Senators John Fetterman and Dave McCormick: Bipartisanship, Money in DC, Datacenters, Graham Platner

Now, a look at the state of Pennsylvania. It's one of the most important states in this presidential race. >> Both Pennsylvania senators, Democrat John Federman and Republican Dave McCormack, voted in favor of the bill. >> In this situation, we both agree that shutting our government down is wrong for our commonwealth and for our nation. >> So, we're looking for ways to find common ground. And when we disagree, we we disagree. But when we can agree, we agree. Our votes are about country over party at this point. >> Well, we're trying to set a good example because we have lots of disagreements, but we trust each other. We like one another, and we look for ways to work

together. >> I thought the best way to kick this off was to actually give both of you a few moments to just say what's on your mind. And so, I think in the rules of parliamentary decorum, Senator Federum, as a senior sitting senator from Pennsylvania, maybe you can start. I'm I'm proud that to call Senator McCormack a a a good friend. Uh and now things are very more polarized and now I refuse to uh engage in the kinds of extremism. And you know, we're going to fight together for Pennsylvania and for our nation right now. And we're going to continue to have conversations like this, you

know, whether in Pennsylvania or here across. So um so we uh we have to find a better way forward through a lot of the circumstances. >> Yeah, Dave. >> Yeah, I think um I mean one of the the the benefits of being in a place like Pennsylvania is that uh the the voters expect us really to find ways to work together. And if you put this moment in perspective, I think it's probably the most consequential moment in all of our lifetimes. And in fact, I think it might be the most consequential moment in humankind, which is which is a big statement. So much change is happening. It's artificial intelligence, of course, but it's it's really how that's affecting everything, life, sciences,

defense, energy. It's it's a moment of enormous change. And that that change creates a lot of anxiety that lends itself to polarization and extremes. And so if there was ever a time where it's more important to find ways to work together, it it's now. And so we've found ways to work together on everything from uh energy policy to fentanyl, the fentanyl crisis to anti-semitism uh in Pennsylvania and across the country to drone technology. And and these are issues that are of such consequence that uh you can't get there by just being with your team. You have to be able to find common ground. And uh we we've really looked for ways to do

that. >> Yeah. I I I think he could confirm uh Pennsylvania keeps you honest now. And now I'd like to remind everybody that we are the only two people in our respective cycles that flipped seats. You know, that's really, you know, both parties want that. they we want to flip seats. It's like, well, you know, we we've done that because I think we've rejected the extreme kinds of views and now it's better to work together for for Pennsylvania or for our country for right now and AI is really really important and and that will sometimes will put me at odds where the direction that the Democratic party seems to be moving in that now. So now uh moratorum

for data centers I for me that's a China first kinds of policy for that. I'm going to continue to push back that. I'm not going to describe that as a scourge. I'm going to describe that as an incredible new opportunity. And now you know my friend he he organized an incredible symposium in western Pennsylvania that brought AI together and energy. And that's two parts of things Pennsylvania really brings to the table in this very very important conversation. >> I think that we're at this point now where is it fair to say as goes Pennsylvania as goes the rest of the country in the sense that if if you can find common ground in the state on these

very thorny issues, maybe the rest of the country can find ground. And the vice versa is also true. If you guys can't find resolution, what are the odds that California and West Virginia making it up find resolution? So what is it like a day in the life in the US Senate trying to find these compromises because from our perspective outside in a lot of the time it just seems like nothing is happening. >> Dave. >> Yeah. I think um if you step back you would we we I know we look very similar but uh we we have uh we have many similar background. >> Yeah. We have what's the difference? We

have similar backgrounds uh in the sense we both grew up in rural Pennsylvania and uh had similar you know similar childhoods and uh John went into public service. I uh I left went to West Point went to the military but we both came back from those those rural backgrounds. But what's interesting in Pennsylvania is 19 electoral votes and the it's a microcosm of the country. You have these two big urban centers Philadelphia and Pittsburgh which are mostly Democrats. you have these these rural areas that are mostly uh red, mostly Republican, and you got to build a coalition across those to win. So, ironically, a lot of the same people that voted for uh Senator Federman voted for me and um and

