i decided to go out and see if we could increase our hold on the market once again. and so what i did was i went around the country as well as in addition to passing the chips and science act, in fact visited countries around the world and two significant south korean companies decided they were going to invest billions of dollars in chip manufacturing in the united states. it was not designed to hurt china, it was designed so we didn't have to worry about whether or not we had access to semi conductors. supply chain, no one knew what you were talking about, now they all know and we lost access to the semiconductors in which new articles in the united states need 30,000 just to about i would a new automobile and didn't have them, so we started to invest here and when we

encouraged the investment through the chips and science act and now we have enormous investment in the united states. over $200 billion in long-term investment in semiconductors. and rebuilding the economy of the united states with those semiconductors. it's not designed to hurt china. the only thing i did say with regard to china, there are certain extremely sophisticated semiconductors that we have built that are useful for nuclear and/or other weapon systems. those we are not selling, we are not exporting to china or anyone else. and so that's the context in which this has all occurred. in the meantime, creating thousands of jobs and bringing back a sense of pride and dignity to so many towns in the country where all of a sudden over the last three decades we found out that factory -- had 600 people shut down. and the soul of the community was lost and so i made sure when the semiconductors were coming

back that they were not just going to go to the coast, they would be all over the country, and so we have a significant field of dreams outside of -- in ohio, outside of columbus, we are in texas, we are in arizona, anyway, all over the country. it's not viewed to hurt anyone else. we are providing access to those semiconductors, we are a supply chain you can count on but we are not, we are not going to sit back and be in position where we don't have access to those semiconductors. we are not going to be placed where we are the end of that line. we are the beginning of it. and generating significant economic growth in america and not hurting anyone. and by the way, it's creating jobs in -- in south korea. it's creating jobs in south korea, not just -- anyway, with samsung and other industries. so i think it's a win-win.

>> voice of translator: with regard to your question, let me provide your answer. korea and the u.s. based on its washington declaration are two countries have agreed to strengthen extended deterrent and implementation level is different than the past. first of all, ncg nuclear consultant group that has been launched to implement discussions and actions and hold regular meetings and consultations under ncg. we will share information on mutual nuclear assets and intelligence and we will jointly plan responses and also jointly

plan exercises and drills, and implementation plans. so all of these will be strengthened and specified under the nuclear consultative group. we want to customize our response against north korea's nuclear threat based on extended deterrent, and in the process of achieving this goal any concerns that koreans may have against north korea weapons will be relieved, i believe. if nuclear weapons are used, our two countries will strengthen our response in a swift manner. any further questions to me?

please. >> voice of translator: reporter from -- i have two questions for you. with regard to extended deterrents, the ncg that has been formed, how will korea function under ncg? any kind of nuclear equipped -- nuclear assets will be in function? and to president biden, korea is to maintain the mpg and strengthen intended -- do you think this is enough to guard korea against a north korean nuclear threat? thank you very much. >> voice of translator: well, let me address your question about the activities of the ncg.

we are going to be sharing information and we are going to be acting jointly, that is the key. i can't talk to the specifics right now about what type of information and what type of specific activities we will be conducting, but however under the nuclear umbrella our extended deterrent was a lot lower. so it's an unprecedented expansion and strengthening strategy under the washington declaration to create the ncg. implementation and the response, at this level has never thus far been this strong. so this is a new level of extended deterrence, much stronger, i can say can of confidence. >> the response i can give you, these kind of deterrents means that we are having more

consultation with whatever actions to be contemplated or taken, and we made it really very, very clear any -- formed confirmed the commitment to nonproliferation treaty and the washington declaration is a prudent step to reinforce extended deterrence to respond to the nuclear threat. nuclear attack by north korea against the united states or allies or partisans -- or partners is unacceptable and will result in the end of whatever regime were to take such an action and strengthening deterrent and behavior and complete consultation, and you know, the idea that i have absolute authority as commander in chief and the sole authority to use nuclear weapon, what the declaration means is we are going to make every effort to consult with our allies when

it's appropriate, if any action is so called for. certainly we have talked about this and some other things today, but the bottom line, there is even closer cooperation, closer consultation, and we are not going to be stationing nuclear weapons on the peninsula, but we will have visits to -- port visits of nuclear submarines and things like that, we are not walking away from that. my turn to ask a question? i think the next question is mary bruce, abc. >> thank you, mr. president. you recently launched your re-election campaign. you've said questions about your age are legitimate. and your response is always just watch me. the country is watching and recent polling shows 70% of americans, including a majority of democrats believe you shouldn't run again. what do you say to them? what do you say to those

