CSPAN - Ceasefire Leon Panetta & Mark Esper
Aired: 2026-03-13
Duration: 01:01:59


=== Pressure on the Strait of Hormuz (15:22) ===

[00:00:00]  To be stolen from.
[00:00:01]  We are done allowing you to be defrauded.
[00:00:04]  We are going to go after the fraud, and we are going to rebuild the American dream by making sure that it goes to Americans first and Americans only.
[00:00:12]  God bless you all, and thank you for having me.
[00:00:42]  Welcome to Ceasefire, where we look to bridge the divide in American politics.
[00:00:47]  I'm Greta Bronner in for Dasha Burns.
[00:00:49]  Joining me now, two guests who have agreed to keep the conversation civil, even when they disagree: Leon Panetta, Defense Secretary and CIA Director during the Obama administration, and Mark Esper, Defense Secretary during the first Trump administration.
[00:01:05]  Thank you both for joining me.
[00:01:08]  Let's start right away with the U.S.-Israel conflict.
[00:01:11]  This week, President Trump sounded very confident about how the mission is going.
[00:01:16]  Here's what he had to say on Wednesday night.
[00:01:19]  We have very good news on the warfront, namely, they are absolutely being destroyed.
[00:01:26]  Iran is being absolutely decimated.
[00:01:29]  That's all I can say.
[00:01:32]  Secretary Panetta, Secretary Esper, you both have led the Pentagon.
[00:01:36]  You obviously don't have intel on this conflict, but do you think decimated is the accurate characterization of where we are at?
[00:01:45]  Secretary Panetta?
[00:01:49]  Well, look, there's no question that we have a military strategy and plan that is being implemented, which is primarily to go after Iran's war-making ability.
[00:02:07]  Look, I think this president uses words like obliterated, decimated, et cetera, only to find that that hasn't happened.
[00:02:17]  I think it's fair to say that they are probably doing a good job of degrading Iran's war-making ability.
[00:02:26]  I think they've gone after missile sites, they've gone after drones, they've gone after all of their capabilities in terms of the Navy and the Air Force, et cetera, et cetera.
[00:02:38]  And so, I think they have clearly degraded their ability, but Iran still has the ability to send missiles into the Middle East, and they still have the ability to keep the Straits of Hormuz closed.
[00:02:54]  And so, we're not there yet, but we are degrading their capabilities.
[00:03:00]  Secretary Espero, how would you characterize Iran's capabilities?
[00:03:06]  Yeah, I think the United States military is well on its way to accomplishing its military objectives, and the objectives that I refer to are the ones that have been spoken to a couple times at least by General Dan Kaine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and those are to destroy Iran's ballistic missile and drone capabilities to include production.
[00:03:23]  Secondly, destroy their Navy.
[00:03:25]  Thirdly, not explicitly, but it's part and parcel of it, is to destroy their air defenses.
[00:03:30]  And fourth, degrade their nuclear infrastructure.
[00:03:33]  Now, he's given very strong numbers with regard to the first two.
[00:03:36]  I haven't heard as much with regard to the nuclear infrastructure, and that is presumably what took us into the conflict 13 days ago now when the president felt that Iran wasn't negotiating in good faith and never was willing to curtail their nuclear aspirations.
[00:03:51]  But with regard to those first few military objectives, I think we've made significant progress.
[00:03:57]  As Leon Panetta said, they still have the ability, though, to inflict pain on the Strait of Hormuz, we know either through patrol boats or mines, even frogmen, despite the fact that over 60 of their ships have been sunk.
[00:04:12]  It's also important to note that they have seemed to be very resilient in terms of deploying long-range drones against strategic targets, political targets.
[00:04:20]  And I think that will take some while to address those capabilities and for us to defend better when they are used against us.
[00:04:28]  On the Strait of Hormuz, the newly appointed Ayatollah Committee said this week that they will continue to use that lever.
[00:04:36]  President Trump said that the U.S. will look to control the Strait of Hormuz.
[00:04:42]  In your opinion, Secretary Esperant, is the U.S. Navy capable of controlling the Strait of Hormuz The U.S. Navy, I believe, is capable of controlling the Strait of Hormuz, but it would be a risky mission.
[00:04:57]  And it doesn't guarantee that there would not be any losses.
[00:05:02]  And so I think at this point in time, what you see is the U.S. Navy, if the reports are correct, are declining to take on such a mission because I think they know that the ships, cargo ships, energy carriers cannot be completely protected at this time because of the, again, the wide range of threats.
[00:05:18]  You have mines, you have drones, you have ship-to-sea missiles to deal with.
[00:05:24]  And I imagine they're not entirely confident that they could deal with all those threats at this point in time.
[00:05:29]  They're probably going to want to use more long-range munitions, continue to destroy those targets before they commit to that mission, would be my assumption.
[00:05:36]  Secretary Panetta, how risky of a mission is that, in your opinion?
[00:05:43]  I think it's a very risky operation.
[00:05:45]  Anybody who knows the Straits of Hormuz knows that it's a very tight strait.
[00:05:51]  You can easily target ships going through the Straits of Hormuz.
[00:05:56]  They're laying mines in the Straits as well.
[00:06:01]  So they really do have the ability to shut down passage in that strait.
[00:06:08]  Which raises a concern, very frankly, that tells us that when you're about to go into war, one of the important things about a process of planning for that war that used to take place in the National Security Council was that you really do look not only at the objective and how to deal with the threat, but you look at the consequences of the war.
[00:06:38]  And my sense is that this administration has underestimated the consequences of this war.
[00:06:47]  They were not prepared for what was obviously going to happen, which was a huge disruption in oil and a dramatic increase in the price of oil.
[00:06:59]  They should have been prepared to basically have ships available to escort tankers through the straits.
[00:07:07]  They should have actually attacked any facilities located along the coast of the Straits of Hormuz so that Iran does not have the ability to be able to attack ships.
[00:07:20]  That should have been an obvious target for military action.
[00:07:25]  And right now, it just seems like we've been caught with our pants down with regards to how we're responding.
[00:07:31]  Secretary Esper, would you agree?
[00:07:35]  Well, Greg, I want to just hit the first part of the question again one more time.
[00:07:39]  You know, even if the United States Navy says at some point here in the next day or two or three, hey, we're prepared to conduct escorts, we feel like we've done enough, that doesn't mean that it will necessarily happen.
[00:07:49]  The shippers have to agree to send their ships through the strait.
[00:07:53]  And they have to agree to not just commit the tankers, but the mariners as well.
[00:07:57]  And the mariners have to agree to take on the ships.
[00:07:59]  And I think at this point in time, there's no guarantee that they will do that, particularly in the light of the fact we've seen seven ships struck.
[00:08:06]  Two of them are tankers that are burning.
[00:08:08]  And so getting them on board is the second step that as well, if you're going to open to some degree the strait.
[00:08:15]  Then, of course, even if you did, the process by which the United States Navy escorts ships back and forth through the Gulf, remaining dangerous, would open up somewhat of the spigot, but it's not going to, you're not going to see the flow of 20 million barrels a day, which is what it's going to take to kind of get prices down and reassure markets.
