Margaret thank you to all of you for joining us tonight, to our dedicated staff here at George Washington university. To our media partner, cbs news and sirius xm and our incredible production team. Thanks for helping the Bipartisan Policy Center sponsor this wonderful debate. Its the fourth in a series by the senate project. Tonight promises to be an interesting and informative discussion on some of the most Critical Issues facing our country and our world. We are honored that senator chris coons and senator marco rubio agreed to participate in this important program. Thanks to both of them. As you saw in those two video, the genesis of the senate project came from two u. S. Senators who had very different points of view but looked for Common Ground. Youll be hearing from senator tom daschle in a moment with more on their relationship and what it meant for the senate as an institution and for our country and all of us. I also have the privilege of collaborating with senators kennedy and hatch during my time as education secretary during the george w. Bush administration. They set a standard for bipartisanship. There are few people id like to recognize. After leaving the u. S. Senate earlier this year the team at the Bipartisan Policy Center have the good sense to reach out to senator roy blunt during his time roy blunt. During his time in congress he became a leader in looking for ways to work across the aisle. Senator blunt is now an executive fellow at the b. P. C. And we are honored to have his expertise. Bruce perselay is chairman of the edward m. Kennedy institute for the senate, joined by his executive director adam heinze. Matt sandgrin is executive director of the orr hin g. Hatch foundation. He spent 15 years as senator hatchs chief of staff. I also want to welcome frank, the cochair of the commission on president ial debates. He knows a thing or two about debates and were pleased he could be with us. Thank you, frank. This is my first day as president and c. E. O. Of the Bipartisan Policy Center. In addition to serving as cabinet secretary, my career has taken me to the College Campus as president of the university of North Carolina system and until just a few weeks ago, president and c. E. O. Of texas 2036, an organization addressing the most important issues for texas. In advance of its bicentennial my new challenge is here. As we expand the mission of the b. P. C. Ill be the first to admit that bipartisanship may not appeal to the most extreme voices in either party. Were all familiar with the noise in todays political climate, evident on both ends of pennsylvania avenue, on cable television, and on social media. And if we can get beyond all of that noise, there are lawmakers who can and do Work Together to accomplish big things. The only way to create lasting change is to have that debate. Discuss the differences. And find Common Ground. So if youre starving for policymakers who will come together, then i ask you to join us collectively as we work to find solutions instead of sound bites. Im looking forward to todays event and what will come next. Both senator coons and senator rubio have agreed to write a joint oped based on what comes out of their exchange this evening. We look forward to sharing that with you and it will be posted on our website at bipartisanpolicy. Org and of course on the hatch and kennedy websites. It is now my great pleasure to introduce the former Senate Democratic leader, tom daschle. He faced more than his fair share of political battles in his two decades in congress. After leaving the senate he collaborated with three other former party leaders, senator bob dole, senator howard baker and congressman george mitchell, to create an organization that fosters fierce debate and Common Ground. Were here tonight in large part because of his vision and his tireless efforts to make our political process work just a little better. The b. P. C. Is one of his greatest achievements and a Lasting Legacy to toms distinguished career in public service. Please join me in welcoming senator daschle. [applause] sen. Daschle thank you, margaret, for that kind introduction and congratulations. I cant imagine a better way to launch your career with the b. P. C. Than an evening like tonight. Margaret and i had the chance to Work Together when she served as secretary of education with the george w. Bush administration. And i must say, served in a just in a remarkable way. So its so good to have her back in washington tonight. I couldnt be more thrilled to wok her on her very first day here at the b. P. C. And thank her for the leadership and the work she has demonstrated over and over again in her public and private careers these many years. And let me thank you for your work the past year at the helm. Of toe at the helm of the b. P. C. It was a little over three years ago when i commended commented to fellow Board Members a Board Members at the Edward Kennedy institute that at times i didnt recognize the senate the way it was operating today. Often called the worlds greatest deliberative body, today polarization is yen rating our politics and media in an impact. Way that oftentimes is repulsive. Thats why im so pleased tonight to see three great organizations working collectively on a single goal. To create a forum in which we can watch the passionate debate that we expect in the senate. A hallmark of our democracy. And then when possible look for areas of Common Ground. Tonight, we have two people ive admired a great deal. Two distinguished lawmakers who represent two different parties and oftentimes two different points of view. But like each of us, theyre americans first. Senator koontz and senator rubid senator reubie will debate several topics, including Climate Change facing the planet, and our adversaries, and just like our founders who argue, who discussed, and disagreed, theyre going to look for areas of Common Ground as well. Yesterday, as some of you may recall, we marked the anniversary of our constitution. And im often reminded of that scene in the final day of the Constitutional Convention in 1787, its a story that im absolutely certain most of you have already heard. But on this, the day after the anniversary of the constitution, i think it bears repeating. As you recall, residents in philadelphia gathered on the steps of Independence Hall to await the news of government from our founders and what theyd crafted. One of them asked the oldest founding father, Benjamin Franklin who stood at the steps as they were walking out, mr. Franklin, what do we have . A monarchy or a republic . Franklin replied, a republic, if you can keep it. Thats our responsibility. Now nearly 250 years later, can we keep it . After all weve gone through these past years, those words actually ring louder than ever. Tonight were going to have a chance to hear those differences but in a forum that gives two u. S. Senators the space to share their points of view. And yes at times, agree to disagree. But with a level of mutual respect. I had the great privilege to work sidebyside with ted and orrin. They were not only colleagues but they became very close friends. We traveled together, we actually hung out on weekends together. Ted and orrin were two different parties. Two different ideologies. From opposite ends of the country. But despite despite those differences they respected each others point of view. They didnt agree on everything. But in areas where there was agreement, they went all in to get things done to make this country a better place. They believed as i so strongly believe that compromise, compromise is the oxygen of democracy. As a result, their names are on some of the most important pieces of legislation from the 20th and 21st centuries. From the americans with disabilities act to the ryan care act for aids to the Childrens Health insurance program, known as chip. And of course secretary spellings knows so well, major education reform with no child left behind. And consider for just a moment the impact each of these bipartisan bills continue tonight to have on the country. We need a lot more like them in congress. If we want to tack they will big issues facing our country now. I only wish they could be here tonight, theyd be so proud of the work that these three highly respected institutions are doing to carry on their legacy. To the b. P. C. , to the e. M. K. Institute, to the hatch foundation, thank you for bringing us together tonight. And for all the work that you do to ensure we can find that Common Ground. And in the bipartisan spirit of the evening im pleased to welcome one of the newest members of the senate alum society, former republican senator from