Return to Transcripts main page

Fareed Zakaria GPS

What the Trump-Vance Ticket Tells the World; The Transformation of J.D. Vance; Interview With Iranian Acting Foreign Minister Ali Bagheri Kani; Interview With Former Taiwanese Minister Of Digital Affairs Audrey Tang; Interview With Miami-Dade County Chief Heat Officer Jane Gilbert. Aired 10-11a

Aired July 21, 2024 - 10:00   ET

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

[10:00:51]

FAREED ZAKARIA, CNN ANCHOR: This is GPS, the GLOBAL PUBLIC SQUARE. Welcome to all of you in the United States and around the world. I'm Fareed Zakaria coming to you from New York City.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ZAKARIA: We'll begin today's show discussing Donald Trump's newly announced running mate, Senator J.D. Vance. America's allies are concerned about statements of his like this.

SEN. J.D. VANCE (R), VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I don't really care what happens to Ukraine one way or another.

ZAKARIA: I'll ask the former Swedish prime minister Carl Bildt for his reaction. Also just who is J.D. Vance? Or perhaps the better question is, who was he before he became MAGA man?

VANCE: I'm a never Trump guy. I never liked him.

ZAKARIA: And David Frum worked with Vance more than a decade ago and he will tell us about the potential VP's intellectual 180.

And following the stunning assassination attempt on Donald Trump in Pennsylvania, news broke this week of another alleged plot to assassinate the former president. This time, an Iranian plan. I sat down with that country's acting foreign minister to press him on that and to ask whether the war in Gaza will expand.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ZAKARIA: But first, here's "My Take."

The Democratic Party is clearly in a crisis. If it stays with President Biden as its nominee, it is likely sleepwalking into a humiliating defeat in November that could go well beyond the presidency. And yet changing candidates at this point seems a risky strategy that could easily go awry. Is there a way out? It will be difficult given how modern political parties in the U.S.

are structured but if handled right, the current crisis could be an important opportunity for Democrats to rebuild themselves for this election and beyond. Ever since the presidential debate, many have wondered why the Democratic Party would not get President Biden to step down as its presidential nominee. The problem is that there really isn't a Democratic Party anymore, not in the sense of an organization that can make a decision like that.

In America, parties are shells in which political entrepreneurs operate at will. In almost all other democracies, political parties still function as powerful organizations with the authority to choose or replace candidates for the top job. Generally based on their electability. In Britain, the Labour Party replaced Jeremy Corbyn with the more electable Keir Starmer, and the Tory shows several new leaders over the last six years.

Australia's Labour Party did it in 2010 as its then leader's popularity was plummeting. In fact, in most democracies, the main role of political parties is to choose their candidates and platforms through some internal process and then present them to the broader public in elections.

In the U.S., however, amidst the fiery radicalism of the late 1960s and early '70s, parties gave up that central power handing it over to primaries. The result is that in America power move from party leaders to party activists. Before primary is dominated, the people who determine whether the candidate was suitable for election, the delegates to the convention, included many current or former elected officials from mayors to senators to governors.

These were people who had experience in running for general elections, in attracting mainstream support and in actually governing. Now those who decide are the small number of primary voters, often more ideologically extreme than the average voter, and for whom ideological fealty is more important than electability. This hollowed parties out, leaving them without the capacity to shape themselves.

[10:05:00]

That's why Donald Trump could so easily take over the Republican Party and essentially turn it into a family cult. To understand how complete that transformation is, noticed that besides Trump not a single former nominee of the Republican Party for president or vice president, even attended the Republican National Convention. While the former president's family occupies center stage and primetime.