and voted for President Trump and and that's the coalition you have to build. And the in particular, it is a working uh families coalition. So the thing that's uh ironic is that even though all the uh all the national unions would have vote would have endorsed Kla Harris and uh Bob Casey my opponent the rank and file twothirds of the rank and file the electricians the pipe fitters the steam fitters voted for me same with him they voted for him so it we actually even though we have a lot of differences in our parties we have come together around that coalition and that coalition includes includes a very significant Latino turnout, uh, a very significant African-American turnout, the highest

African-American turnout in 2024 in the last 30 years. And so, uh, that coalition, I think, is up for grabs. Who wins that coalition in Pennsylvania and who wins it in the country, I think, will dictate the future to a large degree in 2028 and beyond. And so that's what we're working on together because we're trying to build that coalition to do good things together in Pennsylvania. >> The uh Senate is at an all-time low in terms of approval rating. We have the lowest approval rating of a president in history after Biden who is extremely low rated. You guys can't control the debt. The American populace believed we'd be in a golden age right now. They're not

seeing it. Inflation is soaring. The president seems to be running a muck. has no check in the house and you guys are responsible. >> Tell us tell us what you really think other than other than that, Mrs. Lincoln. >> Well, and $40 trillion dollars in debt and you're spending more than ever. So, the American people, I think, are extremely frustrated with both parties. It's great to see you guys come together. Um but what are you going to do to bring back some balance between the branches of the government because this does not seem to be going in um the right direction for anybody but the people in this room which is to say the

top 10% of our society. >> Well I mean for me if you you referenced inflation is soaring. Well just just recently that's p primarily driven by energy prices right now. Now why are those energy prices high? Well, because the president decided to hold Iran accountable. And now I'm the only Democrat that actually agrees with that. That was not that was not a radical idea for a Democrats. Every single person running for president as a Democrat said we must never allow Iran to acquire a nuclear bomb. And now we have the opportunity to hold them accountable. Why? That's why I continue to vote and against these war powers act now too. So for inflation,

yes, now absolutely no one thinks $5 a gallon is is great. But if you allow Iran to become nuclear, you know, that's going to seem quaint, you know, if $5 a gallon holding it up to so what's driving this economic conversation o overall right now. So for me I think what's most important now uh turn everything as a partisan thing and that's the danger where if we despise Trump more than we are concerned about Iran becoming a nuclear power that will have profound implications for not just in that region but al for a global stage for right now that's the difficulty moving forward Now, I've said this in the podcast of, you know, for allin I,

you know, who's the leader's party? I'm like, that's TDS 100%. You know, our party is defined by the opposition of whatever he comes out for. I've said he Trump comes out for ice cream and lazy Sundays, we're we we're going to hate that [ __ ] you know, and we're going to vote it down. Now, we all have we all have a bandwidth and we all have a platform, you know. I feel like you have to discriminate. I don't care about the ballroom. If you want to build it, sure, great. I was there for the the White House correspondent dinner and I saw how dangerous that was for for our leadership. But I don't care about the reflecting pool. But now we can't stop

talking about all this other kind of so we can really focus on thing that's more important when now it's become all just distract distracted by the small small ball game. >> Dave, is there a path to resolution? I mean, like, you're you guys are going to be forced to confront the filibuster, which is this critical bull work that sort of leaves some sort of attempt at finding common ground out there, but there's a lot of pressure to end it. I think Senator Fenerman, you said you'd be supportive of ending the filibuster. Is that where we're going to just total tribalism?

