ExclusiveREP. KEN BUCK: Go Back to American Founding Principles, and Fight the CCP Threats

Hi, welcome to Focus Talk. Our guest today is Congressman Ken Buck, who represents Colorado's 4th Congressional District. Congressman Buck is on the House Judiciary Committee, as well as the Committee on Foreign Affairs. He's also a member of the House Freedom Caucus. Congressman Buck, great to have you on our show. It's great to be with you, Jenny. Thank you. You know, a lot of our audience are Chinese Americans and Chinese around the world. So I wanted to first ask you to give us a little bit introduction of yourself, like where you're from, what was your experience growing up, and why and how did you end up pursuing a political career? Well, first, Jenny, I have not grown up and I don't intend to grow up. I'm going to remain a little kid for the rest of my life. But I actually was born in New York and my dad was originally from Colorado. And so I traveled to Colorado when I was young and I worked on my aunt and uncle's ranch in Wyoming. And then I would go back to New York and go to school and I spent my summers ranching. And during the school year, I played a lot of sports and I had a lot of different jobs in New York. I moved furniture and drove trucks and all sorts of things. I went to college at Princeton University in New Jersey and I played football there and I majored in politics. And it was sort of a lifelong passion of my family. When we were at the dinner table, we talked a lot about politics. My dad was an international lawyer and traveled a lot and would bring back interesting things from around the world as well as interesting stories. And I after college, I went and went to the University of Wyoming Law School and I got my law degree and I worked for a law firm for just about eight or nine months. And then I got received a call from the congressman from Wyoming at the time, Dick Cheney. He invited me to work on the Iran-Contra investigation in Washington, D.C. So that was really the first opportunity I had to come to Washington, D.C. as a staffer. And you, for once, for some time, you were actually working as a prosecutor at D.C., right? Yes, that's right. I started after the Iran-Contra investigation. I went to the Department of Justice and I was a prosecutor and I made my way back to the U.S. Attorney's Office in Colorado, in Denver, and I rose through the ranks to become the chief of the criminal division in Denver. And I left the U.S. Attorney's Office and soon after ran for district attorney, which is the state prosecutor for a region in Colorado. I ran for district attorney and I was successful and I served as district attorney for 10 years before running for Congress. What made you decide to run for Congress? Yeah, it's a great question. And I question my sanity, frankly, in choosing to do it. But I really felt like the laws that I was implementing as a federal prosecutor and even as a state prosecutor could be better. And I wanted to become a lawmaker rather than a law enforcer. And so I chose to pursue a career here in Congress. Hmm. Yeah, that makes sense. So what was the America where you grew up like compared to today's America? Well, you know, the the my my fondest memories are of my time on the ranch in Wyoming and the people that I associated with in Wyoming are what we refer to in terms of settling the West as rugged individuals. They are people who feel a sense of community and they help their neighbor, but they also are very independent and they don't like the government telling them what to do. And they don't like the government taxing them. They don't like the government regulated. They like to be left alone so that they can raise their families and not have people from other parts of the country interfere with their lives. When I was in school in New York, much different. It was really a black and white situation. I in New York, I was really surrounded by people who believed in government and that government played a very important role in our lives. And so I saw the world in two very different ways. And frankly, you can tell that after college, I moved west and was much more comfortable with the independence that we enjoy in the West. So are you, what's your thought about the direction that America is going today? Are you concerned about it? I am concerned. I am concerned about a lot of different things that are going on in America today. One, I'm concerned about the morality. I'm concerned about the divisiveness that we have around us. I'm concerned about the attempts by some to divide our country based on gender or race or ethnicity or social economic status. All those things concern me. When I grew up, we really stressed in my family and in my community, both in New York and in Wyoming, that you are no better than the person next to you. And if that person needs help, don't send them to a government office to get help. Help the person. And if that person is unable to do some things, like, for example, I used to wake up at four o'clock in the morning when I was in college for every snowfall. And my roommate and I would go out and shovel driveways for senior citizens in Princeton, New Jersey. And so I, nobody asked me to do it. It was just something that we did on our own. And it's that kind of attitude that I think America has really been known for, and it just helps us grow as a country. Didn't ask if the person whose driveway I was shoveling, I didn't ask if they were rich or poor, white or black, or male or female. I just felt like this is something I can do to make my community better. Yeah, it's the character. It's the content of the person's character that really makes the difference, right? Not the