The tragic situation facing the Democrats with Joe Biden is that he was a strong candidate against Donald Trump in 2020. And he has been an excellent president with major accomplishments in both domestic and foreign policy. His manner and tone have been dignified, decent, and empathic. But for months now it's been clear that this would not be enough. In early May, I pointed out that polls have Biden headed for a loss, and that the key number to look at was the question of who voters felt was more competent. In 2020, Biden led Trump by nine points. Earlier this year Trump led

Biden by 16 points, a 25-point shift. This is obviously a reflection of people's sense that Biden was just too old for the job. A perception he could not change. And that was before the debate.

The congressional leaders of the Democratic Party, Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, Nancy Pelosi, seem to be taking the responsibilities seriously and have been privately urging Biden to withdraw from the race or maneuvering to force his hand. One can only hope they will persist and be able to make Biden see that he's still has the chance to go down as a successful president, who in the end knew that he could serve his country better by doing that rare thing. Stepping aside, rather than clinging on.

In doing this, however, the Democratic Party can also shift the balance of power. Over the last few years, the party's image has been colored by some of its more extreme and ideological elements. Those active in primaries and on Twitter, and even smaller minority. On issues like immigration, crime identity, politics, campus culture, and transgender rights, it lost sight of the American mainstream.

As Rob Henderson writes, "Democrats espouse too many luxury values, ideas that confer status on educated elites, but are often deeply at odds with the working class' way of life. Changing candidates for November could be the beginning of a broader reset. Party leaders should reform the primary system to balance the power of the activists minority with the more mainstream majority. More superdelegates with the freedom to vote as they wish would be one important step.

The message of the Democratic Party should be shaped by its governors, senators, and mayors, not activists and academics. The next few weeks could begin to shift that would make the Democratic Party more attractive to more Americans for decades.

Go to CNN.com/Fareed for a link to my "Washington Post" column this week. And let's get started.

With less than four months to go to the U.S. presidential elections, many American allies fear or return to Donald Trump's America first foreign policy, and now his choice of running mate, Ohio Senator J.D. Vance, has only exacerbated that concern.

Just look at Vance's record on Ukraine. He voted against the $60 billion aid package for the war-torn nation and said this just Steve Bannon. "I don't really care what happens to Ukraine one way or the other."

Well, Europe cares deeply about Ukraine in part because leaders there wonder where Putin would invade next if his aggressions are left unchecked.

Joining me now is Carl Bildt, the former prime minister of Sweden.

Carl, you must have expected J.D Vance's speech because you were in Munich, at the security forum where he gave an equally fiery kind of isolationist speech. What do you make of it now that he is a potential vice president?

CARL BILDT, FORMER SWEDISH PRIME MINISTER: There's no question that there are a lot of people around Europe who I think they're worried and concerned by the prospect of his policies being the policies of Trump's administration. There were sufficient worry with Trump himself, has to be said. And in Munich and afterwards, you wrote a peace in "New York Times," which was an effort by him to give reason for his views. And that his main reason why one shouldn't care about Ukraine was that Russia was able to produce more ammunition than Ukraine. Russia is bigger than Ukraine.

[10:10:02]

And that's an old argument because that's an argument that would give a green light to Russia invading every smaller country in its vicinity and a green light to every other country of sufficient size to go berserk with international order. So deep worries.

ZAKARIA: Yes, it really almost a kind of recitation of that line into Thucydides' "Melian Dialogue," the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must. But that was always, you know, seen as a kind of warning of the kind of jungle of real politic we don't want to descend into.

Tell me what you think practically this could mean because, you know, with a number of senior leaders in Europe have told me they don't expect that Trump would formally pull out of NATO or anything like that. But it's that rhetoric like his and Vance's will undermine resolve in Europe and booster resolve in the Kremlin.

BILDT: Fully leave NATO, well, most people think that that is unlikely. But there is a lot of discussions about what he called a dormant NATO that U.S. stays but doesn't do anything and doesn't provide that sort of backbone of political will that has been very important during the Biden administration. Europe is united. I think we should note that the very first decision taken by -- the very first act as a matter of fact of the European parliament newly elected after '87 was to take a very strong and with very wide majority resolution supporting Ukraine. And I think they took that resolution also against the background of what's happening in the U.S.

