Now, a look at the state of

Pennsylvania. It's one of the most

important states in this presidential

race. [music]

>> Both Pennsylvania senators, Democrat

John Federman and Republican Dave

McCormack, [music] voted in favor of the

bill.

>> In this situation, we both agree that

shutting our government down is wrong

for our commonwealth and [music] for our

nation.

>> So, we're looking for ways to find

common ground. And when we disagree, we

we disagree. [music]

But when we can agree, we agree. Our

votes are about country over party at

this point.

>> Well, we're trying to set [music] a good

example because we have lots of

disagreements, but we trust each other.

We like one another, and we look for

ways to work [music] together.

>> I thought the best way to kick this off

was to actually give both of you a few

moments to just say what's on your mind.

And so, I think in the rules of

parliamentary decorum, Senator Federum,

as a senior sitting senator from

Pennsylvania, maybe you can start. I'm

I'm proud that to call Senator McCormack

a a a good friend. Uh and now things are

very more polarized and now I refuse to

uh engage in the kinds of extremism. And

you know, we're going to fight together

for Pennsylvania and for our nation

right now. And we're going to continue

to have conversations like this, you

know, whether in Pennsylvania or here

across. So um so we uh we have to find a

better way forward through a lot of the

circumstances.

>> Yeah, Dave.

>> Yeah, I think um I mean one of the the

the benefits of being in a place like

Pennsylvania is that uh the the voters

expect us really to find ways to work

together. And if you put this moment in

perspective,

I think it's probably the most

consequential moment in all of our

lifetimes. And in fact, I think it might

be the most consequential moment in

humankind, which is which is a big

statement. So much change is happening.

It's artificial intelligence, of course,

but it's it's really how that's

affecting everything, life, sciences,

defense, energy. It's it's a moment of

enormous change. And that that change

creates a lot of anxiety that lends

itself to polarization and extremes. And

so if there was ever a time where it's

more important to find ways to work

together, it it's now. And so we've

found ways to work together on

everything from uh energy policy to

fentanyl, the fentanyl crisis to

anti-semitism

uh in Pennsylvania and across the

country to drone technology. And and

these are issues that are of such

consequence that uh you can't get there

by just being with your team. You have

to be able to find common ground. And uh

we we've really looked for ways to do

that.

>> Yeah. I I I think he could confirm uh

Pennsylvania keeps you honest now. And

now I'd like to remind everybody that we

are the only two people in our

respective cycles that flipped seats.

You know, that's really, you know, both

parties want that. they we want to flip

seats. It's like, well, you know, we

we've done that because I think we've

rejected the extreme kinds of views and

now it's better to work together for for

Pennsylvania or for our country for

right now and AI is really really

important and and that will sometimes

will put me at odds where the direction

that the Democratic party seems to be

moving in that now. So now uh moratorum

for data centers I for me that's a China

first kinds of policy for that. I'm

going to continue to push back that. I'm

not going to describe that as a scourge.

I'm going to describe that as an

incredible new opportunity. And now you

know my friend he he organized an

incredible symposium in western

Pennsylvania that brought AI together

and energy. And that's two parts of

things Pennsylvania really brings to the

table in this very very important

conversation.

>> I think that we're at this point now

where is it fair to say as goes

Pennsylvania as goes the rest of the

country in the sense that if if you can

find common ground in the state on these

very thorny issues, maybe the rest of

the country can find ground. And the

vice versa is also true. If you guys

can't find resolution, what are the odds

that California and West Virginia making

it up find resolution? So what is it

like a day in the life in the US Senate

trying to find these compromises because

from our perspective outside in a lot of

the time it just seems like nothing is

happening.

>> Dave.

>> Yeah. I think um if you step back you

would we we I know we look very similar

but uh we we have uh we have many

similar background.

>> Yeah. We have what's the difference? We

have similar backgrounds uh in the sense

we both grew up in rural Pennsylvania

and uh had similar you know similar

childhoods and uh John went into public

service. I uh I left went to West Point

went to the military but we both came

back from those those rural backgrounds.

But what's interesting in Pennsylvania

is 19 electoral votes and the it's a

microcosm of the country. You have these

two big urban centers Philadelphia and

Pittsburgh which are mostly Democrats.

you have these these rural areas that

are mostly uh red, mostly Republican,

and you got to build a coalition across

those to win. So, ironically, a lot of

the same people that voted for uh

Senator Federman voted for me and um and

and voted for President Trump and and

that's the coalition you have to build.

