The following is the transcript of an interview with FDA commissioner Dr. Marty Makary that aired on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on June 1, 2025.

---

MARGARET BRENNAN: Welcome back to Face the Nation. We’re joined now by FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary. Good morning. 

FDA COMMISSIONER DR. MARTY MAKARY: Good morning. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: Good to have you here in person. 

DR. MAKARY: Good to be here. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: So I want to get through a lot here, but one of the things we’ve noticed is this new COVID variant that seems to be circulating in Asia. I believe it’s NB.1.8.1. It’s a variant under monitoring. What do we need to know? 

DR. MAKARY: Yeah so this appears to be a subvariant of JN.1, which has been the dominant strain so it’s believed that there is cross-immunity protection. The COVID- COVID virus is going to continue to mutate, and it’s behaving like a common cold virus. It’s now going to become the fifth coronavirus that’s seasonal, that causes about 25% of the cases of the common cold.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So you’re thinking of it as like a flu-type variant, just a normal fluctuation. 

DR. MAKARY: The flu mutates about 34 times more frequently than COVID. The COVID variant mutation rate appears to be a little more stable, but the international bodies that have provided some guidance on which strain to target, have suggested that either JN.1 or any of these subvariants would be reasonable strains to target.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So you don’t seem overly concerned about that. I want to get now into some of the recommendations that have been very specific this week from the CDC and you with the HHS Secretary in this video announcement on Tuesday where Secretary Kennedy said the CDC was removing the COVID vaccine for healthy children and healthy pregnant women from its recommended immunization schedule. He then had a memo to the CDC rescinding recommendations for kids’ vaccines, saying the known risks do not outweigh the benefits. Then late Thursday, the CDC said quote “shared clinical decision-making,” which I think is just talking to your doctor should determine whether kids get vaccinated. Can you clearly state what the policy is? Because this is confusing. 

DR. MAKARY: Yeah, we believe the recommendation should be with a patient and their doctor. So we’re going to get away from these blanket recommendations in healthy, young Americans because we don’t want to see– 

MARGARET BRENNAN: For all vaccines? 

DR. MAKARY: We don’t- well on the COVID vaccine schedule, we don’t want to see kids kicked out of school because a 12-year-old girl is not getting her fifth COVID booster shot. We don’t see the data there to support a young, healthy child getting a repeat, infinite, annual COVID vaccine. There’s a theory that we should sort of blindly approve the new COVID boosters in young, healthy kids every year in perpetuity, and a young girl born today should get 80 COVID mRNA shots, or other COVID shots in her average lifespan. We’re saying that’s a theory, and we’d like to check in and get some randomized, controlled data. It’s been about four years since the original randomized trials, so we’d like an evidence based approach. Dr. Prasad and I published this in the New England Journal of Medicine last week, and we’re basically saying we’d like to bring some confidence back to the public around this repeat booster strategy theory, because– 

MARGARET BRENNAN: Your statement was not about repeat boosters. It says the vaccine is not recommended for pregnant women, the vaccine is not recommended for healthy children. That’s different than annual boosters.

DR. MAKARY: Yeah at this point we’re dealing, you know, it is a booster strategy- people would be getting the updated shot. So whether or not a young, healthy–

(CROSSTALK)

MARGARET BRENNAN: But what about kids who haven’t gotten a shot?

DR. MAKARY: So we’d like to see the data. We’d love to see that- that data. It doesn’t exist.

MARGARET BRENNAN: No, no, no, but on a practical level, for a parent at home, hearing you, trying to make sense here. 

DR. MAKARY: Yeah. We’re saying, take it back to your doctor. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: Their child has not been vaccinated. Are you recommending that their first encounter with COVID be an actual infection?

(END CROSSTALK)

DR. MAKARY: We’re not going to push the COVID shot in young, healthy kids without any clinical trial data supporting it. That is a decision between a parent and their doctor. And just so, I don’t know if you know the statistics, but 80 for 88% of American kids, their parents, have said no to the COVID shot last season. So America, the vast majority Americans, are saying no. Maybe they want to see some clinical data as well. Maybe they have concerns about the safety–

(CROSSTALK)

MARGARET BRENNAN: I don’t want to crowdsource my health guidance. I want a clear thing– 

DR. MAKARY: The worst thing you–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –I wouldn’t go with popularity–

DR. MAKARY: The worst thing–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –I’m going with, as you’re saying, data– 

DR. MAKARY: –Yeah so let’s see the data.

