"Face The Nation" Full Episode | October 8

I'm Margaret Brennan, and this week on Face the Nation, Israel declares war after Hamas stages a stunning assault by land, air, and sea. Now there's growing fear the conflict is expanding. Overnight, Gaza hammered by Israel with airstrikes. Hundreds are dead. Thousands of Israelis and Palestinians are wounded. Why were warning signs missed? We'll hear from Israel's ambassador to the United States, Michael Herzog, and from Secretary of State, Antony Blinken. Then, after the stunning ouster of former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, can the Republican-led Congress pull itself together and get back to work? We'll check in with South Carolina Republican Congresswoman Nancy Mace, one of the eight Republicans who voted to topple their speaker. And a growing chorus of Democrats warn that the migrant crisis is spiraling out of control. We'll hear from Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker and New York City Mayor Eric Adams, who is fresh off a tour of Latin America. Plus, South Carolina Republican Senator Tim Scott joins us to discuss his bid for the White House. It's all just ahead on Face the Nation. Good morning, and welcome to Face the Nation. It has been a stunning week in Washington and overseas. Congress no longer has a Speaker of the House. Kevin McCarthy was ousted just days after appearing on this program. It is the first time in U.S. history that the House ejected its leader. In the Middle East this morning, the war may be expanding amid an exchange of strikes between Israel and Hezbollah as that militant group enters the conflict. The number of Israelis and Palestinians killed could exceed 900. And we've learned several Americans are among the dead. It is unclear how many. For the latest, we begin with CBS's Holly Williams in Tel Aviv. Hamas gunmen broke through the fence that Israel uses to contain Palestinians in Gaza. The militants, designated as terrorists by the U.S., fired waves of rockets into Israel and arrived by sea and even in paragliders. It was a complex and coordinated attack. What followed was a frenzied bloodletting. This Israeli soldier was apparently lynched on camera. Civilians were slaughtered on the highways and in the towns of southern Israel. And Hamas also took Israeli hostages, including women, children and the elderly. They paraded some of them through the streets of Gaza along with their other trophies, captured Israeli military vehicles. According to Israeli media, around 750 people are missing. What happened today has never been seen in Israel, said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. We will destroy them and we will take mighty vengeance. Israel's already targeted the Gaza Strip with hundreds of airstrikes, demolishing this 14-storey building that it says was used by Hamas. But many here are demanding to know how Israeli intelligence failed to detect the planning for such a massive assault. It came almost 50 years to the day after the beginning of the Yom Kippur War. And there are echoes of that conflict when Israel was also attacked by surprise. Prime Minister Netanyahu has warned Palestinian residents to leave the Gaza Strip. But Margaret, as we know, they are unable to do that. Our Holly Williams from Israel. We're joined now by the Israeli ambassador to the United States, Michael Herzog. Mr Ambassador, first I want to offer you our condolences. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. We know that your prime minister is promising a sustained campaign. Do you have any sense of how Israel will define success? Well, Israel is at war. Yesterday we were attacked by a terror organization. They infiltrated Israeli territory and killed hundreds of Israelis. At least 600 were butchered yesterday, including whole families, elderly women, children. Babies were taken out of their mothers, lapped and murdered. This is war and we have to fight that war and win it. We have to destroy the Hamas war machine. You know, in war, like in war, we have to fight it. How is it that Hamas managed to take Israeli defense forces by surprise? Did they shut down communications? Well, it was a surprise attack. There was definitely an element of surprise, but I think we'll have enough time to investigate that once we conclude that war and victory. You said you want to destroy the Hamas war machine. Hamas is armed and funded by Iran. The Biden administration says they don't have evidence that Iran was linked to this particular attack. Does Israel have evidence they were? Well, we suspect Iranian hands behind the scenes. As you know, Hamas and Iran are closely tied. Iran provides material support, funding, weapons to Hamas. They are tied in what they call the axis of resistance. Of course, resistance to the existence of the state of Israel. They are part of the same coalition. So as far as we are concerned, this is an Iranian-led coalition, and we suspect that Iran is involved. Does that mean Israel will take the fight to Iran? I'm not going to say what exactly Israel is going to do, but I would just say that whoever strikes Israel will strike back. Sir, this is just stunning