The Dispatch Podcast - Will Hurd on Dysfunction in Congress

Episode Date: July 30, 2021

Former U.S. Representative Will Hurd from Texas joins Sarah and Steve to talk about dysfunction in Congress, the January 6 committee, and the centralization of power in Washington. Hurd tells our hosts that there’s no incentive to solve real issues in Congress and we’re incapable of dealing with generation-defining issues because our political system is full of silly issues. Plus, why it’s imperative to teach students how to code. And why, contrary to Republican talking points, January 6 was not an ordinary day. Finally, how the Republican Party can be more competitive with people of color, young people, and suburban women. Show Notes: -Will Hurd’s upcoming book Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to the Dispatch podcast. I'm your host Sarah Isger, joined by Steve Hayes. And this week, I am particularly excited because our guest is Will Hurd. Now, Will Hurd and I go back to actually way before Will Hurd knew who I was. In 1999, I was a high school student in Texas, and the A&M Bonfire collapsed. And it was a huge, huge deal. It was November 18th, 1999. And, And it was a hard thing to watch as a senior in high school to have so many friends who were there. We didn't know what was going on. And this one voice really stood out. And it was the student body president of A&M at the time who really spoke for everyone in the state.

And it was incredible. And his name, as you might guess, was Will Hurd. Fast forward a few years. And I got to meet Will in Austin over some margaritas in Caso at El Arroyo. And if you haven't been to Elroyo, highly recommend. That's the bio of Will Hurd I want to give. But some of you may know Will Hurd because he was a congressman from a district that stretched all the way from San Antonio to El Paso. And he just retired from Congress and has a book, a project.

It's called American Reboot, an idealist guide to getting big things done. I mean, that's who Will Hurd is. So this is going to be a fun conversation. That is the nicest intro and Sarah. I've never heard you tell that story about bonfire. It's a wild thing to think about. I can't believe it's been over 20 years. And it's one of those, you know, I've been in some pretty,

crummy places, and I've seen some pretty terrible things, but whenever I think of tragedy or chaos, you know, seeing what happened at the polo fields back then in 1999 is the thing that always comes to, always comes to my mind. Well, it was an interesting example of leadership, because the leadership that we as a state needed at that point wasn't, it wasn't that we needed you to fix the problem. We needed you to tell us the facts of what were happening in an honest way and in a way that made it seem like you understood and the people who were around you understood what was going to happen, what the next steps were. And boy, that's leadership that I think that description's missing sometimes and especially in Congress. So to just hop in like

why is Congress dysfunctional will? Well, look, honestly, it's funny. We start. We start. started off with bonfire. For those I don't know, you know, this was a structure that was about 110 feet tall, killed 12 people. It was A&M's Burning Desire, Texas A&M University's burning desire to beat the hell out of the university.

It was our greatest tradition. I've been going on for 100 years, all student runs, student developed. And then it collapsed and killed 12 people injured about 26 and this 1999. So a lot of people had cell phones, but the cell phone infrastructure didn't work to where everybody can be on their cell phone at the same time. Cable news was slowly, 24-hour news cycle was slowly becoming a thing. And honestly, I recognize the deficiencies in cable news back in 1999 because they were on TV talking about wind shear and all this stuff that had absolutely nothing to do with the catastrophe.

that we were dealing with. And so I've never, I've never thought about the juxtaposition of being 21 years old, dealing with the worst tragedy to have ever happened out of college campus at that point in our history to where we are now. And it starts with being honest, right? Sometimes if we didn't know, we didn't know, you know. We didn't have an accurate count of how many people were still alive in this, in this, you know, barrier. Like, you know, most people are seeing what happened in Florida with that building

that, that collapsed. That was a similar situation we were dealing with. You know, being honest about what we knew, what we didn't know, being honest about, you know, everybody wanted to start pointing fingers. It's like, hey, let's make sure we dig everybody out first before we start talking about accountability. And these are some of the problems we're dealing with now in Washington. Everybody is quick to point fingers. Everybody is quick to create contrast, and oftentimes we lose the fact that way more unites us and divides us. I believe that. I know that because I represent the 50-50 district in Congress.