(END CROSSTALK)

MARGARET BRENNAN: Okay. So the CDC data said 41% of children aged six months to 17 years hospitalized with COVID between 2022 and 2024 did not have a known underlying condition. In other words, they looked healthy–

DR. MAKARY: So–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –and COVID was serious for them.

DR. MAKARY: So first of all, we know the CDC data is contaminated with a lot of false positives from incidental positive COVID tests with routine testing of every kid that walks in the hospital–

MARGARET BRENNAN: You don’t trust the CDC data?

DR. MAKARY: –When I go to the ICU, when I walk to the P- the we know, We know that data, historically under the Biden administration, did not distinguish being sick from COVID or an incidental positive COVID test. When you go to an ICU in America and you ask, how many people are in the ICU that are healthy, that are sick with COVID, the answer I get again and again is, we haven’t seen that in a year or years. And so the worst thing you can do in public health is to put out an absolute universal recommendation in young, healthy kids. And the vast majority of Americans are saying, no, we want to see some data. And you say, Forget about the data. Just get it anyway.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Okay, so on data and transparency for decades, since 1964 it was the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, ACIP that went through this panel recommendation. People watched these things during COVID. The report was then handed up. It offered debate, it offered transparency, and it offered data points that people could refer back to. Why did you bypass all of this and just come down with a decision before the panel could meet and meet that data? 

DR. MAKARY: That panel has been a kangaroo court where they just rubber stamp every single vaccine put in front of them. If you look at the minutes of the report from, they even say we were- generally want to move towards a risk stratified approach. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: So why not let them do that in June? 

DR. MAKARY: So in the meantime, we don’t want an absolute recommendation for healthy kids to get it. They can do it, and that committee-committee will meet and make recommendations. But you look at the minutes of the last couple of years, they say we want a simple message for everybody, just so they can understand it. It was not a data based conversation. It was a conversation based on marketing and ease and and I’ve written an article titled “Why the people don’t trust the CDC,” and it’s in part from that blanket strategy–

MARGARET BRENNAN: You’re telling them not to right now. You just said don’t trust the CDC. 

DR. MAKARY:  We’re saying it’s going to be between a doctor and a patient until that committee meets or more experts weigh in, or we get some clinical data. If there’s zero clinical data, you’re opining. I mean, you’re just, it’s a theory, and so we don’t want to put out an absolute recommendation for kids with no clinical data at this point.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So you made this pronouncement as well on pregnant women. There is data. Researchers in the UK analyzed a series of 67 studies, which included 1.8 million women, and the journal BMJ Global Health published it. People can Google it at home, and it says the COVID vaccine in pregnant women is highly effective in reducing the odds of maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospital admission and improves pregnancy outcomes with no serious safety concerns. This is data that shows that it is recommended or could be advised, for pregnant women to take this vaccine. Why do you find otherwise?

DR. MAKARY: There’s no randomized control trial. That’s the gold standard. Those 67 studies are mixed. The data in pregnant women is different for healthy versus women with a comorbid condition. So it’s a very mixed bag. So we’re saying your obstetrician, your primary care doctor, and the pregnant woman should together decide whether or not to get it. 12% of pregnant women last year got the COVID shot. So people have serious concerns, and it’s probably because they want to see a randomized trial data, the randomized trial of pregnant women– 

MARGARET BRENNAN: But in the meantime, the world moves on, and you published in the New England Journal of Medicine on May 20. In that report, you referenced, you listed pregnancy as an underlying medical condition that increases a person’s risk for severe COVID. You said that. So then seven days later, you joined in this video announcement saying you should drop the recommendation for the COVID vaccine in healthy pregnant women. So what changed in the seven days? 

DR. MAKARY: In the New England Journal medicine, we simply list what the f- what the CDC has traditionally defined as high risk, and we’re just saying, decide with your doctor. We’re not saying the other–

MARGARET BRENNAN: But doctors want data and information as well from you–

DR. MAKARY: and the randomized trial– so here’s the data on pregnant women. A randomized control trial was set up, and it was closed without any explanation. We wanted to see that trial complete so women can have information that in a randomized control trial, which is the gold standard, this is what the data shows. We don’t have those data. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: All right. It is still unclear what pregnant women now should do until they get the data that you say– 

DR. MAKARY: I’d say talk to their doctor. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: When do they get the data you’re promising? All these controlled studies.

DR. MAKARY: In the absence of data, they should talk to their doctor– 

MARGARET BRENNAN: So no date?

DR. MAKARY: –and their doctor will use their best wisdom and judgment.

MARGARET BRENNAN: FDA Commissioner, thank you for trying to help clear this up. 

