washington and this week on "face the nation," president trump continues to make good on his campaign pledges.

what do americans think of the trump 2.0 policies and the job mr. trump is doing as president? as elon musk and his department of government efficiency squad continue their sweep through the federal agencies, president trump says they're doing so at his insistence, and that there's more to come, but that revamp is leding to confusion and the consequences are spreading across the country and around the world. how could the president's bureaucratic shakeup impact america's law enforcement, homeland security, and intelligence capabilities? plus, what's the impact of cutting u.s. aid to the countries that need it the most? we will talk with texas republican congressman michael mccaul and minnesota democratic congresswoman ilhan omar, tennessee republican senator bill hagerty will join us from the senate republican retreat in florida. it's all just ahead on "face the nation."

♪ good morning, and welcome to "face the nation." we begin today with our first assessment of how president trump and his policies are doing just three weeks into his second term. our cbs poll finds that a majority of americans, 53%, approve of the job he's doing. that's a better approval number than he ever reached during his first term in the white house. joining us with more is our executive director of elections and surveys, anthony salvanto. what's driving this? >> i will keep it simple, margaret, he's doing in the eyes of the public what he said he would do in the campaign. there's political value in that, in fact, 70% of people say he's doing what he promised, whether they approve of him or not. there's another part that continues over from the campaign, there were words that

he was described as being tough, being energetic, and he still is today in big majority numbers. so as people take a look in these first few weeks, there's been a lot of activity, they're getting that general sense of governance and that's being reflected in these early numbers. >> so that's perception. what about the actual policies? >> well, let's start with the ones that are popular. and, again, these echo a lot of what we saw in the campaign. the idea of deporting those in the country illegally continues to be popular. we saw that in the campaign. sending troops to the u.s./mexico border, again, majority in favor, we had seen that in the campaign. for his supporters in particular, the focus on ending dei is popular. we had seen in the campaign a lot of them thought those processes had gone too far. there are some other things in here that get more mixed reviews, i will add the idea of the u.s. taking over gaza is not

seen as a good idea. >> something he floated at a press conference this past week. >> he did, but it also gives you a little insight into how people are processing donald trump and what he does, because then for a lot of his supporters they say, well, that's not really his goal, that's a negotiating tactic. and then on tariffs, those are not as popular those are things that majority with the exception of the ones on china. >> why? >> people think it will raise prices and that's important context here, too, because people are still sensitive to price increases, a lot of them report the prices haven't gone down. remember that donald trump won the election on inflation and that was a big reason, and what we find now is two-thirds of people saying that they don't think the administration is focused enough on lowering prices and that stands out as one of those big gaps when we talk about initial preferences, initial expectations and what's getting delivered, that certainly is going to be something to watch. >> that's interesting because

throughout the campaign he was abundantly clear that tariffs were something he wanted to use and we talked quite a lot about possible impact on inflation. i know you also polled on president trump's work with elon musk and this so-called doge, department of government efficiency. >> yeah. >> we are all kind of learning what it is. what do people think of it? >> exactly on that point, we are all sort of learning this so i think this will take a while to play out. initially you get very partisan responses on the role that elon musk should or should not play. you get a majority of republicans saying he should have at least some influence, though it's more of the maga base that really wants him to have a lot. and a lot of democrats in opposition. you know, part of this is, too, the broad goals of cutting spending, of cutting foreign aid, have things that have long been in the polling popular with republicans, but in terms of the impact and approach, that may take a while for people to really see it play out. >> how you do it, we will be talking about that ahead on the program.

