Speaker 1: Have you decided whether you are going to run for
Speaker 1: re election in four You haven't set up a re
Speaker 1: election campaign yet, as your predecessor had by this time.
Speaker 1: My predecessor need to need you to my predecessor. Oh God,
Speaker 1: I missing. Um No, an answer is yes, my plan
Speaker 1: is the run for reelection. That's my expectation. Do you
Speaker 1: believe you'll be running against former President Trump? Oh? Come on,
Speaker 1: I don't even think about I don't. I have no idea.
Speaker 1: I have no idea what it will be a Republican party. Ah,
Speaker 1: those are dumb questions in my opinion, It's a dumb
Speaker 1: conversation of all the things we need to talk about.
Speaker 1: But anyway, Um, we're happy every Friday when we get
Speaker 1: to talk to Lawn he Chen. He's the David and
Speaker 1: Diane Stephie Fellow in American Public Policy Studies at the
Speaker 1: Hoover Institution and the Director of Domestic Policy Studies at
Speaker 1: Stanford University, and he's a regular contributor at CNN Opinion.
Speaker 1: In Lawn he welcome to the Armstrong and Getty Show.
Speaker 1: How you doing? Always great to do with you. Thanks, Um.
Speaker 1: This is what I'm and asked today whenever we've I
Speaker 1: don't think we've ever approached this way. As a smart
Speaker 1: guy who follows all kinds of different stuff, what is
Speaker 1: the most interesting thing to you right now? Not what
Speaker 1: you know. I know lots of people have be on
Speaker 1: his guests and they want to talk about the news
Speaker 1: of the day, and that's not always the most interesting
Speaker 1: or important thing going on. What's like, what's actually on
Speaker 1: your mind? Like things you're going to be reading up
Speaker 1: on today? Uh boy, I mean, I there's a lot
Speaker 1: of things. I'm always I always come back to this
Speaker 1: issue of how polarized we are as a society, you know,
Speaker 1: and how how many uh and and really kind of
Speaker 1: intractable differences there seemed to be between people based on
Speaker 1: kind of how they see politics. And I've been thinking
Speaker 1: a lot recently about how it is that there are
Speaker 1: institutions and the ways that we do things that actually
Speaker 1: make it worse. Um. You know, one of the things
Speaker 1: I'll just mention this is this might be a little nerdy,
Speaker 1: but the thing is every ten years, you know, we
Speaker 1: take a census and then we actually draw new UH
Speaker 1: lines for congressional and state legislative districts. Right, we sort
Speaker 1: of create these new districts, and that's a really contentious
Speaker 1: process politically, I don't I don't know if people realize it,
Speaker 1: but there's a lot that goes on behind scenes. But
Speaker 1: one of the things that the states, yeah, it's done
Speaker 1: state by state and one of the things, and different
Speaker 1: states do it differently, by the way. Some states have
Speaker 1: a commission, independent so called independent commission of people that
Speaker 1: come out and propose lines. Some have experts draw the lines, whatever.
Speaker 1: But one of the things that struck me is how
Speaker 1: when we draw these lines and we put these districts together,
Speaker 1: we oftentimes pack pack in people who think in a
Speaker 1: very similar way. We don't put people next to each
Speaker 1: other who have very different ways of thinking. And so
Speaker 1: as a result, people say, well, why are we much
Speaker 1: more polarized now? And I say, one of the reasons
Speaker 1: is because we elect people to Congress, or we elect
Speaker 1: people to state legislatures who are increasingly polarizing. Because that's
Speaker 1: also kind of what's what's happening to us. We're living
Speaker 1: next to people, by and large, who we you know,
Speaker 1: may may think in a very similar way to who
Speaker 1: may look like us. And that's much more common now
Speaker 1: than it was. Let's say a couple of decades ago,
Speaker 1: and I think that's actually made the polarization worse. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I've seen some of those stats on the number of
Speaker 1: counties that are um, you know, way more of one
Speaker 1: than the other, and how much more that is than
Speaker 1: it used to be. It's culturally, it's interesting. So, you know,
Speaker 1: getting to the press conference, which is the news of
Speaker 1: the day, when he was talking about the filibuster in
Speaker 1: that sort of thing. Well, I've seen a lot of
Speaker 1: cable news articles and our discussions and read a lot
Speaker 1: of articles about the filibuster, and each side chooses their
Speaker 1: own point. Going back as to who's to blame, you know,
Speaker 1: who started this whole thing. Well, Mitch McConnell did do
Speaker 1: away with the filibuster for Supreme Court justice, but Harry
Speaker 1: Reid did it away with it for Lord Court judges,
Speaker 1: and then before that you had you know, stonewalling on
Speaker 1: this these nominees, and so it just keeps getting further
Speaker 1: and further down the track of of of tip for
Speaker 1: tat and getting further apart is it. Well, like you said,
Speaker 1: you've been thinking about this, trying to figure out how
Speaker 1: to fix it, but it doesn't seem like we're going
Speaker 1: in the right direction currently we're not. I mean, this
Speaker 1: debate over the filibuster is a great example of that.