race. Absolutely. Not the color or anything else on the surface. So let's talk a little bit about what you're working on, Congressman Buck. You're a member of the House Freedom Caucus. It's a very special group, and also it's a group to a lot of our Chinese audience may not be so familiar about. So can you tell us how the group came about and what is its mission? So I was one of the founding members of the Freedom Caucus, and it started in 2015. And we came together really to make sure that we just didn't follow leadership in the Republican Party in the House, that we tried to make every bill more conservative. By more conservative, I mean that we spent less money, that we reduced regulation, that we enhanced religious freedom, that we had a strong military defense. All those things were sort of the prism by which we viewed the legislation that we were working on. And we came together every week that we're in session. I have been every single week since I've been in Congress, I have been in a Freedom Caucus meeting where we sit and talk about the benefits and detriments of different legislation so that everybody has a chance to share their ideas. And then we typically come together on the most important pieces of legislation and try to vote as a bloc to make sure that our views are heard and taken into account. So can you talk about some of the initiatives that you are currently, the Freedom Caucus is currently working on? Sure. We are in the minority. The Democrats run the House, and it takes a majority of votes to get things passed. And so there are very few things that we can do to stop the infrastructure bill or the reconciliation bill, the $1.2 trillion bill or the $3.5 trillion bill. We are most focused on those things that we can do to try to highlight some of the inadequacies of this administration and the way they run Congress. Personally, outside of the Freedom Caucus, I'm spending a good bit of my time working on antitrust legislation to try to rein in big tech. I believe that big tech is one of the least democratic institutions we have in this country, the least open and the least promoting freedom institutions that we have in this country. And so I'm doing what I can to make sure that we are addressing the monopolies that are censoring speech, but at the same time really crushing competition. Yeah, we're seeing a lot of censorship on these big tech platforms nowadays. It is definitely something needs to be done about it. And on the other hand, I wanted to get your opinion about the bill that just got vetoed at the Senate, right, the H.R. 1 bill, the bill about the election. So what's your thought about that one? Well, I was opposed to H.R. 1 when it was in the House. And the reason I'm opposed to H.R. 1 is because in our system of government, the states have always been responsible for running elections. And when you pass a bill like H.R. 1, you make elections a federal matter. And I think that the states are much better equipped to run elections and they will do it differently. And that's OK. We've always used the states in our country as a sort of a laboratory and they can experiment with different things. The goal is to have as many people as possible vote, as many eligible voters vote, but also to make sure that we don't have people who should not be voting participating in that process. And so the states have, for the most part, done a good job in regulating those elections. And I didn't want to support H.R. 1 and override the position that the states have had all along. Yeah. Now, is it part of a constitution that the states actually manage the election matter not at the federal level? I mean, I don't, I'm not a constitution expert, but is there something like that in the constitution? So Article 1, Section 13, says that the states have all the responsibilities not specifically granted to the federal government. These responsibilities, the responsibility of running the day-to-day operation of election, were not granted to the federal government and therefore they are run by the states. Yeah, that's that's right. It's very clear. So I want to get your thoughts on another thing that's very controversial recently. Recently the DOJ announced that it would bring in FBI to investigate the so-called disturbing spiking harassment and threats against school administrators. So this seems, to a lot of people, this seems to be targeting those parents who speak out against CRT and related policies at the school board meetings. What are your thoughts on that? Well, first of all, it involves critical race theory and critical race theory is a hateful and really dishonest analysis of American history. It says that American history is based on promoting slavery and not promoting freedom. And it's clear from people who have read the writings of our founders that this country was based on freedom. Slavery was a terrible aberration and eventually we fought a civil war to get rid of it. But to to deny the basic foundation of our country is wrong. And when parents stand up at a school board meeting and object to it, they're not doing anything other than exercising their First Amendment rights. And those rights should be protected. And the idea that the attorney general has ordered the FBI to investigate parents who are trying to make sure that their children are not indoctrinated with this hateful curriculum is is really embarrassing. And I think that more and more people understand the nature of the Biden administration by seeing the kinds of acts like this that they engage in. Yeah, especially when they're categorizing these parents as domestic terrorists. I mean, in essence, these are American people. So it got many parents worried and very