anthony, thank you. >> thank you. and we turn now to republican congressman mike mccaul of texas. good to have you here. >> thanks for having me. >> i want to dig into what has been happening, this mass confusion, with u.s. aid. there were 30 million metric tons of food sitting at a port in houston all week because there weren't u.s. workers to unload the food aid. american taxpayers had already bought, food that secretary rubio said should be delivered, but wasn't. how is this mass confusion increasing efficiency? >> well, if i could peel back on that a little bit, the confusion, i think, goes back to the biden administration when they started to implement these woke policies of drag queen shows in ecuador, when they started talking about lgbtqia programs like, say, in latin american countries, how to sue catholic governments, promoting

atyism in nepal -- >> i saw the white house fact sheet on this. >> this is what gave usaid a black eye. i personally believe that usaid has a national security mission. >> right. >> if you go back to its inception in the '60s under president kennedy and the cold war, it was to counter the soviet union. we need to return to the core mission principles. >> right. well, you have been a big supporter of usaid when you were chairman of house foreign affairs. >> right. >> you've talked about the great work that it does around the world, but back to this food aid, i mean, this isn't a theater program, this is food for starving people. how is getting it all locked up in these ports -- i mean, it's the way it's being implemented that has drawn so much shock here. do you think this is being done well? >> well, i think -- so the secretary in response to all of this -- and, by the way, i put holds on all of those programs i was talking about that have nothing to do with the central core mission. however, the secretary made waivers on humanitarian

assistance in pepfar which has been the most successful global health program initiated by president bush, by the way. the implementation of this is where i would urge the administration to move more expeditiously. i got word that the world food program that these waivers are being implemented, it is being executed, that food will be going out. but to your point about $40 million in food rotting in these warehouses in houston, about 500,000 metric tons on ships, you know, on the sea. you know, the peace through food program dates back to the '50s after the marshall plan. it is to provide stability in fragile unstable countries. it is to counter russia, china, and terrorism. it is our diplomatic power, otherwise we are talking about bullets as matt has talked about and lindsey graham.

>> if you don't fully fund the state department you have to buy me more bullets is mattis' line. secretary rubio says he's issuing waivers and getting food moving, i'm glad the world food program says food is moving but there is a huge divide between what he is saying and the fact that there weren't usaid workers to move things, weren't folks to process. it seems a fundamental misunderstanding between the bosses and the operators. is this really how it should be done? why not review and then take action? >> and there's a debate about whether you should -- there is a top to bottom review. i think after what happened under the biden administration it absolutely needs to be reviewed to get back to the core mission as i talked about. >> right. >> so that is being done. at the same time putting a halt on all humanitarian assistance and life-saving medicines, i think that's where secretary rubio issued these waivers for a reason. >> yeah. >> in consultation with the president, president trump, and

it seems to me his department needs to start implementing the waivers. now, again -- >> people have to be able to go back to work. that was before the court said people could even go back to work to implement what he's telling them to do. >> there is a temporary injunction on that issue. >> yeah. >> i would urge the state department to put the adequate resources necessary to deliver this, because our foreign adversaries are looking at this, just as they laughed at the ecuador drag shows, they're also questioning what's happening now. i think we need to have a strong presence in destabilized nations to keep out our adversaries. >> but do you think this was done intentionally or are people like this individual pete morocco who secretary rubio authorized to run this, do they just not know how the department works? >> i can't speak for him. i know that he has been put in charge of the foreign assistance program. >> has he come into congress and answered questions since there is a hearing on usaid this week? >> i do think -- the administration has provided, by

the way, notification and consultation with the foreign affairs committee that i chaired and that is required under law. they have done that. i think if they decided to terminate that's a whole another issue. my understanding is that they want to look at putting usaid underneath the state department which is not a novel concept. madeleine albright talked about this and bill clinton and warren christopher talked about this, even joe biden talked about this. i think putting it under state makes a lot of sense to me to provide the direct supervision and oversight. >> but you know how this department works since you were the chair for so long of the committee overseeing it. when this trump-appointed judge put that federal -- the pause on the putting usaid workers on leave, he wrote in the opinion, no future lawsuit could undo the physical harm that might result if usaid employees are not informed of imminent security threats occurring in the countries to which they have relocated in the course of their

