5, 4, 3, 2, 1. But who's counting right? His name is Major. Oh. Ladies and gentlemen, please welcome major Garant
From the Nation's Capital
This is a major achievement
With CBS News, chief Washington correspondent
Major Garrett. Yes. CBS. Yes.
Major. That's nonsense. And you should know better. Is major out of the doghouse <laugh>? The answer's yes. Welcome
To the very best part of my broadcast week. I'm Major Garrett, coming to you from the seventh floor of Longworth House office building in the office of Nancy Mace, Republican Congresswoman from South Carolina. Congresswoman, good to see you.
Good to see you too, as always
Recording this on May 18th. So, remember folks, when you hear this, it might be overtaken by events, but I don't think so. I think we're gonna be pretty safe this week. We're not gonna have a debt ceiling deal the next day or two, congresswoman. Correct. But what is your sense of optimism about a re resolution and avoiding default?
Well, we're hearing a few mixed messages today. Some, some are saying we're close, some are saying we're still far away. And that's a little bit concerning. I did not like seeing the president leave the BJcountry this week. If we are that close to default, then the president of the United States should be up here on Capitol Hill in Washington,
Be up here, actually be here and negotiating
Face to face On the hill.
Yeah, on the hill. And we need a president who's going to make these decisions and negotiate face to face with Republican and Democrat leaders. Because guess what? It's been both parties that got us into this. Republicans and Democrats alike, not one side or the other. And both sides need to sit down and negotiate a deal because it seems like to the American people, Republicans only care about spending when Democrats are in we charge, when both sides should actually recognize that we're here because the former president added $8 trillion of debt to our nation's, uh, you know, to what the issues we're facing today. But also the current President, Democrat, president Joe Biden, added $4 trillion. That's $12 trillion just over the last six years. Both sides are at fault. Both sides need to come to the table. And we need a president who's willing to negotiate.
When the president assigned Steve Chetty, one of his closest aides, and the OMB Director, Shalonda Young, that's not good enough for you.
It's a great first start, but since we're close, so close to the June one deadline, we need a president who will be here and be present. That's why 24 to me is so important. We want someone who's gonna come to the negotiating table and recognize, Hey, both sides are at fault. We're gonna bring people together. We're deeply divided. Congress. We have a house ruled by Republicans, a Senate ruled by Democrats. The American people want us to work together.
What do you need to see? What does Nancy Mace representing the first district of South Carolina need to have in a budget deal? A debt dit deal for you to vote for
It? There need to be cuts to the budget. We cannot continue down this path of spending at $32 trillion today. We're looking at, you know, between 47 and 53,000,000,000,010 years from now. Whether it's a clean debt vote, debt ceiling vote, or whether it's the Republican package. You know, you've got one side going off at 80 miles per hour, per hour off the cliff. The other side's going off at 70 miles per hour off the cliff. Neither of those are good scenarios. I would like to see a deal where we balance the budget over some extended period of time. I have a bill called the Penny Plan that balances the budget in five years. It's a bit aggressive for Washington. They don't move that fast. They can't do anything in five years. But I mean, hell, at this point I would take 20 years. Right. That is a compromise. That's negotiation. Show the American people that we're gonna res be responsible for their tax dollars. We have a history of doing that with a Democrat president and a Republican Congress. We did it under Obama. We had cut cap in balance. We had sequesters to reign and spending in the nineties. In, in 94. Republicans had a plan to balance the budget over a decade. I covered
Clinton, bill Clinton balanced the budget in four years because we had a surplus. But we've had, we have a precedent of working together on this and we ought to take responsibility for it today.
It has been made clear to me that if the president sticks to his requirement that the debt ceiling be reached, raised, rather after the 2024 election, which longer than the house Republicans have voted for, that's gonna raise the price. He's gonna have to compromise more. Do you agree with that?
I I would agree with that, yes.
How much in spending cuts do you need to see to vote for it?
Mean, is there a number, do you have in mind?
I don't have a specific number. I wanna see responsible cuts over an extended period of time. Can't just be for one year, one fiscal
Year. And to be clear, you don't mean on entitlements, you just mean on discretionary spending.
On discretionary. I mean,
Kicks But not the military, not
Veterans, not the military, not veterans, not Medicaid and Medicare. But we do have, we do have spending in mandatory, in the mandatory bucket, we should look at moving over to discretionary. So for example, I supported the PACT Act last year, burn pits. I have family members that were exposed to burn pits in the military. Right? Those service members that were exposed should come home, should have their healthcare covered. But we may not be need to spend as much. So why can't we move that from a, for example, from mandatory over to discretionary spend, what we need to spend, but not be mandated to spend all of it if we don't need to or don't have to. So I think there's some room in there to negotiate work requirements. You saw Democrats coming out this week saying that work requirements are bad. Well, actually, 60 70% of America agree with work requirements. We saw that in Wisconsin, the recent elections there, you know, a large portion of the electorate.
Do they need to be in it for you to vote for
It? They need to be in there. I mean, that's something Requirements. Well, that's just something that both sides,
No work requirements. No Nancy Mace vote.