>> Yeah, let's talk about the filibuster. Let's talk about that. The entire Democratic party, including myself, we were so wrong about the filibuster. In my cycle in 2020, every single Democrat identified we have to we have to eliminate the filibuster. Seems like it made sense now. And thank God, thank God we had people that stood uh there, whether it's Senator Mansion or Senator Cinema, you know, history has vindicated their wisdom to do that thing. And now Democrats, we all wanted to get rid of it in 22 and 2025. We love it. And now it now it reforces people to work together with both sides. Now if you turn the Senate into a smaller

version of the House and majority majority now, that would have profound profound implications for now. So now someone that be the first person to announce, hey, I was so wrong about that. Uh that's one of the kinds of hill I would die on now to defend the filibuster. How important it is to the Senate, but also Senate for the minority rights, whoever that happens to be in in that time. You know, that's what's so critical what the filibuster is to governance here. >> I would say um first of all, uh Congress, but lots of institutions right now have very low public approval, very

low trust. That that's a huge problem. It's across it's across all areas to church uh uh public officials, business uh in many cases. So we've got to rebuild trust in our institutions and one of the ways you do that is through your own personal conduct. So one of the things we can do is try to set the example. Uh if you look at my voting and his voting, I I have I'm an unapologetic conservative. I vote as a conservative. At the same time, that doesn't mean you can't work together. So, we look for every opportunity for bipartisan legislation. So, I've got more bipartisan legislation than anybody. We've collaborated on dozens of things

together because you can do both. And the filibuster, I mean, it is frustrating as a business person. I was in business for 25 years. So frustrating the way the pace of of how slowly things move. But I do think it creates the requirement, the impetus to get things done. And I would disagree with you. I think a lot of big things have been done. I look if you look at the energy agenda, we can't win the AI race without energy and uh we made huge progress on energy. I'm hoping we're going to get permitting reform, which would be the biggest economic lever we could possibly get done over the next 6 months or the next two and a half years. Um we've

closed the border. We've stopped the flow of fentanyl. We had 4,000 people who died in Pennsylvania in the last year of the Biden administration at 1,600. This year it's down 60%. Those same statistics nationally. And then there's huge intractable problems like the debt and the deficit which are existential that we're not dealing with. And that's not a product so much of the filibuster, not the filibuster. That's a product of the polarization of our country and both sides taking advantage of anybody willing to to to look at a problem in a in a hard way. My my question was though about the bottom half of the company country in the

K-shaped economy we're in and how it's not working and you guys are phenomenally unpopular with that group of Americans. So is there a way to make >> wealth concentration? >> Yeah, wealth concentration. The bottom half is not happy with no sides. >> No, it's a huge No, it's a huge problem and I don't I don't think I listened carefully last night. I mean, I I just want to tell you, uh, that is a huge huge problem that's growing. The median income in Pennsylvania is $52,000 a year. When you guys say AI or AI anxiety, I I mean, these these folks, they've been down this road once before when a bunch of smart rich people said, "We got the answer. It's called

globalization." And what happened in my hometown is there was a mill of 2,000 people that got gutted. It's now 100 people. So, there's enormous anxiety, but it's because there's no path to getting ahead. and everybody in this room. Um, the last 10 years has been the greatest 10 years in the history of humanity for those who have assets. >> So, do you have a plan? >> Yeah. Well, there's there's got to be there's got to be a number of plans. Well, do you have a plan? Because it's not just going to be me. It's going to be us because right now I'm listen, I'm a I am a beneficiary of of capitalism. I have been wildly fortunate because of capitalism. But we are we are going to

lose capitalism unless we find a combination of a ways to address this. So what are the ways? The invest America counts is a perfect way, right? Where you are building opportunity for the next generation. The um the school choice uh provision in the working families tax cut act. $1,700. Everybody in this room can give $1,700 every year. billions of dollars that are going to go into uh school choice for for making sure everybody has equality of opportunity. If you don't do that at maximum scale and this moment leaves the majority of Americans behind, we're not going to be able to get anything done. >> Spend more money on programs. >> Yeah. Spend more money, but not not

spend more spend more money in giving people opportunity. So, the reason those two accounts are great, it takes it out of the government, circumvents the government, it's based on incentives and choice by people that have wealth, um, it's, uh, it's sort of Andrew Carnegie uh, brought to present day. Take that wealth, put it in the hands of those who will benefit from it, but it's your choice. It's not decked dictated by the government. I think that's going to have to be part of the answer. Does anyone in Congress subscribe to the notion that I think is rooted in, you know, empiricism that the more we spend, the harder it is for people to have economic mobility, you know, and I