service to the united states. he's saying that the messy way this rolled output people in physical risk when they are deployed by our government to countries overseas. did the secretary of state have any idea? >> the secretary of state issued the waivers for pepfar and for humanitarian both food and med sunshine but people living and working in places like syria aren't able to access computer systems and security warnings that are there. >> every president that comes in does a review. i would argue, though, that ins is the secretary has issued the waivers it's incumbent upon his subordinates now to implement these waivers so that we don't see what could happen where people are not getting their vaccines or not getting the hiv treatment, there are starving people in destabilized countries, and then we see china and russia and, quite frankly, lindsey graham and i did the global fragility act to impact the sahel in africa.

you have ebola popping up in ug uganda. these are serious issues if we don't start implementing waivers you will see it get worse, not better, and i would urge the administration to do that. >> you're striking a very different turn than congressman brian mass who was here last week, he said there is a grift on the american people. he said pepfar and americans shouldn't fund aids drugs for 20 million people across africa because their governments might work with china. there is a divide in your party right now. >> i can only speak to the program that president bush started and it was to save millions of lives. that is probably -- when the best good will missions the united states and put the best face, no pun intended on the nation overseas with our adversaries countering them with these people, we are saving their lives. the best global health program ever implemented by the united states was pepfar.

i'd hate to see that go away. it will sunset once we achieve the mission, however, programs like that when you look at -- if the national security importance of usaid need to be maintained and i go back to why it was implemented in the first place. >> on friday night the president ordered all foreign assistance to south africa be halted and said we should prioritize the resettling of refugees, these are white south africans. that means they will get priority over everyone it seems because there is a suspension of refugee entry into the united states, including those afghan allies who worked along the -- alongside the united states. are you going to try to help lift that? >> yeah, i believe -- you know, i did a comprehensive investigation, the debacle of afghanistan that the biden administration was responsible for, including leaving our afghan partners behind. >> should they get a carveout from the trump ban on refugees?

should the afghans? >> i do believe it was an unintended consequence that needs to be fixed. we promised them we'd protect them when they worked with our servicemen and women in afghanistan, our interpreters, right alongside our combat veterans. they have special immigrant visas and p 1, p 2 and it's my view that they should be allowed to go forward with the siv program and they have been vetted, by the way, margaret, they have been vetted unlike some of the other groups we talk about. these have been vetted, they worked with our troops to defeat the taliban which unfortunately biden surrendered to, but it seems to me we have our live up to our word otherwise down the road in another conflict no one is going to trust us. >> congressman mccaul, thank you. >> thanks, margaret. >> "face the nation" will be back in a minute. stay with us. [ car engine revving ]

we go now to tennessee republican senator bill hagerty who joins us this morning from

palm beach, florida. good morning to you, senator. >> good morning, margaret. good to be with you. >> i have a lot to get to with you today, but i want to start with the announcement from the white house that over 65,000 employees have accepted the offer to leave their jobs, with pay, through september 30th. this is that deferred resignation program or buyout as it's called. can you explain how putting federal workers on paid leave through september will save taxpayers money if we're paying them not to work? >> margaret, eventually it will save taxpayers money. i think what president trump is trying to do is be humane in the process of allowing them to make plans to find other employment but i think the government is far too big, too bloated and we are on a path to see it start to shrink. this is the first step but we're moving in the right direction. >> so does that mean the agencies won't hire replacements for these people who take this so-called buyout? are you reducing head count? >> i think what we will see is

each agency -- i think what we will see, margaret is, is each agency go through a top to bottom review to see what they need to do to deliver on behalf of the american public. there has been consternation and pearl clutching about the activities of elon musk and his teach but their charge is to go in and find efficiencies, opportunities and deliver more of taxpayer dollars to the actual programs that are intended less to overhead and administration. >> so you said eventually it will save money. i know you are on appropriations committee and you watch these things pretty closely here. when will it save money? >> well, i would say certainly as soon as these people start to roll off the payroll. again, i'm from the private sector, my entire background has been in business. this is the way you do it. you come in, you look at the opportunities before you, president trump has brought a new administration in. this is not unusual to take a hard look at these programs and also to look for opportunities to cut bloat and waste. we are $36 trillion in debt. clearly the american -- the american public needs to see