Well, I don't know about that. I wanna see, I wanna see what it looks like. I mean, I am someone who wants to negotiate deals up here. I'm willing to negotiate, I'm willing to build consensus for the long term impact on America. Our GDP grew by 1% a few weeks ago in Q1 analysts and economists were expecting double that inflation is sky high, you know? So we're looking at a dire future even. And we don't control the Fed. But the Federal Reserve is printing over $4 trillion every single year. You can't pay for the deficit spending we have without printing money. So there are a lot of issues on the table right now. Based
On what you've heard from leadership, when do you think the contours of a need of a deal need to be established for this legisl leader to work through the process by June 1st?
I would say by next week, I, we need to see the contours of a deal next week. We need 72 hours to actually read the package.
The deal, it needs to be written into legislative language, then you need to have time to need.
But I, I, I don't think the June one deadline is a hard stop. I think you have some time there. We don't default unless the president wants to. And if you look at the amount of tax revenue our country gets in every year, we're getting 11 times the interest on the debt. There's no reason to default. But what that means is we do have to prioritize spending, which means mandatory spending first. Mm-Hmm, <affirmative> and then everything else. I mean, how we have 52% of the federal workforce that aren't showing up to work. I go down to the DOT that the Department of Transportation. See how empty that building is. If you're un unwilling to show up to work, maybe you ought to get fired. Like, let's start there with the people who are not showing up to work. Let's start cutting. I think that's a great place to start. When
Former President Trump said last week, that default could be just psychological. Do you agree with that?
I disagree with the premise that we should default. That it, that should not be an option on the table. Not only does it have dire consequences for us domestically, but also abroad and around the world. We're already weakened right now, globally. You see China making moves, Russia making moves, Iran making moves. You know, we wanna have strength. We can't do that if we default. So we need to show that we can work together and show strength. And that's one way to do that.
And default under those scenarios is not psychological. It's real.
It's real. It has a real impact on our markets.
And would be, as the President said, catastrophic. You agree with
That? It would be catastrophic. A hundred percent. It should not be on the table. There's no need for it to be on the table.
Lemme ask you about abortion. We'll carry this conversation over into segment two. But in South Carolina, the legislature Justice Week passed a fetal heartbeat Bill. Mm-Hmm. <affirmative> six weeks. Mm-Hmm. <affirmative> essentially support that. Oppose that.
Well, it, it passed outta the State House is going over to the state Senate now. Um, I, I would not support this particular piece of legislation because of the police reporting requirements. I'm a victim of rape myself. I was raped as a teenager at the age of 16, age 16, age 16. I, I couldn't live with myself if I had to go have it reported to police. Most rape victims do not report it. It's a traumatic, it's an extremely traumatic experience. And to force that reporting to local sheriffs is wrong. That's a non-starter. Not to mention that exceptions only go up to 12 weeks. And you have to have two doctor's appointments before the exceptions. If you don't know you're pregnant, you by that timeframe. I mean, it, it's, it's very difficult. Especially those burdens on women and girls who've been raped or who are victims of incest. That's wrong. And that's not where the majority of Americans are today. Republican or Democrat or independent. They're not there with a six week ban. They're at 15 weeks. They're at 20 weeks with exceptions.
What do you think the proponents of legislation like this don't understand about what you just said? Victims of rape, incest, the trauma, the reporting, all these hurdles. Mm-Hmm. <affirmative>. What don't they understand?
They're not listening to women. They're not listening to their constituents. Because the polling will show, and I know this anecdotally, I talk to constituents all the time. I, I read my mail, I answer the phones here when I have time to do that. It's an issue that comes up every single day. And if you live in a place where independents outnumber Republicans, like in my district independence account for about 40% of the district, that's not where they are. And if you wanna win the popular vote in 24, rather than relying on the electoral college solely to win the presidency, you'll listen to the voters. If you live in a swing district or, or a swing state, you'll listen to the voters who are saying, no, this isn't right. Most people are at 15 to 20, somewhere in the middle. They want exceptions. They want women to have access to birth control. They don't want us to mess with IVF or IUDs or all those things. But when you have personhood bills that are coming through, you're gonna lose the right to get an IUD or you're gonna lose the opportunity for access to IVF to get pregnant. And then what do you do with the children who are born, who are unwanted? What are we doing as Republicans, especially in states where we're banning abortion to support those children?
More on that part of the conversation. We come back segment two of the takeout in just one minute. I'm Major Garrett in the office of Congresswoman Nancy Mace.
The FDA did its job. And I hope that the courts will support that decision. The court shouldn't be intervening on what the FDA can and approve for use. That is literally the agency's purpose
From CBS news. This is the takeout with Major Garrin.
Welcome back to the takeout. Nancy Macy's, our special guest. Uh, continuing our conversation. What are your thoughts about federal courts and their intervention on the FDA approved drug miryam?
