tv Governor John Kasich Says U.S. Should Take Out North Korean Leadership CSPAN May 2, 2017 7:50am-8:36am EDT
>> host: when did the you first meet mad m dam president? >> guest: i've hear about her all my life. at that time i'm 13, 14, of course i knew who the minister of finance was. she knew my parents, and so they were, you know, she was somebody that as a child growing up in liberia i'd heard of. she was always speaking truth to power, she was always criticizing the same government that she worked for. and then in 1985 when she was arrested and thrown into jail by samuel doe, i heard all about that, and she became at this time sort of a political icon. >> watch "after words" sunday night at 9 p.m. eastern on c-span2 the's booktv. >> ohio governor and former republican presidential candidate john kasich recently spoke about his thoughts on the first 100 days of the trump presidency and the current political climate in washington.
governor kasich is author of the new book "two paths: america divided or united." he spoke to reporters at this christian science monitor breakfast for about an hour. >> was it on the record back then? be. [inaudible conversations] >> okay. so here we go. dave cook from the monitor. our guest is ohio governor john kasich. this is his seventh visit with our group. he's been dropping by periodically since 1995, and we appreciate it. he was born in pennsylvania, moved to ohio to attend the ohio state university -- this is where i talk and you get to eat. after graduation he worked for a state legislator, and in 1978 at the age of 26, ran a door to door campaign for state senator becoming the youngest man ever elected to the state senate. in '82 he won a u.s. house seat, eventually served as chairman of the house budget committee where
he was a key architect of the balanced budget act of 997, left congress in 2001, became an an executive at lehman brothers. he was elected governor of ohio in 2010 and won an overwhelming victory for re-election in 2014, and so much for biography. as always, we're on the record here. please, no live blogging or tweeting, in short, no filing of any kind while the breakfast is underway. this is no embargo when the session ends. to help you resist that relentless selfie urge, we'll e-mail pictures as soon as the breakfast ends. if you'd like to ask a question, please send me a subtle, nonthreatening signal, and i'll happily call on one and all. we're going to offer the governor to opportunity to make some opening comments. thanks again for doing this. >> well, you know, i'm here because, obviously, i are this book -- i have this book. of it's called two paths, you
know, america divided or united, and i wrote the book because of, basically, 28 years of elected office and also the fact that i've done a number of other things, and i am concerned about the direction of the country. i talk about how we got there and how we can get out of it. and i think it's pretty timely x i'm having -- and i'm having a good time because i've gone all the way from "the view" to the daily show to "face the nation." that's a pretty good, pretty good, diverse kind of media appearances. so i'm having a good time, and it's been very aggressive schedule, and and i'm really enjoying myself. so that's all i have to say. so what would you like to know? >> let me ask you one, and then we'll go around the table. we'll go tokerly, dan -- to perry, dan, john, simone, deirdre, janet, kimberly, chris and tim.
, that should keep us busy. let me can you about tax reform. you were known for what the almanac of politics calls your serious and detailed work on the budget. i know not all the details are known, but what's your take on the tax reform plan the trump administration rolled out this week which has an apparent relaxed approach? [laughter] >> somebody said something, i found it very interesting. when a democrat is president, republicans care about debt and democrats don't. and then when a republican is president, the republicans don't care about tet and democrats -- debt and the democrats do. that's how pathetic it's gotten to be many this town. one of my friends said if you'd have been around after 2000, they'd have had to lock you up in a rubber room. i always had a lot of problem with the kind of pro-growth republicans because they wanted to dynamically score things.
