these events stream live on the free c-span now video apps or online, c-span.org. >> c-span, democracy unfiltered, funded by these television companies and more, including cox. >> when connection is needed most cox is there to help. bringing affordable internet to families in need and support whenever and wherever it matters most we wilbe there. >> cox supports c-span as a public service along with these other television providers giving your front row seat to democracy. >> former new hampshire governor chris sununu discussed checks and balances and dei in an event hosted by george

washington university, this runs an hour and 1/2. >> welcome, everybody, to what i know will be another dynamic, provocative and thought-provoking evening. i wanted to give a shout out to the college of arts and sciences who talked about engage liberal arts while we will engage liberal arts tonight and than the sum and the director of the school of median public affairs which i call home. this is a series as the provost mentioned about democracy and discourse and thanks for making it possible. i've been a journalist and frontline observer in washington for a long time, longer than i like to admit and i've never seen anything like the moment we are going through. and nonstop news cycle that can't possibly keep up with the nonstop news. a president and administration that have made no secret of what they intended to do, they talked about it, disruption,

illumination of the administrative state, and retribution, big changes needed and their polls show people on both sides, conservatives and liberals believe the country is not going in the right direction and needs big change, the question is to what and what about the shockwaves it is causing, we will talk a lot about that. we will talk about what it means for american democracy and our sense of ourselves as a nation, we are polarized can we are divided for sure, makes what we are doing here at the university and in this conversation even more important. to come together, to listen respectfully, to learn and to lean in and to think about where we aren't where we are going. in her book how conflict, amanda ripley says that high conflict is a mode of thinking and feeling that leads to anger, hate and us versus them

mentality. she says we address that not by getting out of conflict but by embracing conflict, she says that is what makes us better, pushes each other to challenge each other and to grow, by having the hard conversations driven by curiosity so that is what we do and what we will do here. i want to, before i introduce the governor, thanks to the siegels for making this possible and many people on the ground, alex ashley and our production and communication team, jack, anna, jane, ebony, thanks to you all for coming. [applause] >> we have been talking for a long time about a lot of change going on in washington. we should have a republican join us to talk about, a lot of them don't want to talk about it. why would that be?

but our guest tonight is and does and he is here willingly. the 80 second governor of new hampshire elected to four terms, bachelors in civil and environmental engineering for mit and when he came out of school, at nyu, the school of the arts, he started his career as an environmental engineer working in wastewater treatment, landfills, that kind of thing, contaminated soil and water, comes from a political family. i covered his dad when he was white house chief of staff, ladies and gentlemen, please welcome former governor chris sununu. [applause] >> are we off to a good start? thank you. the intro is always the easy part. >> i hope so. >> thank you for being with us. >> this is great, can't see anything. can we turn on the house lights? >> no. i want you to see who is in the

audience. how many students are in the audience. >> excellent. >> good turnout of students. >> we will hear from them a little later but we are going to talk about lots of things which had at that finger with anderson cooper, you don't have to quote him. >> anderson and i got along great. that was the irony of the whole thing. i don't think he meant to be rude to me. he got casual. he's anderson cooper. >> did he get mad? >> he wasn't mad at all. he honestly forgot the camera was on. you and your buddies talking and come on, okay. we are live, anderson. it was all fine. we got along great. >> i want to welcome our c-span audience and share what was said if it weren't for family program but that's what cnn was. >> they are a nonprofit. >> i want to start with a video, sarah and alex talked to

some students, journalism and political communication which is what we do here and asked them to get a sense of how they feel about our moment in politics and we will talk about that and take a look. >> i'm trying not to feed into the doom but i would say i don't think it looks too good. there's a lot of division. a lot of anxiety. people are really upset and frustrated with what is going on with the current administration. >> the republican party has american values at heart and to let it descend into what it is with trump is so unlike what the gop is and i want to know why. >> i'm feeling more nervous being in this stage of my life and location. >> there's an underlying understanding and mutual agreement that people are working, living in the same country.

