Meet the Press NOW — January 1

Welcome to a special edition of Meet the Press Now. I'm Garrett Hake in Washington. On this New Year's Day, as we kick off, what will be a high stakes and highly partisan political year. Recently, NBC News launched our Find and Common Ground initiative.

It's an effort to showcase lawmakers and leaders with different points of view who are bridging the partisan divide and working together on issues that matter most to Americans. One of those issues is health care, which will be front and center once again when Congress returns next week. Affordable Care Act tax credits and help millions of Americans afford health insurance expired at midnight, meaning millions of Americans' health care costs will spike this year. In November, Meet the Press moderator Kristen Walker spoke to a pair of lawmakers about their bipartisan plan to address those expiring subsidies.

Here is that conversation. Joining me now on set to talk about their own bipartisan proposal on those Affordable Care Act subsidies, Democratic Congressmen, Sam Liccardo, and Republican Congressmen Kevin Kylie both from California. Their proposal would extend ACA tax credits for two years and pay for it by capping eligibility and cracking down on Medicare advantage payouts to insurers. Thanks so much to both of you for being here.

I really appreciate it. So let's dive right into this Congressmen Liccardo. We just heard there's a lot of different plans out there, not a lot of consensus consensus at this table. Why is this proposal the best?

Well, Kevin and I worked on a plan that would accomplish three things. First, to address the skyrocketing health insurance premiums at tens of millions of Americans are grappling with. Second, find a way to pay for it. And that's obviously a controversial topic.

And third, do it in a way that's bipartisan. We know it needs to get past the Senate. So it needs about Democratic and Republican support. So this is certainly one idea.

There may be better ones, but it's important for us to actually have something that qualifies under each of those criteria. Congressman Kylie, have you had conversations with your colleagues? Do you get the sense that there is support for this bipartisan legislation that you all are proposing? I do.

I mean, number one, as we just saw, there are a number of Republicans who believe that we do need to do something. So we can't just let 22 million Americans suddenly see this huge increase in health cost thousands of dollars. But also, the components of this that Sam just listed are really crucial in that they make it so that we can actually have this extension without increasing the deficit and without raising taxes. And by making reforms that actually make the program work a lot better.

So I think that those are the key pieces that are actually going to lead to a bipartisan deal. It's interesting, Republican, Kylie, Congress, and Kiggans also has a bill for temporary extensions. I believe that's only for one year, though. Why not join forces?

Would there not be strength in numbers? Why don't you start? Well, I think we have forces. All of us are interested in finding a solution.

I don't think either of Sam or Iers will say, no, this is the one and only thing to do. But I think that we've put forward a framework that is a great compromise. I don't think that anyone's going to say that this gives them 100% of what they want. But I think it gives enough sort of constituencies and groups of members in the House enough of what they want that it could be the basis.

I do have to ask you about President Trump's proposal, which is direct payments, Congressman Laccardo. Is that something that you think ultimately could be realistic? Well, I don't see it as a substitute for what we need to do, which is to help tens of millions of Americans be able to pay for their health. Premiums, what we know about HSA, for example, is it typically can't be used for insurance premiums.

If you've got cancer, if you've got a chronic illness of some kind, that money's going to go very quickly. The whole point of having insurance is to protect all of us and give us the peace of mind to know that we may have a very serious illness and still be able to find a way to pay for it. Congressman Kylie, how about you? Do you think that could ultimately be a long-term solution?

I think I'm a fan of Health State of Wisconsin, giving that kind of choice to consumers. But what Representative Laccardo said is correct that right now there's a restriction on using it for premium support. Now, there's a theory that, well, maybe then, you can have a higher debt to a plan, so that will level out the cost. I'm a little skeptical that we'll be able to figure anything like that in a month and a half, which is when this cliff is going to hit.

So that's why we're saying, let's extend this for two years. So let's do it in a fiscal responsible way. And then in the meantime, we can actually work on a long-term solution to the health care of Fortnite. You take me to my next question.

Congressman Kylie, you are the party in power. House Speaker Mike Johnson has not committed to bringing a bill to the floor. So let me ask you, do you think that will happen? And do you think it will happen in time before these subsidies start to increase and actually have an impact?

I do think well, though, I mean, the house will work its well. And I think you have a solid majority in the house that believes that we need to do something, that thinks that doing nothing is not an option here. When you have people who are already facing such a high cost of living, particularly in our state of California, and you're telling folks, sorry, you're going to suddenly have to pay thousands of dollars more, many thousands more, in some cases for health care. These are independent contractors.

These are people who work for small businesses. These are folks who are tired and aren't yet eligible for Medicare. We can't force them to pay such a high price because Congress has failed to act. Let me ask you a similar question, Congressman Laccardo.

Do you think this can get done in time because early enrollment has already begun? There are already signs that people's premiums are starting to increase? Well, based on what we've heard so far from the speaker, if we get this done, it's going to have to be around the leadership now. Fortunately, we have some practice with the vote on the Epstein file petition.