missouri and now an executive fellow at the Bipartisan Policy Center, my friend and truly my friend, roy blunt. [applause] mr. Blunt thank you, tom. Tom is a good friend, our accomplished wives are good friends, which makes it easeor for easier for us to be good friends. Tom has been an adviser of mine since i announce fahd years ago i wasnt going to run for another term. The United States senate is one of the few places in the world where at my age, after 26 years in congress, people would ask why are you leaving so early . I want to join in welcoming margaret, and thanks to kelly who filled in while we wayed for margaret to get here. And with my colleagues, with my friend val demings from florida, we found ways to Work Together. We had an oped published not too long ago, i was glad to be part of that. One of the reasons were here, tom daschles determined leadership that you have to find solutions. I point out that the Bipartisan Policy Center is not nonpartisan. Its bipartisan. And thats different. When tom daschle and i first had a chance to Work Together, i was the republican whip in the house and he was the democratic leader in the senate. Those are clearly not nonpartisan jobs. But i think we both felt then and still feel that the best solutions are found in the middle. They last the longest. They have the most resilience. They serve us the best. A couple of congresses ago, there were 52 republicans in that senate and 48 democrats. My staff came to me one day and said, you do so many things with other members to find one thing you can agree on. We thought wed just check and see how many of the 48 democrats youd been the principal sponsor of the bill with, not just a cosponsor but principal sponsor and the answer was 44. I thought that was a pretty good answer. In my last speech on the senate floor i said to get something done here you dont have to find something you dont have to find somebody you agree on everything with, you just have to find somebody you agree on one thing with and that leads to getting things done. Senator rubio, senator coons and i all came to the senate at the same time and we worked on lots of things together. Senator coons and i worked on the victims of child abuse act every time it needed to be extended. And americorps every time it needed to be extended. Senator rubio and i were sat sidebyside on the Senate Intelligence committee for several of the years that we served there and everything from dealing with those intel issues to daylight savings time, fulltime extension. Which we are both for and almost everybody in this room will be for in about six weeks or. So wondering why we didnt get that done even though i will point, there was one day when our daylight savings bill passed unanimously in the senate though ive never been quite sure how many senators were there. The day it passed snamsly. Were here for an oxford style debate two people stand on the stage and Exchange Ideas about issues we have to find a solution to. Lucky to have ed coe keefe from cbs news here ed okeefe from cbs news here to see that this debate answers some of those questions. Also lucky tonight to welcome nadia to come and sing the national anthem. Id like for all of you to stand as she comes to do that. O say can you see by the dawns early light what so proudly we hailed at the twilights last gleaming whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight oer the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming and the rockets red glare the bombs bursting in air gave proof through the night that our flag was still there o say, does that starspangled banner yet wave oer the land of the free and the home of the brave [applause] please welcome tonights moderator, cbs news senior white house correspondent, ed okeefe. Ed good evening. Im ed coe keefe, white house and Political Correspondent for cbs news. Welcome to the Senate Project Debate taking place here on the campus of George Washington university, in washington, d. C. To those of you watching on cbs news or through sirius xm, thank you for tuning. In this is a partnership between the edward m. Kennedy institute for the u. S. Senate, the orrin g. Hatch foundation and the Bipartisan Policy Center. The organizations joined together to create a forum in which elected officials can discuss some of the most important issues of our time while also looking for arias of Common Ground. Delaware democratic senator chris coons delaware democratic senator chris coons and Florida Republican senator marco rubio have agreed to join us on this stage and senator rubio selected topics of china and global leadership. Senator a coons chose energy and the environment. The third topic will focus on the u. S. Senate as an institution and the state of our politics today. Each senator will present opening arguments, followed by rebuttal my job is to give them the time and space to have that debate and leave it to them, primarily, to have that conversation. The audience behind me has assured me, assured me, theyre going to remain quiet for the next hour except right now as we welcome senators coons and rubio to the stage. [applause] ed didnt realize we were getting such a hollywood opening. Thank you gentlemen, senators, for being here. Senator rubio opted to go with the issue of china and u. S. Global policy. So senator rubio, first with your opening argument, and then well hear from senator coons. Sen. Rubio thank you. Its an honor to be here. Ive done a lot of debates over the last few years but usually we have 10 other people on stage calling each other names. This should be interesting and productive. I picked the topic of china, its not really about china, its about us. 80 years from now salespeople will write books about this century. Most of us wont be here. Therell be a couple of chapter on vladimir putin, but that book, the story of the 21st century will be about what happened between the United States and china. What happened . Did one overcome the other . Did one become predominant in the case of china . Were they able to find a balance and coexistence to their relationship . Whatever the outcome i think will define the 21st century. Weve made some bad mistakes over the last 30 years. Neither of us were in the senate at the time but policymaker we did have a bipartisan consensus in this country. That was that the cold war was over, the free world had won, now it didnt matter anymore where the market sent jobs because all these jobs could leave but dont worry, better jobs will replace them and pay you more. And once china got rich and prosperous, etch if they cheated their way there,he it sounds stillly now but it benefited everybody, it benefit silicon valley, the chamber of commerce and other industries. It was a terrible mistake. It does matter. Nationhoods matter. The ability to make things matters. It did matter those jobs were leaving. They were not replaced by better paying jobs for the people who lost them, maybe for others. The result is not just having an impact on america but on every single western industrialized country on the planet. Everyone is going through an upheaval because of this at the core of it is china make no mistake, china is an expansionist power. An expansionist power. Think about over the last 100 years as the west is decolonized, walking away from colonization, in inner mongol goala and tibbett, theyve taken over hong kong, portions of northern india. Theyve claimed the entire South China Sea to make it very clear that they intend to take over taiwan one day. This is an expansionist power. They also economically cheat. They steal 600 billion a year of intellectual property. Their companies can do whatever they want in america but our companies cant do whatever we want over there. Capitalism did not change china. China changed capitalism. They used it against us as a weapon. They empower and empowered and enabled and depp fiezed deputized hundreds and hundreds of industries and their lobbyists to influence american policies. Were running out of time to reverse this. Its an extriertdnary, historic challenge, one we need to confront with open eyes and truly understand that they do not view this as a winwin situation. In their boif the last 100 years are an aberration and it is their rightful place to be the worlds most powerful country and i for one dont want my children or grandchildren who are yet to be conceived or at least born, i for one dont want them to inherit a world where the most powerful nation on the earth is a fascist police state that condemns uighur muslims to work camps. That oppresses its people and that empowers that sort of authoritarianism around the world. I think its an extraordinary