to see what has happened in the past few hours. But there are questions within Israel, as you know, about how such a strong military was taken by surprise. There has been a massive expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank area, and with that, a buildup of forces to protect them. The former ambassador to Israel, Martin Indyk, has publicly raised the question of whether that's why the border towns over and around Gaza were left unprotected. Were they? Was that a factor? Well, I don't buy that argument. I think that analogy is irrelevant to the current situation. Yes, it was a surprise attack, but I don't think it has much to do with the fact that the IDF was preoccupied in the West Bank. They prepared a surprise attack. They breached the border fence. They came with paragliders and through the sea. And as I said, there will be sufficient time after the war to investigate what exactly happened. Right now, we are at war, and we have to fight that war and win it. We were attacked by a terror organization funded by Iran, and that's where we are right now. But you have said that perhaps Hamas miscalculated by looking at all the domestic problems Israel has within its own politics right now. Absolutely. Do you think that that was actually, though, a factor when it comes to military readiness? Did it leave your forces vulnerable? They may have. Maybe they were under the impression that given the internal debate in Israel, that Israel is weakened so that they can provoke us. If they thought so, I think they're definitely mistaken. You have to know Israelis to understand that when Israel is under attack, Israelis close ranks, and they fight together. And there's no opposition coalition right now in Israel. There's no debate. All reservists are volunteering. Our embassy is flooded with phone calls from people who want to go back to Israel and fight Hamas. So in that sense, I think it was a gross miscalculation on their part. But did it impact readiness? Because there were concerns of your reservists having objections, political objections, and refusing to serve. No, it did not impact readiness. I think Israel is strong. As I said, Israelis are closing ranks right now, and we will fight back. Back in 2006, you had a soldier taken captive and held in Gaza. It took over five years to get him back. And Israel did so in exchange for 1,000 Palestinian prisoners. At what cost is Israel prepared to get these new hostages out? I think it's premature to discuss that. I think we just attacked yesterday. We understand that there are probably dozens of kidnapped Israelis and others in the hands of Hamas. We'll have to deal with it in due time. The whole issue of hostages is a very sensitive issue. I think you know it from your situation in the U.S., and we have had experience in that in the past. It's a very complicated situation. But I think it's premature to discuss any deals or prices or whatever. Right now, we are at war. Are there Americans among those hostages? I understand there are, but I don't have details. You don't know the numbers or ability to retain them? No. What is it that Israel and your prime minister is asking of the American president right now? So there was a very good phone call between President Biden and our prime minister yesterday. The U.S. administration sounded a very strong voice of support for Israel and the nation for the terror attack and support for Israel's right to self-defense. We are in discussions with the administration about the situation and about our needs. I want to take the opportunity to thank the administration for the solid support of Israel and its right to self-defense. Before I let you go, how is Israel going to allow some of those Palestinian civilians who are trapped within Gaza to escape so that they aren't victims of these strikes? Well, the fact of the matter is that Hamas uses civilians as human shields. Unlike Israel, we use our weapons to defend our population. They use the population to hide their weapons behind them. So it's a very unfortunate situation. We cannot allow terrorist impunity just because they hide behind civilian population. We give the civilian population due notice and warnings before we strike any military target, and we'll continue to do so. And to the extent that the population of Gaza is suffering, I think the address for this question is Hamas. Ambassador, thank you for your time and our condolences once again. Thank you very much, Margaret. We go now to Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who joins us from the State Department here in Washington. Good to have you with us, Mr. Secretary. I know you have been working straight through on this. Can you answer the question yet of whether the Hamas assault is over? Are there more attacks to come? The assault isn't over. There continues to be very active fighting around Gaza. At the same time, we've seen more quiet in other parts of Israel, but there is intense fighting going on. And what about Americans? There are a lot throughout the region. How many Americans are among the hostages and among the dead? So, Margaret, we've got reports that several Americans