employer is walmart. i am just perplexed because i saw my family suffer from it, and many families in this little town in the mountains. so, if you could shed some light on that and if there is a chance that any of these jobs whatever come back to these old towns across america. i guess i am looking for hope. is there any? guest: i would say there is hope. it is not going to look like it did in the 1970's. but, there is the possibility to attract new factories to communities. it takes some policy to do that and it takes a reversal of the free-trade policy is that we saw over the last -- policies over the last couple of generations that led to the demise and manufacturing in a small and mid side towns

>> -- critical issues of democracy, public understanding, and civic -- -- around the world. today's conversation will explore the most pressing questions facing the country at this very moment. we established in a downed fund to ensure the essential debate and dialogue surrounding our democracy will endure and to ho nor --

supporting our students and fostering could echo conversations like the one we have this evening. frank scobee represents the very best of journalism and public affairs. at cnn he served as the white house correspondent, anchor, talkshow host, and washington bureau chief. his reporting has spanned global conflicts, humanitarian crises -- he has interviewed presidents and prime ministers, advocates and activists. in 2023 he was awarded gw's presidential medal in recognition of his many achievements and contributions. he was named the executive director of the alliance -- [indiscernible]

it is gw's mission to be a convener for thought leadership in the pursuit of these ideals and in making the world a better place, to enable tough intellectual conversations about deep divisions and pressing challenges. for generations this mission has enabled gw students to be on the front row of history, engaging the defining issues of their time. at gw, you lead, challenge, and illuminate the pathway forward. the school of media and public affairs housed within the columbia college of arts and sciences is the ideal home for this conversation. smp a prepares students to engage in accountable and tenacious pursuits of truth. values that lie at the heart of a liberal arts education and serve as the essential tools for a thriving democracy. so thank you all for being here with us tonight and it is now my great honor to welcome professor

frank to the stage. [applause] >> thank you and welcome, everybody. welcome to what i know will be another very dynamic, provocative, and thought-provoking evening. i want to give a quick shout out. we will engage the liberal arts tonight and then some. [indiscernible] this is a series about democracy and discourse. i have been a journalist and a frontline observer for a long time. longer than i would like to admit. i never seen anything like -- [indiscernible]

disruption, elimination, and retribution. big change is needed. the country is not going in the right direction. [indiscernible] we are polarized and divided for sure. it makes what we are doing here even more important. we come together to listen respectfully, to learn, and to lean in. and to think about where we are and where we are going. in her book, amanda ripley says

high conflict is a mode of thinking, and her words. 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 the 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 will do here. before i introduce the governor i want to offer thanks for making this possible and the many people on the ground who made this evening possible. our production and communications team. super thanks to you all. [applause] so we have been talking for a long time about there is a lot of change going on in washington and we really should have a republican join us and talk about it.

turns out a lot don't want to talk about it. why would that be? but our guest tonight did and does and he is here willingly and exuberantly. the 82nd governor of new hampshire elected to four terms, has a bachelors in civil and environmental engineering from m.i.t. and when he came out of school he actually did a stint at the nyu tisch school of the arts. i want to ask him about what happened there. he started his career as an environmental engineer working in wastewater treatment plants, landfills, cleaning up contaminated soil and water. i covered his dad when he was white house chief of staff. before that his brother was governor. please welcome former governor chris sununu. [applause] are we off to a good start? mr. sununu: the intro is always the easiest. prof. sesno: thank you for being with us. mr. sununu: this is great.

i can't see anything, but i assume there are people out there. prof. sesno: i want you to see. how many students are in the audience? a good turnout of students. we will hear from them a little later. how did that thing go with anderson cooper? you don't have to quote him. mr. sununu: anderson and i get along great. that is the irony of the whole thing. i don't think he meant to be rude with me. he got casual. prof. sesno: did he get casual or get mad? mr. sununu: i think he honestly just forgot the camera was on. it was just like you and your buddies talking. it was all fine, we get along great. prof. sesno: i want to welcome our c-span audience and i would share what was said in that thing. mr. sununu: they are nonprofit

so we have to keep it clean. prof. sesno: i want to start a video. sarah and others went and talked to some students and asked them to get a sense of how they feel about our moment in politics and we will talk about that and other things. let's take a look. >> i am trying not to feed into the doomerism, but it doesn't look good. there is a lot of division and anxiety. people are really upset and very frustrated with the current administration. >> the republican party has american values at heart and to what -- let it descend to trumpism is so unlike what the gop is and i want to know why you're letting it happen. >> i am feeling more nervous being at this stage in my life and location. >> there is an underlying

understanding and mutual agreement that people are working and living in the same country. so i think it is kind of a path that people have to take on to explore the right methods to get there. but i think the destination is the same. >> time will tell and we will just have to wait and see what is going to happen or how things are going to go now that these new policies and executive orders have been enacted. prof. sesno: what you heard is just a sampling. a lot of division, a lot of anxiety and concern about how divided we are. why are we so divided? mr. sununu: a couple things. one of the things to have perspective on is unfortunately a lot of these students -- i am not that old, i am only 50 even though i act like i'm 25. 1980's, 1990's, 2000's, it wasn't like this. democrats and republicans could

get along. my father was at the white house and him and kennedy would go at it. 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, this generation, that is all they see. i am the eternal optimist. i always believed in a system and invest in it until it is proven to be a complete failure. i don't blame one side or the other. the republicans are going to destroy democracy, all that kind of stuff. those are just dog whistles for i don't agree with you in the other side is evil. i am not putting the blame on trump or anything like that. obviously the democrats -- let me back up. we talk a lot about the republican party. how can you let this happen? first off, i didn't know one

person is letting anything happen. i worked really hard to get nikki haley elected. didn't quite work out so well. at the end of the day the party is not defined by one individual. he is the leader and the voice of the party. prof. sesno: it is defined by one individual right now. mr. sununu: sure. you don't think that when someone is the president, you don't think biden/harris defined the democratic party? prof. sesno: no. because you heard all kinds of criticizing from the democrats against obama and biden. mr. sununu: we can disagree on that. i would say this. the argument i have is if you think trump is a problem, find. trump is trump. there is no trump-lite. i am not trying to be overly polarizing to start but i have always argued the democrat party has a much bigger dna problem because generationally there is a gap between what this upcoming

generation sees as the progressive values and socialism and all the things they want to see versus the old school democrat party which is a little more of the tradition. republicans have the same thing but we are not defined -- trump is trump, we are not defined by him. i am not saying it goes back to the way it was. but who is going to be running for president in four years? it might be j.d. vance, des antis. prof. sesno: might it be you? mr. sununu: no, i need to make some money. in all seriousness, i think both parties have problems in different ways. social media and how we consume information is at the heart of a lot of this. people talk about but the but do not practice it. the reason i get re-instilled with optimism because i don't live in this, excuse me, godforsaken city. this place is a bubble unto

itself. i was governor of a state where you are constantly held accountable, where you believe in local control. one of the reasons i actually like what is happening with what trump is doing, it is a decentralizing of government. that is empowering to more citizens. if you do that, if we can champion that instead of just looking at washington, d.c., people clearly have more faith in the system. the more you localize the process -- prof. sesno: anybody in the room from new hampshire? anybody in the room been to new hampshire? mr. sununu: don't worry, you will all be retiring there. prof. sesno: here is what i want to ask you about the division. there is a johns hopkins poll that was done before the election and they found there was a very disturbing response that something like nearly half of americans think the opposing side was evil. not just an adversary, but people. that is a big change. mr. sununu: hugely problematic.