more accountability, more visibility, more performance for their taxpayer dollars. >> i think anyone who works in the private sector understands how layoffs work. the government is so unique, though, with laws establishing some of these nation and as you know and we will talk about it later in the program some of this is tied up in the courts. specifically, since you are on banking, the budget director announced he's notified the federal reserve that the consumer financial protection bureau will no longer take congressional funding because it's not necessary. elon musk tweeted, rest in peace. can you tell us did the white house inform -- >> i missed elon musk's tweet. >> did the white house inform the banking committee that it's being dismantled? what does cfpb rest in peace mean? >> so i have had significant conversations with russ vought or new omb director. it has been out of control for some time, the way it's designed i think is unconstitutional, has

no oversight, has been a reckless agency that has been able to go beyond a mandate that was originally intended. i'm applauding anything we can to to bring more stability and control to the federal government and take agencies like this back -- you know, back into some sort of sense of accountability and oversight. >> so what does that mean? because it's established as an agency and there are legal protections here. >> well, it was established as an agency that does not have the jurisdiction of the congress, its funding source is separate from us, it has no accountability. this is not the type of agency i hink that the founding contemplated. we actually contemplated a balance of power, yet this rogue agency has been created and frankly it's been used as a tool to come in and hammer the american private sector and pursue initiatives that, you know, certain people like chopra might have approved or senator elizabeth warren might have approved but it is not the way the american public should be funding and supporting programs of this nature. >> okay. so a different government

agency, usaid and its fate is also in question. we looked at the congressional research service definition here because it was enshrined in law, usaid, it says because congress established it as independent within the executive branch, the president does not have the authority to abolish it. congressional authorization would be required to abolish, move or consolidate usaid. so have you -- do you expect congress to actually authorize the president to dismantle and consolidate usaid? >> i think there's a tremendous appetite to do t again, margaret, because we what want to see is alignment of our programs with america's national security interest. usaid has been out of control. i have demanded accountable from aid, they have refused it. i've asked them to be very clear about, for example, their role funding hamas in gaza. they would not comply. they will not tell us what they do. now that we start to find out

some of the programs that aid has been funding, if you think about it, sex change operations in guatemala, lgbtq programs in serbia -- >> the u.s. government does not fund sex change operations or fund hamas. you know that, though. but you -- >> that is not true, margaret. i couldn't get the secretary of state -- i asked him three times to tell me that we were not funding hamas through aid. he couldn't do it. and frankly what we found -- >> do you have any evidence that the united states government is funding a terrorist group? >> certainly. the funds that have gone to unrwa. you saw the unrwa -- >> okay. unrwa is not a terrorist group. unrwa is part of the united nations. >> supporting terrorist groups. if you look at what unrwa has done it's been so counter to our national interests it's unbelievable we would fund it. >> since you are on foreign relations let me ask you what's happening inside the state department right now. a gentleman named darren beaty has been appointed as acting undersecretary for public

diplomacy and public affairs. he was fired from the first trump administration after he attended a white nationalist convention. he has made a lot of inflammatory statements against women and minorities. if he couldn't work for the first trump administration, how is he qualified to work now? >> margaret, i'm not familiar with mr. beaty or the claims that you raise but if we want to talk about qualifications for people serving in the administration why not look back at the prior administration. the only qualification tony blinken had to be secretary of state is that he organized 51 so-called intelligence officials to forge a letter to say that the hunter biden laptop was russia disinformation. >> is attending a white nationalist rally -- if it wasn't appropriate to attend a white nationalist rally is it appropriate now? >> i don't know anything about this claim. >> the secretary of state spoke about it earlier this week so secretary rubio does know about it. tariffs, president trump said he plans as soon as this week new