ZAKARIA: Is it possible that Europe can step up and, you know, it's already -- Europe is now I think in total spending more on Ukraine than the United States. But could it do more as a result of this?

BILDT: Well, as you say, Europe has been substantially more, but -- and in my opinion and the opinion of very many Europe has to do more primarily on the financial side, but the U.S. has been very important primarily on the military side and it will be difficult to replace some of the things that U.S. has been helping with. But you are right and there's going to be a lot of discussion about that of Europe having to step up even further and even more in the years to come, irrespective of Trump, I would have to say.

ZAKARIA: And meanwhile, the fate of Ukraine is in the balance. What do you think happens there if American aid dries up or if American resolve dries up? Will Putin look for a negotiated deal?

BILDT: Well, I think if I tried to read the tea leaves and that's everything we can do when it comes to Moscow, it looks like they are going to have increasing difficulties with their suppliers of war material of different sorts. Putin has taken the word ceasefire in his mouth but has conditions to that, the bounds of where should Ukraine surrender. At the same time as he has taken the word ceasefire in his mouth, although an acceptable one, he sent out Medvedev to say that they should aim at getting rid of Ukraine completely by 2035. So the ceasefire for Putin probably means sort of pause and replenish and hardly peace.

So that I think is the reality of the situation that we are facing with the Russian aggression and its future.

ZAKARIA: Carl Bildt, always a pleasure to talk to you. Thank you, sir.

BILDT: Thank you.

ZAKARIA: Next, how did J.D. Vance go from a never Trump Republican to a MAGA darling? I'll talk to someone who knew him before and during his radical transformation.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:18:25]

ZAKARIA: Eight years ago, J.D. Vance, celebrated memoirist and Yale law grad, was at the vanguard of a group of conservatives who are often branded as never Trump Republicans. He called Trump cultural heroin and wondered whether the billionaire was America's Hitler. Today he is Donald Trump's running mate. What explains this extraordinary transformation?

Joining me now is a man with a unique vantage point on it. David Frum is a staff writer for "The Atlantic," who has known J.D. Vance for more than a decade. They first crossed paths when Vance wrote a series of articles under a pseudonym for Frum's former Web site.

David, welcome. Your Web site, which I read avidly, was an effort by a group of sort of moderate Republicans to try to get the Republican Party to be more inclusive, more tolerant, sort of the opposite of the direction that MAGA went in. When you set this up and when Vance talk to you, did he seem kind of wholly bought in to your project?

DAVID FRUM, STAFF WRITER, THE ATLANTIC: It said on the mast head, economically inclusive, culturally modern, environmentally responsible. And everyone who wrote to me or came to find me knew that that's what the site was about. J.D. wrote about a dozen articles under a pseudonym and we all thought this was a man who is going to be a leader, probably a future national leader.

ZAKARIA: And then there's this moment, this is before the 2016 election, and we forget everyone assumed that Trump would lose that election, but he wins very narrowly and then you were in meetings with Vance and his stance you say was to hold up a kind of anti-Trump opposition within the conservative movement and the Republican Party, correct?

[10:20:14]

FRUM: Well, you could see him, his thinking shift. J.D. convened a meeting in Washington to ask, was there any way we could build anything positive out of this seeming debacle for our kind of Republicanism. He was already beginning to think about adapting to the new realities. But that the people in that room where who came from this reform tradition in the Republican Party still looked to him as a leader of that reform movement.

Over the next year and a half that's when he decided, you know what, there's no percentage in the reform and instead he was going to go forward with altered Trumpism beyond and beyond.

ZAKARIA: He says in the book, you know, people -- the people in Appalachia shouldn't be blaming others. They need to become -- take personal responsibility. He points out, I mean, the heroic role that the two institutions play that bailed him out of his misery are the Marines and Ohio State, both government institutions. And yet now he rails against government.