[00:08:33]  Iran sees this, using this lever, the Strait of Hormuz, as their way to try to end this conflict.
[00:08:40]  CNN spoke this week with Kamal Karazi, the foreign policy advisor, to the Iranian supreme leader.
[00:08:47]  He does not seem inclined to negotiate with the Trump administration and indicated that Iran's current regime can continue with the war while inflicting this economic pain.
[00:08:58]  Take a listen.
[00:08:59]  I don't see any room for diplomacy anymore because Donald Trump has been deceiving others and not keeping his promises.
[00:09:09]  How does all of this end then?
[00:09:11]  If you say right now there's no room for negotiation, President Trump says he wants complete surrender.
[00:09:17]  What does that lead to?
[00:09:18]  There's no room unless the economic pressure would be built up to the extent that other countries would intervene to guarantee this termination of aggression of Americans and Israelis against Iran.
[00:09:37]  Secretary Esper, economic pressure built up on other countries so that they intervene and ask the United States to stop.
[00:09:46]  Is that, do you think, could that be an effective strategy?
[00:09:52]  You know, I'm more concerned, Greta, about the economic pressure that creates political pressure on Washington.
[00:09:58]  We know that for some time polling shows that Americans are concerned with topic number one is affordability.
[00:10:03]  We've seen the prices of some goods up, go up, others have gone down, but clearly in the past, what, two weeks now, the price of gasoline at the pump has gone from $280 and $290 a gallon to what, $340, $350.
[00:10:15]  And there's some expectation it could go higher the long this goes on.
[00:10:18]  And so this is not something you want prices high at the pump as you head into the summer travel season, vacations, and certainly not as you get closer and closer to the midterm elections, if indeed this is Americans' number one choice.
[00:10:33]  And by the way, I'd say it's not going to be limited to gas at the pump.
[00:10:37]  We know that what's being cut off in the strait is not just fuels, but things like fertilizers, which is going to impact agriculture, which trickles its way onto the grocery shelves, and you could see higher prices there.
[00:10:48]  But there's no other commodity that I can think of right now that affects so many different sectors.
[00:10:54]  Again, not just fuel at the pump, agriculture, airline tickets.
[00:10:59]  You can go across sector by sector.
[00:11:01]  You'll see impacts if this goes on and if it worsens.
[00:11:04]  And to me, that's going to create the political pressure for the White House, looking at some midterms right now that look like they favor the House, favor the Democrats for the House, and are putting the Senate into question to some degree as well.
[00:11:16]  Do you have concern with that, Secretary Esper, that the political pressure is what causes the president to say, okay, I'm claiming victory.
[00:11:25]  And is that, if he were to do that in the coming days, what is the risk?
[00:11:30]  What is the fallout?
[00:11:33]  Well, look, politics is always part of a conflict, right?
[00:11:37]  The famous German theoretician Klausewitz always described, as I learned at West Point, that war is an extension of politics by other means.
[00:11:45]  So, politics is definitely at play here, and certainly with the administration where it is right now, it's going to be a factor.
[00:11:51]  President Trump has rightly said that a short-term rise in gas prices is worth it if we can deny Iran a nuclear weapon.
[00:11:59]  I think that's spot on.
[00:12:00]  The question is: will he hold to that over what could be some really tough weeks ahead if indeed Iran digs in like it appears to be and threatens a complete, you know, continued, complete shutdown of the Strait?
[00:12:12]  And at some point, will the Arab neighbors and partners come and put pressure on Washington?
[00:12:17]  We'll see.
[00:12:18]  I don't think Israel will because I think Israel wants not just disarmed Iran, they want to make sure they have no nuclear program and, in fact, want regime change.
[00:12:27]  And so, Israel and the United States will have two different strategic objectives at this point in time that will have to be reconciled at some point.
[00:12:34]  Secretary Panetta, pick up on that point.
[00:12:37]  How big of a problem is that when the U.S. and Israel have two different objectives?
[00:12:44]  Well, it clearly is, I think, a fact that, as Mark pointed out, that Israel's goal is regime change.
[00:12:57]  It always has been regime change.
[00:13:00]  And the United States, although it began with the argument that we were entering the war in order to force a regime change and get the people of Iran to overthrow their government, what we found is that the regime is a lot more entrenched than we thought.
[00:13:21]  And they've appointed a new leader.
[00:13:24]  And I think they're feeling empowered right now because of their ability to put pressure on the United States because this is, without question, the largest disruption of oil that we've seen in a long time.
[00:13:40]  And that's not going to turn around very easily.
[00:13:44]  So what you have is a situation now where Iran feels that it is imposing a very heavy price.
[00:13:54]  And yes, it's a political price, but it's also an economic price that's very real to Americans right now when they go to the pump or when they're trying to get fertilizer.
[00:14:07]  Gasoline is part of our transportation system.
[00:14:11]  It's going to be reflected in plane prices as well as in trucking prices.
[00:14:17]  So prices are going to go up, and that's going to create some real political pressure on the administration that will have the president trying to see if he can try to calm the waters.
[00:14:32]  I mean, he's declared victory, which everybody knows we're not quite there yet in terms of any kind of clear victory.
[00:14:40]  And it's going to continue to put pressure on the president to try to at least find a way to bring this war to an end.
[00:14:50]  Whether he's successful at that or whether he frankly jumps to a quick settlement that obviously leaves the regime in place, doesn't deal with the nuclear problems there.
[00:15:04]  If he does that, then it's going to be pretty clear that the regime has prevailed.
[00:15:10]  To both of you, if you were advising the president.
[00:15:14]  Sure.
[00:15:15]  Greta, if I could add real quick, Leon Panetta made a very important point that I want to double down on, and that is with regard to the regime.

=== Defining the War's End Game (14:11) ===

[00:15:22]  I agree.
[00:15:22]  I think they feel very emboldened right now.
[00:15:25]  Why is that?
[00:15:26]  Because I think they survived the decapitation strikes.
[00:15:29]  Their institutional structures held, their processes held.
[00:15:32]  You know, they had a council of three take over for a brief moment of time.
[00:15:36]  They pulled in the assembly of experts, and within, what, a day or two or three, we have a brand new Ayatollah.
[00:15:41]  And there was no fracturing within their institutions.
[00:15:44]  There was no revolt.
[00:15:45]  There was no IRGC taking on the Ayatollah's or the pragmatists trying to butt their way in.
[00:15:51]  But their process worked, and we've seen no uprising in the streets.
[00:15:54]  They've contained that.
[00:15:55]  So I think they're feeling pretty emboldened right now.
[00:15:58]  And that I imagine, I'm speculating, of course, that they feel that they've probably taken the brunt of U.S. and Israeli firepower and have endured.
[00:16:08]  And so now we see, you know, as you said earlier, the new Ayatollah Mustaba Khamenei come out and say, not just are they going to hold the Strait of Hormuz hostage and keep it closed, but they're demanding reparations now.
[00:16:19]  So it's very interesting to take, and this will be interesting with regard to how it plays out, because at the end of the day, warfare is a contest of wills.
[00:16:27]  Yes, resources matter, things like that, but it's a contest of wills.
[00:16:31]  And you can't count the Iranians out on this one.