angry, to be frank. So does the Congress plan to do anything about it? So the Congress, I guess we have a few options. We could defund the FBI. We could defund the Department of Justice. We have the power of the person. We have some authority to make sure that those things don't happen. Nothing will happen as long as the Democrats are in charge of Congress. And that's really the problem. So what we need to do is once we get the majority in the House, when we pass appropriations bills, we can put language in the appropriations bills that say no funds shall be used to and then whatever the act is that we're trying to avoid in this case, monitor parents at school board meetings. The other thing, Jenny, I think is really important to understand is in our system of federalism, the states have the primary jurisdiction over those kinds of local crimes that have occurred on a very rare basis. Hundreds of thousands of people have objected at school board meetings and maybe a dozen have done something that has been violent. And in that situation, the local police and the local prosecutors have handled these matters and handled them expeditiously and fairly. And no one has suggested that they are not doing their jobs. And so the federal government has no need to get involved in something that is being handled at the local level. Yeah, you know, to a lot of Chinese people who fled communist China, it reminds them of the way the Chinese Communist Party used the judiciary system in China to actually silence dissidents, silence people they don't like. So I think it's something it's going in a dangerous direction if we let it continue. So that's just something I'd like to share with you. Can I interrupt you for one second, Jenny? I think that that's a great analysis. And I think that really it's really in two parts. One, what the what the socialists, the communists in this country are trying to do is to indoctrinate our children very much like they indoctrinate children in the Communist Party tries to indoctrinate children in China. And then the second part is as parents object, then they use the force of government to try to silence those objections. And so I think it's very similar to what's happening in communist China. Yeah. So I actually talk to a lot of parents. They're really ready to stand up and speak up. But you're a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. So in terms of Communist Party, I think you have you have clearly indicated in the past that you think the Chinese Communist Party is aggressively engaging America in a cold war. Tell us a bit about why you think so. I think there are a number of signs of warfare going on at this point. And I think America is just too, too happy and too really satisfied with our position in the world to recognize the threats that are occurring from China. Number one, China has a long history. And I don't say the Chinese people talking about the Chinese Communist Party has a long history of stealing intellectual property from this country. And they steal intellectual property in violation of international law. And they have done it for years. And for the first couple of decades in the 1970s, 80s, maybe even 90s, Americans looked at this and thought, well, this is a developing country. And the more it develops, the more they will start to comply with the norms of international law. And so there's really nothing wrong with it. Now they're getting to the point where they are stealing military secrets and stealing technology that can be used to harm America, as well as our allies around the world. It's becoming a very serious matter. The other issue that really bothers me is the fentanyl that is produced in China and is smuggled into the United States and is killing literally thousands, tens of thousands of people in this country. China has a grip on the products that are produced in China and transported out of China. If they wanted to stop the murder of Americans, they could do it. The fact that they haven't chosen to do it, to me, is a purposeful act and a purposeful strategy that they have employed. Yeah, you know, I think a lot of things you talk about is like the result of this 40 years engagement policy, right, the U.S. had with China. So now many China experts realize that this engagement policy was wrong. The CCP didn't become more democratic. They become actually more authoritarian. So and these experts are having various discussions and they talked about how they were wrong about the CCP. So has your view of the CCP gone through a similar process? I've never trusted the Communist Party. I learned that at the kitchen table. My father fought in World War II against the fascists in Europe, and he was absolutely convinced that totalitarian governments in Russia and China needed to be confronted. And we should never appease those governments. He lived through the time when England had to make a choice between those who wanted to appease Adolf Hitler and those who wanted to confront Adolf Hitler. And fortunately, those who wanted to confront Adolf Hitler won that argument. And they were able we were able to win. The Allies were able to win World War II as a result. I believe that any form of totalitarianism, whether you put a communist label on it or a fascist label on it or any other label, is something that America needs to stand against to make sure that we are supporting our allies in that effort. You know, just now you clarify, you said you were referring to the Chinese Communist Party, not China, not Chinese people. I think since the last administration, since the Trump administration, a lot of people are making distinction between the two. Do you find that with your colleagues or people