think that there's a a simplified notion that government has to play a role in driving people's progress. And the truth is the more government intervenes in markets, the more inefficient and the more expensive those markets get. And therefore the more inaccessible wealth and value creation is for any individual and the freer the market the less the government intervenes the less the government is spending the less the government is buying the better things get for people generally speaking does is and it seems to me every time I visit DC I leave profoundly unhappy because I meet with people in Congress and this is a notion that seems to be diametrically

opposed to their viewpoints that everything is about doing more for people government needs to do more on both sides of the aisle versus if the government did less things would get more affordable, things would get more accessible and people would have greater economic mobility. >> Well, I mean, you know, talk about the the the government now. We had not just one, we had two shutdowns. Both were historic in terms of their length. Now, we couldn't just agree on very basic things. And now we've shut the government down collectively for over uh 120 days or whatever. Now then that's one of the thing as a Democrat I refuse to engage in that thing. If that's a

core responsibility as a senator keep our government open and for the love of God find a way to agree enough to keep things open and put things in risk and make our country less less safe. You know, I'm proud to be a capitalist and now capitalism is the the one system that has proven to raise life standard of humans across the globe. You know, and now people in my party now now we're having bad ideas refuse to die and now we're talking about socialism and and communists right now. We have we have candidates now that I'm I am a communist. These things and it's like that seems interesting. You know what's your point now? Talk to anyone that's had to live under those kinds of regime.

Now they're all absolute capitalists right now and that's that's absolutely the fact that the market wool has fixed a lot of these kinds of problems you know and I'm not terrified by AI. Am I concerned about it 100%. right right now and with now mythos and other concerns about mass hacking and weaponizing it that way you know that's coming and now I think that should belong to America you know that you know we America should build that chassis and now that's why if we turn my party into we're AI is the scourge or the cancer now I refuse to reject that because it's going to transform the world now it can come from us or it can come from China whose side

are you going to be in? And a lot of the people that oppose that now, a lot of that opposition is funded by a lot of these groups that are aligned with CCP. So that's part of the danger right now. So that's the dangerous time right now and like Democrats now my party. Oh, the problems are billionaires. Oh, but we love the billionaires that fund, you know, our kinds of views and our views and that too. I know target people, you know, people, you know, call out Bezos or whatever. It's like you don't don't do that. Don't call out private citizens, identify them the problem. You know, they are create jobs. If you've never created a job, don't criticize people that that have really changed our

our economy for the better. Honestly, >> why is Graham Platiner doing so well in the polls? This is a candidate that has a literal Nazi tattoo on his chest. Yeah. Yeah. >> And what does what does history tells us comes next? If he wins, >> if a candidate like that can win, what does that tell us? >> Yeah. Well, when I when I was a kid, if someone had a Nazi tattoo, you probably could call them a Nazi sympathizer, you know, and someone now uh and now just yesterday we discovered that he was sexing with up to a dozen women. And now Democrats now some saying, "Well, what's

the big problem?" you know, that's, you know, they're constantly just ignoring a lot of these things. Um, and now this is a guy that just a couple years, a couple years ago, uh, described, uh, an American soldier in a firefight with the Taliban. Uh, dumb motherucker that doesn't deserve to live. That's his words. Who does that? Who lurks on there? And, you know, he's really a tough guy behind a keyboard. And I can't, you know, explain other than that it's a backlash to to how partisan things are. Someone like that should have been uh in this race right now. So here we are, you know, a guy that was

texting to up to a dozen women, you know, he's getting his swall on and now we're now we're kind of just, oh, what's the big deal? uh why not confront that and just and call that out and that's that's the danger if now um these kinds of views uh could you imagine could you imagine if either one of us described an American soldier as a dumb mother that deserves to lie or he described the our army as as absolute trash absolute trash he described American army as absolute trash um and and that's a viable candidate now and that's that's a bizarre place to live right now as a Democrat. You know, >> if he wins, what happens to this? What what does that tell us about where we're