Well, the FDA approved that over 20 years ago, the court should not be intervening in this case, I came out and it is, it, it is. And we had two different decisions on the same day that said the opposite. What a lot of people may not know about MiFi PRI stone is that not only it's used in abortions before there's ever a heartbeat up to 10 weeks, seven to 10 weeks, there's no heartbeat during that time. The other thing that a lot of people don't know that it's used for women who are miscarrying their children, who don't want surgery, who wanna pass it naturally pass the miscarriage naturally. But also when doctors don't want that woman as she's going through her miscarriage to get sepsis. So it prevents that from happening. It's used in cancer treatments. It's used with for rare diseases like Cushing's disease. It's used for a lot of different things, which I think most people don't necessarily realize. And so, I don't agree with the court ruling. It was a, it was a handpicked case with a handpicked judge. And it was the wrong ruling. It was, it was based on an unconstitutional law. Right.
Is there there a legislative remedy in this space
Potentially? Um, but the FDA did its job. And I hope that the courts will support that decision. The court shouldn't be intervening on what the FDA can and can't approve for use. That is literally the agency's purpose.
It's probably worth also noting that in the complications area, more from Viagra than from Reto.
Yeah. And it and it's crazy. That's a fact. Yeah. Well, then you also have people up here that don't wanna talk about birth control. Right. It, it, I have in your party, in my party. I have pro-life groups that I've done pro-life legislation with that won't talk to me anymore because I'm talking about birth control. And it's sort of like, wait a minute, time out. If you, if you wanna reduce the number of abortions in this country, you need to increase access to birth control, for example. And so those things have now become controversial to talk about, which is crazy and scary at the same time.
You have described yourself as someone who overshare,
I do. I'm not gonna ask you to overshare, but I I'm gonna ask you to share, because you mentioned it before. Mm-Hmm. <affirmative> molested at age 14. Raped at age 16. How did that shape your worldview? You've talked about challenging bullies in that psychological context. Yeah. Talk to my audience a little bit about that.
Well, now I'm, I'm 45. I'm older. I'm a mom. You don't realize it at the time, but some of your early trauma in life really shapes who you are. And I was too scared to come forward. When I was molested at the age of 14, I was molested by a good friend of one of my coaches. And I blamed myself 'cause I was wearing a two piece bathing suit. I thought that it was my fault because in the nineties when women got raped or assaulted and you saw those stories, those women were dragged through the news. It was always their fault the way that it was depicted.
Too suc is what they wore. And I was 14, asked for it. I, I was, I, it was must by a guy who was in his mid twenties. I was 14 years old and I blamed myself 'cause I was a news junkie back then. I read the news and, and I knew that when I was raped at the age of 16, that if it ever came out, if I reported it to the police or gotten a news story, I, me and my family would be dragged through the mud. So it was one of those things, at that time in the mid nineties, you just didn't talk about it. And it took me a week to tell my mom. But I think one of the reasons I'm such a fighter, why I get so angry sometimes, because I was once a victim. I'm not a victim anymore.
I'm a voice for victims. And it gives me that learning, that experience. I quit on life. I quit school. I became a waitress at a waffle house. I would eventually You dropped outta high school, right? I dropped outta high school. And my parents said, if you're going to quit going to school, you gotta start going to work. Well, that's when I took a job at a Waffle House. I went and, um, I got, I took college courses at a local community college. And I got high school credit. I ended up graduating six months later and getting my high school diploma. And then a year later, the Citadel decided to let women in. I was the first class of women. But those experiences, first graduate. First graduate. But I learned about having courage. I didn't have the courage at the time when I was assaulted. But later on, when I went through the Citadel, that taught me about having courage that taught me to stand up for myself.
That taught me to fight for myself and fight for what I believed in. And that's made me who I am today. I still harbor a lot of anger over my early trauma. I think it's one of the reasons I, I bring a gun to a knife, fight. I'll punch a bully in the face before I even think about it. I, I, I overshare. 'cause I want people to know I'm just like you. I'm just like your daughter or your granddaughter fighting for the things that all of us as Americans believe in. And I'm never gonna back down. And that's what I learned from that early, very traumatic, very emotional experience. It shaped who I am. It defined who I am. Later on in life.
I've read that you took Prozac and marijuana at times to deal with anxiety.
Yes. And the Prozac that I took was early on when Prozac hit the market, it made me wanna kill myself. So I actually stopped taking the drugs that were prescribed to me by my doctor. 'cause I was suicidal. And I started self-medicating with marijuana. Not realizing, realizing at the time I was 16 and 17 years old. I took it for a year, a year and a half or so. It helped, it helped the marijuana cut my anxiety. I could sleep at night. I didn't live in fear. Some I took too much. I thought I was funny. Um, I could live life. I could be productive. I had a full-time job. I finished high school and I, I credit cannabis was saving my life during that time.
How does that inform your attitude about federal policy relating to
Cannabis? I have legislation related to cannabis. Uh, it's called the State's Reform Act. And it allows states to be the driver to make the decision whether they want it to be legal or illegal medical, or all the way to adult use that states can make that decision. Um, and
Take it outta schedule one
Take. I I am for Descheduling. Right. Entirely. Rescheduling doesn't do it for me. I think we don't want the FDA to have total control
And explain why audience, what descheduling means.