in other words, they wanted to say if you do something, all these great and glorious things are going to happen. we just saw my be colleague in kansas write a budget that way. i think he actually wanted to pay for his tax cuts and the legislature, typical politician, said, oh, no, we want to give out the tax cuts, but we don't want to have any pay-fors. so you can see what's happened to the kansas. they have enormous revenue problems out there. but here in washington, same is true. now, i do believe there's a dynamic impact on tax cuts. the corporate rate is too high. what it ought to be, i'm not sure, but that would be a matter of negotiation. but there is a you somewhat of a dynamic effect, but it's also going to result in massoff deficits. we do have a $20 trillion debt. the interest that we pay on the debt is taking away resources that could be used to fund vital programs including things like nih. and, you know, it's -- they just
need to be careful about adding an enormous amount of increase to the national debt, because when the debt goes up, the jobs go down. and when the debt goes down, the jobs go up. so i hope the congress will be able to work their way through there this -- through this with some tax relief but at the same time making sure we don't explode the debt. we'll have to see what happens. >> last one from me. on monday you told cbs this morning, quote: it's unlikely that i will ever seek office again, but you to never know. in your victory speech in november 2014, you spoke movingly about helping others. said in part, nothing good is ever lost. anything you ever do to lift someone else to the give them a chance to improve lives gives them some hope. if just one person, it will be recorded in the book of life and will follow you through eternity. that strikes me as not a common political vision. >> well, this book is not a common political vision. anybody here read it?
it's really good, read it. [laughter] >> if you, if you're talking about not running -- >> well, first of all, i didn't say -- >> who do you see pushing that kind of vision? if you don't? >> well, you know, look, i mean, one of the things that i believe and i didn't really even understand this, i guess, for a long, long time. i've heard it said but now i know it's true, you know, if you're young, if you're living in the shadows, if you're weak, if you're powerless, you know, we run over you because you don't have any political clout. and that's just wrong. and i think that in our country everybody has to have the seasons that they have a shot, they have a chance and that they have an opportunity. first of all, i just want to make it clear, i'm a hypocrite, okay in -- okay? but i would like to know who sitting around this table is not a hypocrite, okay? be i'm a flawed guy. sometimes i don't spend enough time with people, sometimes i'm short. but i don't want to be that way,
and i don't like to be that way, and when people point it out, i'll turn around and try to do something to fix it. i think it's, politics is changing, frankly, and i think, i think the rise of independents is, we're going to see it. i don't know over what period of time, but i think it's very possibling to see either a realignment or the beginning of a serious erosion of both political parties because they're not -- they're too locked in. i mean, everything has now become like a parliamentary system, and people are disgusted. and i saw today in a poll in, i don't know, one of the papers i read this morning quickly is that no matter who you are, you are very upset about the fact that america's divided. one of the things i learned on the campaign trail is you can talk about, you know, what your tax plan is and what your, you know, all these kinds of things, but how people really want to be connected, in my opinion, is they want to believe that somebody actually cares about them.
i think it's more about touching people's hearts now than it is about what's in their wallet. and so, you know, i would just tell you when's going to inherit that, who's going to talk about it? i don't know, but i think that's the new politics, and that doesn't mean you tear down successful people, but it does mean you are part of an effort to try to lift everyone. and i i know this is a political breakfast, but i think our problems are much broader. and in case you fly united airlines, you can tell me about it. we are increasingly treating people like widgets, we increasingly absorb only that we agree with, and i believe it's the effort at resolving our problems of common humanity that can allow us to come together and start pushing positive things in this country. but it's so interesting to me that when you're a trump voter, whether you're not, everybody's saying the same thing. this is not where we want america to be. so i don't know if i answered your question. >> you did.
>> and in terms of politics, i don't know what the future brings, although i know it's in front of me. [laughter] bill from bloomberg. >> thank you, governor, for coming. thank you, dave and the monitor, for having us -- >> and i know your boss. >> great. >> is so watch yourself. [laughter] >> dave did steal my main question, but i wanted the follow up on that. when you look at the few details we've seen about trump's economic policy and his tax plans, particularly the corporate rates dropping by more than be half, do you see any evidence that that would kick start the kind of growth that would be necessary the -- >> depends what the plan is ultimately going to look like. look, part of the reason they're not paying for it is i tried to push tax reform in ohio. you know, that's -- first of all, it is full employment for lobbyists. it's the greatest thing going for them, and the reason why having tax reform and pay-fors is because the people who have things taken from them are really angry about it. and really energized.
