tv Charlie Rose Bloomberg April 26, 2017 10:00pm-11:01pm EDT
♪ announcer: from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." charlie: we continue tonight with our coverage leading up to president trump's 100th day in office that comes this saturday, april 29. the president has continued backpedaling on his ambitions ahead of the milestone that he now calls an artificial barrier. this departs from the campaign when he promised to achieve a range of accomplishments by this time in his presidency. it included building a border wall with mexico, replacing obamacare, and tax reform. the president revealed plans to cut corporate taxes to 15% from the current rate of just over 39%.
during free -- and joining me alz theshington is dan b , chief correspondent at the washington post, thank you for doing this. everyone is asking the same question of you and everyone else. to hear it from you is important. how do we assess these hundred days leading into the beginning to the time we are now in this presidency? dan: we address it with some caution because it is only 100 days. we address it with some concern because of the kinds of problems the trump team and the president have run into. i think it is a little premature as it always is at this stage to draw conclusions about what this ultimately means for his presidency. but they have done a lot of things wrong. they've got some things that they can point to, that they will point to as successes.
overall, this is been a very rough and rocky days for them. first 100 charlie: successes include the confirmation of a supreme court justice. some say the syrian air strike was a success. what else? dan: i would say that from their point of view, some of the things they have done on the immigration front. put aside the fact that the border wall is not in process at this point. but the actions they have taken are consistent with what we have -- with what he talked about in the campaign. by some measures, they cut down on illegal immigration. they have created alarm within the hispanic community. i am not suggesting that they are not without negative consequence. they would say this is what we came in to do, what we said we would do. they have signaled on the issue of trade that they are going to be much tougher than the past administrations have been.
unraveling the north american free trade agreement, simply stepping away from tpp. it does not necessarily change things. onhink what they have done teel, the on s aggression on the canadians on lumber, signal a pretty genetic change. on that one they would say we are keeping our promise. charlie: i think so, too. the chinese just yesterday talked to some prominent -- this relationship, they are listening to each other. that is a positive thing. dan: i think that is right. they have stepped away from the campaign promise to label the chinese a currency manipulator. if you talk to people, he did not fulfill that promise. the answer that comes back is well the chinese are working , with us on north korea.
why would we not want that to happen? and if the currency manipulation issue were to get in the way of that, that is not worth the cost of it. they see the north korea issue as a much bigger and more serious problem. i think they think they are developing a working relationship with the chinese that could perhaps bear fruit. charlie: i think it was a republican who said this because , of what happened in whatever number of days -- 90 and counting. a republican said that they no longer say that donald trump views vladimir putin the same way he did as a great leader. , he believes there's a lot of room for russia and the united states early on to work together against terrorism and other issues. dan: that is exactly right. the question is, was it circumstances that created this new view of russia in his mind? perhaps that is the case.
but the talk in early january about a president that had cozied up to vladimir putin, you don't hear that much anymore. those around him, whether it is secretary tillerson or secretary others have been very , tough in their language on putin. there is a different situation there. obviously, he was hoping there could be a different relationship with the russians because of his desire to do something to eradicate isis. but a lot of other things have intervened to get in the way of that. he is in a different place on that. charlie: even though he talks down the 100 day standard, they -- you really is working hard to have a big week to take credit for a lot of things. dan: i think that is right. he is a person who prizes success. he wants the best ratings every time. he wants the best report card of 100 days.