are among the dead. We're working very actively to verify those reports. At the same time, there are reports of Americans being taken hostage there, too. We're working to get the facts and to find out if those reports are accurate. So you don't know if there are hostages or not? We can't confirm that in this moment, but we're very actively working to see if we can confirm the reports that we've had. Has the United States asked Israel not to strike Iran? The only things we've said to Israel are that we're here, we've got your back. We want to make sure that you have the support that you need. We want to make sure that you have the assistance that you need. At the same time, I was on the phone yesterday and many others were on the phones yesterday with counterparts from Egypt, from Saudi Arabia, from Jordan, from Qatar, from the United Arab Emirates, from Turkey, Lebanon, and many European countries as well, to make sure that, first of all, people have heard very clearly what the president said about others in other places not taking advantage of the situation, and to use the influence that they have with different groups to make sure that they don't do that, precisely so that we don't have a broadening of this conflict to other places. But the door is open for Israel to expand this, to take the fight to potentially sponsors of Hamas like Iran? Israel is focused entirely on Gaza and on securing its citizens, a number of whom remain under direct threat right now in Israel proper, and as I said, trying to do what's necessary to have accountability and to make sure that this doesn't happen again. That is Israel's focus. Is there a sense that this was an attempt to take advantage of the West's focus on Ukraine? No, I don't see that. I think, look, we'll have to see as we learn more what the motivations were and what they are, but here's one thing that's clear. We've been actively working on trying to help Israel and Saudi Arabia normalize their relations, as well as Israel broadening its relationships with many other countries in the region and beyond. Very hard work, and not clear that we could get there, but if we could, it would really change the prospects of the entire region far into the future. Now, who's opposed to that? Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran. So I think that speaks volumes, and there are really two paths before the region. There's the path of greater integration, greater stability, including, critically, making sure that Israelis and Palestinians resolve their differences, or there's the path of terror that Hamas has engaged on that has not improved the lives of a single person. On the contrary, it's destroyed lives, including Palestinian lives. But let me press you on that because you're suggesting this may have been a strategic choice, but then I look at conditions having been deteriorating for Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza for a while now, the right-wing coalition in Israel. In fact, the CIA director, Bill Burns, has publicly warned of his concern, a U.S. intelligence concern, about the risk of instability in this region. Jordan's king has been warning about the risk of extremism. Did the Netanyahu government underestimate that risk? Why were they so vulnerable? First, let's be absolutely clear that there is no equivalence between the differences that exist between Israelis and Palestinians and the actions of the Israeli government in that regard and these absolutely heinous acts of terrorism that we've seen directed at Israeli men, women, and children. Now, we have been concerned about the risks of instability for many, many months between Israelis and Palestinians. We've said from day one that even as we're working toward normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia, that can't be a substitute for resolving the differences between Israelis and Palestinians. We think the best way to resolve it remains a two-state solution and one that ensures that Palestinians and Israelis alike know equal measures of democracy, of opportunity, of dignity in their lives. That's why we've been very focused on that track as well. Yeah, but that has not been a priority between the parties themselves. But as you know, Gaza, and I'm explaining this to our audience because I know you know how concentrated the population is within such a small area. And every time we have a conflict like this, it raises the question of what the humanitarian impact will be. If this is a prolonged attack, what kind of humanitarian crisis are you expecting here and impact on civilians? Well, we've seen this unfortunately repeat itself, although the magnitude, the scale of what Hamas did here is something we haven't seen before. But in prior instances, those who have suffered along with the victims of terrorism are civilians, including in Gaza. And whatever Israel does in Gaza, as always, we look to it to do everything possible to avoid civilian casualties, something of course that Hamas doesn't do. On the contrary, not only does it not seek to avoid them, it deliberately targets civilians. It's gunning down Israelis in the streets, in their homes, and