[00:16:34]  This is a country that for 47 years, this horrible regime has caused mischief in the region.
[00:16:41]  But they also survived a seven, eight-year war against Iraq that saw, I think, over a million people killed, many, many Iranians, chemical attacks, you name it.
[00:16:50]  Mustaba Khamenei, if I recall correctly, was part of the IRGC then and fought in that war.
[00:16:55]  So keep your eye on that in the days ahead.
[00:16:59]  Secretary Esper, you called this warfare.
[00:17:02]  There is debate about whether or not we are at war.
[00:17:06]  Are we at war?
[00:17:09]  Oh, yeah, there's no doubt in my mind that we're at war.
[00:17:12]  And I served in a war, the Gulf War in 1990, 91.
[00:17:15]  They're very different, of course.
[00:17:17]  At that time, I was a young infantry officer in the 101st Airborne Division, and there's no ground troops here, at least not yet.
[00:17:24]  So they're different, but to me, it's still war.
[00:17:27]  This isn't Grenada in 1983 or Panama in 1989, where it's a few-day exercise, or for that matter, Venezuela just a couple months ago.
[00:17:35]  So in my mind, it's a war.
[00:17:36]  We've seen, unfortunately, and tragically, American casualties, both several killed and many more injured.
[00:17:43]  So that's how I categorize it right now.
[00:17:45]  And the president has as well, by the way, on a few occasions.
[00:17:49]  Secretary Panetta, if you were advising the president, what would you tell him to do next or in the coming days?
[00:18:00]  Well, I think it is important to acknowledge it's a war, this political game of trying to say it's an excursion and it's not really a war.
[00:18:09]  Come on.
[00:18:10]  We've lost seven of our troops, men and women in uniform.
[00:18:17]  We've got 140 who've been injured.
[00:18:20]  There's a lot of destruction going on.
[00:18:23]  This is a war.
[00:18:24]  This is a war.
[00:18:26]  And acknowledge the fact that we're in a war.
[00:18:29]  I think the president has to determine what the end game is here.
[00:18:36]  What is the end game?
[00:18:39]  As Mark knows, one of our biggest responsibilities as secretaries of defense was to deploy our men and women in uniform into harm's way.
[00:18:49]  And to do that, you always try to have three things.
[00:18:53]  Number one, a very clear objective.
[00:18:55]  Number two, a clear strategy to achieve that objective.
[00:18:59]  And an end game.
[00:19:01]  When is it over?
[00:19:04]  Unfortunately, I think the administration has had mixed messages on all three of those.
[00:19:09]  They keep saying all kinds of things about the objective in the war.
[00:19:13]  It's not clear what that strategy is, and it's not clear what the end game is.
[00:19:19]  I think the president has to decide if we are going to bring this war to an end soon.
[00:19:27]  I think the goal is to basically make clear that we've achieved the military objectives, that we have degraded their war-making capability, and that We've made clear that we are not going to allow them to be able to develop a nuclear weapon.
[00:19:48]  We've hit at their capabilities to develop a nuclear weapon.
[00:19:53]  But the biggest problem he's got right now is that to make that work, he's got to get a ceasefire.
[00:20:01]  And right now, Iran is not interested in a ceasefire.
[00:20:06]  So ultimately, in order to make this work, he's going to have to develop the ability to negotiate with Iran and establish the conditions for a ceasefire.
[00:20:18]  In other words, we're looking at what I would call the Gaza solution.
[00:20:24]  In Gaza, we turned Gaza, or the Israelis turned Gaza into dust, but Hamas still was around.
[00:20:34]  And ultimately, they did agree to a ceasefire that had conditions on it.
[00:20:40]  Some of those conditions have yet to be met.
[00:20:42]  But that is what you're going to need in order to ultimately find a way to bring this war to an end.
[00:20:50]  Picking up on two points, there has been discussion about whether or not the president sends some troops into Iran to secure nuclear material.
[00:21:00]  Secretary Esper, is this a good idea?
[00:21:06]  Well, it depends, right?
[00:21:08]  Let me back up before I answer the question directly, because you asked Leon about the end state, at least as I interpret it.
[00:21:15]  And it is true.
[00:21:16]  I think you have to have a clear political objective by which you can measure success or failure.
[00:21:20]  And the Pentagon, for the most part, has done its part.
[00:21:22]  General Kaine, as I said earlier, has enunciated core military objectives, which I think are specific, they're attainable, they're measurable, and they'll make a difference.
[00:21:32]  And I think, as I said earlier, we're well on the way to achieving those objectives.
[00:21:35]  But if you go back, broaden the lens a little bit more, what took us into this conflict, ostensibly, two weeks ago, was the fact that Kushner and Wickoff were in Geneva, I believe, and didn't feel that the Iranians were serious about giving up their nuclear program.
[00:21:51]  And so the use of military force was said to be to get them back to the table or at least show the seriousness of the United States in this regard.
[00:22:03]  So if I were in the White House now advising the president, one thing I think I would put on the table is, you know, Mr. President, we can knock out the military objectives.
[00:22:14]  We're well on the way to do this.
[00:22:15]  I think we need some more clarity on the nuclear.
[00:22:18]  But a good political objective here would be is get the Iranians to the point where we have a negotiation and the negotiation includes the fact that one, they will allow international inspectors, IAEA, that's the International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors, back on the ground.
[00:22:35]  So not boots on the ground, but shoes on the ground into Iran to go wherever they want, Natans, Fordeau, Isfahan, Pickaxe, Mountain, you name it, and verify that Iran's program is no longer underway and that, frankly, it's being disassembled.
[00:22:49]  That should be the second thing.
[00:22:50]  And then thirdly, their role would be to find out where the 900 pounds or so of enriched uranium is so that could be taken out of country.
[00:22:59]  And to me, that is a win.
[00:23:00]  If you can get them, you can get inspectors back on the ground, you can get some verification with regard to the infrastructure, its degradation, and get the nuclear material out.
[00:23:09]  That to me would be a better approach than sending ground troops in.
[00:23:12]  Now, why is that?
[00:23:13]  To do that, first of all, we have to identify where it is.
[00:23:16]  We think that maybe that 900 pounds of nuclear material, at least what's publicly reported, is at two separate sites.
[00:23:22]  Is it, you know, how is it containerized?
[00:23:25]  We'd have to get troops in.
[00:23:27]  You have to have a security force as well to protect them.
[00:23:29]  You'd have to put an air cap over that country.
[00:23:31]  I just think it's a very dangerous mission.
[00:23:33]  Not that it can't be done, but it's a very dangerous mission that if it goes wrong, it would not augur well for the president, for this administration, for the United States of America, frankly.
[00:23:42]  So I'm not sure that we'd want to put the troops in that situation, despite the fact I think they would probably be successful, but not without great risk to the unit and great risk to the mission.
[00:23:52]  So I think the president is smart to never take that option off the table, but I see it as unlikely and probably unwise at this point in time.
[00:24:02]  Secretary Panetta, do you share that assessment?
[00:24:06]  No, I think Mark has described it pretty accurately.
[00:24:12]  Look, this would be a very risky operation to deploy our forces, even special forces, into that situation.