I've seen that in my travels across the country. But I've also recognized that 92% of congressional seats get decided in a primary. And when the way you win an election is by creating contrast, what do you do when you're not running for election, creating contrast. And so that's what's more interesting. And I think those are some of the fundamental problems that we have right now in our political discourse. Steve, I know we want to get into the specifics of the January 6th Select Committee, and Will's had some thoughts on that, and so have you. Yeah, actually, before we get there, let me follow up on exactly that point, because it's one of the things I was most eager to talk to you about. I mean, can you give us a sense

of what it's like to serve in Congress in a 50-50 district when virtually everybody else in your conference is trying to fend off a primary. What you're trying to do politically is very different from what most of your colleagues are trying to do at any given day. And I wonder how receptive congressional Republican leadership was to your needs and to the kinds of arguments that you have to make when you have this entire horde of members, moving in precisely the opposite direction. How did that work? What was your relationship like with leadership?

How receptive were they to you and to the kinds of political, you know, exigencies that you faced? Sure, Steve. And I'd like to, to, to, I agree with all your, your premise, that's for one minor point. I had primary challenges as well, right? You know, this is, this is one of the misconceptions is that folks that have, have, races in November, I say in 2020 was 8%. And I use that 8% because there was only 34 seats that were split ticket, meaning in the previous presidential election, people voted for one party of president and the other party for Congress. And to me, that's what signifies a jump

ball. That number is 34 in 2020. I think 20 years ago, that number was in the 80s. 30 years ago, that number was north of 120, right? And so, but I still had primaries that I had to deal with. I remember early on in my time in Congress, Mark Meadows came to me. Mark Meadows was, I think he was the first head of the Freedom Caucus, came on to be the President Trump's last chief of staff. And Mark Meadows and I started on Oversight and government reform together, and I considered Mark a friend.

He came up to me one time, like pat him on the bat. And he goes, you know, there's a lot of, of websites out there that evaluate someone's conservative score. And there was this one based on your voting record in relation to your district. And he said, based on that, he goes, Will, you're more conservative than I am, Mark, or Louis Domer, right, based on your voting record and the nature of the district. And I kind of laughed at that. But here is what I would say.

Leadership always put me in positions where I could be successful and do the things that I want. But I also didn't need them, right? Like, look, it was valuable that Jason Chaffetz called me two days after I won my election and asked me to be a chairman of a subcommittee on oversight and government reform. And I'm like, what the hell is oversight and government reform? That is not the committee. That was where, like, everybody, like, all the biggest fights were, right? I was like, that's not my style. But it gave me an opportunity to work on technology issues, things that I cared about and had an expertise in. And so, so the times that I needed leadership to do things, they did, right? And everybody knew when I was a yes,

I was a yes. When I was a no, I was a no. And so I never had some of those pressures, but also I broke ranks when I thought it was what was right. And it wasn't always what was right from my district, it's what I thought was right. And, you know, my, my promise I made to my constituents were, you're going to see me, you're not always going to agree with me, right? And so I spent a lot of time in the district. And so people appreciated that. So, so it was never, of course, there were times, look, I think solving immigration and fixing DACA is something that should happen, right? Even Trump's voters believe there should be a permanent legislative fix for DACA recipients, right? This is one of those things that should be stished. Look, this is a

plus 70% issue across the board, across the ideological spectrum. Why can't we solve this, right? And guess what? Paul Ryan and Kevin McCarthy jammed us, right, and preventing that from happening. But then the next year, Nancy Pelosi jammed us the exact same way. right and so so anyways my my point is and why did they do that why did they do that why did because they want to keep this a political issue like exactly people would rather use this as a political bludgeon than solving the problems because go to my my first comments the way you win elections is by creating contrast and so more people would rather create now asterisks and district like mine, even if every Republican votes for me, I would have still lost, right?