it is a path people have to take on to explore the right methods to get there but the destination is the same. >> for now time will tell and we have to wait and see what's going to happen or how things are going to go now that new policies and executive orders have been enacted. >> what you heard is a sampling, not scientific but a lot of division, a lot of anxiety and concern how divided we are. why are we so divided? you talk to people. >> a couple things. one of the things to have perspective on his a lot of these students, i'm not that old, i'm only 50. i act like i'm 25. point being early 2,000s it wasn't like this. democrats and republicans could get along, the fingers reagan and tip o'neill examples of hashing it out, my father was at the white house and he and kennedy would go at it left and right but at the end of the day

they would find a way to move forward together. since about 2008, 2010 for a variety of reasons both sides, social media, new technology is how we communicate, this generation, that is all they see unfortunately. i'm the eternal optimist. i always believe in a system and i believe in the best in it until it is proven to be a complete failure. the argument, i don't blame one side or the other. both sides, the republicans are going to destroy democracy, the democrats are killing the constitution, all that kind of stuff, those are just dog whistles for i don't agree with you and the other side is evil. i'm not putting the blame on trump or anything like that but the democrats, let me backup. we talk about the republican party to address that young woman, how can you let this happen. no one person is letting anything happen. i worked hard to get nikki haley elected, didn't work out

so well. at the end of the day the party isn't defined by one individual, the democrat party isn't defined by one individual, he' he is the leader and the voice of the party. as was the democrat party defined, you don't think, when someone is the president you don't think biden and terrace defined a democrat party. >> you heard all kinds of griping and complaining and criticizing from the democrats against obama, against biden. >> we can disagree on that a little bit. i will say of this was the argument is if you think trump is a problem, that can be your opinion, fine, trump's trump, there's no trump light, no trump 2. oh coming in. i have always argued and i'm not trying to be overly polarizing to start but i always argued the democrat party has a much bigger dna problem because generally there's a gap between what the upcoming generation sees as the progressive values and

socialism and all that that they want to see out of the democratic party versus the old school democrat party which is a little more traditional. republicans have the same thing but we are not defined, trump is trump, hughes the president, we are not defined by, there's no trump light coming up. i'm not saying it goes back to the way it was but who is going to be running for president in four years? might be jd vance or desantis or some governor. i need to make some money. if you're hiring, let me know. in all seriousness, both parties have problems in different ways. i think social media and how we consume information is at the heart of a lot of it. i think people talk about empathy but don't practice it. the reason i get instilled with optimism is because i don't live in this, excuse me, godforsaken city. this place is a bubble unto itself as you know. i was a governor of a state

where you are held accountable into believing local control. a reason i like what trump is doing in some ways is a decentralizing of government. that is empowering to more citizens and if you do that, if we can champion that instead of just looking at washington dc, people have more faith in the system, the more you localize the process the more faith you have in it. >> anybody in the room from new hampshire? anybody in the room been to new hampshire? >> you will all be retiring. >> here's what i want to ask about the division. a johns hopkins paul done before the election found a very disturbing response something like nearly half of americans think the opposing side was evil, not just an adversary but evil. >> usually problematic.

>> and >> if you and how we communicate and absorb information. the fact that we say anything at it goes to the whole world, not verified, not checked. people posting things on social media, 98% of it nationally on a political stay are supposed to what is happening locally and you don't have to look somebody in the i, with all the vitriol you want and no accountability to it. i argue my generation was smart enough to invent social media but not the maturity to understand how to handle it.