prof. sesno: why have we so demonized the other, and what is it that people like you, people who have a podium can do, if anything? because maybe you can't now. mr. sununu: a couple things. if you want to know why we polarized, at the heart of it i believe is social media. prof. sesno: at the heart of it? mr. sununu: yes. prof. sesno: it is also what we are communicating. mr. sununu: the fact be can say anything and he goes out to the whole world and it is not verified or checked. usually when people post things on social media at 98% of it is happening nationally as opposed to locally. again, when you are doing it you don't have to look somebody in the eye and have an actual discussion. with all the vitriol you want and there is no accountability to it. i have always argued my

generation was smart enough to invent social media but we didn't have the sense of how to handle it. i believe in this generation. i don't believe in the politics all the time this generation has grown up with that. they are going to learn the prague room -- problems with it and how to handle it. prof. sesno: the cat is out of the bag, right? mr. sununu: it is not going back in. prof. sesno: is there a way to come back from people -- viewing people who disagree with us as people? or is this not what we are? mr. sununu: it is baked into the conversation but this generation will have a better understanding to have a healthy sense of cynicism when they hear that kind of stuff. prof. sesno: i want to ask you about bipartisanship, endangered species. i started my career, my journalism career in the neighboring state of vermont. vermont and new hampshire are 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. that's it. how did you make that happen? did you make that happen? mr. sununu: a couple things. new hampshire, live free or die. prof. sesno: that is the motto, in case you don't know. mr. sununu: it is more than four cool words on a license plate. at the heart of it,, it is about limited taxes local government, local control. limited government, if anything. [indiscernible] the reason we get away with that is the only taxes you pay as a citizen is property tax. we have a high property tax. it stinks.

but we have no control over your property taxes. zero. you do. you go to a town meeting every year and you decide what the curriculum will be in your classrooms. only you can do that as a parent, as a citizen what potholes will be filled. we have state of meant as well of course but we keep it so localized, what happens? people get empowered. you go to the town meeting. do you want to see the fights i have had with my brother? i mean that sincerely. you get to understand where the dollars are going, what is happening with your taxes. you get much more engaged in new hampshire than anywhere else in america in terms of the civics of it. because it is transparent. when you have an argument at town meeting, you are arguing with your neighbor or your brother. and the next day your kids are at the bus stop together. so you can have those arguments and you learn how to walk away. you don't make it personal.

just make it about a difference of opinion and at the end of the day you get along. at the core that is why we hold the first in the nation primary. people say what gives you the right? frankly, we do it better than anybody else. you have the highest voter turnout and we have such high demand of accountability. we don't care what your name is or how much money you have. you have to earn it on the street. prof. sesno: and you have dixville notch. mr. sununu: the local aspects of what we do empower transparency and participation like nowhere else which keep it independent. mr. sununu: come back to the bipartisanship. it is an interesting example. you call it a miracle budget. mr. sununu: that last one i did. prof. sesno: you had bipartisan support for some dramatic things including -- mr. sununu: tax cuts, raise for state employees. we have 1.4 million people in

new hampshire and we have 400 state reps. it is the third-largest parliamentary body high british parliament, u.s. congress congress and the state of new hampshire. prof. sesno: it is a little state. population of? mr. sununu: 1.4 million. it is the most representative audie of government on the planet. you know how much they get paid? $100 a year. it is truly a volunteer government. so what does that mean? you never know who is going to win. he or she who knocks on the in most doors and connects with people and talks about what they want to do in their community gets elected. it is not about the money. i have had republicans and democrats run my house and senate. in the last term i had the split of all splits. 201 republicans, 199 democrats. at the same time kevin mccarthy, who was a friend, he had a 10 vote swing. my speaker got elected on the first vote.

at the end of the day, people said you will never get anything done, complete gridlock. by the way, depending on attendance, if a few republicans don't show up, democrats control the day for the house votes. so people said it will be complete would lock and you will never get anything done. let me cut to the end of the story. i got my balanced-budget past. all states have balanced-budget amendment, we have to pass balanced budgets unlike washington. my budget was passed unanimously on the first vote in the house of representatives. prof. sesno: how did that get done? mr. sununu: i talked to them. i will do a little bit of the politics over them. i knew what the democrats wanted. i could not give it to them. i disagreed with a lot of them. but i find that when you can just give a little. the democrats wanted a little over here and there, things that were minor issues for republicans. i wanted big things like my big

tax cuts. i wanted expansion of school choice. you get a little, you can get a lot. not only did i give them a small thing, i give them credit. i went to the unions and i gave them, not a raise, but a change in the rule that allowed for more flexibility. then i went to the democrats and said thank you for getting this done. i would not have even seen this issue. but we all came together and found a way and got it done. they were so happy. i not only got it down for them, but i gave them credit. while we disagreed on a lot of big issues, at the end of the day we were able to work enough into the budget that we were all able to come together. some people didn't like it but at the end of the day, we had a unanimous vote. i am very proud of that. because i wanted to show washington, don't tell me it is gridlock. don't tell me you cannot get something done. when someone says we can't get it done, you are just saying you

don't have the political will and courage to do what you need to do to either push back on your own party, work with people on the other side. it doesn't mean you compromise your principles as a conservative, you understand there are bigger issues sometimes. you have to think locally. i got my legislature to think globally as a state. prof. sesno: let's now travel from your state new hampshire to washington. where you said you have to give a little. now i have a chief executive who is executive ordering a lot and giving nothing. it is likely fast and furious. banning birthright citizenship, blowing up usaid, firing inspectors general, booting the president and board of the kennedy center, granting pardons for violent criminals. i am not done. doge, elon musk with access to files, sensitive data, pulling

research contracts that have already been signed, firing federal workers. he is not giving anything. mr. sununu: you have not explained why the other side doesn't like that. prof. sesno: you just explain how you got bipartisan support, by engaging the other side. if you republican criticizes trump, never mind a democrat, he doesn't talk to him ever. mr. sununu: a couple things. the process to talk to democrats is when it all comes to congress. prof. sesno: congress, what's that? serious. this is a conversation we are going to have about whether there is a congress at this point and what role they had in checks and balances. mr. sununu: he is telling doge, doge technically doesn't have much power at the end of the day other than to say we are going through the executive orders and saying we are going to review and realign it agencies are going to disappear. they are going to bring all

these recommendations to congress. we can take any of these agencies plus a whole lot more. they are all going to be completely put under the microscope and say you need to come back and justify why you need to exist. justify what the value is for america. and congress will have to do most of the actual heavy lifting. what is it, a couple vote margin in congress? they are going to have to give a little to get a lot. i don't know whether that can or will happen but that will be the process, no question about it. even trump has said that, we know we are going to have to work with congress. prof. sesno: do you offer any advice to this president about the damage that is done in the short term with a mad dash through the executive orders? there is food that is not being delivered to hungry people waiting and die. mr. sununu: i love and hate it at the same time.