americans who are watching and aren't convinced? you've said you can beat trump again. do you think you are the only one? >> i may not be the only one, but i know him well and i know the danger he presents to our democracy and we have been down this road before. and with regard to age, you know, and polling data, i noticed the polling data i keep hearing about is i'm between 42 and 46% favorable rating, etc., and but everybody running for re-election in this time has been the same position, nothing new about that. you are making it sound like biden is really underwater. and number one. number two, when the same polling data asked when they think what kind of job i've done, overwhelming positive results, 58, the chips act and the things we have done. we created, like i said, we

created 12 million new jobs. we have created 800,000 manufacturing jobs. we have economic growth moving. we are in a situation where the climate we have invested more money and more help in dealing with the climate crisis than any nation in the world. and so things are moving and the reason i'm running again is a job to finish. the other thing is that look, you know, think about what i inherited when i got elected. i inherited a nation and overwhelming debt at the time, number one, and the hole for the four years he was president. i inherited a nation that had a serious loss of credibility around the world as america first and the first meeting i attended at the g7 i said america is back and one of the world leaders looked and said for how long. it was a great concern about the united states being able to lead the free world and we are doing that again. and those same polls you look at, take a look at the polls

saying whether i pull together nato and european union as well as asian partners i think we have. but there's more to do and with regard to age, i can't even say -- i guess how old i am, i can't even say the number, it doesn't -- it doesn't register with me, and -- but the only thing i can say is that one of the things that people are going to find out, they are going to see a race and judge whether i have it or don't have it. i would expect them to take a hard look at it, i would as well, i looked at it before i decided to run, i think we are on the verge of turning the corner we have in a long time. we are at a flexion point, really are. what happens in the next 2, 3, 4 years, will determine what the next 2, 3, 4, decades look like, and never more optimistic in my life about the possibilities of

the united states. >> to be clear, you said i know him well. did donald trump's decision to run affect yours? would you be running if he wasn't? >> yeah, i think i still be running if he wasn't. i do know him well. he's not hard to know, as you know. you know him well, too. and the question is whether or not -- look, just -- there's more to finish the job. we have an opportunity to put ourselves in the position where we are economically and politically secure for a long time. look, we continue to have i know you don't like me to say it, still a contest between autocracy and democracy and we are the leading democracy in the world and something i know a fair amount about, something i care about and something that i have found a willingness in a lot of our allies and friends to follow. so i think we have to finish the job, nail it down. [inaudible]

>> voice of translator: you need to repeat the question, the mic was not used, we cannot interpret. >> they need to repeat the question. >> voice of translator: place use the microphone. we cannot provide interpretation if you do not use the microphone. >> my apologies, thank you. did president biden provide you assurances -- >> voice of translator: with

regard to that, we are communicating between our two countries and we are sharing necessary information. i believe that investigation is underway in the united states so various and complex variables are always in play. we need time to wait for the investigation results by the united states and we plan to continue to communicate on the matter. >> this will be the last question. >> voice of translator: i'm from financial news. my question goes to both of you. first one -- during the state visit you've said that the alliance has strengthened to cutting edge industries, to cutting edge science and also

investments in businesses have been some of the outcomes. some of the positives. to each individual of the public how will it have a long-term impact, what will be the direct benefit felt. and to president biden, in celebration of the 70th anniversary of the ialliance, because of the chips act businesses are on edge. what message can you send to the korean companies to make sure and tell them that this is not something to worry about? >> voice of translator: the technology cooperation between the rok and the u.s. and partnerships and cutting edge industries and science and technology was your first question. so, that is about really strengthening the competitiveness of our two countries. and it will enhance the

productivity and create added value, high added value. these are the types of products that are going to be produced and from the prospective of the public for each individual. in that process they will reap the benefits wide and comprehensive that will stem from these industries and investments in these industries, for example, from job creation as well. and above all, the future generations will be given the determination and will to take on new challenges and embrace opportunities in our industry so that they can continue to prosper and grow and become more abundant in the future. >> reassurances to do well, it is, it's very much in america's interest that korea do well in the pacific, very well. because they are one of our most valued partners, and so i think

the combination of growing democracies in the democratic institution as well as their economies, is overwhelming in the benefit of the united states, whether it is in south korea or it's in australia in the deep south pacific. and so i think that there's a reason overwhelming reason, plus in addition to that, we are increasing the number of student exchanges, access to more information between our folks, educating our people, as well as we are going to be cooperating in everything from space to technology to medicine and so so many opportunities we have and i don't think we, at least we don't, and i don't think so far, most of the south korean companies believe that there is somehow a u.s. effort to slow them down, prevent their growth, or anything like that. we would like to see them grow, and i mean that sincerely. it's overwhelming in the u.s. interest for south korea to do very well economically.