And so I had to get independence and conservative Democrats to vote. And the way you do that is solve problems. And so I think if more districts were closer to the 50-50, we'd be seeing more people that are willing to work across the aisle. Oh, and by the way, when things do get done, you know, I always tell folks, you know, when I give speeches, I say, raise your hand if you've ever clicked on an article that said Congress words, right? And nobody, nobody raises, nobody raises their hand. So as individuals, right, and as citizens, we should be modeling the behavior we want to see. And so if we're not clicking and looking and watching about things when they actually do it, then guess what? We know, you know, what's the old, the old newspaper adageant if it

leads, it leads. And it's some variation of that has continued through cable, television, through social media. And so part of it is we need to be consuming stuff that we think are, you know, is positive. And I catch myself, look, they get me on clickbait all the time. And I try to catch myself to make sure I'm rewarding positive behavior with my clicks. Yeah. So we use immigration all the time as an example of exactly what you're describing. We use that on this podcast.

We've used it multiple times. Let me just push a little further on that. What I've found very difficult to describe to people, and my job is basically to be a reporter or to help run an organization that describes to people what's happening in Washington, gives them a sense of the reality. It's been very difficult, particularly over the past five years, as I've talked to Republicans, because in contrast to what you're describing your approach to legislating, your approach to representation is so many Republicans I speak to who will tell me one thing off the record

and then tell me the opposite on the record, you know, and it's it's perplexity. It's very difficult to convey to people the sense. I mean, this is, of course, obviously true about Donald Trump was sort of the number one thing. You'd have people who would take me to the side and say, you know, be critical of Trump. You guys should be harsher on him. You should call him out on this, this, this, and this, go after him. And literally those same people would stand in front of microphones within an hour saying, I support Donald Trump. I can't stand these people who are not sufficiently supportive of our president. How much of that did you see as a member when you're talking to your colleagues? Is it as prevalent as my experience would

suggest it is? Or did I just get a bad sample? No, I think that's, I think that's actually. that reflects the experiences that that I had when I was in Congress. You know, I remember a couple of times I'd be walking through the hall. People like, you know, the big guy's watching. I'm like, God? And they're like, no. You know, you know, the president watches that. I was like, I don't care.

Right? Like, my thing is it, like, I agree when I agree, I disagree, when I disagree. And that's what I handled. And it goes to something really basic in my opinion. So there are some structural changes that have happened in Congress that has forced this kind of negative behavior. We've already talked about primaries and 92% of house races being decided in the primary, R's and these.

You also have the centralization of power into leadership. 20 years ago, the speaker did not write the appropriations budget. It was the chair and the ranking member of the Appropriations Committee. And they would tell the speaker to go pound sand if the speaker tried to get in the way. And the chair of the Appropriations Committee and that ranking member took more of their rank and file members' requests into approach than they did people of their own party. Right. And so this centralization of power into, look, one of the reasons I'm a conservative is, I don't, I think centralization of power in the hands of a few is a bad thing.

That exists in a government. That exists in organizations and entities. And so Congress is seeing the centralization that is, that is, that is, that is, that is, that is happening there. So that's, that's, that's one thing that's one kind of structural trend that is happening. And the other is very basic. You know, I ran in 2009. I left the CIA where I was recruiting spies, stealing secrets. best job on the planet. I got pissed because the hundred or so members of Congress that I had

to brief over my decade, almost decade-long career, I thought were morons, to be honest, RSDs, men, women, all 50 states. So I ran for office and I lost. I lost a runoff in a primary by 700 votes, not a lot of votes. And that next year, I'm from born and raised in San Antonio, the school district that I grew up through and went to school through, I'm having a program called Pillars of Character. And I was nominated to be the pillar of trustworthiness, which I thought was funny that the former spy and politician was like the pillar of trustworthiness, right? And so I spoke in a couple hundred schools, middle, elementary, and high school. And I told them that being a person of character takes practice, just like being an engineer or being a musician,

or being a athlete, right? And unfortunately, we have too many people in elected office that haven't had that practice of doing the right thing when the consequences are hard. And so what do they do? They don't do the right thing, right? And it sounds so basic. It sounds like, you know, this is something a second grader can understand, but that is the fundamental problem because people are afraid of their decision. Now, in a 50-50 district, guess what? No matter what I do, half the districts have set, which is very freeing because it allowed you to do what you thought was right. And so at a very fundamental individual court, it is someone that doesn't have the

fortitude to do the right thing when there is potential consequences. Oh, and by the way, they're lazy and don't have a relationship with their constituents to where they should to be able to go out and explain a particular decision. So, Will, I have some beef with you. Let's just air it out in front of all of our closest friends and family here. You get elected in 2014. You get reelected in 2016. You get reelected in 2018.