as I said, dragging them across the border in Gaza. So there's absolutely no comparison. But we look to Israel as always to apply the highest standards when it comes to avoiding civilian casualties in anything it may do in Gaza. Mr. Secretary, thank you for your time this morning. Thanks, Margaret. Good to be with you. Face the Nation will be back in one minute. Stay with us. Last week, eight House Republicans joined by a unified Democratic caucus voted to eject Congressman Kevin McCarthy from the position of Speaker of the House, a historic first. One of those Republicans, Representative Nancy Mace, joins us this morning from Mount Pleasant, South Carolina. Good to have you back with us. Let's go straight to the news. You had said to The Wall Street Journal the reason you voted down McCarthy was because promises you were made were not kept. You've been working very hard on very specific issues for a very long time. When you shake a hand, make a promise, you ought to keep it. What specific promise did he fail to follow through on? Well, first of all, he made a promise to our country that he would follow the law and present a budget and 12 spending bills. There's a law from 1974, the Budget Impact and Control Act, that says we are supposed to do that. But Congress always manufactures an emergency every year like they don't know that September 30th exists, and they skirt the law with CRs. Number one, I want a speaker who will keep their word and who will get the job done. Secondarily, I was very public about working on many different issues, whether it was trying to get a balanced budget amendment on the floor, working through the Ethics Committee to come up with a process when we are trying to get people off of committee that they're allowed due process, that it's vetted via the Ethics Committee. I've been working on women's issues. I've been working on gun violence issues in our communities, and I had his pledge of support on many of those things. But this is bigger than just me and him. This is about the future of our country and mortgaging our kids' future, and I'm unwilling to do that. Well, the balanced budget amendment was introduced by you September 18th, very recently. Your rape kit backlog bill, an important one, moved through Judiciary Committee fairly swiftly at the end of September, and they already were in process of voting through those appropriations bills, as you know. And, in fact, voting could happen now, except there's no speaker, so we're stuck. What was it that flipped the switch? Well, again, for me, it's someone that will keep their promises, that will keep their word, and not kicking the can down the road. And it was a matter of trust, not just for me, but there were other members in our conference. There were members on both sides of the aisle. And it's very important that when we make a promise to the American people, we really ought to keep it. And I've been back home in South Carolina the last couple of days since we recessed and adjourned, and I heard from a lot of people. And it was a lot of thank you for your vote on Tuesday, thank you for your position on abortion. We support you. We've got to stand up for the people of our country. I'm going to stand up against the folks in Washington that want to do the same thing we've always done. But, again, when we make promises to our country, we ought to keep them. And I'm excited about the prospects of the speakers next week. That's what I want to ask you about. So what fulfillment of those promises is required for you? I mean, is that what you're asking of Jim Jordan and Steve Scalise, the two candidates? I have spoken with both of those gentlemen. I think they would both be great leaders. And my bar for the next speaker is to commit to the promises that the former speaker made to our country and to get the job done and to be productive. We have a lot of work that we have to do. We have a very short window of time to do it. Put us to work, and let's fulfill the promises that we made to the American people. How quickly can this get done? Is there any unity? I think it can get done very quickly. I think there can be in the next couple of days. I believe we need to be swift with it. I have spoken to both of them. They are committed to bringing our party together and unifying and not continuing the division that we have, and that's what we need to do. I think it's a great opportunity. It could be cathartic for the party. It could be very positive next week. I have to take a break and continue this conversation on the other side of it with you. Stay with us. If you miss an episode of Face the Nation, you can find it all on YouTube and our website. We'll be right back. Welcome back to Face the Nation. Let's continue our conversation now with South Carolina Congresswoman Nancy Mace. We were talking about the two candidates for speaker who have put themselves forward. You voted to certify the 2020 election. Steve Scalise did not. By CBS standards, that makes him an election denier. Is that disqualifying for you? Well, with both of the candidates, there are going to be issues that we agree on and disagree on. That's the way