[00:24:22]  And largely, look, first of all, the president has a habit of saying openly everything he's planning to do, which is a mistake sometimes.
[00:24:37]  And now saying that he's thinking of that possibility is certainly sending a signal to Iran to make sure that they have security around all of those potential sites that could be targeted.
[00:24:52]  And that makes it even more dangerous for any groups going in.
[00:24:56]  I think the better course is what Mark suggested, which is to have negotiations, hopefully as part of a ceasefire, that deals again with the nuclear area and does provide for inspections and does provide for containment of whatever enriched fuel they've had.
[00:25:18]  If you can negotiate that, and I would suspect that that might be a positive negotiation as part of a ceasefire discussion, that that would be the best way to be able to secure that as opposed to sending boots on the ground.
[00:25:36]  Current Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth was critical of past U.S. wars in a recent speech.
[00:25:43]  Take a listen to what he had to say.
[00:25:46]  The dumb, politically correct wars of the past were the opposite of what we're doing here.
[00:25:51]  They had vague objectives with restrictive, minimalist rules of engagement.
[00:25:56]  No more.
[00:25:58]  Our authorities, his authorities, CENTCOM's authorities through the President and myself are maxed out.
[00:26:05]  Our capabilities are overwhelming and gathering still, as are those of our Israeli partners.
[00:26:12]  Our munitions are full up, and our will is ironclad, which means our timeline is ours and ours alone to control.
[00:26:24]  Secretary Panetta, is he talking about the two of you?
[00:26:31]  I think part of the problem with the Secretary is that he loves to engage in tough talk.
[00:26:38]  And very frankly, I always thought that for a Secretary of Defense, that it's much better to show how tough you are by the actions of the military.
[00:26:54]  That's the main signal that needs to be sent.
[00:26:58]  And when he kind of says that they're not abiding by any rules, the fact is they are, and there are limits here that are involved here.
[00:27:10]  And so I think rather than basically saying that somehow we're operating without the rules or restrictions involved in combat, basically just sends a message that the United States talks a tough game, but doesn't really implement a tough game when it comes to what we actually do on the battlefield.
[00:27:37]  That's what concerns me.
[00:27:38]  I would rather he refrain from doing that and really focus on making sure that we accomplish the military mission.
[00:27:47]  That's really his main job.
[00:27:49]  Secretary Esper, what's your take?
[00:27:53]  You know, before I became Secretary of the Army and Secretary of Defense, years before, I served 21 years in uniform, so I was a soldier.
[00:28:00]  At times, I've seen the rules of engagement be too restrictive, right?
[00:28:05]  And sometimes that's not coming from the Pentagon, per se.
[00:28:08]  It's misinterpreted or overly interpreted at the tactical level, way down in.
[00:28:12]  So look, I'm sympathetic to reviewing the rules of engagement.
[00:28:17]  In many cases, change per operation, per mission, per context, you name it.
[00:28:21]  But they're there for a reason.
[00:28:23]  And not just the fact that we're legally bound through the Geneva Conventions and through U.S. law to obey a certain set of rules under the laws of land warfare, but they're also there to make sure that we do so in a way that is professional, that we feel is morally justified, that gives our soldiers, our airmen, our Marines, guardians, you name it, a sense of purpose and righteousness that they're doing the right thing on behalf of their country, our great democracy.
[00:28:49]  So that we have to have rules of engagement.
[00:28:52]  We have to abide by them, even when sometimes it seems unfair.
[00:28:55]  I don't believe that we should have overly restricted rules because it is combat.
[00:29:00]  But I do think they serve broader purposes.
[00:29:02]  And another one often cited is we set the standard for the world, right?
[00:29:08]  If we have rigorous rules of engagement that not only allow us to accomplish our mission, but also allow us to do so in a way that seems righteous and moral, it also sets the standard for other countries, certainly the Western democracies, and holds a mirror up to others who won't.
[00:29:25]  And what we don't want to do is give other countries a reason to not abide by any rules.
[00:29:29]  Whether or not they will or won't can be challenged, but the fact is we set the standard globally.

=== Accountability for Civilian Strikes (03:38) ===

[00:29:34]  In our final two minutes here, I want to focus on that U.S. strike on the school in Iran.
[00:29:40]  Here's the New York Times headline.
[00:29:42]  U.S. at fault in strike on school in Iran.
[00:29:45]  Preliminary inquiry says the report indicates outdated targeting data may have resulted in mistaken missile strike.
[00:29:54]  Secretary Panetta, how has the administration responded to this?
[00:30:00]  And what do you think needs to be said?
[00:30:06]  Well, I think it's important to admit that it was a mistake and that we bombed the wrong target.
[00:30:15]  Clearly, bombing a girls' school is not a military target and really sends a signal to the Iranian people that we are not just focused on military targets, but on civilian targets as well.
[00:30:34]  So I think it's important.
[00:30:36]  We've done an investigation.
[00:30:37]  I mean, I think the administration hesitated to admit the problem.
[00:30:44]  The president at one point said it was the Iranians that were responsible for what happened.
[00:30:50]  That was wrong.
[00:30:53]  So we now know what the problem was, and the problem was bad intelligence, and that happens a lot, particularly when you're dealing with old intelligence, which was the case here.
[00:31:05]  That intelligence should have been upgraded.
[00:31:07]  They should have made sure that that was the target that they thought it was going to be.
[00:31:12]  And so that means the United States is responsible for this mistake.
[00:31:18]  And I think the president should say that, that we accept that responsibility, and that we are doing everything we can to avoid that happening to innocent civilians.
[00:31:31]  All right, Secretary Esper, your final thoughts here quickly.
[00:31:36]  Look, it was a mistake.
[00:31:38]  My gut feeling told me that when it first happened because it was the opening shots of the war.
[00:31:41]  And we should acknowledge the mistake and we should conduct an investigation, which is ongoing, and avoid speculation either way until we see the outcome of the investigation.
[00:31:52]  And, you know, Leon made the point.
[00:31:54]  I agree.
[00:31:54]  We do want to send the message to the Iranian people that we aren't out targeting civilians.
[00:31:58]  And look, it was tragic, doubly more so by the simple fact that it killed, what, 150, 140 young schoolgirls, right?
[00:32:06]  But we need to send the message to the Iranian people that we conduct warfare professionally, as morally as possible, in accordance with the laws of warfare, whether it's not striking civilians, not striking cultural sites, things like that.
[00:32:17]  Because part and parcel of that is not just upholding those standards, but we're trying to keep the Iranian people on our side.
[00:32:24]  The estimates are that 80 to 90 percent of the Iranian people do not like the regime and probably don't like the new one under Mustabah Hamadeh because he's supposedly more of a hardliner.
[00:32:34]  So what we don't want to do is chip away at that 89% who hates the regime and has pro-Western leanings.
[00:32:41]  That's important as well.
[00:32:42]  So I think let the investigation play out.
[00:32:45]  Let the chips fall where they may.
[00:32:47]  If there's some accountability, there should be accountability.
[00:32:49]  But it seems like it was just a mistake of bad information.
[00:32:53]  And those things happen in war, unfortunately.