and the people who get the benefit from the lower taxes seldom speak up. i mean, even in my own legislature there are people who say, well, you know, we cut the income taxes, and no one ever gives me a bouquet, so why does this matter, you know? do i think lower taxes will result in faster economic growth? be i do. do i think that there are changes in the tax system that discourages some things and encourages others? absolutely. so i do believe our corporate tax rates are way too high in the country, and they need to be reduced. again, you should accommodate some of the die mommic -- dynamic scoring for that. i wrote my be own tax plan, it was paid for. it did account for some amount of dynamic scoring, but it's got to be a legitimate number. apparently, there are some republicans that are expressing concern. the other thing i saw today is that democrats have said we're not participating in this at all. why don't we just go straight to -- you know, i'm convinced
after having been in london that we have a stronger parliamentary system in america than they have in great britain, because when i met with some of the people in the conservative party, they're like, yeah, we're working together with labour. yeah, we're doing that. yeah, we like that. i mean, we hate that here. i don't know how -- this is just really terrible. >> ben from the hill. >> [inaudible] thank you very much for being here, great event, as always. so during your speech you made a pretty clear allusion to your rivals, you know, the path that exploits anger, encourages resentment, turns fear into hatred and divides people. and you also said candidates who viciously attack each other are are not wore worthy of the office that they're seeking. from what you've seen, do you still view the president embodying the second of those path, or have you seen anything
that makes you think he's -- >> i think we're seeing fewer tweets. and i don't follow all this because it doesn't interest me that much. but i think we're'ing a little less -- seeing a little less of that. you know, i was the boring candidate for president because i actually was talking about reality, and now we're beginning to see them approach the positions that i have. out of on the trail, you know, 13 million, we're going to shut, throw 'em all out. no, we're not. we're going to just abandon all trade. well, i guess, no, we're not. we're going to rip up the iran deal on day one, and we haven't. but, see, i was boring. and you folks, you know, the print -- i was told by somebody yesterday that the print folks really gave me a fair shake, but the tv people, you know, i wasn't -- we're going to rip it up, we're going to tear 'em down, we're going to go get 'em, and all that stuff.
so, you know, the campaign deteriorated into ratings, and, you know, and all those kinds of things. and so i'm not a believer, i am not a believer that you give people false promises. i don't think you say to somebody the reason you don't have something is somebody else took something from you and, by the way, i'm going to fix it, okay? we don't live in a -- we can't fix our most serious problems with a new app or take a pill. these things are serious problems, and we have problems that are coming our way that are of a tsunami level if we're not careful. the number one job in america is driving. you ever see those trucks that come your way carrying all this stuff, okay? whether it's amazon prime or fedex or whatever? within the next decade, we're not going to have people striving these trucks. there are going to be autonomous vehicles. your groceries will come by drone. it's going to be a big change. artificial intelligence.
you know, that's what watson is, you know? watson is somebody there, that computer that says, oh, let me explain this to you. if you an insurance adjustor or you're working in finance, you know, you better be careful that you're not going to have artificial intelligence take your job. so what i'm suggesting is if we don't deal with this and our educational institutions are woefully inadequate on this in terms of determining what the future's going to look like and what we do to prepare people for the future, we're going to have more gnashing of teeth, more displacement. it doesn't have to be that way. and it doesn't have to be that way if people who run these institutions suddenly become i care about my neighbor, i care about these children, i care about how we educate instead of being stuck in their own silos and their own caves and saying we're going to keep doing things the way we've done them for the last hundred years and, by god, we're going to stay with it. we need an awakening in this country where people begin to
say that, you know, i'm going to do something for somebody else. i'm going to live a life a little bigger than myself. that's what we really need. and to a degree, that's what the two path speech was about. >> daniel strauss from politico. >> thank you, governor. i wanted to ask you about the house republicans and, essentially, what are they not getting about passing a new health care or obamacare repeal bill? i mean, you were -- >> what do you mean, what are they not getting? >> whew can't they -- >> i'm glad they haven't gotten it. >> could you elaborate on that? they've tried hard. >> i don't really understand all of it, but here's what i do know. obamacare needs significant reform. we could take medicaid and we can reduce the expense to the federal government, but over time. and you can give us some flexibility with guardrails, by the way. with guardrails. >> [inaudible] >> well, i think that you have to make sure that there is mental illness and drug addiction inside of any final package that we're presented
with. i've thought about this, and i thought, you know, i thought about this and, you know, am i for mandates, and then i thought about mental illness, i mean, we're just barely coming out of the cave on mental illness. and we need to address it. give us some flexibility on medicaid. give us the ability -- i told the president about, i outlined all of this for him. give us an ability to exclude certain drugs from our formulary because we have no leverage with pharmaceutical companies. i'm not against those companies, they're important, they can give us breakthroughs, soft a lot of the -- solve a lot of the problems we have, but they're too much. so you have two choices. you can either negotiate with them, or you can exclude them, and then that would give you some leverage to reduce the prices. our pharmaceutical costs are the biggest nag costs we have in ohio where we have dramatically controlled or significantly controlled our medicaid costs.