i don't agree with the politics of time but this generation know the push and pool, they will learn problems with it and how to handle it. >> this generation are anybody, the cat is out of the bag. >> host: is there a way to come back from people viewing people as evil as this baked into what we are? >> it is baked into the conversation but this conversation will have a better understanding to have a healthy sense of cynicism when they hear that stuff. >> host: i want to ask about bipartisanship, endangered species. i started my career, my journalism career in vermont and vermont, wonderful examples of jeffersonian democracy. you can have a conversation with your neighbor. when there was journalism it

was about you reporting on, about, from, to the neighbors. how did you make that, did you make that? >> a couple things. new hampshire, i would hope. it is more than four cool words on a license plate but it is at the heart of it about limited taxes, local government, local control, limited government if anything. >> those who don't know, in new hampshire back to when i was there decades ago there is no state sales tax or state income tax, one of the few states, no broad-based act and the reason we get away with that is the only taxes you pay is a citizen's property tax. but the value there is this. as a governor, we have no control over your property tax, 0. you do.

you go to town meetings every year, you decide what the curriculum would be. a citizen, someone who drives it. we keep it so localized, what happens? people get empowered. do you see the sites i had with my brother? get to understand where the dollars are going, and more engaged in new hampshire than i would argue anywhere else encodes the civics of it because it is transparent. when you have an argument, arguing with your neighbor or your brother and your kids are at the bus stop. you can have those arguments and learn how to walk away and don't make it personal a difference of opinion and get along and that is why we hold

the first in the nation primary. we do it better than everybody else. we have the highest voter turnout. high demands of accountability. don't care about any of that, you got to earn it on the street. >> how many voters. the local control efforts of what we do empower transparency and participation like nowhere else. >> host: back to the bipartisanship coming interesting example commute call it miracle budget. >> guest: that was amazing. >> host: bipartisan support for dramatic things. >> guest: school choice, tax cuts. take a step back, one. 4 million people in new hampshire, 400 state reps, the

third-largest parliamentary body behind parliament and the state of new hampshire. >> guest: 1.4 million, the most representative body of government on the planet and those guys get paid $100 a year. truly a volunteer government. what does that mean? never know who is going to win. he or she who knocks on most doors and connects with people, not about the money. republicans run my house and senate and democrats. my last term i got 201 republicans, 199 democrats. at the same time kevin mccarthy, who is a friend, was going through at 10 vote swing, guess what, my speaker got elected on the first.

it is complete gridlock. depending on attendance, if republicans don't shop democrats control the day on the house votes. it is complete gridlock and never get anything done. the end of store you are referencing, i got my balance, all states, and my budget got passed unanimously on the first vote on the house of representatives. i talked to them. a little bit of the politics of it. i knew what the democrats wanted. i disagreed with a lot of it. i find you do two things, at the democrats wanted a little over here or a little over there. the interest in dividends and

expansion of school choice, give them credit. i gave the unions not a raise but a change in the rule that allows more flexibly for them and thank you for getting this done. i haven't seen this issue but thanks to democrats here and republicans there, we came together, found a way to get it done. not only got it done but gave him credit. we disagreed on a lot of issues at the end of the day we worked and off into the budget and out of the budget, some didn't like it but i am proud of that because i wanted to show if anything washington, don't tell me it is gridlocked or you can't get something done. when someone says we can't get it done it tells me you don't have the political will and courage to do what you need to do to get pushback from your party and work with people on

the other side, doesn't mean you compromise your principles as a republican or conservative you understand there's bigger issues sometimes and you have to think as a governor, i've got the legislature to think globally as a state. >> let's not travel from your state to washington where you got to give a little, executive ordering a lot. like the fast and furious, banning birthright citizenship, firing inspectors general and commissioners, booting the president from the board of the kennedy center, granting pardons to the most violent criminals. >> let's not get into pardons, both parties are completely -- problematic. dogyou coming alone musk with access to files, pulling research contracts, firing

federal workers on mask. >> you have the claim why the other side doesn't like that. 12% of the employees -- >> you explain how you got bipartisan support by engaging the other side. if a republican criticizes trump nevermind a democrat -- >> a couple things here. the process will be when it comes to congress. most of this stuff. >> congress wants that. the conversation we have about whether there's a congress at this point and what role it has in checks and balances. >> most of us have to go through congress. telling doge it doesn't have much power at the end of the day other than to say all the executive orders say we will review and realign, review and realign and certain agencies will disappear, bring these recommendations to congress and force these agencies, a whole lot more.