peter baker of the new york times wrote a very good piece today that said, he thinks the idea of these report cards at 100 days is ridiculous, but nonetheless, he wants an a plus for his first 100 days. there is a lot of truth on that. the void they are aware of, they have done things on executive orders, some things on foreign policy, but they do not yet have that big legislative achievement. even getting some big piece of legislation through one chamber. ie, the health care bill. that stands as a void and they know they will be downgraded for that. they are trying to force people to look at other things they have done. here we have done this, there we have done that. do not only look at the legislation. they would dearly love to have a vote on the health care bill go through this week. it is not clear that that will
happen. charlie: why are they so insistent on that? a gave him a lot of problems. not only was there no democratic support, there is division within the republican party. dan: that is the problem they run into on a number of these things, but particularly on the health care front. you cannot lay the entirety of the failure of the house to pass health care on the white house. they may have contributed to it or they may not have been able to resolve it, but that is a long-standing division within the republican party that they, frankly, inherited. they have not found a strategy to overcome it. i think they are hoping it will organically resolve itself, that the members of the house will find a way to work themselves through it and that the white house can ratify it. every time they seem like they may be getting close, there is some hitch that gets in the way. i don't know how to predict they -- when they will actually get to that vote. everybody is still confident that at some point they will get
it through the house and move it on to the senate. but who knows when? charlie: there is a question of how many things are part of what -- are seen our continuing issues that have nothing to do with a specific legislative goal, but have do with overall performance of a presidency. what can we say about those kinds of factors? you can look at staff staff , shakeup, solidification of speaking with one voice. of eliminating and minimizing distractions. all those kinds of things. do we see that happening? do we see a president who is learning, do we see a president who is listening? dan: charlie, as i talk to people this week about that i , get mixed reviews. some people would say he has learned that the presidency is far different from a campaign and different from running a big business. some would say that the white house today is a little bit more
subtle than it was weeks ago. sixother people say, if i see donald trump as president, it's the same donald trump i saw in the campaign. in some ways, that surprises me most. normally you think a president that comes in with a lack of experience would begin to operate differently because of the constraints built into the presidency and the traditions and conventions that go along with it. and in many ways, people will say, look, he's very much the same person that he was. that could be concerning. the other thing we know about donald trump is that the conventional ways that we have judged past presidents or past presidential candidates don't necessarily apply to donald trump. i think that is why it's a little bit difficult to render any real conclusion. there is no question this is a white house that has had more palace intrigue and seemingly infighting in the early days. is that a function of the fact
that no one was really empowered at the outset to bring order to it? has that changed? has the relationship between steve bannon and jared kushner changed in a way that will bring a more harmonious white house? i think those are still open questions. there have been changes in the balance and the structure there. it comes after some very difficult weeks and months. charlie: the idea of predictability and being unpredictable is either an asset or a risk. how do you assess that? dan: we know what the president believes. we know he believes that unpredictability is valuable. particularly in foreign policy. the leaders of other nations would say, they do not necessarily agree with that. in many ways, they want to know that there is predictability, particularly about a president
who has said a lot of things during the campaign that were alarming to others in the world. and who is still a relatively novice in terms of making foreign-policy decisions. the other area of unpredictability that continues to cause problems, he can be unpredictable to the people working most closely with him as he was last week when they -- when he announced they would unveil their tax plan on wednesday. this obviously caught people by surprise. they do not have a fully formed tax plan, from everything we know. they're going to have some key elements of it. but this is not a plan that is ready to go to the congress in terms of the legislative language. charlie: great to have you. back in a moment. stay with us. ♪ charlie: john kasich is here,
the governor of ohio. he is a former presidential candidate and served nine terms in the house of representatives. and he chaired the house budget committee for six years and and spent 18 years on the armed services committee. he and he reflects on the 2016 presidential campaign in a new book called "two paths: america divided or united." it comes out of a speech he made. i am pleased to have him back on this program. gov. kasich: thank you, charlie. charlie: you made a speech and i
assume what is here is a fundamental sense of where the country is and where the country ought to go. gov. kasich: that's exactly what it is. i didn't know that i was going to -- i've written -- this is the fourth book. i did not know i was going to do this. charlie, i'm so worried about where our country is going for two reasons. i love my country. twins,, my daughters are they are 17 years old. it has become coarser and more divided. we can't have this if we are going to be a great country again. gov. kasich: we will talk about coarser, then divided. coarser meaning what? gov. kasich: think about united airlines and how they yanked that guy off that plane. they were treating him like he was some sort of a widget. there was no sense of his being a human being with hurts and loves and cares and struggles. we see that in a lot of ways.