Clearly, it's going to take enough Republicans and Democrats getting together to say, we're going to have to go around the speaker if the speaker's not going to allow the vote. Yeah, well, and you're talking about a discharge petition rarely works with the exception of this Epstein. You're right, vote. I mean, does that enough to give you confidence?

Well, we are going to continue these conversations. I had conversations this recently last night with some Republicans that were very eager to get a deal done. I think there's plenty of room to do this, if we're all working together. I want to talk to you all about bipartisanship more broadly.

We are coming off of the longest government shutdown in history where it seemed like it was just impossible to find common ground on this issue of health care. Congressman Lecardo, why do you think it is so challenging? How did we get to this point? Well, I've been here for all of 11 months, so I'm probably not an expert on that subject, but I can tell you what has made a difference.

Well, here you are, you found some rounds here. I was grateful, Kevin, since I'm publicly about supporting ways to help address these healthcare costs I reached out to him, and that's really how it has to happen. What amazed me, I probably had conversations with three dozen Republicans over the last few weeks on this bill, and it was surprised me as how many people were surprised that they got a direct phone call from me. There simply is not enough direct communication from member to member across the aisle.

Yeah, Congressman Kylie, same to you. Yeah, and I give him a report of a credit. He really is walking the walk on those sort of things and reaching out to members on those sides. I've tried to do that as well, and I think we all have a role to play in kind of shifting our paradigm from searching for points of division, to searching for points of commonality, and trying to actually seek out the common ground where it exists.

Well, let me read you some poll numbers. This is from NPR. 82% of Republicans say they find Democrats close-minded. 72% say they're dishonest.

Among Democrats, 85% find Republicans close-minded, and 65% say they are dishonest. When you look at those numbers, Congressman Kylie, first to you, how much concern and pause does that give you that the country can move beyond this moment of extreme partisanship and find more bipartisan ways to work together? Well, it's concerning that that seems to show that this is permeating the whole country and we've all experienced this in our daily lives, but a lot of it really emanates out of Washington DC here and the way that we conduct ourselves and the items that are put on the agenda. So I do think it's incumbent on us to try to show that there's a better way.

And at the end of the day, I think when you're actually looking for common ground, whether we're talking about folks like us in the Hall of the Congress or just people out in their communities when you're actually looking for the values we have in common, there's a lot more there than you might think at first glance. And what about you when you see those staggering numbers? Yeah, I think I'd agree with what Kevin said. This is a lack of leadership, frankly, from Washington.

What we've been doing far too often is following the great divide that we see that is spun out between social media and obviously the political establishment. It's time to see leadership that helps us collectively overcome this kind of divide. Well, here we have today, another example of extreme partisanship. You have Democrats saying that some service members should ignore orders if they think they are illegal.

The president responded by accusing them of seditious conspiracy. First to you, I just want to get your reactions to what the president accused these Democrats of. Well, I think it's outrageous and even more outrageous that he would retweet a post that says hang them. That is on his own true social site.

Look, political violence has no place in America. And this is why many of us believe that Don't Trump has no place in leadership or in the White House. You simply can't have a commander in chief who is simultaneously identifying people. My colleagues, all six of whom served honorably in the armed services and pointed at them and saying they deserve a violent outcome, whatever it is, hanging whatever it is he's suggesting.

Look, my colleagues urged, was simply, that the members of the military followed the law. In Article 92, you know, from the military code of justice is very clear. Not only is there a right not to obey an unlawful order. In fact, there is a duty, not to obey an unlawful order.

This should have been a non-issue instead. The president made it one. Congressman Kylie, what was your reaction? Did the president's comments make you uncomfortable at all?

Well, of course, I just thought I think it's wrong. I think there's no place for that. It's unacceptable. I didn't like the video either, by the way.

I think that if you think of order is unlawful, the appropriate thing to do is to challenge that in court. But in any case, we just need to dial down the rhetoric and find ways to remember that we're all Americans here. Final thoughts to both of you building on that point. If you could talk to your conference, what would you tell them about the importance of trying to dial down the rhetoric, trying to find these common spaces?

Well, I mean, I just say, look at everything that we've lived through. We keep having these traumatic incidents that have really just shocked our country. And the level of rhetoric that we have is, I think, contributing to that environment. And we all came here because we love our country and we want to make a difference.

And we want to improve people's lives. And when we're yelling at each other and engaging in this extreme rhetoric, it makes that very difficult to do. Final thoughts, Congressman Ricardo. Yeah, it's time for all of us to lead by example and we can all do it in our own communities.

All right, well, what a fantastic conversation. Thanks so much to both of you for being here. And we have much more of our Finding Common Ground Special still ahead. Up next, top senators speak out on their bipartisan efforts to support Ukraine, confront Russia, and reunite families impacted by the ongoing war.

You're watching a special edition of Meet the Press Now. Welcome back. As Ukraine welcomed in the new year, it was also defending against a major attack with Russia launching more than 200 drones in the country. And as the Trump administration continues to push for a peace deal in the nearly four year long war, a bipartisan pair of senators is working together to reunite Ukrainian children kidnapped by Russia during the conflict with their families.