they are all going to be put under the microscope and you need to come back and justify why you need to exist, justify what the value is to the american public and the american dollar and congress will have to do most of the heavy lifting. similar to new hampshire, they have to give a little to get a lot. i don't know whether it can happen or will, but that will be the process, no question about that. even trump has said that, we know we have to work with congress to get it done. >> host: do you offer any advice to this president about the damage that is done in the short term with the mad dash through executive orders? there's food that's not delivered to hungry people waiting and rotting. >> the way he is going about it i love and hate at the same time. i love that he is fundamentally doing it.

this is congress's job, accountability, managing budgets, asking the departments to be accountable to themselves, they have done nothing for the past couple years and republicans and democrats equally have been complete buffoons for 20 plus years. 1998-1999 the last balanced budget these guys have completely derelict in their duty and not done their job, trump is saying you had 25 years, that's it, now i am going to bring a group in here, go hard and fast, bring a lot of recommendations, to everything under the sun that people have talked about but not had the courage to do and bring it to congress, you can decide what you want to do but we are doing this because you haven't and i argue the reason this is happening is congress did nothing for 25 years. not only are they finding efficiency, the amount of fraud and corruption here is staggering. >> how do you know that?

>> you think there's no fraud and corruption? >> i am sure there is fraud and corruption. i know there is any efficiency. of the process that is happening here, as a journalist i have covered this through the years, when your father was white house chief of staff, you mentioned the balanced budget they had in the 90s, the reason they had the balanced budget in the 90s was george herbert walker bush for whom your dad worked, read my lips, no new taxes raised taxes which may be why he lost reelection. that was our process, a negotiation, somebody giving and getting. >> i'm not here to apologize for elon and trump but i will say this. the speed let me backup, the alternative, what if they had come out, six months, tear this thing apart and then six months

come out and give you a report. they didn't say anything for six months, working on something, to their credit they are going hard and fast and talking about what they are doing every step of the way which opens them up for massive criticism some of it rightly so and even elon said we will make mistakes, we will break some eggs but there's a lot of eggs to be broken. >> host: what is the rightly so criticism? some of the criticism rightly so. >> guest: they are being too abrupt, when they get rid of usaid, they didn't get rid of usaid but that we are going to review it. x billions of dollars go to usaid, we can reallocate 5 to 7 million back to fight wildfires in california, back to north

carolina, reappropriate mishandled dollars back to america and figure out where those agencies need to be restructured, as opposed to getting rid of this, getting rid of this. it is not too fast but it is too hard. don't mind getting rid of the employees. >> host: let's talk about that. house lights for a minute. i'd like to ask the audience a question. students in the room, raise hands. how many of you at washington dc, this terrible town, how many of you are considering some, were considering some form of public service for a career? are they wrong? >> guest: why what i think they are wrong? public service doesn't mean you have to be in this city. the most valuable public service you can do is local.

donald trump and the school board. what has more impact on your life. a nonprofit helping the poor, the needy, helping those that need extra help. >> host: we talked to a student who addressed this. we talked earlier, alex and sarah did, about the people part and what is going on, the research, look at what she said. >> i've seen the fear in my friends doing research, my roommate is doing research on environmental policy and the administration has decided to

come -- a very troubling time. very disappointing. as a federal employee, i worked my entire life to serve my country, and seeing how people like me are being completely disregarded for the work that we do, which is extremely valuable, it is really disheartening. it is sickening. >> host: thank you. [applause] >> host: it was set up pretty well. a roommate is doing research, we don't need the research, people who work for the federal government being told your cheats, your fraudsters and you are not needed. >> guest: a couple things. the environmental peace. i'm an environmental engineer, the paris climate agreement i think is nonsense.