And the in particular, it is a working

uh families coalition. So the thing

that's uh ironic is that even though all

the uh all the national unions would

have vote would have endorsed Kla Harris

and uh Bob Casey my opponent the rank

and file twothirds of the rank and file

the electricians the pipe fitters the

steam fitters voted for me same with him

they voted for him so it we actually

even though we have a lot of differences

in our parties we have come together

around that coalition and that coalition

includes includes a very significant

Latino turnout, uh, a very significant

African-American turnout, the highest

African-American turnout in 2024 in the

last 30 years. And so, uh, that

coalition, I think, is up for grabs. Who

wins that coalition in Pennsylvania and

who wins it in the country, I think,

will dictate the future to a large

degree in 2028 and beyond. And so that's

what we're working on together because

we're trying to build that coalition to

do good things together in Pennsylvania.

>> The uh Senate is at an all-time low in

terms of approval rating. We have the

lowest approval rating of a president in

history after Biden who is extremely low

rated. You guys can't control the debt.

The American populace believed we'd be

in a golden age right now. They're not

seeing it. Inflation is soaring. The

president seems to be running a muck.

has no check in the house and you guys

are responsible.

>> Tell us tell us what you really think

other than other than that, Mrs.

Lincoln.

>> Well, and $40 trillion dollars in debt

and you're spending more than ever. So,

the American people, I think, are

extremely frustrated with both parties.

It's great to see you guys come

together. Um but what are you going to

do to bring back some balance between

the branches of the government because

this does not seem to be going in um the

right direction for anybody but the

people in this room which is to say the

top 10% of our society.

>> Well I mean for me if you you referenced

inflation is soaring. Well just just

recently that's p primarily driven by

energy prices right now. Now why are

those energy prices high? Well, because

the president decided to hold Iran

accountable. And now

I'm the only Democrat that actually

agrees with that. That was not that was

not a radical idea for a Democrats.

Every single person running for

president as a Democrat said we must

never allow Iran to acquire a nuclear

bomb. And now we have the opportunity to

hold them accountable. Why? That's why I

continue to vote and against these war

powers act now too. So for inflation,

yes, now absolutely no one thinks $5 a

gallon is is great. But if you allow

Iran to become nuclear, you know, that's

going to seem quaint, you know, if $5 a

gallon holding it up to so what's

driving this economic conversation o

overall right now. So for me I think

what's most important now uh turn

everything as a partisan thing and

that's the danger where if we despise

Trump more than we are concerned about

Iran becoming a nuclear power that will

have profound implications for not just

in that region but al for a global stage

for right now that's the difficulty

moving forward Now, I've said this in

the podcast of, you know, for allin I,

you know, who's the leader's party? I'm

like, that's TDS 100%. You know, our

party is defined by the opposition of

whatever he comes out for. I've said he

Trump comes out for ice cream and lazy

Sundays, we're we we're going to hate

that [ __ ] [laughter]

you know, and we're going to vote it

down. Now, we all have [laughter] we all

have a bandwidth and we all have a

platform, you know. I feel like you have

to discriminate. I don't care about the

ballroom. If you want to build it, sure,

great. I was there for the the White

House correspondent dinner and I saw how

dangerous that was for for our

leadership. But I don't care about the

reflecting pool. But now we can't stop

talking about all this other kind of so

we can really focus on thing that's more

important when now it's become all just

distract distracted by the small small

ball game.

>> Dave, is there a path to resolution? I

mean, like, you're you guys are going to

be forced to confront the filibuster,

which is this critical bull work that

sort of leaves

some sort of attempt at finding common

ground out there, but there's a lot of

pressure to end it. I think Senator

Fenerman, you said you'd be supportive

of ending the filibuster. Is that where

we're going to just total tribalism?

>> Yeah, let's talk about the filibuster.

Let's talk about that.

