welcome back to "face the nation."

we return to our conversation with kentucky governor andy beshear. governor, kentucky has a lot of coal, natural gas. mr. trump has selected chris wright, the ceo of liberty energy, to be the next energy secretary if confirmed. he has also selected doug burgum, governor of north dakota, to run the interior department, and he's promised to open up more federal lands to drilling. do you have any idea what the impact would be on your state from the signals being sent with these selections? >> well, we'll see. i mean, i saw the comments recently from the ceo of exxon which was a little different than what we might expect, talking about needing to move to greener forms of energy regardless of what the policy of the day is. and i certainly see from companies that are coming into kentucky each and every day, we just announced a new industrial battery facility that's going to create 1,600 new jobs. they demand a certain portfolio

of energy. yes, the lights have to come on. but especially over time for their customers, they want a certain amount of renewables. what i've seen as governor is a private sector push that i do not think is going to change demands placed on states, demands placed on utilities, and the private sector ultimately moving us to a more diverse and cleaner portfolio. so here in kentucky, yes, we have many traditional forms of energy, and they have really good jobs. we want to make sure we never look down on, and we support each of those jobs. but my goal is to diversify our production as much as we can so that we have the jobs of the present and those jobs of the future. >> you've said kentucky has something like 10,000 jobs related to electric vehicles. you really made a big push on t that. during the campaign mr. trump vowed to undo the electric vehicle mandate, that's what he called it, and he's going to, he says, repeal the law that

includes credits for green projects. do you know at this point if republican leaders intend to keep parts of that? and are there projections on what repealing that law entirely would do to the job creation in your state? >> well, it's really concerning. you look at a state like kentucky that voted for president-elect donald trump by 30 points, and it's 10,000 ev-related jobs on the line. and those are only growing. go up to ohio and look at that -- $20 billion chips factory, which i'm a little jealous of, but happy for the people of ohio and what that would mean. another state that voted for the president-elect. you look at all of these jobs and jobs of the future that have come to what the administration will probably view as red states. it's important that these projects continue. remember, a lot of the people taking these jobs, jobs that support their families, voted for president-elect donald trump because they thought that would improve their job, that he was

focused on their job. so i hope that he will get good advice, and i'll do everything i can to get my message out through our federal delegation of how important these jobs are, and they're not in urban kentucky. they're in rural kentucky. they are game-changing investments that have created a bright future here, and i'm certainly going to do everything i can as governor of kentucky to protect them. and not because i'm a democrat but because i've shown my people that every single day i'm going to try to create a better life for them, and that's hwhat thos jobs do. $14 billion between now and 2030 was promised to your state. i wonder if you just think democrats didn't do a good job of explaining that. >> well, i certainly don't want to do any finger pointing because the vice president had 107 days and did her very best. i proudly criss-crossed the country in support of her. what i know is going forward over the next couple years, we

have a chance every day, every moment to show the american people that we are laser focused on jobs, on their health care, on their infrastructure, on their kids' education. just those everyday worries. with this administration at least now selecting some extreme appointees, it's a chance to make a real difference, to really show people that we are where their basic needs are. >> well, but there was, as you know, some analysis after the fact among democrats about the focus on some culture war issues or -- so to speak. congressman seth moulton said of transgender issues, "i have two little girls, i don't want them getting run over on a playing field by a male or formerly male athlete. as democrat i'm supposed to be afraid to say that." he says he's speaking authentically and said democrats should do more of it. do you think democrats have been out of touch on some of these things that obviously resonate in states like yours? >> well, i think that all

candidates should stand up for their beliefs, and that we don't have to abandon those beliefs. you know, i vetoed one of the nastiest anti-lgbtq bills that my state had ever seen in my election year. but i did two things. number one, i talked about my wife. for me that's my faith, where i'm taught that all children are children of god. i wanted to stick up for some children that were being picked on in a pretty rough bill. but the second thing is the voters in my state knew the very next day i was going to be working on jobs. i was going to be opening a new health clinic. first hospital in our largest african american neighborhood in 150 years. we just cut the ribbon on. we've created two pediatric autism centers in appalachia so that people don't have to drive two hours. so it's both sharing your life for your views, but the other piece is about that focus. remember, if we're talking about this issue of the day and then we're talking about what donald trump said last night and then

