All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
Feb. 19, 2026 16:10-16:30 - CSPAN
19:57
Washington Journal Vance Ginn
Source
|

Time Text
AI's Role in Future Jobs 00:08:56
And the first female chief executive.
Prior to moving into the governor's mansion, she represented Virginia's 7th district in the U.S. House for several terms.
Before entering public life, the governor served as a CIA officer, working to find, recruit, and build relationships with foreign nationals of value to the U.S. government.
Before joining the CIA, she worked as a teacher and a postal inspector, something her father did as well.
A reminder, we'll have full, complete coverage of all of the State of the Union events starting Tuesday at 7 p.m. Eastern.
Watch the president's remarks, Governor Spanberger's response, and interviews with lawmakers as they react to the evening.
All available on C-SPAN, C-SPAN2, online at c-span.org, and on C-SPAN Now, our free video app.
Democracy.
It isn't just an idea.
It's a process.
A process shaped by leaders elected to the highest offices and entrusted to a select few with guarding its basic principles.
It's where debates unfold, decisions are made, and the nation's course is charted.
Democracy in real time.
This is your government at work.
This is C-SPAN, giving you your democracy unfiltered.
Welcome back to the program.
Joining us to discuss artificial intelligence, the impact on jobs and on energy is Vance Ginn.
He is a former Office of Management and Budget Chief Economist for the Trump administration, also host of the podcast, Let People Prosper.
Vance, welcome to the program.
Thank you so much, Mimi.
It's a pleasure to be with you.
I want to start with the potential impact of AI on jobs and specifically entry-level jobs.
The CEO of Anthropic has said that as much as 50% of entry-level white-collar jobs will go away because of AI.
What do you think?
Well, AI is something that's new.
And so many people are looking at, should we fear it?
Should we embrace it?
You know, what's going to be the best path forward?
And if you look back historically to other types of revolutions, and I do believe we're in the AI revolution now, there's been the same sort of fears, whether it be whenever we went from horse and buggy to the T-model car or when we had the internet.
These are all things that have come up in our lives.
And yes, some job displacement happened.
And I think that's important to acknowledge that some jobs will be displaced.
But at the same time, there were many more jobs that were created in the process.
Whether it be from the horse and buggy to the T-model car, there are many more people who were helping build the car.
Or on internet, on the internet, there were more people that were able to access things and start businesses online than before.
And so now we're in a situation where AI could displace many of those entry-level jobs.
But it could also mean opening up of new jobs that we don't know about.
And some of that's already happening now, whether it be the data centers that I know we'll talk about, where people can work on and build and other things that are happening there, or the new innovations that are coming out.
I think one of my key points here, Mimi, is that I don't think that we should necessarily fear AI.
We're using AI every day, and I don't know that people actually consider it to be AI, whether it be using your computer or using GPS when you drive from one place to the other.
These are all forms of AI that we've been using for years, if not decades now, that I think we just need to take a step back and say what exactly is happening.
And from what I'm looking at this as an economist and someone looking into AI, I think this is going to be a pro-growth, pro-people sort of situation that's going to allow us to flourish and prosper even more into the future.
So yes, we need to understand the causes and effects and other things that are going to happen, but I don't think it's something that we should fear at the end of the day.
So Vance, I want to read to you a portion of an article written by Matt Schumer.
He's an AI influencer.
He posted this on X and it's gotten a lot of attention lately.
And then I'll have you respond to it.
He says this.
Here's the thing nobody outside the tech quite understands.
We're not making predictions.
We're telling you what already occurred in our own jobs and warning you that you're next.
The experience that tech workers have had over the past year of watching AI go from helpful tool to does my job better than I do is the experience everyone else is about to have.
Law, finance, medicine, accounting, consulting, writing, design, analysis, customer service.
Not in 10 years.
The people building these systems say one to five years, some say less.
So this would indicate a much bigger disruption, Vance, than going from the horse and buggy to automobiles.
And it could, especially in certain tech industries and other places.
But what I would consider is what Frederick Hayek at Economist called the knowledge problem.
We don't know exactly what's going to happen in the future.
We know what the jobs are today that are using AI and other areas in our economy, but we don't know what new jobs, new sectors, new innovations that will come out in the future that will allow us to feel many of those jobs that are displaced in the process.
So I'm not here to say that there's not going to be any disruptions and there's not going to be any sort of changes in the economy.
I think that there will be.
The issue is that I'm trying to argue is that we don't know exactly what the future jobs will look like and how we could use AI to best support the jobs that are already there, to use it as a tool to help us to improve the jobs that we're doing.
And maybe some of the jobs that we're doing today are more mundane or things that we would like for an AI to do to help us out in the process.
And I don't see anything that's wrong with that.
And so while we may want to fear it or regulate it or tax it, there's many things that politicians are trying to do to AI right now.
I think that would be setting us back.
The other thing we've got to think about is that we're not just in this alone as America.
We're in a competitive marketplace.
Some of those who are friends and foes in other countries like China, and the more that we press pause or try to regulate or tax away AI, the other countries are unlikely to do that.