The entire Democratic party, including

myself, we were so wrong about the

filibuster. In my cycle in 2020, every

single Democrat identified we have to we

have to eliminate the filibuster. Seems

like it made sense now. And thank God,

thank God we had people that stood uh

there, whether it's Senator Mansion or

Senator Cinema, you know, history has

vindicated their wisdom to do that

thing. And now Democrats, we all wanted

to get rid of it in 22 and 2025. We love

it. And now it now it reforces people to

work together with both sides. Now if

you turn the Senate into a smaller

version of the House and majority

majority

now, that would have profound profound

implications for now. So now someone

that be the first person to announce,

hey, I was so wrong about that. Uh

that's one of the kinds of hill I would

die on now to defend the filibuster. How

important it is to the Senate, but also

Senate for the minority rights, whoever

that happens to be in in that time. You

know, that's what's so critical what the

filibuster is to governance here.

>> I would say um first of all, uh

Congress, but lots of institutions right

now have very low public approval, very

low trust. That that's a huge problem.

It's across it's across all areas to

church uh uh public officials, business

uh in many cases. So we've got to

rebuild trust in our institutions and

one of the ways you do that is through

your own personal conduct. So one of the

things we can do is try to set the

example. Uh if you look at my voting and

his voting, I I have I'm an unapologetic

conservative. I vote as a conservative.

At the same time, that doesn't mean you

can't work together. So, we look for

every opportunity for bipartisan

legislation. So, I've got more

bipartisan legislation than anybody.

We've collaborated on dozens of things

together because you can do both. And

the filibuster, I mean, it is

frustrating as a business person. I was

in business for 25 years. So frustrating

the way the pace of of how slowly things

move. But I do think it creates the

requirement, the impetus to get things

done. And I would disagree with you. I

think a lot of big things have been

done. I look if you look at the energy

agenda, we can't win the AI race without

energy and uh we made huge progress on

energy. I'm hoping we're going to get

permitting reform, which would be the

biggest economic lever we could possibly

get done over the next 6 months or the

next two and a half years. Um we've

closed the border. We've stopped the

flow of fentanyl. We had 4,000 people

who died in Pennsylvania in the last

year of the Biden administration at

1,600. This year it's down 60%. Those

same statistics nationally. And then

there's huge intractable problems like

the debt and the deficit which are

existential that we're not dealing with.

And that's not a product so much of the

filibuster, not the filibuster. That's a

product of the polarization of our

country and both sides taking advantage

of anybody willing to to to look at a

problem in a in a hard way. My my

question was though about the bottom

half of the company country in the

K-shaped economy we're in and how it's

not working and you guys are

phenomenally unpopular with that group

of Americans. So is there a way to make

>> wealth concentration?

>> Yeah, wealth concentration. The bottom

half is not happy with no sides.

>> No, it's a huge No, it's a huge problem

and I don't I don't think I listened

carefully last night. I mean, I I just

want to tell you, uh, that is a huge

huge problem that's growing. The median

income in Pennsylvania is $52,000 a

year. When you guys say AI or AI

anxiety, I I mean, these these folks,

they've been down this road once before

when a bunch of smart rich people said,

"We got the answer. It's called

globalization." And what happened in my

hometown is there was a mill of 2,000

people that got gutted. It's now 100

people. So, there's enormous anxiety,

but it's because there's no path to

getting ahead. and everybody in this

room. Um, the last 10 years has been the

greatest 10 years in the history of

humanity for those who have assets.

>> So, do you have a plan?

>> Yeah. Well, there's there's got to be

there's got to be a number of plans.

Well, do you have a plan? Because it's

not just going to be me. It's going to

be us because right now I'm listen, I'm

a I am a beneficiary of of capitalism. I

have been wildly fortunate because of

capitalism. But we are we are going to

lose capitalism unless we find a

combination of a ways to address this.

So what are the ways? The invest America

counts is a perfect way, right? Where

you are building opportunity for the

next generation. The um the school

choice uh provision in the working

families tax cut act. $1,700. Everybody

in this room can give $1,700 every year.

billions of dollars that are going to go

into uh school choice for for making

sure everybody has equality of

opportunity. If you don't do that at

maximum scale and this moment leaves the

majority of Americans behind, we're not

going to be able to get anything done.

>> Spend more money on programs.