Real quick, descheduling, right now it's a schedule one drug, like heroin. It's not heroin. I mean, when you look at marijuana, your
Lived experience tells you that
My lived experience. But also medical studies will show you that if you have one marijuana dispensary in one state, the the reduction in opioid addiction, opioid mor morbidity is reduced by up to 20%. It saves lives. It's not a gateway drug. Um, I I, I have family that have Parkinson's right now. I've talked to Harvard doctors that will say if one little marijuana gummy a day could help protect the brain, the, the neurons from Parkinson's. So it can be a lifesaving treatment for a number of ailments, including depression, including PTSD. Like what I had when I was in my youth after my assault.
What did you learn from being a waitress at Waffle House?
I learned about community. I learned, you know, we'd have people coming off the, their late night shifts in the morning for coffee. To have breakfast. I learned about family. I learned about hard work. That's not an easy job. We made good money back in those days. It was great money at the time. But I would stand on a piece of duct tape, like a foot wide. And I would yell to the cooks in the back how my customers wanted their hash browns. They were always demanding customers. But you learned about working hard about what you wanted outta life and about community. 'cause you'd meet people from all walks of life, all colors, all socioeconomic statuses. Who doesn't like waffle? They love Waffle House. And, um, I, I visit Waffle House all the time today. It's one of my kids' favorite restaurants. And I love meeting the cooks and the waiters and the waitresses. I wanna hear their life stories. 'cause their life story is very similar to mine. It's a place where I started and here I am. What, from the Waffle House to the US House,
Are there bullies in politics? Always. Is Trump one of them?
I think there, I think there are bullies on both sides of the aisle. Uh, I, I will tell you, last year I was the only Republican to beat Donald Trump in a primary. I know I was called a lot of names disloyal. And we won. We won to fight all of that nasty. But you know what, I'll punch a bully in the face. And well, what
Was he bullying you in that context?
Well, if you look at the names that I was called, I mean, I had all sorts of, you can define it, nicknames like nasty Nancy and Disloyal. And I'm actually a very loyal person. I think I'm nice until you cross my proverbial red line and yeah, I will punch back. I'll bring a gun to a knife. I and I'll punch a bully in the face. And we were the only house Republican to win last year when he primaried us.
How do you de bully politics?
I think you have to sometimes treat fire with fire. And I also think you have to show how you can, how you can win, how you can bring people together. I'm a conservative, but also I've worked with all the different groups of Republicans up here. We have the Freedom Caucus, we have RSC, we have problem solvers. Main Street, RG two. I work with Democrats right where we can find agreement. I've been able to do bills with Ana, for example. Mm-Hmm. <affirmative> and get Joe Biden to sign those cybersecurity bills into law. Jamie Raskin and I did a letter a couple of weeks ago about, uh, Saudi Arabia, detaining and imprisoning individuals that were tweeting things they didn't like about Saudi Arabia. They're out of prison today. So I found a way as a conservative to work with the other side, to work with all sorts of Republicans in my party, but work with Democrats too, to deliver results.
Do your colleagues on the Republican side admire that or scorn that?
I think there's probably a little bit of both. I, I, I intimidate people so I don't always get the truth right to my face. But you hear rumors and things going around. But, um, you know, I think it's probably a little bit of both.
I'm not here to make friends. You're
Not? No. You're here to what? I'm
Here to work, deliver for my state
Work and deliver. We'll talk about that delivering process and statewide ambitions, which she will deny. But I'm pretty sure she had. Nancy Mason is our special guest. Seventh Floor, the Longworth House office building back for segment three in just a second.
I wish that the FBI and the DOJ, regardless of who appointed them or who's in power or who's in the White House, would treat Republicans and Democrats the same
From CBS News. This is the takeout with Major Garrin.
We're back with Nancy Mace Congresswoman uh, Durham Report. Yeah. Talk to me about it.
Well, it should have, I mean, what they did to the former president, like him or not, no one can say I am a shill for Donald Trump. But they didn't have evidence, uh, to say that there was Russia collusion. And what you saw happen with the FBI and DOJ was wrong. It shouldn't happen to any President of the United States. Regardless of how you feel about that person, personally, it was wrong.
When you read that report, do you say to yourself, I wish the FBI had been as curious with Hillary Clinton in emails or less curious about both?
I think they should. Well, that's a great question. That's a tough question actually. But I wish that the FBI and the DOJ, regardless of who appointed them or who's in power or who's in the White House, would treat Republicans and Democrats the same. And I go back to the investigation that we're doing on oversight with Hunter Biden and the nine Biden family members. Whether you are a supporter of Joe Biden or not, even the Daily Beast said this week that this should be investigated. Both sides have people who have broken the law or are showing corruption. The things that are legitimate should be investigated to the fullest extent of the law, regardless of who's in power. But it, it sort of feels like sometimes when you look at the investigations and the false allegations against Donald Trump in the past, that there's one side, there's one standard for Republicans, but not for Democrats. And you know, there, everyone's going after Donald Trump on the classified documents, obviously wrong. But what about Mike Pence? What about Joe Biden, who also had classified documents, didn't have the right to declassify anything. Is the standard the same for everybody, or is there a double standard? So I think the politics of personality sort of overshadows some of these investigations, and they should be totally nonpartisan. But it doesn't feel like that. And that's what, not the way the American people feel. And so investigate them
All. And is that what you hear from your constituents?