And so they would tend to grow faster in this space.
And if we are left behind, we're doing ourselves a disservice on national security, on economic output, and ultimately the prosperity of people.
If you've got a question for our guest, Vance, again, about artificial intelligence, about the impact on jobs, the economy, data centers, energy, you can call us now.
The lines are biparty.
Republicans are on 202-748-8001.
Democrats 202-748-8000.
And Independents 202-748-8002.
I want to mention a YouGov poll, Vance, that say that Americans are more likely to say AI will have a negative overall effect on the economy than a mostly positive one.
So 45% versus 16%.
What do you think of those numbers?
And is there, where do you think they're coming from and how would you counter that?
Well, I mean, I think it's normal for us to be able to think about this in a negative way, where we want to fear what AI is going to have forward.
I think people oftentimes will consider maybe the Terminator, right?
And thinking about this AI that's coming to attack us and maybe displace all the jobs and cause major disruptions in our lives.
But there's also many positive things that are happening in AI that I think, for one thing, I don't think the Terminator is going to exist.
And if we do have a Terminator, we need an AI that's going to help compete with it, right?
To help overcome it.
And so we need to make things positive in the same time.
But there are certain areas of our economy that I think could improve dramatically and which helps our lives, which are education.
I think education is going to be reformed by AI and allow for there to be better education tools that can help meet the needs of the unique students versus just being in a classroom all day or maybe in the classroom they're able to use AI to get more information or allow for them to have more interaction with what's happening and get a you know a better feel for what they're learning.
The other big one though, Mimi, is looking at health care.
Healthcare and AI, I think, is another area where you can get multiple second looks, third looks, fourth looks on whatever it is that you're, you know, your MRI or x-ray or other things that are life-saving situations, along with better drugs and prescriptions to allow for us to have a healthier life.
So we could be better educated, healthier in the process.
Healthcare's AI Revolution 00:02:50
And I think this would also help many of the manufacturing plants and others to where, sure, some jobs could be displaced.
And I can understand the fear.
I'm empathetic with it as well as someone who has three kids and works in this space a lot.
But I think at the same time, I want to be an optimist about the human ingenuity of these God-given brains and resources that we have, I think are going to allow us to move into the next centuries being even better and brighter and healthier than.
We're going to break away from our program here as President Trump is speaking in Rome, Georgia.
You're watching live coverage on C-SPAN.
You've leveled it.
The playing field's back.
So when I came in and we did what we had to do to save all these businesses, you went through the roof, huh?
We did.
Our quotes, our orders.
We're so busy now, we don't know what to do.
My lead time now on an order is 36 weeks.
We were at a point in time with our RACS division.
We were laying off workers.
We were working one shift three days a week, begging for work.
Now we're turning work down, which is a position that nobody wants to be in, but it's the reality of what your tariffs have done.
Honestly, you've got thousands of businesses all over the country the same.
They're taking it away.
They were ripping us off.
Every country in the world was ripping us off.
And to think that we have to be before the Supreme Court on a thing like this.
Here's a man virtually going out of business, and now he's got a thriving business, hiring people, can't get enough people.
And it's all because of tariffs.
I had Novartis come in yesterday, a big drug company.
They're building 11 factories, 11 drug plants for prescription drugs in the United States.
I said, why are you doing that?
He said, one reason, tariffs.
And we have to be between the Supreme Court with China-centric people suing us, people from China suing us.
They're all China-centric and people from outside of our country.
Sir, it's the best right there.
And it's making our country rich.
And it's a disgrace that we even have to talk about this update.
That's like men playing in women's sports.
It's like, you know, the tariff is the greatest thing that's happened to this country.
We're making a fortune.
But more importantly, all of these factories are booming now, and they were all dead.
Look at that.
All right.
I hope you take it down.
I hope you show them that we have to be, seriously, that we have to be before the Supreme Court of the United States to justify tariffs, which are making every one of these businesses thrive.
And without them, all these buildings are closed like they have been before I got here.
Thank you very much.
Yes, let's move back.
Let's move back.
Federal Moratorium on AI Regulations 00:08:09
You've been watching live coverage.
We return now to our scheduled program.
We joined it in progress.
Would require AI companies to publish safety and child protection plans.
So, what do you think of that?
And do you agree with that executive order banning states from having their own AI regulations?
Well, I think what the president has talked about is kind of a moratorium, or at least what's been discussed in that AO that he talked about there, the AI action plan, is to really look at how can we kind of freeze any additional AI regulations.
So, the old ones would still be, you know, grandfathered in, if you will.
So, those would still stay on the books and allow for that to happen.
But at the same time, we've got to think about what does our system of federalism say?
Our system of federalism, which I think is a beautiful part of America, allows for states to have more rights and authority to do things than just the federal government.
So, there's not this top-down approach.
And that allows for this laboratory of competition to see what works and doesn't work.
So, we have some of this AI that's happening, or AI regulations that have been happening across the states, including in Texas, where I live, there was an AI bill that was passed last year.
And so, a statewide moratorium on AI regulations would keep those in place.