i find this amusing -- i took up swimming after the olympics because i wanted to look like those guys. charlie: like michael phelps? gov. kasich: or any of them. charlie: the wing span of about 10 feet. gov. kasich: i understand. i dropped my phone in the pool and i had to get it replaced. i went to verizon and they made me wait. they gave me another phone. this was recently. charlie: the governor had to wait? gov. kasich: if you go to verizon, you will have to wait, too. i said what do i oh you? they said nothing, we made you wait and inconvenienced you. i said it is so nice of you. the manager said this is really nothing. a week ago, a lady brought her smartphone in and it was broken. we fixed it and it was our fault. when i give it back to her she said to me, what do i owe you? nothing. she started to cry. she said, nobody treats anybody
with this kind of kindness where i live. i think there is that sort of rushing past people and i think we are more coarse. charlie: famously talking about the coarseness and also the dumbing down of everything about what we do. the lowest common denominator. it is part of that, too. gov. kasich: it is. i don't want to say that we are in some sort of apocalypse here, but the drift is not where i would like it to be. i pay a lot of attention to young people, too. i watch what they do. some of them get it and some of them don't. i talked to people that have authority where they are. listen, if a young person is particularly polite and respectful -- i walked into a gym the other day. i think that's where i was. this young guy must've been 18, 19. how's it going, man.
i was leaving and he said, have a nice day. i said, can i give you some advice? you do not say somebody as much older as i am then you are how's , it going, man? you need to say, sir, how are you today? i will tell you why. when you do that, you will stand out. you will so get my attention. i will help you with your career. charlie: you said we have lost our sense of unity and purpose. gov. kasich: families are fighting each other over politics. people gave a bowling and took up politics and now they are too strident about it or consume only the news that they agree with. they feel entitled to be strong about what they believe. i'm all for that. but i'm not for the inability to look at someone else's point of view. and what i'm not for is a certain anger that is embedded in that. i have been a populist republican which in some ways is unusual.
i grew up a democrat, blue-collar, working-class environment. populism is sort of the name of the game. charlie: how is it defined? gov. kasich: you want to think about the middle class. think about the working folks. you want them to get a square deal, including those that live in the shadows. they need the opportunity to rise and realize their potential. when i see the republicans continuing to worry about cutting the taxes for the very rich, i wonder, what are we worried about? are they not doing well enough? what about the middle class what , about folks at the bottom? when i cut the income tax in ohio, we created an earned income tax credit. the first time we ever did that in ohio because you want everybody to have a sense that they can get somewhere. that they can get ahead. back in the days when i was in congress, i was a reformer of the pentagon. in the republican party it was if we can reform welfare for the , poor, we ought to reform welfare for the pentagon and the
rich. i fought the issue of corporate welfare. i have a positive view of things. there are populist, we saw some of this out of our president, negative populists. you have problems and someone else created them for you. and you have been taken advantage of. charlie: and thirdly, i will take care of it all. gov. kasich: charlie: i will take care of it all. i will be a voice and take care of it all. gov. kasich: which we know you can't do. but we live in an environment where a bumper sticker -- let me take this pill and i will feel better. life doesn't work with quick fixes. charlie: what has shaped your own views about government? about the relationship between government and people about , significant public policy issues? is it the way you grew up, the education you had, the experience in politics? i would assume a lot of those
basic values were shaped before you got into politics. you got in pretty young. gov. kasich: my mother was something. she was very intelligent, very articulate, and very opinionated. i used to say that she was a pioneer in talkshow radio or radio talk. people say, why was that? i said someone on the radio , would say something and she would yell at the radio. she always said, johnny, tell it like it is. my father was a postman and knew -- always had a twinkle in his eye and you everything going on. i'm probably a combination. but more melded than i used to be because i was so much more outspoken. charlie, i have changed. i've gotten older. i've examined my life after my parents were tragically killed by a drunk driver. i was 35 years old. in search of who i was and what i'm about. my relationship to the creator
and is there a creator, and all those kinds of things. then becoming governor. i have 11.5 million people. when people in my state hurt, i hurt. i can't really explain it to you. i tell you, i was writing with one of the guys that looks after me. one of the guys in the highway patrol. we came up to a corner and there in the grassting and the dart. he seemed to be combing his hair. i was telling the story last night. the more looked at him he had a cigarette lighter and he was burning, that is how he was giving himself a haircut. i looked at the trooper and said you see that guy over there? , that is your brother. he's my brother, too. and this is a good thing, to feel like this. charlie: you said during the campaign in 2016 that you had
