passed the Big, Beautiful Bill. It's going into effect in July. And it's going to have massive impact on the economy. There are residual problems that we've inherited, in part, the runaway spending from the previous term. And so whose economy is it is more of a political question than an economist question. KRISTEN WELKER: Well, but you just touted all the benefits that you see at this point -- KEVIN HASSETT: With the eye on the horizon. KRISTEN WELKER: Does the president own the economy at this point? He's been in office for six months. KEVIN HASSETT: With the eye on the horizon, the economic outlook is huge. It's great. We've got the Big, Beautiful Bill. We've got AI increasing productivity. We've got everything. And we've got all the tariff revenue coming in. So we have every confidence that the economy is headed way, way up from here. KRISTEN WELKER: All right. Kevin Hassett, thank you so much -- KEVIN HASSETT: Thank you. KRISTEN WELKER: – for being here. KEVIN HASSETT: It's great to be here. KRISTEN WELKER: We really appreciate it. When we come back, Democratic Senator Alex Padilla of California joins me next. KRISTEN WELKER: Welcome back. Joining me now is Democratic Senator Alex Padilla of California. Senator Padilla, welcome back to Meet the Press. SEN. ALEX PADILLA: Thanks for having me back. KRISTEN WELKER: Thank you so much for being here in person. Let's start with the economy. President Trump, as I was just discussing with Kevin Hassett, his decision to fire the head of the BLS, of course it has prompted some backlash. We've just heard Kevin Hassett defend the move. Now that the president is appointing a replacement to head the BLS, my question for you, will you trust the job numbers when they come out? SEN. ALEX PADILLA: Well, and that's a big question for members of Congress who have to confirm, just as members of the Senate who have to confirm whoever Trump replaces. It's what confirmation hearings are supposed to be about, is it going to be somebody that will maintain the independence of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, like so many other departments and agencies that need to have the independence from political pressure of the White House to do their job reliably, or will this be another 'yes' person for the president that's going to be more interested in propaganda than statistics, more interested in propaganda than the facts. KRISTEN WELKER: Well, you know, it's interesting because two former BLS commissioners wrote a letter, calling on Congress, actually, to investigate what led to the firing of the commissioner and possibly to reverse the move. And we're even hearing some criticism from your Republican colleagues. Senator, do you think there would be enough bipartisan support to launch an investigation into the firing of the BLS commissioner? And would you support that? SEN. ALEX PADILLA: Yeah. I think an investigation is certainly in order, right? Just as I've called for an investigation, by the way, on Hatch Act violations on the redistricting in Texas conversation. There is example after example of Donald Trump weaponizing, no longer just the Department of Justice — but when he's trying to weaponize the Bureau of Labor Statistics, that tells you a lot about their insecurity about the economy and the state of economic affairs in America because everything that they're claiming to be true is not true. Prices are still going up. And this is from a president who promised to bring prices down. And so American people are feeling it. The impact of tariffs, $2,400 a year for working families across the country, that's the reality of tariffs. KRISTEN WELKER: Well, we are going to get to redistricting, in just a moment. But first, I want to talk to you about another issue that you're deeply engaged in — the issue of immigration. The Trump administration is touting record low illegal crossings at the southern border. You've obviously been very critical of the president's deportation policies. You were very outspoken, for example, at a press conference of the Homeland Security Secretary, wound up getting handcuffed there. But do you give President Trump credit for these record low crossings at the border? SEN. ALEX PADILLA: We should debate how the reduction in crossings has come about, but I think most importantly, let's look at the different pieces of what the immigration system looks like. Border security, everybody agrees, we need an orderly, humane border. There is an element of people wanting to come to the United States and how those programs need to be modernized and updated. My focus has been on the people who have been here, millions of long-term residents of the United States who happen to be undocumented, that have been the target of this administration's increasingly aggressive and cruel arrest, detention and deportation policies. If, and this is important to emphasize, they were truly only going after the dangerous, violent criminals they so often talk about, there would be no debate, there would be no discussion. But the vast majority of the people they're arresting, detaining and even deporting, many without due process, do not have those criminal violent convictions on their records. They're actually people who are critical to the economy. KRISTEN WELKER: All right. I know that debate continues. Something will continue to track. Let's talk now about what you just brought up, the midterms, congressional maps obviously in focus. They are usually redrawn every decade. But in Texas, as you referenced, Republicans there rolled out a new map that could actually add up to five GOP seats. You now have Governor Gavin Newsom promising that California would respond with a new map that would boost Democratic seats in that state. Let me ask you, Senator. Do you believe it's hypocritical for Democrats to deploy the same strategy that they're criticizing by Republicans in Texas? SEN. ALEX PADILLA: Well, first of all, let's understand why Donald Trump is asking for five more Republican seats out of Texas. It's because his policies, especially his economic policies, have been so bad, right? The prior guest referenced the Big Beautiful Bill. Wait until people start losing their healthcare and their healthcare costs go up, right? If Republicans were confident on their policy agenda, they would be eager to defend it with the people and to defend it at the ballot box, next November. But they know they're in trouble. And so they're trying to rig the system to hold on to power next November. That's what this redistricting move is really about. KRISTEN WELKER: You know, powerful language that you're using: "Rig the system." I mean, some of your party warn that going down this path could actually erode trust in the system. Here's California State Assembly Member Alex Lee. This is what he said. He said, quote, "Trying to save democracy by destroying democracy is dangerous and foolish. By legitimizing the race to the bottom of gerrymandering, Democrats will ultimately lose." Do Democrats run the risk of destroying voters' faith in the entire system, Senator? SEN. ALEX PADILLA: I'll tell you what's destroying faith in the system. It's