it would be with any speaker. But I will tell you today, I am going to be supporting Jim Jordan for speaker for a number of reasons. I think that his values, his work ethic, his ability to just run circles around everyone with regards to policy and pushing forward. We've been one of the least productive congresses in inside of 30 years. And he's going to be a workhorse for our country. And I'm really looking forward to rolling up our sleeves this week, no matter how this shakes out, and working hard for the American people. Because we've got to stand up for the people. We've got to put the American people first and move this country forward and do it in a positive way. And I think he's going to bring that to the table. Well, let me ask you about Jim Jordan. Because former Congresswoman Liz Cheney, who, as you know, was one of the lead investigators on the January 6th committee, warned Republicans against making him speaker of the House. Listen. Jim Jordan knew more about what Donald Trump had planned for January 6th than any other member of the House of Representatives. And if the Republicans decide that Jim Jordan should be the speaker of the House, there would no longer be any possible way to argue that a group of elected Republicans could be counted on to defend the Constitution. That is a chilling statement. Does it give you any pause? Well, again, there are going to be all sorts of issues that we agree on and disagree on. And also, in terms of January 6th, the Electoral College, et cetera, I was one of the most vocal members of our party that day and the days and weeks beyond that. I got primary because of my vote to certify, because I spoke out. And so, you know, we have to look forward and unite and come together, regardless of what has happened in the past. We have to be forward-thinking and look to the future to bring the party together, bring the people together, and let the American people know that we care and we're going to work and fight hard for them. I know you've been outspoken about defending victims of sexual assault due to the past allegations against Jim Jordan that he turned a blind eye to sexual abuse. Give you any reservations? Yeah, I'm not familiar or aware with that. He's not indicted on anything that I'm aware of. And so I don't know anything and can't speak to that. It's the Ohio State University allegations. I don't know anything, and I don't know anything about that. What I do know is that I've been a very strong voice for women. I've talked to Jim Jordan and Steve Scalise about that. I've been a very strong advocate for rape victims. As you mentioned earlier, the Judiciary Committee, with him as chairman, recently passed a rape kit bill that Barbara Lee and I are working on. And those are the facts and the data that I have to work with, and I've had a very positive experience with him in that regard. You mentioned among the things you wanted promises on from McCarthy, the Ethics Committee was something you said was also a priority for you. Matt Gaetz, on this program, you've called him a fraud. McCarthy said his ouster is personal payback from Gaetz for the House Ethics Committee investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct that Gaetz is accused of carrying out. Does that bother you? Again, he's not indicted for anything. I don't know much about it. It's the Ethics Committee. I've had my ups and downs, and I'm not on the Ethics Committee, and I don't know what they have. I haven't seen it. But I've had my ups and downs with a lot of members in Congress, because as an independent voice, I will call the balls and strikes, regardless of the consequences, regardless of the backlash. I think that's very apparent after the last five days or so. But, again, nothing's come out of the Ethics Committee. I also heard in the last couple of days, in terms of the retribution against Matt Gaetz, they were going to pull something out of Ethics Committee to get him back. I'm being threatened to be thrown off of my committees. I'm being threatened to be thrown out of the conference. They're threatening to take my gavel away on oversight. By who? By fellow members. I mean, there was a letter signed on Friday. I want to use this as an opportunity to say I'm willing to work with anyone who's willing to work with me. We want to move our country forward and unite during the speaker debate and the vote this week. Nancy Mace, thank you for your time today. We'll be right back. Mayor Eric Adams is back in New York City this morning after a trip through Mexico and Central America where he delivered a message. His city cannot handle more migrants, and he needs more help from the federal government. Mayor Adams joins us from New York. Good morning to you, sir. Good morning. And if I can, at the start of the broadcast, I just want to—I landed this morning, and I am pained over the horrific attacks in Israel. My heart goes out to the Israeli people. We have the largest Jewish population outside of Tel Aviv here in this city, and it's really horrifying to look at some of the images. And again, I'm lifting them up in my prayers this morning, as well as other New Yorkers. I