we're talking about jobs, we're only spending a third of the time talking about what people are worried about and what impacts their life the most. >> governor, thank you for joining us. we'll be right back. (vo) kate made progress with her mental health, but her medication caused unintentional movements in her face, hands, and feet called tardive dyskinesia, or td. so her doctor prescribed austedo xr— a once-daily, extended-release td treatment for adults. ♪ as you go with austedo ♪ austedo xr significantly reduced kate's td movements. some people saw a response as early as 2 weeks. with austedo xr, kate can stay on her mental health meds— (kate) aww! hi buddy! (vo) austedo xr can cause depression, suicidal thoughts, or actions in patients with huntington's disease. pay close attention to and call your doctor if you become depressed, have sudden changes in mood, or have suicidal thoughts. don't take if you have liver problems, are taking reserpine, tetrabenazine, or valbenazine. austedo xr may cause irregular or fast heartbeat, or abnormal movements. seek help for fever, stiff muscles, problems thinking, or sweating. common side effects include inflammation

of the nose and throat, insomnia and sleepiness. ♪ as you go with austedo ♪ ask your doctor for austedo xr. ♪ austedo xr ♪ ♪♪ imagine checking your own heart with medical precision from anywhere. introducing kardiamobile 6l, the fda-cleared ekg that provides six-times more heart data than any smartwatch. and it detects three of the most common arrhythmias in just 30 seconds, including atrial fibrillation, bradycardia and tachycardia.

check your heart with the most advanced personal ekg outside the hospital. get yours at kardia.com or amazon. ♪♪ we're joined by sue gordon. she served as principle deputy director of national intelligence during donald trump's first term in the white house. good to see you here again. >> great to see you, margaret. >> you personally briefed donald trump as president in the oval office. if this nominee-to-be, tulsi gabbard, becomes the director of national intelligence, and john ratcliffe becomes the cia director, are you confident that mr. trump will be told the information he needs to know and not just what he wants to know? >> well, i think that's the -- that's the question of the day. intelligence is weird because it's always uncertain. and you are always making an assessment so that a

decisionmaker can figure out what they're going to do with it. so it's particular. and your only job is to ruthlessly report what you see, not what you prefer. so that's the primary job of the d&i is to go in and be his principal adviser on intelligence. you're the first in, the last out. you cannot afford to i'll say pander to preference. loyalty doesn't serve you well in that job. you have to be so committed that you will say inconvenient things. i will say the former president would tell you that i would talk to him about russian interference, i know he hated it. but russia was, in fact, interfering, and he needed to hear that information. so do i believe that tulsi and john can be that person if they believe they must be? they can learn. if they lean on the women and

men of the intelligence community, they will produce an assessment. but that's a hard day, and you better be good at it. >> you had to undergo an fbi background check to object tin a security clearance and to plaun it, you were a career official 25 years at the cia then moved on to national intelligence. "the new york times" is reporting that the trump team may bypass the fbi process and just use a private firm to vet candidate, then when the president is sworn in he can grant access to the nation's secrets, rather than go through that screening. what risk is there in bypassing the fbi? >> well, the first risk is that you get an incomplete picture of the human that is carrying both the trust of the american people and the trust of our allies and partners and the trust of the women and men that are putting their lives on the line for that judgment. right? everyone hates vetting. it's intrusive, you you don't

know why anyone should have to do it because you know who you are. but the truth is we know adversaries and competitors will exploit humans be to be able to advance their interests, and you want to make sure the people that hold the american people's people's trust and the advantage have no cracks in who they are. and so it seems expedient, but i think it will ultimately harm the institution. and by that i mean the institutions of america, if you have people who we discover later that they should not have had access or we discover later that they were vulnerable to the actions of our allies -- our adversaries and competitors. because -- >> and -- >> it is. the craft of human intelligence is actually finding someone who has a weakness and getting them to be able to advance your