everything coming out of the White House right now. The ideal scenario, Kristen, is for Texas to stand down. They don't have to do this. They shouldn't do this. But if they were to go forward and deliver Trump his five additional Republican seats, that's what he's asked for, just like he asked the Georgia secretary of state for 11,000 more votes after the 2020 stakes are simply too high; the economic stakes, the state of our democracy, the health of our institutions, the checks and balances in our country. So, yes, California and others are going to look at what options we have to defend what we believe America should stand for. KRISTEN WELKER: All right. Let me talk about another recent split in your party. A lot of debate going on. Senator Cory Booker clashed with fellow Democrats over their support, just to explain to our audience, okay, this was their support for bills that would fund police departments. Senator Booker is arguing that these bills would only reward police departments in states favored by the Trump administration. I want to play one exchange that he had with Senator Klobuchar and get your reaction on the other side. SEN. ALEX PADILLA: Sure. [BEGIN TAPE] SEN. KLOBUCHAR: You can't just pick out a few bills that came out of a committee and say, "I'm going to stop those." SEN. CORY BOOKER: That is complicity with an authoritarian leader who is trashing our Constitution. It's time for Democrats to have a backbone. It's time for us to fight. It's time for us to draw lines. [END TAPE] KRISTEN WELKER: Is Senator Booker's approach, where he's basically saying he's not willing to give an inch to President Trump, is that the right approach for Democrats? SEN. ALEX PADILLA: Well, I think what he's doing is using his powers and opportunity as a member of the Judiciary Committee, he and I sit side by side, and on the floor of the Senate, to call out what this administration is doing, you know, budget reconciliation, which we went through a couple months ago, rescissions more recently. On a daily basis, the Trump administration is withholding funds in so many categories from Democratic states and Democratic cities but not so in Republican jurisdictions. That is absolutely wrong, especially when it comes to an issue as important as public safety. So to withhold funds from New Jersey for public safety programs is dangerous. KRISTEN WELKER: But is his no-holds-barred approach the right one, do you think? SEN. ALEX PADILLA: Look, I think the extreme way in which this administration is conducting itself calls for higher and higher profile ways of pushing back and doing right by our own constituents. KRISTEN WELKER: I want to ask you about the big news now for the Democratic Party and your state, former Vice President Kamala Harris announced she will not run for election as California's governor. The move, of course, left the door open for a potential run in 2028. Here's how she explained her decision not to launch a statewide race in an interview this week. Take a look. [BEGIN TAPE] KAMALA HARRIS: For now, I don't want to go back in the system. I think it's broken. I always believed that, as fragile as our democracy is, our systems would be strong enough to defend our most fundamental principles. And I think right now that they're not as strong as they need to be. [END TAPE] KRISTEN WELKER: She says the system is broken. That is very strong language. Do you agree? Is the system broken? SEN. ALEX PADILLA: I think the system is under duress because of both the attacks of the Trump administration and the unwillingness of Republicans in Congress to stand up and do their job as a co-equal branch of government. And so what do we need to regain and strengthen the system? Democrats are doing our parts, trying to stand up and push back. But the people across the country are increasingly standing up and speaking up on so many things that are going wrong. KRISTEN WELKER: I know we've got to get through 2026 first, but let me ask you about 2028. Some Democrats are starting to privately express concerns about a possible run by the former vice president. One top operative noted to POLITICO, quote, "Downballot candidates outperformed her in 2024, and she was a drag on them." Would you encourage former Vice President Kamala Harris to run for president in 2028? SEN. ALEX PADILLA: I would encourage Vice President Harris to follow her heart. And I think right now, she says, okay, she's not running for governor, but she's going to spend time trying to help elect more Democrats across the country. And it should be not just for federal office, for state office, for local office. That's the best way to improve our position as Democrats for the 2028 cycle. Let's make sure we do well or very, very well in 2026. KRISTEN WELKER: Alright, I have to ask you about the hunger crisis in Gaza, turning to overseas. Last year, the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, charging him with war crimes for "starvation as a method of warfare," among other charges. I have to ask you, Senator, do you believe Prime Minister Netanyahu has committed war crimes? SEN. ALEX PADILLA: Yeah. Well, look, the situation in Gaza is absolutely heartbreaking. And it truly is a humanitarian crisis. So Israel needs to do more. And the United States, the Trump administration, can and should do more to address that. Absolutely. KRISTEN WELKER: But do you think that he's committed a war crime? SEN. ALEX PADILLA: Well, let's let the experts conduct their research investigation and reach those conclusions. Again, what's happening in Gaza is heartbreaking. We need to be doing more. But addressing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and Israel's right to defend itself are not mutually exclusive. KRISTEN WELKER: You're saying the U.S. has to do more. More than half of your caucus this week, a record number, voted to block sales to some weapons to Israel. You did not though, Senator. Why do you think the U.S. should keep sending weapons to Israel, and does that undercut your message that the U.S. should do more? SEN. ALEX PADILLA: Well, I don't think it does. I think we should actually focus on the humanitarian piece and move, not just resolutions, but policy and investments accordingly. What the resolution spoke to is much broader than just Israel and Gaza in those negotiations because, as you know, Israel's under constant threat from Hamas still — from Hezbollah, from the Houthis, from Iran, on a more broader level. And so we need to try to do what we can to maintain the security and stability of the region and address the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. KRISTEN WELKER: Senator Alex Padilla, thank you so much for being here today. We really appreciate it. When we come back, the jobs report that rattled the president and the markets. The panel is next. KRISTEN WELKER: Welcome back. The panel is here. NBC News White House White House correspondent Yamiche Alcindor; Susan Glasser, staff writer for The New Yorker; Stephen Hayes, editor and CEO of The Dispatch; and Symone Sanders Townsend, former chief spokesperson for Vice President Harris and co-host of 'The Weeknight' on MSNBC. Thanks