headed? >> Well, look at what I mean, what's happening there is I mean, there's there's problems on both parties, but certainly what you've seen on the left is two things. I think it's indisputable. One is a a migration to these terrible ideas of socialism and Marxism and so forth. But in addition to that, this really rise of anti-semitism and hatred and that and the the tell here of how pervasive it is is the people who are now campaigning in Maine, Chuck Schumer, uh, Elizabeth, these are mainstream Democrats that have now lurched so far to the left. And I think um I think this is going to be if if those candidates win and that becomes validation of the

viability of that stream of thinking in the Democratic party, I think it's in horribly unhealthy for America. Uh ironically, the best thing we want if we're Republicans is a strong Democratic party that keeps us honest and keeps us in check with good ideas. And uh and that's not happening. And uh as I said, we have problems on both sides. But I think that lurch to the left is really frightening a frightening thing. >> Well, and then let's and you just, you know, brought up Israel. You know, that's a profound betrayal for my party on on Israel or not. So, you know, the people that are winning a lot of these elections, you know, you know, one of their signature view is anti-

anti-Israel and borderline just, you know, raw anti-semitism in from a lot of these candidates now, too. And that's that's exactly where where we are. Um and now that has isolated me and the party and just calling that what that is. I mean that that's that's dangerous and now uh that that's where one of the things that we happen to agree on. Uh that's the right side of history uh for me. And that's a >> I mean maybe one of the best things that can happen is Shapiro continues to do well in Pennsylvania irrespective of which party you align with a prominent Jew winning in Pennsylvania running that state well is a very good sign actually

for the rest of the country that there's common ground and that anti-semitism is much more in check than the perception >> hero we had also >> I think Josh is fantastic >> yeah and he you know has a lot of disagreements about us maybe uh going into this for and you know maybe being egged into doing it. Uh and and by the way Federman um if you're look or Freeberg if you're looking for the source of why people feel comfortable saying these terrible things you can look no further than Trump and what he said about McCain being a war hero that started this actually this rhetoric and now everybody wants to one up it. He

said he's not a war hero and he got captured. That's where this started. Sax. Oh, please. >> You're trying to blame Trump for the fact that a Democratic candidate in Maine has a swastika tattoo. >> The rhetoric. No, the rhetoric. It started Start with Trump. We're in TDS and he needs to >> We're in TDS land, but fortunately, we're not interviewing you, JCAL. Let me ask uh Senator Federman a question. So, I appreciate your common sense views on AI, on capitalism, on all the things we're talking about, and I think that uh the people in Pennsylvania appreciate it. I think you're very popular there. But I'm curious, do you ever get worried

that you might get primared in the Democratic party when when you come up? Because I mean, the Bernie Sanders wing is powerful. They have a lot of activists. They're very noisy. I mean, do you ever I mean, I appreciate your maverick streak and your independence, but do you how do you think about that risk? >> Well, a seat or a job is is not I'm always going to be I'm going to be honest and I'm always going to have uh you know, my votes or my opinions are going to be what I happen to believe is is true. You know, uh it's not a seat worth trying to maintain if I'm going to lie or to pretend that things aren't absolutely true. Yeah, absolutely. I can

be be primar and there are some Democrats that are they're angry at me. If they're angry at me for supporting Israel, hey, they have at it. If they're angry at me that I think it's wrong to shut down the government, that's fine. Uh if if they're angry at me because I I refuse to call him a Nazi or a fascist or a piece of I'll never do that. You can hold me in that, too. But what's really strange in that the truth is somebody that votes like a 93% as Democratic line and if I change my party there was a lot of palace intrigue that I'm going to change the party and I'm I'm never going to do that and if I did I could change you know I could announce