challenge and one i hope we can build a new consensus on. Ed senator coons . Sen. Coons thank you, ed. Thank you to the Bipartisan Policy Center and thank you to senators daschle and blunt. G. W. , my wife annie, family and friends for being here tonight. To senator rubio, marco, thank you for agreeing to this evenings discussion. To look back at how this started, we agreed to the agree act in 2011, five different ideas we wove together to challenge our parties which at that time were already showing pieces of that agree act had to do with protecting our inventions and our innovations from chinese predaition. I largely agree with senator rubio that china is the leading challenge to the american way of life. To our security. To our inventions and innovations. To testing our global standing. They have engaged in death trap diplomacy through the belt road initiative. They are threatening our supply chains and access to everything from pharmaceuticals to semiconductor chips. As i came into the senate i was leaving eight years in a Manufacturing Company and i knew all too tellwell how chinese theft of our inventions, our trade secrets, was a critical challenge. So one of the very first bill us got involved with was teaming up with thensenator orrin hatch to pass into law the defend trade secrets act. It was based on an experience i had in the private sector where someone we thought was a trusted partner in research was in fact a p. L. A. Agent who ran out the door with a laptop full of some of our most important inventions. At the time the law didnt allow a private Sector Company to take private action to recover that set of trade secrets. Now it does. As the chair of the africa subcommittee in my first two congresses with my dear friend Johnny Isakson of georgia, i could see how chinese offerings of investment in infrastrur infrastructure were tempting african developing nations and we werent offering and alternative. I worked hard with thensenator bob corker to pass a bill to help create the Development Finance corporation to provide an alternative that was more transparent, more sustainable, that met our values. Im working hard to provide the resources d. F. C. Needs to be something that can meet the moment of that challenge. And last, in terms of the issue of threats to semikungtors and our supply chain, the real risks posed to taiwan, not just the risk to their independence and freedom but the risk to our defense and our system, i worked with senators of both parties to help shape and pass the chips and science act in the last congress. I think its critical to show that we can solve problems. China is an absolutely critical threat. Ill close with this. The most important thing we can do is to strengthen our democracy by showing that we have answers to challenges of this century. Thats why im excited to be on the stage with you tonight is to show you that we is to show that we can find Common Ground together. Ed youre fre to rebut. Sen. Rubio its a nice statement, i dont know how to rebut that. First of all let me say the issue of china, there is a developing consensus in the country that this needs to be confronted even in congress. I would say that the divisions on this issue arent necessarily always partisan. It generally falls in line this way. If youre an industry or a business thats done quite well with your investments in china youre going to come up with all kind of creative reasons we shouldnt go too far in pushing so that doesnt always fall along neat partisan lines. In many cases some of the real challenges we have faced have been in my own party with regards to some of these issues. There were many who would say we should trust the market. I hate socialism. Its a failure. This country is facing a crisis because of immigration away from socialism from veans way la and tua. The mark will find the most efficient outcome which is generally the right jut come. What do you do when the most efficientout come is not in the National Interest in it is more efficient to depend on them for 80 of the pharmaceutical ingredients because its cheaper. But we shouldnt. We can go down the list, industry after industry. That desire to confront this is a new consensus. I think whatll be our challenge is this is not an issue that lends ourselves to incremental. I. The challenge sex trierdnary. This is by far the single greatest adversary this nation has ever confronted. They are much more powerful than the soviet union ever was. They were never industrial or technological ones. And i do think that our concern needs to be matched by a level of urgency in both political parties. Its not enough to say we are going to pass a bill that says nasty things about china. Thats tactical. We have to have a Strategic Point of view in regards to how serious the threat is and take measures that make sense. And that respond to how serious a threat this is. With serious proposals. We can only do this as a bipartisan consensus around this, not half measures. Hopefully well be table arrive at that point in our country at that level of urgency to get something done. Ed let me ask you both. President biden was asked to characterize the u. S. China relationship in a recent visit to vietnam he said in part, quote, we think too much in cold war terms. He later added the relationship instead should be about, quote, generating Economic Growth and stability in all parts of the world. Is that the right approach to china . Sen. Rubio i dont think this is anything like the cold war. I never used that terminology. The cold war was scarier but ease year to understand. They wanted to spread marxism all over the world. He the chinese dont care if you become a marxist or not. They want you to owe them a bunch of money if you owe them as much as your economy is worth, youll owe youll do whatever they want. They seek to become a dominant military power in the indopacific region but they want to project power all over the world. They seek to dominate all the industries that are going to be key to the 21st century. They dont talk about this anymore, but made in china 2025. They said were going to dominate these 10 industries. Some of them are things like heavy machinery. Not just some of the high tech stuff. I think we have to view it in that way the chinese would like to the communist party of china would like to avoid confrontation with the United States as long as possible because they believe the longer they can extend this, the longer they can continue their lies without conflict setting them back. But we should be under no illusion they do not have a winwin mentality and we should also be under no illusions about this we are here tonight to talk about arias of agreement and consensus. Thats not a tradition in the political culture. Its not. Its not going to translate to Foreign Policy ed senator coon, is it a cold war or Something Else . Sen. Coons its Something Else but ill reference some ways it seems eerily reminiscent. We are in a contest of wills with a different system. The high these communist party which under xi jinpings leadership has taken a sharp turn to control and repress its people. To be more active and engaged in what was the independent private sector formerly in china. And as senator rubio has said, significantly more expansionist. Regionally and globally. And that in that way this is somewhat similar to our contest with the soviet union a contest of two very different systems. With different understandings of individual rights and liberty and where our greatest strength is our Global Network of alliances. Our alliances were critical to our success in the cold war and i would argue our alliances with countries with common values that are free market societies, open societies, with are robust media that respect the right of individuals and free and mare elections. Thats the world we now need to embrace and lead. I would argue we are. When xi jinping and his emissaries go around the world, i have heard this and seen this in dozens of countries i have visited, they say we are a declining power. They say the United States is inevitably headed downward and they are inevitably ascendant we can prove them wrong. But doing so begins by strengthening our own internal capability to show that democracy delivers and by embracing our Global Network. Ed so we both agree china is bad. Were not in a cold war. Sen. Rubio theres one point i would put a different are we allowed . Usually theres someone scream, thats not in the rules. Ed go ahead. Sen. Rubio i think the world will look different than the one senator coons describes in the cold war. I think theres clearly a block of nations coming together, probably not