to all of you for being here.A lot of news to talk about this week. Yamiche, let me start with you and President Trump's decision to fire the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. You heard my conversation with Kevin Hassett. It's obviously going to continue to get backlash heading into this week. What are your sources telling you inside the White House about what was behind this? YAMICHE ALCINDOR: Based on my reporting and a lot of conversations with White House officials, this had been brewing for a while. The president had been attacking the Bureau of Labor Statistics even back when he was a candidate in 2024. But White House officials told me that he was liking the job report numbers so he essentially held off on firing the commissioner because he was okay with the data coming out. Then on Friday, when he saw the July numbers and then saw the revisions to May and June, he decided to pull the trigger. And even though Kevin Hassett said these revisions are evidence, there really isn't any hard evidence that this commissioner was cooking the books. And also, William Beach, who held that job before and was appointed by Donald Trump, called her firing "dangerous." So the big question now is who ends up in that job? The president was asked specifically, "Are you going to get somebody with experience in statistics and in data?" And he said, "I want someone who's honest', and I also want someone,essentially, who I like and who's going to be supportive of my goals. So, it's going to be very, very telling who he puts in that job because, if you can't trust those numbers and if the president installs someone that doesn't have the confidence of the 40-odd-plus people, as you said, who put this together, it's going to be a real problem not just for his administration but for America on a whole. KRISTEN WELKER: Talk about the implications of this. Why is it significant and why does it run the risk of eroding public trust? SUSAN GLASSER: Yeah, absolutely. I mean, this is, you know, for many people who've lived and worked in other authoritarian countries, this seems like a move right out of the authoritarian playbook. You know, it's the move of a person, an individual, or a system that doesn't like what it hears and chooses not to address the problem but simply to fire the messenger. And I was really struck by your interview with Kevin Hassett. Not only could he not provide any evidence but he went out of his way essentially to say, "The facts are whatever we think they are. And if we don't like it, you know, the president has the right to act arbitrarily." That, again, is something-- in the past, Donald Trump has insisted on his own facts. But in Trump 2.0, he's moving to create a world where he can fire people on the basis or what he himself admitted the other day was, quote, "My opinion." And I just think that is a transition and an escalation in Donald Trump's tactics that we should take very seriously. KRISTEN WELKER: Symone, pick up on that point. And you are hearing with very fiery language from Democrats. Leader Chuck Schumer saying, quote, "This is classic Donald Trump, shooting the messenger." What recourse do Democrats have in this moment? SYMONE SANDERS TOWNSEND: Well, look, I do think you had Senator Padilla here. Democrats are in the minority, I would note. But in the Senate they do have a little more leeway to hold things up, to go to the floor, to make a speech, to find, some, one or two other senators that want to join with them. And I do think an investigation here is warranted. We do have examples across the world, the globe, of other countries, Venezuela, Argentina, the Soviet Union, okay, the former Soviet Union, of what happens when data is manipulated or changed or maybe just underreported because you want to keep some people happy, like the person at the top, in this case, the president. And in every single one of those instances, the economy has been destabilized. The currency is affected. Business is affected. So there are long-term implications for what looks like a short-term gain. KRISTEN WELKER: And. Yeah– STEPHEN HAYES: –This just really is banana republic stuff. I mean, really. It's like breaking the thermometer because you don't like that it's hot outside. It's not the way that civilized nations behave. And one would hope that Republicans who disagree with this, and behind the scenes are criticizing the president for this, would find their voice at a moment like this. You know, you talk to Republicans who aren't fully on board with the Trump train. And they will say privately they'll criticize him all along and they'll say, "Well, I've got to pick and choose when I'm criticizing him. I don't want to criticize him for everything." Well, now would be the time to find your voice. You know, this was an impetuous decision from the president, sort of a tantrum. We've seen this kind of thing from him before. Remember when there was a black sharpie drawn to show the direction of a hurricane. You remember during Covid he said he wanted to stop testing because he didn't want the results of the tests. The MS-13 photoshop. He just tries to bend reality to meet his perceptions in a way that I think is just fundamentally dishonest. KRISTEN WELKER: It's fascinating to hear some of the backlash from Republicans themselves. In terms of what's dividing Democrats right now, Yamiche, you have to think about Gaza. You heard me have that discussion with Senator Padilla. And this debate over whether funds should continue to flow to Israel. President Trump, actually expressing some frustration privately, amid questions about whether the images coming out of Gaza are real. He's been told, "Yes, they're real." And he's been very firm with the prime minister, apparently. He wants something done about it. YAMICHE ALCINDOR: Yes. And my sources at the White House tell me that the president was very moved by the images of these children and families starving in Gaza, and who really couldn't be? You see these images and they're heartbreaking, right? That said, this break between the president and the prime minister, Netanyahu, it might be in some ways over this one issue. But they are still very much allied in the mission of it. And let's remember that President Trump has essentially called for the clearing out of Gaza and said that he wants to turn it into essentially a real estate resort. So there's also that going on. But, the president has been clear. He wants to get people fed. He had an interview with NBC News this week saying he wants to get people fed in Gaza. But, we think about the long-term goal and how he talked about Gaza, and that's not lost on folks. And then, yeah, you have one the Democratic side Senator Bernie Sanders getting as many Democrats as he's ever had before backing this idea of stopping giving weapons to Israel. But that doesn't mean– Senator Padilla said, "Well, I still voted against that." And he's getting by that. So that's also where a majority of Democrats are. KRISTEN WELKER: It's a great point. Susan, you wrote about it this week and that there is mounting pressure on both sides to do something. SUSAN GLASSER: No, that's