Speaker 1: I mean, you can very easily if you if you
Speaker 1: go on the Google machine, you can very easily look
Speaker 1: up and find clips of Joe Biden and Barack Obama
Speaker 1: and prominent Democrats talking about how important the filibuster is
Speaker 1: when they were in a position to use the filibuster
Speaker 1: to stop let's say, either nominations or legislative action. And
Speaker 1: you know, now the rules are reversed, and you've got
Speaker 1: the same Democrats saying, well, you gotta get rid of
Speaker 1: the filibuster. And by the way, you know, Republicans aren't
Speaker 1: aren't necessarily immune from that hypocrisy well when it comes
Speaker 1: to these kinds of issues. So it really is that
Speaker 1: kind of political convenience that I think gets people worked up.
Speaker 1: I mean, at a at a very basic level, you
Speaker 1: would hope that there can be some consistency in politics,
Speaker 1: but we just don't see that as much anymore. And
Speaker 1: I think that also contributes to we're talking about this
Speaker 1: polarization thing, when you feel like you have to always
Speaker 1: take the positions that your side is taking, otherwise there's
Speaker 1: some kind of trader or you're somehow less than uh.
Speaker 1: In in the Republican Party, we have this term rhino
Speaker 1: that's been thrown around. You know, you're a rhino if
Speaker 1: you don't support everything the Republicans do. And and you know,
Speaker 1: I think that's really too bad because there are a
Speaker 1: lot of things that you just took a good hard
Speaker 1: look at it and said, look, you know, is this
Speaker 1: something that that is conservative? Is this something that's progressive?
Speaker 1: And if it's so, then I'm gonna support or oppose it.
Speaker 1: Then you know it's understandable. But when it comes down
Speaker 1: to just as kind of shirts and skins partisanship, uh,
Speaker 1: that to me is probably not not great for America
Speaker 1: in the long run. We're talking with Lona Chen. You
Speaker 1: probably see him on various big time shows here. I'm
Speaker 1: on various big shows. Readers, articles, that sort of stuff. Um.
Speaker 1: One interesting thing we've been discussing is apparently, according to reporting,
Speaker 1: Joe Biden met with some historians the other day and said,
Speaker 1: you know, how big should I go? Am I going
Speaker 1: too big? And know they are because he invited in
Speaker 1: super liberal progressive historians. Um, they all said no, no, no,
Speaker 1: go big, goes big now's your time, and so we
Speaker 1: think he's working on trying to be a transformational People
Speaker 1: talk about him a hundred years from now like FDR
Speaker 1: sort of president. And you know, if he takes some
Speaker 1: hits right now politically for doing away with the filibuster,
Speaker 1: that won't matter if people are still talking about the major,
Speaker 1: the important changes he made to America, you know, a
Speaker 1: century from now. Do you think that's where we're headed. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, I think that is part of the goal
Speaker 1: of uh of of many who support him, and perhaps
Speaker 1: Biden himself. I mean, just look at it for context.