It is. I think people feel like it's one sided. And even, and I'm in a very independent minded district. It's very purple. We have 40% independence about a third Republican less, just less than a third Democrat. Mm-Hmm. <affirmative> Republicans are outnumbered two to one in my district. So I have a very good sense of where middle ground is or the middle of the road. People believe what Biden's family has done is wrong, and they want everything investigated to the fullest extent of the law.
Picking up on that thread, investigate everything in a non-partisan way. Do you think there should be similar curiosity? About $2 billion from the Saudis to Jared Kushner? Right after leaving the Trump White House,
Democrats had the House, they had the Senate, they had the White House. They didn't feel the need to investigate it. If, if it should have been investigated. They should have started that investigation when they had the entire Congress and they had the White House two years ago. Over the last two years, they didn't do that. So I don't know what the, do
You think there's anything curious about that? I
Haven't. It's, I see where allegations might come from. But where are the facts? You gotta have something to back that up. And, and Democrats decided not to investigate it in, in the, over the last two years. So there must not be anything there
When James Comer said over the weekend that the, either the whistleblower or the informant is missing. Has that whistleblower been found? You know,
I'm not sure. You have to ask Jamie Comer, but what I do know is that we have multiple whistleblowers. And so because one can't be found or is missing, doesn't concern me at this point. If you can't, it does not. Okay. If you can't find any of them, obviously that's a huge problem. But there are multiple whistleblowers with multiple pieces of information. And so it doesn't end and stop with one person.
When Wisconsin Republican Senator Ron Johnson says, as he did recently, that you have to infer the criminality of the Biden family. Does that make you comfortable?
Well, there's gotta be due process. So, so if you're gonna accuse someone of doing crime things,
'cause on the right, that's what people said the left did about Trump all the time. Right. Infer
And they did. And you saw that with the German report court and
Made up or, or invented things or accused him of things that they couldn't prove in court
Ger report. Right. You know, germ report is, is a glaring example of that, of the laws
Assuming the worst launching investigation.
But that's right. I mean, that's, that's really, really bad.
So we should be inferring criminality on either side.
We should not be inferring in criminality. But I can tell you from what I've seen from suspicious activity reports from the bank records, that if we don't see charges referred to the DOJ, something is wrong with the process. Because when I look at all collectively, and we're only at the, we're very embryonic, we're at the very start, the tip of the iceberg of the investigation. But when you look at the dozens and dozens of shell companies, when you look at how the Biden family members were paid, the amount of money they were paid, who they were paying, they weren't foreign agents. There was no business plan. The seed money went into their pockets. It didn't go to anything else. When you see that, it looks like classic Rico. It looks like money laundering and wire fraud. And so when you see that evidence is sort of like you're scratching your head of going, there are sirens here. There's clearly something going on and there's been no charges referred. And so at the end of the day, we should follow the facts that the facts say refer charges. And that's what we should do. And at the end of the day, this is all innocent. There was a business plan, the money was invested, then fine, no crime was committed. But when you look at it now, it's absolutely looks like racketeering. It absolutely looks like money laundering. That's what I see when I look at the books.
Is this a Hunter Biden story or a Hunter Biden and Joe Biden story?
None of this happens without Joe Biden. None of it. And if you look at the,
He's criminally implicated.
Well, I would say that his family could not have made the tens of millions of dollars that they made without Joe Biden. Joe Biden being vice president or President. You look at the revolving door of records at the White House of who visited Joe Biden. And when you look at his son being on the plane with him going to China, going to other countries, when you see some of his public comments about Barisma and the investigations in the problematic attorney in Ukraine, when you add all of it together collectively, collectively, and knowing the fact that Hunter Biden was also paying some of his bills, allegedly looking at, it's not just his brother and his son. It was current wives, ex-wives, a grandchild, nieces and nephews. And those younger Bidens, those are just innocent bystanders. I don't think they intentionally broke the law. But when you look at it, you sort of go, why hasn't anybody been charged with a crime here? 'cause it looks like classic Rico.
Are you comfortable or uncomfortable with the terminology Biden crime family?
I don't think I've ever said that. No. But others have. Yeah. Others have, until charges have been, have been filed or there is an indictment. I I don't think that's an accurate representation until you have all the evidence. I'm a big due process person. I didn't vote to impeach Trump because of the lack of due process. I wanna see George Santos removed from Congress. I wanna see him resign. But again, there's gotta be due process. He's not yet convicted. And so I try to be very much a constitutionalist when I look at these from the outside, from the lens that I have.