there's no enforceability, no standards being held by any country. it is an unenforceable document that is costing the country massive amounts of money. i would argue the united states does a phenomenal job and we keep making huge investments in terms of being responsible, carbon emissions or whatever it is and we are going to get there. other countries that signed on to that agreement, chinas of the world are putting up 50 call factories a year with no account ability. >> host: they are also racing ahead with electric vehicles and battery technology and renewables. >> guest: they are an environmental disaster. this is completely unfair. we are doing this, no enforceability. on the employee side, not that the work is devalued in terms of what a lot of these employees are doing. these things you are cutting, okay, it is interesting but is

it worth the dollars? this gets to the heart of fiscal responsibility. we owe $35 trillion, does the government oh $36 trillion? no. you owe $36 trillion, your neighbors do, you owe that money. that is hours you worked away from your family, sacrifice, blood, sweat, and did 2 years. it is a real number, not an imaginary number, $100 a second for 30,000 years, 11,000 years, that gets to how much we owe. and because they haven't balanced going into such debt. the economies in a weak position, got to make some

tough choices and prioritize. that organization and that agency, financial consumer protection bureau was created after 2008, completely duplicative, accountable to nobody. the fcic or the sec, the credit union, they have a lot of these rules and stuff in place and they can do a lot of work the bureau does so do we need this duplicative thing? they are judge, jury and executioner, not accountable to congress or anything, they think the rules are to go but we can keep a lot of the good out of that, save a lot of money and move on. if it is duplicative or we have better use of that dollar, got to make tough decisions. it is not easy, it is painful. you owe this money.

>> host: it is also people. >> guest: to be employed -- >> host: congressional research service lists 10,887 federal government employees in new hampshire and district one, 8,049 in district two. you are okay of half of them are fired? >> guest: absolutely. the government isn't here to keep you employed. let me back up. the government isn't here -- >> host: when you're employed you expect some process of transparency, to just get your head lopped off like that, i have laid people off. >> guest: as have i. >> host: we had a process. is there process? >> guest: in new hampshire i can't keep borrowing money. i have to have a balanced budget. when the revenues don't come in and things don't match i have to let people go. you people, the city, our federal government has gotten away with we don't have to let

anybody go, you really really -- coming to a head at the same time. >> host: what about people i have talked to, who don't feel valued, don't feel respected because of the language that says all of you -- >> guest: the process is too hard. there is an argument the process, i don't mind the speed but that is where my hope, this is what i think is going to happen. i might be proven wrong and i will be first to admit it. my hope is we are only 30 days in, as of four years ago doges putting out receipts and proof of what they are doing. we can go back and forth. people will agree on it or maybe they won't. in six months my guess is there will be a report to congress, first of many and say here's the first phase report and here's the backup and the information.

and provide the proof and held accountable to that. i totally get it. at the end of the day a couple things. a strong economy, you don't do it because people can find another job. doesn't mean they are not valued but congress has to make some tough decisions who stays and who goes, something they have not been willing to do and it's like the perfect storm of problems where a lot of people all at once lose their job, their agency or decentralized. that is a real answer here. decentralizing washington. people complain the department of education, i am a governor and believe strongly in education but someone has yet to explain to me what is the value add for the federal department of education? >> host: to look across the country and see that there is equality of access, people with

disabilities -- >> guest: you think governors don't do that? >> host: they do it unevenly. it is all over the place. >> guest: as it should be. new hampshire is not california. i think an extreme example, gavin newsom and i don't see i to lie at all but i would argue gavin newsom knows what california needs for education and the need and where the value is more than anybody in washington. as hochul in new york and sununu in new hampshire. >> host: isn't harrison's federal department of education is running things when it isn't, 7% of funds to go to school districts. but school districts should be run by school districts. >> guest: what does washington add to that equation? >> host: some degree of equity, i know that a word we are not supposed to use now and some degree of oversight, right? oversight.