NBC's Julie Serkin sent down with Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar and Republican Senator Lindsey Graham. Here is that conversation. Why did you partner together on the issue of the Ukrainian children who have been abducted? Ladies first.

OK. So Lindsey and I actually have worked together on Ukraine issues for a long time. My first trip to Ukraine was with John McCain and Lindsey Graham. And that was after the first invasion.

And from the very beginning, Lindsey has stood up. And here's Eve in the middle of a blizzard with John McCain. And we were in the Dunbas region. We were there for a number of days.

And through thick or thin, he has stood with the Ukrainians. And I've always really admired him for that. And the fact that we've been able to make this a bipartisan issue has been really important through two different administrations. So the kids and former prosecutor and a mom.

And to me, the fact that you have thousands and thousands of kids that were stolen and taken away from either their families or an orphanage, a number of the ones that I met recently in Rome when the pope took a visit with us and with the kids was about actually teenagers who were taken when their mom was the mom was killed. Another was just taken from a school. And they have the wherewithal because they're teenagers to get a phone from someone. And they were able to call their grandma in one case.

And she was with us. And they were able to get them out. And the Vatican's been really involved in negotiating a number of kids' release. But the fact that Putin thinks it's OK to take kids out of orphanages and away from their families just shows that evil we're dealing with and why it is so important for us to stand with Ukraine, the sovereign state that has taken all the bloodshed and basically stopped Putin from marching right through Ukraine to other allies, NATO countries.

Yeah, so number one, I found out about this issue through her. She had a resolution, I think, basically a Senate resolution condemning Putin for taking 19,000-plus kids out of occupied territory to send him to Russian, trying to turn him into Russians. I didn't really know anything about it, and I talked to Amy and a few others, and I said, can you list the bad things of this war that list is long? I put this near the top.

I mean, for any century, this is an outrage. Most people don't know that in the occupied territories of Ukraine, the Russians have separated Ukrainian children from their families, sent them back to Russia, put them in re-education camps, sent them to the front lines to fight for Russian and their Ukrainian kids, trying to wipe out their identity as Ukrainians, and I want the world to know about it. They cannot be adjusted into this war until these kids are accounted for. The issue of kids is something you two have partnered on a lot, even when it comes to tech.

The only issues I feel like where there's any bipartisan ship now is tech and Ukraine. That's what it feels like. Those are two big ones. Those are two big ones.

Yeah, but there's also a lot of areas of disagreement. Americans think that there's just so much stalemate in both parties, they don't trust Congress, they don't trust the media either. But how do you rebuild that trust? I just think your courage is not just saying by yourself giving a speech to an empty Senate chamber, but courage is whether or not you're willing to stand with someone you don't always agree with, for the betterment of this country.

And to me, that tech issue is literally the interests have pushed so hard that nothing has really passed, not a privacy law, and not any kind of liability when it comes to getting kids hooked on drugs, or seeing pornography. And Senator Cruz and I did pass in one bill this year with the president's support that they have to take down a non-consensual porn. And that is within 48 hours. But that's really the first one that's passed.

And so Senator Graham is thinking big on this from the beginning, is that they have to be responsible. And I joined him in those efforts. Yes, she did. And we're taking on the biggest companies into history of the world.

These companies make a gob of money through advertising. The more eyeballs, the more money they charge for ads. There was a time when we needed to make sure the internet would be up and running in flourish. Outborn didn't it, we want to make sure it worked.

Well, we've come to the point now where the dark side has to be dealt with. What is the mood like? I mean, you've both been here for a while. Is there just as much vitriol behind the scenes as it appears to be online and on television?

If you know Amy, she's very determined. She embraces her causes. And I like what I drew to the cause. And I like people who are passionate about what they do.

She's determined, and I'm determined, too, to hold a boot accountable for kidnapping 20,000 children. And when he says he had, he's a liar. And we can't end this war with this on a candidate for her. That's what happened again and again, when it comes to social media.

Every parent out there, grandparent, you know what we're talking about. I mean, she cares, I care. All of us care, but why a few people? A lot of people in politics now are new.

And the reward for solving problems is a lot less than for yelling. And I don't want to just be up here yelling all my life. I'd like to solve problems that matter to people. And you'll find out pretty quick in both caucuses who you can go to if you need to get something done.

That makes sense. And Amy is on top of the list. If you can convince her, this is Jessica, she'll jump in. I'd like to be considered somebody.

If you convinced me, it makes sense. I want to get outcomes. And I can't think of a better use of my time or her time than give relief to parents and grandparents suffering from their children, grandchildren. Having their lives turned up down by social media.

I can think of a better cause than trying to get 20,000 kids back with their family. So is that pool of lawmakers that Senator Graham was talking about? Is it growing or is it shrinking? It depends on different issues.

That's what's surprising people will work together. It happens all the time. You know, Wayne Paul's been working on the tariffs. There are an interesting group.