saw your governor condemned a protest that's supposed to be held in Times Square that's described as in support of the perpetrators of the attack. Is that going to take place? And security-wise, are you concerned? I was briefed this morning with the elected officials, and I communicated while I was abroad with my police leaders to make sure that we will monitor the protests here in the city. One has the right to protest, even if I strongly disagree with any form of celebrating such a horrific incident like this. But we are going to monitor to make sure that people do it in a peaceful way. There are going to be, I'm sure, pro-Israel organizers, as well, and we're going to make sure that people abide by the law. I want to ask you about this trip you just took throughout Central America, and you went to the Darien Gap, that transit point between North and South America. Why did you make this visit, and what did you learn? It was extremely important. This is my style of governing. People know I go to crime scenes when victims of police violence. I'm going to go when there's a horrific fire on the ground. We cannot stay in the sterilized environments of our executive chambers while there are real things happening on the ground. Ground zero is what's taking place in this region, in this hemisphere, what's happening in Colombia, Ecuador, and Mexico. I needed to see firsthand why are we seeing the flow and speak with the leaders there to see exactly what was taking place. It was an eye-opener for me just to learn that over 21 percent of those who are going through the Darien Gap, they are children. This is a children crisis that we are facing, and I wanted to communicate with the local CBOs, local elected leaderships there, and the local citizens and residents to learn from them, but also to send a clear message on their media. New York is out of room, and we need to communicate that. You've said this will destroy New York City. We had your governor on last Sunday, and she said the border's too open. She called for a change to asylum laws. Is that something you're calling for, too? Yes, and I want to thank the governor because we see what's happening to this city, and when you look at the flow, think about this for a moment. Three hundred and seventy-five thousand migrants and asylum seekers went through the Darien Gap this year. That's 100,000 more than last year, 200,000 more than 2021. Just this, the last week of September, we had over 3,700 asylum seekers that came to New York City. That's an increase. We were getting 600 a week, which was unsustainable, and now we're up to getting anywhere from almost 800 a week. These numbers are not sustainable, and it's not sustainable in Chicago, where people are living in police precincts, Los Angeles, Houston, Washington. This is just not right, what is taking place. You are asking the courts in New York to suspend the right to shelter rule, which requires emergency housing to be provided. What's your plan to prevent that from contributing to more homelessness? Well, our legal team is not asking for a suspension. We want clarification. This is a humanitarian crisis that we are facing. This is not what the architects of right to shelter thought about when you were dealing with those New Yorkers who needed shelter. We can't have a rule that one can come from anywhere on the globe and come to New York City and remain in New York City as long as they want, and taxpayers must pick up the cost. This is a $5 billion price tag this fiscal year, $12 billion over three years. That money is coming from somewhere. It's unfair to the migrant seekers and asylum seekers, and it's also unfair to everyday taxpayers, New Yorkers. And so we want clarification coming from the courts. You had called on the Biden administration to grant temporary protection, which they did to some Venezuelans so they could work, so they could get out of the shelters, and there are a large number of Venezuelan migrants, I know. In the city, the governor of Illinois, who's about to join us, says that many of these people can't even afford to apply, and they need the federal government to waive fees. Has the Biden administration understood the problem that it says it's trying to solve? Like, what do they need to do? You know, one of the most troubling aspects of this conversation has people regulated this to just a Mayor Adams and the president's conversation. We need to really wake up. This is a global crisis of movements of human beings for several different reasons based on which country you're looking at. And we need to reexamine not only our long-term immigration policies, but how do we allow people on a pathway of being self-sustaining? The only reason we are who we are as a country is because people have the right to work. I keep saying that's the precursor to sleep that allows you to experience the American dream. Not being able to be self-sustaining, paying to the tax base of all groups, not only just the Venezuelan, the rule and policy that was put in place would impact, we believe, 15,000 to 17,000 in that area. But we have people coming from West Africa, South America, Central