exactly right. But let's be clear here that Donald Trump, you know, what he's expressing is not so much a foreign policy shift as it is a series of social media postings. And Trump's own policy bears a lot of responsibility for what's happening right now in Gaza. Remember that there was a ceasefire. Donald Trump hailed the ceasefire in January as epic, essentially a world historical event. When it collapsed in March, that was because Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel, almost unilaterally pulled out from that ceasefire. You did not hear Donald Trump talking about the subsequent blockade of aid. You did not hear Donald Trump changing American policy to address the very obvious consequence of a near blockade of aid which is going to mean starvation. So, these pictures that he's seeing, he is, in part, the author of them. And I have not heard this week – he sent his envoy Steve Witkoff on a trip to Israel, including a visit to Gaza. I have not heard a major shift in what the U.S. is actually going to do. This is Donald Trump doing what he does which is watching the television and acting in a sort of media feedback loop with it. YAMICHE ALCINDOR: Can I just also say that our reporting on the ground from NBC is that, that was sort of a publicity stunt in some people's eyes, including medical professionals. And that Steve Witkoff really wasn't seeing the reality on the ground in Gaza. Of course he's saying something different, but I just want to point out what our reporting is showing. SYMONE SANDERS TOWNSEND: I mean, they announced the trip prior to going. And when you go to a zone, such as, given what's happening on the ground in Gaza, you do not announce a trip like that prior to for security reasons, to ensure that you can see what you need to see and then report out when you leave. The proactive note I think is something to take. KRISTEN WELKER: Quick thought, Steve, before we break -- STEPHEN HAYES: Yes. I mean, look, we should level set here. Hamas is responsible for the deaths and the starvation. They were responsible for starting the war. I think the risk for Israel at this point is the loss of moral authority. Israel has had moral authority since October 7th. They risk losing it now because there clearly is starvation on the ground. KRISTEN WELKER: And that increasingly, I think, becomes the debate and where that goes. Thank you all. Pause for a moment. When we come back, the mystery of Jimmy Hoffa continues 50 years after he vanished. Our Meet the Press minute is next. KRISTEN WELKER: Welcome back. Fifty years ago this week, labor leader Jimmy Hoffa vanished. An unsolved mystery that still looms large, fueled by his alleged ties to the mafia. In 1961, Hoff had just been reelected to lead the powerful Teamsters Union despite mounting allegations of corruption that would later land him behind bars. He joined Meet the Press at the time to address those claims. [BEGIN TAPE] LAWRENCE SPIVAK: Mr. Hoffa, you have been investigated, as you yourself have said, more than almost any man in this country. Wouldn't it help you if you kept records? Wouldn't it help you if you paid by check instead of by cash and having no records at all of what you did? Doesn't that open you to suspicion? JIMMY HOFFA: There is an old story Mr. Spivak that figures don't lie but liars figure. I go on the premise that I have been investigated by the entire United States Senate, by almost every precinct agency in this country. And I question whether or not any one of the four of you sitting there can go through the same investigation Hoffa did and come out with the record Hoffa can proudly say is his after three and a half years, that they have found nothing wrong with Hoffa's finances. [END TAPE] KRISTEN WELKER: When we come back, former Vice President Kamala Harris calls the system "broken" and issues a dire warning for the country. More with the panel next. [BEGIN TAPE] STEPHEN COLBERT: Who's leading the Democratic Party? I'm just curious. FORMER VICE PRES. KAMALA HARRIS: There are lots of leaders. I think it is a mistake for us who want to figure out how to get out and through this and get out of it to put it on the shoulders of any one person. It's really on all of our shoulders. It really is. [END TAPE] KRISTEN WELKER: That was former Vice President Kamala Harris on 'The Late Show' this week, her first interview since losing the 2024 presidential election. The panel is back with us. Symone, of course I have to start with you. You used to work with the former vice president. Look, I've been talking to Democrats. They're divided over where they think she should run for president. She obviously left the door open to that. Some people say, yes, she should run. Other people say she can't run after losing 2024, that that was the end of her political career. What are you hearing? What do you – SYMONE SANDERS TOWNSEND: Look, what I'm hearing, I'm hearing the same things you're hearing. But I will say this: I think that the vice president is someone that understands the landscape. And I think the statement that she put out today and her interview on Colbert was actually very illuminating. For me, I was struck by the fact that she says she wants to – she doesn't want to go back in the system right now. She's – she's not confident in the system. And some could read that as she's not confident in her prospects, but I read that as she is not confident in what is currently happening. Should she, will she be the Democratic nominee in 2028? We have no idea. You know, at this time, in 2007, no one knew it was Barack Obama, right? This time, in 2019, they definitely were saying it wasn't Joe Biden, and we know how that went. So I just think people need to hold their horses. But she absolutely has the right to be out here. She got 75 million votes. She lost by 1.5%. I think the woman has earned her right to speak up and do what she wants. KRISTEN WELKER: Susan, what are you hearing, and the reaction to this comment that the system is broken? SUSAN GLASSER: Yes. I think that was the most notable thing, right? I mean, how striking that, you know, this person who has benefited from the system, who has been the first woman vice president of the United States, just a few months after losing this historic presidential election she says, "Actually, the system is broken." But, you know, we talked about Cory Booker earlier in this show, and I'm really struck by the fact that, you know, many Democrats, millions of Democrats want their leaders to fight. They want them to be in the fight. So it's very hard to say, "I might want the mantle of authority in 2028, but right now I'm going to opt out of the fight." And so that's one challenge. The other issue though is are we looking forward or are we looking back? And American politics generally is looking forward. Now, I will say this: It'll be interesting, the conversation ignited by the former vice president's memoir. But many Democrats I speak with, they are still almost incandescent with rage, many of them, not at Kamala Harris but with her former boss, the former president, Joe Biden. And to the extent that that's the conversation Democrats are