from the political circle in D.C. and other places, more and more people are making distinction between these two concepts? I absolutely believe that, Jenny. And I have to tell you something. In my heart, I was a prosecutor for 25 years, 15 years in the federal government, 10 years as district attorney. I absolutely do not tolerate hate crimes or crimes against people because of their gender or race or ethnicity or what country they come from. And it just bothers me to my core that people don't understand the difference between a Communist Party, a government of a foreign country, engaging in, whether it's cold warfare or whether it's hot warfare, and the people of that country. I've met many, many Chinese people in this country who love freedom and who love China and talk about the beauty of China and how it has been ruined since the Cultural Revolution. And I know that if they had the opportunity to return to China, if they had the opportunity to help their country blossom into a democracy, into a free country, they absolutely would. And we are making such a terrible mistake when we don't understand the difference between the government of a country and the people of a country. The people of China are industrious. They are bright. They are hardworking. They have at least a 5,000 year history of just magnificent works. And for Americans to not say, here's the difference between the two, we can strongly dislike the Chinese government and the terrible things that happened in China. At the same time, loving the Chinese people and praying for the Chinese people and really hoping our very best that God's blessing is given to the Chinese people so they can overcome this terrible government that they are burdened by. Yeah, I think you're so right. Actually, I think that's part of the reason why in the past a lot of the American politicians think that by engaging with China, by helping them to become more economic, stronger, strong, China will become more democratic. But they didn't realize that they were dealing with the CCP, not the normal Chinese people. Right. And we see the same thing, frankly, in Cuba. And we see the same thing in other countries. All we're doing is making poor totalitarians into rich totalitarians. We're not making people, you know, by having wealthier dictators, they don't become nicer. They don't become more benevolent. They don't become people who foster freedom. They become people who are have more resources to repress their own people. So now the Biden administration tries to categorize this relationship as competition, competitors. They said that they have no plan for a Cold War with any nation. So what do you think of that approach? I think it's ignorant. And I think it is really they don't realize the extent to which China has engaged in the Cold War and they don't realize the extent to which China wants to win this Cold War. We recognized right after World War Two that we were in a Cold War with Russia and we were not going to lose that Cold War. And thank God President Reagan decided that he was going to win the Cold War on his watch. And he stood there in Berlin and told President Gorbachev, take down this wall. We need to have the same kind of strength in this country dealing with the Chinese Communist Party. Nowadays, the situation at the Taiwan Strait is really tense, and the CCP has clearly shown its intention to take Taiwan by force. So what do you think the U.S. and its allies should do to effectively deter CCP's military aggressions? Well, the first thing that we should not do is look weak when we exit Afghanistan. I think China noted what happened in Afghanistan. They used that to their diplomatic advantage by telling countries around the world where they have influence that the United States will not stand with its allies. We look like buffoons in the way we left Afghanistan, left Americans behind, left our allies behind. It was it was just unacceptable. And the result has been a tension around the world. We need to stand strong with Taiwan. We need to engage in military sales with Taiwan. We need to increase our trade with Taiwan. Taiwan, the Chinese people who live there are freedom loving. And to allow Taiwan to go the way of Hong Kong, to allow Taiwan to go the way of different areas in the world would be disgraceful. And we need to make sure that we have a military presence in the area around Taiwan and that we build their military, their ability to defend themselves, as well as their prosperity through trade as much as we can. Do you think the Biden administration is doing enough? I don't think the Biden administration has done enough. And I think that the pressure will increase. I think as Republicans take control of the House in 2023, we will make sure that very strong messages are sent to China as well as to the people of Taiwan, as well as other Pacific Rim countries. Frankly, the Chinese are very aggressive around the Philippines. They're very aggressive around New Zealand and Australia and other countries in the Pacific. And so we need to make sure that our allies know that we will continue to project our naval strength, our military strength. And the next area of work, frankly, is in outer space. And we need to make sure the Chinese understand that we will not tolerate their adventurism in outer space. Now, just now you mentioned the intellectual property. I know you're very concerned about the CCP's threat and infiltration in the United States. One of them is the intellectual property theft, and the other probably is the data security issue. So you and others have successfully introduced an amendment to the fiscal year 2021 National Defense Authorization Act. So in essence, that amendment