>> Yeah. Spend more money, but not not

spend more spend more money in giving

people opportunity. So, the reason those

two accounts are great, it takes it out

of the government, circumvents the

government, it's based on incentives and

choice by people that have wealth, um,

it's, uh, it's sort of Andrew Carnegie

uh, brought to present day. Take that

wealth, put it in the hands of those who

will benefit from it, but it's your

choice. It's not decked dictated by the

government. I think that's going to have

to be part of the answer. Does anyone in

Congress subscribe to the notion

that I think is rooted in,

you know, empiricism that the more we

spend, the harder it is for people to

have economic mobility, you know, and I

think that there's a a simplified notion

that government has to play a role in

driving people's progress. And the truth

is the more government intervenes in

markets, the more inefficient and the

more expensive those markets get. And

therefore the more inaccessible wealth

and value creation is for any individual

and the freer the market the less the

government intervenes the less the

government is spending the less the

government is buying the better things

get for people generally speaking does

is and it seems to me every time I visit

DC I leave profoundly unhappy because I

meet with people in Congress and this is

a notion that seems to be diametrically

opposed to their viewpoints that

everything is about doing more for

people government needs to do more on

both sides of the aisle versus if the

government did less things would get

more affordable, things would get more

accessible and people would have greater

economic mobility.

>> Well, I mean, you know, talk about the

the the government now. We had not just

one, we had two shutdowns. Both were

historic in terms of their length. Now,

we couldn't just agree on very basic

things. And now we've shut the

government down collectively for over uh

120 days or whatever. Now then that's

one of the thing as a Democrat I refuse

to engage in that thing. If that's a

core responsibility as a senator keep

our government open and for the love of

God find a way to agree enough to keep

things open and put things in risk and

make our country less less safe. You

know, I'm proud to be a capitalist and

now capitalism is the the one system

that has proven to raise life standard

of humans across the globe. You know,

and now people in my party now now we're

having bad ideas refuse to die and now

we're talking about socialism and and

communists right now. We have we have

candidates now that I'm I am a

communist. These things and it's like

that seems interesting. You know what's

your point now? Talk to anyone that's

had to live under those kinds of regime.

Now they're all absolute capitalists

right now and that's that's absolutely

the fact that the market wool has fixed

a lot of these kinds of problems you

know and I'm not terrified by AI. Am I

concerned about it 100%. right right now

and with now mythos and other concerns

about mass hacking and weaponizing it

that way you know that's coming and now

I think that should belong to America

you know that you know we America should

build that chassis and now that's why if

we turn my party into we're AI is the

scourge or the cancer now I refuse to

reject that because it's going to

transform the world now it can come from

us or it can come from China whose side

are you going to be in? And a lot of the

people that oppose that now, a lot of

that opposition is funded by a lot of

these groups that are aligned with CCP.

So that's part of the danger right now.

So that's the dangerous time right now

and like Democrats now my party. Oh, the

problems are billionaires. Oh, but we

love the billionaires that fund, you

know, our kinds of views and our views

and that too. I know target people, you

know, people, you know, call out Bezos

or whatever. It's like you don't don't

do that. Don't call out private

citizens, identify them the problem. You

know, they are create jobs. If you've

never created a job, don't criticize

people that that have really changed our

our economy for the better. Honestly,

>> why is Graham Platiner doing so well in

the polls? This is a candidate that has

a literal Nazi tattoo on his chest.

Yeah. Yeah.

>> And what does what does history tells us

comes next? If he wins,

>> if a candidate like that can win, what

does that tell us?

>> Yeah. Well, when I when I was a kid, if

someone had a Nazi tattoo, you probably

could call them a Nazi sympathizer, you

know, and someone now uh and now just

yesterday we discovered that he was

sexing with up to a dozen women. And now

Democrats now some saying, "Well, what's

the big problem?" you know, that's, you

know, they're constantly just ignoring a

lot of these things. Um, and now this is

a guy that just a couple years, a couple

years ago, uh, described, uh, an

American soldier in a firefight with the

Taliban. Uh, dumb motherucker that

doesn't deserve to live. That's his

words. Who does that? Who lurks on

there? And, you know, he's really a

tough guy behind a keyboard. And I

can't, you know, explain other than that

it's a backlash to to how partisan

things are. Someone like that should

have been uh in this race right now. So

here we are, you know, a guy that was

texting to up to a dozen women, you

know, he's getting his swall on and now

we're now we're [laughter] kind of just,

oh, what's the big deal? uh why not

confront that and just and call that out

and that's that's the danger if now um

these kinds of views uh could you

imagine could you imagine if either one

of us described an American soldier as a

dumb mother that deserves to lie or he

described the our army as as absolute

trash absolute trash he described

American army as absolute trash um and

and that's a viable candidate now and

that's that's a bizarre place to live

right now as a Democrat. You know,

>> if he wins, what happens to this? What

what does that tell us about where we're

headed?