Something Like a formal military alliance but certainly some sort of Global Cooperative between china, russia, iran, north korea and others. Coalition of the sanctions, i guess she right term. And then and then obviously nations that have respect for the things we have discussed or to have common interest in us in preserving things like freedom, democracy, liberty, individual liberty, a concept foreign to the Chinese Communist party. They have no concept of individual liberty as we would define it. Then theres a third group eric merging countries. Theyre doing what youd do if you were an emerging country. Ill cut the best deal i can with both sides. Can i get weapons from the u. S. . Can i get cheap huawei systems from china that are effective . I think we have to be mature and strategic how we approach that in many cases. Senator coons is an expert on africa issues. Many of those country, they dont want to be forced to pick a side in this. They want the benefits of both. Thats one of that existed somewhat in the cold war but i think itll be really pronounced in this new area. Ed i want to ask you both a Senate Question related to china. Majority leader schumer is said to be preparing a bipartisan troip china. Is that a good idea . Sen. Coons many senator have never been to china. Many have a view and understanding of the p. R. C. That is informed by what theyve read or seen on television. And like many places ive been in the world i think you cant grasp what china is today, what its capable of in scope and ambitions without spending time there. I first went to china decades ago. I most recently went there leading a codel. And was shocked at how much of a difference there is in their development and technology. And in the directness with which theyre willing to just sit down and lay out that they are intending to meet us and in some places replace us. Thats a challenge they have, an ambition, on the world stage. We are capable of having collaboration and cooperation and we have to consider that. On critical areas. Whether its nuclear proliferation. Counterterrorism. Managing pandemics. Dealing with Climate Change. Theres a mixed record across those four. Theres also areas where we have to be cleareyed about their competition with us, for those nonaligned countries. And how we to understand their engagement need to meet with them and hear from them. But frankly also if you havent seen china on the ground in the last decade or never been there at all i think its hard to grasp. To go to taiwan and to go to the p. R. C. , and to see in a chinese context a robust democracy and open market economy. And a country controlled by the c. C. P. Is to be informed about the challenges ahead. Ed senator rubio . Sen. Rubio i will not be on that trip, im banned from china its one of those trips where 10 people go, if im one of them, only nine may come back. I will tell you my only concern, i generally, you want to go and meet with leaders and talk to them. But my only concern is the way it would be perceived. Perception is real. The perception and mindset that, the way the world views america right now, unfortunately, forget about who is president , who was president , who will be president. Just in general, we cannot sustain our attention span, well talk about things for three months, thats our longterm planning. Then we move on to Something Else. In the end, their viewpoint is no matter how much these politicians talk tough, they like buying stuff from shein. Ive never ordered from there but i hear its cheap. They are so addicted to what we can provide them that in the end theyre limited in what they can do. And my fear is that theyll perceive these leadership trips as an indicator of us looking for a strategy, and accommodation on that front if they want to go, i hope the message they take and deliver is a strong one. Ill be watching here from the crites because i cant go anyway. Ed both of you also agreed to take on the broader topic of u. S. Leadership. Its something you confront every day as members of the Foreign Relations committee. Senator rubio, go ahead. Sen. Rubio i think u. S. Global leadership is important, it needs to be adjusted to the times in which we live. A perfect example, i think we should be a country if youre friendly and aligned with the United States we should be good to you and supportive. If youre an adversary we should be firm with you and may have to engage on an issue. What i get from leaders in latin america, they wonder is it better to be mean to america . Is it better to be cross ways with america . You seem to be they seem to spend more time and attention on you than they would otherwise. This is tough for us to accept. This was once a union polar world, we were the only country that could pronl power everywhere. Thats no longer the case not because america has gotten smaller but the world is more complex. We should care about all the things that are happening on the planet. We have to prioritize the ones that have direct impact on our National Interest. Our National Interest has to be at the forefront of where weall kate resources and spend our attention on how we make these decisions. Some nayses in some places and some crises have greater impact on our National Interest. This doesnt mean we want to act counter to National Interests of other nations but sometimes itll be in conflict. What matters to the sus important. Ill put it to you this way if United States leaders dont put National Interest in the United States first what leaders in the world will . Thats our number one obligation. So i think thats the part where our Global Engagement needs to be tailored, perhaps more than it was even five or 10 years ago. Ed are we a reliable ally and partner . I think about the questions i have been asked by foreign ministers, heads of state. In dozens of countries in recent years. We just sen. Coons we just adopted that no president can withdraw us from our most enduring alliance, nato. Theres a reason for that. Whether its strengthening our alliance, this is a moment in our role in the world where our National Interest is to be a strong and reliable ally. One of the reasons were fighting to hard to expel russian occupiers is because we committed to this. There are 47 other countries contributing collectively as much if not more than we have. This sends a signal around the world. If we flag in our enthusiasm to the point senator rubio made about concerns about our attention span, not just individually but collectively, if we flag in our enthusiasm and support for the fight of ukraine, it sends clear signals, i think, to others in the world who would also seek to change boundaries and to invade or occupy or undermine countries by force. Ed youre both on the Foreign Relations committee. Youre both also on appropriations. Ukraine, as you mentioned, is seeking even more assistance, president zelenskyy will be here this week. Give us a sense where thats headed . Are they going to get the money . How much . Is there push to have Strings Attached or have better accountability real . Sen. Coons theyre doing a great job at transparency and accountability. Last time i was in kyiv was with senator portman last year. One thing we did was meeting with those prosecuting and investigating russian war crimes was to meet with a team following, track, tracing where our funds and resources and equipment are going. It is an active war. So one has to be a little patient about every single piece of equipment. But overall, i think weve got a very strong system of accountability. Both senator schumer and senator mcconnell, both of our caucus leaders, and many of the chairs and ranking of the relevant key committees have spoken up privately and publicly about the importance of this funding. Because of what it sends as a signal. Putins strategy is to wait us out. Its a strategy he followed in chechnya. Its the strategy he followed in syria. Its a brutal, aagressive, world war i style war of attrition. We cannot let him win. Putin will only stop in ukraine if we all collectively stop him. So i think this funding is critical. Sen. Rubio i generally agree with that. There are three things that are important. One, do we have a National Interest in whats happening in ukraine . I believe we do, not an unlimited interest but an important one. If the United States tomorrow announced we werent doing anything more with ukraine, were gone, it wouldnt just be felt with ukraine, every Alliance System would be put in doubt if youre japan, taiwan, south korea, anybody, theyd say, thats america doing what we thought and feared they might do. Number two, china is on russias side. I want putin to lose this engagement. Theres