>> guest: so much oversight -- >> guest: when washington offered additional grants for special education which we need desperate because so many kids qualify for special, every state needs more money for special ed. the hurdles and barriers it took for me to get that money, the redtape designed by washington, the districts said it won't work. don't bring us this money because we have to send it back because we don't meet this standard that was set up by some congressman in arizona. my argument is this. every state knows what they need. if you want to send us the money, great. states on the ground that know what their needs are. i would never tell massachusetts what massachusetts needs. i can show by example what might be working in new hampshire but she knows. >> host: let me read a bit from a story today about schools and

local control. the education department, trump education department warned schools in a letter on friday that they risk losing federal funding if they continue to take race into account making a scholarship or hiring decisions, all other aspects of student academic and campus life. let's say you are a school and have a large group of young students from ethiopia, they speak that language and now you can't do that. >> guest: that is not what they are saying. the supreme court made a ruling, the supreme court ruled on this. in education -- >> host: you may not take race into consideration at all when hiring. in a case like this --

>> guest: that is different from race. >> host: may be they do take race and what if they do? what if you have a diverse group of students, who can relate. >> guest: the supreme court is saying it has to be on merit, that's the law. i don't know what to tell you. >> are you talking local control to make that decision for themselves? >> i argue a private institution can but a public institution is held to a different standard. >> host: you talked about local control, people say we want to have this. >> guest: it is reverse racism. i'm not a lawyer but i'm telling you there is a clear argument of why that was overturned in the supreme court. they didn't do it just because. i don't want to get into a race

issue but the supreme court said public institutions, they say don't do that. >> host: by the way it is not just public institutions. according to what i'm seeing as we are hearing, the trump administration say any institution taking federal money can include private universities. >> guest: i don't know the law they are using but that is likely the basis of it. >> host: have we overdone with this conversation about dei? you signed a bill that embrace diversity and inclusion. have we thrown the baby out with the bathwater? we are a diverse society, why shouldn't we embrace that and explain that to people in more diverse environments? >> guest: when i created my dei commission it was great and it was all because we found we had police department in particular the said when there's crime and

has something to do with race, they didn't have the training or experience. we just need help, we created this commission that would hire folks, let's talk about what it was. how to be sensitive to certain things and all that sort of thing and it worked well. it performed its duties. there is no question that dei as defined in 2024 is completely different. >> host: how is that? >> guest: it has become a political whistle. no question about that. if you don't have this, then you are canceled, you are excluded, you cannot be part of our system. you have to have it. or you don't get funding. colleges and universities, that is not right. >> host: if we are going to talk about cancel culture we have canceled culture like we've never had where people are being fired, funding is

being restricted, agencies are being shut down, boards are being thrown out. we talked about canceled culture before, we are canceling people and firing of them now. >> guest: two separate things. cancel culture as we talk about it in terms of the woke and cancel culture there is based on i am offended by what you say, i don't agree with what you say, i'm going to cancel it. what you are talking about, we don't have the money or the dollars a duplicate of efforts and can do it another way. those are very separate things as opposed to i am offended by your language so i'm going to cancel you. very different thing. >> host: now you criticize me, offended by your leg which, you're fired. >> guest: people are not being fired because they are criticized. >> host: go to the fbi, the doj, they are being investigated and fired because they did their jobs, this is what is so interesting about it. >> guest: that is introducing theoretically i don't know these individual cases but theoretically, introduce politics in an operation that

needs to be apolitical, you haven't done your job appropriately. not saying i agree with it per se but on both sides, a lot of folks, the famous couple, the husband, the man and woman caught with their texts that the biden doj had to get rid of, works on both sides and they should route that out. >> host: if you're going to have a beverage with donald trump right now and talk about dei. >> guest: talk about dei, what am i going to say about that? >> host: that is what i'm going to ask you. the example you gave, the reason you signed the bill is a great example where there is a police force dealing with a racial issue where they don't understand it, we need