No more interesting. OK, so people do work across the aisle on different things. So I hope it's increasing. And I will say, when you ask about what it's like, people behind closed doors do have cordial relationships in the Senate.

There's only 100 of us. And it's part of it is, it's one thing to work together. But then don't go stab someone behind their back. If you disagree with them on something fine, or don't go trash them personally, you might disagree with their view.

But it can get when it gets like that. So that's for me, one of the lines in the sand. And I actually like to get things done. And I figure my constituents sent me to Washington to try to get something done not to fight all the time.

But things do get personal. I mean, you're very good friends with the president. You know that he makes some statements maybe. You don't even endorse.

But he does get personal. Does it make it harder to work with people in his party? Given? He's got it.

He's Trump. And he's going to be Trump. But you know, I think Melania's been great, right? She's shown the light on that thing.

President Trump would probably cheer lead this stuff. And you know, we need to give him a product this month for some. Go sit on him, Mr. President.

You've got a chance. If you get behind this, we'll get it to this. I think it's made it harder to get things done overall. But it hasn't changed my relationship with people in the Senate.

Next, a bipartisan pair of house lawmakers take us inside their fight to combat the opioid epidemic and its devastating toll on America's veterans. Stay with us. I'll meet the press now. We'll go back to our meet the press now, finding common ground special.

Our next bipartisan duo brings us back to the House, where North Carolina Republican Greg Murphy and Connecticut Democrat Joe Courtney have teamed up in an effort to combat the opioid epidemic and its impact on veterans. Here's their conversation with Kristen Welker. Well, I want to start with the legislation that you're co-sponsoring. It will address the opioid epidemic specifically among veterans.

Congressman Courtney, let me start with you. What does the HOPE Act into accomplish? So what it does is actually gets the VA very focused in terms of really trying to, you know, on a recurring basis, collect data so that the system and the country actually has a better understanding of the prevalence of opioid addiction in the veteran community. We know from sort of ad hoc reporting that it's significant.

There's incidents of service-connected injuries as well as PTSD, which sort of drives, you know, people who are in the veterans community towards the use of opioids and to self-edicate. And so, you know, it's a problem that really, we need to get our arms around so that we can come up with really better solutions to try and, you know, reduce that harmful impact. Well, Congressman Murphy, you are a doctor. Explain why the opioid epidemic is so devastating to the veteran community and what needs to happen in addition to this legislation.

Yeah, Kristen, you know, this has been something that obviously affects veterans more than a dozen civilian population. The overdose rate really is twice as many. And, you know, and we did a lot of great work a decade or so ago. I did a lot in the State House in trying to decrease the number of prescribing opioids, five physicians.

And there's been remarkable amounts that have been done with this that we decrease the number of prescribed opioids. But what we have happening is because veterans oftentimes, because of chronic pain, from traumatic injuries, et cetera, need to have some type of relief. And sadly enough, a lot of the unprescribed opioids, the ones on the market, the unsolicited, the fentanyl, all the other things are leading to overdose deaths also. So, looking to see why the VA is not addressing these, are they addressing these?

Really drilling down on why this component still is leading to the number, a tragic number of overdose deaths in our veteran population by partisan effort. We're really wanting to make sure that our veterans have taken care of, and we can try to get to the root cause of really why this is happening. Well, Congressman Courtney, I wonder what kinds of conversations you've had with your fellow lawmakers. Do you get the sense that there's enough support to get this out of the house?

I'm actually pretty optimistic. I mean, the space that we're talking about in terms of people who wear the uniform of this country and our veterans is a place where, you know, by and large is the most, you know, the best opportunity really to sort of turn down the partisanship and move a bill forward. Again, Greg and I both represent districts with large military installations. His is huge.

Mine has about 8,000 sailors up in Bratton, Connecticut. And so, you know, that's where, you know, having that experience, it kind of transcends party identification and your caucuses. And there's a lot more of that, I think, in both bodies, the House and the Senate, that I think gives me hope that we can move this bill. Congressman Murphy, how optimistic are you?

Do you think it can get done this year and get to the President's desk? I don't know about this year, Chris. We got a lot to worry about the work on this year. But, you know, as you pointed out, we have a lot of veterans actually now that serve in Congress probably more than we ever had before.

And so a lot of these individuals, male, female, depending on what branch they have, have great sympathy for their fellow veterans and the troubles that they go through, whether they range from PTSD, opioid addiction, or other disorders. There's a lot of wealth of sympathy, not only for civilians, veterans, and other folks that are in Congress. Understand that this is an issue that touches, you know, the opioid epidemic outside of veterans, touches every demographic that we have. And now specifically with our veterans, those who have served so much and sacrificed so much to serve our nation.

I think this is a huge bipartisan effort, and I'm very optimistic, as is Joe, that we get done probably early next year, I hope. Okay. Let me ask you about a big headline that we've been tracking. The federal bankruptcy court approving a settlement over the opioid epidemic with Purdue Farmer Pharma, I should say, which is the maker of Oxycodone, its owners, the Sackler family.