It's just saying, hey, let's take a pause, see how these are going to have effect, and then determine what's going to happen next.
Because the issue with AI is it's not just in one state, right?
It is a commerce across states.
So, the commerce clause also comes in, which brings in federal authority to do something whenever it's dealing with cross-state, across state lines sort of approach with this AI.
And so, I think that's something that we really got to consider.
I'm more in favor of doing that right now because I think what we're seeing is a patchwork quilt of different regulations on AI across the states.
And that could not only hinder the economy, hinder the progress that we could have, but it could also hinder what other states are going to do.
Because if California has a highly regulated system that stops much of the AI and new progress that's going to happen, then that's also going to influence other states.
California has got nearly 40 million people.
And so, if that is going to impact them, it's going to impact many others.
And so, I do think that this is a good opportunity for the federal government to come in and even provide some safeguards.
You know, I'm a limited government free market guy, so I don't think that there should be a lot of new regulations that come in because of the progress and the prosperity that we would otherwise have.
And so, I think this is where the federal government does have a role to play in this situation.
And a statewide moratorium on new AI regulations would be a good path to go.
So, we've got a question for you by text.
This is Michael in Riverdale, Georgia.
He wants to know your thoughts on if a universal basic income is an answer to jobs lost as a result of AI.
Well, I appreciate the question.
And when you look at this, a UBI, universal basic income, could be a fixed amount or some amount that would go out per person or per household.
Some have said maybe $10,000 per person.
There's different amounts that have come out.
I remember a couple of years ago, Andrew Yang, who was running for president at the time, really tried to push this more as a UBI.
The issue is that if you give out the $10,000 in one pocket, that money has to come from somewhere.
Nothing is free, especially when it comes to government spending and taxes.
And this would just be a massive redistribution instead of allowing for the private sector to deal with through spontaneous order, through different market activity, to deal with the situations that are in place, instead of trying to redistribute money around through something like a UBI.
So I don't think that a UBI is a good idea.
I think it also breeds dependency on government from those redistribution that's taking place rather than allowing for people to improve their skills, go to trade school, find other avenues that are going to allow them to be more productive and have increases in their real wage in more jobs than ever before.
Maybe many more people are working remotely in an AI sort of situation or working in pods and other opportunities for them to deal with whatever the situation may be with the AI revolution, rather than having the government come in to either stop it through regulations and taxes or to subsidize people through something like the UBI.
All right, let's talk to callers.
Michael is in Florida, line for Democrats.
Michael, you're on with Vanskin.
Yes, this AI thing, I hear this gentleman talking and everything about what you've been discussing.
The thing I got a question about, I've seen some of your response from people that have lost their jobs from it already.
The thing they don't talk about is they don't ask the consumer how they feel about AI.
And they're dealing with it every day because they deal with their banks, they deal with everything.
It's all AI.
You don't get to talk to a person.
It takes forever to get a person to talk to, which is very aggravating to people.
I think this is a bad thing and not a good thing.
And as far as the workers go, my advice to them, all these workers, they need to get together and organize.
Organize and start a union.
And if you want to fight this, that's the way you fight it.
You fight it as a group.
And get organized and tell them what you don't want.
Thank you.
Vance.
No, I appreciate that.
And I think you're right, actually, as far as the workers go.
I'm not for forced labor unions.
I'm glad that I live in a state that's a right-to-work state.
It should be voluntary.
But if that is something that workers want to do and join together voluntarily, then go for it and allow for those voices to be heard even louder in that sense.
But I think we've also got to be careful about how much that we want government or the private sector to move in a certain direction without thinking about all the opportunity costs and the benefits.
I think too often we consider kind of out of that fear, right, because it's something new, the cost of AI, like we've been talking about today, without really considering the benefits, education, healthcare, transportation, banking.
I mean, there's a lot of other benefits that have happened.
And, you know, it reminds me of when the ATM came into existence, many people were worried that the bank tellers were all going to lose their jobs.
Well, that actually didn't happen.
Bank tellers were able to do different jobs than, you know, dealing with loans or dealing with other things that are helping the consumer more than just handing out cash or cashing checks or depositing checks that now you could do in ATM.
Now, of course, AI could be much greater than that sort of situation, but it provides an example of what I think that we're missing, right?
We have the seen versus the unseen.
And all too often, the unseen has many more benefits than the cost of what we're seeing on the surface.
And so that's why I'm an optimist when it comes to AI.
Let's talk to Alan in Old Saybrook, Connecticut.
Republican, good morning, Alan.
Sorry, Ms. Feemy.
I watch business news on various channels, and there seems to be concern about how artificial intelligence affects software use and installation.
I'm not really even sure how software is used at broad scope.
Can you explain that dynamic of software and artificial intelligence, please?
Thank you.
Well, if I understand it, thank you for the question there.
If I understand it, there is an opportunity now using AI, things like claude or chat gpt where you can create your own we're going to break away from our program here as president trump is speaking in rome georgia You're watching live coverage on C-SPAN.
And I won't forget the men who died, who gave that life to me.
Export Selection