a National Interest. The second thing is, what are we supporting . What is the strategy . I think here is where the difficult part is the Ukraine Ukrainian view is they seek to retake all the territories that rightfully belong to them including crimea, are we helping them recapture where they were before february 2022 . Thats the important isnd answer, what are we putting it toward . And how much can we afford to do . Heres where the real challenge comes in. We dont have unlimited resources. Primarily what were providing is weapons. We give them a system off our shelves, we have to replace it. We have to fund our own defense. These arent necessarily things you can order on amazon and get delivered on two weeks. It take longer for me because im sanctioned by china. You cant order these things when they come online. We dont have the industrial capacity in some cases to make them. Im cautious in this endeavor that we are not depleting our own stockpiles in a way thats diverting from what i believe is potentially one of the most catastrophic things we should we may see before the end of the decade and that is a temptation to the Chinese Military to move militarily against taiwan, a direct test against not just the assurances we have made in that rebut in ways that could redefine the global order permanently. If were not prepared yes, we have a National Interest on the scale of one to 10, its a five. It is not an unlimited National Interest and not immune from Public Opinion where americans are asking, i have this problem and face this other problem and find billions for that and nothing for this. That is a real challenge and gets harder every month. Where would you put limits on the National Interest . Senator rubio the National Interest is to make sure russia is not successful. He would invade and zelenskyy and would be greeted as liberators. His leaders were telling him. And they tell them want they want to hear and it didnt work out that way and make sure he is never successful. Anything beyond that congress has to debate. I dont want them to take crima. That wasnt americas posture before the invasion. There needs to be a strategic view that guides us and how much to spend. Senator coons the Ranking Member of Foreign Relations has remind us that ukraine has the Third Largest arsenal. Russia, u. K. Persuaded them, the budapest memorandum signed by those countries with the commitment to protect their territory. We made a commitment. Second, our president has said as long as it takes. Third, we have expanded nato. Nato has new members who are incredibly capable and i think that means strategically putin has failed. Why the wagner group marched on moscow out of frustration to achieve their aim and out of frustration at the corruption and inep thy thud. Who is Putin Meeting with . Kim jongun. We are making progress. So it is hard to say that on a 110 i put this at an 8 or 9, i would. We are no resolution to this war unless putin says there is no way out. We need to be committed as long as it will take. And it will take less long for putin to conclude he cannot win. The prisoner swap between the United States and iran, especially in the context of global leadership. The United States continues to engage adversaries in this way. Senator rubio these are tough issues if you are an american citizen is unjustly detained. Youve paid money for it and we gave concessions in venezuela and made a deal in exchange for americans. We exchanged narco terrorists, we sent them back. Its not a sign of weakness, but put a price tag on americans. From haiti to iran, venezuela saying if we find an american, we can arrest them. Lets take them because we can get something in exchange for them. That is the difficulty. I also think the context of that and the cash that was frozen, the context was part of the broader effort to try to revive the iran deal which is unrevivable. It is not that americans are coming home. They realize we can get something for americans. Lets take them. Whether in vends waila, russia or iran. Small but important points these are iranian frozen assets, not money from american taxpayers going to the Iranian Regime but i understand the signal it sends as we try to negotiate to bring americans home. Having sat with the families with several of those on their way home. I celebrate the return of americans. Its about 6 billion and there will be guardrails placed on that money. There are members of your party are you confident the guardrails will hold up . Senator coons i do. The regime do on not have a good track record. What does have a good track record on innovation, and they are increasing all the capacities they have been able to carry out in terms of longrange Missile Systems and hezbollah and other terrorist organizations. That is why the assets were frozen so they wouldnt be able to dedicate it to those things. In the global broadcast, that money will be spent the way they think it needs to be spent. They have been pretty clear of it. I dont think we should be counting on it and that money will be used that they have been spending it on, sponsorship of terrorism and increasing nuclear capabilities. You would figure out that the money is being spent the wrong way . Senator rubio you would see the end product, hezbollah has more money. Theyll try to hide it but they deny they are behind those things now. The expansion they have carried out even with sanctions in place are pretty substantial. What they supply others with in that region is pretty substantial imagine with another 6 billion on the way. We are dealing with a regime used acquisition of these weapons not as a way of survival to achieve their aim of sheer dominance in the region. Senator coons at the end of the day regime that is driving greater and greater risk is russia. Sitting with north koreans. We need more artillery and what concerns me is what technology, what capabilities, what secrets the russians are going to give for those. And strengthening our pressure, our collective global pressure on russia for its conduct in ukraine and partnership with these other regimes is a critical place in the world. We found some agreement. That is a good sign. Move to the second topic of the evening chosen by senator coons, clean energy and the environment. Senator coons u. S. China relationship is the defining issue for u. S. National security and Climate Change is the defining issue for our world. We are from two states that are the lowest line in the whole country. I am seeing more and more what i call not just global warning and tornadoes in places we have never seen them. And wildfires devastating communities and hurricanes pummeling states in particular florida. In response to this, i started the Bipartisan Climate Solutions caucus. 77. We have a meeting with critical Industry Leaders to talk about the path forward in a clean energy transition. In the case of confronting china, i had a strong area of legislating and working with senator collins on chemistries and and hydrogen bills with senator cornyn. I support Nuclear Energy as part of our Nuclear Security and now kevin cramer to get these emissions intensity measured and begin to move the chinese economy through common action. One of the biggest things accomplished in the last congress is where we might disagree. The Inflation Reduction Act put 369 billion of incentives into the american economy. It is restoring manufacturing. There are groundbreaking on plants in texas, and ohio. It shows a sharp contrast how the United States is responding and how europe. Europe through regulation. The United States, through incentives. I spent time in a Manufacturing Business before i came to the senate and nothing strengthens our society more than restoring being a country that builds things. We need to build security and have to confront that the world is transitioning to a cleaner energy economy. We have a lot of hard work to do together. As a member of the caucus, senator rubio would be one of my legislative partners. Senator rubio i would say im all for dealing with mitigating the sea levels are measurable. Heres the impact that it has. I have nothing against electric cars, nothing against make windows and build these windows and rely on solar. Gave it to the chinese and dominate that industry and we have to rely on that. Heres the challenge, talking about the energy part that is not dealing with it at any cost. That is at the core of everything. Our Economic Prosperity and ability to do anythingp manufacturing, you need Reliable Energy sources and im not accusing the senator of saying this because he approached this of trying to find solutions but there are some out there at