right now I am changing it right now my votes aren't going to change my views excuse thing uh I wouldn't vote any differently things I happen to believe and and if if Democrats run me out of the party. They will be attacking a committed Democrat that votes your line 93% of the time because we're in an unique time right now that I think things are more important than trying to I I know what pays the bills as a Democrat now. Literally what campaigns are based on Trump literally in their campaign commercials. Yes. and in their emails and outrage. You know, it's constant rage bait. I I refuse to engage in that. And I'm going to be the an example of what I think is entirely

appropriate and and a lot of the conversations are driven by people that represent very, you know, safe blue state states. Now, oh, like that's why Pennsylvania keeps people honest here. And people are going to remember in 28. Oh yeah. Oh, I want to be bipartisan. I want to get along. You know, like people don't believe you, you know, like they remember what what they've said and how people behave. Uh so that's where I'm at. So yeah, I could be primar. But what's more important to be uh be truthful what I think are important values and remind people that the things we used to believe in you know I I think

>> I want to I want to I want to just move to just domestic policy and economics for a second Dave you you me you said this incredible story in the green room which maybe you can start off with which is the quantum of people that reach out to you every week to mostly complain about various companies, but just use that as an insight maybe to talk about AI because that's a huge part of your state. It's also a huge part of the American economy. And maybe compare it to what happened with shale and oil because there's a lot of commonalities. I think it's quite interesting. >> Yeah, it's uh I don't know if he gets the same amount, but on an average week,

we have 14 million people in Pennsylvania almost. On an average week, I'll get something like a hundred,000 outreaches to me, uh, letters, emails, phone calls across different issues. And you can almost see when the activists are mobilizing groups to come come and and make the case on certain things. And I do a call every two weeks. It's an sort of an open mic where you get about 10,000 people to show up. and the the number of data center calls, data centers have become uh a much bigger and per pervasive thing. And just to put this in perspective, David David was there. Uh Dena and I hosted an energy and innovation summit in Pennsylvania last July. We had $92 billion of

investment committed. We had the energy CEOs, the AI CEOs, big investors, global investors. We had uh Senator Federman came, Governor Shapiro came, the president came, the cabinet came. was amazing and that's by by the way that's what you need. Winning is a team sport and winning in AI is a team sport and you need all those players at the table. Um and so it was it was a real success and since then there's been enormous investments made in Pennsylvania. I visited uh one just the other week, Homer City. 4.4 gawatt of power from a coal plant that's being transitional to natural gas. 3.4 gigs is going to go into a data center complex. a a

gigawatts going back on the grid to hopefully bring down energy prices. So, this is this is happening across Pennsylvania, but the opposition is growing and it's clear. >> Is there any organic part to this? Like is cuz it's very hard to understand what's happening when you have these kind of dark forces, dark pools of money. >> I can't is there a legitimate like I don't want to have this in my backyard for XY. There's enormous misinformation >> and I think that misinformation is largely being driven by China and outside forces and then there's just legitimate >> not not understanding not knowing and we

need to do a much better job of making sure that the outlines of what these data centers mean to communities is clear and and and frankly there needs to be a much clearer covenant of what it means. If you're going to have a data center in your community, you're a township supervisor, here's what you know. Um, you're going to they're going to bring more energy they're going to use. They're going to protect their water with closed loop. Um, they're going to give this much to the tax base. They're going to build schools or infrastructure, whatever going to build. >> Isn't that first part the only thing that matters in people's minds? I just don't want my energy to build go up.

>> No. Um, because as soon as you get through that, they move to the next thing which is water. And then the the schools are going to be crowded and there's like So >> the schools are going to be crowded because there'll be new jobs. No, because we new people and they don't they're not making the connection to the tax base. The roads are going to be crowded. So there's a whole comprehensive case that needs to be made and u what uh Jamath was making the point we went through this before John and I went both lived through this with fracking huge campaign against huge misinformation lack of understanding and 15 years later I'd say there's pretty

broad-based support >> for no yeah there's unlimited money I mean you know they they someone finds some B-roll kind of a comment and they put $10 million behind it and they they can turn you into the most extreme kinds of things. It's ironically, you know, originally people try to convince people that I'm a socialist and now people are like now I'm MAGA or whatever. I'm like, no, I'm just I haven't changed. My views are my views are are are the the same. And you know, I would tell people energy is national security. Look at what's happening in, you know, in in Europe and other parts. Now if you don't have energy security then your your national security is in