i love that he is fundamentally doing it. let's deal with congress. this is congress's job. asking departments to be accountable to themselves. they have done nothing. i am not talking nothing the past couple years. republicans and democrats equally have been buffoons for 20-plus years. i would go back to 1998 since the last balanced-budget. they complete derelict of duty and have not done their job. trump is saying you had 25 years, that's it. now i'm going to bring in a group and we are going to go hard and fast and bring a lot of recommendations, we are going to do everything under the sun that people have talked about but have not had the courage to do, and bring it to congress. but we're doing this because you haven't and i would argue the reason this is happening is because congress did nothing for 25 years. there would not be a need to do this. not only are they finding efficiency, the amount of fraud

and corruption is staggering. prof. sesno: how do you know that? how do you know that? mr. sununu: you think there is not? prof. sesno: i am sure there is fraud and corruption. i know there is inefficiency. but the process that is happening here, and as a journalist, i have covered this through the years, when your father was white house chief of staff. by the way you mentioned the balanced-budget they had, the reason they did is because george h.w. bush, who said read my lips no new taxes, raised taxes. probably why he lost reelection. it was so they would be a balanced-budget down the line. that was a negotiation, somebody giving and getting. mr. sununu: i am not here to apologize for elon and trump. i will say this. let me back up. let's do a thought experiment. what if they came out and said i

am giving six months and we are going to tear this apart and in six-month who will give you a report and it didn't say anything for six months? there would be very little criticism. they would say they are working on something. to their credit, they are going hard and fast and talking about what they are doing literally every step of the way, which opens them up for massive criticism, some of it rightly so. even elon the other day said we are going to make mistakes. we are going to break some eggs. but there's a lot of eggs to be broken. prof. sesno: what is the rightly so criticism? you said criticism, rightly so. what is it? mr. sununu: i think they are being too abrupt. when they get rid of usaid -- by the way, they didn't get rid of it. they should have said something like this. x billions of dollars go to usaid, we think we can reallocate $5 million to $7

million back to fighting firefighters and disasters. we are going to re-appropriately mishandled dollars back to america and we are going to figure out where those agencies or sub departments need to be restructured. as opposed to saying we are getting rid of this and this and this. it is not too fast but it is too hard. i don't mind getting rid of the employees though. prof. sesno: let's talk about that. can we have the house lights for a minute? i want to ask the audience a question. students in the room, could you raise hands again? how many of you -- you are here at washington, d.c., how many of you are considering some -- or were considering some form of public service for a career? you did that too as governor. are they wrong? mr. sununu: no. why would 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. [indiscernible] what has more impact in your life, president trump or a local nonprofit? . prof. sesno: you are posing a question here, and that is very good because we talked to a student who addressed this. i think she is in the room. we talked to her earlier about the people part and what is going on, both the research and where people in the file government. take a look at what she said. >> i have heard the fear, i have seen the fear and my friends currently doing research. my roommate is doing research on environmental policy.

the administration just decided to come out of the paris climate agreement. so it is a very troubling time and very disappointing. as a federal employee, i have worked my entire life to serve my country, and seeing how people like me are now being completely disregarded for the work that we do, which is extremely valuable, it is really disheartening and sickening. prof. sesno: thank you. [cheers and applause] talk to her for a minute. no, let me set this up. roommate who is doing research. [indiscernible] mr. sununu: we can talk about

the environmental peace first. [indiscernible] -- is costing the country massive amounts of money. i would argue the u.s. does a phenomenal job and we keep making huge investments in terms of being responsible, rather it is through emissions or whatever it is. other countries that signed on to that agreement are putting up 50 coal factories a year with no accountability. prof. sesno: they are also racing ahead with electric vehicles and renewable energy. mr. sununu: they are an environmental disaster. a disaster. compared to this country, not even close. people are saying this is completely unfair. we are doing our best, and it is no enforceability so we will move on. it is not that the work is completely devalued in terms of what these employees are doing or the research is doing.

i could pick out a lot of things they are cutting where i would say ok, it is interesting but is it worth the dollar? this gets back to the heart of what i am all about which is fiscal responsibility. we owe $36 trillion. does the government oh $36 trillion? no. you owe $36 trillion. you owe that money. for every dollar that goes to pay down that $36 trillion that is hours you worked away from your family, the sacrifice and blood sweat and tears you put into the system. it is a real number. this is not an imaginary number. you could pay a hundred dollars a second for 30,000 years -- no, 11,000 years, and that gets to how much we lp it is not that you are not valued. there are only -- only so many dollars in the tail because congress has screwed this up for 25 years. they let us go into such debt.

it puts our entire economy in such a weak position. we have to make tough choices and prioritize. that project or that organization or that agency, the financial consumer protection bureau let's use as an example. that was created after 2008. completely duplicative and accountable to nobody. the fdic or the sec or the credit union association, they have a lot of these rules and stuff in place and they can do a lot of the work this bureau currency -- currently does. they are the judge, jury and execution by the way. they are not accountable to congress or anybody, they just make the rules up as they got. we can save a lot of the money and move on. doesn't mean the work those individuals are doing is not valued but if it is duplicative or we can have -- [indiscernible]

it is not easy, it is painful. [indiscernible] prof. sesno: i looked this up. congressional research service lists 10,887 federal government employees, workers in new hampshire district one. an 8049 and district two. are you ok if half of them are fired? mr. sununu: yes absolutely,. the government is not here to keep you employed. let me back up. prof. sesno: when you are employed, you expect some process on transparency. you just get your head lopped off? i have laid people off. we had a process. we had a process. is there a process here? mr. sununu: in new hampshire i cannot just keep borrowing money because i have to have a balanced budget. when the revenues don't come in or things don't match, i have to

let people go. the city and our federal government has gotten away with we don't have to let anybody go. but you really do. unfortunately it is coming to a head at the same time. prof. sesno: what about people like her and others who don't feel valued, don't feel respected because of the language that says all of you are worthless? mr. sununu: the process is too hard. i don't mind speed. that is where my hope -- and this is what i think is going to happen. i might be proven completely wrong. my hope is this. we are only 30 days in. as of four days ago, doge is starting to put out the receipts and proof of what they are doing. we can go back and forth and see it. maybe will agree on it or not. my guess is they will have a report to congress, the first of money, and say here is our first phase report and here is the