You choose not to run for re-election in 2020, even though it looked pretty good. I mean, it's always a tough race. I would have won by 20 points. Yeah, you were going to win. Congress without you is undeniably worse, and we have members showing up who say they're not going to even have legislative staff. They're just going to use that money to have more calm staff because in their view, and I'm not sure they're wrong, by the way, like I think they're reacting to market incentives here. And their view, doing legislative work doesn't get you reelected.

Being on cable news, saying outrageous things gets you reelected. So my question to you, Will, is why shouldn't I be mad at you for making Congress worse? And what are you doing with this time now that I'm no longer paying you as a taxpayer? Well, well, I'm sorry to upset you. It was also funny. A lot of people got mad at me because I said I didn't really support legislation that called for term limits because my point was every two years you have term limits, right? And so I'm one of the few people that walked away.

And it's like you don't have to be, you don't have to die or lose in order to walk away from Congress. And I think these jobs are doing right, you have a shelf life, six, seven, eight years. And that's why I made the decision when I did. You're too kind of say that things have degenerated since I was gone. You know, obviously that was, that's not the case. What I'm trying to do, so what, and one of my concerns is that we have some truly, generational defining challenges that is facing the United States of America today. And we're incapable of dealing with these issues because our political system has gotten

mucked up by silly shit. And so ultimately, like, American economic and military dominance is no longer guaranteed. The Chinese Communist Party is trying to surpass the United States as the sole superpower. And they're doing it by being a leader in advanced technology. The only way we're going to survive against an authoritarian government that can move all factors of production into the direction they want to do is ensuring the public sector and the private sector starts working a little bit better. And specifically on technology. So these are the things that I want to be working on and be focusing on, because this, I want to make sure America stays the most important economy in the world, and I want to make sure that America continues to uplift humanity

for another 245 years, right? And doing that in this environment right now up in Washington, D.C. is not the case. And also some of the things I'm doing writing, you know, you talk about the book, thank you for that. I lay some of these things out in American reboot and talk about how we're supposed to do this. And can we put a plan to show other people how we can do this to ensure that we stay the greatest planet, the greatest country on the plan? Okay, but the January 6th Select Committee,

you've said publicly that you think that it was a mistake for Pelosi to reject the two members that McCarthy offered, he offered five, he then pulled all five. I agree with you, both from a strategic standpoint, but also I think your point was actually just that the minority should get to have its picks, whoever they are, would you have served on the January 6th committee if Pelosi had asked you

if you were still in Congress? And, yeah, and what should we make of it? To be honest, I don't know, right? If she was going to reject all the minorities' picks, you know, I have a problem with that because it's, no. The legislation that was passed said she got the, she got the, she got the approval. For me, I also think that all of the areas of jurisdiction should finish their reports before you have a broader commission. I would have favored more of a 9-11 style commission than what's happening now. And look, ultimately, his GAC, or the Homeland Security Committee in the Senate, in a bipartisan way, did a report that went through VJ, right?

It's like the intelligence failures that happened. And it's hard for me to say intelligence failures because it should be the public, you know, public source information failures. You know, this wasn't like you needed some CIA officer getting some, you know, like there was, my, literally. My 87-year-old father knew something was going to happen. I was supposed to actually fly to D.C. on the 6th. And my dad, I was talking to my dad, and he was like, isn't that one that big rally that's going to have all those kinds of problems going to happen? Like, this is several days before the events, right?

