Return to Transcripts main page

At This Hour

Russian Commanders In Belarus For Massive Military Drill; Biden Denounces Florida's "Don't Say Gay" Bills As "Hateful"; Consumers Feel The Pain Of Inflation At 40-Year High; Aired 11:30a-12p ET

Aired February 09, 2022 - 11:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


[11:30:00]

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Threat from NATO. The foreign ministry here and in Moscow is saying that the way to de- escalate tensions isn't for them to draw down their forces. They're saying that the international community should make changes in Ukraine. Specifically, they're saying that the international community, NATO, and its allies should stop supplying weapons to Ukraine. Incidentally, another planeload of weapons supplied by the British arrived today.

The Kremlin is also saying that NATO military advisors and trainers should leave Ukraine as well that joint military exercises with NATO forces and Ukrainian forces in Ukraine should stop. And this is the kicker here, after all, the United States has supplied hundreds of tons of military hardware including anti-tank Javelin missiles to the Ukrainians. The Kremlin is saying that all of these weapon systems that have been supplied to Ukraine should be pulled out of the country to de-escalate the situation. This, of course, when the Russian Navy is now having military exercises in the Black Sea, just south of Ukraine with frigates and amphibious landing craft as well, Kate.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN HOST: Nic, thank you for that update. I really appreciate it. Joining me now is John Herbst. He's the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, now the Senior Director of the Atlantic Council's Eurasia Center. Ambassador, thanks for coming back in. We knew the drills were planned, but now we know you know, they're going forward with them. From your perspective, what does it signal?

JOHN E. HERBST, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO UKRAINE: It signals Moscow's continuing intention to use as major buildable forces to intimidate the United States, NATO, EU, Ukraine, to make concessions.

BOLDUAN: We also just found out that the Vice President, Kamala Harris is going to be heading to the very high profile Security Conference, the Munich Security Conference next week, do have a speech and also meet with allies, what role do you think the VP can play in all of this?

HERBST: I think it's important that the VP expressed the strength of Americans' position to punish Moscow if invades Ukraine and takes major steps even before to deter such an invasion.

BOLDUAN: What -- when you say we've seen the Secretary of State overseas, you're now going to see vice president overseas, how does that -- how does it all fit together because obviously, the buck stops with the President? He's the one directing all policy. What does she do in place of the President?

HERBST: Look, she is the second-highest official in the land, so what she says, counts. If she goes to the Munich Security Conference, which is a major security forum and delivers a message of strong American support for Ukraine under Russian aggression and to work with our allies to punish Moscow again if it escalates. That's a very good step.

BOLDUAN: And something I'm sure you and many others will be listening very closely for. You know, over the past two days, you have the French President trying to play -- I'll just say dealmaker here, going from Moscow to Kyiv and find some way to de-escalate. Macron get spoke out publicly saying that essentially progress was being made suggesting that he'd achieved a pause in the crisis yet the Kremlin has now poured cold water on any suggestion that Putin has agreed to de-escalate. How are they not on the same page here? I mean, is that a miscommunication or is this something more -- something strategic?

HERBST: This is an elaborate game. Macron quickly -- properly would like this crisis to go away. But he's trying to achieve this via negotiations. The only negotiations Moscow wants are concessions from the West and from Ukraine. And clearly, Macron is not in a position to offer such concessions. It requires Ukraine to make those concessions. And Ukraine is not about to fritter away things of importance just because Moscow was threatening to invade. So the real game is the buildup of military forces by Russia on the one side, but again, the strong Western response led by the United States to send weapons to Ukraine to beef up American forces and NATO forces in NATO's east and to lay out the strong sanctions that will be put on Moscow's head if they invade. That's the real game. The negotiations are secondary.

BOLDUAN: It's interesting you bring up the game because there is this big question about what is Putin decided to do. And there's a new piece in foreign policy that grabbed my attention for its kind of contrary view to the narrative that Putin is playing chess while the West is playing checkers. Let me read for you just a part of it says. It was never apt at all, in no small part because it attributes to the genius which is better attributed to bass thuggery. And the thing about thuggery is it doesn't take enormous amounts of strategic thinking to make it effective. It is essentially opportunistic and asymmetric. What do you think of this, Ambassador?

HERBST: Well, I think that analysis, a bomb is sound. Putin has succeeded in his war against Georgia in 2008, in a seizure of Crimea in 2014 because he acted like a thug and the Western world acted like weaklings. Things began to change when Putin began his war at Donbas and the West responded with serious sanctions.