I talked to Dusty Johnson yesterday on our show, America Decides, and he said that, uh, George Santos from his vantage point is a clown and he's pretty sure he will be convicted. Do you share those
Sentiments? I would agree with that. I think those are astute comments from Dusty Johnson, whom I love. But I've been saying since January that George Santos should resign. He lied to get here. He's lying since he's been here. He's lying now. And I
Do you think he lies within the conference? I mean, like tells you Oh,
Hunter. He doesn't, I don't know one time now that I know his story and what he is lied about, I don't think he's told the truth since getting elected. I just don't believe it. He loves you can see him when he is gallivanting around the Capitol or in New York. And he loves the attention. He loves the media frenzy that he's created and the story that he's telling. All the lies. He lives for it. This guy shouldn't be here. He has tarnished the institution. And I'm saying that as a Republican, about another Republican, because we have to be better than that. We have to hold ourselves accountable. Because if we can do that and show more integrity up here on the hill, the American people can trust us better than the other side. But that's not, that's not what's happening. He's gonna, he's going to probably make money off this thing. I'm sure there'll be a book and whatever, but it's wrong. He should resign. He needs to leave the hill
If he's convicted Right. He should be expelled. So the precedent, that's
The historical and I, and then on both sides. Yeah. On both sides. The historical precedent is that when there's a convention conviction, then you get expelled. So Right. And that's due process. Right. Wait until there's a
Conviction. But in the interim, the speaker needs his vote.
Yeah. He needs about four votes. <laugh>. Yeah.
That's the political reality.
That is the political reality. It's
The operational reality. He may be a liar, a fabulous, and someone you cannot count on in any other context.
And you cannot trust. But you still need his vote. Yep. If you're the speaker of the house.
Yeah. I, I don't wanna be in those shoes. I mean, Kevin McCarthy's speaker is navigating many different families or groups within our own party. The five families. It's the five families. And you have a caucus of one and Nancy Mace here. Uh, you don't have a family. I don't have a family. I never really have. I've always sort of marched to the beat of my own drum and been an independent voice. That's, I I'm always a square peg in a round hole. I've never quite fit in. And that's the way it do. Do you want to Not really. Uh, my district doesn't want that. I wanna represent all the voices in my district, and that means that I don't, that I have to operate a little more independently than most others would.
That is the voice of Nancy Mace. We are coming to you not from the seventh floor of the Longworth House office building, because we just picked the seventh floor, happens to be her office. We're using part of our office here. More of our conversation where we come back segment for the takeout in just one second.
Social media is influencing our country in a really negative way. And you just, at some point, you gotta say, stop and time out and say, this is nonsense
From CBS News, this is the takeout with Major Garrin.
Welcome back to the takeout. Nancy Mac is our guest. It's been said, and you've said this in our articles Mm-Hmm. <affirmative> that you have no hobbies and you read notebooks.
Yeah. I don't have time. I mean, I like to surf with my kids in the summertime when we have some time. You're a surfer. Yes. We, I, my kids and I picked it up when I was getting my divorce. It's an activity that we like to go do as a family, um, when we can. And I travel a lot for my job. Obviously when I'm home, I wanna be with my kids or do my job. Like I'm married to my work. I'm married to my kids. And there's not a lot of time. I mean, I do town halls every week. I, I'm already a campaign seven days a week too. I'm in the office seven days a week. So there's really not a lot of time. The last book I read was a couple years ago was Calvin Coolidge. By, by Coolidge? By Amle. Mm-Hmm. <affirmative>.
He was an ordinary man that became president and not so ordinary. That's when really the silent majority term was coined Yep. During his presidency. And I was sort of fascinated with how he came to be and everything, and how he operated just as a normal American in this really extraordinary position. Um, but that was the last book that I read. I just as a single working mom and having two kids and having a big job, like I'm, we're busy, we're doing kid things, going to sporting events and games and making sure the kids are good and the dog is good. I have a dog too. Mm-Hmm. <affirmative>. And
It wasn't a sermon, but Calvin Coolidge said something very important about the application in life of persistence. Yeah. And, uh, if you haven't looked it up, folks, look it up. You will find many life lessons within those five or six sentences. I'll leave it at that. Um, you've also been described in the New York Times as fluent in the art of the political troll <laugh>. Are you?
I don't know. I mean, I do get on Twitter. Do you aspire
No, I don't. But I, I have access to my Twitter. I bet you do. Much to my staff chagrin. And I'll get in there and I'll see some. And I'm just like, well, this is crazy. Right? And I, I don't like to be bullied. And if I'm gonna get punched, I'm gonna punch back. Mm-Hmm. <affirmative> I want people to know that I'm gonna fight for the right things for them, for my state, for my country. I don't care if you have an R or D by your name. If what you're doing is wrong, then we're gonna call you out on it. Some of the stupidity that we see out there. And it, it, it, the social media is influencing our country in a really negative way. And you just, at some point you gotta say, stop and time out and say, this is nonsense. People aren't for this. This is crazy. This is stupid. You're dumbing down our country. I want a great and bright future for my children. And I'm trying to do my part.
You've said in the context of gay marriage and gay rights generally. Mm-Hmm. <affirmative>. If gay couples want to be as happily or miserably married, uhhuh as straight couples more power to them. Trust me. I've tried it more than once.