And so anyway, as long wind, I'm being long-winded, but so, you know, I would have tried to make sure that some of the existing committees and a 9-11 style commission that removes politics would be able to look at it. Because I do believe, you know, there is some analysis of the lead-up and rhetoric, right, that inspired and inside of this insurrection. And then I also think some of the preparation or lack of preparation, you know, exacerbated the problem. It's not an even Either or it's an and and getting out. And then my question is, are some of the other institutions prepared? Is the National Archives prepared for someone to go in after that?

What about the Supreme Court, right? And how did some of these, you know, look, I've been in embassies that were almost overrun. And so this is not an issue that I take lightly. So in comments that you made, I believe it was at an Aspen Institute forum recently, you did call it an insurrection as you just did in conversation with us. And you also said for those members of Congress that want to act like that was a normal day is insane. It's insane. It was an insurrection. It was encouraged.

And those flames were fanned by President Trump. pretty clear unequivocal uh statement there i guess my question is what do you say to the republicans in congress who didn't think it was a normal day on january sixth and january seventh but now would have everybody believe that it was a normal day because they don't want to deal with it and from my conversations i would say what i'm describing there is now a majority of the Republican conference? I would say be honest, do the right thing, right? You know, be intellectually consistent.

And ultimately, what this, the focus on, in January 6th is important, right? Because it was, now, the lead up to it, the day of it, and then the nights, right, are all, you know, connected. So in the end, our government was able to still function. but it shouldn't have gone through what we went through on January, on January 6th. Not addressing this up front and being honest about the feelings and experiences how you felt that day. If you're questioning, go talk to some staffers, right? What bothers me is that how many new people, this was day two, I think the new Congress got sworn in on January 4th.

This is day two for probably hundreds, maybe thousands of people. First day, they're super excited, right? And then they're freaking out. And I know there's still a lot of staffers that were there that have problems. So that's just the staff. Then listen to the testimony of those four law enforcement officers that testified about how that day was for them. And so if you say you back the blue, right? If you say you support law enforcement, why aren't we support the law enforcement?

why are we supporting the law enforcement that was dealing with that issue that day? But also, we should be supporting them and saying why didn't they have the right tools? You know, the Homeland Security report talks about how some of the riot gear was locked in a bus and they couldn't get access to it.

It's just like, what? So there's some of that. Oh, and by the way, if we want to get to a point as conservatives and Republicans to talk about the issues of the day, we have to get through this. And so it's preventing us from being able to have the conversations about crime increases around the country, about, you know, potential of what happens with inflation. Is it going to come? Is it not going to come? Is there ways that we can save this off? Are we preparing for this new Cold War with the Chinese government on advanced technology? Are we making sure that people are ready in a post-pandemic economy to,

to not have the same problem that they had before the pandemic, right? If we want to talk about the issues where we win, we have to get, we have to get beyond, we have to be able to get beyond this, right? And it's going to continue to consume, especially when there is a disconnect on what was said on the six and the seven versus what's said today. If, and I do, I have about a million questions. I know we don't have a ton of time, but I have about a million questions on those issues for you. But before we get there, you know, you said those flames were fanned by President Trump.

Kevin McCarthy said the same thing in the days after January 6th. He was asked at a press conference just a couple days ago whether he stands by those comments and he refused to answer. Is it as simple as what you described hearing in the hallways when you were a member of Congress? The big guy is watching. Is that the problem here that they won't just stand by the things that they said before? that they're trying to recast this or downplay diminishing? So I think President Trump's election in 2016

show that there's a lot of people angry in this country. They've been angry that they've been told one thing and then people go off and do something else, right? And so this ideological inconsistent has fueled this problem and I think fueled what I would call an authoritarian wing of the Republican party. Now, you have some similar problems on the edge, right? Because I believe the political continuum is now no longer a line.

It's a horseshoe, and the edges are closer to each other than they are to the middle. And so a part of this is people are worried about future primaries and that you have to have the support of the former president in order to win. But we just saw in my home state in Texas, that's not the case. one of the opponents, one of the special election, Ron Wright, who died from COVID, you know, his wife was supported by the former president and she lost in that, in that special election. We've also seen polling that even though people may continue, you know, a good size of the Republican electorate has a positive opinion and affiliation with President Trump, that affiliation doesn't have anything to do with down-ballot races.