Do you think he secretly still believes the kind of thoughtful stuff he was writing? How do -- you know, do a little mind reading for us.

FRUM: I think very few people are capable of conscious hypocrisy. That is saying one thing while thinking another. The thoughts and the words come into alignment sooner or later. I think something that has happened and you can see it in some of his more offbeat interviews with people like Steve Bannon, is he really did fall deep into the pit of the online, ultra ideological, ultra intellectual far-right with doubts about American democracy.

I mean, it was very strange in his speech at the Republican convention how much he insisted on the idea that America was not a set of ideas. Now, why would you go out of your way to dispute that? That's a pretty standard piece of campaign rhetoric. It doesn't seem like something worth arguing about at a national convention when you could be talking about things that voters really care about. But it's obviously important to him.

ZAKARIA: I was struck by the very thing you talked about, how he wanted to dispute the idea that America, he says at one point, what makes America special is not these ideas, but rather the fact that we are a nation. We have a homeland. And of course, I thought that that got it exactly backward. Every nation has a homeland, every nation has a political history of people living in the same place.

What makes America unique is that in addition to that, it has these founding ideals that can appeal to everybody, that can appeal to the world, and has that generosity of vision as a result.

FRUM: At the heyday of American self-confidence at the Republican convention in 1998 -- 1988, I beg your pardon, when George H.W. Bush accepted the Republican nomination on the brink of winning the Cold War, on the brink of pulling so many countries into the American-led world system, H.W. Bush said, America is not just another country on the roster from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe. It is something special.

And that is something that American politicians have always insisted upon and that has given meaning to this otherwise ungovernable and hugely disparate country. But that is a thing that he took time to attack when he could have been talking about, for example, he's got some vulnerabilities on his extreme views on abortion. He could have talked a little bit about his attitudes toward women and found ways to make those more inclusive, found ways to tell the kind of story of his own life and related in a way the way that Sarah Palin so effectively did in 2008.

If you compare this speech that he gave to Sarah Palin's it's remarkable how much less good it was and it was less good because he would not relinquish his odd ideas in favor of a more general appeal. This is very much about his personal sense of mission. You don't get to the vice presidency and beyond without that sense of mission. But the question we all have to ask is, what is in it for the rest of the country?

And the message that was delivered by him, and that has been delivered by this convention was very much for a part of the country and not the whole of the country.

ZAKARIA: David Frum, always a pleasure.

FRUM: Thank you.

ZAKARIA: Next on GPS, last week's horrific shooting in Pennsylvania apparently wasn't the only scheme to kill Donald Trump. CNN reported this week that the U.S. had identified another alleged plot to assassinate the former president this time by Iran. I asked that country's foreign minister about this. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:29:08]

ZAKARIA: On July 5th, Iranian voters surprised the world by choosing Masoud Pezeshkian as their president. He's a former surgeon and health minister who campaigned on having closer ties with the West. It's a dramatic shift from his predecessor, the far more hardline president and cleric, Ebrahim Raisi, who died in a helicopter crash in May. But it's also worth noting that Iran's presidency often has had little influence in a regime where the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, holds ultimate power.

Earlier this week, I spoke to acting foreign minister, Ali Bagheri Kani, about the Islamic republic and its relations with the world.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ZAKARIA: Mr. Foreign Minister, thank you for coming on the show.

My first question to you is relating to the news that CNN has broken about information that the U.S. government received. The National Security Council then passed on to the Secret Service of a plot, an Iranian plot to assassinate the former President Donald Trump in retaliation for the assassination of Qasem Soleimani, the senior Iranian general, that happened during the Trump administration. What can you tell us about this?

ALI BAGHERI KANI, IRANIAN ACTING FOREIGN MINISTER (through translator): As you know, the Islamic Republic of Iran immediately, following the assassination of General Soleimani, try to traditionally and legally followed the assassination at Iranian courts. And at the same time, we have tried to make use so the international judicial and legal procedures in order to prosecute the perpetrators and advisers who helped this assassination.