the most, sort of, open reflective attitude towards the voters. reaching out to them, listening to them, wanting to have a dialogue with them. donald trump primarily had huge rallies. it was very successful. he won. gov. kasich: my wife said to me, and i've been saying this for a number of interviews, i was in a rocky start as a governor because i was acting like a congressman in the governor's office. john, you're the governor of ohio. you are the father of ohio act , like it. we have taken on some incredible issues. people talk about medicaid expansion, which i did. it was very controversial but if i can help 700,000 people. we did another thing that is really incredible. i have a lady by the name of nina turner who is an african-american liberal former state senator who heads a task
force along with the head of our highway patrol on the issue of community and police. we put the first policy and on the use of deadly force. we will now have a reporting on all stops police have inside of our state. we have policies now on recruiting and hiring. we brought the police and the community together. that is really something and there is no other state doing that. charlie: you are the governor of a state and you have good poll numbers. why didn't you do better? gov. kasich: it's the craziest thing. first of all, here i was congressman, budget committee , chairman, pretty high profile in washington. almost 10 years at fox. and then governor of ohio. i went to new hampshire. you know what my name id was? 2%. no one knew who i was. i figured out that being in the midwest, nobody comes there. they might come into a story, but if you are shunning the government down in washington, reporters fall out of bed to
cover you. if you are in the new york media market, they cover you. charlie: more governors have been elected and senators. gov. kasich: it has changed, charlie. so i was unknown. i go to new hampshire and do 106 town hall meetings and to the shock of everyone, i finished i second. beat everybody other than trump. the ability to be there and connect resulted in success. wherever i could do it i did well. i won manhattan, by the way. charlie: suppose if you started earlier? gov. kasich: i could not raise the money, either. charlie: the town hall thing made a big difference for you. gov. kasich: but it was a grassroots growth thing in new hampshire. if you look at what happened when we got to the northeast, i finished second everywhere. but the trump juggernaut was just rolling. i thought that it was possible if i could hang in there that he would not get the delegates, go to the convention, have a be contested, and they would pick somebody else. turned out i was wrong.
he rolled and he couldn't be stopped. i was not going to be in there just to disrupt and lose my message. charlie: you didn't go to the convention. gov. kasich: i did not. charlie: which happened to be held in what city? gov. kasich: cleveland. can you imagine was that -- what that was like? charlie: did he call you up and say, please come? gov. kasich: no, he called and asked me if i would endorse him. are twoook, we companies and people want us to merge but we have different values, different visions, different structure, different way of doing things. when that is the case, as you know in business, mergers don't happen. charlie: mergers involving companies of different cultures don't work. gov. kasich: correct. i made this speech in new york , and i wouldhs really like you to read it. he believes politicians are malleable. unlike when they say things it does not matter. charlie: he were to that way as a businessman.
gov. kasich: well, charlie, i've got to tell you there are a heck of a lot of republicans that i did not endorse and had nothing to do with it. some think politics is transactional. say whatever you want and tomorrow is another day. i think that is baloney. charlie: you said you are not a pol but you are a politician. gov. kasich: i'm not sure that i really said i'm not a politician. that's the job i have. but i don't determine what i will do by checking in with the republican national committee. i do my job and i look at things like my mother would've wanted me to. look at something, be honest about it, get good advice then , make a decision. being an executive in this job it is challenging, but it's not , hard. i don't search around saying, if i do this, how is the wind going to blow. i look at it and let the chips fall where they may. charlie: how much trading between ohio -- gov. kasich: there is some, but
we have a lot of trade with germany and great britain. we are interested in a relationship with china. charlie: is donald trump on the right track with china? gov. kasich: which track is he on? charlie: he is having a negotiation, saying we have to change he got out of tpp. , gov. kasich: i was totally opposed to that. i thought the the asian trade agreement -- i did like it. the reason is not only because , of commerce and the potential to expand it but because of the strategic side. now we worry about asia. we walked away from those countries. i was clear about that fact. i went to the oval office with president obama to try to get him to pass it. i do agree with donald trump and i said during the campaign, if a country is going to cheat us on trade and we let them get away with it, we are crazy. charlie: that is what donald trump says. we want a level playing field. we are not going to tolerated anymore.