>> Well, look at what I mean, what's

happening there is I mean, there's

there's problems on both parties, but

certainly what you've seen on the left

is two things. I think it's

indisputable. One is a a migration to

these terrible ideas of socialism and

Marxism and so forth. But in addition to

that, this really rise of anti-semitism

and hatred and that and the the tell

here of how pervasive it is is the

people who are now campaigning in Maine,

Chuck Schumer,

uh, Elizabeth, these are mainstream

Democrats that have now lurched so far

to the left. And I think um I think this

is going to be if if those candidates

win and that becomes validation of the

viability of that stream of thinking in

the Democratic party, I think it's in

horribly unhealthy for America. Uh

ironically, the best thing we want if

we're Republicans is a strong Democratic

party that keeps us honest and keeps us

in check with good ideas. And uh and

that's not happening. And uh as I said,

we have problems on both sides. But I

think that lurch to the left is really

frightening a frightening thing.

>> Well, and then let's and you just, you

know, brought up Israel. You know,

that's a profound betrayal for my party

on on Israel or not. So, you know, the

people that are winning a lot of these

elections, you know, you know, one of

their signature view is anti-

anti-Israel and borderline just, you

know, raw anti-semitism in from a lot of

these candidates now, too. And that's

that's exactly where where we are. Um

and now that has isolated me and the

party and just calling that what that

is. I mean that that's that's dangerous

and now uh that that's where one of the

things that we happen to agree on. Uh

that's the right [snorts] side of

history uh for me. And that's a

>> I mean maybe one of the best things that

can happen is Shapiro continues to do

well in Pennsylvania irrespective of

which party you align with a prominent

Jew winning in Pennsylvania running that

state well is a very good sign actually

for the rest of the country that there's

common ground and that anti-semitism is

much more in check than the perception

>> hero we had also

>> I think Josh is fantastic

>> yeah and he you know has a lot of

disagreements about us maybe uh going

into this for and you know maybe being

egged into doing it. Uh and and by the

way Federman um if you're look or

Freeberg if you're looking for the

source of why people feel comfortable

saying these terrible things you can

look no further than Trump and what he

said about McCain being a war hero that

started this actually this rhetoric and

now everybody wants to one up it. He

said he's not a war hero and he got

captured. That's where this started.

Sax. Oh, please.

>> You're trying to blame Trump for the

fact that a Democratic candidate in

Maine has a swastika tattoo.

>> The rhetoric. No, the rhetoric. It

started Start with Trump. We're in TDS

and he needs to

>> We're in TDS land, but fortunately,

we're not interviewing you, JCAL.

[laughter] Let me ask uh Senator

Federman a question. So, I appreciate

your common sense views on AI, on

capitalism, on all the things we're

talking about, and I think that uh the

people in Pennsylvania appreciate it. I

think you're very popular there. But I'm

curious, do you ever get worried that

you might get primared in the Democratic

party when when you come up? Because I

mean, the Bernie Sanders wing is

powerful. They have a lot of activists.

They're very noisy. I mean, do you ever

I mean, I appreciate your maverick

streak and your independence, but do you

how do you think about that risk?

>> Well, a seat or a job is is not

I'm always going to be I'm going to be

honest and I'm always going to have uh

you know, my votes or my opinions are

going to be what I happen to believe is

is true. You know, uh it's not a seat

worth trying to maintain if I'm going to

lie or to pretend that things aren't

absolutely true. Yeah, absolutely. I can

be be primar and there are some

Democrats that are they're angry at me.

If they're angry at me for supporting

Israel, hey, they have at it. If they're

angry at me that I think it's wrong to

shut down the government, that's fine.

Uh if if they're angry at me because I I

refuse to call him a Nazi or a fascist

or a piece of I'll never do that. You

can hold me in that, too. But what's

really strange in that the truth is

somebody that votes like a 93% as

Democratic line and if I change my party

there was a lot of palace intrigue that

I'm going to change the party and I'm

I'm never going to do that and if I did

I could change you know I could announce

right now I am changing it right now my

votes aren't going to change my views

excuse thing uh I wouldn't vote any

differently things I happen to believe

and and if if Democrats run me out of

the party. They will be attacking a

committed Democrat that votes your line

93% of the time because we're in an

unique time right now that I think

things are more important than trying to

I I know what pays the bills as a

Democrat now. Literally what campaigns

are based on Trump literally in their

campaign commercials. Yes. and in their

emails and outrage. You know, it's

constant rage bait. I I refuse to engage

in that. And I'm going to be the an

example of what I think is entirely

appropriate and and a lot of the

conversations are driven by people that

represent very, you know, safe blue

state states. Now, oh, like that's why

Pennsylvania keeps people honest here.