Accordingly, the Islamic Republic of Iran will make use of all legal potentials inside the country or at the international level in order to bring the perpetrators to the justice.

ZAKARIA: Let me just be sure I understand what you are saying. Are you categorically denying that Iran had any plans or any element of Iran, the Revolutionary Guard, an Iranian backed militia had any plans to try to assassinate Donald Trump?

KANI (through translator): As I put it very blatantly and openly, I told you explicitly that we will resort to legal and judicial procedures and frameworks at the domestic level and international level in order to bring the perpetrators and military advisers of General Soleimani's assassination to justice.

ZAKARIA: That means not -- not violent measures? When you say legal and judicial measures, you are talking about international courts and things like that?

KANI (through translator): As I told you we will only resort to Iranian and international legal and judicial procedures. Until now, we have done it and this is our right. And of course, we will continue. And the Americans openly said that that they assassinated the senior Iranian military commander. So, it is our natural right in order to follow this issue. And those who are accused in this case they should be brought to justice in a just court.

ZAKARIA: I noticed that you have talked about the possibility of nuclear negotiations and even moving towards some kind of a new nuclear deal or a return to the deal. But I want to first ask you Iranian officials for many years have been very clear that Iran does not want to acquire nuclear weapons, that there is a religious fatwa from Khomeini and Khamenei against nuclear weapons. They don't say that much anymore.

Can you tell us are -- is the development of nuclear weapons according to Iran a haram? Is it -- has it been -- has it been ruled out as a possibility by Imam Khomeini and the current supreme leader Ali Khamenei?

KANI (through translator): Neither I nor anyone else have not talked about a new agreement. Back in 2015, we concluded an agreement by Iran and five plus one. It was finalized. It was the U.S. who withdraw from the deal. And it was the U.S. who created some damages to this deal. We are a member to the JCPOA, the nuclear deal. And the U.S. is not back to the JCPOA. So, our target and objective is to revive the 2015 nuclear deal. We are not looking for a new deal.

ZAKARIA: But you're not -- you're not explicitly answering the question I'm asking. Is it still the policy of the Iranian government that the development of nuclear weapons is prohibited by fatwas from both supreme leaders of Iran?

[10:35:04]

KANI (through translator): This is a fatwa made by the supreme leader of Iran and his eminence is the highest religious authority and at the same time political authority in the country. So, his eminence's instructions as you call -- we call it fatwa, is binding for all members in the country. We cannot violate it.

ZAKARIA: Let me ask you about what is going on in Gaza and in Israel right now. The war continues but could it expand? What I'm trying to get at is Hezbollah has actually been quite restrained so far and Israel has been restrained. On that front is there a danger that that escalates?

KANI (through translator): We, as the Islamic Republic of Iran, never welcome expansion of tensions in the region. We do not welcome expansion -- spill over of tensions out of Gaza. We will never do it. But these are designers who on different occasions have threatened Lebanon. And it seems that the Zionist failure and defeat persuade them to expand tensions to other regions.

This approach adopted by the designers, I mean, the expansion of the war and tensions to other parts in the region is a strategic mistake which will definitely -- will not only go against the Zionist benefits and interest, but it will also enter the Zionist regime into some serious threats.

ZAKARIA: Mr. Foreign Minister, thank you for coming on the program.

KANI (through translator): Thank you very much as well.

ZAKARIA: Next on GPS, an interview with Taiwan's first ever digital minister, Audrey Tang, about Taiwan's big existential threat, China.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:41:45]

ZAKARIA: "Taiwan should pay us for defense." That's what former President Donald Trump told "Bloomberg" presumably worrying leaders in Taipei as Beijing continues to rattle its sabers near the self- governing island.