[11:35:00]

HERBST: And now for the first time, even before Russia strikes again, he's being threatened with major steps and that's a good thing. That's the game. Dan Baer's right that this is not genius, this is basic raw international politics based on thuggery. And that requires a strong and determined response by us and our European allies.

BOLDUAN: So interesting. Great to have you, as always, thank you for being here.

HERBST: God bless you.

BOLDUAN: Coming up for us, a controversial bill moving forward in Florida, why do Republican lawmakers want to ban the discussion of gender identity and sexual orientation in the classroom now?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:40:00]

BOLDUAN: New this morning, President Biden is denouncing a controversial bill that's being advanced by Florida Republicans as hateful. If passed, it would ban any discussion of sexual orientation or gender identity in schools. And in a statement, the White House condemns the so-called Don't Say Gay bill, saying this. Just imagine what it would feel like to be a kid watching the leaders in your state bully you through legislation that tries to erase your existence. These types of attacks are the root cause of the mental health crisis that too many LGBTQI+ children face. The President wants LGBTQI youth -- young people who may be feeling scared or alone to know that they are loved exactly for who they are and that he won't stop fighting for the protection and safety they deserve.

Joining me right now is Florida State Representative Carlos Guillermo Smith. He's the state's first openly gay Latin X legislator. Thank you for being here. I really appreciate it. I want to read -- you've -- I know you know the wording but for everyone else, I want to first read the wording in this bill. The wording is as follows.

CARLOS GUILLERMO SMITH, DEMOCRATIC STATE REPRESENTATIVE, FLORIDA: Sure.

BOLDUAN: A school district may not encourage classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in primary grade levels or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students. The language is ambiguous wording of this bill, but what is the practical impact of what it will do?

SMITH: Well, thank you for having me on, Kate. Listen, we call this the Don't Say Gay bill because it will censor conversations about LGBTQ students, families, and history in our schools. LGBTQ Floridians, like, myself, we're a normal and healthy part of any society and any school. We exist in conversations about us, about who we are, about what our families look like. They're not dangerous conversations, and they don't need to be censored. And suggesting that they're dangerous or inappropriate as governor DeSantis has already done, it sends a really terrible message to some of our most vulnerable youth who really just need our support.

And to your question, the bill -- it's so intentionally vague that it doesn't just censor conversations about sexual orientation and gender identity. It actually has a chilling effect on the Safe Schools policies that provide supportive educational environments for LGBTQ students to learn and succeed. These are policies, Kate that have saved lives. The bill is not solving any problem that currently exists. And frankly, I think it's disgusting that Republicans are again, using LGBTQ kids as pawns to score political points.

BOLDUAN: You mentioned the governor, let me play what he said about this, this week.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. RON DESANTIS, (R-FL): In terms of the schools, you know, we've seen instances of students being told by different folks in school, oh, you know -- you know, you're -- don't worry, don't pick your gender yet, do all this other stuff, they won't tell the parents about these discussions that are happening. That is entirely inappropriate. And we need -- I -- schools need to be teaching kids to read, to write, they need to teach them science, history. We need more civics and understanding of the U.S. Constitution on what makes our country unique.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: What is your response to him? I don't know. And to parents who may agree with him.

SMITH: Yes. The reality is, is that conversations in schools that simply acknowledge the existence of LGBTQ families, as part of our community, they're always age-appropriate. Governor DeSantis is pushing this bill and a number of other bills that basically censor honest conversations and discussions that he doesn't like, not just about the LGBTQ community, but conversations about diversity, about race, and history. And it's not just in our schools, Kate. He's pushing legislation to prohibit these types of discussions in the workplace as well. This movement to censor school and workplace topics and discussions that don't align with a political ideology, it's not what we do in free states, it's what happens under authoritarian regimes and that's why we're fighting against this very dangerous legislation.

BOLDUAN: It's moving through the legislature now. We'll continue to follow it. Thank you for being here. Coming up for us --

SMITH: Thank you, Kate.

BOLDUAN: -- Rising food prices are putting a major strain on Americans still. A new report from Goldman Sachs is now revealing whether any relief could be on the way. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:45:00]

BOLDUAN: The latest measure of the economy is out tomorrow which will give a further window into just how high inflation is climbing still, it's already at a 40-year high and consumers everywhere are feeling it. Prices for everyday items like eggs, fruit, you name it, are way up. Goldman Sachs now says that it's only going to get worse this year. Their estimate is prices could rise by another five to 6 percent. Joining me now, for some more on this is former Clinton Treasury Secretary, Lawrence Summers, who also served as a top economic adviser during the Obama administration. Secretary, it's great to have you here. A year ago -- almost to the day, a year ago you really seem to predict the situation that we're currently in. Writing in an op-ed that kind of you know took the world by storm, this.