gov. kasich: and when it isn't, we need a mechanism to stop the flow into our country that takes people's jobs. because by the time that trade bureaucracy gets done hearing the cases even when we win, , we've lost the jobs. i think an expedited process to look at trade in a fair way is good. but free, open trade is critical. we live in a global world we , can't go hide. we can't be threatening people charlie: brexit. gov. kasich: i don't agree with it -- let's talk about brexit, though. here is the problem with brexit. these were institutions that got sclerosis. these things became bureaucratic. they were not responsive. if an organization is not responsive they can lock up and meltdown. i would tell you a lot of people thought brexit wasn't going to pass and they didn't go to the polls. the reason why it happened was frustration with the bureaucracy.
charlie: young people that supported remain, they did not go to the polls. the older people with tensions, they went to the polls. gov. kasich: the fear of trade and competition means consumers pay more and products are not very good. what happened when japanese cars came into this country? they said the japanese would take over america. american cars got better. competition is good. unfair competition is just silly. if we are playing golf -- charlie: have we not? gov. kasich: we have been. and that is why i have been concerned about -- charlie: what donald trump did, and you can correct me because you were in the battle. what he did was convinced those people that were factory workers in the middle class of america, convinced them that he was going
to save their jobs. that what he would do would save their jobs. gov. kasich: how's it going? charlie: he pointed to people that were villains and he said that he would stop them. gov. kasich: i didn't say that, charlie. you're asking me why didn't i win? low name id and being governor handicapped me because i wasn't going to make wild promises. charlie: the republican party needs ohio. gov. kasich: i beat donald trump in ohio soundly. we were competitive in michigan. i didn't win. it was a unique time. but by being responsible and not making wild promises that i couldn't keep, i became a boring candidate. on the iran deal, i will rip it up on day one. what would you do? i would have to see. that didn't get anybody interested. i've never been boring in my life, but it's fine.
and now i think i have credibility. charlie: we will see if donald trump rips it up or not. gov. kasich: he didn't rip it up on first day. charlie: he's been in office less than -- gov. kasich: they set on the first day. charlie: but he did not say i was wrong about not liking the iran deal. gov. kasich: is the iranians not only violate the litter but the spirit of it, we can't look the other way. we can't do it. it's not as though i can say we can trust iran or anyone else. but anyway, charlie -- let me tell you what i fear that is coming. we have people worried about globalization. the number one occupation today is driving. drivers.
you know what will happen when we have autonomous vehicles? you know what happens when data analytics begins to replace stockbrokers? you see ibm watson, artificial intelligence will have a big impact. charlie: you put that in your speech. gov. kasich: exactly -- charlie: you talk about artificial intelligence -- gov. kasich: our academic institutions are not preparing our people for the coming changes. the ceo of siemens is inviting me to talk about these issues to their board. he is concerned about it. i'm concerned about it. we have to prepare our people for the digital revolution or we will have more division, more anger, and it won't be pretty. it's one of the warnings i have out there. charlie: what do we have to do to be prepared for the future? we live in a very competitive world. and china, across the pacific, has not only an economic growth rate bigger than ours, it is a
larger population and has enormous potential. people will question if they can deliver on that. gov. kasich: it does not call china being one of the superpowers and is interesting. that we have the intellect and the freedom that comes with the ability to bring about great advancements. this is back to this book. when we are self absorbed and not thinking about others, we maintain institutions that may not be delivering the goods for our people. charlie: you are very much in favor of not reducing, in the budget -- you are in favor of the kinds of commitments we've had in the past the national institute of health. and science you believe you have to support. gov. kasich: the national laboratories are not very
helpful to people that do want to create. they are bureaucratic and hard to get into. i don't think they are changed. the national labs conducted operations. it is hard for them and wants to be involved in managing the nuclear stock while. -- stockpile. let me tell you about universities. you have stanford, m.i.t., harvard. it is so hard to get university research and commercialize it. we have all this potential, but we are not taking advantage of it. they are a different institution, they have is this is directly involved. they provide incentives for professors. remember the great author, to catholic theologian. it is not under laid -- i think he was right. charlie: health care