says no TikTok on government device. So how big of a threat do you think apps like TikTok is to the United States? I think China is using every means possible to gather information on the United States. That if a war happens, and I think that all Americans and frankly, the Chinese people don't want to see a war. But if a war happens, it will happen on land, on sea, in the air, in space, but also economically. And we have all become so accustomed to having our phones in our hands and being able to drive our car where we want based on a GPS system. We've become accustomed to using our fingerprint to open a phone. We've then become accustomed to using our social security number for bank records. The more information our adversaries, be they China, Russia or any others, gather on us, the more they can shut down our finance system, our food supply in other areas. So I think that's what China is engaged in. And that's really what TikTok is being used for, is to gather information about Americans. And I'm very concerned that especially government devices, there is no reason. If you hand a government employee a phone so that they can make a phone call for work or they can send a text for work or they can send an email for work, they should not be engaged in recreational activities with their phone. So I'm very much opposed to having TikTok on a phone when China can gain an advantage on us for that reason. So are there any further legislations that's going in that direction to restrict the use of those kind of apps? I certainly will look at every opportunity to restrict Chinese influence in this country. For example, we just recently had an antitrust bill that passed the House and we had a limit on the number of companies it applied to. The Senate changed that limit so it would include a Chinese company in that. We will continue to look at ways that we can hold China responsible for their actions in just about every piece of legislation that passes Congress. What about intellectual property theft? How serious do you think this issue is right now with China? I think it's very serious. And I think President Trump tried to address it with a trade agreement with China, and he did his very best to make sure that we have linked any advantages that China receives from the United States with their participation in the international economic system. And I think it's the absolute right path to take, and I hope President Biden continues on that path. As one of the measures to basically fight back on that end, I think the U.S. is now restricting the type of Chinese students who can get a visa and come to study at the universities. But on the other hand, the U.S. has always been a country that welcomes talents from around the world, including China, to come to study here and achieve success and contribute to the society here. So how do we balance these two aspects, in your view? Well, I think one of the things that the United States has always taken pride in is that we welcome people from all over the world. So we don't want people from just Germany coming to the United States or from Kenya coming to the United States. We want a broad cross-section of people to come to the United States and make this country even more diverse than it is now. We are a country of immigrants. We have welcomed immigrants for hundreds of years, and we will continue to welcome immigrants into this country. And so I think that it's important to make sure that as students come to our universities, that we continue that idea of having a broad cross-section. So if a student from Kenya comes to the United States and studies and goes back to Kenya, he has a positive influence, he or she has a positive influence of America and a better education and a better understanding. And I think that's part of our diplomacy around the world, is to use our university system in a way that promotes really the diversity and the goodwill that we enjoy around the world. I think there are some issues with universities that concern me. The Confucius Centers at universities are something that I believe the Chinese Communist Party is using to influence the thinking of our young people. It's scary. It's something that, you know, people in this country just ignore. And I think we ignore those things that are paramount. I think a lot of universities are actually doing something about it. We see the closing of many Confucius institutions in America. Actually, I think Taiwan is the place where it retains the most traditional Chinese culture. So I think for American students, they can really learn the most authentic Chinese culture from the Taiwan institution, not from the CCP-controlled Confucius institutions. And we, you know, Jenny, we've always in this country, we've had Chinatowns in many of our different major cities. And while they're not pure, you know, Chinese culture, it certainly has exposed many of us to the foods and cultures in China and in different parts of Asia. And it's always something that I love about our urban centers in this country is that you can go to one part of town and you can enjoy, you know, Italian food and see sort of an Italian culture in another part of the town and see Chinese culture. And we are a melting pot and we should promote those parts of the melting pot. As you say, like Taiwan, that promote freedom and share our values. Thank you for sharing some of your insights on some important domestic issues as well as China-related issues. I think these are important issues that people should have more discussion about and know what's really going on. So thank you. Thank you very much. It's great to be with you. Well, thank you for watching Focus Talk. We'll see you next time.