danger. Now AI is coming and and what what he's done he created this amazing symposium to remind people that the you know we need both. We need energy and Pennsylvania produces a lot of that and now also AI is coming otherwise we'd still be using this spinny Jenny or whatever that's called you know. So it why do we talk about data centers? Because people forces are describing them as a scourge or a cancer that's going to bankrupt you or destroy your community. Uh why do we have that right now? Because this is something that's going to transform our society. Um there you know absolutely there could be a downside but overall it's going to be much more productive and that's going to

create new opportunities. Now I refuse to become a party of of lites. Uh you know that's you know like honest if I had to vote now claim that that's all cancer it's danger and it's all downside then I'd be lying and that's why I'm saying Republican or Democrat you know that's a fact. These things are very very important and that's why I'm going to >> Can I just Can I just double click on this thing when you compare it to Shale? So in shale, I'm going to assume that when shale was escalating in importance, the push back were from corporate interests that would have economically lost out. That's what I'm guessing. The majority

>> environmentalist. >> Environmentalist. >> Yeah, environmental. >> But it seems like in AI we're dealing with foreign state actors. >> Yeah. >> Is that fair? Is that is that is it as reductively simple as that? Well, if you go to those two parts, one was the the campaign of misinformation and the other is a lack of understanding, there's much more of a campaign of misinformation from outside forces this time around. Uh but but what happened in in the you know in in the case of shale methane destroys the water table, you know, don't want these in our backyards. What happened of course was these enormous royalties for the farmers. Um we're we're the fourth largest natural gas reserves in the

world. But if we were a country, Pennsylvania would be number four. This is the economic engine for our state. Our state is the second largest energy producer in the country. So this unlocks everything for Pennsylvania. And as those jobs started to be created, so you saw the economic benefit, the misinformation about the methane and the water table became clear slowly and much too long, 15 years later, we're now at a place where I bet 80% of the people would have support fracking. last night event you know you described that we have six to eight months uh ahead of China right is that right yeah okay so now you know you know you know my party

is driving for a moratorium for data centers like I mean do you think China doesn't love that you know again that's why they're there they're parts behind some of driving this this view you want to give that race to China it's coming it's the choice do you want America to to to build that chassis or do you want the Chinese to do that? You know, like yeah, you know, data centers can make some things with some uh >> and at the core of that, John, is what you said earlier, which is it starts with TDS and then it goes with give China AI. Is that >> I would say this, vote me out. If you think it's okay to give China a benefit

to win the AI race, vote me out, you know, and you know, but it's it's like so >> your favorite person in the audience. My wife is clapping for you. >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No, that's exactly your favorite. I mean, that's exactly the way I see it as well. So, um, we have great bipartisan agreement here. So Dave, I was at your summit last year, the energy and innovation summit, where you announced $90 billion of new investments. The thing I was struck by was how broad-based the representation was at that summit. You only had software companies, you had hardware companies, you had manufacturing, you had robotics, you had energy, nuclear fracking, and then most interestingly is

that you had the trades there. And that's when a light bulb went on for me that oh this is a bluecollar boom because con this is a construction boom and blueco collar workers are really going to benefit and the trades who represented there spoke to that and since then we've had hundreds of of thousands of new jobs construction jobs created and 25 to 30% wage increases for construction workers and so I'm curious does that help make the cause more popular in Pennsylvania? Are those trades are the unions still on board with this or have the politics of that changed at all over the past year? >> Um, it's a great question and it's it's

been extraordinary. So, just in the last 15 16 months and this these are related by the way. It's not just energy projects and data centers. It's US Steel and a new next generation mill. It's Eli Liy building a new plant. It's Hanwa and the Philadelphia shipyard. But they're coming in part because of the data centers and the energy projects and um and so I've spent a lot of time with the trades lately. The most secure job in Pennsylvania right now is a secure welder. I mean is a seasoned welder >> an electrician. >> An electrician. These these honestly these these folks are coming out. They're getting the training. They're in