interests. it just -- a really good day is when you find someone whose interests align with yours and then you push that. so a private firm isn't going to have the standards that we've had. i know it's inconvenient, but i think it's a bad strategy and risky for america. >> cbs has also learned that to date the trump team hasn't signed the paperwork that would start the process of the national security briefings so that someone's not walking in cold. they're briefed and up to speed, along with these background checks. the partnership for public service, a nonpartisan group that helps with the transitions, confirmed that to cbs. is there any good reason not to sign those papers? and what does it do for the officials who arrive without being read in on what's happening now? >> yeah, i can't think of a good reason. i think one of the great falsehoods that's been perpetratored on america is that our institutions are mall fees ant. they need to be better, they need to be slimmer, more transparent. you're not protecting anybody by

not signing those papers. and especially some of the nominees we have that don't have the really deep experience base, these are big jobs. i mean, intelligence is not just advising the president, it's also running a huge enterprise in a manner that allows our allies and partners to trust us with their most precious thing. so i can't think of a reason why that's not signed, and to start your gig without any foundation at all, especially when the institutions are begging to give you that foundation, just seems wrong-headed. >> you're diplomatically referring to tulsi gabbard there who doesn't have a background in intelligence. she also has a history of saying things that mirror the rhetoric of u.s. adversaries. vladimir putin and bashar al assad. there were at least two chemical weapons attacks in syria that killed thousands of people, and the u.s. intelligence community came to public assessments of

high confidence. i imagine you saw all of that intelligence and you briefed on it. >> yes. >> when she says that she doubts it, she's skeptical, how is that going to be received by the career professionals who work for her? >> yeah, i mentioned one of her jobs would be to be the senior adviser. the second is to be responsible for all intelligence-sharing agreements. so our allies and partners upon whom we rely that assessment, that was joint with our allies and partners. the one we had was joint. our assessment of ukraine was joint. >> that was -- sorry, to explain for our viewers. you're talking about the killing on british soil of a former russian by russian intelligence. >> but all those were jointly done with our allies and partners. we need them. it's one of the greatest strengths of america. but they will make their own assessment over whether we can be trusted with their nation's interests. and whether she meant it or not,

whether she was just ill informed with that, she comes in with strikes against her in the trust perspective. can we trust her with our most sacred intelligence to represent that in a fair way? i think it's a problem whether it's judgment or any other thing that she has represented there. >> another nerve in the intelligence community, of course, is edward snowden. >> yes. >> tulsi gabbard and the selection for the attorney general, matt gaetz, put forward resolutions to call for the charges to be dropped agains him because he leaked classified national intelligence material. he's living in russia these days. that kind of a position, how is that going to be received? >> it reflects a lack of understanding of who we are and reflects a lack of respect for what we do. unauthorized disclosures of intelligence are always bad. don't go with the good or bad --

good outcome or whether he was right or wrong. he had no authority, and he had different paths and harmed america. he not only harmed intelligence, he harmed our allies and partners and harmed our businesses by what it allowed china to assume about that. there is nothing justifiable about what he's done, none. and so if they vacate it, what they're basically saying is all those rules you follow in order to be able to serve america, they don't matter anymore. >> sue gordon, thank you for explaining this very opaque world of intelligence to us and for your analysis today. we'll be back in a moment.

dr. deborah birx served as the white house coronavirus response coordinator in donald trump's first term. she also had a long career in public health in the army, working on aids in africa at the state department as well as time at the cdc. good morning, welcome back. >> good morning, margaret. glad to be with you. >> so dr. birx, i want to ask you about your views on public health which we're looking at because of this nomination potentially of robert f. kennedy

jr. hhs has wide portfolio here, vaccines, medicine, overseas medicare, regulates food, beauty products, baby formula, reproductive health care. what will the impact be of having someone without government experience in that top job? >> well, i think the most important thing is what team he would bring with him because you're talking about really a large cap corporation with a highly diverse group. what you have to really bring together -- and frankly, eliminate some of the duplications between these agencies to really become more cost effective. and so really having a management person at his side, a chief of staff perhaps, that has really come out of industry, that would know how to bring and look and bring those individuals together that are running the other agencies because it's a very -- hhs is probably one of our most complicated departments. >> so you're saying people with experience around him we need to look at those lower level apointies mr. trump might make. what's so interesting with rfk