on the exchange side, we know what's happening there, and we have to make sure that exchange does not collapse. and there are things that can be done on that side as well including getting the federal government out of the insurance industry. so to me, there's a way to achieve this, but the idea that they're repealing all these taxes which most be people don't even know about and we cut in half, basically, the resources that go to support people who have health needs is not good. and there's a way to achieve this over time that will work. and it's essential that we given to reform it. so my staff's now in talks with some of the democrat governors. i'd lo to see us -- love to see us come to consensus. but jamming something through that's going to take health care coverage away from millions of people -- i saw a very interesting thing, i think written by the reporter for the cleveland plain dealer, he took a quote from robert taft sr.. finish now, many of you would
not know who that is, okay? he was around like when eisenhower was there. he was president too for a while. and -- i'm just kidding, all the young people here don't know all these things. [laughter] the beatles were there, it was an amazing time. [laughter] taft was the -- >> ah, to be young again. >> taft was the senator from 1939-1953. he was known as mr. conservative. and he said that if americans do not have health care because they cannot afford it, it ought to be given to them for free. >> so to go back to my be original question, i'm sorry, david, i won't take too long here, it sounds like it is hess the tactic or the approach house republicans have taken, and you think it's the actual bill that they've been trying to move that have stopped them from repealing obamacare. >> well, you know, when you go home and everybody's yelling at you on both sides, you know, that's one thing.
politicians don't like anybody yelling at 'em, okay? and you don't like anybody yelling at you at politico. we yell at you from time to time. you deserve it though. [laughter] but, i end mean, i think it's what's in the bill. i don't understand the whole thing, but the senate is going to be a whole different thing. and i just am hoping that we can come up with something, and you want to know if you were to involve the democrats and say what do you think, then i think you'd have a bill that would be sustainable and one that would be constructive. because i do think the whole system needs to be improved. >> phil rucker from the post, washington post. >> hey, governor, good to see you. >> thank you. >> as you may have heard, we're nearing the 10046 day mark -- 100-day mark for president trump, which is tomorrow. [laughter] a two-part question. first, if you could just give a grade, how you think he's done -- >> incomplete. >> okay. and the second question is a little more complex. it's about north korea. >> yeah.