[00:32:55]  All right, that's all the time we have.
[00:32:57]  Former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper.
[00:33:02]  Thank you both for joining us.
[00:33:05]  We turn now to this week's C-SPAN flashback, where we look back at moments from our video archives that connect to today's headlines.

=== Preparing America for an AI Future (15:42) ===

[00:33:13]  Rising oil prices are among the major stories this week, just as they were in 1990 following Iraq's invasion of Kuwait.
[00:33:21]  Here's Democrat Lee Hamilton and former Labor Department economist Joel Popkin at a hearing on the economic impact of the sudden spike in oil prices.
[00:33:32]  Since Iraq invaded Kuwait a year, a week ago, touching off the latest Middle East crisis, U.S. military forces have been moving toward the Gulf.
[00:33:41]  Efforts to isolate Iraq economically have escalated, and prices for crude oil and petroleum products have risen significantly in the United States and around the world.
[00:33:52]  Every $1 increase in the barrel price of crude oil drains $6.2 billion out of the U.S. economy.
[00:34:03]  Now, since half of our oil is imported, $3.1 billion leaves our shores right away.
[00:34:10]  It goes to other countries.
[00:34:12]  The other half goes to oil companies, domestic oil companies, who don't spend it as fast as the consumers from whom it's been taken would have spent it.
[00:34:22]  I would say that if prices stay up for two or three months, a recession can become a reality.
[00:34:30]  Weeks following that hearing, the crisis escalated, leading to a U.S.-led coalition buildup in the Persian Gulf, and months later, the launch of Operation Desert Storm to push Iraqi forces out of Kuwait.
[00:34:43]  And now, a bipartisan discussion with two former governors from either side of the aisle, former Tennessee Republican Governor Bill Haslam and former Massachusetts Democratic Governor Deval Patrick.
[00:34:54]  Governors, thank you both for joining me.
[00:34:56]  Thank you.
[00:34:58]  You both are co-chairs of the Bipartisan Policy Center's Commission on the American Workforce.
[00:35:03]  How did the two of you come to this project?
[00:35:06]  You know, both of us as governors realized really quickly that figuring out how you're going to train your workforce was not just a good thing to do, it was necessary.
[00:35:14]  And the world was changing fast then, it's changing faster now.
[00:35:19]  So I think we both, when we were in office, said this has got to be a focus of what we do.
[00:35:23]  And since been leaving office, I think we've shared the fact that it's remained something that we're going to continue to prioritize.
[00:35:30]  So how often do you communicate with each other, talk?
[00:35:34]  Well, we had a year of convenings thanks to the bipartisan commission here in Washington.
[00:35:40]  And Margaret Spellings, who's a pal of both of ours, was a former education secretary under George W. Bush, asked us to be a part of this.
[00:35:51]  And as the governor said, you know, this idea of being ready for the economy we have and will have and how our people are made ready for that is a concern we both worked on and worked and inspired a lot of our work when we were in office and things are changing even faster now.
[00:36:13]  Critically important to have a national strategy to get at that.
[00:36:17]  As former governors, is your reach more powerful together than separately?
[00:36:22]  I think, you know, hey, the reality, and you know this better than anyone, the world's become so polarized that sometimes you can actually get people's attention when you have a Republican and Democrat that say, this is really important and nobody's paying attention to it.
[00:36:35]  Yeah, you write op-eds, and I want to show our viewers one of those op-eds.
[00:36:39]  This is from Newsweek in October of October 23rd.
[00:36:44]  The former governors, we need a national strategy to meet the needs of the American workforce.
[00:36:49]  And you wrote, we are living in a moment of profound change.
[00:36:53]  Millions of Americans are at risk of being left out and left behind without the skills they need to get ahead.
[00:36:59]  And yet we are not fully preparing our people for the future, a future that will come whether we are ready or not.
[00:37:07]  Governor, what future are you referring to?
[00:37:09]  Well, look, we have technological change, including AI, but not limited to AI.
[00:37:15]  We have changes in industry itself, different kinds of companies, companies that, frankly, in many cases, because of AI, can be stood up faster.
[00:37:26]  And, you know, I remember from my experience governing through the Great Recession that we had lots and lots of people out of work, and we had lots of jobs that went unfilled because the employers couldn't find workers with the skills they needed to do the jobs they had.
[00:37:40]  And that to me seems like it can be and will be an even larger challenge today.
[00:37:45]  And in the near term, we have to be ready for it.
[00:37:48]  I think it's also a matter of national interest because our competitiveness as a nation is at stake and our sense of opportunity that you have a chance to make a way for your family and yourself has been frayed and in jeopardy for some while and feels to me like I think to both of us at even greater risk.
[00:38:11]  So let's take it on.
[00:38:13]  You know, the change that happened 15, 20 years ago from industrial to a digital economy, it disrupted the economy and it meant the loss of job opportunities for a certain amount, particularly of blue-collar workers as things became automated, okay?
[00:38:28]  This is going to affect folks across the spectrum, whether you're somebody that graduated from college thinking you're going to a bank training program or you're going to be a paralegal.
[00:38:37]  It's not just going to be a certain, it's not now just a certain class of jobs that's going to go away.
[00:38:44]  It's going to be much broader than that.
[00:38:45]  And so I think the point the two of us are trying to make is this, is like, look at the things that are filling the headlines.
[00:38:53]  There's not many that are a bigger challenge than are we preparing people for the work that's coming.
[00:38:59]  We need to do that from a human standpoint, but also like we're not going to be competitive as a country if we don't do this.
[00:39:05]  By this, you're referring to AI.
[00:39:07]  I want to show our viewers a Reuters-Ipsos poll from August found 71% of respondents were concerned AI will put too many people out of work permanently.
[00:39:17]  But a Gallup poll found by the end of 2025, 12% of U.S. workers are using AI daily, 26% are using it daily or a few times a week, and 46% are using AI daily, a few times a week, a few times a month, a few times a year.
[00:39:36]  So it's here.
[00:39:37]  It's here.
[00:39:37]  It's here.
[00:39:38]  And I will say, I may be in the minority.
[00:39:42]  I think AI has great opportunity to augment rather than just replace workers.
[00:39:49]  I think there'll be new kinds of jobs that we don't anticipate just yet.
[00:39:53]  We can't quite define.
[00:39:54]  Either way, it's here.
[00:39:56]  And there is disruption that comes with it.
[00:39:58]  And so how do we ready ourselves?
[00:40:00]  That's really the point.
[00:40:00]  And what we have found, I think, in working on the Commission is that there is interest in this subject and in having a national strategy that spans across the political spectrum.
[00:40:11]  When it comes to the national strategy, how much of the focus is on education when you don't know what types of jobs this is going to produce or take away?
[00:40:20]  Well, we do know that there are certain skill sets that are going to be required.
[00:40:23]  Like you said, you know, 10 years ago, everybody's saying, we need more people who can code.
[00:40:27]  And now they're saying, hey, you know, pretty soon Duval and I'll be able to code.
[00:40:30]  It's going to be that.
[00:40:31]  It's going to be the last on the list.
[00:40:33]  But to your point, we don't exactly know what the change will be.