As a part of the settlement, just for our viewers to fill them in, the Sacklers have to contribute up to $7 billion over 15 years and also relinquish ownership of Purdue. Congress recording Purdue Pharma is based in your home state of Connecticut. Are you satisfied with the terms of this agreement? So this has been a really long journey for the families and the plaintiffs in the class action.

I think as you know, I mean, prior settlement, you know, milestones seem to be the end of the case, and the good news is that actually the judges and the courts rejected what was on the table, Attorney Generals, I think weighed in representing their various states and communities. So this latest iteration is definitely a better product in terms of really reaching more people. You know, obviously, there's going to be, I think, a pretty deep hearing at the bankruptcy court and the parties are going to have an opportunity to weigh in. People can opt out if they still feel that they want to have their day in court, but at some point, you know, I think everybody's looking for sort of an end game here so that, you know, we can get the help out to people and to communities who really allow the brought in terms of caring for people.

So they get actually compensated. Congressman Murphy, quickly, what was your reaction to this settlement? You know, this started in the late 80s when people were saying physicians were not treating pain well enough and Purdue Pharma came out with this new medicine, OxyContin that was going to cure all, save all, not be addictive. And they lied to physicians, and they lied to the American public, and it created the biggest epidemic, obviously, that we've had as far as medication goes.

Is it enough? I don't know, that remains to be seen, but it's a long, long overdue, and this needs to be some form of justice for those who have been harmed so badly over this horrible horrible 30 plus years. Absolutely. Well, I want to just zoom out and talk to you broadly about bipartisanship here.

Both of you are co-sponsoring this legislation. What are each of you doing to foster bipartisanship in other areas? Congressman Murphy, why don't you start? Yeah, no, over half of my bills easily.

The majority of my bills are bipartisan in nature. And sadly, and I mean, this is just a point blank. The media, the social media, I think, is really one of the root causes that we have of severe horrible partisanship that we see in this country. We also have members who love the camera, chase the camera, who love to say crazy things, and cause divisiveness.

Joe and I are here to do the work of the people, as should, every member of Congress. And sadly enough, sometimes the headlines are made for those who want to cause partisanship. I think this nation does not want that any longer. And I'm glad to be able to work across the aisle to make things for the American people that we all need.

Congressman Courtney? So yeah, I mean, Greg's right. I would note there actually is more of my partisanship happening than sometimes people are aware of. I mean, I have constituents who are almost shocked here that I work with a Republican counterpart on the armed services, me, Trent Kelly, from Mississippi, who politics are different, but we work together on a whole bunch of measures regarding the Navy and the Marine Corps and veterans.

So we've just been through a pretty rough moment here in terms of the shutdown. My sense, just again, being back here in town is a lot of us, and a lot of people are just sort of exhausted. But I mean, I'm ready to sort of get this budget done for FY26. And as Greg said, I think a lot of us now are really sort of scrubbing through bills that have been pending during the last few months or so to really try and see if you can find ones that are going to move quickly, like the Hope Act, hopefully, which really, it's hard to imagine that there's really going to be opposition to any significant amount.

So, but frankly, it takes an effort and people really have to kind of decide that that's what they should do, and frankly, that's what the American people desperately want. Well, picking up on this point and find a question to both of you, if you could talk to each of your conferences, what advice would you give them to turn the temperature down? Congressman Courtney, why don't you start this time? Sure, so I mean, look at being in the minority, but still, I think that if you look at the portfolio that we all have here, there's so much work to be done in a whole host of issues, which really, it doesn't take a lot of effort to find places where there is consensus, and hopefully the committee chairs and the ranking members will really look at their backlog of bills and kind of been introducing, we're now like 6,000 or 7,000 house bills that have been introduced.

There's a lot of meat on the bone here that we really could move forward on, and I think actually maybe get some good momentum in this place about the fact that Greg and I standing here, you know, I don't bite, he doesn't bite, we can work together as people from different parties. Well, Chris, I would say that, and to Joe's point, the American public wouldn't realize this, but I think about 80% of us could agree on 85% of things. It's the folks that are on the far extremes that you hear about from the most, that cause the most noise, that get the most attention from the American public. They don't see, you know, from the news media, you don't see the people behind the scenes that are working so hard on the average things, they don't see the bipartisanship, they don't see people working in committee work or outside committee work, actually to get things done on a bipartisan basis.

I wish, I would say this to you, I wish the American media would show more of that, and that's a welcome thing, if you guys are doing that, I applaud that tremendously. Well, and having the two of you here, so significant to talk about this bipartisan legislation that you're co-sponsoring, we hope to have more of these conversations. Congressman Joe Courtney and Greg Murphy, thank you both so much for your time and your perspectives. Thanks, Chris, and thank you.