The following is the transcript of an interview with Sen. Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, that aired on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on June 1, 2025.

---

MARGARET BRENNAN: And we go now to Republican Senator Rand Paul, who joins us from Lexington, Kentucky this morning. Good morning to you. 

SEN. RAND PAUL: Good morning, Margaret. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: You just heard the Treasury Secretary say a number of things, dismiss the potential price increases that could come from the tariffs when it comes to retailers. He also played down the cost of this tax and border bill that just passed through the House. Do you agree with his math?

SEN. PAUL: Well, the math doesn’t really add up. One of the things this big and beautiful bill is is it’s a vehicle for increasing spending for the military and for the border. It’s about $320 billion in new spending. To put that in perspective, that’s more than all the DOGE cuts that we found so far. So, the increase in spending put into this bill exceeds the DOGE cuts. When you look just at the border wall, they have 46.5 billion for the border wall. Well, the current estimate from the CBP is 6.5 million per mile. So, if you did 1,000 miles, that’s 6.5 billion, but they have 46 billion. So they’ve inflated the cost of the wall eight fold. So, there’s a lot of new spending that has to be counteracted. But essentially, this is a bill by the military industrial complex advocates who are padding the military budget. There’s going to be a lot of extra money. Look, the President has essentially stopped the border flow without- without new money and without any new legislation. So, I think they’re asking for too much money. And in the end, the way you add it up to see if it actually is going to save money or add money, is how much debt are they going to borrow? 5 trillion over two years, an enormous amount.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Right. That- that was the number that the Secretary was quibbling over. The President has taken note of some of your skepticism, and he did tweet yesterday saying that if you, Rand Paul, vote against his massive border and tax bill the people of Kentucky will never forgive you. Do you consider that a threat, and do you know if you have three other Republicans who will join you to block it from passage?

SEN. PAUL: I had a very good conversation with the President this week about tariffs. He did most of the talking, and we don’t agree exactly on the outcome. But when I come home to Kentucky, I talk to the Farm Bureau, which is opposed to the tariffs. I talked to the bourbon industry which is opposed to the tariffs. I talked to the cargo companies, UPS, DHL, all their pilots are opposed to it. I talked to the hardwood floor people. I talked to the people selling houses, building houses. I have no organized business- business interests in Kentucky for the tariffs. So I think it’s worth the discussion, and it’s worth people remembering that the Republicans used to be for lower taxes. Tariffs are a tax. So, if you raise taxes on the private sector, that’s not good for the private sector.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, you know, we hear from other senators who also get complaints from their people in their districts, but they’re falling in line. Do you have three other Republicans who will stand with you to block this bill?

SEN. PAUL: I think there are four of us at this point, and I would be very surprised if the bill, at least, is not modified in a good direction. Look, I want to vote for it. I’m for the tax cuts. I voted for the tax cuts before. I want the tax cuts to be permanent, but at the same time, I don’t want to raise the debt ceiling 5 trillion. So, I’ve told him, if you take the debt ceiling off the bill, in all likelihood, I can vote for what the agreement is on the rest of the bill, and it doesn’t have to be perfect to my liking. But I can’t be- if I vote for the $5 trillion debt, who’s left in Washington that cares about the debt. We will have lost it. The GOP will own the debt once they vote for this.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But that the leader, as you know, is sort of in a tight spot here. He needs a vehicle to raise that debt ceiling. Otherwise, you have to turn to Democrats to get that done. What was the White House response when you asked that to the President?

SEN. PAUL: Well, historically, the debt ceiling has always gone up and will always go up, and I’m not proposing that it doesn’t, but the people who should vote for it are the people who vote for the spending. Historically, all the Democrats vote for raising the debt ceiling, and about 15 big government Republicans vote for it. This will be the first time it’s voted on just by Republicans. This will be the first time that Republicans own the debt. They already own the spending. In March, we continued, not me, but most Republicans voted to continue the Biden spending levels. So you remember the campaign, everybody is talking about Bidenomics and Biden inflation and Biden spending levels. Well, the Republicans all voted to keep the Biden spending levels, and that’s why the deficit this year is going to be $2.2 trillion this year. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: So, you think this is bad politics for Republicans. Some of your Republican colleagues, like Josh Hawley, are saying that changes to Medicaid are bad politics for America’s working people and for your party.

SEN. PAUL: I think it was a bad strategy. I think the tax cuts are good for the economy. When we passed the tax cuts in 2017 the economy grew like gangbusters. We had lowest unemployment historically. It was the great achievement of Trump’s first administration. They should have been satisfied by just doing the tax part of this and not getting involved into the debt part of it.