Right? You're seeing some of that. I'm seeing some of that polling as well, too. So, so yeah, I think in the end, it's, it's, you know, in an electoral strategy. But here's the reality. Republicans are taking the house back in 2022. Period. Full stop. That's just math, right? That is just math. And it's like, and so, so when we look at what, you know, the number of seats we're going to pick up because of redistricting, when you look at, um, uh, natural trends at the first, you know, so that's like plus six for, for Republicans in the House just on the redistricting. Then you add the average of 27 votes swing when a, the first midterm election for a new president, right? We're at plus 33. Nancy Pelosi only has a plus three margin. That means just like math alone, we win, right? And so, but again, I think we're to take the wrong lesson from winning in 2022, and then we're going to all get murdered in 2024 because that swing, not murdered, I shouldn't be flippant with my language, that we're going to lose at the ballot in 2024 because we're going to learn the long lessons. And for me,

the takeaways from 2020, excuse me, from 2020 is simple. Don't be a jerk and don't be a socialist. right? Like, those are the two takeaways. And unfortunately, Democrats are trying to be bigger socialist and Republicans are being bigger church. I don't know that answer your question, Steve. It does. Not long ago, I saw someone go through a sudden loss, and it was a stark reminder of how quickly life can change and why protecting the people you love is so important. Knowing you can take steps to help protect your loved ones and give them that extra layer of security brings real peace of mind. The truth is, the consequences of not having life insurance can be serious. That kind of financial strain on top of everything else is why life insurance indeed matters. Ethos is an online

platform that makes getting life insurance fast and easy to protect your family's future in minutes, not months. Ethos keeps it simple. It's 100% online, no medical exam, just a few health questions. You can get a quote in as little as 10 minutes, same day coverage, and policies starting at about two bucks a day, build monthly, with options up to $3 million in coverage, with a 4.8 out of five-star rating on trust pilot and thousands of families already applying through ethos. It builds trust. Protect your family with life insurance from ethos. Get your free quote at ethos.com slash dispatch. That's ethos.com slash dispatch. Application times may vary. Rates may vary. All right. So as part of your American reboot, you're identifying problems and solution.

So I want to read you one of the problems you've identified and then your solution. Problem. The Republican Party is not competitive within communities of color, people under the age of 29, and suburban women with college degrees. No argument there. That's just factual. Solution. Make the GOP start looking more like America by aligning our actions with our true values, not being racist, misogynistic, homophobic, and appealing to the middle instead of the edges. So a couple things here. One, you were just talking about learning the lessons, but they're about to win in 2022. They won in 2016, got more votes than, you know, the second most votes ever in 2020.

So, A, are you sure that they have to do those things? Because in 2012, the autopsy report, all of that, Mitt Romney got slaughtered, you know, and to not use that word. Like, he lost pretty badly. And he was trying to do all those things. And second, if you have to say that the party shouldn't be racist, misogynistic, and homophobic, have we already lost that then? Like, is that really how we're going to convince people to be Republican?

Hey, we're going to try to be less racist than misogynistic. Yay. No, so the short answer is, yes, we got to do all those things. Because we have lost seven of the last eight national elections, right? So that should be that that's the bellwether that we're looking at. George W. Bush was the last person to win a national, the popular vote, right? And we're getting further and further away. So guess what?

Yes. In some of the short terms, we could win, right? But we could also win big. We can win more if we do it a different way, right? And so that's my, oh, and by the way, we know where things are going. And so the demographic changes that have always been talked about that are coming and we're starting to see it. and we're seeing it with our inability to perform in minority community, and black and brown communities with women and all that.

But will, in Texas, along the border, one of the best predictors of which counties Donald Trump won in Texas was the percentage of the Latino vote in those counties. And here's why. Here's why. So 40% of Latino families that live along the border is associated with law enforcement in some form of families. factor, right? Another 40% is associated with the, with natural gas, with the oil and gas industry. Okay. So when Democrats are being seen as, you know, against oil, against oil and gas and against the

police, guess what? You're going to see what just happened, because they were going against their, they were going against their livelihood. So imagine. we actually talk to those people, right, and not just win because we're not as bad as the other side, right? Like, like, that is, that's the, that's the upside for me. And, and that is where we can get in along the board show that we can win. The issue that we should be talking about all the time is education. We're better on it. And my home state is a perfect example. The, this, This experiment with school choice has eradicated to zero the learning gap between Latino kids and white kids in Texas. And it has decreased the learning gap with black kids really significantly as well, right?