over whelming, and south korea says here you have a nation that is significant but not a nation of 2, 3, 400,000 people making the kind of exchanges it's making. it gives smaller countries with democratic institutions and cutting edge industries, new sciences and technology, a.i. and other things, there's a future for them and that's what this is about. we view south korea's economic growth as a benefit to the united states as well as freedom around the world. thank you all so very much. appreciate it. >> john: see if there are shouted questions, i doubt if they would answer them even if

they were there, because they agree to these things at the beginning, sandra, two questions. >> sandra: he is taking one here, let's listen. >> haven't figured out the debt limit yet. >> john: that's unusual. you don't see that very often. usually they agree to two questions a side and then walk away, he's back again. >> extended. that's not negotiable. i noticed a "reagan" they quote reagan all the time and trump, both said, i'm paraphrasing, absolute crime to not extend the debt limit. >> sandra: and to be clear, john, the republican plan is to extend the debt limit, right. and avoid default. so the premise there is -- would obviously the gop would take issue with. a remarkable moment there of touting success for the american economy at a moment when the

american people by an overwhelming majority in poll after poll are not giving him good marks. he referenced polls showing that he is, john, so that was a bit of a confusing moment. and on his age, saying he can't say the number, just doesn't register with him, he's 80 years old. >> john: you are as old as you feel some days we feel older than others. bring in marc thiessen, former speech writer for president bush, sandra's point there, call for number three, everybody says they like the job i'm doing. underwater, border security, way underwater, but most underwater on the flipping economy which is what presidencies are won and lost on. >> he thinks he's doing a great job and brought back the leadership on the world stage, inherited a world when america was in retreat.

he inherited four abraham accords, where is the 5th, it's not there, he has not done it. donald trump had trade deals with canada, mexico and south korea, the president of the country who he was standing with. where is the single trade deal joe biden -- no single agreement signed but he's bringing back international diplomacy and says finish the job? worst inflation in 40 years, worst border crisis in america history, worst crime wave since the 1990s, worst worker shortage, finish the job? people say? i don't want anymore crisis. can we have anything worse? >> sandra: and two-thirds of the country continue to say, and it is growing, they are living paycheck to paycheck. battling that inflation, i mentioned the moment he was asked about his age, after he

just announced his re-election bid, and here was that moment. >> i noticed the polling data i keep hearing about is that i'm between -- 42 and 46% favorable rating, etc., and but everybody running for re-election is the same position. nothing new about that. you are making it sound like biden is really underwater, number one. >> the record, 538 average of polls for presidents, you look at every president going back to harry truman, he has the lowest approval rating of any president going back to harry truman except every once in a while trump pulls ahead of him. the most unpopular president in the history going into the re-election. the only reason he has a chance of winning is because donald trump is less popular than he

is, and because people who disapprove of him, disapprove of trump more. 39% advantage of people who disapprove the both men. he's the least worst candidate from their perspective. >> john: so the south korean president visit here, the first in 12 years. president trump went to korea twice, i went with him, and the second time to the dmz, brings us full circle back around to trump's negotiations with kim jong-un and a heady time in the nation's history looked like south korea might be making some moves toward denuclearization. kim was cheating all the time but at least trump had him on the hook. he wiggled off the hook and doubling down on the efforts to go nuclear. >> very will chance trump would succeed, but he was trying. there was a brief pause in tests, but i don't think north korea was ever going to give up

the nuclear plans. so this is why it's so important. we have to -- what we have to do, deter them from using their nuclear weapons and also deter them from using their nuclear weapons as cover to carry out an invasion. so, what's the most important thing we can do to do that? succeeding in ukraine. what's happening in ukraine right now, russia is using its nuclear arsenal to try and deter us from helping conventionally to stop an invasion of its neighbor. and so if they succeed in that, what does north korea see? they see i should get icbms to reach the united states, i can invade south korea and the u.s. will not help them conventionally. and south korea will say if that's the case, i'm going to get nuclear weapons too and japan is going to say i'm going to get them too, and all of a sudden a nuclear arms race in the pacific and what else. iran will say well, i should get a nuclear weapon, then i can attack israel and the u.s. will