[00:40:37]  So we need to teach people how to think critically and how to be curious enough to learn and adapt to change.
[00:40:44]  So there are things that can happen there.
[00:40:46]  The main point I think we're trying to make is this is an opportunity for leadership, okay?
[00:40:51]  This is not one of those that only Republicans care about or only Democrats care about.
[00:40:54]  Like everybody cares about this.
[00:40:56]  And so before it inherits all the political baggage of one side or the other, if we can have some real leadership saying, let's address this, then we're going to be way better five years from now.
[00:41:07]  We talked about the impact on the workforce.
[00:41:09]  What about the impact on Wall Street?
[00:41:11]  What are you seeing that's happening in Wall Street now with the investments in AI and the impact that that could have on the American people if this is not what they predict it to be?
[00:41:23]  Are you concerned about that?
[00:41:24]  What they, meaning Wall Street predictions?
[00:41:26]  Well, okay, God bless Wall Street.
[00:41:30]  It is a, you know, it's hard for me to hold myself out as an expert on the speculation that happens on Wall Street.
[00:41:41]  There will be wise investments, there will be lucky investments, there will be dumb investments.
[00:41:46]  People will make money or not.
[00:41:48]  I think the question is below or I'd say above market speculation, what is the economy actually going to be?
[00:41:58]  And how is it going to be growing so that we create opportunity for people and how are people ready?
[00:42:05]  And some of that is education.
[00:42:06]  A big part of that is education at various levels.
[00:42:10]  But as we learned in our work, and we talked about with others, not just education, some of it is childcare, family leave.
[00:42:18]  How do we support people at the center of thinking about what this strategy ought to be?
[00:42:24]  And there are lots of components to that which are not just in the workplace, but that support the ability of people to compete in the workplace.
[00:42:32]  You know, if you look at what's kind of driving GNP, like where the investment, a lot of it's gone around data centers and investment in future of AI.
[00:42:40]  If you look at what's driven the stock market, it is that.
[00:42:43]  So the folks that are allocating capital are allocating a lot of it to this.
[00:42:49]  We'll see if that translates into real productivity game.
[00:42:52]  There's obviously a big debate about that now.
[00:42:55]  Regardless, what we want to emphasize is, I mean, we'll find out soon whether Wall Street's made the right choice of investments.
[00:43:03]  What we want to say is we can't, you know, we still do education the same way we did when we were in an agrarian economy.
[00:43:10]  Like, that just has to change.
[00:43:12]  All right.
[00:43:13]  Well, let's turn our attention to politics.
[00:43:15]  We discussed combat operations.
[00:43:17]  We tried to get out of that.
[00:43:18]  I know.
[00:43:20]  Can't escape it.
[00:43:21]  That's right.
[00:43:22]  So let's turn our attention to that.
[00:43:24]  We discussed combat operations earlier on in the program.
[00:43:28]  Let's talk about the political fallout domestically as it continues here.
[00:43:32]  I want to show CNBC a headline.
[00:43:34]  Iran war could make affordability bigger issue in the 2026 elections.
[00:43:39]  And this is what they reported.
[00:43:41]  Democrats hoping to flip the House and Senate in the 2026 midterm elections are dealing, are dialing up their messaging on cost of living issues after the United States and Israel launched these military strikes.
[00:43:52]  Republicans are projecting confidence, predicting a short conflict, and arguing that they can continue to work on affordability while the country is at war.
[00:44:03]  Governor Haslam, how is that an effective strategy when the conflict is rising the costs, is increasing the cost of living for Americans?
[00:44:12]  So one thing, we're both former governors where we're worried about Medicaid and delivering services in our states.
[00:44:20]  We really don't, you know, people ask me all the time about foreign affairs issues.
[00:44:23]  I go, you know, I don't have any insight that your average citizen doesn't.
[00:44:26]  So I want to start with that, okay?
[00:44:27]  Just to qualify or disqualify my own comments.
[00:44:31]  Very limited knowledge.
[00:44:33]  Listen, Iran and its leadership are obviously bad folks that have done a lot of damage and terror around the world, okay?
[00:44:42]  Limiting their capacity to do that is a good thing.
[00:44:45]  What I hope we have is a strategy for what comes next.
[00:44:49]  And you're not seeing one?
[00:44:50]  Well, I don't, again, I'm not on the inner circle of that.
[00:44:53]  I've never been involved in Iran policy.
[00:44:56]  I think what the American people want to know is, okay, if we're going to do this and spend dollars here, show us exactly what the end result is.
[00:45:05]  But again, you have to start.
[00:45:07]  I think most Americans have to acknowledge that Iran and some of the folks it supported have rained a lot of terror on a lot of people in this world.
[00:45:16]  If the strategy is not made clear, what is the impact, do you think, on the midterm elections for Republicans?
[00:45:21]  You know, again, I don't know.
[00:45:23]  I haven't seen enough data to do that.
[00:45:25]  But again, I think that's what leadership does.
[00:45:27]  It says, here's what we're doing, here's why we're doing it, and here's why that should matter to you as an American.
[00:45:33]  That's what leadership looks like.
[00:45:35]  Again, whether we're talking about education and training the future workforce or whether it's foreign policy, leadership defines reality and says, here's what we're going to do about it.
[00:45:44]  Governor Patrick, this war, this conflict is opposed by the majority of Democrats.
[00:45:50]  What is the message to independence from the Democratic Party so that you can convince them to vote for your party in the midterm election?
[00:45:59]  Well, first of all, with the same qualifiers that Governor Haslam spoke to, I have the information and the reaction I think that and the perspective of any other citizen.
[00:46:13]  I don't have any special knowledge or intelligence.
[00:46:18]  I will say that to me, what is missing in a lot of leadership in a lot of corners, public and private, is this notion of long-term value and how we look around the corner to the consequences of the decisions we make today.
[00:46:37]  And that's the part I'm most worried about right now.
[00:46:40]  It seems to me to trivialize that to just talk about, due respect to your question, Greta, to just talk about what the impact will be on this or that party's political gains or losses in the midterm elections.
[00:46:54]  I think we need to be thinking about the national interests around the corner, and I worry that there hasn't been enough explanation of that thinking, if there has been that thinking.
[00:47:03]  Let me ask you then, as former governors, you both served when there were conflicts happening in around this region.
[00:47:10]  What's your advice for governors today as this conflict continues?
[00:47:15]  Well, I think first you start with the people.
[00:47:17]  You start with the people who were serving.
[00:47:19]  I remember sending off, welcoming home National Guardsmen and women who were serving, visiting them in Iran and Iraq and Afghanistan at the time.
[00:47:31]  I think paying attention to the people who were affected most directly by the conflict is critical.
[00:47:39]  And then, as we are all or were then all in conversations with policymakers at the national level, there is a question of trade-offs.
[00:47:48]  And engaging in that conversation in a constructive way, I think, is incredibly important.
[00:47:55]  We can't do anything anymore in silos alone.
[00:48:00]  And as I say, I do worry that we're not thinking comprehensively about some of the consequences of the actions we're taking at the national level.
[00:48:10]  Your advice?