their late teens, early 20s. They're making more than 100 grand a year in these sites and they can't they can't build they can't hire quick enough. uh they can't find enough people to meet the demand and uh you know these the the data centers I mean I've looked closely at that there's one you know coming in Burwick Pennsylvania right next to where my uh where I went to high school you know the the way to think about it is there sort of four buckets of economic activity that comes jobs that come there's of course the deals that come with them but there's the thousands of jobs to build the data centers and the energy that goes side by side so these are 5 10000 uh folks on the site

Then there's the hundreds of people to run the data centers. Then of course every 3 to four years the the hardware and everything in the data centers gets upgraded which brings in hundreds sometimes thousands of jobs. There's the energy that's going side by side. Then there's the restaurants, the hotels. I met with the the trucking association the other day. They they uh guess that it's about two logistics jobs for every one job in a data center. These things are economic engines. So once you get that covenant straight, people are willing to make the decision. And if they're if a township supervisor, a county commissioner, no senator is going to tell them to do this. This has to

come from the ground up in terms of making the decision. But once they decide to do that, it's a huge uh engine for their communities. If they decide not to do it, my point is, okay, where's where's your plan? What is the plan? In Pennsylvania, we've been losing people for 20 years. We can't get our kids to stay. This is like a rebirth. It's amazing what's happening, but we got to break through the misinformation. >> Freeberg, do you have a final question? If not, >> well, I mean, I think on this point, why do you think it's so difficult for the Democrats to embrace the facts on the ground? because you have an empirical story to share about job

creation, value creation and there's no empiricism on the other side that there's job displacement or job loss in the white collar jobs which is generally part of >> two things I would say the notion of AI broadly is getting munched with the notion of data centers in a narrow thing data centers of course are an enormous component of this but those two those two things are unrelated second I I I don't think it's just democrats like I mean we have >> no the America first movement is now in the horseshoe exactly aligned with the >> we have we have the the the far left and

the far right >> converging on an anti >> we even have some besties who occasionally buy into the jobs apocalypse. So, >> no, no, I'm I'm I'm I I'm job. No, never misrepresent me, Sax. I will call you out every time. I'm I just believe there'll be jobs. >> You could also use the word job mobility. >> Well, I think I'll let finish my sentence, please. >> I'm speaking job displacement is occurring and that new jobs need to be created to fill that in. And I think that's the blind spot of the people who have Trump dedication syndrome is that they will never actually do anything that would modestly criticize the

president. And that's part of the challenge. I want to have a last just >> just about the amount of money being donated by special interests. Do we need to get money out of politics? Because that seems to be the root of a lot of these problems is that you know billionaires can give 50 million 50 million 100 million 200 million whether it's Soros or friends of ours. It feels like there's way too much money in politics. Does that have to change for this type of issue uh you know around data centers etc. and special interest and and how do we can we ever get there? >> Yeah. Well, I I would I would say of the five things I would do to fix America

right now, that wouldn't be in the top five. But yes, conceptually, I'd like to get money out of politics. There was my race was $500 million. >> We raised 200 million on my side, 300 million on the on the the opposition side. We we couldn't keep up. >> I was I was record before in 22. we raised, you know, and and know my race was 300 330 million and and now that's quaint. Wait till 26, wait till 28. This is going to look like quaint and that's the thing, you know, collect >> we need to get money out or this group needs to be donating a lot more to both >> or get get rid get rid of the primary p process too, you know, and and now open

to other people. And now these primaries, they identify the extreme kinds of views and put out someone, you know, and and that's part of it now, too. Collectively, $300 million were spent to to describe to destroy our reputations. Think what $300 million could do for Pennsylvania or for people that was spent to destroy reputations. You know, you're terrible. I am terrible. Uh that's the absurdity of the American politics, right? >> On on that note, I actually want to say both of you are incredibly rational and reasonable and incredible American. So I just want to thank you Senators Federman

and McCormack. Very much appreciate