not come to the defense. and then a nuclear arms race in the middle east. it hangs on what happens in ukraine. stop a war on the korea peninsula, stop the invasion of taiwan, stop vladimir putin from using the nuclear arsenal to invade the neighbor. >> john: when you think about this at night do you ever get back to sleep? >> i sleep well. >> john: scary point. >> sandra: president biden was asked by a reporter would he be running for president again for another term if former president donald trump was not running. and he said i would still be running. what was your reaction to that? >> i mean, i think the reason why the rational for democrats why he is the candidate to go with is because they think he's the best position to beat trump, he's done it once in 2020 and a

proxy battle in the 2022 midterms defeated the trump hand picked candidates. he -- joe biden, i gave you that litany of the failures, disapproval rating of 54%. the best performance of the president in a midterm since john f kennedy except for bush after 9/11. it's not because they approved of biden, but think disapproved of the other one. it's going to be decided by a few hundred swing voters in five states. we have to find somebody to appeal to the people and 54% of the people who disapprove of joe biden, get them to vote for the republican candidate. >> john: probably going to be trump, isn't it? >> it may be, but -- at this point in 2016, jeb bush was the bygone favorite for the nomination. lots of things can change. >> john: good to talk to you.

thanks for hanging around. a live look at capitol hill, lawmakers will have a chance in moments to press a powerful teacher union on school shutdowns. >> sandra: it has begun. we ask lawmakers to ask randi weingarten about the role in crafting the cdc guidelines. >> john: for reopening schools or keeping them closed. she is down playing union influence but now admits school closures and lockdowns were tough on kids as they struggle with learning loss even to this day. >> sandra: dr. anthony fauci is back in the headlines reflecting on his response to the pandemic, admitting he got things wrong. >> particularly in our country with our free spirit, which we all embrace, that people being told what to do very often has the opposite effect. >> sandra: so what does senator rand paul think about that?

we'll ask him in just a moment. but first something he's been sounding the alarm on for months. brand-new warnings of the dangers of gain of function research happening around the globe with much of it coming from the u.s. direction and funding. gillian turner live in washington. >> international consortium of scientists, public health officials and doctors are calling for a global ban on virus hunting, the practice to search for viruses in nature and then bringing them into research labs. >> i've called for a moratorium on gain of function research. because i think normally we have a species barrier that can interfere with new pathogens going from nature into humans. but when you do gain of function research, you remove that barrier and put us at great risk. >> doctors who treated thousands of cases on the front lines argue the risks of virus hunting

are too great for they're patients. >> gain of function research, going into the amazon jungles and caves where we have exotic animals who naturally carry viruses, i think we should leave mother nature alone. not interfering. >> other medical experts argue that virus hunting is outdated and no longer serves any scientific purpose. >> the reality is that in the modern world you can decode any new virus in 20 minutes with modern pcr technology. in the old days it took years, so there was a rationale for going out there and potentially acquiring wild viruses for the sake of studying them. today that rationale does not exist. >> a recent investigation found covid was from a wuhan lab that put people at danger while

collecting field sample from bats. >> overall, very casual attitude about doing this type of research realizing that this -- that that's biochemicals could be more dangerous than weapons of mass destruction. >> the who says the exact number of dangerous pathogens and the biocontainment labs that handle them around the world is not known but experts tell us they number in the thousands, sandra. >> sandra: gillian turner, live in washington. thank you, gillian. >> john: kentucky republican senator rand paul. we want to ask you at the hearing in the house, the subcommittee on covid, winstrup did his opening statement, randi weingarten is the witness today. listen to just a little bit of what he said and on the back side. >> to be open are we doing everything we can to make that happen.

unfortunately, many schools chose not to reopen despite the science supporting safe in-person school practices. this all came to a head in february 2021 when the biden administration and the cdc issued its first school reopening guidance entitled "the operational strategy for k-12 schools through phased prevention." according to reports when this guidance was issued, its recommendations would keep 90% of schools, including almost all of the 50 largest counties ins the country from fully reopening. why primarily because of three recommendations. the use of community spread rates to determine reopening. a requirement for routine screening testing, and six feet of distancing instead of three feet. none of these based in sound science at the time, yet all directly supported by the aft.

