[music]

>> Bloomberg Audio Studios. Podcasts,

radio, news.

>> Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was

pressed about how the administration can

square the new round of strikes on Iran

after declaring that the US had

destroyed Iran's capabilities earlier

this year.

>> How is it possible if their capabilities

were quote functionally destroyed 3

months earlier as she claimed for them

to be doing this now?

>> Well, Senator, Iran is at the weakest

point militarily it has ever been in in

the past decade.

>> Joining us now for more is Republican

Senator Rick Scott of Florida, a member

of the Senate Armed Services, Homeland

Security, and Foreign Affairs

Committees, also a veteran himself.

Senator, thank you so much for being

here live with us on Capitol Hill this

evening. When we consider we're coming

off of 10 consecutive days of the US

striking Iran anew and the president

repeatedly threatening to go harder, to

consider heavier options, to use his

language to try to finally bring the

regime to heel. Is that the only course

forward? Is just to intensify a campaign

that has killed so many Americans

already?

>> Well, first thing, my heart goes out to

the families who lost their loved ones.

I was fortunate to just to be able to

serve in the US Navy, but

never got shot at. So, my heart goes out

to the families who lost loved ones.

Nobody wants that. You know,

unfortunately, Iran's been killing

Americans for 47 years. We finally have

a president that said enough's enough.

They're not going to have a nuclear

weapon. They're not going to be having

ability to continue to kill Americans.

Unfortunately, it's going to continue to

take military effort to do it. The

Iranian regime is not ready for change.

So, it's probably going to take a lot

more bombing to get it done.

But, we if we don't, then we're all at

risk. None of us want to be killed by a

nuclear weapon.

And so, I mean, it's it's a it's war is

terrible.

>> If a lot more bombing must be done,

there's a question about how much it

might cost. And that was a big part of

the conversation today with the Defense

Secretary. He had a number for us today,

37.5 billion. Knowing this supplemental

request is about twice that,

what is the administration voting for

beyond replenishing the supplies? Will

there be much more money required

to continue this operation?

>> Well, we don't know.

Bottom line is we don't know. We don't

know when the Iranian regime is going to

come around and decide they don't want

they don't want to continue to kill

Americans.

>> Well, then should this be paid for if

this is going to be a longer haul?

>> Well, I I think you know I believe

everything ought to be paid for. I don't

think with this government should you

know any government should be running

deficits. And so I've been I've been

frustrated up here because we're running

$2 trillion deficits right now. So I

think things have to be paid for if we

want to get inflation under control.

>> Right.

>> And nobody wants their taxes to go up.

So but here I mean it's a trade-off,

right? Nobody wants to go to war, but we

don't want them to have a nuclear weapon

to kill us.

I've got kids and I've got grandkids and

I don't want them to be killed by a

nuclear weapon. I'm sure you're in the

same position. You don't want your

family killed by a nuclear weapon. So

it's going to cost us money.

It's going to cost to have a strong

military to be able to stop this. And

let's look at the world right now. The

world's dangerous.

The world's dangerous for you can blame

anybody you want to blame, but the

government of Russia hates us, the

government of China hates us, the

government of Iran hates us, the

government of North Korea hates us. So

it's a dangerous it's a dangerous place.

And so if we don't build up a military

that can defend our freedom, then we're

going to lose it. And so unfortunately

it costs money.

>> Yeah.

>> Well, should there not be answers as to

how much ultimately this is going to

cost? You feel that the Pentagon has

been transparent enough with that

information? The Defense Secretary only

revealed that today

giving sworn testimony before the

Appropriations Committee.

>> Well, I think I think it'd be easy if we

knew how many more days it was going to

take. We don't. I mean we don't know how

many more days it's going to take to

take it a new regime and to destroy them

or bring them to the table. We just

don't. And we actually you never have

enough information about how well your

enemy is doing.

So, I you know, I look Pete Hoekstra has

been always up open honest with me. If I

if I call him or if I text him, I get an

answer within hours.

He's very transparent with me. He's been

very transparent with the Armed Services

Committee.

But I don't think I don't think I don't

think you we know yet. I mean I

I wish I knew. I wish it was tonight. I

wish we we they would come to their

senses cuz I don't want more American

lives lost and I don't want to be at

war. But I don't want them to have

nuclear weapon.

>> Well, so

with all of that said, do you buy talk

of a 10-day ceasefire that we've been

hearing about recently, or is that a

waste of time? How do you trust this

party with a ceasefire?

>> I mean we tried. I mean we we gave we

gave them the chance of a diplomacy.

Okay, they used it to rearm basically.

They were never serious.

So, they're a bunch of liars. They they

want to kill us. So

>> So if we're going to get serious, do we

bomb pickaxe mountain, and do we seize

Karg Island?

>> So, I mean that's a decision the

president gets to make. The way I look

at it is is that we have to do

everything.

I mean there nothing should be off the

table. I don't like we want we don't

want to be at war, and we don't want

Americans killed. So, whatever it's

going to take, whatever it's going to

take because they want to kill us.

Whether we like it or not, we we'd love

to have diplomacy, we don't want to be

at war, they want to kill us. So, if

they somebody wants to kill you, I want

to make sure they don't.