And people are going to remember in 28.

Oh yeah. Oh, I want to be bipartisan. I

want to get along. You know, like people

don't believe you, you know, like they

remember what what they've said and how

people behave. Uh so that's where I'm

at. So yeah, I could be primar. But

what's more important to be uh be

truthful what I think are important

values and remind people that the things

we used to believe in you know I I think

>> I want to I want to I want to just move

to just domestic policy and economics

for a second Dave you you me you said

this incredible story in the green room

which maybe you can start off with which

is the quantum of people that reach out

to you every week to mostly complain

about various companies, but just use

that as an insight maybe to talk about

AI because that's a huge part of your

state. It's also a huge part of the

American economy. And maybe compare it

to what happened with shale and oil

because there's a lot of commonalities.

I think it's quite interesting.

>> Yeah, it's uh I don't know if he gets

the same amount, but on an average week,

we have 14 million people in

Pennsylvania almost. On an average week,

I'll get something like a hundred,000

outreaches to me, uh, letters, emails,

phone calls across different issues. And

you can almost see when the activists

are mobilizing groups to come come and

and make the case on certain things. And

I do a call every two weeks. It's an

sort of an open mic where you get about

10,000 people to show up. and the the

number of data center calls, data

centers have become uh a much bigger and

per pervasive thing. And just to put

this in perspective, David David was

there. Uh Dena and I hosted an energy

and innovation summit in Pennsylvania

last July. We had $92 billion of

investment committed. We had the energy

CEOs, the AI CEOs, big investors, global

investors. We had uh Senator Federman

came, Governor Shapiro came, the

president came, the cabinet came. was

amazing and that's by by the way that's

what you need. Winning is a team sport

and winning in AI is a team sport and

you need all those players at the table.

Um and so it was it was a real success

and since then there's been enormous

investments made in Pennsylvania. I

visited uh one just the other week,

Homer City. 4.4 gawatt of power from a

coal plant that's being transitional to

natural gas. 3.4 gigs is going to go

into a data center complex. a a

gigawatts going back on the grid to

hopefully bring down energy prices. So,

this is this is happening across

Pennsylvania, but the opposition is

growing and it's clear.

>> Is there any organic part to this? Like

is cuz it's very hard to understand

what's happening when you have these

kind of dark forces, dark pools of

money.

>> I can't is there a legitimate like I

don't want to have this in my backyard

for XY. There's enormous misinformation

>> and I think that misinformation is

largely being driven by China and

outside forces and then there's just

legitimate

>> not not understanding not knowing and we

need to do a much better job of making

sure that the outlines of what these

data centers mean to communities is

clear and and and frankly there needs to

be a much clearer covenant of what it

means. If you're going to have a data

center in your community, you're a

township supervisor, here's what you

know. Um, you're going to they're going

to bring more energy they're going to

use. They're going to protect their

water with closed loop. Um, they're

going to give this much to the tax base.

They're going to build schools or

infrastructure, whatever going to build.

>> Isn't that first part the only thing

that matters in people's minds? I just

don't want my energy to build go up.

>> No. Um, because as soon as you get

through that, they move to the next

thing which is water. And then the the

schools are going to be crowded and

there's like So

>> the schools are going to be crowded

because there'll be new jobs. No,

because we new people and they don't

they're not making the connection to the

tax base. The roads are going to be

crowded. So there's a whole

comprehensive case that needs to be made

and u what uh Jamath was making the

point we went through this before John

and I went both lived through this with

fracking huge campaign against huge

misinformation lack of understanding and

15 years later I'd say there's pretty

broad-based support

>> for no yeah there's unlimited money I

mean you know they they someone finds

some B-roll kind of a comment and they

put $10 million behind it and they

they can turn you into the most extreme

kinds of things. It's ironically, you

know, originally people try to convince

people that I'm a socialist and now

people are like now I'm MAGA or

whatever. I'm like, no, I'm just I

haven't changed. My views are my views

are are are the the same. And you know,

I would tell people energy is national

security. Look at what's happening in,

you know, in in Europe and other parts.