America, China, all over the globe is coming to this hemisphere. And we need to be prepared with the right policies to get this done correctly. And we're going to continue this conversation, Mr. Mayor, with our next guest. Thank you for giving us your view. The Democratic governor of Illinois, J.P. Pritzker, has many of the same concerns. And he's joining us this morning from Chicago. Governor, thank you for joining us. Of course, we should say, in order to do many of the things you and the mayor are asking for, we need a Congress to legislate. And to legislate, you need a Speaker of the House. And we are stuck. So, at the moment, though, I want to understand what it is that you're asking President Biden to do, because you had a pretty sharply worded letter this past week talking about the federal government's lack of intervention and coordination, creating an untenable situation in Illinois. Did the White House respond? Have they fixed your problem? Well, thanks and good morning, Margaret. Let me also begin by sending our condolences. And, you know, our hearts are with the people of Israel at this moment. The families of those who died, and also the people who have been kidnapped and taken hostage by these terrorists. So, the United States stands with Israel, and so does the state of Illinois. And so do I, personally. Let me answer your question by saying that, you know, we were very clear in our communication with the White House that what we need is logistical support. That is, help deciding where these folks ought to go, because they can't all go to Chicago and New York and D.C. They need to go in places where there's even more help to offer. We, of course, are a welcoming state and have been caring for the people who've arrived. But we can't bear the burden only ourselves. Who can? Where do they go? So, we communicated that. Well, let me also say that the White House has been told, you know, we need resources. You talked about the Congress being in chaos. The House of Representatives is opposed to any kind of comprehensive immigration reform. It seems like now is the moment to talk about border security and immigration reform. We want immigrants in the United States. We also want border security. It seems like there's a compromise there that can occur. But look, there are lots of places in the country where there are NGOs that can be of assistance to these folks who've arrived. They're here legally. They have refuge in the United States for the moment. My family were refugees to this country, too. We ought to welcome them, put them through a process. And if they don't meet the requirements, they should be sent back. And that's what the president is beginning to do now. Beginning to do with that announcement that Venezuela will now accept some deportations. But on that point, you were pretty prescriptive in your letter. You said you need a single office with an identified leader. You told the president to take a more active role. You recommend he put one person in charge who works directly for him. This sounds like a management 101. How did that go over? Well, they heard me. You know, there are so many departments that are responsible for helping to care for these asylum seekers as well as managing them as they cross the border. I hope that they will put one office together. I know the White House right now is coordinating it. But they need one office and, in my opinion, one person at the head of that office that we can call, that we can work with to coordinate. Because, look, we're providing shelter as best we can and providing for the needs of these folks arriving in Chicago. And as I say, we're a welcoming state and we understand the humanitarian crisis that we're addressing. But we can't address this all by ourselves. And we need help from the White House. One example of this is this communication that I think needs to occur with data so that we can understand who's arriving and when they're arriving. And whether they have relatives already in the United States who might be able to help care for them. None of that is being done at the border. That's where it ought to be done. And then folks should be told that it's going to get cold in Chicago and New York very soon. And there are lots of other places in the country that they might want to consider going. And the White House and the federal government should be facilitating that. I appreciate your focus on the human element here. I want to ask you about the political. The Democratic Convention is in Chicago next year. Are you confident that your city and your state are going to have a better grasp on it by this time? I am confident that we can handle it. But, again, it will require help from the federal government. And someone needs to work in Texas with these border politicians to have them stop sending people only to blue cities and blue states. And the President of the United States and the White House has the ability to help disperse folks across the country. That will help a lot. But we are managing in the city of Chicago and the state of Illinois as best we can in these circumstances. But not if just those few politicians in Texas