having rather than a conversation about how to counter Donald Trump, I don't know, you know, whether that benefits, putting aside their political interests, the country's interests right now. KRISTEN WELKER: Well, Steve, therein lies the problem, I think, for a number of Democratic – STEPHEN HAYES: Yes. KRISTEN WELKER: – candidates, this question about how to respond to the extraordinary arc of former President Biden. His decision to drop out of the race, that debate. That certainly would loom large over a Harris candidacy, should she run, over a Pete Buttigieg – STEPHEN HAYES: For sure. KRISTEN WELKER: – candidacy, should he run. STEPHEN HAYES: Yes. Look, I think we can't overstate the importance, I think, to the general electorate of what that meant. That, not only have Democrats lost twice to Donald Trump in national elections, but the last time they did it they did it in part because the party apparatus covered up the decline of the existing – of the sitting president. And then Kamala Harris had 107 days to try to run. She wasn't a very good candidate, I don't think. And I think that that moment on Colbert was – sort of captures the Democratic Party at this moment where the most recent Democratic leader couldn't name or refused to name Democratic leaders when asked about it. And if you look at what she was doing, she announces that she's, rather than going to try to fix the system, she's going to sit back. She's not going to try to fix the system. I mean, if you're looking for a leader – SYMONE SANDERS TOWNSEND: No, I – STEPHEN HAYES: – that's not it. SYMONE SANDERS TOWNSEND: – Kamala Harris has spent her entire life within the system. And, frankly, I think she mirrors a lot of women elected officials, a lot of Black women in the Democratic Party apparatus that say, "I have been in this. I have been fighting. And I am a little tired, and I'm – I'm a little dismayed by what I'm seeing. So let me –" STEPHEN HAYES: But is that leadership, though? SYMONE SANDERS TOWNSEND: "-- try in a different way." STEPHEN HAYES: Is that leadership? SYMONE SANDERS TOWNSEND: I mean – STEPHEN HAYES: How is she leading? SYMONE SANDERS TOWNSEND: I think – I think Kamala Harris is going to go out there and campaign for folks. I think she's going to raise money for people. And I think she's going to help get some people elected in – KRISTEN WELKER: Yamiche, you covered her campaign. SYMONE SANDERS TOWNSEND: – midterm elections. YAMICHE ALCINDOR: I did. KRISTEN WELKER: What are you watching for? YAMICHE ALCINDOR: So I'm watching for a couple things. One, Our reporting is that she still wants to keep the door open on looking at 2028. I'm also looking at who she ends up campaigning for and how that goes. Who wants her out there on the campaign trail? I think the other thing, when you hear talk about the system being broken, I think Symone is right about the idea of a lot of Black women feeling like the system is broken. Senator Padilla said it's "under duress." He wouldn't say "broken." But, to me, the language is very much mirroring the fact that they see all this power that President Trump has amassed and they're very shaken by it. And they're not, also, really understanding how, not only did they lose, yes, it was a close election, but they lost every battleground state. And that's something that I think Democrats are still trying to wrap their heads around. KRISTEN WELKER: Susan, this comes against the backdrop of this debate that we saw in the Senate between Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar. You referenced it. But this idea about how to fight back against Donald Trump. SUSAN GLASSER: Yes. I mean, what's extraordinary is that you see Donald Trump's shock-and-awe campaign unleashed on the federal government and – and, you know, segments of the American people over the last six months. And you have Democrats still having a circular fight about this. And I just – I have to say too, Symone, like, I get the idea that she's, you know, going to do what she's going to do. But to define that as leadership, you know, right now? And I – I get the idea that, you know, there are many Americans who are suffering right now as a result of, you know, what they perceive to be the Trump administration's policies. But saying, "Well, I'm – I'm going to wash my hands of the fight because the system is broken," I find that hard to believe, just as a matter of politics, that that's going to be a winning message for Democrats next year in – SYMONE SANDERS TOWNSEND: I just – I didn't hear – SUSAN GLASSER: – a midterm election. SYMONE SANDERS TOWNSEND: – the "washing hands of the fight." I think I've heard a lot of people interpret what she said that way, and I didn't hear it that way. I think that power has never come from – real power and the grassroots and the energy has actually never come from the elected leaders, and especially not here in Washington, DC. Even in the resistance movement, if you will, post-2016, those were people in the streets. And so I hear Kamala Harris saying, "I'm about to go over here and get out here with the resistance because what I'm seeing in Washington is not working." STEPHEN HAYES: I think if – if Democrats – KRISTEN WELKER: Steve, the final 30 seconds. STEPHEN HAYES: – look at Donald Trump and his ascent to the pinnacle of American politics, he did it with one thing: He fought. He fought everybody at all times. He blew up what the Republican Party had thought of it – thought of itself, ideologically and philosophically. And I think you're seeing Democrats, Cory Booker being the most notable, trying to imitate that, trying to make that same case. KRISTEN WELKER: All right, guys, thank you so much. Great conversation. That is all for today. Thank you for watching. We'll be back next week because, if it's Sunday, it's Meet the Press.

Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
It's Trump's economy now
Presented by With help from Eli Okun, Bethany Irvine and Ali Bianco Good Sunday morning. It's Zack Stanton. Get in touch. THE CONVERSATION: Within days of her election in November, Rep. Sarah McBride (D-Del.), faced backlash from some House Republicans for being transgender. In the face of those attacks, McBride has sought ways to forge ties across the aisle, animated partly by her hope of bringing 'a sense of kindness and grace' to Congress despite the 'reality TV show nature' of today's politics, she tells Playbook's Dasha Burns on today's episode of 'The Conversation.' Listen in: The two also discuss the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza, how the Democratic Party can rebuild its coalition without 'reinforcing right-wing framing' over 'culture war' issues and why her pursuit of bipartisan legislation is in part a direct response to President Donald Trump. Watch the full episode … Subscribe to 'The Conversation' on YouTube, Apple Podcasts or Spotify DRIVING THE DAY WELCOME TO THE VIBE SHIFT: For months, Trump has boasted that under his leadership, America is the 'hottest' country in the world. (He repeated that claim overnight in a social media post at 1:49 a.m.) Now, he's at risk of being burned by those expectations. On