We have income inequality because we have education inequality. And if we start leading with that, we're going to be able to have a much better message. Oh, and by the way, don't be racist, misogynist, homologism. foe of all that. Most Republicans aren't. The Republican Party I know, and the people that voted for me and supported me, they're not that way. But because we are perceived that way by a handful, a minority of the people within the party, that has longer-term effects on all of us. You mentioned the threat from communist China earlier, and the cliche is to ask you what keeps you up at night. I am not going to do that. But after

when you sort of survey the global landscape and you look at the threats we face as the country, after you've had a really good night's sleep, what's the first thing you think about when you wake up in the morning? Well, the first thing I wake up about is how do we catch up on 5G AI and quantum computing? And then I've added a fourth since I've been out of Congress, and that's bioengineering. And I'll start with that last one first. The question isn't, did COVID-19 come out of the lab?

The question should be, what do we do when COVID-20 comes out of the lab? The tools exist now to program DNA the way we program computer code. The Impossible Burger, you know, that burger, the meatless burger, do you all know why it tastes like meat? Hemoglobin. Some scientists figured out that hemoglobin is what gives meat its meaty taste. So these scientists figured out, okay, let's take that, let's take hemoglobin DNA, insert it in a way yeast molecule and make yeast bleed. Right? Like, that's, that's how you get, that's how you get a, a not meat burger to taste like meat.

They're still terrible. Like, to me, that's just mind-blowing, right? So, imagine you're going to do that with a virus that affects people in the West, right? That can happen. So how can we, we've gotten pretty good at developing a virus, by the way, not a virus, a vaccine. Pretty good. Really, really. It's amazing.

It's amazing what happened. If you look, so Pfizer prior to, it took Pfizer like eight years on average, develop a vaccine. They did it in less than eight months, right? The most vaccines they had ever produced was 300,000 in one year. They did like 3 billion? What? Like, like, it's just crazy. Therapeutically, they're really good job.

But when it comes to the surveillance piece, we haven't improved. How would we detect COVID-20? So that's one thing. 5G AI and quantum our phones are even more powerful because of 5G you could be able to push more data make them faster get information in real time right like our phone is going to be able to react quicker than our thoughts and then we're going to have um AI to be able to do things you never thought of magic to me AI is the same as nuclear fission nuclear fission controlled you get nuclear the power, clean energy that can power the world.

Nuclear fission uncontrolled nuclear weapons. And that's what to me, AI. Oh, and by the way, our adversary in this doesn't give two shits about civil liberties, right? And so we do. So we got to make sure that our algorithms are being trained. And this is what the future of conflict is going to be. And quantum, real simple. once we get once we achieve quantum you're going to be able to break encryption in a minute

which means every bank transaction everything that you've ever encrypted in your life you're going to be able you're going to be able to read right we remember we're old enough to remember y2K right you know sarah may not have been but steve you and i you and i you and i you know And, you know, Y2K was a big deal. I think we spent, I think in the end, we spent like $2 trillion on being prepared for Y2K. We need to be putting that same level of effort in a post-Q. So those are the things that I think about when I wake up and try to work on that. What do we do about education post-pandemic?

Is this an opportunity to remake education in this country? Or do we need to fix what we've screwed up in the last year? I feel like the effects of the last year on our education system will be profound because the effects on the children who were in our education system for the last year are going to be so profound. Look, I agree with you. One, we got to make sure that we can get our kids, you know, in classrooms and around the people. We know what the development does for them to be around folks.

but also, you know, my, again, go back to my dad, my 87-year-old dad, right? He's like, why are they still teaching people the way I got taught? Right. And that's a good point, right? We should be able to embrace these tools, right? And it's going to be harder for teachers, no doubt, right? And so imagine if it's like thinking of a perfect world and a kid gets sick, and they're able to stay and say listen to the classroom.

you know, from their bed and while they're listening, you know, like, imagine that. So, so it's going to have to be the purpose of being sick, Will. That would defeat the whole purpose. Right. This is something like someone who doesn't have kids, right? And, and so, so what we're going to have to be able to do. And it's not just education. I think it's entertainment.