And after the break, we'll hear from members of Congress coming together to find ways to help small businesses deal with big changes in the age of artificial intelligence. Keep it here, I'm at the press now. We'll go back to our Finding Common Ground special, turning now to a bipartisan pair of lawmakers working to help small businesses embrace and use the power of AI. My colleague Ryan Nobles recently spoke to Democratic Congresswoman Hillary Shoulton of Michigan and Republican Congressman Troy Downing of Montana about their bipartisan legislation that would require the small business administration to develop resources to help smaller companies be more AI literate.

Here is that conversation. Thank you guys for both for being here. I appreciate it. It's always good to get people from both sides of the aisle talking about an issue that they're working on together.

Congressman, talk to me about this legislation, the AI-Ys Act. Why is it so important? And how do you think it's going to help small businesses? The AI revolution is not just coming.

It is here. Almost 50% of small businesses report that they use AI in some form or another. Compare that to the fact that a recent Deloitte study analyzed that close to 80% of CEOs in this country believe that AI will shape the future of business. But two-thirds say, we're not ready.

So think about that. The vast majority agree. This is going to shape the future of how we do business, but also the vast majority saying, we're not ready for it. And that's because if you delay in adopting these AI tools, you get left behind, right?

Your business gets left behind. But also, if you take advantage in the wrong way, you open yourself up to all kinds of risk and liability. So we need the SBA to be doing its job, providing the critical tools that small businesses need to educate themselves on how to use AI wisely. And there's another component in this requirement because a small business, if I'm not mistaken, employs more people than any other industry.

Absolutely. Especially in my state. Absolutely. But there's also a worry, right, that AI's going to take some of these small business jobs as well, right?

So the Congresswoman talks about how you've got to be able to adapt it in an AI world. But then how also do you kind of combat this idea that it's going to take jobs away? Well, we've seen this many times in humanity. I mean, you see some new technology.

You think it's going to destroy one industry. There's always something else that comes out of it. And AI, for me, it's so exciting, the opportunity that you have there. It's also so scary at the same time and how you navigate this.

Because you see a lot of foresters and bad actors who are adopting and using this a lot more quickly than you see business and small businesses. And they need to be able to keep up and understand this. And so having educational tools out there for them through the SBA, I think, is incredibly important. So that they have the resources to figure out how to use it and what it's going to do.

But to your question on whether this displaces workers, I think it shifts workers. I mean, and at the end of the day, as you start to see these tools develop and get stronger and faster, there's always going to be the question on, where's the humanity, where are the poets and philosophers? Where's the human part of this? As you're solving problems for businesses and still need that human part to maintain our humanity as we create these opportunities for small businesses.

It's interesting you talk about adapting, right? Because I think small business, I think mom and pop, right? I remember my father-in-law ran a law firm and never had email, right? Because that's how they possibly retired about four or five years ago.

So it's part of that as well, right? Like teaching these small business owners who have done things a certain way for a long time to adapt into these terms. And that's exactly right, because as we say, it's coming whether we like it or not. In fact, it's already here.

And so we don't view it as taking jobs away, but rather teaching people how to keep these jobs just in a new and more tech-friendly format. So many people are already using the tools of AI. They might just not realize it or know how to use them properly. So what this bill is going to do is help the platform of the Small Business Administration be able to help small business owners to use this wisely, appropriately, and safer.

Yeah, and one of the things, obviously, this is one tool of a huge toolbox for dealing with this. But I want to form a regulator, securities insurance regulator, and trying to understand how AI-affected insurance rating, how it affected these large industries, was always an interesting issue. Because as soon as you get prescriptive, as soon as you put something down on paper, it becomes irrelevant because it's just evolving so quickly. So how to be concepts-based?

And I think a big part of this education in these tools is to think about concepts and how this can be used, how this can make your business more efficient, how you can answer questions more quickly. I mean, there's so many things that you can do with this. But again, one of the problems with the evolutionary cycle of this is we're getting to the point now where AI can write AI. It's going to evolve faster than we can keep up.

So how do you keep that concept-based education so you're thinking correctly about this without putting something prescriptive that is irrelevant as soon as you put it on paper? At that end, does Congress need to do more to regulate AI? Absolutely, and I think that this is not the end point of what we're hoping to do. And several other committees are hoping to weigh in here.

First and foremost, we need a foundational data privacy bill. It's been in the works for quite some time. But absent that, we're not going to wait and prevent small business owners from having the tools that they need to protect themselves. So absolutely, Congress needs to do more.

We're planning to do more on the small business committee. There was a tandem bill that was already introduced alongside that, passed out of committee by partisan AI for Main Street Act. On a committee that I'm the ranking member on as well, we're going to have a hearing in the new year on digital currency, which is another emerging technology emerging platform that so many entrepreneurs and small businesses are using. Yeah, but one of the problems that we need to be cognizant of is if you need to have cyborgs or need to be cyborgs, so we need to decide where those cyborgs are.

But they can't be so restrictive that you start forcing innovation elsewhere. Because we'll lose that race if we're too restrictive on that. Because we need to make sure we're encouraging innovation here, but really asking hard questions of how do we need to get the tools out there and the protections out there in industries, for consumers, for businesses. I mean, it's just so widespread.