Just two months ago, China's military held a drill in which it in encircle Taiwan. But an actual invasion of the island isn't the only concern. Taiwan says that Beijing is constantly engaging in various forms of electronic warfare. And my next guest, Audrey Tang, was until recently charged with countering those attacks. She was Taiwan's first-ever minister of digital affairs and recently co-authored the book "Plurality."

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ZAKARIA: I have always told what you do is so critical because in the China-Taiwan tussle, I think, invasion is, you know, obviously the terrible scenario but also kind of an unlikely scenario.

AUDREY TANG, FORMER TAIWANESE MINISTER OF DIGITAL AFFAIRS: Exactly.

ZAKARIA: The most likely scenarios are all kinds of other pressure. So, to tell me first how much of that do already see China using various tools to pressure Taiwan?

TANG: I mean, the height of which we have seen in 2022 August when Speaker Pelosi visited Taiwan there was a hybrid coordinated cyberattack, polarization attack, denial of service, and so on. And there's also drills but I think the goal is to make us panic, to make the stock market crash, to push this idea that democracy only leads to chaos and never delivers.

ZAKARIA: So, you mentioned cyberattack. You mentioned polarization attack. What's that?

TANG: Yes. So, polarization attack is disseminating the most extreme parts of the views. For example, there was signboards outside train stations and these were hacked into and replaced with hateful messages written in simplified Chinese against Pelosi and so on. Of course, then you see that there's rumors saying they have taken over, this ministry, that ministry. And when you try to connect to those ministries Web site it's very slow. You can't connect to it. So, it feels this vacuum of information --

ZAKARIA: Denial of service. Is China able to cut off internet in Taiwan?

TANG: So, a year or so ago there was two subsea cables connecting Matsu and Taiwan, our two islands. And within one week there were two vessels, one fishing, one cargo, accidentally dropping the anchor, accidentally destroying those subsea cables, both flying the PRC flag. They said they are all, you know, accidentally. But we know that once these lines were cut then Matsu is without broadband internet.

Of course, we very quickly responded with microwave, with satellite internet, like Starlink, except we used OneWeb and SES and so on. So, we restored the service but we do see that it is actually possible to destroy the subsea cables.

ZAKARIA: And what about a physical blocking? It seemed to me after the Pelosi visit one of the things that Chinese military was practicing was not so much an invasion but a blockade.

TANG: Yes. So usually -- I mean, the tactics whether it's communications or whether it's physical, kinetic, as you said blockades, it is usually to signify like before an election or something that there are candidates they prefer and there are candidates they don't prefer.

[10:45:03]

Except this January, I don't think any of these tactics worked. First of all, all three candidates said that they don't like the Hong Kong model. And also, the polarization attacks, the A.I. deepfakes, whatever -- we do see some of that, but it did not impact the election that much.

ZAKARIA: Is it possible that these attacks, this whole strategy of China is backfiring and creating greater resistance to China and a greater desire to never have to embrace something like a Hong Kong model?

TANG: Well, just the fact that we're having this conversation right now shows that the world really cares about Taiwan and not just for the chips or the hypothetical 10 percent GDP loss, if something happens to Taiwan, but also the fact that we have a democracy that is working really well. So, it stands as an example of how democracy can advance over authoritarianism in not just countering the pandemic but also against polarization, infodemic and so on. So, it's (INAUDIBLE) to care about Taiwan.

ZAKARIA: George Yeo, the former foreign minister of Singapore, says, maybe there's some solution which is sort of like the commonwealth. You know, a group that both China and Taiwan can be a kind of confederation where the Chinese don't have any -- Beijing doesn't have any control over Taiwan, but there is a kind of -- the recognition that you're both Chinese --

TANG: Mutual recognition between democracies.

ZAKARIA: Yes. Well, there wouldn't be a democracy but there would be --

TANG: No. But look at what happened to Hong Kong, right? So, I don't think it's Taiwan moving away from authoritarianism. I mean, we've always been committing on democracy. And so, we didn't change our tracks. That's what we're saying.