MARGARET BRENNAN: The last time you were with us in March, you talked about conversations you had with Elon Musk, as you know, he’s just left his work with the administration. You had proposed a rescission request, a claw back about $500 billion of money Congress had already signed off on. We know now that the White House is going to ask Congress this week for some rescissions. Sounds like it’s just $9.4 billion and it’s- it’s PBS, it’s NPR and it’s foreign aid. Is this really the best strategy? And do you think 51 Republican senators are on board with it?

SEN. PAUL: First of all, I will vote for spending cuts. The more the better. This is very, very small to put it in perspective, if the deficit this year is 2.2 trillion, if you cut 9 billion, the deficit is going to be 2.191 trillion. It really doesn’t materially change the course of the country. We should do it by all means. And it is the low hanging fruit. This is the money that was pointed out that was being spent for sex change operations in Guatemala, trans-opera in Columbia, all this crazy spending. Yes, it should be cut–  

MARGARET BRENNAN: — Sesame Street.–  

SEN. PAUL: — I had an amendment about a month- Excuse me– 

MARGARET BRENNAN: It’s Sesame Street. It’s PBS and NPR.

SEN. PAUL: Yeah. And I think, yeah- you’re right. We’ll see if there’s the votes to cut it. I don’t think we necessarily need government programming anymore. We have so many choices on the internet and so many choices on television, but my preference has always been, in the past, to cut a little bit of everything, rather than cut a lot of something. So what I’ve done in the past is propose a penny plan budget where we cut a certain percentage of everything, but it includes entitlements, or it doesn’t really work. Once you exclude the entitlements, there isn’t enough money to cut so you can never achieve balance by not looking at the entitlements. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: The budget director on another program this morning said they may not need to use this rescission, this claw back, because the White House has other tools. Do you think they need to go through Congress? Is this overstepping? 

SEN. PAUL: Well, they- well, they absolutely have to use a recession- the rescission, and it is done by simple majority, by Republicans only. There is no filibuster of it. So, it’s a great tool to cut spending. If they don’t use, it will be a huge wasted opportunity. But I will tell you, they tried in the first Trump administration. It wasn’t their fault. They sent a tiny one, 16 billion, and it failed because two Republicans went the other way. So, we’ll see what happens on this. But if we can’t even cut welfare that we’re giving to other countries, if we can’t cut foreign aid welfare, I feel bad for the country. You know, interest rates are rising. We’re having trouble selling our debt. We’ve got a lot of problems.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Senator Rand Paul, we’ll be right back. 

The following is the transcript of an interview with Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, Democrat of Illinois, that aired on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on June 1, 2025.

---

MARGARET BRENNAN: We turn now to the top Democrat on the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, that’s Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi. He’s in Illinois. Good morning to you. I want to get–

REP. KRISHNAMOORTHI: –Good morning.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to get straight to it. You heard from the Secretary of State this week that the State Department is going to work with Homeland Security to aggressively revoke visas for Chinese students, including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields. There are like 300,000 Chinese students with visas in this country. The U.S. government already has a heightened level of vetting. What’s going to change?

REP. KRISHNAMOORTHI: I don’t know. There’s not enough details, but what it looks like if they’re targeting all people of Chinese origin who are on international student visas because he’s not limiting it to just people who might have ties to the Chinese Communist Party, and if they do have those ties, they don’t belong here, especially if they’re committing nefarious acts. However, this appears to be much broader and it’s terribly misguided and it appears prejudicial and discriminatory. My own father was, came here on an international student visa. And I believe that these people are vital for our economy and for entrepreneurship in this country. And I think this is going to harm America more than help.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You said if someone has ties to the Chinese Communist Party they shouldn’t be here. Does that mean all the, the students who are children of leaders, for example Xi Jinping’s own daughter, shouldn’t have been allowed here?

REP. KRISHNAMOORTHI: Well, if they were engaged in nefarious activities and if they are somehow deeply connected to the CCP, I think that we should be very careful. But in this particular case, they’re not only going after people who might fall in that category, but it’s anybody who is from China, including Hong Kong by the way, where people are actually persecuted for various freedoms they’re trying to exercise, and who come here seeking to exercise those freedoms. So this is a terrible, terribly misguided policy.

MARGARET BRENNAN: The Biden administration did conduct heightened vetting, as you know, of Chinese students. Do you think that there is a legitimate argument for expanding this, that certain areas should just be off limits?