backup and the information. the reason i got into the argument with anderson cooper he was like, where is the proof? whoa whoa whoa. give them credit. if they don't provide proof should be held accountable. i get it, these are individuals and jobs and families. but at the end of the day a couple things. we have a strong economy. you don't do it because people can find another job. it does not mean they are not valued. congress is going to have to make tough decisions about who stays and who goes, something they have not been willing to do. it is the perfect storm of problems where a lot of people all at once are going to lose their job. that is the real answer here. we should be decentralizing washington. people complain about the department of education. i think it is great that we might get rid of it. i believe strongly in education. but someone has yet to explain to me what is the value add for the department of education? prof. sesno: to look across the

country and say there is a quality of access, that people with disabilities are being -- mr. sununu: you think governors don't do that? prof. sesno: i think they do it very unevenly. mr. sununu: new hampshire is not california or mississippi or new york. i will use an extreme example. gavin newsom and i don't see eye-to-eye on a lot but i would argue he knows what california needs for education and the needs and where the value is more than anybody in washington, d.c. prof. sesno: isn't there a sense that the federal department of education is running things when in fact it isn't? what is it, 7% of funds that go to local school districts? mr. sununu: so why do they have 5000 employees? prof. sesno: right. school districts will be run by school districts. washington adds to that equation some degree of equity -- i know

that is a word we are not supposed to use now -- and some degree of oversight. mr. sununu: oversight? prof. sesno: his title ix -- mr. sununu: went washington has offered me additional grants for special education which we need desperately come every state now needs more money for special ed. leap hurdles and barriers it took for me to get that money that the red tape designed by washington made it so all the districts kept saying it won't work, don't even bring us this money because we have to send it back because we don't meet this weird standard set up by some congressman in arizona or whatever. my argument is this. every state knows what they need. if you want us -- let states that know what the needs are -- i would never tell massachusetts what they need. i can show by example what might be working new hampshire and all that but she knows.

prof. sesno: let me read a short bit from a story today about schools in local control. the education department, the trump education department, warned schools that they risk losing federal funding if they continue to take race into account when making scholarship or hiring decisions, or so much as not to race in every aspect of student, academic and campus life. let's say you are a school and you have a large group of young students from ethiopia. and you need to hire an ethiopian person to teach those kids speak that language, have someone there who looks like them. now you can't do that? now this education department is saying they are going to pull this funding. this is what they are saying. mr. sununu: the supreme court ruled on this that you cannot separate opportunity within education on race. prof. sesno: what they are saying is you may not take race

into consideration at all. in a case like this, lewiston, maine -- mr. sununu: [indiscernible] prof. sesno: what if you have a very diverse group of students and you have a lot of black students in you say we need to have some people here who look like them and can talk to them and relate. that is now not allowed? mr. sununu: they are saying it has to be on merit. that is a law. i don't know what to tell you. prof. sesno: aren't you talking about local control? should the principal and the community be able to make that decision? mr. sununu: i would argue a private institution can but a public institution is held to a completely different standard. prof. sesno: you just talked about why there should be local control. why isn't this an example? mr. sununu: the argument is is reverse racism. i am not making that argument. i am just telling you there is a clear argument of why that was

overturned in the u.s. supreme court. they didn't do it just because. i don't want to get into a race issue here but the supreme court said public institutions cannot do that. prof. sesno: so now you say -- by the way, it is not just public institutions according to what we are hearing and seeing. it's the trump administration saying any institution taking any money. mr. sununu: i don't know the law. but that is likely the basis. prof. sesno: do you think we have overdone it with this whole conversation about dei? you signed a bill where you embraced dei. you walked away from it later. but we are a very diverse society. why shouldn't we embrace that and explain that to people who are in more diverse environments? mr. sununu: when i created my dei commission it was great and worked wonderfully. prof. sesno: 2017. c --

mr. sununu: [indiscernible] we created a commission that would hire folks and just talk about the issues that were out there. how to be sensitive to certain things. and it worked really well and we got that out there and it performed its duty. there is no question that dei as it is defined in 2024 is completely different. prof. sesno: how so? mr. sununu: it has become a political whistle. there is no question about that. that if you don't have this, then you are canceled, then you are excluded, then you cannot be part of our system have to have it. you have to have it or you don't get funding. college and universities get scored on it now where they don't get certain funding. that is not right. prof. sesno: if we are going to talk about cancel culture, we

have a cancel culture now like we have never had where people are being fired, funded as being restricted, agencies are being shut down, whole boards are being thrown out. we talked about cancel culture before. but we are firing people now. mr. sununu: cancel culture as we talk about it as he woke as he woke is a man cancel culture, it is all based on i am by what you say, i don't agree with what you say i'm going to cancel it. what you are talking about is we don't have the money or the dollars in these efforts and we can do it another way. those are two very separate things as opposed to i'm offended i your language so i'm going to cancel you. prof. sesno: except now we have you are fired. they are certainly being fired. they are being fired because they did their jobs before to investigate. mr. sununu: i don't know these

individual cases. they are saying you introduced politics in an apolitical -- i don't mind them looking at it. there was the couple that were texting. it works on both sides. prof. sesno: if you were going over to have coffee or whatever beverage with president trump right now to talk about dei -- mr. sununu: what am i going to say about that? prof. sesno: that is what i was going to ask you. the example you gave in the reason you signed the bill is a great example where there is a

police force dealing with a racial issue where they do not understand it. they need to train just like we need to train the workforce. yet we are banding even the words dei across government. what is the proper calibration? mr. sununu: if a local state or government wants do something on dei, they want to set up a commission, have at it. great, that's fine. the federal government has every right to say we are not going to measure you on that and fund you on that and we are not going to cancel you on that. prof. sesno: but that is exactly what they are doing. you received federal funding -- mr. sununu: this is not just their opinion, this is the supreme court. prof. sesno: no. that is a different thing. that is at the level of hiring. i have talked to private corporations who have said we are dropping the terms dei and we are not even going to use the

words. mr. sununu: that is their choice. prof. sesno: that is not their choice because federal contracts are now in jeopardy. mr. sununu: you think companies are dropping dei programs because they will lose federal grants? prof. sesno: absolutely. mr. sununu: that is their choice. has anyone said if you keep dei your cancel and you cannot work for the government? that has never been said. prof. sesno: there is no dei in the government anymore, so it is not an issue. mr. sununu: if disney wants a dei program, they can. no one has said if you had a dei program you cannot have a contract with the government. has someone said that? prof. sesno: it is certainly out there. i have talked to senior executives in government, who have come to the universities by the way. there are programs at universities so that universities can accommodate the diverse populations, students, faculty, staff, and others they

have been a way that builds a sense of community. mr. sununu: again, i'm not apologizing for this administration. i am just saying if folks want to do something at a local level i'm a big believer that they should be able to. the government has every right to say we are not funding into that. should people be excluded? no. i am not saying that. prof. sesno: another topic for you to offer your advice to the president on. because i'm really interested in this. this is on climate change. the federal government as we heard is walking away from some research, from the paris climate accords. also, telling people to go through their language in government agencies and remove references to these things. there are pages that are now down from noaa and other agencies where they do this research. i went to the new hampshire