>> and i'm wondering how comfortable you are with the leadership you've seen from president trump and with what you know about him having run against him about his decision making process -- >> i have no idea how he makes decisions. >> well, but are you concerned given the threat in north korea? >> yeah, okay. >> just describe your state of mind as it relates to what's happening in the peninsula and what you see the administration starting to do. >> right. first of all, on the first 100 days, i did go to the oval office and had a very delightful visit with president trump. and in the course of describing including my trip to moon you can with john mccain -- munich with john mccain where i saw world leaders very unsettled, i also told him said, you know, i didn't have a great 100 first days when i was governor. my wife came to me and said, you know, you're the governor of ohio, why don't you act like it. so that was really important, and, you know, i think i've changed, no question i've
changed over the course of being governor. so you've got to give him time to figure out how this whole thing works. now, it's like on health care. i happen to believe he doesn't really care what the plan is. i mean, i don't care what he says, i just know if he could get something through, you know, he's not going to be, okay, i'm an ideological guy on health care. i mean, not. not true, okay? but on korea, first of all, on the strike in syria, that was a very important thing not just because, you know, we all felt, you know, we did -- we're doing something, but it was an important message to send to a lot of world leaders who thought that maybe we were out to lunch and we were not going to be engaged. that's number one. now on north korea, look, we've kicked the can down the road on north korea, you know, forever, and there's two ways i look at this. number one, increasing, ratcheting up pressure probably has moved the chinese, although i'm not sure. nobody knows for sure, but it
appears as though perhaps it has moved the chinese because they have ratcheted up the pressure. maybe the economic pressure and maybe also the fact that we're getting very serious that they can't have an icbm, okay? now, there's a point at which, there's a point at this in my opinion where saber rattling is not effective, okay? and you have to be very careful about approaching that. i also don't have all the intelligence that he has, i mean, the intelligence, information -- [laughter] okay? let me be clear about that. [laughter] >> there's a headline. [laughter] >> so, you know, i think you have to be careful that you get to a certain point. what do i think is going to have to happen there, i think the thad is the first bit of leverage against china. they do not want the anti-missile system on their border. but i'm pretty convinced, and because there is, you know, the
problem of bombing is, you're going to lose a million people in that. i mean, you know, what is it, three-quarters of the population of korea lives in seoul, okay? so it's, now, how do you deal with this? well, i think there might be a way x that has to do with taking out the north korean be leadership. i'd just lee it there. leave it there. >> what do you mean, militarily? >> if you can't figure that out, phil, i don't -- you know exactly what i'm talking about. the north korean top leadership has to go. and there are ways in which that can be achieved. now, but you have to have very good intelligence, you have to have an ability to do things very quickly, and, you know, i think that is not beyond our capability to achieve that. i think i actually said it during the campaign. i don't remember all that i
said, but an ability to remove a number of the top people and have a more benign leadership there that understands what's at risk, i think, is perhaps doable. >> si men --? >> i'm sorry. >> but moving big war hardships in and having a war -- warships in and having a war, i don't think that's going to work. too much loss of life. but, again, i don't have the generals sitting around a table, and i just wouldn't have generals sitting around a table, by the way. you know, i'm also familiar with -- and many of you are not. when i was in the fifth or sixth grade, dizzy remembers this because he had graduated from high school. [laughter] but, you know, when i was in the fifth grade, we used to go -- this is unbelievable for you young folks. and, by the way, i love to see all the young people now in the media, and i love the fact that you're doing this, okay? i love it. we used to go in the cloakroom
and hide our heads in coats thinking that if there was a nuclear war against russia, that we would be safe being in the cloakroom. the generals told jfk we immediate to go, and jfk as a relate of the bay of bay of pigs started to exhibit more judgment. and this was one incident, i believe, and i haven't watched the movie or read the book lately where there was a ship approach, and the generals wanted to take it out, and kennedy said let it pass. >> yeah. >> and then it was, like, we need to bomb, you know, we need to do this. and kennedy said, no. so you always want to have good military advice. i served on the defense committee for 18 years and i had lots of experience with the military. you want them at the table, you want to pick the ones that have an ability to some degree see beyond the chain of command.