REP. KRISHNAMOORTHI: I think that you should definitely have heightened vetting, especially in certain critical areas because we know that the CCP tries to steal, for instance, intellectual property or worse. But the way that this is currently structured looks very, very suspicious and you have to remember that the people that are cheering for this policy, what Marco Rubio had called for, is the Chinese Communist Party. Why? Because they want these people back. They want the scientists and the entrepreneurs and the engineers who can come and help their economy. And so we are probably helping them, as well as other countries, more than helping ourselves with this policy.

MARGARET BRENNAN: The Defense Secretary is traveling in Asia right now and he said in a defense forum speech that Beijing is quote “concretely and credibly preparing to use military force.” He said their military is rehearsing. Take a listen.

PETE HEGSETH: Any attempt by Communist China to conquer Taiwan by force would result in devastating consequences for the Indo-Pacific and the world. There’s no reason to sugar coat it. The threat China poses is real and it could be imminent.

MARGARET BRENNAN: He did not say what the consequences would be. Are you encouraged by what appears to be a statement of support for allies?

REP. KRISHNAMOORTHI: I am. I think what he’s saying is largely correct, but I think the problem is at the same time he says that, either Donald Trump or even him or others say other things that push away our friends, partners and allies in the region and cause confusion. And so we need to be consistent and thoughtful with regard to our statements, and we need to be also very methodical about our actions in trying to curb military aggression by the Chinese Communist Party in the South China Sea and with regard to Taiwan.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Since you track U.S. intelligence, I wanted to ask you if you have any insight into what appears to be the swarm of Ukrainian drones that has destroyed 40 Russian military aircraft deep inside Russian territory overnight. Sources are telling our Jennifer Jacobs that the White House wasn’t aware that this attack was planned. What can you tell us about the level of US intelligence sharing with Ukraine right now and helping them with their targets?

REP. KRISHNAMOORTHI: I don’t want to get into classified information, but what I can say is that it’s a little bit more strained in light of what Donald Trump has said recently. The one thing that I can also say is that Trump was right the other day to say that Putin is crazy in the way that he’s going after civilian areas in Ukraine repeatedly, and so the Ukrainians are striking back. At the end of the day, the only way that we can bring these hostilities to an end is by strengthening the hand of the Ukrainians. Trump should, at this point, realize that Putin is playing him and aid the Ukrainians in their battlefield efforts. That’s the best way to get to some type of armistice or truce at the negotiating table sooner rather than later.

MARGARET BRENNAN: All right, Congressman Krishnamoorthi thank you for your insights today.

The following is the transcript of an interview with Michael Roth, Wesleyan University president, that aired on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on June 1, 2025.

---

MARGARET BRENNAN: And we’re turning now to the President of Wesleyan University, Michael Roth, who joins us from Monterey, Massachusetts. Good morning to you.

WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY PRESIDENT MICHAEL ROTH: Good morning. Good to be with you. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to pick up on something we were just discussing with the congressman, and that is this instruction to have new scrutiny of Chinese students, but also, more broadly, Secretary Rubio said all U.S. embassies should not schedule any new student visa application appointments at this time. About 14% of your students are international. Are you concerned they won’t be able to come back to school in September?

ROTH: I’m very concerned, not only about Wesleyan, but about higher education in the United States. One of the great things about our system of education is that it attracts people from all over the world who want to come to America to learn. And while they’re here learning, they learn about our country, our values, our freedoms. And this is really an act of intimidation to scare schools into toeing the line of the current administration. It really has nothing to do with national security or with anti- antisemitism. This heightened scrutiny is meant to instill fear on college campuses, and I’m afraid it is working. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, it is noticeable, sir, that you know, at a time when so many higher education institutions, Harvard, Columbia, Brown, have had federal funding revoked because of their policies, we find heads of universities are fearful of speaking out. Why are you not afraid of speaking critically?

ROTH: Oh, I am. I’m afraid too. But I just find it extraordinary that Americans are afraid to speak out, especially people who, you know, run colleges, universities. Why- this is a free country. I’ve been saying it my whole life. I used to tell my parents that when I didn’t want to do something, I would say it’s a free country. And this idea that we’re supposed to actually conform to the ideologies in the White House, it’s not just bad for Harvard or for Wesleyan, it- it’s bad for the whole country because journalists are being intimidated, law firms are being intimidated, churches, synagogues and mosques will be next. We have to defend our freedoms. And when we bring international students here, what they experience is what it’s like to live in a free country, and we can’t let the president change the atmosphere so that people come here and are afraid to speak out. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: But there are also some specific criticisms being lodged by members of the administration. Do you think that higher education has become too dependent on federal funding, for example, or money from foreign donors, are there legitimate criticisms? 