department of sciences homepage and it says research indicates the concentration of greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide, has seen unprecedented increase due to the combustion of fossil fuels and urbanization of natural areas. adding more heat trapping gases to the atmosphere is causing global temperatures to increase, causing changes to the earth's climatic system resulting in more variable and extreme weather conditions. that is on your website. mr. sununu: yeah. that was done by a unh study. prof. sesno: right. [indiscernible] mr. sununu: because i disagree with it it should not be on the government website? come on. prof. sesno: but you see what is happening at these places where research is being done. so again, you are having a conversation with the president. what should the federal government doing and saying about climate change? mr. sununu: very little. just generally speaking, the

climate is changing. it is not the end of the world. it is not the catastrophe folks have made it out to be. look, i spent my career doing this. i was the environmental engineer, i went to m.i.t. believe me. [indiscernible] prof. sesno: not feet. half the state isn't under. mr. sununu: 2.5 millimeters per year. prof. sesno: ok. mr. sununu: if you are arguing we should spend billions of dollars we haven't lost any coastline -- [indiscernible]

prof. sesno: people can barely afford it. mr. sununu: i have a coastline. everyone in the houses in new hampshire has insurance. prof. sesno: you are not in the bullseye. go to florida. mr. sununu: you think the coastline is eroding in florida caster then new hampshire? it goes up and down at the same levels. prof. sesno: insurance companies have calculated the risk and they are charging you for it. they are price gouging. mr. sununu: [indiscernible] prof. sesno: a lot of the climate messaging has happened. stream weather has increased.

droughts and wildfire and heat has hit new levels. extinctions are taking place. ice loss is dramatic. mr. sununu: i would argue that. prof. sesno: what is the price tag on the extreme weather we have had? mr. sununu: you want to argue price tag versus climate change? prof. sesno: when i am saying is there is attributional science that connect these things. mr. sununu: [indiscernible] prof. sesno: i am asking where

do we go now because this administration is and has said it's a hoax. this is a drill, baby, drill administration. mr. sununu: climate is not a hoax. prof. sesno: what is the green new deal? i don't even know what that is. mr. sununu: [indiscernible] who gets hurt by energy bills? most of us can pay. but an elderly couple can't.

it is almost unpayable. why is it that when i bring hydropower down from canada, if the plans are too big they don't get renewable energy credits. don't tell me they are not gaming this system with massively high prices. i was an environmental consultant. do you know how much money we made? it's a scam. it's insanely expensive. you have to say we will address climate change but let's do it through the lens of those who have to pay the bill. that's it, it is give and take on all of this in the cost is a serious issue when you have a country that is 36 trillion in debt. prof. sesno: i want to say this before we move on, yes, the cost

is an issue and yes the country is in debt but let's think about how much money, taxpayer money over the years has gone to fossil fuel companies to let them drill and support their businesses and appreciate the amount of money they put -- when you talk about government money wasted, and let's say something else -- if we are going to transition to another energy infrastructure, it's going to take massive amounts of time, money and investment and innovation. that's happening and it's very exciting, some of it is owned by china right now because the chinese government is investing like crazy in solar panels, batteries. mr. sununu: coal plants, 50 coal plants per year. prof. sesno: that's not what i'm talking about, i'm talking about the future. mr. sununu: you think china cares about the environment of future of the planet? 50 coal plants per year? prof. sesno: we could and we

should do this again and just talk about this but i want to go to congress and the republican party. in the world of checks and balances, what role should congress have in your view? mr. sununu: a huge role. prof. sesno: we will -- mr. sununu: the role of congress and that usual branch are key. former president said this to me. what are we gonna do, leaders, the next president, it's all about money and gerrymandering and he said chill out. he said -- come and go but america's institutions are strong. in his right. prof. sesno: are you talking about anybody in particular? [laughter] mr. sununu: i am, he had a thick texas accent. he said a this is the only

country in the free world where our parliament -- congress if you will, is elected completely separate from the executive. in those countries, parliament picks the prime minister and we don't. we keep our present completely separate from the legislative branch and we are one of the only places that does set for the purpose of checks and balances. we keep our judicial completely separate. folks get nominated or not nominated on politics of course and that's why the pendulum goes back and forth. but the fact we have the checks and balances that virtually no other country has a -- don't forget the institutions are strong. i'm gonna go way back, bear with me. we went through a civil war that tore the country apart but congress, the presidency, the judicial branch, federalism or the states have the ultimate say, it stood strong. we went through world war i and world war ii, the civil rights movements where resource america's greatest leaders literally assassinated in front

of our eyes. think about that. jfk, rfk, martin luther king jr.. people said the american experiment is over and we had a right to panic but we stood strong and came back from it. we went through not, through a pandemic and the institutions fundamentally are sound. i would argue we have other things that are infecting those institutions. i think we need campaign-finance reform, term limits, i think we should not vote for anybody who agrees with those things. gerrymandering is hard to put back in the bottle but it's a fundamental problem. at its core, sometimes democrats run congress, sometimes republicans. it's a really good thing and it means at the end of the day we swing back and forth, you have to on it and get something done, you have to cross the aisle. i think we've lost a little of

that the last 10 years but are institutions are very sound, very strong and will carry the day alternately. we will go through some pain like now. paying off $36 trillion in debt will be really hard. there's no easy way to do it but you cannot ignore it. these buffoons have ignored it and you should be really angry about that. you want to dislike trump, i don't care, you want to dislike elon musk, i don't care. we were talking earlier, if barack obama was doing what trump is doing. and let's say it was george soros instead of elon musk. oh my god, what is he doing? prof. sesno: why are you not saying that about elon musk? mr. sununu: i would be right in saying i'm trying to take the personality out of it and look at the purpose of what they are doing.

i don't think they are doing it because they don't like democrats. i think democrats would say we've got to cut something. they put out a tweet where obama had a great speech in the beginning of his first term were he said we are going to get rid of departments and be efficient and get this under our control because finances are out of control. they all talked a good game, they have the right idea, these are smart people, but they didn't have the right pieces in place to fulfill it. people are upset but somebody has to pay. this is about dollars and cents. don't get emotional -- it's hard not to because we take it personal in some ways. there will be massive programs in my own state of new hampshire, massive layoffs, but at the end of the day if we don't get finances under control, that's how the experiment ends. not because of congress and the presidency but because we ignore the cost of all of this -- how much did we pay in interest this year? prof. sesno: around 36 trillion?