but you also want the some very, very intelligent civilian, than military intelligentsia sitting around that table to give you advice. so i don't know everything that he is hearing, but it seems to me the best approach -- we have capability of doing things like that. and that's what i'm talking about, phil, when it comes to capitation of the top leadership of that country. >> simone from roll call. cq roll call. >> if you were still a republican -- >> a little louder for the ancient. >> if you were still a republican in congress today, how concerned would you be about keeping the majority in two years? >> well, i'd want to keep the majority, obviously, i want to keep the majority, but i'm a lot more concerned about what i'm doing to help the country. i mean, somehow in the midst of everything, it isn't about i want tock in power, it's about doing the right thing. the politics comes later. see, that's a big problem with politicians. like my job as governor, it's
challenging. it's a challenging job, but it's not that hard because i'm not sitting around looking at polls as to whether i should expand medicaid or what i should do with autism, what do i do, try and make sure my budget is balanced. i'm going to do what i want to do not blind or deaf to the fact of what people's opinions are. but at the end of the day, you have to do what you think is going the advance your state and your nation. so if you're sitting around worrying about what all these polls are, it's not very good. and you get bad results. and there's nothing more weak than a leader who is incapable of making decisions that improve an organization. that's one of the things that i write about in this book. i wish some of you would read it, it's called followship. in my opinion i think it i created a term. if i took it from somebody else, i'll admit it, but i don't think
i did. any leader in any organization needs to paint a vision about how that organization's going to improve. and if, in fact, that vision is a good one and is accepted, then the people who are down the line, the followers, need to support that vision. and there are leaders within the follow group. there are people that emerge to push it. i was telling somebody the other day, chris shays was one of the followship in my budget committee, and he made sure they stayed on track whenever i left the room. now, if that organization loses its vision or gets off track, then i think the followers have a duty and a responsibility to begin to change that organization or walk away from that organization. and that's what we see in many things of life. wells fargo, epipen, united airlines, the catholic church during the scandal, okay? whatever it is -- the media, you know? in our schools. i mean, i've always been amazed that if you have a school where no one's ever learning, why is it that one teacher doesn't
stand on the front of the building with a sign that says my kids aren't learning, we ought to shut this down? i mean, now, my wife tries to correct me and says, john, people have mortgages, they have kids, blah, blah, blah, and people can't just walk away. i'm glad she told me that. she's right. i'm just different. she's right. but there are ways in which to effect an organization without having to get yourself fired, to make yourself known, to make your feelings known. and it's on all of us, all of us in this room to make sure that we can have some integrity, that we can live life a little bigger than ourselves. i don't know how i got there, but i'm glad i did. >> john from news max. >> thank you, dave. nice to see you again, governor. >> you're at news max now. i can't keep track of you. can you send me your resumé? [laughter] >> it's only been four years. [laughter] i just want clarification -- >> how time flies. >> yeah.
i would like a clarification and ask a question. when you said taking out the north korean leadership, you also know that from 1953-1960 at least four times the u.s. authorized the overthrow of other governments -- guatemala, iran and in 1960 taking out patrice he mum baa with an executive order. is that what you're actually talking about, the president signing something as eisenhower did in the congo -- >> let me put it to you this way. i don't know the technicality of this, john, but if i were president and i had the sense -- that's what i think the right policy is. now, if i are the write something on a piece of paper and stick it in a safe, fine. but i'm saying to you i believe the best way to solve this problem is to eradicate the leadership. and i don't mean, you know, i'm talking about those who are
closest in making the decisions that north korea's following now. now, i don't think this is something -- i don't want to say any more than that, okay? there's no reason to say any more than that. that's what i believe we need to do as opposed to some full military strike. i think being able to remove them, and, look, there's some signs here that are interesting. there's a chinese professor that made a speech that talks about the fact that russia -- or that china shouldn't be so close to north korea. normally, when a professor makes a peach like that, that -- a speech like that, that professor would be hut down. there's been no government reaction to the that speech. these are signals. am i like a china expert? be of course, no, i'm not. but i know that there are some things that you see that are very interesting. and it's also interesting that they didn't move forward with this nuclear test which shows that some of the pressure has worked. the president deserves some credit for it.