Wednesday, new GDP numbers showed that in the first half of the year, the economy grew at an annual rate of less than 1.3 percent. On Thursday, new inflation numbers showed that the personal consumption expenditures price index jumped by 2.6 percent in the year ending in June — an acceleration of the inflation rate from April. On Friday, the new jobs report showed that net hiring has 'plummeted over the past three months with job gains of just 73,000 in July, 14,000 in June and 19,000 in May,' in the words of the AP. And behind those topline numbers was a striking datapoint, the WSJ's Te-Ping Chen and Harriet Torry note: 'The number of people unemployed for at least 27 weeks topped 1.8 million, the highest level since 2017, not counting the pandemic's unemployment surge.' This morning, it's clear that a new consensus is emerging: For all the talk of a new 'Golden Age,' there are abundant signs that the economy, while at times glittering, may not be gold. Simply put: 'Job gains are dwindling. Inflation is ticking upward. Growth has slowed compared with last year,' AP's Josh Boak and Christopher Rugaber write. '[T]his is not the boom the Republican president promised, and his ability to blame his Democratic predecessor, Joe Biden, for any economic challenges has faded as the world economy hangs on his every word and social media post.' Indeed, nearly 200 days into his second term, even members of Trump's administration are signaling that the window during which Biden could be blamed has now passed. The 'Trump economy has arrived,' Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said on Wednesday. 'Biden's first quarter is behind us, and growth is already accelerating.' Trump has made himself central to the economy. 'After campaigning on a pledge to free business from worrying about Washington's dictates, Trump has made public policy — and his own norm-busting behavior — the primary variables affecting the $30 trillion U.S. economy, economists said,' WaPo's David Lynch and Abha Bhattarai report. Washington, they write, is now 'the focus of business and investment decision-making.' That's unlikely to change anytime soon. Among the reasons why, two loom large: the coming economic impact of Trump's tariffs, and new concerns about the reliability of government economic statistics going forward. ON THE TARIFFS: 'Companies are starting to shift more tariff-related costs onto consumers,' NYT's Sydney Ember reports in an A1 story this morning. 'Many businesses chose to absorb the additional tax during the early days of President Trump's trade war. But evidence is emerging that they are running out of options to keep prices stable in the face of deteriorating profit margins, suggesting that the tariffs could have a more pronounced effect on prices in the months ahead.' Yes, the inflationary effects of Trump's tariffs have been muted thus far. But economists 'cite several reasons for that limited impact,' Ember writes. 'Companies across the country raced to stockpile goods before any tariffs kicked in, giving them a significant cushion before they had to import goods subject to higher levies. Many businesses, big and small, were reluctant to pass along higher costs to their inflation-weary customers without more clarity on where the tariffs would settle.' A new economic divide: Now that the policy is settling into place, a 'divide is widening in the US economy as the biggest banks and technology groups shrug off Donald Trump's tariffs to post huge earnings gains while consumer-facing companies struggle with rising costs,' FT's George Steer writes this morning. Stat of the day: In total, 52 percent of the S&P 500 companies that have posted Q2 results reported declining profit margins, FT reports, citing Société Générale, a financial services company based in France. Companies reported margin pressure even as their sales rose, which suggests 'that their costs are going up but that companies aren't yet passing this on' to consumers, Andrew Lapthorne, the firm's head of quantitative research, told the FT. ON THE DATA: On Friday, Trump ordered his team to fire Erika McEntarfer, the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, after the jobs report showed weaker numbers than expected for July and downgraded the May and June figures. That's igniting 'worries that Trump's volatile temperament could cause additional economic harm by undermining market confidence in the government data that investors, business executives and policymakers require to make decisions,' WaPo's Lynch and Bhattarai write. 'If policymakers and the public can't trust the data — or suspect the data are being manipulated — confidence collapses and reasonable economic decision-making becomes impossible,' Heidi Shierholz, the president of the center-left Economic Policy Institute and former chief economist of the Labor Department, told the Post. 'It's like trying to drive a car blindfolded.' SUNDAY BEST … — U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer on the new tariffs and future trade deals, on CBS' 'Face the Nation': 'These tariff rates are pretty much set. I expect I do have my phone blowing up. There are trade ministers who want to talk more and see how they can work in a different way with the United States, but I think that we have, we're seeing truly the contours of the president's tariff plan right now with these rates.' — National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett on the jobs numbers on 'Fox News Sunday': 'When the data are unreliable, when they keep being revised all over the place, then there are going to be people that wonder if there's a partisan pattern in the data. … And so, I think what we need is a fresh set of eyes at the [Bureau of Labor Statistics], somebody who can clean this thing up.' — Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) on the firing of the head of the BLS, on NBC's 'Meet the Press': 'That's what confirmation hearings are supposed to be about, is it going to be somebody that will maintain the independence of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, like so many other departments and agencies that need to have the independence from political pressure of the White House to do their job reliably? Or will this be another yes person for the president that's going to be more interested in propaganda than statistics, more interested in propaganda than the facts?' — Doctors Without Borders USA CEO Avril Benoît on the starvation in Gaza on ABC's 'This Week': 'We need to flood the zone with as much food as possible. The problem with the [Gaza Humanitarian Foundation] is, of course, it's unsafe. It's an inefficient way to deliver aid. People have to cross very unsafe zones to reach those areas that are controlled by the IDF and military contractors from the U.S., and then there are insufficient quantities.' TOP-EDS: A roundup of the week's must-read opinion pieces. 