ROTH: There are lots of legitimate criticisms of higher education. I don’t think overdependence on federal funding is the issue. Most of the federal funding you hear the press talk about are contracts to do specific kinds of research that are really great investments for the country. However, the criticisms of colleges and universities that we have a monoculture, that we don’t have enough intellectual diversity, that’s a criticism I’ve been making of my own school and of the rest of higher education for years. I think we can make improvements, but the way we make improvements is not by just lining up behind a president, whoever that happens to be. We make improvements by convincing our faculty and students to broaden our perspectives, to welcome more political and cultural views, not to line up and conform to the ideology of those in power. But yes, we have work to do to clean up our own houses, and we ought to get to it. But to do it under the- under this- the gun of an aggressive authoritarian administration that- that will lead to a bad outcome.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you define some of the protests that even Wesleyan had on its campus that were, you know, critical of the State of Israel, for example, regarding the war against Hamas in Gaza, do you consider them to be xenophobic by definition, antisemitic or anti-Jewish?

ROTH: Oh no, certainly not by definition. There are lots of examples of antisemitism around the country, some of them are on college campuses. They’re reprehensible. When Jewish students are intimidated or afraid to practice their religion on campus, or are yelled at or- it’s horrible. But at Wesleyan and in many schools, the percentage of Jews protesting for Palestinians was roughly the same as the percentage of Jews on the campus generally. The idea that you are attacking antisemitism by attacking universities, I think, is a complete charade. It’s just an excuse for getting the universities to conform. We need to stamp out antisemitism. Those two young people just murdered because they were Jewish in Washington, that’s a great example of how violence breeds violence. But the- the attack on universities is not an- is not an attempt to defend Jews. On the contrary, I think more Jews will be hurt by these attacks than helped.

MARGARET BRENNAN: President Roth, thank you for your time this morning. We’ll be back in a moment.

Watch CBS News

Watch CBS News

The following is the transcript of an interview with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent that aired on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on June 1, 2025.

---

MARGARET BRENNAN: Good morning and welcome to ‘Face the Nation.’ We begin today with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. Good morning and thank you for being here. 

SECRETARY SCOTT BESSENT: Morning, Margaret. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: There’s so much to get to. I want to start with China, because the Defense Secretary just said there’s an imminent military threat from China to Taiwan. Days earlier, Secretary Rubio said he’d aggressively revoked Chinese student visas. On top of that, you have curbing exports to China. Trade talks you said with Beijing are stalled, and President Trump just accused China of violating an agreement, and now says no more, ‘Mr. Nice Guy.’ Are you intentionally escalating this standoff with Beijing?

SEC. BESSENT: Well, I don’t think it’s intentional. I- I think that what Secretary Hegseth did was remind everyone that during COVID, China was an unreliable partner, and what we are trying to do is to de-risk. We do not want to decouple Margaret, but we do need to de-risk, as we saw during COVID, whether it was with semiconductors, medicines, the other products we are in the process of de-risking.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Making the United States less reliant on China, but at the same–

SEC. BESSENT: –Well, and the whole world. The whole world, because what China is doing is they are holding back products that are essential for the industrial supply chains of India, of Europe, and that is not what a reliable partner does.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So is that like- what specifically is President Trump saying when he says they are violating an agreement? Because it was the one you negotiated in Geneva earlier this month. And what’s the consequence for that?

SEC. BESSENT: Well, we will see what the consequences are. I am confident that when President Trump and party Chairman Xi have a call, that this will be ironed out. So- but the fact that they are withholding some of the products that they agreed to release during our agreement- maybe it’s a glitch in the Chinese system, maybe it’s intentional. We’ll see after the President speaks with party chairman.

MARGARET BRENNAN: That’s critical minerals, rare earths. Is that what you’re talking about? 

SEC. BESSENT: Yes. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: So, the President has said a few times that he was going to speak to President Xi, but he hasn’t since before the inauguration. Beijing keeps denying that there was any contact. Do you have anything scheduled?

SEC. BESSENT: I believe we’ll see something very soon, Margaret. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you have a conversation with your counterpart or Lutnick with his counterpart at the commerce level? 

SEC. BESSENT: Well, I think we’re going to let the two principles have a conversation, and then everything will stem from that.

MARGARET BRENNAN: JP Morgan CEO, Jamie Dimon, spoke this week at an economic forum, and he gave this read on Beijing. 

[SOT]

JAMIE DIMON: I just got back from China last week. They’re not scared, folks. This notion they’re gonna come bow to America. I wouldn’t count on that. And when they have a problem, they put 100,000 engineers on it, and they’ve been preparing for this for years.