[00:48:11]  You know, my predecessor is governor, Phil Bredison, who was actually a Democrat, but when I was going to office, he said, I said, any advice for me?
[00:48:18]  And he said, only do what only the governor can do.
[00:48:22]  And there are certain things the governor can do.
[00:48:24]  Duval mentioned several of those, like you, you know, if you've got troops overseas, you go visit them.
[00:48:28]  When people are coming back, you make sure your National Guard has the preparation they need.
[00:48:32]  At the end of the day, I could never influence what I served, I was governor under President Obama and President Trump.
[00:48:41]  I couldn't affect any decision they made in terms of foreign policy or military involvement.
[00:48:47]  What I could do is control the things that I could and then do my job.
[00:48:52]  Amid this conflict, there are threats to the homeland as well.

=== Fixing Federal Communication Gaps (11:13) ===

[00:48:56]  USA today, federal counterterrorism agencies are on high alert for a potential retaliatory attack on the U.S. soil after U.S. and Israel forces launched strikes on Iran.
[00:49:07]  Semaphore reported the administration has issued bulletins warning of possible lone wolf and cyber-based homeland attacks as its conflict with Iran continues.
[00:49:16]  But people with direct knowledge of the situation told Semaphore of an ongoing internal disagreement about how to handle those warnings and how to communicate the risk of Iran-linked violence inside the United States.
[00:49:29]  How do you coordinate?
[00:49:31]  How do governors explain that for our viewers?
[00:49:33]  How do you coordinate with federal departments and agencies during a time like this?
[00:49:39]  I'll start if it's okay.
[00:49:41]  You know, we had a lot of experience with this when I was in office because I was there when the bombs went off at the Boston Marathon.
[00:49:48]  And we had practiced through something called the Joint Terrorism Task Force, which I think was set up after 9-11.
[00:49:55]  That's right.
[00:49:56]  And so there were federal, state, and local law enforcement intelligence officers and so forth who did tabletop exercises.
[00:50:04]  It doesn't mean you're ready for everything, but having some familiarity with the other resources available to you at a time of crisis is incredible.
[00:50:13]  And having a sense of what to elevate and what not to in terms of inbound threats or what seem to be threats, I think comes from practice, frankly.
[00:50:27]  Yeah.
[00:50:28]  There are a lot of places the federal government does not communicate very well with state and local agencies, but my experience on security issues, there was a pretty good communication and coordination link in the things that I dealt with.
[00:50:42]  So a lot of times I had complaints about the ways the feds interacted with us.
[00:50:47]  This is one issue where I did not.
[00:50:49]  This is all occurring while the Department of Homeland Security is in this partial government shutdown.
[00:50:56]  And I'm curious, Governor, Governor Patrick, if you think Democrats need to stand down from the policy changes that they're demanding when it comes to ICE enforcement tactics in order to get parts of the Homeland Security up and running to address any threats.
[00:51:17]  I think that the behavior of ICE and the instructions they have been given to enforce immigration rules have been demonstrably cruel and unnecessarily so.
[00:51:31]  And I think that is an issue that requires the attention of our leadership at the national level.
[00:51:39]  This is a tactic.
[00:51:40]  There are lots of different tactics.
[00:51:43]  I don't really have a comment on this one.
[00:51:45]  But I think getting attention drawn to this issue.
[00:51:50]  We're better than this.
[00:51:51]  Governor Haslam, what is your take on what you've seen from ICE?
[00:51:54]  Yeah, again, I can focus on the things that I can focus on.
[00:52:00]  There's a lot of things that I look at and think I want to hear the policy behind that and why we're taking that approach.
[00:52:08]  But again, on the idea of like cutting funding, at the end of the day, I always think when you're in office, like what's the right thing to do?
[00:52:16]  How can you best fulfill the thing you want to do?
[00:52:18]  I think one of the things that concerns me overall is we keep holding one thing leverage for another.
[00:52:24]  And that's happening.
[00:52:25]  Both sides are doing that.
[00:52:27]  You can think of issues right now where that's happening.
[00:52:30]  That's kind of one of those, you know, we're both going to end up, everybody will end up blind from knocking off the other folks' eyes, and we're not ever going to accomplish what we want to.
[00:52:39]  That didn't happen when you guys were governors with state legislatures?
[00:52:42]  Well, at least not to the same degree.
[00:52:44]  Exactly, exactly.
[00:52:46]  Now, again, the world's gotten more polarized and partisans, even in the time since we've lived off, we've been in office.
[00:52:53]  But there was, listen, there's always horse trading, right?
[00:52:56]  That's just how life works.
[00:52:58]  But leveraging, withholding something that's really important to the people you serve to try to accomplish some other aim just never made a lot of sense to me.
[00:53:08]  Sticking with immigration, Speaker Mike Johnson indicated that the Republican Party is making a bit of a reset on this issue.
[00:53:16]  Take a listen.
[00:53:18]  We got a little hiccup with some of the Hispanic and Latino voters for certain because some of the immigration enforcement was viewed to be overzealous and everybody can describe it differently.
[00:53:27]  But here's the good news.
[00:53:28]  We're in a course correction mode right now.
[00:53:30]  We're going to have a new Secretary of Homeland Security, Mark Wayne Mullen, is going to be do a great job in that role.
[00:53:36]  I'm sure that he'll be confirmed by the Senate.
[00:53:38]  He's a thoughtful guy.
[00:53:39]  He'll bring a thoughtful approach.
[00:53:41]  You have somebody like Tom Holman who has 40 years experience in the field and was decorated by former Democrat presidents for his acumen and expertise.
[00:53:49]  And he went into Minneapolis and brought calm to the chaos there.
[00:53:52]  That's what you're going to see.
[00:53:53]  And I think that the Hispanic and Latino voters who came to us came for a number of reasons.
[00:53:58]  They were very animated about the open border and all the negative secondary effects that came from that.
[00:54:02]  But they're also concerned about the cost of living and the lack of jobs and all these other things that everyone's concerned about.
[00:54:08]  So we have a great record to run on.
[00:54:11]  Axios is also reporting a change in messaging.
[00:54:14]  Take a look at this headline.
[00:54:16]  White House tells House Republicans to stop talking about mass deportations.
[00:54:21]  Governor Haslam, is a course correction needed?
[00:54:24]  Well, actually, I'd go back.
[00:54:26]  I'd go bigger than that.
[00:54:27]  I think this is one of those issues that we need a national immigration policy.
[00:54:34]  And I think there's one of those that we can arrive at.
[00:54:36]  It's going to involve some compromise, which won't be real popular with either party's base.
[00:54:41]  But we don't have a, we've said, what's the immigration policy of the U.S.?
[00:54:44]  We don't have one.
[00:54:46]  It crashes from one guardrail to the other between administrations.
[00:54:49]  I don't think folks liked what was happening under President Biden, and I don't think a lot of people aren't real happy with the policy now.
[00:54:56]  This is one of those issues that if Republicans and Democrats would set aside their talking points and their fundraising points and say, well, would actually solve it?
[00:55:04]  Let's put a process in place.
[00:55:05]  It will involve compromise.
[00:55:07]  You'll have a few less easy fundraising letters to send off.