reciprocal tariffs on everybody. it sounds like he's broadening out this trade war. do you know exactly which goods or countries will be impacted in the coming days? >> so i talked with president trump on friday about this broadly, margaret. this is a concern that he has had for some time. as you know i served in his previous administration and worked my heart out to get two trade agreements executed with japan. i was the u.s. ambassador to japan in his administration. here is what we're trying to deal with and it goes all the way back to world war ii and the aftermath. we made favorable terms of trade with countries that were devastated in europe and japan. we should have time limited that because what we have now are countries that have very unfavorable and unfair terms that are fully developed. so it's time to address this. >> senator, i'm sorry -- >> president trump and i talked -- yeah. >> senator, i'm sorry, my -- >> it's already go unto happen. >> i'm running out of time because of the commercial break that's coming up here so i have to leave it there. i apologize for cutting you off.

we will be right back. within a week of posting, i had over $25,000 in sales. i don't have a million dollars to put towards marketing and branding. tiktok was the way and it saved my company. we had a video do really good this week. sales were up 29%. about 80% of my business right now is from tiktok. small businesses thrive on tiktok. tiktok brings in so much foot traffic. i need tiktok to keep growing. we have so much more work to do. type 2 diabetes? discover the ozempic® tri-zone. i need tiktok to keep growing. i got the power of 3. i lowered my a1c, cv risk, and lost some weight. in studies, the majority of people reached an a1c under 7 and maintained it. i'm under 7. ozempic® lowers the risk of major cardiovascular events

such as stroke, heart attack, or death in adults also with known heart disease. i'm lowering my risk. and adults lost up to 14 pounds. i lost some weight. ozempic® isn't for type 1 diabetes or children. don't share needles or pens, or reuse needles. don't take if you or your family had mtc, men 2, or if allergic to it. stop taking and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or any of these allergic reactions. tell your provider if you plan to have surgery or a procedure, are breastfeeding, pregnant, or plan to be. serious side effects may include inflammation of pancreas, gallbladder problems, or changes in vision. call your prescriber if you have any of these symptoms. taking with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase low blood sugar risk. common side effects include nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, constipation. some side effects lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. living with type 2 diabetes? ask about the power of 3 with ozempic®.

coming up, we will check in with democratic congresswoman ilhan omar from minnesota. she's here with us in studio. not all multimillionaires build their wealth the same way, you have... the fearless investor. the type a cpa. the boot strapper. the boot maker. hee-ha. but many do have something in common. we all trust schwab with our wealth. thanks to our award-winning service, low costs and transparent advice, every day, over a million multi-millionaires, trust schwab with more than three trillion dollars of their wealth. ♪♪ (vo) weight loss. of their wealth. for so long, i felt stuck. but zepbound means change. zepbound is for adults with obesity,

to help lose weight and keep it off. activating 2 naturally occurring hormone receptors in my body, it works differently. it's changing what i believe is possible when it comes to weight loss. it's changing how much weight i lose. up to 48 pounds. and changing what happens. don't take if allergic to it, or if you or someone in your family had medullary thyroid cancer or multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. tell your doctor if you get a lump or swelling in your neck. stop zepbound and call your doctor if you have severe stomach pain or a serious allergic reaction. severe side effects may include inflamed pancreas or gallbladder problems. tell your doctor if you are experiencing vision changes, taking a sulfonylurea or insulin, having suicidal thoughts, if you're nursing, pregnant, plan to be, or taking birth control pills. side effects include nausea, diarrhea, and vomiting, which can cause dehydration and worsen kidney problems. zepbound means change.

and when it comes to weight loss... change is good. discover the weight loss you could be bound for. talk to your doctor about zepbound. we will be right back with a lot more "face the nation." stay with us.

♪