[END SOT]

MARGARET BRENNAN: Have you underestimated the Chinese state’s backbone here?

SEC. BESSENT: Again, Margaret, I hope it doesn’t come to that. And Jamie is a great banker. I know him well, but I would vociferously disagree with that assessment, that the laws of economics and gravity apply to the Chinese economy and the Chinese system, just like everyone else.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But when you were last here in March, we were trying to gauge what the impact of the standoff with China and with the tariffs on the rest of the world would do for American consumers here at home. At that time, you told us you were going to appoint an affordability czar and council to figure out five, you said, or eight areas where there will be some pain for working class Americans. Where are you anticipating price increases?

SEC. BESSENT: Well, thus far- we wanted to make sure that there aren’t price increases, Margaret. And thus far there have been no price increases. Everything has been alarmist, that the inflation numbers are actually dropping. We saw the first drop of inflation in four years. The inflation numbers last week, they were very- the- pro-consumer. We’ve–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Right, but you listen to earnings calls just like we do. You know what Walmart’s saying, what Best Buy’s saying and what Target are saying of what’s coming–

SEC. BESSENT: But Margaret, I also know what Home Depot and Amazon are saying. I know what the South China Morning Post wrote within the past 24 hours that 65%- 65%- the- of the tariffs will likely be eaten by the Chinese producers. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: So are there five or eight areas that you have identified, as you said back in March, where American consumers will be able to have lower prices, or should be warned of higher prices?

SEC. BESSENT: Well, a lot of it’s already working its way through the system. So we’ve seen a substantial decrease in gasoline and energy prices. So that’s down 20% year over year. We’ve seen the food prices go down, these notorious egg prices. Through the good work of President Trump and Secretary Rollins, egg prices have collapsed. So we’re seeing more and more. And what we want to do- the- is even that out across the all sections of the economy. So inflation has been very tame. Consumer earnings were up 0.8% last month, which is a gigantic increase for one month. So real earnings minus low inflation is great for the American people, and that’s what we’re seeing.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But you know, because when you met with the Chinese earlier this month and you went down from the 145% tariff down to about- it’s like 30%. 30%’s not nothing, that tax on goods coming in here. Retailers are warning of price hikes–

SEC. BESSENT: Well, so–

MARGARET BRENNAN: When you go back to school shopping, things are going to cost more. 

SEC. BESSENT: But Margaret, some are and some aren’t. Home Depot and Amazon said they’re not. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: Home Depot and Amazon aren’t where you go for your back school shopping, when you buy your jeans, when you buy your crayons, and you buy all those things that parents–

SEC. BESSENT: I don’t know about you, but I do it online at Amazon. This isn’t an advertisement for Amazon. And guess where most of the Halloween costumes in America get bought? At Home Depot. So that’s just not right. There’s a wide aperture here. Different companies are doing different things. They are making decisions based on their customers, what they think they’re able to pass along to their customers, what they want to do to keep their customers. And I was in the investment business for 35 years, Margaret, and I will tell you earnings calls- they have to give the worst case scenario, because if it- if they haven’t and something bad happens, then they’ll be sued.

MARGARET BRENNAN: It’s not always the worst case. It’s the most probable case–

SEC. BESSENT: –No, no, no–

MARGARET BRENNAN: as well–

SEC. BESSENT: –No, no, no. No, they have to give the worst case. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: So Walmart- there was just a piece published with the conservative strategist Karl Rove. I’m not asking about politics, because he is a political strategist, but he went in on the math here. And he points out that Walmart has a profit margin of less than 3%. He says, ‘If it does what Mr. Trump says, eat the tariffs, it can’t break even. It can’t absorb the cost of an imported pair of kids jeans with a 46% tariff on Vietnam, a 37% tariff for Bangladesh, or 32% tariff on sneakers from Indonesia. Other companies are in the same pickle.’ So should companies cut back on the amount of goods they have on their shelves or just on their profitability? 

SEC. BESSENT: That- that’s a decision company by- by company, Margaret. And I had a long discussion with Doug McMillon, the CEO of Walmart, and they’re going to do what’s right for them.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But for consumers, the reality is there will either be less inventory or things at higher prices, or both.

SEC. BESSENT: Margaret, when we were here in March, you said there was going to be big inflation. There hasn’t been any inflation. Actually, the inflation numbers are the best in four years. So why don’t we stop trying to say this could happen, and wait and see what does happen.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Just trying to gauge for people planning ahead here, one of the things the President said on Friday is that he’s going to double the tariffs on steel and aluminum up to 50%, effective June 4. How much will that impact the construction industry? 