are taking responsibility for this. It needs to be a federal national problem that gets handled at the national level. Governor Pritzker, thank you for your time this morning. We'll be back in a moment. Thanks, Margaret. On Friday, we spoke with Republican Senator and presidential candidate Tim Scott from his home state of South Carolina. Our conversation began on the economy and the surprisingly robust September jobs report. Friday's jobs number shattered expectations. It showed some economic momentum. In fact, restaurant hospitality hiring back to pre-pandemic levels. That seems to undercut your argument that the economy is broken. Well, all you have to do is talk to the average American family and ask them how they feel about Bidenomics. The answer is very simple. We've lost over $5,000 of spending power since January 2021. We should always celebrate the creation of jobs, but we should never forget that we went 52 consecutive paychecks, 52 consecutive paychecks with a loss of spending power. And you blame political leadership, not the Federal Reserve? Well, if you think about the fact that over the last, I guess, year and a half, we've seen a 16 percent inflation since Joe Biden's taken office, which led to 11 consecutive rate increases. That downward pressure on our economy certainly created cracks and fissures throughout the economy. That was caused by Joe Biden's lack of leadership and understanding of how to create jobs in America. I want to bring up something specific about your economic plan because the Wall Street Journal editorial board, which is conservative leaning, it did praise many parts of it, but they zeroed in on your promise to offer the child tax credit to pregnant women, criticizing it, saying that is social policy masquerading as economics. Why are they and other Republicans wrong? Well, here's the question. Do we want to find a way to encourage life in this country? I think the answer is yes. Creating a culture that benefits a single mother like the one that raised me when she gets pregnant. Why not extend the child tax credit to when the mother understands that she's pregnant? Let's give her that benefit. Every single thing that we do that encourages family and encourages mothers to continue forward. I think that's a good thing. As a matter of fact, if you look at the tax code of our country, the one thing since the 1930s that we've seen in our tax code is having the tax code create the kind of America that we want. I'll never back down from helping single mothers like the one that raised me and mothers overall be in a better position to take care of their families. I don't care who disagrees with that. How confident are you Congress is going to avoid a shutdown next month? Well, you have until November 17th to figure that out, Margaret. I will say without any question the road to socialism runs right through a divided Republican Party. When you have 221 members of the party in the House, you need 218 to choose a speaker. One of the things they should do is go behind closed doors. Let's figure this out in advance. Do you have a speaker of the House in mind? I don't. One of the things I've noticed about those of us outside the House, the last thing we need are more voices in the House. You understand this as well as anybody else. There are multiple factions in the House. The last thing we need are more voices on the outside weighing in on the House of Representatives. So it sounds like you disagree with Donald Trump on his decision to wade into that. You know one of the sticking points on aid... I do. One of the sticking points is aid to Ukraine, which I know you have said is vital to U.S. interests. How do you persuade reluctant Republicans to sign on? One of the things we saw in the last aid package that was absolutely missing was only $4 billion to finish the construction of the wall, $5 billion to use the available military-grade technology to surveil our border, to stop 70,000 Americans from losing their lives in the next 12 months because we saw that in the last 12 months. So if you were to be able to, so to speak, walk and chew gum at the same time, if you solved our national security issue on our southern border in addition to aid to Ukraine, you'd have the kind of package that most Americans and, frankly, most members of both Houses would sign off on. So this week the Venezuelan government announced that they have agreed to accept back into their country some of the migrants who crossed unlawfully into the United States. That hadn't been happening for some time. Do you support that Biden administration diplomatic initiative? Well, there's no doubt when the Biden administration decided to give work permits to those Venezuelans, you would only expect for an acceleration of more Venezuelans coming to our country, frankly, illegally. And so to see the Biden administration find common sense is a good thing. I wish they just would have found it in January of 2021. Tim Scott, Senator, thank you for your time today. Yes, ma'am. Yes, ma'am. We'll be right back. That's it for us today. Thank you for watching. Until next week, for Face the Nation, I'm Margaret Brannan.