Now if you don't have energy security

then your your national security is in

danger. Now AI is coming and and what

what he's done he created this amazing

symposium to remind people that the you

know we need both. We need energy and

Pennsylvania produces a lot of that and

now also AI is coming otherwise we'd

still be using this spinny Jenny or

whatever that's called you know. So it

why do we talk about data centers?

Because people forces are describing

them as a scourge or a cancer that's

going to bankrupt you or destroy your

community. Uh why do we have that right

now? Because this is something that's

going to transform our society. Um there

you know absolutely there could be a

downside but overall it's going to be

much more productive and that's going to

create new opportunities. Now I refuse

to become a party of of lites. Uh you

know that's you know like honest if I

had to vote now claim that that's all

cancer it's danger and it's all downside

then I'd be lying and that's why I'm

saying Republican or Democrat you know

that's a fact. These things are very

very important and that's why I'm going

to

>> Can I just Can I just double click on

this thing when you compare it to Shale?

So

in shale, I'm going to assume that when

shale was escalating in importance,

the push back were from corporate

interests that would have economically

lost out. That's what I'm guessing. The

majority

>> environmentalist.

>> Environmentalist.

>> Yeah, environmental.

>> But it seems like in AI we're dealing

with foreign state actors.

>> Yeah.

>> Is that fair? Is that is that is it as

reductively simple as that? Well, if you

go to those two parts, one was the the

campaign of misinformation and the other

is a lack of understanding, there's much

more of a campaign of misinformation

from outside forces this time around. Uh

but but what happened in in the you know

in in the case of shale methane destroys

the water table, you know, don't want

these in our backyards. What happened of

course was these enormous royalties for

the farmers. Um we're we're the fourth

largest natural gas reserves in the

world. But if we were a country,

Pennsylvania would be number four. This

is the economic engine for our state.

Our state is the second largest energy

producer in the country. So this unlocks

everything for Pennsylvania. And as

those jobs started to be created, so you

saw the economic benefit, the

misinformation about the methane and the

water table became clear slowly and much

too long, 15 years later, we're now at a

place where I bet 80% of the people

would have support fracking. last night

event you know you described that we

have six to eight months uh ahead of

China right is that right yeah okay so

now you know you know you know my party

is driving for a moratorium for data

centers like I mean do you think China

doesn't love that you know again that's

why they're there they're parts behind

some of driving this this view you want

to give that race to China it's coming

it's the choice do you want America to

to to build that chassis or do you want

the Chinese to do that? You know, like

yeah, you know, data centers can make

some things with some uh

>> and at the core of that, John, is what

you said earlier, which is it starts

with TDS and then it goes with give

China AI. Is that

>> I would say this, vote me out. If you

think it's okay to give China a benefit

to win the AI race, vote me out, you

know, and you know, but it's it's like

so

>> your favorite person in the audience. My

wife is clapping for you.

>> Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No, that's exactly

your favorite. I mean, that's exactly

the way I see it as well. So, um, we

have great bipartisan agreement here. So

Dave, I was at your summit last year,

the energy and innovation summit, where

you announced $90 billion of new

investments. The thing I was struck by

was how broad-based the representation

was at that summit. You only had

software companies, you had hardware

companies, you had manufacturing, you

had robotics, you had energy, nuclear

fracking, and then most interestingly is

that you had the trades there. And

that's when a light bulb went on for me

that oh this is a bluecollar boom

because con this is a construction boom

and blueco collar workers are really

going to benefit and the trades who

represented there spoke to that and

since then we've had hundreds of of

thousands of new jobs construction jobs

created and 25 to 30% wage increases for

construction workers and so I'm curious

does that help make the cause more

popular in Pennsylvania? Are those

trades are the unions still on board

with this or have the politics of that

changed at all over the past year?

>> Um, it's a great question and it's it's

been extraordinary. So, just in the last

15 16 months and this these are related

by the way. It's not just energy

projects and data centers. It's US Steel

and a new next generation mill. It's Eli

Liy building a new plant. It's Hanwa and

the Philadelphia shipyard. But they're

coming in part because of the data

centers and the energy projects and um

and so I've spent a lot of time with the

trades lately. The most secure job in

Pennsylvania right now is a secure

welder. I mean is a seasoned welder

>> an electrician.