least they are selling this mythology that renewables can replace hydro and carbon like that. It cannot. If you think about the world today if everybody else on the planet consumed 50 of the energy that we americans consume and we are doing it in this very room. Other parts of the world want the same thing. If they had 50 of that, you would have to increase Global Energy production by at least 50 , how are you going to do it with renewables we cant . Oil and natural gas and the question who is going to control that because the less we supply of it, the more the opec does. The supply and demand is the reason why President Biden had to reach in. We are going to and china leads the world in coalfired plants and lead the world in Refining Capacity. They are doing the batteries and solar but they are building Refining Capacity through oil and coalfired plants because countries developing are not going to walk away from that. We need to acknowledge that. Our emissions are down. 50 of the emissions come out of the Asian Pacific region. They need affordable reliable and Abundant Energy resources. Caused by human nist and the emissions we put in the atmosphere . Senator rubio absolutely, chinas emissions are growing faster. And their emission from heavy industry from transportation to the development of their economy, it will swamp anything we do and so many ask why restrain our industry and economy at all in pursuit of this. I would argue we dont have a choice, the models of how much we will end up spending if we cannot collectively come up with a path forward. It swamps everything else. The number of billion disol arizona disaster per year have increased year after year after year and will outstrip our capacity to deal with them. We deal with it by pricing emissions and protects American Manufacturing that stays if you are making cement glass or aluminum and doing it in a clean way you already are because you are complying with u. S. Regulation. We shouldnt let china russia steel without a tariff. And those emissionintensive products and as ch chancellor schultz proposed in the g7 that we end up in a common approach and these open associates that share Climate Emissions that if you want to sell to our market these are our standards that and that alone will change the trajectory. I am skeptical will make a difference. That can change the world. Senator rubio nation states are going to act in the National Interests. When russian oil was taking out the marketplace the amount of nations grew. And developing countries who want their piece of prosperity. And maybe 100 years from now it will be cheaper to again rate. But not today and not for the foreseeable future. Hydrocarbons will be part of the matrix. And in florida, our Largest Utility Company has walked away from coal and doing extensive natural gas and Nuclear Energy as well and prices have been stable and able to retain that but took time to buildup and havent backed away from hydrocarbon or natural gas. Going to replace hydrocarbons with solar and wind, the numbers arent there, not real and dramatic on the economy and cost of living and other nation are not going to go along because they need to provide prosperity to their people and you cannot do that today with the technology no matter what example we think we are setting. Senator coons we should innovate our way through it. Im not sure if he is debating with me. But i support nuclear and i support natural gas switching from coal to natural gas and relying on cleaner combustion of natural gas. Thermal, hydro, wind and solar into a longterm sustainable. I think the science is clear and i think the numbers are strong and the criticism that we cant make a difference as long as the chinese and indians and other economies continue to grow their emissions, i agree. That is a critical concern. Anyone who wants to persuade the other party and our public that we have a path forward needs a market mechanism. Dust bowl and bunch of wildfires. My point is tease ok if we want to adjust that towards new Energy Sources thats fine as long as it doesnt devastate you are economy. We have a reasonable approach for the most part and maybe i wish i had a different debate topic on this one. We cant fall under the illusion that somehow for the future we are going to provide industry and individual americans with reliable and Affordable Energy that we can provide today through hydrocarbons. At a minimum natural gas which we have abundant supplies of that. How long that transition takes. What innovation will come along the 40 years that will make technologies proficient. The real life costs come into play and you can ask europe what happens in their climate decision. It has an impact that undermines their economy and ukranian invasion and where they are going to get natural gas. What is causing Climate Change . Senator rubio there are published reports that due to the industrial era, temperatures have risen. That needs to be compared with much broader time frame. Give you an example, my back yard is full coral rock. I dont dig in my yard anymore. That means at some point, my back yard and my home was under water. I want it to stop like my neighbors house. And we must wipe out our economy and impoverish ourselves by relying on unreliable sources of energy. It is economic suicide. It sounds like china wants to get rich and like us. Big mistake. I dont think we should make that decision no matter how many u. N. Reports because we are not a planet, but a country and will continue to emit. Anything we could possibly. Stand on the way of innovation but we cant pretend in the foreseeable future that they can replace what we have been accustomed to. Senator coons humans are causing changes in our climate. Where animals live and plants thrive is changing rapidly. Two different mountains, kilimanjaro and the mountains of Central Montana had glaciers 30 years ago. I have been back to both and the glaciers are almost gone. Someone trained as a scientist or chemist i believe that there is compelling Scientific Evidence that the emissions methane, Carbon Dioxide are changing the chemistry of our atmosphere and our future as a planet. We are a country but citizens of this planet and if the planet becomes unhabitable and people will flee, those challenges and impacts for us will be unavoidable. We have to bring our two topics together to find a way to drive china towards reducing its emissions in time that we innovate and reduce our emissions before it is too late. We have an urgency. I worked in an Innovative Company in the private sector. We can win the competition to be the dominant Technology Country in this century as we transition globally to that. I was excited about the science part as about the chips part because we both have kids, three and four, and i worry about the future of this planet and so do my kids. Senator rubio Climate Change is going to lead to these disruptions. The inability of government to provide Economic Prosperity. That is what is happening in haiti and latin america. They cant provide for the families. You cannot provide Affordable Energy resources and you will have civil wars and mass migration and they need to be balanced when making a decision. As far as human activity, the United States has reduced its emissions by 33 . Technology will move us in the right direction. We dont need to overreach and say we are going to do these things. On this point im not saying that is what senator coons is asking for. I think there needs to be. And on the one thing we agree on is irrespective of whatever law we pass or incentives we create, this is the trend line and we need to mitigate against the impacts, what they can build, where they can build. I have long been a supporter of that. I have a question of both of you, energy policy. Senator coons has alluded to this, you come from lowlying coastal states. If a constituent comes to you and says im thinking of buying some property along the coast, you are not Real Estate Agents but you are subject matter experts, if they ask you should i buy Coastal Property right now, what would you tell them . Senator coons i would tell them to take a hard look of the fema maps and how inaccurate. We were both in state and local governments. In four years we had a 100 year flood, 500 year flood in my county. Clearly this is happening more often than every happen hundred years. I would urge folks to buy on Higher Ground farther back and to think about not buying right on the coastal waterfront and look at the history of delawares coastline which has been wet over the last century. I do think Sea Level Rise is a real thing and i think federal and state policy needs to respond