Yeah. I've done it twice. So expand on that. Well, I mean, it's, and the sentiment behind it and the sentiment. I mean, I've been married, divorced twice now, and I really mentioned engage now
Yes. Uh, yeah. It's, life is complicated. I'm hard to love, as my mother would say, but if they, if if gay couples or biracial couples wanna be as happily or misery married as, as straight couples, why are we stopping them? Like, let them have the same freedoms. If we're for freedom, if we're for liberty, then we should be for gay couples and biracial couples being married to the person that they love, the love of their life. Why would you say no to that? Mm-Hmm. <affirmative>. So it just, to me, it's some my life, my personal life. 'cause I've had my ups and downs. But if they wanna have their ups and downs too, more power to
'em. And love has been by turns happy and miserable for you. Yeah,
A hundred percent. And I, and I, you know, I struggle in my personal relationships. I think it has a lot to do with my being assaulted when I was young. Um, you know, it's difficult for me to, to do that, which is why I focus. I'm almost addicted. Addiction runs in my family, but it's, I'm addicted to my work. I'm addicted to making sure my children have what they need. And that's where I've made my priorities in life rather than my marriage. You know, I love my ex-husband. He's great. We just can't live together like we love each other. He's my best friend. He supports me a hundred percent. Just can't live together. I mean, I, I'm hard to live with. I'm hard to love. And so, but we have a great, like, modern family, the whole family supports us. They understand that mom's got a purpose. We love her purpose. We wanna support her. I wanna support my kids too at the same time. And I love what I'm doing. They love what I'm doing. And getting as a working mom, showing my children what that means and what we're able to do for our state and for our country. They respect that. They love that. And they're all a part
Of it. Is compassion fundamental to your politics?
It is. It is. Compassion is fundamental because I think in a lot of ways Republicans come across as cold and unfeeling and not compassionate. Especially when we're talking about sensitive issues like gun violence or like abortion. We come across as so unwavering and unfeeling. I'm a conservative. I'm also a mom. I feel the pain when there's a mass shooting because I've been in the carpool line and I've gone to drop off my kids at school. And as moms, you wonder, is our school next? What can we do to keep our communities and our kids safe? So I touch a lot of sensitive subjects because I wanna show that as conservatives, we can be compassionate. We can show love.
How does that inform your position on transgender rights?
Well, I'm, I'm pro transgender rights. I'm pro L-G-B-T-Q. Just don't go to the extreme with our kids. Our kids should
Define extremism there for me.
Well, sex change surgery, the hormone blockers that sterilize our children. We shouldn't be doing that. When a child is prepubescent or going through puberty, let that child go through the natural process of life and let them make that permanent decision when they're older. Now, if they wanna take on a different pronoun or a different gender identity or grow their hair out, or wear a dress or wear pants or do those things as a minor, those are all things that I think most people would support. Be who you wanna be, but don't make those permanent changes when it's a child. I mean, that's just abusive.
Even if the parents agree,
Even if the parents agree. When we've read stories, there's a young woman named Chloe who had her breasts removed. Uh, she had gender dysphoria. She had a, a double mastectomy at the age of 15. A year later, she decides at 16, she made a huge mistake. She doesn't wanna be a boy. She wants to go back to being a girl. She can't do that now. She's had the, the home arm, home arm blocker. She had her breasts removed. And in, we've seen, for example, I, I have a lot of friends that have kids that are autistic or that are on Asperger's, on the, on the spectrum. A lot of my friends that have kids on the spectrum, there is a lot of gender dysphoria, especially when they're going for puberty. But it may not be permanent. They may grow out of it. They may decide as an adult, Hey, instead of being Johnny, I wanna be Jill. That's okay. But let them figure that out and make that decision when they can consent. A child can't consent to getting sterilized. A child can't and should not consent to permanent sex change surgery. That that should not be a thing in our country.
And the state has an interest, a compelling interest to intervene and block that.
Yes. And I support legislation to block that. So, but as an adult, if you wanna, I mean, if you wanna make that permanent change, that is your decision. Do it on your dime. Not the government's dime. But you can make that decision freely. It's your body, your choice, it's your body. But, um, but on children, it's different. And I, and I know people in my district who have kids with gender dysphoria who've taken on different identities who are transitioning, that wanna transition, but they cut the per cut the child's hair, for example, at the child, you take on a different name. It's different when it's not permanently done to your body. That's a huge difference.
If I hear what you're saying, you can do this on a gradualist basis with things that are less,
That aren't permanent. Right. You don't wanna do anything that's permanent. You can grow your hair out. You can cut your hair, you can change your clothes, take on a different pronoun. Those things are not permanent things. It's the surgery, it's the hormone blockers. Those things that sterilize a kid. You shouldn't be doing that. That should be totally off limits to a minor.
That is the voice of Nancy Mace coming to you as we have been all the time. Seventh Floor, the house Longworth building her office here. Congresswoman, it's great to see you. And stay tuned for your takeout outtake as bestia. That is coming next.
That's my playlist. So when my staff drive me around, it's all, it's all the local music that I love
From CBS News. This is the takeout with Major Garrett.
Welcome to your takeout outtake especial. I am, of course, major Garrett. Nancy Mace is our special guest. Uh, a couple of quick questions and we'll get to the funny games part of this convers, i I promise you. Yeah. Uh, do you allow your children, you've mentioned 'em several times, your teenage children to use TikTok? Yes. Why?