SEC. BESSENT: Well, I think- I was with the president at the U.S. Steel Plant in Pittsburgh on Friday, and I will tell you that the President has the- reignited the steel industry here in America. And back to the earlier statements on national security. There are national security priorities here for having a strong steel industry.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But do you have a prediction on how much it’s going to impact the construction industry, for example? 

SEC. BESSENT: Well, I have a prediction on how much it’s going to impact the steel industry, and you know, again, we- we’ll see there are a lot of elasticities that- you know this is a very complicated ecosystem. So is it going to impact the construction industry, maybe. But it’s going to impact the steel industry, the- in a great way. The steel workers, again, were left on the side of the road after the China shock, and now they’re back that the- they are Trump supporters. And when I tell you that it was magic in the arena, or it was actually at the steel plant that night, that these hard working Americans know their jobs are secure, there’s going to be capital investment, and the number of jobs is going to be grown around the country, whether it’s in Pittsburgh, whether it’s in Arkansas, whether it’s in Alabama.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to ask you about this big tax bill that worked through the House, is going to the Senate next. In it is increase or suspension to the debt limit that you need delivered on by mid-July. How close of a brush with default could this be, given how massive some of the Senate changes are expected to be to the other parts of the bill? 

SEC. BESSENT: Well, first of all, Margaret, I will say the United States of America is never going to default. That is never going to happen. That- we are on the warning track and we will never hit the wall.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You have more wiggle room if they don’t deliver this by mid-July? I mean, how hard of a date is this?

SEC. BESSENT: That- we don’t give out the X date because we use that to move the bill forward.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Sometimes deadlines help force action, as you know, particularly in this town, sir, that’s why I’m asking. The President did say he- he expects pretty significant changes to this bill, though, so that affects the timing of it moving. What would you like Republican lawmakers to keep? What would you like them to alter? 

SEC. BESSENT: Again, that’s going to be the Senate’s decision. Leader Thune, who I’ve worked closely with during this process, has been doing a fantastic job. And Margaret, I’ll point out, everyone said that Speaker Johnson would not be able to get this bill out of the house with his slim majority. He got it out Leader Thune has a bigger majority, and this is with President Trump’s leadership. So–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –There’s no red lines for you in there of just don’t touch this you can, you know, tinker with that.

SEC. BESSENT: Well, I- I think that they’re not necessarily my red lines. The President has the- his campaign promises that he wants to fulfill for working Americans. So no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, no tax on Social Security, deductibility of auto loans for American made automobiles.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So those have to stay in. 

SEC. BESSENT: Those have to stay in. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: JP Morgan’s Dimon also predicted a debt market crisis. ‘Cracks in the bond market’ was what he said. You are considering easing some regulations, you’ve said, for the big banks. How do you avoid that bond market crisis he’s predicting, spreading and really causing concern, particularly with all of the worries about American debt right now?

SEC. BESSENT: So again, I’ve known Jamie a long time and for his entire career he’s made predictions like this. Fortunately, none of them have come true. That’s why he’s a banker- a great banker. He tries to look around the corner. One of the reasons I’m sitting here talking to you today and not at home watching your show is that I was concerned about the level of debt. So the deficit this year is going to be lower than the deficit last year, and in two years it will be lower again. We are going to bring the deficit down slowly. We didn’t get here in one year. We didn’t get here in one year, and this has been a long process. So the goal is to bring it down over the next four years, leave the country in great shape in 2028.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You know that the Speaker of the House estimates this is going to add four to five trillion dollars over the next 10 years, and there’s that debt limit increase.

SEC. BESSENT: Well again, Margaret, that’s CBO scoring.

MARGARET BRENNAN: That’s the Speaker of the House. 

SEC. BESSENT: No, no, no.

MARGARET BRENNAN: He said it last Sunday on this program. 

SEC. BESSENT: The- he said that’s the CBO scoring. Let me–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –No, he said that sounds right.

SEC. BESSENT: Let me tell you what’s not included in there, what can’t be scored. So we’re taking in substantial tariff income right now, so that there are estimates that that could be another 2 trillion that we are the- pushing through savings. So you know my estimate is that could be up to another 100 billion a year. So over the 10 year window, that could be a trillion. President has a prescription drug plan with the pharmaceutical companies that could substantially push down costs for prescription drugs, and that could be another trillion. So there’s the four.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Treasury Secretary Bessent, we’ll be watching closely what happens next. ‘Face the Nation’ will be back in a minute, so stay with us.