jr. is how he has in some ways tapped into this health movement in america. he's talking about more regulation, not less when it comes to american food. here's some of what he's said -- >> i'm just going to tell the cereal companies, get the dyes out of their food. i'll get processed food out of school lunch immediately. 10% of food stamps go to sugar drinks, to sodas. we're creating diabetes problems in our kids by giving them food that's poise an. i'm going to -- poison. i'm going to stop that. >> those sound like good goals, can he actually take on big agriculture and get that through? >> i think because of a lot of the people who are suffering the most from these additives are actually people in our rural areas. you know, 16% of americans live in a rural area, but they are providing all of our oil and gas, all of our fiber, all of

our cotton, and all of our food. and the level of diabetes in these communities because of their access to certain foods is extraordinarily high. just came out of the field, 58% of the adults in the town that i was just in had already diabetes or prediabetes based on household survey where we went house to house. this is the reality of america. what i'm hoping is he brings his transparency for all americans, and we really start to tackle these issues one by one by one. i think everybody across america wants to have healthy kids that they know will grow up, and not end up with the complications of diabetes or heart disease. >> it was very hard for michelle obama when she was first lady to get any of that done. and it might be hard for lawmakers who come from some of those agricultural states to vote against their own interests in terms of the farm subsidies and the like. >> well, we're not talking about eliminating good food. we're talking about using all of their ingredients in a way that is more healthy for americans. and i think that's what people

are calling for now. europe did it years ago, and i think we're capable of doing that. we are really smart, high levels of technology. we can make food tasty without a lot of these additives because we can see that other groups are doing it in a small way. so we're not talking about eliminating the need for wheats and grains. we're talking about putting those together in a healthy way. >> i want to ask you, as well, but some of his -- the things he said about vaccines. as you know, the vaccine -- vaccination rates are declining in america. he said things like restoring transparency around them. it's not really clear what that means. why do you think there's decline of vaccination? >> i think there's two pieces to it. i think when we talk about things in public health we don't acknowledge the concerns. because when my children went to school, there was maybe one in 1,000 kids with autism, diagnosed autism. now it's three per 100. so every mom is seeing a

classroom of kindergarteners where one of the children has autism. that's scary to moms and dads. they want to know why. it's not good enough to say vaccines don't cause autism, it's us finding what is the cause of autism -- >> i think a lot of people would absolutely agree that it is ridiculous that there isn't a lot of research and established causation with autism. >> yes. >> what he has said in the past is that autism? caused by vaccines. and there's no scientific basis for that conclusion, as i understand it. >> that's correct. and so that's why when he talks about transparency i'm actually excited that in a senate hearing he would bring forward his data and the questions that come from the senators, would bring forth their data. what i know for sure is he's a very smart man who can bring his data and his evidence base forward, and we can have a discussion that many americans believe already is a problem. so until we can have that transparency and that open

discussion from both sides, i know the members have incredible staffers who will bring great questions from their constituents, and that hearing would be a way for americans to really see the data that you're talking about, that we can't see that causation right now. but what is causing it? so you're absolutely right, addressing what the cause is will be critical. and i think what has confused people is we weren't clear about what covid vaccines do and don't. so now people are questioning, well, what do my child vaccines do and don't. they don't understand some of the vaccines their childre are getting protect them from disease and create herd immunity, and some that they get are just for their child. like h-flu and pneumovax to protect their child from getting serious illness. we're not explaining all of this correctly. >> that's why the messenger matters so much. >> yes, it does. >> which is why his past statements are being scrutinized. you worked on aids for a good part of your career. he has said that he doesn't take

a position on the relationship between hiv and aids, but then he laid out alternative theories in his book and said dr. fauci never produced a study to demonstrate his hypothesis using accepted scientific proof. do you agree with that assertion on hiv and aids? >> having spent a career in understanding how hiv and aids progresses, hiv virus is the cause of aids. >> period. >> there's a whole set of things that happen, and i think what hiv taught me is you have to -- it's asymptomatic for ten years. we're finally recognizing how important a symptomatic disease transmission is. that's what hiv taught us. what other hiv taught us was the entire human immune system. so by investing in hiv research, we learned about car-t cells that we use today in cancer. a lot of these research and investments pay off in other areas. and i think once he's there at hhs he'll see that. >> if he's open to the data.

dr. birx, thank you. we'll be right back.

that's it for us today. thank you all for watching. until next week. for "face the nation," i'm margaret brennan.

♪