to that. We are ensuring the construction of homes that are not longterm sustainable. Maybe you want to buy on Higher Ground. Senator rubio it goes back 80 to 100, miami with the everglades and people said we are going to drain it with a bunch of canals and fill it in with sand including miami beach which is not a real island and build stuff here. That is 60 years later and nothing in the history of the earth. The earth decides you know what . This is still swamp how much you build. That is something that i think requires humility. If you want to buy ocean front property you need to build something different. Higher, fortified against the wind and water and some places you may not be able to. And i do think that there is a conversation to be had and very serious look to be made that once you rebuild the place three times which is happening in some parts of the country, it is telling you it is impossible to insure and those are expensive real estate and we have to mitigate the best we can. But it would depend what people are looking to build. Something that you build to protect against water. Having seen your neighborhood in little havana, thank you for engaging on that one. I appreciate it. We are going to move onto the grab bag portion of the evening and talk a little bit about bipartisanship because is hosted by the Bipartisan Policy Center and let me start with this, senator coons, why are you here tonight . Senator coons because i was recruited. Im here because i believe as we heard from the outset the former senators that Bipartisan Solutions are Lasting Solutions and im here because of that exchange with one of our framers, one of our founders, its a republic, madam, if you can keep it. I have moved from confidence about the future of our democracy. We have seen in our 13 years in the senate together how frequently we are voting, how frequently we have regular order and meaning to legislating. Our senate floor is empty and silent most of the time. I was invited to take the stage with someone who has served as long i have and legislated as long as i did. I just turned 60 last saturday and how much more can i do, how much of an impact can i have and im confident that without this work without reigniting the spirit, we are at risk of losing this most sacred project of our republic. Senator rubio im here to convince chris coons to agree with me on everything, but that has not worked. First of all, i think one of the most important things is to understand what bipartisan means. Doesnt mean that you agree even on the issues on how to solve them, but it you have to have a process and lack of that especially in this day and age is hurting the country. Other countries and leaders watch our news and watch these reports and think this nation is falling apart and think we are on the verge of a civil war and implode from within. I think its important any time we have an opportunity on this stage or on the floor of the senate to show there are premises in how we behave because the lack of that adversaries act against us. We have to understand that with all this talk about partisanship and i know what is happening. There are a lot of people in this country that are angry at the political system. They feel they have been left behind and ignored and all the benefit have gone to certain people and manifesting itself that is creating a realignment in our politics and its messy and loud and polarization is encouraged. Senator coons will tell you this, if you want to get famous say outrageous nasty things. You may never pass a bill but you will get on television and we live in a media culture that encourages and rewards that behavior. It draws more clicks and more viewers. And conflict and generates ratings. But it will droi our country. When the level of polarization makes you incapable of confronting serious challenges then you have a big problem. Its not the nastiness but the inability to act because of it that endanger our future. Is that a good explanation . Senator coons i dont work for one of those conflict channels. How the senate works and how you guys spend your time in washington and this may be uncomfortable and maybe naive question. Senator rubio, when was the last time you went to dinner oneonone with a democrat . Senator rubio maybe 2 1 2 years ago. And ill be honest with you, im not a night person, breakfast pass. When did you have breakfast. Eight months ago. Everybody knows everybody. Today you are fighting about something and that person may be on your side on the same issue. We walk by in the hall ways and and you have to work on one or two. Maybe you have a different perspective. The most coveted, can i get a and where can i find in my party. What is more problematic believe it or not bipartisan bills that make sense are the hardest things to pass these days. Noncontroversial and people think that isnt important. Individual members for the most part have good working relationshipses and there are some reasons that some people may not like each other. And you still have to pass it. Senator coons have you done anything socially with any of the eight republican senators who voted against certifying the 2020 president ial election . Senator coons i have. Im a regular participant in the weekly bipartisan Prayer Breakfast. And on the matter of lunch, im going to briefly mention, Johnny Isakson hosted a bipartisan barbecue lunch and drive up from georgia and johnny would say barbeque brings people. Find another member of the other part that you dont that well and sit with them. Senator plant and i continued that tradition, this thursday, that tradition is continuing. Of the eight senators, the story i was about to tell, i was the speaker at the Prayer Breakfast three, four months ago and as i was reflecting on a particular passage of scripture that it was a challenge to me directly because i was holding a deep grudge that i would not resolve against those who voted. January 6 was a fairly challenging, unsettling, grateful concerning day and the number of folks who even after that were unwilling to reconcile, i was refusing to speak to. One of them was in the room. And i stood up and spoke that morning about my own need for humility and open hard he hadness to be reconciled against those who i was holding a profound grudge. That senator and i have just passed a piece of legislation that goes back to the history of our state, expanding the brown versus board Historic Site to include his state. I have not reconciled with all of them but i have made some progress. Senator rubio, you have known each other and know organizations like the one who is sponsoring this and commentators on the left angry Television Shows will pine when you all hung out after work, is that a naive way of looking at how washington should operate now or can operate now in terms of finding bipartisan consensus and making sure the process works. Senator rubio when people know each other it makes it harder to hate each other. We are an organization together, a Prayer Breakfast but you have disagreement but you like them as a person. You just dont know how they voted or bumper stickers and know them as a father, mother, neighbor, someone who did you favor and that is always important. In the senate that happens. Committees are smaller and you have to make a point of seeking it. I dont know if we are going to get back that everyone lives in washington and goes on vacations. Are you but you need to have that level of cooperation and know each other. You may not agree on 910 things but agree on things you have common interest on. The most coveted thing is a bipartisan cosponsor and makes the bill more attractive and easier to pass. In my case, there was a time when senator cardin were passing so many bills together. They would call me cardin and rubio. And that happens and citizens will tell you, committees you are on, interest of your state or particular interest. Senator coons there is a subject that has earned a lot more attention than recent months because of who lives in the white house and some of the people that you serve with. And i want to quote one of your colleagues, senator romney. He called the u. S. Senate, quote, a club for old men. The average age in the senate is 63. You are under average in that regard. Senator rubio you are 52. In your view senator coons, how old is too old to serve in the u. S. Senate . Senator coons less than a matter of years than capability. I had a debate on the senate floor about a decade ago about term limits and there is a basic difference of having a term limit and this is what elections are for. The elect rate elect rate should say they are seasoning their relationships and