[11:50:00]

BOLDUAN: There is a chance that macroeconomic stimulus on a scale closer to World War Two levels than normal recession levels will set off inflation pressures of a kind we have not seen in a generation. So where do you see us right now?

LAWRENCE SUMMERS, FORMER TREASURY SECRETARY DURING CLINTON ADMINISTRATION: That's unfortunately where we -- where we are. I think we are dealing with inflation of a kind we've not seen since the 1960s and 70s. I think the principal reason for it is that we have overheated the economy with the incredible volume of stimulus we provided during 2021. And when you provide so much stimulus, you get bottlenecks, you get labor shortages, you get inflationary pressures, and that's what we're having. And my fear is that given the magnitude of a labor shortage that we have in the economy, given what's happened historically in the housing markets we're likely to be looking for relatively high inflation certainly far above the 2 percent target through this year.

BOLDUAN: Do you think no inflate -- no stimulus would have been better than so much stimulus, then? Is that -- that's not what it says, no?

SUMMERS: No. I think -- no. I think that the rescue Act was needed for rescue but it wasn't needed on a $2 trillion scale. It wasn't needed, primarily in the form of cash transfers to households, rather than investments in increasing the capacity of the economy. And I think the Fed, frankly, misdiagnose the situation, and the Fed was still fretting about the possibility of deflation long after it was clear that the bathtub was overflowing in terms of monetary pressure for growth. And so when you had both deficit policy and monetary policy pushing together, you got the kind of outcome that we've seen. And then we caught some bad -- we caught some bad breaks in terms of bottlenecks and semiconductors in terms of what happened with geopolitics and oil. But the more -- the stronger and the sooner we act to contain inflation, the better off we're going to be.

BOLDUAN: So the question is, how do you do that, right? So Neil Irwin of Axios laid out today what -- they are kind of calling a pick your poison environment for the Biden administration now, and the Fed right now. The issues driving inflation that got us here are likely to remain through this year and beyond. But this is how he writes it. "The measures that would be needed to bring inflation down more rapidly would risk sending the economy into a tailspin." So, this sounds like there are only -- I mean, it kind of sounds like there are only bad options here for the White House and the Fed. Is that how you see it?

SUMMERS: I think we're in a perilous situation. I think the -- what we have to hope for is that we can gradually decelerate the pressures on the economy, but it's a narrow ledge. The Fed has put itself on too, and there are risks of falling off onto either side. If they act with insufficient rigor, then we'll end up in trenching and even higher inflation rate, and the ultimate pain will be greater. If they induce a recession, that will have very substantial -- very substantial costs. So it's a difficult balance that has to be struck. I do think there's some things the administration can do that would be helpful. This is a moment for reducing not increasing tariffs. This is a moment for focusing more on being able to buy inexpensively, then on focusing --

BOLDUAN: What about Build Back Better, Secretary?

SUMMERS: -- Source of good.

BOLDUAN: Because that seems to be something the President is pushing kind of in part of this economic agenda to get us out is Build Back Better still. Does that play a role here at all?

SUMMERS: I think the effects are very small. You know, Build Back Better is half as large over 10 years as the stimulus that we did in the last 18 months was -- over 18 months.

[11:55:00]

SUMMERS: The stimulus we did wasn't paid for with tax increases. Build Back Better will be paid for with tax increases, build back better will increase the supply of the economy much more than what we get in 2021. What I do think is that we need to make sure we're not pushing deficits further up in the near term, which would just increase demand. We need to make sure that the micro policies contained, whether it's how we subsidize childcare or what we do about prescription drugs are operating to bring down rather than to push up prices. But Lord --

BOLDUAN: But it's --

SUMMERS: -- Build Back Better is an investment we need to make in the future of our country in some form.

BOLDUAN: well, sounds so easy to fix it all after this discussion. It's good to see you, Secretary, thank you so much for coming on. I really appreciate it.

SUMMERS: Good to be with you, Kate.

BOLDUAN: Thank you. Thanks for being, everybody. INSIDE POLICY with John King starts after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ANNOUNCER: INSIDE POLITICS with John King, next.