mr. sununu: in interest. our budget is about $6.5 trillion and one trillion of that is just interest. seven or eight years that goes to $1.8 trillion in interest. can you imagine what we could find with medicare and medicaid and all of these other programs if we had been smaller -- heads -- have been smarter 20 years ago? they are sing we gotta get our fiscal house in order. in eight years, social security goes bankrupt. medicare goes bankrupt. the interest rate goes to 1.8 trillion good our spending is still rising year-over-year so $36 trillion in total debt goes to $42 trillion in total debt and it's a car crash of finances. they are trying to get some control over, trying to do it hard and fast and say congress you better get your act

together, we will give you ideas and we hope you act on them. it's not pleasant -- why doesn't this happen in the states? we all have to live by -- prof. sesno: i want to ask another question of the audience. the students in the room, how many of you think you may not have social security when you retire? mr. sununu: that sucks. that sucks. that's awful. should have social security when you retire. prof. sesno: which means there has to be hard decisions. a lot of it was made by your dad and the presidents. there will be surprises. we are running down on time and i want to get to some audience questions. i want to ask about the republican party in the changes in the republican party and where it stands. this administration has turned republican orthodoxy on its head. mr. sununu: traditional, yeah.

i am a catholic reagan republican so i get frustrated. prof. sesno: immigration used to be talked about in glowing terms. ethan, we talked to him earlier, he's a political science major and is vice president of student government here and he had an observation about people changing their positions. let's role that video. ethan: with usaid we saw a lot of republicans especially in the senate that last year tweeted about how important usaid was and this year apparently it's fraudulent and full of scams. prof. sesno: usaid or anything else, what about what it means to be republican? mr. sununu: those are two separate questions. usaid, a lot of folks don't know what it really did.

they saw some key programs that are beneficial and are great and will likely stay and they are tweeting how wonderful it is. they are opening their eyes to the programs they didn't realize were in there. there's so much spending that if we went to the list you would be like i don't think we need to do that. there are a lot of things we do internationally on health. i think a lot of that will come back into play. they put the ebola money and aid money back in the pure -- back in. get out the vote, $26 million in small you, maybe not the best use. a lot of folks are saying we didn't realize this was in there because it was a because i government agency that didn't have to report every line item. i wouldn't call that a changing of position, i think they are aware some things need to be realigned. on the republican party, donald trump is a lifelong democrat, he was right until he was a

republican. i'm a pro-choice republican and now he's a pro-life republican, go figure. i will never explain why people change positions. i'm a big believer you have to be true to your values and i don't mind if people change positions, just explain it. nothing too major. i wanted this story come back and i realized it's can affect the communities in the negative way i didn't see, i will pull back good is not so much changing a position but maybe we have to be more measured about how we go about it and more strategic. i'm not gonna justify congress, i can justify, you want to talk changing positions, how about democrat party that in 2009 where hillary clinton stood up and said if you are illegal and you commit a crime you are out of this country? never would have said defund the police. never would've said some of these extreme things and 15

years later they're talking about defunding the police, open borders, everyone gets to stay. don't say republicans are guilty of changing positions when democrats -- i would argue this. someone came to me in the media and said why do you think the country has gone more conservative to let trump win? i set the countries where it's always been. trump won the race to be sure but it was more of a loss by the democrats, right? there are working-class americans, lifelong democrats that said we are done with this party, we are done. i knew trump was going to win six months ago. it wasn't because i hoped, it's because i saw two key numbers nobody wanted to talk about. he was definitely going to get more african-american voters and more latino voters than any republican in history. prof. sesno: doubled his african american boat and latinos 47%.

mr. sununu: if you do that in you translate to places like atlanta, philadelphia, detroit, you saw where the swing states were going to go. the mainstream media didn't want to look at that i kept saying don't look at the national poll numbers, it doesn't mean anything, look at the subtext. the subtext of a conversation is working-class americans said to the democrat party we are not more conservative, we are the same hard-working americans, but you left us. i was strongly argue and i think the proof is the selection, the democrat party changed their philosophy far more than republicans. trump is trump but in terms of a party and where are they now -- the demo cap party will fix itself, will figure out who their leader is and what their priorities are. they are not getting there quickly. why are comes numbers going up? because americans say we might not like the guy, his approach,

but somebody in washington is finally doing something. prof. sesno: one correction, 538 shows these numbers fairly stable at about 49% approval. the number that has gone up is the disapproval number, aggregate polling up about three or four points over three weeks. mr. sununu: just reporting that cnn said he had the highest net positive approval maybe 10 days ago. it may have changed since then but i'm telling you. his numbers are strong. prof. sesno: the numbers are very set. mr. sununu: if six month ago you so what trump was going to do in his first month would you believe he had such strong approval? prof. sesno: there was an interesting piece in the wall street journal, they talked to swing voters and some are very much still trump, some people said if i had known he was going

to do this i would have voted for harris. it's worth watching the next three to six months. i want to go to audience questions. some came in, you can raise your hand. i have a prep -- question from our president. she said you have universities that have been in the spot of higher education, one of the greatest benefits of having strong research universities in your state? as the governor of a state. mr. sununu: theoretically a lot of the research that comes out of universities, other businesses tie impudent did research about regenerative medicine manchester, and history is the heart of that right now in america. we are building a factory to literally grow hearts, lungs and

amazing things, it's so cool. that comes out of being near the research. prof. sesno: research money comes from where? mr. sununu: the federal government, private -- yeah. prof. sesno: so maybe if you're talking to trump you could talk about that. mr. sununu: the nih stuff? this is where i think trump has missed the mark, he didn't message this right. willie have a federal contract, it says you could take eight to 12% for overhead and profit. it's a limit to make sure no contractor in america can bilk the system. the nih grants, for everyone million dollars that goes in on average, only half a million gets put to the r&d and the other goes to overhead and salary.

should 850,000 go to r&d? that's what it should be, is not designed to keep your staff employed. is designed to go into research and development. prof. sesno: you have to keep the lights on and by the microscopes. mr. sununu: and 15 is enough. prof. sesno: says who? mr. sununu: all the other contractors that take the same amount. why should universities get 50% when deloitte it's 9%? prof. sesno: the light doesn't run laboratories. mr. sununu: they have employees and lights to keep on. prof. sesno: do they have laboratories to the extent that the research is being done -- mr. sununu: $850,000 goes to laboratories, it doesn't go to the salaries. 15% does but it's more generous than the average government contract. all the nih is saying you have to put money to research, not staff. prof. sesno: the move to 15%

turned off the lights and made the research not possible. is that the outcome we should want because we are a fiscal hawk? mr. sununu: if the move to 15% has that result in we will see if it does, congress can come back and revisit the rules but the nih has thrown out the federal government rules and said we are going to play by our rules and universities can spend as they want on staff. you can't. should we let everybody spend 50% on overhead? why are universities treated differently? everybody has to play by the same rules. want to change rules, go to congress and change rules. there is a process to do that. prof. sesno: arbitrarily this decision came arbitrarily, perhaps it had been better. mr. sununu: is not arbitrary, everybody plays by the same rules. prof. sesno: it is arbitrary, some are negotiated at different

levels, one day after things were signed, -- mr. sununu: 50% is defined in the rules and we are saying you have to play by the same rules as your buddy else. prof. sesno: after funny grants have been approved -- mr. sununu: i agree, if funding grants have been approved they have to go forward, i have no problem, but understand the goal is to put money in research, not staff and why would anyone complain without? the university might not like it because they can hire more staff but let's put into research. prof. sesno: they would argue we could invite people to do this. is the staff necessary to support the research. mr. sununu: universities are using students for half of their staff. are they paying students the giant salaries the deloittes of the world have to pay? i would argue universities have cheaper staff.