ZAKARIA: Yes. So, you need Beijing change rather than you?

TANG: That's exactly the case.

ZAKARIA: Pleasure to have you on.

TANG: Pleasure.

ZAKARIA: And we will be back.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:51:33] ZAKARIA: Record breaking temperatures have been wreaking havoc around the globe with the month of June being the hottest ever since 1850, when global record keeping began. Here in the United States, over 150 million people were under heat alerts this week. The "New York Times" reports that surface temperatures in parts of Phoenix reached over 150 degrees Fahrenheit.

When I was in Aspen recently, I spoke with Jane Gilbert, the first person in the world to hold the title of chief heat officer. Jane was appointed to that job by Miami-Dade County in 2021. Miami is considered ground zero for the climate crisis in this country.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ZAKARIA: Jane, pleasure to have you on.

JANE GILBERT, CHIEF HEAT OFFICER, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY: It's a pleasure to be here.

ZAKARIA: What does it mean? What is your job?

GILBERT: So, when I was appointed by our mayor, she charged me with addressing the increasing health risks and economic burdens associated with rising temperatures, with extreme heat in particular. So, the first thing I had to do was really understand what -- what's the nature of the problem? Who and where are people most at risk?

And so, we looked at emergency department visits -- heat-related emergency department visits and hospitalizations by zip code in the county and we found a very big disparity. Some zip codes with four times the rates of heat-related illnesses than others. And the top correlating factors was low income, high percentage of outdoor workers, and urban heat islands, high land surface temperatures. In other words, areas with low tree canopy, a lot of pavement, a lot of waste heat from buildings and cars. These neighborhoods can be 10 degrees hotter than other neighborhoods in our county.

And -- so, this is where people are most at risk. And that has really helped me in responding. People are having a hard time staying cool at home. Either they don't have adequate cooling or they can't afford it anymore. They may be exposed at work. We have over 300,000 workers that work outside every day in the county.

ZAKARIA: If you're an outdoor worker, you're one of those 300,000 --

GILBERT: Yes.

ZAKARIA: -- they seem to me the most at risk.

GILBERT: Yes.

ZAKARIA: And there's the least you can do about it because they have to work in the farms, in construction, whatever it is.

GILBERT: Yes.

ZAKARIA: What should they do?

GILBERT: So, they should know that hydration and taking strategic rest breaks in a cool area and then getting back out there and working can really preserve their health but also the productivity.

ZAKARIA: That feels to me like there are a lot of cities in the country that should be doing this. So, you're appointed by the mayor. Are you getting support from the federal government? And are you getting support from your governor, Ron DeSantis, who has not been the greatest proponent of, you know, anti-climate change measures?

GILBERT: Yes. So, on the federal government, absolutely. The Biden administration with the Inflation Reduction Act has been a leader in investing in not only helping communities adapt to the changes that we already experienced, but also getting at the root problem.

ZAKARIA: What about Ron DeSantis?

GILBERT: So, Ron DeSantis has been a mixed bag. He has definitely supported local governments with coastal resilience and stormwater management investments. As it comes to heat management and mitigation, that has not been something that his administration has addressed, at least not yet.

[10:55:07]

ZAKARIA: So, there are mayors around the country, around the world who are facing these challenges. What is your message to them?

GILBERT: I think every mayor should have a study done to really understand the vulnerability of their population, who and where are people most at risk. And at least look enough to what is the plan they need to create.

Mayors are so much on the frontlines of the problem that we're facing, but they're also the frontlines of solution, particularly when it comes to how do we adapt to the changes that are already happening and are going to continue to happen in years to come.

ZAKARIA: Jane, pleasure to have you on.

GILBERT: Thank you.

ZAKARIA: Stay cool.

GILBERT: You too.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ZAKARIA: And that's it. Thanks to all of you for being part of my program this week. I will see you next week.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)