community spread does not reflect school spread. >> john: so congressman wenstrup will go on with his opening statement but senator, you heard the crux of it there, cdc guidance came out, kept 90% of schools closed, six foot distancing one of the big reasons why schools could not reopen and now learn from an article in "the new york post" the teacher's unions, including the american federation of teachers, headed up by randi weingarten, helped the cdc write those guidelines. was this based in politics or in science? >> well, you have to wonder if asking workers whether they want to work is a good idea, or maybe we should have asked the school children do you want to go to school. there was no clear science that any of the six foot recommendations actually did anything to slow down the spread. we do know that looking at europe at the same period of time, particularly sweden where they stayed in school, there was no increase in deaths of children and actually no

increase in deaths or infections of teachers. there really was not good science for doing this. i told dr. fauci as much at the time and yet it continued to happen. so people have a self-interest in not working should not be the ones letting us -- guiding us what kind of policy we should have for having the schools open. bad science, bad for students, once again, the teachers' unions concerned with themselves and not necessarily with the students. >> sandra: senator, we are about to hear randi weingarten herself, obviously in an attempt to defend what we all know didn't have to happen in so many of these cases with these school closures. the american people, we know our viewers, they take this in because this -- our memories are very strong when it goes back to what happened during the covid pandemic, senator paul, and they are upset that they were being told to do things that were not being driven by science as they

were told was the basis for these decisions. >> this is hysteria and comes from the top down, and fauci was essentially the top dog in town, he was giving the information, wear a mask, one mask, two mask, cloth masks, natural immunity didn't make any sense. the thing is natural immunity was our biggest protection until we got the vaccine and what they should have been saying, if you work in a nursing home, your parents are in the nursing home, they should be people have had had covid, the workers, the only way to protect the senior citizens. dr. fauci discounted natural immunity and then overboard and closed the schools with no evidence children were getting sick or dying. almost no children died from covid and the few that did, a couple hundred in a country of 300 million were children with significant preexisting problems, in the hospital for

cancer or other life-threatening injuries or illnesses. so, everything they told us was wrong, it was a lie, but the teachers were self-interested in that who would not want to get paid for not working. >> john: and fauci in some recent interviews is denying any responsibility for closures of schools or businesses or anything else for that matter. he said this, show me a school i shut down and show me a factory i shut down. never, i never did. i gave a public health recommendation that echoed the cdc recommendation and people made a decision based on that but i never criticized the people who had to make the decisions one way or the other. i can't remember one instance, senator, somebody looked at the cdc guidance and said you know what, i don't believe it, we are staying open. everybody looked at the cdc guidance, nih and said oh, my god, the sky is falling, shut it down. >> right. if dr. fauci says you need too wear masks and against the best practices not to wear a mask and i own a hotel.

i'm fearful if i don't follow dr. fauci's recommendations, which are not really a mandate but they become a mandate, i'm going to be sued for not observing best practices so his edicts did have the force of the mandate. democratic governors followed them, schools followed them, and when i challenged him on opening schools i gave him the information. we put up six different charts of european countries and had gone back to school without increase or exacerbation of infection and went by him. on both sides of the school issue two dozen times. several articles summarized he's been on both sides of the issue almost the same day some days. >> sandra: wenstrup says weingarten may have jeopardized

the nation's children during the pandemic, she should be held accountable. and we saw her out there all the time, the protests from the teachers, you know, we saw the emergency, urgency they were putting on that moment. you know what is urgent right now, how far behind america's children were. and look at the state report kids, kids are graduating high school not near level reading. they are not reading, not riding, don't know how to do math. where is the urgency on the teachers' union on that and addressing children that have fallen behind on the rules. >> the children have been damaged and long time in the recovery. but collusion between fauci and public health experts, or

stifl stifling and we cannot stop the teachers' union for giving the advice they don't think the teachers should work, but we can stop government from colluding in secret, voters have to decide do you want a government that allowed the schools to be closed for two years. democrat governors, democrat presidents, and the head of the unions, by and large democrats. >> samantha power, head of usaid was a witness and youp sent a letter earlier this month asking again for documentation from usaid about support for the wuhan institute of virology and other research into viruses. you have not gotten any of that documentation yet, senator. if and when you do, what do you