you asked me how i would deal with it, i've told you how i think we should deal with it. >> my question was -- >> i know, but i'm not answering your question. >> no, no, my question -- >> he has another one you don't want to answer. >> that was just to clarify what you meant. my question is this, you talk about the decline of the parties, we saw it in france last week, the two parties had ignominious de350e9 in the voting rounds for president. if a third party were to rise up in the next two years, would you consider joining? >> no, i'm a republican. i haven't begin up on my party. you know, look, as a republican i actually care deeply about the environment, and i actually do -- i didn't go to the march, but i kind of do believe in science, okay? but i don't believe that science ought to the overrule faith. i think faith is science are consistent. -- faith and science are consistent. i'm in favor of trade. i'm in favor of trade because i
think free trade is not only strategic, but it's economically good. i do, i don't like rising debt. i think we should deal with it. i do believe in tax cuts. i believe in immigration. i don't support things like knock and talk policies. you know, i don't -- i just think we should be pro-immigration. i think that we need to be, we node to be a party that lifts people. our whole purpose is to give people a shot so everybody feels included. now, on a number of those issues the party has diverged from my thinking, okay? well, it's a struggle. it's a tug-of-war. and we'll see what happens. but i will tell you with i do believe it is possible in the future for a well-funded, independent candidate, wealthy independent candidate to win the president i. i believe -- presidency. i believe that is possible. >> john from the bbc. >> governor -- >> i read you every day. >> oh, that's are kind of you. >> not you, but --
>> yeah. [laughter] >> you built me up and then knock me down. i want to follow up with, if you could change one aspect of the way the president bays, what would it be? and -- behaves, what would it be? and a follow up to the north korean policy, do you believe what you've advocated is being seriously -- >> i don't know, but it should be. and probably it is. i'll bet they're thinking about it. i think they're probably -- if i were there, i'd be asking them about it and, you know, are you staging raids, do you know how to land, do you know how to get there, are your helicopters going to work. i mean, all these kinds of things are really important. but i have great, great confidence in the ability, these military young men and women are just unbelievable, what they can achieve and the way that they train. and i think there are things that they can do.
i'll bet they are looking at it. in terms of what would i change, it has to be a unified message. and i'd be calling the democrats n. now, the democrats mesa say they're not interested. nancy pelosi said the other day, and i like nancy -- don't tell any republican i like nancy personally. she was asked a question, if we did away with the border wall concept, would you work to do a health care bill, and she said, no. i heard one democrat senator say, well, i'm not working on health care, and if it collapses, the republicans get the blame. what kind of thinking is that? what is that about? some political strategy? what about the people who would get crushed? maybe they don't matter anymore down here. so i hope that answers your question. >> anything about the democrats, if it collapses -- [inaudible] >> i think it's,en again, i
don't agree with where we are here. and, look, i think with president trump, i'll make one observation, and i'll make -- i don't know him at all. i think there's a tug-of-war going on in the administration, idealogues versus those people who are practical, and i think it depends which today -- you ever been in, they do that in england? >> there's a parliamentary tug-of-war that takes place every year. >> deirdre. "usa today". >> hi, governor. if you're not going to run for president, what's next for you finish. >> i don't know what i'm doing. i never said anything. what i'm saying is it's unlikely, but i don't know what the future's going to bring for me or what obligation or responsibility that i feel. but i'm not doing this, i'm not writing this book, i'm not here today because i'm running for president. i mean, my wife would kill me -- i'm not, sweetie.
that's not why i'm here. [laughter] but you don't ever say no to anything in life. i mean, i never thought i'd be governor. you don't know, but it's unlikely. >> where do you see yourself career wise after your term ends, your governorship? >> i don't know that either. but i will tell you that i aim, if i can, to maintain a political organization so that i can continue to have a voice. whether i'm holding off or who i'm -- office or whether i'm not. i think it's a challenge for people. there are some who have pulled it off, colin powell, al gore, dramatic impact on environment being out of office. so i don't know, but i intend to keep, raise the money if i and have the resources to continue to have a team so i can engage and speak out. and who knows where it's all going the go. >> janet hook from "the wall street journal" sitting in the cheap seats over there. [laughter] >> thanks for being here, governor. i have to follow up on that last thing, you're keeping a political team -- >> well, i hope to.