I, well, I, I monitor their apps that they're on. I can control what apps they have and how much time they have. Um, they love it. They scroll through it. I see a lot of the content that they're on. Their friends are on it. It's the way that they communicate. They're not on Facebook, they're not on Twitter. The kids are on Snapchat and they're on TikTok and other apps. Now, as a parent, we monitor what they're on. We, we limit the time that they're on those things. 'cause that's our responsibility as a parent. But it's up to the parents to decide. It's not up to the government. Do
You use chat GPT for your speeches or anything in your office?
Well, my staff doesn't write my speeches. So you do. Uh, well, I don't, I actually don't write any of my speeches either. I mean, I'm usually off the cuff, so, but we do, I do actually encourage my staff to use chat, GPT or chat sonic any of the AI apps apps to help with the writing. Could be for a news release or to summarize a bill or even help draft legislation. Um, it speeds up the time for their writing and their content. They're able to do more with less time. So for us as an office, the efficiency we can get out of utilizing AI to help assist write pieces of content is great.
When you think about the future of artificial intelligence, what's the best thing you can imagine? And what's the worst thing you can imagine?
The best thing would be business efficiencies. Being able to do more with less. Allowing your employees to have resources to do more and to see advances in technology.
I also read about medical efficiencies.
Yeah. You know, um, curing cancer, quantum computing, all those things I think AI will be involved in. Now, the worst case scenario you're talking about would be what happens with cybersecurity? What happens with DeepFakes? What happens in the 2024 election with disinformation? Those are the things that we need to be concerned about at this point. Not necessarily regulating ai, um, or overregulating ai. If we do that, we,
You don't wanna regulate ai.
I don't wanna overregulate it. I think that there's some,
But nobody knows how to define that yet. Do Right.
You can't do that. In fact, you can't
Define the eu. You can't even define what overregulation is. Well,
The EU tried to regulate AI and then chat. GPT came along and they, they no one took account. You don't know what you don't know. Now there are things we can do, like when you see an image on the internet, that where was the image taken? All the metadata disclosing information, the source of the information. Now Elon Musk done a great job with the community notes on Twitter. So you can see the original source file for the photo or where the story comes from. The disclosure of information is actually where we should be starting in our conversation about ai.
Since you mentioned him, do you think Elon Musk has been good or bad for Twitter?
I think it's a mixed bag. There are things that I love that he does, but then you wanna see some of the bots cleaned up. Is he, is that happening? I don't know. It's hard to say at this point. Um, but it's 50 50.
Do you pay for your check mark?
No, but my, my campaign wants me to pay for my check mark. I guess there are certain things you can do with it or not. I haven't decided yet.
When are you gonna run for statewide office?
Well, right now there's no statewide office up for grabs. But I do love what I'm doing here in Washington and I love the job. And I would like to keep continuing to do this
Job. Do you wanna be Senator of South Carolina?
I, I don't, I'm not the type of person that has a long-term plan. Do you know when your kid's growing up and you're in college, where do you wanna be five years from now or 10 years from now? I just wanna live for the next day. Right. And so I, I have very short term plans, which are, what am I doing tomorrow? What am I doing this weekend? How am I improving the life of every South Carolinian? I don't have long term future plans at this point.
Understood. Just wanna work hard. We have three questions we ask everyone on the show, so take them in whichever order you prefer. Mm-Hmm. <affirmative> most influential book in your life and why? Favorite movie. And if you're gonna have a long flight or a long drive and really enjoy some music, what kind of music is that most likely to be? Oh
My goodness. Okay. Um, oh gosh. I wish I'd been known this before. <laugh> the book
Is, we, we try to make sure people don't know it before. I know. So we get genuine answers.
Lords of Discipline by Pat Conroy was the most meaningful book in my life. That was my bible. The book that I read in the weeks before I went to the Citadel. It was my guide on my guidebook on what that experience to prepare me for it. Worst case scenario, Lords of Discipline. That's what I read. And he was a prolific southern writer. Mm-Hmm. <affirmative>. I've read all of his books. They're wonderful. But that is by far my favorite, favorite, uh, music. Gosh. I love local bands outta Charleston, suto and Jump Little Children. I listen to a lot of, um, uh, shovels and Rope. I listen to a lot of bands outta my, outta my hometown, outta my district. I grew up on Jump Little Children. I grew up on local bands. I go to local shows a lot. A lot of local musical shows. And, um, that's my playlist. So when my staff drive me around, it's all, it's all the local music that I love. Um,
That's the answer we're looking for. Yeah.
Favorite movie? Uh, favorite movie? Gosh, I have a very, um, gosh, I have very different taste. Um, I love, I love military film like Band of Brothers. Mm-Hmm. <affirmative> and Saving Private Writings. My father served 28 years in the military. Brigadier General. Brigadier General. I remember watching Band of Brothers with him in the final episode, and he was in tears. And this was 20 years ago-ish. And knowing the service and sacrifice that he made for our country that I am trying to protect every single day in my job, those are the memories that I cherish as he gets older.
Nancy Mays, it's been a pleasure. Thank
You. Yeah, thank you so much. We'll
See you next week, folks.