play by the same rules as ever buddy else. maybe they should pay students as much as they pay the experts at a government contractor. prof. sesno: that will keep tuition down. mr. sununu: don't get started with that university heavy abused you guys in terms of tuition the last 25 years. why has it gone up at three times the rate of inflation since 2000? no one has ever asked that question and got a straight answer. i know it is. the government took over the long process, everyone could get a loan and there was no incentive for universities they keep numbers down because everyone was, get money. it kept building and building. who gets screwed? you guys. why does this university go up three times the inflation rate of any business in america, explained that. ask your present -- your president. i'm pretty piston about it. prof. sesno: it does stink.

what people pay does not cover the cost of what the education and the institution cost to run. mr. sununu: i don't know about gw but at unh we said we are going to cut out the fat and restructure our university staff contracts and that sort of thing and make sure we are getting what we pay for. if we have to cut some basket weaving classes we will do it. prof. sesno: come on now. mr. sununu: i don't think there are basket weavers in here, maybe there are. i make sure we aligned our degrees with the workforce need as opposed to just what the university wanted to do to make the process more efficient. my eight years as governor, unh, frozen tuition for eight years. prof. sesno: in-state or everybody? mr. sununu: for everybody. i don't know if you can say the same thing, it's hard. at the end of the day you and your families have to pay.

you know what to seven gate 12 was? -- 278.12, that's what we had to pay me and my wife and we got off easy, you will be paying student loans forever. it's really wrong. when they say they will get rid of your student loan, that just makes the cost of the universities go higher. is no incentive for them to drop the amount if they think the federal government is going to pay your loans off. my biggest argument is this, you guys should be mad and i don't know why you're not mad. your parents should be mad, you should demand and ask these questions. i was in new york last weekend, touring nyu, it's over $100,000 a year. it was $22,000 a year 22 years ago and it's gone up of four times.

prof. sesno: inflation does not measure the cost of running an institution like this could same thing with health care. mr. sununu: why should this be different than a dairy queen or business? prof. sesno: they are not doing what dairy queen does, which is to make ice cream? let's go to other questions on the floor. do we have a microphone someplace. stand up please and introduce yourself and we are running a little over. mr. sununu: i will stay as long as you want, i'm having a great time. >> i'm from your state, from sunapee, and i'm curious to know why you disagree a lot about government funding from certain local projects. to what extent should state government or federal government pay into local communities to stimulate economic growth.

in sunapee we have a boat ramp that's been broken for years and years. our select board has failed to fix it. linda tanner in concord and your budget has tilde fix it, the state government has failed to fix it, to what extent does the buck stop and we stop the bleeding? mr. sununu: i literally know the boat ramp you are talking about. we put all money into fixing it, the locals couldn't decide how to do it. some locals one of the boat ramp here, some wanted to rebuild the one here, some didn't want this one because of the smelt issue. the environmentalists got involved. the funding was there. we did a grant program -- i will make up a number of want to say about 52 cities and towns took advantage of a local grant program to rebuild boat ramps. sunapee just couldn't get their act together. i'm not blaming them but there

is a local battle issue going on good a lot of folks didn't want tourists from the outside coming in. the public has to have access. rich guys on the lake didn't want the public to have access. i'm all for giving grants but the locals have to figure out how to do it. i'm not throwing sunapee under the bus -- it's funny you come from sunapee, it's a great town but they can never quite figure it out. we invested in local theaters, we rebuilt local theaters during covid because we were basically open when everyone else shut down. we invested our dollars back into business and cities and towns. it's a hugely important effort. that's kind of my key argument with what's happening in washington. washington is not in charge of the government, the states are. the 50 states are. they should have the final say. if the government wants to give

grants and opportunity, great, if it to california and let california do what they want with it. give it to new hampshire. it wasn't designed to be everybody is the same. this isn't a democracy, it's a republic. democracy is the act of voting but we live in a republic where states and local should have more control, the control should decrease up the ladder and that's why new hampshire is successful. i have republicans try to pass a bill especially after covid, they said if local school boards do xyz, we will tell them they can do it. local control is paramount. that's when parents get involved. when the state takes over control of some thing and tells you you were doing it wrong, that's where the system breaks down. the best thing you can do is let locals fail. what i mean is it's like your

kids. you learn by making mistakes, not by your parents "fixing" everything. that's how you become better and stronger and have checks and balances work. sometimes if a local district did something, who knows best for what's in that local school? the governor or the parents and teachers? they are the voters. give them the control. sometimes it will work and sometimes it will but they will figure it out. if something doesn't work they will change and they can change faster at the local level. some will do great, some will do great, sumwalt, and up here you have to have certain rules and regulations at the state level but new hampshire is fundamentally different from all 50 states. a little bit the same. politically it's very different. it's ok to let locals make mistakes because that's where empowerment is. the key to all this is letting

the individual have the control government is not here to solve your problems but to create opportunity. prof. sesno: one of the interesting arguments around this is when you have local control you can have very unequal outcomes. mr. sununu: that's ok. prof. sesno: mip ok and less you say i am low income and -- mr. sununu: you have a town meeting and vote on your taxes in the curriculum at school. prof. sesno: it's an interesting philosophical conversation about what responsibility society has to address inequality. states rights obviously was the argument that propelled slavery for years. that's what that was built -- mr. sununu: slavery was around before states rights, states rights kept it longer. that's what you are saying. prof. sesno: we now have a patchwork of access to

reproductive care based on states decisions. you can end up creating very unequal outcomes. mr. sununu: that's ok, sometimes unequal is ok. there are fundamental human rights, slavery and all of these things, the government is primarily for health and safety and beyond that you should question why it is involved. you should question why bigger government is involved and wanted held at a local level. prof. sesno: let's get to another question pugh an interesting one from lyle greenfield, an author, he wrote a book called uniting the states of america. he set i have some questions and i set fire away. he made reference to the last guest we had, which was governor spencer cox of utah. lyle asks, healthy conflict for

a better policy wrote, there is an exhaustive majority of americans discouraged by the ugliness of politics today, the divisiveness undermines success as a nation and hurts our relationships, we have to find a way to disagree better. what lyle asked is have you seen any difference in the way your colleagues interact with each other? mr. sununu: i wouldn't say i've seen a difference since it was put in place but all 50 governors pretty much get along. we are not like congress -- i call kathy hochul him and ask for ideas, i bumped into any number of governors -- jb pritzker and i disagree on everything and we can be tough, no doubt. but during covid we were banging ideas back and forth and he had good ideas governors work together very well. we disagree all the time and the