9 THINGS FOR YOUR RADAR 1. RECESS BEGINS: Senators left Washington yesterday to begin their long-awaited August recess. Republicans left without locking in a deal to confirm dozens of nominations that Trump has put forward, but Senate Majority Leader John Thune has vowed to return in the fall to clear the deck after Trump privately told Republicans to go home and cut negotiations with Democrats, POLITICO's Jordain Carney reports. The U-turn: Thune and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer had a path forward on the floor (which hadn't been formalized) that would have exchanged a tranche of confirmations for the release of withheld NIH and foreign aid funding, Jordain writes. That came after Republicans seemed adamant on Saturday about getting the nominations resolved this weekend, whether by cutting a deal, changing the confirmation rules or by adjourning to allow recess appointments. The Trump of it all: 'The president is fed up,' Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) said. Trump manned the phones yesterday for conversations with some key GOP senators, and late last night he blasted Schumer for 'political extortion' on Truth Social and urged all Republicans to head out. Thune teed up seven final nominees for confirmation votes last night before moving on to recess. Among the newly confirmed: Jeanine Pirro, the former Fox News host, now formally the U.S. attorney for D.C. following a 50-45 vote. What Thune is thinking: He's already preparing for the possibility of speeding up the process with a rules change come September. 'I think they're desperately in need of change,' Thune said, per AP's Mary Clare Jalonick and Joey Cappelletti. 'I think that the last six months have demonstrated that this process, nominations is broken. And so I expect there will be some good robust conversations about that.' What Schumer is thinking: He defended the Democrats' response, saying 'historically bad nominees deserve historic levels of scrutiny.' Still in limbo: The nominations of Mike Waltz as UN ambassador and Kimberly Guilfoyle for U.S. ambassador to Greece, CBS' Cristina Corujo notes. It's still unclear if the Senate will take up nominations as soon as they come back on Sept. 2, or if they'll wait until after the shutdown deadline. 2. PROMISES BROKEN?: 'White House has no plan to mandate IVF care, despite campaign pledge,' by WaPo's Riley Beggin and Jeff Stein: 'The White House does not plan to require health insurers to provide coverage for in vitro fertilization services, two people with knowledge of internal discussions said … In addition, White House officials are backing away from proposals discussed internally to mandate IVF coverage for the roughly 50 million people on the Obamacare exchanges … It is unclear whether the administration plans to ask lawmakers to take up a bill, but the two people said that forcing insurance companies to cover IVF is not currently on the table.' 3. TRADING PLACES: India will continue purchasing Russian oil even as Trump threatens penalties, Reuters' Shivam Patel and Chandni Shah report. Trump said Friday that he was told India would stop the trade with Russia. But sources in India's government said no policy changes have been made. It's the latest instance of an increasingly sour relationship between the U.S. and India, one tied not just to trade, but also Trump's claimed credit over the end of India's brief conflict with Pakistan, WSJ's Alex Ward and colleagues write. On the tariffs: As the final deals in Trump's trade war emerge, Myanmar is still optimistic it can come to an agreement with the U.S. that would decrease its new 40 percent tariff levels, per Bloomberg's Khine Lin Kyaw. But in Switzerland, investors are bracing themselves for the market's reopening tomorrow after Trump's 39 percent tariff announcement came during Swiss National Day, Bloomberg's Gary Parkinson and colleagues report. Elsewhere on the economy: Though Washington has increasingly come down on electric vehicles, they're not going anywhere, writes NYT's Jack Ewing, as the cars become cheaper and tariff resilient. … Fed officials say the U.S. labor market is still solid despite the July jobs report, WSJ's Nick Timiraos scooped. … As Fed Governor Adriana Kugler announced her resignation on Friday, Trump now has an opportunity to install someone at the Fed to push for interest rate cuts, Bloomberg's Christopher Condon and Amara Omeokwe report. 4. THE CRISIS IN GAZA: Special envoy Steve Witkoff told the families of Israeli hostages yesterday that the U.S. has a plan to bring home all of the remaining hostages in a deal with Hamas that could soon end the war, WaPo's Gerry Shih reports from Jerusalem. Trump 'now believes that everybody should come home at once, no piecemeal deals. That doesn't work and we've tried everything,' Witkoff said. He added that Hamas was ready to disarm itself, which the group denied. Not a moment too soon: The starvation and struggle over aid continues to ravage the Gaza strip. Hundreds of thousands of people are overrunning aid convoys out of desperation for access to food, WaPo reports. Though the Trump administration claims it has given over $60 million in aid to Gaza, the State Department has only pledged half that amount and only a fraction has been issued in Gaza so far, per WaPo's Karen DeYoung. More on the starvation in Gaza from the NYT Back in Washington: Pro-Israel Democrats are increasingly publicly breaking with PM Benjamin Netanyahu and circulating a letter in the House to potentially recognize a Palestinian state, CNN's Isaac Dovere reports. Related read: 'Mike Huckabee, Israel's Passionate Defender as Gaza War Drives Allies Away,' by NYT's Elisabeth Bumiller 5. IMMIGRATION FILES: DOJ is walking back Stephen Miller's touted goal of 3,000 ICE arrests per day, as the Trump administration told federal judges last week that this quota doesn't exist, POLITICO's Kyle Cheney and Josh Gerstein write. That figure has emerged in multiple lawsuits over the administration's deportation drive, and its denial is the 'latest example of a gulf between what White House advisers say in public and what the Justice Department says in court.' It also comes as an appeals court on Friday upheld the block on the seemingly indiscriminate immigration raids in Los Angeles. Dade County, all day: Billionaire Michael Fernández is behind the new ads in Miami blasting its representatives in Congress over the mass deportations of immigrants, telling NYT's Patricia Mazzei that he hopes to 'wake up the conscience' of Miami's Cuban GOP voters. … But Latino representatives in Congress, including Miami's own Cuban Republicans, are already concerned Trump's deportations could backfire with Latino voters, WaPo's Marianna Sotomayor writes. Deep in the heart: 'Trump's Border Wall Is Back—and So Is His Fight With Texas Landowners,' by WSJ's Elizabeth Findell 6. FROM THE WILDERNESS: New campaign finance filings reveal some Democrats are already revving themselves up for 2028, with former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg raising $1.6 million with his PAC and some Democratic governors raising hundreds of thousands as well, POLITICO's Jessica Piper and Elena Schneider report. … Kamala Harris told Stephen Colbert she doesn't 'want to go back in the system' right now, and some Democrats are hoping she doesn't in 2028 either, POLITICO's Dustin Gardiner and colleagues write. … Democrats are increasingly turning to veterans across the country, NYT's Shane Goldmacher reports, as the party tries to shift away from its currently unpopular branding. Survey says: Democratic voters see their party as 'weak' or 'ineffective,' with one-third describing the party negatively in a new AP-NORC poll, per AP's Steve Peoples and colleagues. 