Speaker 1: We've passed two trillion dollars in fiscal stimulus spending or
Speaker 1: fiscal relief, whatever you want to call. It's two trillion
Speaker 1: dollars of spending and we and we did so in
Speaker 1: sort of a record amount of time without a whole
Speaker 1: lot of reflection in my view, And now they're talking
Speaker 1: about doing four trillion dollars in additional spending later this
Speaker 1: year on you know, I mean, some of it is
Speaker 1: surely stuff that we need. We need better roads and
Speaker 1: bridges and airports, and no one's arguing with that. But
Speaker 1: the notion that we would do it, and you know,
Speaker 1: just kind of say and wave our hands at it
Speaker 1: and say, well, it's just another couple of trillion dollars.
Speaker 1: That amount of expansion and spending and expansion in the
Speaker 1: rule of government will will truly be unprecedented. And I
Speaker 1: think if Biden manages to be successful, even if it's
Speaker 1: just with that two trillion impact to two trillion dollar
Speaker 1: package he did and another several trillion dollars and spending
Speaker 1: going forward, that will met his place in history in
Speaker 1: some ways as being the most progressive president that we've
Speaker 1: that we've ever seen. And I and I think it's
Speaker 1: remarkable because a lot of people, I think who voted
Speaker 1: for him and supported him said, Okay, look here's someone
Speaker 1: who's going to be relatively moderate and reasonable and gonna
Speaker 1: come in and try to heal the divisions. And you know,
Speaker 1: I just say, let's look at where we are and
Speaker 1: let's look at what let's actually happened into. Yeah, you
Speaker 1: never know what you're gonna get. I've done a lot
Speaker 1: of reading about L. B. J and all those Carol books,
Speaker 1: and you know, he was the guy in the Senate
Speaker 1: that stopped any civil rights legislation from ever even getting
Speaker 1: a sniff in a committee for years and years and years,
Speaker 1: and then when he becomes president, you know, he turns
Speaker 1: on a diamond and takes the other direction. So you
Speaker 1: never know what you're gonna get with the president. It's
Speaker 1: it's really interesting. And that was a good thing obviously,
Speaker 1: but um uh, I guess you don't know what's in
Speaker 1: somebody's true heart until they get the power to do things.
Speaker 1: Do you have any idea how many push ups you
Speaker 1: can do in a row right now? I don't know.
Speaker 1: It's a good question, so we could lie. I could
Speaker 1: lie and say a hundred, but that would I think, Uh,
Speaker 1: I don't know. I I think fifty. I think my
Speaker 1: son can do more than I can actually, because he's
Speaker 1: you know, he's and he's ten. So that just tells
Speaker 1: you what kind of that's funny because I'm my oldest
Speaker 1: is eleven, and uh the other day we ran and
Speaker 1: he's just about faster than me. Now I have to
Speaker 1: run full speed to barely beat him now in a sprint.
Speaker 1: Um yeah, yeah, there are points when you realize your
Speaker 1: own physical limitation. And I will I will say that
Speaker 1: that is that is a that is a part of
Speaker 1: the of the age curve. I'm starting to find myself
Speaker 1: on Now. It's interesting because every day I get slower
Speaker 1: and every day he gets faster. So at some point
Speaker 1: those lines are gonna cross, like supply and demand. The
Speaker 1: reason I ask is we had this health thing. Um,
Speaker 1: your chance of heart disease goes down two thirds if
Speaker 1: you can do eleven push ups as opposed to ten
Speaker 1: in a row. And I did, and I cranked out eleven.
Speaker 1: So I'm feeling good about my heart health. So I
Speaker 1: just wanted to you know, that's a stat Yeah, I didn't.
Speaker 1: I didn't know that I learned something today. Yeah, that's
Speaker 1: that's andy. Um. One more political question before we let
Speaker 1: you go, um uh. Watching the press conference, what do
Speaker 1: you think the performance was like overall? Were you bothered
Speaker 1: by a guy who used to chair the Foreign Relations
Speaker 1: Committee and was on Meet the Press every Sunday and
Speaker 1: could talk about any place in the world and name
Speaker 1: the leaders and had all those facts and figures at
Speaker 1: you know, at the tip of this tongue. That's the
Speaker 1: way he was young Joe Biden now having to read
Speaker 1: few cards for his own foreign policy. Yeah, I mean
Speaker 1: he's clearly lost several steps since he uh, you know,
Speaker 1: played those roles you know. I mean, look, I think
Speaker 1: me at least, that's not what I focus on. I don't.