think it will show? >> what we are looking for is scientific research funded by our government that funded the development of viruses similar to or equivalent to covid. we do know in the wuhan lab, institute of virology in wuhan, china, they recommended u.s. money to be spent on an experiment to take a coronavirus and add something else to make it more infectious in humans. our government turned that down but we want to look at a whole array of the research to find out what our government funded, what they didn't fund, but to know what the wuhan lab was attempting to do. also discovered some of this money went to military research in china. so we know of several universities now, u.c. davis, duke, berkeley, took it and funneled it to military research

in china. that shouldn't happen, should be forbidden, and right now a conspiracy of the administration to block knowledge of this because they don't want to display the culpability for funding the research that may have led to the pandemic. >> sandra: senator paul, finally your reaction to this sound from dr. anthony fauci as we continue to monitor that hearing, that hearing room there in washington. fauci dismissing american's personal liberties, something about which you spoke a lot during the pandemic, over masking and lockdowns. your reaction. >> we better try to reach out and be a better explainer of why we feel these things are important because particularly in our country with our free spirit, which we all embrace, that people being told what to do very often has the opposite effect. that's what i was referring to in that interview. >> sandra: with our free spirit which we all embrace.

final thoughts, senator. >> he's partially right, vaccine hesitancy lying about the vaccine saying that children needed and lying on c-span or telling the truth on c-span in 2004 saying if you had the flu, the vaccine is not necessary because you've been inoculated by the flu and now him saying it does not matter if you've been infected, you need to be vaccinated. distrust of the government, it was inconsistent and inconsistent with his previous statements, so the biggest purveyor of misinformation, untruth and of vaccine hesitancy is dr. anthony fauci. >> john: senator rand paul, thank you for being with us today, appreciate it. >> sandra: former education secretary betsy devos. madam secretary, thank you very much for your time. we continue to monitor this hearing happening on capitol hill because it is an important one. people want to know if anybody

is going to be held accountable, randi weingarten or otherwise for what these kids and schools were put through during this pandemic. where do you lie on what we are learning here and learning from anthony fauci? >> sandra, we know randi weingarten and her allies are going to try to revise and rewrite history and deliberately deceive the american people over what actually happened through covid but we know for a fact they have worked in collusion with those at the cdc to rewrite, to edit guidance, to make things more restrictive and more difficult for kids to get back into school. there is all kinds of evidence to that fact and all kinds of evidence on how many millions of kids have fallen dreadfully behind because of adult decisions, because of adults who were trying to leverage the pandemic to extort money and

concessions from the american people in order to go back to work. >> john: madam secretary, you were at the department of education when a lot of the early discussions about how do we get schools reopen again were underway. obviously most of that was the purview of the cdc, but what were you hearing about what the unions' level of involvement in the discussions was at that time? >> well, john, we held two summits at the white house reopening schools in the summer of 2020, ways to do so safely. schools all over europe had reopened in the spring and there was every evidence that that's exactly what should happen in most schools across the country. and i also did a whole tour with vice president mike pence in the late summer to schools that were actually figuring out how to reopen safely. but the fact is that the teachers' unions and all of

their allies continued to collude, to demand, you demand, depending on geography, in l.a., a wealth tax, medicare for all, ban expansion of charter schools, they wanted to, you know, they had all of these demands that had nothing to do with getting kids safely back to school. so all through this it has been -- they have been the cause of the problem, and they continue to be the impediment to a solution. >> sandra: we are going to get in here in just a minute, madam secretary. but if you could, what would your question be in that room? >> my question would be how can you come and honestly say that you are focussed on doing -- that every decision you made is focused on doing what's right for children and their futures. i don't think she can with a straight face thinking about and

caring about students. parents' eyes have been opened to this. they have realized just how many ways their children have been held hostage to a system that is focused not on children and their needs, but on adults and their issues. >> john: she's been introducing some of the people there with her, madam secretary, listen in for a few minutes and your thoughts on the flip side if we can. >> and to prepare them for life, career, college and citizenship. we know that kids learn best in person. so opening schools safely, even as the pandemic surged, guided the afts every action. i'm grateful to set the record straight from the earliest days of covid, the aft knew safety was a pathway to opening schools and keeping them open. we along with parents and administrators and health officials, we needed clear science-based guidance to keep

students and staff safe in school and yes it made sense to consult with the cdc and not only appropriate for the cdc to confer with educators, it would have been irresponsible for them not to. and the cdc conferred with more than 50 organizations about the guidance. but before the cdc, and frankly, neither the president at that time nor betsy devos would confer with us, but we tried to do whatever we could. we released this report in april 2020, a common sense science-backed plan to open schools safely. that same month we worked with john king, the former education secretary to focus and combat learning loss. 2020 was chaotic and terrifying. the previous administration downplayed the pandemic. failure to protect americans had unbearable costs.