advisers. you don't just come up with stuff overnight, you know? you have of to exam issues -- examine issues, you have to kind of work at this stuff. you have to work at communicating it the right way. >> -- [inaudible] the opportunity presents itself -- >> no, no, it's not about ready to run. maybe, but it's not really about ready to run. it's a willingness to be heard and a need to be heard if you think that things are going in the wrong direction. but, you know, i have a team that's removed from my office. it has nothing to do with my job as above of ohio, but it's a side group that works and advises me and travels with me, and, you know, i want to get involved in the balanced budget amendment, you know? this has been a passion of mine for many years. it seems like we need it now more than ever. i'm going to be involved in this whole issue of bottom-up community, and, you know, if you take the health care bill, for example, now, that's one where i can analyze it inside the
government because it affects me. but if i'm out of power and i don't have all that, i've got to have a way in which to gatter and have something intelligent to say if i see something i don't like instead of just blabbering out there. so i don't know finish it's all about being able to have an impact. >> kimberly leonard from the washington examiner. >> hi. thank you for taking my question. back to health care. the american health care act has recently added an amendment that would give states the option to waive certain protections that exist under the affordable care act. what are your thoughts on those amendments as well as some of the changes that would be allowed under medicaid such as turning it into a block grant or a per capita spending? >> yeah. well, look, i have my own plan which i developed with a number of other governors, and i think these things are designed to get votes, and i think it needs to start from ground zero. i don't want -- i haven't studied. i think it's window dressing.
but it's more serious than window dressing, because i think there's an ability to just repeal some things or states that just walk away from some serious things that need to be attended to. i don't know who put it in there or why they put it in there. block grants that are not set the right way don't work. giving stays flexible it but i'm worried about the also worried about the people, right now the resources to fund this are about half of what they were. i know that they repealed some
of the taxes that were put on the highest income americans. i guess we really are what about whether rich people are doing well. >> were going to go to christine from the weekly standard. >> i'll go back to something you said earlier -- >> the republicans may pass some healthcare thing, okay? what i got to tell you something. if your drug addicted, do you know how often you to go and get treatment? if you are mentally be in a much jutta going to see doctor? they're going to get under the republican plan like $3000 a year for health insurance. what you get for $3000 a year? you get nothing and you get very high deductibles. the people of mental illness, a lot of times they can't scrape enough money together to go see a doctor if you have a $20 copayment. i wouldn't be surprised if they
pass something. i'm not for it. i'm just telling you. >> with respect to something to sing earlier about automation and the changing nature of the economy and the solutions of tomorrow. ben sasse talked about this and is written a lot about this and i am understand your perspective as saying politics at this point are evil and a worthless. >> no, no, no. >> how does congress from your perspective from a political standpoint reorient itself to discuss some issues that were still bogged down talked about tax reform and reforming health care system? automation are problems of torpomoreperky think the politim is capable of reorienting itself, discussion to discuss is in the future? >> that's what i wrote my book him a message about when your worried about politics, you just need to know you don't need a phone because when you're out, no one will take your calls and
no one will ever call you back. why don't you start thinking big about how you can save the country. everyone was safe who was he to tell me that? of course i do. >> how would you do that? how would you think carefully about the country? what are some things, such as a framework or theoretical standpoint, but if you're in congress and you think someone needs to be done the next 20 or 30 years, what's the big ticket item? >> you have hearings. i did the entire 18 years i was there. you have a vision and to pursue a patient or even if you're alone. you pursue, pursue, pursue. i think politics is very important. decisions that could not in the sphere are important when people who are in the political sphere are only worried about their own reelection and their own little thing, that will not bring up the best of politics. there are a lot of really good people. charlie dent, for example,, he's always thinking in the future. do i think of the political system is capable of looking at the education system? the training, the job-training system.
sure i think it is but we have to get to the people really going to take those issues on. here's the bigger problem. the bigger problem is not washington, the bigger problem is our k-12 education system and our higher education system in the country. that starts at the school board level. are we training our kids, relating as my kids printable says, are we letting education get in the way of learning? why are we not doing more of the models were kids spend a big chunk of time out in a private sector? whawhy are we not adopting the bottles they have an account called marietta, where people are talking to kids about occupations in kindergarten and getting them out in the community. we are not doing that by large in most schools. all we are worried about is what's best in the vase going do? forget betsy devos. i want to know what you can to do in your school board. -- >> we will eat this conversation at this point. you can see it in its entirety at a website