But the reality of it is, is if we put too many restrictions, we're going to be left in the dust by adversaries. I just think it's refreshing sitting here at cover cover cover every day. So you're a Republican and a Democrat nod while the others making a point. This is an issue where you guys obviously have common ground.

Are there more issues that we don't realize that Republicans and Democrats have common ground up there? There's so much. People get stuck on, when you put on the jersey, you're on social media, and everybody gets upset about what divides us, and nobody gets excited about what connects us. And we find these things.

And so there's bills that I've brought where I have Democrat co-sponsors that really, we have very little in common, but we found some consensus where we both are passionate about it, and we get that through. And I've got examples of that in the Financial Services Committee where we got it through unanimously and got it through unanimous consent off the House floor. So that happens. It's just not exciting to people who are looking for things that anger them in headlines on social media.

I mean, that is an issue for you, though, right? Sometimes the base of your party, they can get upset if they see you working with the Republican, right? How do you message that to show them that ultimately it's good for the country? I think it's good for our districts.

It's good for our country. Back home in West Michigan, people want to see me working in their best interests, Republican or Democrat. It doesn't matter. I'm the first Democrat in the century to hold this important seat I serve in the legacy of Gerald Ford, and bringing that civility back to the work that we do is essential.

But you're right. It doesn't always sell headlines. I remember when I passed my first bipartisan bill out of the house, and I walked down with my Republican colleague, walked down the steps, and the cameras were flanked around a very controversial member of Congress who's no longer with us in the House. And we thought, this is what the American people see and what they think Congress is.

But what we just did was to transform the way it was small business bill. The way small businesses can access capital. And that type of work happens every single day. If people are there to look for it and see it, and we're going to keep delivering on those things, because it matters now more than ever.

OK, now we're going to have to leave it there. I appreciate you guys both being here. Let's see more examples of this as we go forward. Thanks for having us, man.

Thank you for being here. And still to come, health care, rising costs, the race for control of Congress and in New York City. We're looking ahead to another pivotal year in politics. The panel joins me next on Meet the Press Now.

Well, the back of joining me now is our panel. Tarrant Rosenkranz is a Democratic strategist and CEO of New Blue Interactive. And Malik Abdul is a Republican strategist. We've got such a good panel.

We only need two of you today, instead of our usual three. Tarrant, we've been talking about bipartisanship, this whole broadcast. I'm curious if you think it's harder for lawmakers to find this kind of bipartisanship in our current environment, or if we were having this conversation in like 1996, or 1986, if we'd still be saying the same thing. Right, right, right.

I do think with social media, we actually just have a conversation. So you might sound familiar. But I think the social media is a little bit harder to be able to get across the people, because people can get so much more riled up and angry very quickly, because they're curing curated content. But I do think that these members of Congress right now are facing a very tough time.

If you're a moderate Republican, you're kind of getting nervous and biting your nails a little bit. So I think there's a lot more reaching across the aisle and they're trying to get back to a little bit more civility. I think I heard while I was watching this, the word civility. Quite a bit.

Definitely the buzzword of the week. Definitely the buzzword. And I do think everybody's intent is there to try to make this a little better, because they realize they're not getting anything done without it. Do you think some more bipartisanship would reverse our retirement crisis that we're seeing on Capitol Hill?

I mean, people are headed for the exit. It's getting more stuff down across the aisle and undo some of that problem. I'm not exactly sure, because we really were talking about it. I think it's more than just getting things done in Congress.

I think that is the toxic climate that has been created. So even if things are happening in Congress, it will be seen through the lens of, well, the your side did it or my side didn't appreciate it. So that's why it is so toxic. And social media really has played a very huge role in that.

My hope is, is that things like health care, all of these things, there's so much bipartisanship that can happen, but lawmakers probably are going to have to just maybe be a little bold and not listen to so many of the loud voices online. And to that end, I was struck just watching this broadcast. We didn't see a single member of leadership in any of these bipartisan pairs, right? Right, I mean, these are rank and file members.

Is that where this kind of thing is going to come from? I do think that's the case. I think right now that's part of the reason they're having trouble getting anything done is because we've got very much extremism from the White House all the way down. And so I think you're trying to see on the Democratic side, I will say, they're trying to be more moderate.

They're trying to come together. They're trying to reach across out. But it's hard because there's a lot of like rage and a lot of anger that is just from the public right now. And they know that and they're trying to harness that while still get things done.

And how much of this is going to change in the midterm year where, in some cases, it's better to be seen, losing on an issue that you can then run on. I think about Republicans on immigration. John Corning used to sell the time. There was a issue which they never failed to fail.

And then Republicans could run on every cycle. You're probably going to have a number of people, not a lot, and more so in the House and in the Senate, who are going to probably just kind of distance themselves from Donald Trump. And we saw that from Barack Obama administration to Biden administration, because there are some things. They're the swing districts.

And the Republican party has to be concerned about that. And because we know that affordability will be on the ballot. And not just what you pay at the pump or what you pay at the supermarket, but also the huge deal around health care. I think that if Republicans and Democrats, I think both sides will ultimately be blamed for it if there is not an answer to this health care crisis.