legislation. gov. kasich: democrats and republicans need to do it. reform the system but don't leave people behind. charlie: pre-existing a less? gov. kasich: we have to take -- gov. kasich: we have to take care of all of that. robert taft, mr. conservative, if people can't afford health care, we've got to give it to them. charlie: would you, therefore, find yourself being in favor of some kind of single-payer system? gov. kasich: i don't think that's the way to go. i think it is transparency, paying for performance. there is a variety of things that can make the system work better. let me say something about this book. what is critical is for us to find our common humanity to work where we live, work to defeat
this drug academic -- epidemic. charlie: are there more deaths in europe states? gov. kasich: it doesn't matter. we are high. what we need to do is education. i met with the drug enforcement agency. everybody needs to be involved in getting the next generation to stay away from these drugs. and we are clamping down on what doctors can prescribe. humanity. feeding the poor. the kinds of things were we see movements that resonate from the bottom up that have united us. gov. kasich: the central message is about humanity and finding common ground than it is about any particular specific policy. gov. kasich: public policies can help us. for example, we have a mentoring program. we have a program called start talking to warn people about
drugs. if we have people pidgeon, they will talk even if they don't agree with the president or a did three -- pitch in, they will talk even if they don't agree with the president or they do agree with the president. charlie: let me read this. two paths. one that exploits anger and encourages resentment, turns fear into hatred, and divides people. this solves nothing and weakens our country. it cheapens each of us. it has but one beneficiary, to the politician who speaks of it. the other path is the one america has been down before. it is well trod and at times steep. it is what our forbearers took together. from this path we are offered the greater view. america divided or united. the author is governor john kasich. thank you for coming. gov. kasich: it is a real honor and pleasure to be with charlie rose. thank you. charlie: back in a moment.
national convention. i am pleased to have an old friend at this table. frances: thank you, charlie. charlie: i remember the political and how much we talked about that book way back when. after all the journalism, why this subject? what sparked your interest? frances: it was an accident. i happened to be at lynchburg and some professor pointed me toward jerry falwell's church. i am a new yorker with an episcopalian background and never to my knowledge had i ever met a fundamentalist before. i thought i'd better go. i was fascinated. charlie: and later he formed liberty college. frances: he was already starting
a college that became liberty university in the end. i wrote a long piece about what it was like. i dropped the subject for a. of time -- for a period of time. i wrote quite a bit about it for the new yorker during the last phase of the w. bush administration. it is possible to understand the christian right, or indeed the progressive evangelicals that have appeared in recent years without understanding the history of the evangelical movement.
charlie: this is about white evangelicals. frances: black event jellico's have a completely different story. -- evangelicals have a completely different story. they start from a different place. it is not the same at all. it would be another book to write about lack evangelicals. at first, meeting fundamentalists. it was how they took care of their children. it was not just the address --
their dress. what they expected for their children in higher education. what they felt about their pastors. how they felt about their lives being born again. in christ, this very emotional moment that was on them. and i sometimes felt that they were speaking to god as if god was sitting on their shoulder. charlie: they probably think that is true. evangelical, what is the definition? frances: a religious definition. first of all, a very high view of the bible. secondly, salvation through christ alone. thirdly, this born-again
experience. between the old life and the new life. charlie: morning again you accept jesus christ as your savior? -- born-again, meaning you accept jesus christ as your savior? frances: that is right. the duty to evangelize. charlie: people like jerry falwell, what about billy graham? was he an evangelical? frances: yes, and more than that, he invented the modern terminology of evangelical. in the 19th century, virtually all protestants were evangelicals. charlie: then there was donald trump. you end this with the 2016 convention. i suspect at the beginning, no one would say that the person most likely to get the evangelical movement is donald trump. but he did.
in primaries and the election, 80% of it. frances: i think the people that were most puzzled were the evangelical leaders. the christian right had gone to a meeting, some 50 of them. they had endorsed ted cruz. the progressive evangelicals never endorsed anybody. that is not their thing. but they were hopeful that more people would vote for a democrat this time. what i saw that made sense was a poll that was done by life way, and invent -- an evangelical research center. april was done and asked about what issues people would vote on. when they asked the pastors, the pastors would talk about the religious issues.