7. A HOMECOMING FOR WILES: White House chief of staff Susie Wiles returned to her home state of Florida on Saturday night to receive the 'Statesman Award' from the Republican Party of Florida, Kimberly Leonard writes in to Playbook. Speaking before the Red Florida Dinner at the Rosen Shingle Creek in Orlando, Wiles called her job 'a dream beyond anything I could ever have imagined,' adding: 'The golden age of America is here, because Donald Trump is in the White House.' The evening was a testament to how Wiles helped transform Florida from a purple to a red state in just a few election cycles — first with Rick Scott's 2010 campaign for governor, then for Gov. Ron DeSantis' first gubernatorial campaign in 2018. She also led Trump's Florida operation in 2016 and 2020 and ultimately led his 2024 comeback to the White House. Now, many Floridians she has worked with over the years are in the administration. 'Honestly, Floridians overpopulate the West Wing in a really big way,' Wiles said to applause. Wiles' band of loyalists heaped praise on her throughout the evening. Top Trump pollster Tony Fabrizio called the award 'long overdue.' Chris LaCivita praised Wiles as 'inarguably' the best in the field. Deputy chief of staff James Blair said Wiles 'deserves all the credit she gets and then some.' VP JD Vance delivered a surprise video greeting, crediting Wiles with keeping the White House 'on track and on schedule' while also being a 'ruthless political operator.' And Trump capped off the love fest in his own video message, saying he was unsure whether to call her a 'statesman' or 'stateswoman,' but concluding: 'You are the person of the year in my book.' 8. DEMOCRACY WATCH: DOJ is expanding its efforts to get access to voter data and election information, sending letters and emails and phone calls to get copies of voter registration lists in at least 15 states, AP's Ali Swenson and Gary Fields report. That includes 'all records' from the 2024 election and any records retained from 2020, and it's raising red flags with some state officials. In one instance in Colorado, consultant Jeff Small asked Republican officials if they would give a third party access to election information, and that he was acting on a request from Stephen Miller, per CNN's Fredreka Schouten. 9. RETRIBUTION CORNER: 'Agency Scrutinizes Jack Smith After Republican Complaint,' by NYT's Devlin Barrett: 'An agency that scrutinizes the conduct of federal employees has opened an investigation into Jack Smith, the former special counsel who investigated Donald J. Trump before he returned to office … The Office of Special Counsel confirmed on Saturday that it had opened an investigation into Mr. Smith for a possible violation of the Hatch Act, a law that prohibits federal workers from using their government jobs to engage in political activity. … Senator Tom Cotton, Republican of Arkansas, had asked the agency to investigate.' TALK OF THE TOWN PLAYBOOK METRO SECTION — 'Smithsonian to restore Trump to impeachment exhibit 'in the coming weeks,'' by WaPo's Jonathan Fischer and Samantha Chery: 'The Smithsonian said on Saturday that it would restore information about President Donald Trump's two impeachments to an exhibit in the National Museum of American History within weeks.' SOUNDS LIKE VEEP — After Alan Dershowitz got into it with a farmer's market vendor on Martha's Vineyard who refused to sell him a pierogi, Crooked Media's Matt Berg published the corresponding police report. The highlight: 'Dershowitz stated he was going to spread the word to others at the market to not buy from the pierogi booth,' the report reads. At a nearby lemonade stand, a cop warned him not to. It concludes: 'Shortly after, the lawyer departed, pierogiless.' FIRST IN PLAYBOOK — K STREET FILES: AECOM, the giant infrastructure firm the White House picked to lead the engineering team for the construction of the $200 million White House ballroom being built with private money, is registered with Ballard Partners, the powerhouse lobbying firm with ties to chief of staff Susie Wiles, POLITICO's Daniel Lippman writes in. AECOM has paid Ballard Partners $120,000 to lobby the White House and Congress this year, according to lobbying records. The firm run by Brian Ballard, a top Trump fundraiser, registered for AECOM a week after the election. The initial listing said it was lobbying Congress and the State Department, but in the second quarter it added the White House. Wiles told Playbook in an email that she has never represented AECOM, adding she didn't 'know how they were selected, but I was never lobbied about any of the contractors or involved in any way.' Ballard declined to comment. Spokespeople for AECOM didn't respond to a request for comment. AECOM has received numerous federal contracts since the start of the Trump administration, including an Air Force contract worth up to $1.5 billion and at least two major contracts from the Army Corps of Engineers. A White House official pointed Playbook to data showing AECOM has also been a major contractor for the government during Democratic administrations and that two-thirds of AECOM's contributions in the 2024 cycle went to Democrats. Wiles worked for Ballard from 2011 to 2019, helping open up its D.C. office. Stories about the firm often include the fact that he used to employ Wiles. AG Pam Bondi also is an alum of the firm. Ballard Partners has risen to the top of the K Street ranks in the months since Trump's reelection. Speaking of the ballroom: 'Experts Raise Concerns Over Trump's White House Ballroom Renovation Plans,' by NYT's Ashley Ahn HAPPY BIRTHDAY: Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) … Reps. Gabe Vasquez (D-N.M.) and Ryan Mackenzie (R-Pa.) … Bernadette Meehan (5-0) … KFF Health News' Rachana Pradhan … Matthew Foldi … ABC's Ben Siegel and John Parkinson … Scott Parkinson … Claire Olszewski of the Obama Foundation … Jeff Dressler of SoftBank … Tom Freedman … Matt Compton … former Sen. Roland Burris (D-Ill.) … Jordan Burke … Erikka Knuti … Katherine Robertson of Alabama AG Steve Marshall's office … Graham MacGillivray … Jessica Ennis Kitelyn … Brian Morgenstern … City Journal's Brian Anderson … Dow Jones' Clarissa Matthews … Joe Ramallo of Sen. Bill Cassidy's (R-La.) office … Jay Caruso … Rachael Shackelford Dussuau … Reuters' Brad Brooks … Ken Nahigian … DNC's Emma Bailey … James Wegmann of Stand Together … Jacob Weisberg of Pushkin Industries … Andrew Craft … POLITICO's Jasmine Turner and Bemi Ukuedojor … Dmitri Mehlhorn … Sydney Hilbush of Rep. John Garamendi's (D-Calif.) office Did someone forward this email to you? Sign up here. Send Playbookers tips to playbook@ or text us on Signal here. Playbook couldn't happen without our editor Zack Stanton, deputy Garrett Ross and Playbook Podcast producer Callan Tansill-Suddath.