Speaker 1: I'm not bothered by whether he's reading or not. What
Speaker 1: I am bothered by the actual policy. What I'm more
Speaker 1: bothered by is what they're actually doing, rather than what
Speaker 1: he's talking about or how he's talking about it. I mean,
Speaker 1: Joe Biden is never gonna win on style points, so
Speaker 1: you know, whatever, you give them that and I understand people,
Speaker 1: you know, take issue with the fact that he can't
Speaker 1: even talk about it without the que cards. And that's
Speaker 1: fine if they want to. My my bigger issue is,
Speaker 1: you know, do we really think four trillion dollars in
Speaker 1: additional spending makes sense? Do we really think that that,
Speaker 1: you know, a foreign policy like the one that we've
Speaker 1: got now, you know, makes sense? I think those are
Speaker 1: the kinds of questions we should be asking and not
Speaker 1: you know, did he read off a cute card or not?
Speaker 1: I mean that that's kind of where I would spend
Speaker 1: my time and energy. So does he do like two
Speaker 1: press conferences a year, all with just a handful of
Speaker 1: reporters on his side, that he knows what they're gonna ask?
Speaker 1: Is that the way he's gonna do it well the
Speaker 1: more to me, at least, the more shocking thing was
Speaker 1: not his performance, but the reporters performed. The fact that
Speaker 1: you've got so many reporters who are unwilling to ask
Speaker 1: tough questions. It's their job to ask tough questions. They
Speaker 1: asked a lot of tough questions of Donald Trump when
Speaker 1: he was president. That's what the that's what the media
Speaker 1: is supposed to do. Now when it comes to Joe Biden,
Speaker 1: they you know, they say things like, well, you know,
Speaker 1: you have an image as an honorable and decent man,
Speaker 1: and you know, you know, it's almost like Uncle Joe's
Speaker 1: story time instead of holding a president accountable. And and
Speaker 1: you need to hold president's accountable. I don't care if
Speaker 1: the Republican or Democrat. The job of the media, if
Speaker 1: they're doing it well, is to hold people in power accountable.
Speaker 1: And you look at what's happening in Washington, by the way,
Speaker 1: you look what's happening in state capitals like Sacramento. That's
Speaker 1: why there's all these people, all these who have worked
Speaker 1: up about Gavin Newsom. No one asked the hard questions anymore.
Speaker 1: And and that's when you get essentially politicians who decide
Speaker 1: they can do whatever they want. Pomo is another one. Well,
Speaker 1: part of it got away with murder. Well, part of it,
Speaker 1: especially now, is you'll get lit up by your own
Speaker 1: side on your Twitter feed if you if you come out.
Speaker 1: There was an there was a column in the Washington
Speaker 1: Post saying, hey, media, go easy on Uncle Joe. Remember
Speaker 1: he's on our side, not trying, you know that sort
Speaker 1: of thing. It's yeah, I don't think people want to
Speaker 1: take the bullets from their own side. Yeah, there's no
Speaker 1: our side or their side when it comes to there
Speaker 1: shouldn't be when it comes to the media. Unfortunately we
Speaker 1: know that in too many cases there is, and it
Speaker 1: shouldn't be that way. Well, I took a lot of
Speaker 1: your time today. Appreciate you doing it. I expect you
Speaker 1: to tweet out later how many push ups you did
Speaker 1: in a row, and I'll be following your Twitter feed
Speaker 1: that'll see. I'll be I'll be a shame you're not
Speaker 1: gonna see that number. But but but all the best
Speaker 1: for for good heart help. If that's a great whist
Speaker 1: for everybody, you bet, Thank you very much. Loon heat Chen,
Speaker 1: regular contributor on CNN Opinion uh, David and Diane Stephie
Speaker 1: fellow in public policy at Hoover and all around smart
Speaker 1: guy and I like it. Whenever if I see he's
Speaker 1: on facination or something like that, I know it's gonna
Speaker 1: be a good episode. Art Strong