religious freedom. whether the judges would be religiously minded and on their side. abortion and so forth. when they asked the laypeople, the issues we are going to vote on our economics and national security. there was a difference between the laity and the creatures. i think the evangelical community is splintering now. charlie: into? frances: various parts. charlie: economic issues and national issues versus cultural issues? frances: that is one of them.
another is a generational change. at the christian right as we used to know it under jerry falwell and pat robertson -- a much more socially engaged group of young people for whom social justice issues are just as important as what they call -- charlie: when did the evangelical movement to become political? winded politics become a component? frances: i think it has always been political. for example, political in the larger sense, they were responsible for almost all of the reform movements in this country ranging from the criminal justice system to care for the indigent and the poor.
to the public school system that they essentially created. in the civil war, they divide between the evangelicals in the north and the south over slavery. there is a conservative divide in the north. the fundamentalist and the modernist essentially broke apart. and the evangelicals are sort of an outgrowth of this fundamentalist movement. billy graham was the one that created the new evangelical movement out of this.
charlie: and because he was a popular figure, politicians were attracted to have his support. frances: and that was before the separatist fundamentalist that were also attracted to powerful political figures. they had some support for the lawmakers on the state level and the national level. charlie: the political influence today, trump got 80% of the vote. can they be a decisive component of electoral success? frances: not exactly. they are 20% of the population. but if 81% of them vote, it is a major thing. and i think that, you know, the religious right have been trying to keep them in line all this time. with what i call the splintering, the generational splintering. and by the way, ethnic slim
during -- ethnic splintering. charlie: they worry about that, they are more attractive in latin america and other places around the world to -- especially latinos, evangelicals. issues like that, then they are the catholic church. frances: and here, they make up one third of the catholic church. and less of the evangelical churches at the moment. that may change because they may become prosit -- protestant. i'm not sure it will because the latinos while being socially conservative are also tending to vote democratic. because of economics and because of immigration. charlie: in 2016, it surprised some people that it wasn't as against trump has many people thought it might be. frances: that's true. but if you talk about latino
evangelicals, you find more and more determined to vote to reform the immigration system. charlie: where will they be in 2020? frances: that is a very good question. i think there will be many fewer white evangelical churches. in many fewer white mainline protestant churches. that if the groups that do not accept the immigrants. asians, latinos, so forth. they will find themselves very small. whereas the other ones are going to grow. charlie: where do they become
linked to the republican party? frances: in 1980, really. charlie: reagan's run. frances: jerry falwell and reagan made this sort of pact. it was solidified by those two and it never changed after that. and of course, the south went republican at that time. it was a lot of people and a lot of evangelicals. charlie: let me review before we close here. they are very much antiabortion. frances: yes. charlie: what are the fundamental issues that mean the most to them in the cultural arena and in the sort of social issue arena? frances: there is no them anymore. abortion is probably dealmaking which unites evangelicals at the moment.
certainly not gay rights. the younger generation has grown up with gay friends and acquaintances. they are not bothered by that. they tend to be much more tolerant about other people's religions. it is very difficult to describe evangelicals as a whole at the moment. charlie: who are the evangelical leaders today? frances: that is a good question. i'm not sure there are any, certainly not of the stature of falwell -- charlie: his son endorsed president trump. billy graham's son endorsed donald trump. they do not have the lifestyle that they would necessarily subscribe to at the pulpit. but they supported him because, some say, they believed they
needed a strong leader and that they thought he was a strong leader. frances: they also thought that as a republican, they would have more support than a democrat would. trumps economics i think persuaded a lot of people. most of these are working-class people. charlie: they talked about jobs in china. frances: the very rich would benefit, as they said then. charlie: there is a struggle to shape america, frances fitzgerald. thank you for joining us. frances: thank you, charlie. charlie: see you next time. ♪
alisa: i'm alisa parenti, and you are watching "bloomberg technology." the trump administration has announced what it is calling the biggest tax cut in u.s. history. the plan cuts to talk income rate from 35% and reduces the number of personal income tax brackets. the new tax rates would be 10%, 25 percent, and 35%. the white house is weighing whether to pull out of nafta in coming days. the draft order is under review. it could change as talks evolve and other officials weigh in. the house speaker says the republican effort to revamp obamacare is winning support, but did not promise about anytime soon. las