[00:55:11]  But I think that's the American people are ready to, I think, for somebody to kind of call forth the better angels of the country.
[00:55:16]  Why hasn't it happened yet?
[00:55:18]  I mean, it's decades.
[00:55:19]  I want to second the point.
[00:55:20]  I think this is, frankly, like the crisis facing the workforce and our preparedness, this is an issue where the public is more ready than the policymakers for big ideas.
[00:55:34]  And we know our rules are stale and outdated.
[00:55:38]  They need, when it comes to immigration, they need to be updated.
[00:55:40]  They need to be updated in a way that is practical and not performative.
[00:55:46]  And we have to have a way of enforcing those rules that is consistent with the character or the best character of our country, which is fair, humane, serious, and effective.
[00:55:58]  And I think there is legislation there, and I think we have not had legislation because it has served political interests not to have legislation.
[00:56:07]  It's a good wedge issue.
[00:56:07]  It's a good wedge.
[00:56:09]  The reality is, and folks on either side don't want to believe this because everybody around them thinks like they do, but we're an evenly divided country, right?
[00:56:17]  The last, you know, however many presidential elections have been decided by a few digits.
[00:56:22]  The House and Senate leadership goes back and forth.
[00:56:25]  So to solve any problem, like I said, we can either go guardrail to guardrail, which is what we've been doing on immigration, and that's probably the foremost example, or we can say, you know what, I'm actually going to try to solve the problem.
[00:56:38]  And one of the issues is we have so few competitive general elections.
[00:56:43]  98% of our elections are decided in primaries.
[00:56:47]  That doesn't lead you to say, oh, I think I'm going to go try to actually solve the problem.
[00:56:52]  Explain that more.
[00:56:53]  Why?
[00:56:53]  Well, if you look at the number of House seats, I'm not going to be exact, somebody's going to have the exact number, but there's like out of the total number of seats in the House, there's like 30 that are actually competitive in a general election, okay?
[00:57:05]  So that means the only way you're going to lose election is to the right if you're Republican or left if you're a Democrat.
[00:57:09]  So you're going to make certain you don't get beat to the right and left.
[00:57:11]  And one of the things you do on that is you make hay out of the immigration issue.
[00:57:16]  It does not politically lend itself to say, how can I solve this problem?
[00:57:21]  Even though I'm like Paul, I think most people in the country, they're tired of the back and forth.
[00:57:26]  They want a real solution.
[00:57:28]  You know, I'd take it even further.
[00:57:30]  I actually don't think the political dynamic in the country today is so much Democrat, Republican as it is insider-outsider.
[00:57:37]  And most people are feeling like outsiders.
[00:57:39]  Like what goes on with the insiders is not about them.
[00:57:42]  And this is an example.
[00:57:43]  Yeah, listen, the hard thing there is we want to have secure borders and we want to treat people that want to come here as people, as a person of faith, I'd say, as people who are created in the image of God.
[00:57:56]  How do we do both of those things?
[00:57:57]  I actually think we can do both of those.
[00:57:59]  And I think if you talked it through with most Americans, they'd say, yeah, we want to treat people that way, but we've got to have secure borders.
[00:58:06]  I want to wrap with looking ahead to 2028.
[00:58:09]  I want both of you.
[00:58:11]  I'm not running.
[00:58:12]  Okay, you're not running.
[00:58:13]  Governor Brown.
[00:58:14]  Come on.
[00:58:15]  You ran for the White House during 2020.
[00:58:17]  For 15 minutes.
[00:58:18]  You can't count that.
[00:58:20]  I want you both to give us your predictions for your own parties.
[00:58:25]  Who do you think are going to be some contenders?
[00:58:27]  I have no idea.
[00:58:29]  And I keep my mind open for the element of surprise.
[00:58:34]  I think we have a deep bench in the party.
[00:58:37]  I think what the American people, not the party necessarily, whatever that is, but what the American people want is the spirit of problem solving that we've been talking about.
[00:58:46]  Yeah, I'm the same.
[00:58:48]  Two names.
[00:58:49]  Well, two and a half years is an eternity, and you know that.
[00:58:52]  In this world, I mean, we could all throw out names and be fun, but I think it's meaningless at this point.
[00:58:57]  That's all the time we have.
[00:58:59]  Former Tennessee Republican Governor Bill Haslam and former Massachusetts Democratic Governor Deval Patrick.
[00:59:05]  Thank you both for joining me.
[00:59:06]  Thank you.
[00:59:08]  And let's close this week's program with our Ceasefire Moment of the Week, highlighting what's possible when politicians come together as Americans, not just partisans.
[00:59:17]  In Milburn Township, New Jersey, a bipartisan group of more than 100 community members tuned in to a discussion on local immigration policy and residents' legal rights.
[00:59:28]  The mayor, state senators, immigration lawyers, and chairs from opposing parties took part in the virtual conversation.
[00:59:36]  Take a listen.
[00:59:38]  This webinar idea began with a simple conversation between two neighbors.
[00:59:43]  Although we represent different political perspectives, we approached the conversation with mutual respect and a shared concern for our community.
[00:59:51]  Working together, members of both the Democratic and Republican committees joined forces to create this opportunity for civic education and constructive dialogue.
[01:00:00]  It's not common for local party committees to collaborate in this way, and we are very proud to present this as a unified, community-centered effort.

=== Join C-SPAN to Watch Democracy (01:49) ===

[01:00:09]  That's all the time we have for this episode.
[01:00:11]  Ceasefire is also available as a podcast.
[01:00:14]  Find us in all the usual places.
[01:00:16]  I'm Greta Bronner.
[01:00:17]  And remember, whether or not you agree, keep talking and keep listening.
[01:00:29]  C-SPAN's Washington Journal, our live forum, inviting you to discuss the latest issues in government, politics, and public policy from Washington, D.C. to across the country.
[01:00:39]  Coming up Saturday morning, we'll talk about U.S.-Israeli combat operations against Iran with Kylan Hunter of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America and Navy Federal Credit Union Chief Economist Heather Long on the economic fallout of the war in Iran and the surge in gas prices.
[01:00:54]  C-SPAN's Washington Journal.
[01:00:56]  Join the conversation live at 7 Eastern Saturday morning on C-SPAN, C-SPAN Now, our free mobile app, or online at c-SPAN.org.
[01:01:06]  You're watching democracy happen in real time.
[01:01:09]  For 47 years, since March 19, 1979, C-SPAN has made that possible.
[01:01:15]  No commentary, no spin, no government funding.
[01:01:19]  Just democracy unfiltered as we celebrate our Founders Day.
[01:01:22]  Join viewers like you who are helping C-SPAN carry this mission forward.
[01:01:26]  Visit c-span.org/slash donate or scan the QR code, make your contribution today.
[01:01:31]  Preserve the legacy, power the present, shape the future.
[01:01:35]  Support C-SPAN with a Founders Day gift.
[01:01:41]  Congress returns as the Homeland Security Department remains partially shut down for a fifth week, with talks between Senate Democrats and the White House still at an impasse over funding ICE and reforming the Immigration Enforcement Agency.
[01:01:53]  The House returns on Monday from its week-long recess at noon Eastern, and later in the week, members.