>> Well, you mentioned that the Iranian

regime, to use your language, hates the

United States. You mentioned Russia as

well. Obviously, there is some renewed

momentum behind a

sanctions bill that would intensify the

pressure on Russia via giving the

president authority to implement

secondary tariffs on buyers of Russian

energy products. Is that going to pass?

>> I think I think it's

it should I think well I think it'll be

it'll pass before going recess.

>> Wait, and should it within the next

>> I mean look, Putin's despicable. You

look at the

the women and children he's killed in in

in Ukraine.

I mean he's a despicable human being.

And anybody that wants to support him um

by buying buying the war and they're his

oil is is is doing the wrong thing and

they ought to be held accountable. I

mean, the world would like to be None of

us want to be at war. The world would

like to be at peace. Maybe people like

Putin and Xi and and uh the Ayatollah

don't but but so it's going to take we

all have to be in this together. So stop

helping these thugs. These are thugs.

They want to They're killing their own

citizens. Don't care about their own

citizens. Look at Putin. How many people

in Russia died because of what he's

done? Yeah. I mean, how does he wake up

in the morning and and look at the

mirror and say I've really done the

right thing? No. I mean, it's it's it's

you know, how it's it's hundreds of

thousands of from what you read.

>> Yeah, it's remarkable the loss.

>> Uh on both sides here, Senator.

These are just a couple of the items you

could be voting on uh with your week and

change left before

uh the August recess. There's also a

continuing resolution that we haven't

had a chance to ask you about. Is that a

smart move right now? Looks like the

votes are there in the House to pass

this and avoid what could be a shutdown

at the end of September?

>> We have to do it.

>> You have to I mean, we can't we can't

have a government shutdown.

>> So regular order is not going to fly

this time.

>> I mean, the Democrats have walked away

from it. Uh we finally got the the the

list of anomalies to be able to put it

put together a continuing resolution. I

hope the Democrats vote for it. Um so

we'll see but we need to vote on that to

try to make sure we don't have a

government shutdown. It It's horrible

for the people I mean, think about it. I

mean, people the Democrats have shut

down the government three times. These

are people that work their butts off at

here, they're federal workers and

they're all over the country and they

don't get paid. Some of them don't get

paid for weeks and weeks and weeks. They

have mortgages. They have groceries.

They have kids camp, all this stuff and

they're not getting paid. That's wrong.

>> Well, your leader, Senator Thune, has

suggested suggested the CR could

ultimately get attached to the third

budget reconciliation package if the

votes aren't there with Democrats.

Basically, do this along partisan lines.

What what precedent would that set?

>> Well, look, we've already gotten rid of

the filibuster. Now, this is remember,

the filibuster is only to stop it's

supposed to be only to stop debate, not

to stop bills. But then we've already

gotten rid of the filibuster for noms,

we've already gotten rid of the

filibuster for judges, right? So, the

only thing left is for for bills. And

so, it's when when we say

reconciliation, that means you can do it

with just your party votes.

>> Right.

>> That's basically getting rid of the

filibuster.

>> Mhm.

>> So, my view is just get rid of it. Let's

get rid of it and and and pass the stuff

we we care about election security, we

care about funding the government.

There's so many things we care about,

let's get them done.

>> Well, Senator Thune has stood by the

filibuster. He has previously publicly

said he's not willing to kill it. You're

saying he effectively would be if he

chooses that course of action.

>> Well, it's a way to get around it,

right? You know, it's only it's only for

budgetary items. But if let's be let's

let's be honest, it's there's not a lot

left. It's only it's only bills because

we're using reconciliation, which we

don't have a filibuster rule for that.

We've already gotten rid of it for

nominations, we've already gotten rid of

it for judges. So, there's not much

left.

>> I'm going to just mention for the

benefit of our radio listeners that

we're talking to Senator Scott here in

the rotunda of the Russell Senate Office

Building, which is why you're hearing

all this echo. And he's wearing a lapel

pin that says one word, jobs. I have to

ask you, we've been talking about not

only jobs every day, but data centers

every day. Byron Donalds, the

congressman from your state, talked to

us about his plan not for a moratorium,

but to control power off the grid and

keep water, for instance, in a closed

circuit on site. That's a different

attack than New York, which put in place

a year-long moratorium. As somebody who

has background in tech, you're wearing

the jobs pin, what's the right answer?

And should Florida be welcoming data

centers under that construct?

>> Well, so, when I ran for governor back

in 2010, the state had lost 832,000

jobs. I'm a business guy, I build

businesses all my life. I grew up in

public housing, I watched my parents

struggle for work. So, jobs is the most

important thing we can do for any

family. So, right now, we need more

jobs. My state is hurting with jobs

right now. We need to get the cost of

living down, and the only way that's

going to happen is balance the budget.

Now, with with regard to data centers,

what we've got to do is we cannot allow

data centers to cause electricity prices

to go up. That is not fair. It hurts the

poorest family. If you're rich, none of

this stuff hurts you. On top of that,

we've got to preserve all of our water.

Water's important in my state. We're

going to preserve all the water in my

state.

>> Okay.

Great to spend time with you in person.

Meet us up here again and you're back in

Florida. Fantastic. Senator Rick Scott,

Republican from Florida. We thank you,

as always, for being with us on

Bloomberg.