it's not just the 1.1 million americans that died of covid. black children died at almost three times the rate of white children. 245,000 children were orphaned in america and members of my union died as well, gabriel gall was a 4th grade teacher pregnant with her second child when she died. we lost holly anne hoover, a nurse, anthony harrell, a school custodian and so many more. and this is what the aft did. when the strategic national stockpile unstocked, we bought $3 million of ppp for our nurses and for our teachers in schools. we ran vaccination clinics, virtual town halls for parents and educators and mental health experts together. we spent $5 million together on a back to school campaign to get people back to school. i think from developing reopening plans back to school fairs, door to door visits with

parents, billboards, radio ads, etc. our priorities were to open schools safely to keep students and staff and families safe, to focus on students' social, emotional and academic well-being and get the resources for this. we were viting for better ventilation, yes for covid testing and the tools we needed and the same was true with parents. when president trump left office, 46% of schools were open for in-person instruction. between the american rescue plan and the work done by the cdc and other agencies, and by governors and educational officials, parents and educators, including the union, went from 46% of schools open for in-person instruction january 2021 to close to 97% open in may 2021. now, teachers want what students

need. let's work together now to help kids recover and leap academically. let's expand community schools. let's increase experiential learning and career connected learning. let's address educator burnout. together we can overcome the effects of this unprecedented pandemic and i welcome your questions. and apologies for being nine seconds over. >> quite all right. miss weingarten, i want to thank you for being here today and providing your testimony. i now recognize myself for questions. >> john: so we are going to jump back out for a moment here and go back to betsy devos quickly, because she charged madam secretary that you would not confer with the union in the early days of plans to try to reopen schools. what do you say to that charge? >> well, john, that is a plain

out lie. she never asked for a meeting, she never asked to confer. the unions and their allies never asked to confer. we worked hard to try to provide resources to have a forum that they were welcome to attend as well as everyone on getting schools reopened. in the summer of 2020. and we were highlighting the many places and mostly in states where republicans were governing at the state and local level where schools were safely and effectively going back in person. if you look at the data, it's the states and local communities that are run by democrats with heavy teachers' union, school union presence, the kids were out of school a long period of time and ultimately harmed the most and the ones that can least afford it. >> sandra: if you could hang on with us, she just took a question from the chairman, a critical question, and that is

how did the teachers' union guidance end up in cdc government guidance, listen. >> but what -- >> when was the first time you engaged with cdc in any way, shape or form directly? >> the first time? >> yes. >> when they asked us to do the zoom -- i think the first time -- look, i'm 65 years old, i don't remember anything anymore, i'm sorry. >> me too. >> i think the first time -- the president was -- >> really the only question did they reach out to you or you reach out to them. i know they asked for guidance -- >> they reached out, they reached out -- my recollection is that they set up this january 29th half an hour conference call, my recollection. >> and again, yes or no. did that include any direct interaction with cdc director walensky? >> did it -- meaning did i talk

to her directly? >> you or your staff. >> that day we talked to her directly. >> okay. and so that was via zoom at that time. >> right. >> later on were there emails, phone calls? >> i think there were a couple of phone calls but what there also were and i wanted to just correct the record on this, sir, march -- what you may not have asked us for is on march 23rd, 2021, we actually -- we actually had several public letters with the cdc, including march 23, 2021, where we actually talked about how we understood their change in terms of social distancing to three feet. so we had several public letters to the cdc because we wanted to be transparent of everything that was going on. >> so again, yes or no, but did aft provide suggested revisions

to the cdc operational strategy regarding school closures or reopenings? did you suggest revisions to their operational strategy? >> what we suggested, sir, was ideas. >> ok. >> your letter to the -- your letter to the subcommittee said the aft proposed a handful of edits to the operational strategy, is that right? >> we -- what happened was there was one particular edit that they accepted. there were several different ideas that we proposed. the edit that they accepted was in the -- if i may explain or no? >> yeah, go ahead. >> they asked us in the january 29th meeting and you from your document request as you know we provided documents including all the emails back and forth between and among staff, our staff, they -- asked us for -- >> i want to get to the point i