>> An electrician. These these honestly

these these folks are coming out.

They're getting the training. They're in

their late teens, early 20s. They're

making more than 100 grand a year in

these sites and they can't they can't

build they can't hire quick enough. uh

they can't find enough people to meet

the demand and uh you know these the the

data centers I mean I've looked closely

at that there's one you know coming in

Burwick Pennsylvania right next to where

my uh where I went to high school you

know the the way to think about it is

there sort of four buckets of economic

activity that comes jobs that come

there's of course the deals that come

with them but there's the thousands of

jobs to build the data centers and the

energy that goes side by side so these

are 5 10000 uh folks on the site

Then there's the hundreds of people to

run the data centers. Then of course

every 3 to four years the the hardware

and everything in the data centers gets

upgraded which brings in hundreds

sometimes thousands of jobs. There's the

energy that's going side by side. Then

there's the restaurants, the hotels. I

met with the the trucking association

the other day. They they uh guess that

it's about two logistics jobs for every

one job in a data center. These things

are economic engines. So once you get

that covenant straight, people are

willing to make the decision. And if

they're if a township supervisor, a

county commissioner, no senator is going

to tell them to do this. This has to

come from the ground up in terms of

making the decision. But once they

decide to do that, it's a huge uh engine

for their communities. If they decide

not to do it, my point is, okay, where's

where's your plan? What is the plan? In

Pennsylvania, we've been losing people

for 20 years. We can't get our kids to

stay. This is like a rebirth. It's

amazing what's happening, but we got to

break through the misinformation.

>> Freeberg, do you have a final question?

If not,

>> well, I mean, I think on this point,

why do you think it's so difficult for

the Democrats to embrace the facts on

the ground? because you have an

empirical story to share about job

creation, value creation and there's no

empiricism on the other side that

there's job displacement or job loss in

the white collar jobs which is generally

part of

>> two things I would say the notion of AI

broadly

is getting munched with the notion of

data centers in a narrow thing data

centers of course are an enormous

component of this but those two those

two things are unrelated second I I I

don't think it's just democrats like I

mean we have

>> no the America first movement is now in

the horseshoe exactly aligned with the

>> we have we have the the the far left and

the far right

>> converging on an anti

>> we even have some besties who

occasionally buy into the jobs

apocalypse. So,

>> no, no, I'm I'm I'm I I'm job. No, never

misrepresent me, Sax. I will call you

out every time. I'm I just believe

there'll be jobs.

>> You could also use the word job

mobility.

>> Well, I think I'll let finish my

sentence, please.

>> I'm speaking job displacement is

occurring and that new jobs need to be

created to fill that in. And I think

that's the blind spot of the people who

have Trump dedication syndrome is that

they will never actually do anything

that would modestly criticize the

president. And that's part of the

challenge. I want to have a last just

>> just about the amount of money being

donated by special interests. Do we need

to get money out of politics? Because

that seems to be the root of a lot of

these problems is that you know

billionaires can give 50 million 50

million 100 million 200 million whether

it's Soros or friends of ours. It feels

like there's way too much money in

politics. Does that have to change for

this type of issue uh you know around

data centers etc. and special interest

and and how do we can we ever get there?

>> Yeah. Well, I I would I would say of the

five things I would do to fix America

right now, that wouldn't be in the top

five. But yes, conceptually, I'd like to

get money out of politics. There was my

race [clears throat] was $500 million.

>> We raised 200 million on my side, 300

million on the on the the opposition

side. We we couldn't keep up.

>> I was I was record before in 22. we

raised, you know, and and know my race

was 300 330 million and and now that's

quaint. Wait till 26, wait till 28. This

is going to look like quaint and that's

the thing, you know, collect

>> we need to get money out or this group

needs to be donating a lot more to both

>> or get get [laughter] rid get rid of the

primary p process too, you know, and and

now open to other people. And now these

primaries, they identify the extreme

kinds of views and put out someone, you

know, and and that's part of it now,

too. Collectively, $300 million were

spent to to describe to destroy our

reputations. Think what $300 million

could do for Pennsylvania or for people

that was spent to destroy reputations.

You know, you're terrible. I am

terrible. Uh that's the absurdity of the

American politics, right?

>> On on that note, I actually want to say

both of you are incredibly rational and

reasonable and incredible American. So I

just want to thank you Senators Federman

and McCormack. Very much appreciate

[music]

[music]