I think it's work. You know, how do you provide an experience, a hybrid experience in person, and digitally at the same time. I don't think we have the tools to do that because it's not just having a laptop up and some crappy earbuds to be able to talk. I think we've got to have additional tools that make that kind of that seamless transition.

But also, you know, the thing that we have to start doing is we have to start teaching our kids more coding, right? Like if I would say if I had a magic wand and I could fix one thing, it would be every kid in middle school gets exposed to coding because that's going to be if data is the coin of the realm right then the lingua franca is is coding and we need more and i don't care what job you're going to get into in 15 years it's the equivalent of us imagine if you all couldn't type right like if we couldn't if we couldn't type we wouldn't have gotten jobs right every job required you to type and if you were sitting there hundred something pecking and took forever to write some report, you'd get the hook, right? And so I think coding is one of those things. And we need to embrace this opportunity. We're talking about

infrastructure in Congress, and as we're having this conversation, we've got to have a digital infrastructure in place. What's fascinating, if you look, there's a study. I think the FCC did it. The counties that have the least high-speed Internet action. access are the poorest counties, but there's a correlation between the two. And right now, FCC says only about 20 to 30 million Americans don't have access to high speed internet. That number is probably closer to 130 million. A third of Americans don't have access to high speed internet. Now imagine in a couple of years when we're going to have the super fast 5G infrastructure that you have to have in order to take advantage of the tools on our, on our heads, on our phones and

our computers, there's going to be an even bigger digital divide. And that's going to exacerbate this education problem that we started this conversation. And yet most of what we're fighting over is critical race theory in education. And I haven't really heard anyone have this fight because it's not a fight because no one really disagrees. And so then it's not dominating cable news the way that frankly it should be. All right. Will, last question, if anyone on this podcast can't tell. I'm totally obsessed with Will. He's just the best of the best that's ever been.

But even so, Will, it kind of feels like maybe we should have had your dad on the podcast instead of you. And I'm curious, God willing, your dad's 90th birthday. How do you plan to celebrate? Well, it's a good question. So my mom and dad just celebrated 50th, their 50th wedding anniversary, right? which is awesome. And we, and my sister and brother and I'm the baby of three, we were going to have a party and have all their friends coming down.

And my dad's like, I don't want that. And he said that few, couple of choice words. He's like, I want to go to the aquarium. Like the aquarium. And so San Antonio has a new aquarium at the river, River Cinema. And so my dad wanted to go to the aquarium. And he's like, and there's a burger place right next door to him. I want to go to that to eat.

We're like, okay. So we went to the aquarium. and then Dave and Busters celebrate their 50th anniversary. So it's not up to me how we're going to celebrate his 90th. It's up to him. And honestly, he would be amazing. I should have brought you. And I'm going to try that.

I'm going to bring him one time because he really is. He really is fascinating. He's a really fascinating person. I'm lucky to have him and my mother. And we're lucky to have you, Will. I love you, man. You're a wonderful friend. And thank you for coming on this podcast.

podcast, and we'll hope to talk to you again soon. When the book comes out, American Reboot, you can pre-order it on Amazon. You definitely should, but don't worry, because if you forget, we're going to have Will back on to talk about it when it comes out. Awesome. And you get it from my website, too, Willbeheard.com. So I appreciate your time. Love y'all. And I'm glad we're going to make it to me. With Amex Platinum, access to exclusive amex pre-sale tickets can score you a spot trackside. So being a fan for life, Turns into the trip of a lifetime.

That's the powerful backing of Amex. Pre-sale tickets for future events subject to availability and varied by race. Terms and conditions apply. Learn more at amex.ca.com.