And we're getting ready for another budget battle, I believe, on January 30th. I want to turn you on health care, but I'm curious, do you think that distancing from Trump effects would kill the prospect of any other reconciliation bill where you would need every Republican, basically? Is that just a non-starter in a midterm year? Yeah, probably.

Yeah, I would say that. On the flip side of reconciliation, we have this weird dynamic that we're seeing now in this House, which is these discharge petitions where Democrats are like taking control of the House. We're going to see that on this health care vote here coming up. Talk to me about the political imperatives around this for Democrats.

Getting something passed in the House does not guarantee any action whatsoever in the Senate. The Democrats are trying to get caught trying to solve this problem at this point. I think right now they feel this urgent crisis. I mean, we know this is happening, we know it's just going to be more expensive for your health care, for your health insurance, every aspect of this.

And this idea that they are, you know, Trump saying affordability is a hoax and they're all trying to ignore it. I think they have to do everything they can to mark their ground and their territory. We're trying something. We're trying every avenue.

And if they don't, they're going to get blamed by the American people the same way you're saying. They got to be careful of that. So I think they really do need to kind of get out there. I'm very curious about this point.

The idea that Democrats would be blamed by the American people for this. Republicans never feel this way when they're in the minority. If they don't get what they want, they say go vote over Republicans. I think Democrats have this like thing.

It's like we have to govern. You control nothing. Why do Democrats feel like this is their problem to solve as opposed to just go run on in November? I do think the Democratic Party tends to be the one that's blamed more often for everything.

It's like, and so I do think that they react to that, right? And I do think there's a very much an anti-incumbent sort of movement right now in this country. And I think that's what they're kind of responding to. That's why you're seeing so many retirements, whether it's Democrats or Republicans.

It's because they're realizing this is a big headwind, and it's going to be hard to get past it. And I do think that Democrats, and I'm not just saying this because they do have this absolute desire to govern. It is like a policy long nerd that they just can't get past. So they're trying their best to use the law.

Let's do this the right way. And that comes from a good place. And obviously they're trying to do it. I want to make sure we talk about the other big political story today.

Zoramandani sworn in today as New York City Mayor. He's a Republican's favorite Democrat to campaign against I think in this moment. So I'm going to let you respond to this. I want to listen to some of his speech from today.

Today, we will govern expansively and audaciously. We may not always succeed, but never will we be accused of lacking the courage to try. I was elected as a Democratic Socialist, and I will govern as a Democratic Socialist. I will not abandon my principles for fear of being deemed radical.

I feel like I could hear our colleagues upstairs at Fox News in this building reacting to that in real time. But I'm curious what your take is on this. Are we going to hear that sound by it again and again? And again this year?

I was going to say, let the church say amen, because we are going to run that clip over and over again, and we're going to tie him to every single thing that's wrong with the country. Now the reality is that we've always made the New York mayor. I'm kind of old enough to remember that. We've kind of made every New York mayor.

This is what's going to happen, and the bottom is going to fall out of it. That kind of is what's happening in Chicago, because it's a similar candidate, with Brandon Johnson, the mayor of Chicago. I'm not convinced that this is going to happen, even though we're going to run against it for sure. I'm not convinced that we're going to see gloom and doom.

The Republicans will need a new Nancy Pelosi. You will need a new boogeyman. Zoram and Dami can play some of that role. To that point, I was struck also by the fact that you have Bernie Sanders there swearing in.

And what does it say about the manner in which Dami considers his new role? There's a senator from Vermont there for his public swearing in. I know, and it's funny because I say this all the time, but we're a big tent party. So there's always going to be room for everyone under the tent.

And so you're going to see that this is a part of the Democratic Party who is there, and you're seeing that they're all there. This is also New York City. So I do think most people do not associate themselves with New York City. So if you're like, yeah, they got a socialist mayor there, and you're going to be like, OK, well, that's not.

I don't even know what a socialist is, right? And I think Bernie needs to support, and they're trying to support the socialist movement. And they're trying to feed upon what is happening everywhere, which is this populist maga movement wanted the same thing as the socialist. They actually want things to be more affordable.

And that's what it is. It's going to be a fascinating dynamic. And it's a White House correspondent. I'm just looking forward to him coming back to the Oval Office.

That was an incredible television. I'm Taryn and Malik. Thank you both for coming in. Happy New Year to you.

And thank you all for being with us and watching on this New Year's Day. We will be back tomorrow with more Meet the Press Now. And there's more head on NBC News Now. It's here.

The Ford is a big deal. Not yet. The Ford is a big deal. Oh, guys, just wait.

The Ford is a big deal event is on. Really? Now, hurry into least a 2026 Maverick XLT hybrid all-wheel drive for $197 by weekly at 5.29% APR for $6 with $29.95 down. That's like $99 a week.

The Ford is a big deal event. Visit your Ontario Ford store or Ford.ca.