more local, i know you're probably tired of hearing me say this come up with the more local you keep the decisions, the better along everybody gets because of got to fight those issues with my neighbor. i fight on the issue, not the personality the more you go national it becomes personality driven. i don't like trump or elon musk and i don't like what they do, i don't like barack obama, i don't like george soros, don't like what they are doing. that's the problem. you got to have the courage and empathy to take the personality out of the situation and say at the core what a refund of mentally getting? i think obama did really good things. biden was a super nice guy. i think he was a very sweet guy. horrible president but a very sweet guy. i worked very hard to separate that out. i think at a local level we do it and nationally, for when talking about national politics, that's where there is no since of accountability to that. prof. sesno: let's go to another

question on the floor. >> one of the questions is, you keep talking about separating the person and what they believe would when you look back to january 6 and those type of things that people believe in, like pro-choice or pro-life, how can you separate those actions from the actual person? i think about people who are so gung ho and supportive of january 6, i can't associate myself with them. mr. sununu: that's ok. >> how you talk about separating that, how do you separate that from the person? prof. sesno: before you answer that, can i ask you for the next question let's up ethan fitzgeralds that we have on tape. mr. sununu: let's use generate six as an example, a terrible day, the president had a lot to do in inciting that it was awful.

i'm not talking about the personalities involved, it was wrong and bad and a mistake. it was completely inappropriate. on that one, just focus on the issue. maybe i'm different because i'm a governor. i have a responsibility to 220 cities and towns, all of the people whether they voted for me or not. i don't know your situation or your family's background, i don't know your business's problem. i'm not here to solve your problems what i can do is create as many doors of opportunity as possible. when government says i'm going to be one-size-fits-all and education is a great example, you have to fit in this box, and for 98% of the kids it's fine. for 2% it could be a disaster. let the families have some flexibility.

always focus on the issue and appreciating -- i'm not trying to say i'm not going to consider your personality, i'm trying to say i know nothing about your story and it could be tragic, it could have twists and turns, i don't know why you believe -- sometimes when i get in a political argument i will say tell me more, i'm not very at, keep talking. explain to me why you are there and i am not. the morning about your background, no i have an empathetic understanding of ok, i see why this person is passionate about xyz. i respect it might disagree with it in terms of policy and what to do but it is hard. i'm a very flawed human being. i'm sure you all believe that after this hour, i'm not perfect but i really try hard to enter these conversations with an empathetic year and i think if we all do that, generally the rising tide floats all boats. prof. sesno: let's take one last

question. you have ethan? there you are. let's listen. [video clip] >> i welcome disagreements, i disagree with my friends all the time. i think it's natural and part of life and i think how you respond is important. i try to listen and see the core issue because normally when you bring in names, whether it is donald trump or joe biden, kamala harris, when you stick to those names, it's hard to have a conversation. if you are like let's actually have a conversation about what is going wrong in the economy and you focus on those, i've seen in my conversations you can make progress. mr. sununu: you've got it. the only problem is he's a political science degree. prof. sesno: watch this space. leave us with a roadmap. leave us with your sense of how we navigate what is an

incredibly difficult time. mr. sununu: how many political science degrees? comedy want to going to public service? that's awesome. here's the road map. the best public service don't run for office right away. you have to have real-world experience. i mean that sincerely work for nonprofit, get a job, learn soft skills. learning office politics is really important for the bigger issues in terms of how to build teams, approach challenges, learn how to lose, because you will lose a lot and public service, you will not get what you want. you will be a social worker fighting hard for an abused kid and the judge sent them back with an abusive dad and he will drive you crazy -- i've seen it's only times. it will break your heart. but if you give up at that point

because you haven't built soft skills in life, it's really important to get a real job, don't just jump into politics. i think i do the political thing pretty well, i was an environmental engineer and i ran a business and i had 800 employees and my job was to make sure every one of my employs could bring home a paycheck. when god doesn't give you snow and you have 800 employees depending on the paycheck but no one came to ski, you are screwed. prof. sesno: back to climate change. [laughter] mr. sununu: you learn those type of struggles are important to be the best you can be when it comes to being in public service. i've seen a lot of folks in puppets service burnout too hard, too fast. i did it a little bit to my family, it's brutal on families.

it's noble, you should all do it, it's wonderful but there is a path and a strategy to be long-term successful. if you do that, a couple things happen. the most polarizing individuals sometimes just jump into politics without really understanding what it's about or the bigger picture. that's the best roadmap i want to leave people with in terms of getting along, disagreeing better, all those issues. it's about making sure your personal path is the path you want and you're setting yourself up for long-term success i believe collectively we can get there and it doesn't mean we will agree. i'm not trying to convince anybody of anything other than to have a strong cynicism of government. i'm from the government and i'm saying you should not by what we are shoveling and i mean that sincerely. that's why democracy is not eroding, it's so freaking strong. you have the final say.

ultimately the voters have the final say every time. the other side might win, but the voters have the final say and that institution itself -- it might be as polarizing as it's ever been before, it's as strong as it's ever been because the number of people that vote keep going out. we didn't get to lkbout participating in primaries. don't get discouraged. prof. sesno: is your definition of long-term success you want to run for president? mr. sununu: no. prof. sesno: are you done with politics? mr. sununu: probably. i will do the media thing, i am inspired to be frank senso someday. [laughter] we will see how long that lasts that i don't feel the need to be

the guy in charge. i worked with the biden administration and the trump ministration because it was with my states interest to do so. prof. sesno: i want to thank you for your time, if you have a question i'm sorry we couldn't get tomorrow. it's been fascinating. it's been interesting. it's hard to get a republican to come and speak publicly. mr. sununu: i see why. [laughter] i'm just kidding. [applause] prof. sesno: if you have a question, he is here, if not, have a great evening. >>he.s. postmaster general

s formed the postal board of governors he intends to step down from his role leading the he writes in p "i've worke tirelessly to lead the men and women of the postal sein acshing an extra ordinary trantion. we haveved the american people through an unprecedented pandemic andiod of higher education and sensationalized litics. our successful r delivering covid test gets to million households is only one testament to the superb work performed inheast five years on behalf of the american people." goes on to request the board of governors begin the process of selecting a new postmaster general. he was really tapped by president trump to lead the agency in 2008. >> all this week, watch c-span's new members of congress series

where we speak with republicans and democrats about their early lives, previous careers, families and why they decided to run for office. tonight, interviews include a montana republican congressman who paused his career in business to enlist in the air force after the september 11 attacks. >> i was moose hunting in alaska would have happened so i was one of the last people on the planet to find out about it. i didn't see it on tv, i got stuck because borders were closed, i couldn't fly over canada. as soon as i could get home, i walked into her recruiter's office and said i've got a pilots license, was a researcher at and why you, what can you do with me? >> watch new marissa congress all this week starting at 9:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> next, president trump announces new executive orders related to expanding accesso