make them a strong legislator. Over the course of the 13 years we have served together we have seen folks younger than us who perhaps didnt succeed at the job and much older than us that passed landmark legislation together. I think it is hard to say this is the age limit, 65 and mandatory retirement. Capacity is in front of us all the time. I look back the last two years and the most legislatively accomplished. The bipartisan accomplishments of the last congress exceeded anything in the last 30 years. And no small part from the seasoning and capability of some of the folks who serve in the senate. You wouldnt put a number on it . Senator coons i wouldnt. Senator rubio it has to deal. Chuck dprasly knows everything what is happening. I dont think that number is age specific. It is more about a capacity driven thing. And i do think there comes a time for all of us you have to ask why you still doing the job and takes certain level of passion to do it well. When you are no longer excited about doing the job and achieving things. That is a moment to reflect why you are still there. I decided what quiem going to do and move on. I think that is a big part of it. But i dont think you can put a number or an age on it for say where we have people significant people doing extraordinary things and do the job. Senators who represent states with large retiree populations. Senator rubio many of whom are still voting well into that their 90s. There are proposals for a state to allow a temporary replacement if someone is going to be out for a while. Would you consider Something Like that . Senator coons the state legislature should make and depends on the state and the reasons they would be taking it up. There are many different ways of filling vacancies as state. Senator rubio a temporary. That sounds kind of weird. There is a real inconsistency. New person is appointed, how is he going to sign any bills and what about the work you did. I would hope that people who love me and would encourage them and generally people get that way for the most part and none of us control one day or doing great with health and next day something can happen in your lives to change that dynamic. I heard about a member of the house and not running for reelection because of a diagnosis and its a tough one. But i actually did you make that one up . No. No. What do you think about the floridians. I have to go through my brain. You have the sitting governor. Senator rubio when President Trump was president , public policy. Child tax credit expansion wasnt high as i wanted it to be. I think some of the policies. We have significant reference. And i live in a state that governor desantis. Thats not what florida is. So, and there are tim scott is one of my closest friends. He has a strong message. And nikki haley did a good job at the u. N. And they provide strong choices. One of the reasons why i dont think what senators think about primaries. And these are the highly watched races and Republican Voters will choose a nominee and go from there. If President Biden wins another term and secretary of state Anthony Blinken opts to leave, what qualities should the next secretary of state possess . Senator coons he should stand at least 6 feet tall and a full head of hair. I have Great Respect for secretary blinken and National Security and Foreign Policy team and he is entitled to pick whoever he wants. I asked for his guidance how i best could contribute to this administration and he said stay in the senate and craft bipartisan bills. Thats the task i put myself to. And if you look at the last two years, the outcome has been positive. I was saddened to read the piece omit romney and why he is retiring from the senate. And whoever is the next president and i have a strong favorite, our current president , that he will be served by a cabinet that has the understanding and knowledge how to move legislation in the congress. We are dpriending down to on confirm ambassadors, judges and pass legislation. At home in delaware, its my hope we have a next congress and next administration that is committed to our erm role in the world, law. And to democracy. The at the end of the day only count committed to liberty and justice and i dont want to see this experiment end. If he calls . Ill consider it. Senator rubio if he offers it to me, i will not serve under President Biden. If he is nominated, never mind. Closing arguments. Senator rubio i appreciate you hosting this. I do believe the question is in a political realignment. I actually think at the end of the day we are much more polla rised. But i think it is an important moment to understand. You cant go back to the past future is inevitable. With the first is that nation matters. Our job before anything else is do what is in the best interest in america. But i think a good and Strong America is good for the world and that includes having an economy that expects ablebodied people to work and dignified ann people that at least sustain a family and contribute to families and things that are critical. Being tested on the International Stage and not just tested on Foreign Policy or military projections but how we perform and baiive here at home because people watch what is happening in america, january 6 or debates that happens in our politics and influences our policies. Senator coons said this earlier, our adversaries, particularly china keep telling people, america is a hollowed out nation in decline. Look at their political process how dysfunctional it is, how can you rely on them to come to your defense. We have to be cognizant of that and at the same time that there are people are and thats real and give it a voice and hope we can build a governing consensus. A little bit to the left and right and soviet union and marxism needed to be defeated. It is going to be a lot of work and i appreciate the chance to model how some of those conversations would go. And this is the example of the things we can achieve together if we give it a shot. Senator coons. Senator coons let me tell you a story about three different women. When we were first elected and came to washington, didnt know each other. Marco was high profile National Figure that had been catta polted and i defeated someone. I was the more accidental senator. But within our first week here, one person, adrian who graduated from the same high school and Business Leader texted both of us and said get to know that other idea and we both literally went him. She texted him and purposed us until we started talking together and produced that first bill. We need others outside of circles to distract us to push us together and i seen that add dry and had both cells phones and get inside our lives and circles. I have a dear departed grandmother who was conservative. And she said dont forget your pay stubs as legislator, i want to know you are doing it. And every time you cash it you are paid by the taxpayers to do that job and it is my hope out of this discussion tonight we will go back to legislating together. We were supporting israel and chinas Human Rights Violations and investments in science and technology and hope well do nor. I went to the National Constitution center when they were giving the Liberty Medal to the late john mccain and my friend joe biden and spoke longer than senator mccain in introducing him and senator mccain delivered a remarkable speech. If you havent watched it, it is a love letter to america. It was striking and i said to my wife how tragic that this incredible generation of senators is passing and they knew each other and knew each other spouses and stayed in each others home but they disagreed and trusted each other and each was a patriot. And my wife wouldnt let me wallow in that moment. She said thats your job, buster. She said go find republican friends and partners invite them to delaware and go to their home state and work with them, 10 to 20 years some americans would look at the two of you how inspiring to have such two different senators willing to on legislate together. Thats why im here tonight. Democracy is a verb and has to be an active verb and only remains a democracy if we do it together. [applause] our thanks to senator coons and senator rubio. They are going to do a lot of other things tonight. Hopefully we provided that nudge that senator coons and this reporter is glad we can participate. And thanks to the Bipartisan Policy Center, edward m. Kennedy institute and orin Hatch Institute and thanks to George Washington hosting us tonight. Thanks for watching. Good night. [applause] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2023] captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org