guess. we know two of the proposed changes. >> right. >> work from home options for teachers with high risk conditions, and that if a new variant arose the guidance may need to be changed. so with that -- and again, yes or no. were these proposals accepted by the cdc? >> well, the one proposal that was accepted, during -- if i may explain. during the -- the meeting of the 29th, we raised several different issues. we did not -- we had seen all the former -- >> were there -- it's -- no question. when you made the proposals, the two i suggested, were they accepted by the cdc. >> the proposal to have at risk -- the second proposal was not made on january 29th. >> i didn't say that. >> sorry. the first proposal about at risk immunocompromised workers and not that simply that they would

work at home, but there will be accommodations for people who were at risk, that proposal was accepted. >> ok. now you've answered my question, thank you. >> sorry, i'm just slow. >> well -- and then if the other -- if a new variant arose guidance may need to be changed and then what else did aft propose? i mean, i mentioned those two i know of. were there other proposals that were not accepted? >> yes, several. >> and the proposal about a new variant arising that the guidance may need to be changed, was that accepted? >> so, what we asked for was because there were new variants starting to happen. >> i understand we all know there were new variants. was the proposal accepted? >> yes. >> before the operational strategy was finished aft advocated for a school closure trigger, that's the word in your documents. on january 29, 2021, in notes

prepared for you before a call with the cdc, your staff recommended pushing the cdc for a trigger stating we need an objective metric for closure, dot dot dot, triggers. and then on february 11, 2021, following the need to push for a closure trigger, a member of the aft staff emails director walensky directly and says we must, however, urge inclusion of clear closure triggers in the imminent guidance. and in february, they state our emphasis will follow randi's statement, push on needing a closure trigger. then in a february 12, 2021, email from you to members, you mention the cdc did not install a trigger stating while the cdc guidance does not contain a

closure trigger, schools may temporarily close to in-person learning. the same newsletter in bold font, the cdc is not mandating the reopening of schools. why was that in bold, why was that to be emphasized? >> the -- so which -- which of these questions do you want me to answer? >> i'm asking -- well, i gave statements that are -- that we have documents on. >> right, uh-huh. >> why was that statement in bold, the statement that says the cdc is not mandating the reopening of the schools. why would that be in bold? >> i have no idea. >> thank you. usually means some type of emphasis, i would think. but you don't recall. you don't recall. >> what -- what -- >> by this point, though. >> sandra: we are going to continue to monitor the hearing on capitol hill, betsy devos is still with us. john, and madam secretary, if we could get your reaction to what we just heard there. >> well, it's interesting that they're talking about details

nearly 10 or 11 months into the pandemic when the reality is that most charter schools and private schools went back to school in the fall of 2020, if not in the spring of 2020. and so this -- this notion that it couldn't happen safely is simply false and attempt to revise history and attempts to get kids back in school is blatantly deceptive. >> john: i remember madam secretary, we had our twins in public school and looked like fairfax county was not going to go back in the fall of 2020, but the local catholic school had plans to reopen and reopen safely so we switched our kids to that school. and they had a couple cases of covid but the protocol dealt with everything beautifully and seemed to be a model for how the public schools could reopen but

they did not adopt it. >> why the education freedom policy is rolling country wide, why state overstate is adopting this to put parents in charge and have the decision where their kids go to learn and the best thing for kids long-term and the best for american education. >> sandra: former education secretary betsy devos joining us on the breaking news on capitol hill. we are going to continue to monitor this hearing, john, as this is important, it's important for the country to see how the decisions were made. it affected absolutely all of us and you know, john, you go back to those moments and you go back to when all the decisions were made, just -- it was just a brutal, brutal time for everyone, all over the globe. but to see how the decisions were made, this is important on capitol hill how the teacher union guidance was ended up in

cdc guidance that affected all of us. >> john: there was a call for science to rule the day here and a lot of cases as the former secretary is pointing out, it was not science but other things. >> sandra: john, another jam-packed "america reports". great to be here. >> john: amazing time to be on tv. >> martha: and time continues i'm martha maccallum. we're watching chosely. this is very significant as sandra and john had just been covering. the hearing that is going on with randi weingarten on capitol hill. this is a live unfolding hearing that we'll be ducking in and out of here as this gets interesting. so she, of course, is the head of the most powerful teacher's unions in the country. they played anrm