'This Week' Transcript 6-6-21: Secretary Gina Raimondo & Nick Clegg

This is a rush transcript of "This Week" airing Sunday, June 6.

ByABC News
June 6, 2021, 9:38 AM

A rush transcript of "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" airing on Sunday, June 6, 2021 on ABC News is below. This copy may not be in its final form, may be updated and may contain minor transcription errors. For previous show transcripts, visit the "This Week" transcript archive.

ANNOUNCER: "This Week With George Stephanopoulos" starts right now.



JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We can't reboot the world's largest economy like flipping on a light switch. There's going to be ups and downs.

STEPHANOPOULOS: With hiring sluggish, President Biden pushes his infrastructure plan, but the GOP holds firm.

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY): Once you get into this tax increase area, you're going to create an enormous amount of controversy. I don't know whether we are going to reach an agreement or not.

STEPHANOPOULOS: A wave of cyberattacks target our daily life.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The initial thought is, you don't want to pay the ransom. You don't want to pay these contemptible criminals.

STEPHANOPOULOS: The secretary of commerce, Gina Raimondo, joins us on where negotiations stand and how to protect America from these multiple attacks.

Suspended, but not silenced.

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: They may allow me back in two years. I'm not -- I'm not too interested in that.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Trump on the attack after Facebook bans him for two years.

This morning, an exclusive interview with top Facebook executive Nick Clegg and all the week's politics on our powerhouse roundtable.


ERIC ADAMS (D), NEW YORK MAYORAL CANDIDATE: You can't run from the city, Andrew, if you want to run the city.

ANDREW YANG (D), NEW YORK MAYORAL CANDIDATE: People in New York know exactly what I have been up to the past several years.

KATHRYN GARCIA (D), NEW YORK MAYORAL CANDIDATE: I invite anyone on this stage to talk about track records, because I actually have one.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Democrats spar over the top job in America's largest city, Jon Karl with the candidates, as the New York mayor's race enters the final stretch.


ANNOUNCER: From ABC News, it's "This Week."

Here now, George Stephanopoulos.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Good morning, and welcome to "This Week."

As we head toward summer, President Biden is preparing his first overseas trip, heading to Europe for the G7, a visit with the queen, and his first summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, where that spate of cyberattacks targeting our daily life will be at the top of the agenda.

Here at home, Biden hasn't given up hope for a bipartisan deal on infrastructure, but he's facing pressure from progressives to go it alone, as Republican votes prove elusive.

And the latest unemployment report shows that our economy isn't creating quite as many new jobs as expected.

Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo is standing by to address these issues.

First, let's get a better sense of where things stand from our senior White House correspondent, Mary Bruce.

And, Mary, let's start with those infrastructure talks.

The president is set to meet again tomorrow with GOP Senator Shelley Capito, but the two sides are still quite far apart, with these deadlines looming.


And, look, both sides have shown a willingness to budge here, but not nearly enough to reach a deal. They're still far apart on the scope of this plan and how to pay for it. The president has now rejected the latest Republican counteroffer to come up $50 billion in spending. And Republicans have dismissed the president's latest offer to pay for all of this by implementing a 15 percent minimum corporate tax rate on those companies that now pay little or nothing.

Now, the White House will tell you there are no firm deadlines here, but there's a very real sense that time is running out. The president is facing increasing pressure from members of his own party, moderates who want him to strike a compromise, and those progressive members, who are encouraging him to go it alone and do this with just Democratic support.

On the Hill, we know they are readying options to do just that, while, here at the White House, the president continues to work the phones, reaching out to members of both parties. And, tomorrow, he will sit down with Senator Capito, the lead Republican negotiator.

STEPHANOPOULOS: And, Mary, the administration is also sounding the alarm about these cyberattacks.

This week, the FBI director, Christopher Wray, compared the challenge posed by these attacks to 9/11.

BRUCE: George, the White House views this is an urgent national security threat, even though many of those being targeted are private companies.

These hackers have increasingly shown that they are capable of disrupting major parts of American life. And the White House is now urging companies to take action now, saying no company is safe.

The president has made clear he feels that Russia bears some responsibility for these bad actors. We know he plans to push Putin on cybersecurity when they meet face to face next week.

The president told me this week that he is considering his options for retaliation. George, the White House says no option is off the table.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Mary Bruce, thanks very much.

Let's bring in Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo right now.

Secretary Raimondo, thanks for joining us this morning.

GINA RAIMONDO, U.S. SECRETARY OF COMMERCE: Good morning. Good to be with you.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let's start with these cyberattacks, eight attacks every day in the United States right now. They're targeting food. They're targeting gas. They're targeting television, our water supply.

Does the government have to do more to force businesses to protect themselves and their customers?

RAIMONDO: So, I think the first thing we have to recognize is, this is the reality, and we should assume and businesses should assume that these attacks are here to stay and, if anything, will intensify.

And so, just last week, the White House sent out a letter broadly to the business community, urging the business community to do more.

The thing -- the only good news here, George, is that some very simple steps, like two-factor authentication, having proper backups and backup technology, can be enormously helpful against a wide variety of these attacks.

So it is clear that the private sector needs to be more vigilant, by the way, including small and medium sized companies. And also President Biden has been clear that we are going to do more. In fact, certain components of the American Jobs Plan provide for investments to shore up the nation's cyber infrastructure, which is just another reason why it is so important that the AJP passes.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But should the government be requiring these steps by businesses?

RAIMONDO: You know, I think that, as I said, at this point we are urging businesses, businesses know how to do this, it’s relatively inexpensive to do the simpler things like two-factor authentication, and at the moment we're going to, you know, pursue that versus, you know, what you're talking about, a little bit more heavy-handed approach.

STEPHANOPOULOS: We know that a significant number of these attacks are emanating from Russia. Is it time for the administration to take a more aggressive approach and target the source of these attacks?

RAIMONDO: Well, as I said, this is a top priority, and, again, the president has been clear. He -- we are evaluating all the options and we won't stand for a nation supporting or turning a blind eye to a criminal enterprise. And as the president has said, we are considering all of our options, and we're not taking anything off the table as we think about possible repercussions, consequences or retaliation.

STEPHANOPOULOS: That’s the national support. Should we be contemplating military action even if these are private, not government entities?

RAIMONDO: As I said, all options are on the table. This is a top priority and all of us in the Cabinet and the National Security Council are focused on it and considering all possible consequences. This week when the president meets with Putin and other world leaders, this will be at the top of the agenda.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let's talk about the infrastructure talks. The president meeting with, as I said, Senator Caputo tomorrow on the infrastructure talks. Is this week do or die for a bipartisan deal?

RAIMONDO: No. This is not do or die. You know yourself that, you know, the practice of legislating is much more art than science. There’s no one better at it than President Biden. I know from my time as governor, it’s a messy process. So, no, it’s not do or die. There’s no, you know, hard-wired deadline. We are doing the work of legislating.

This is a big week. You know, you'll see in the House this week Congressman DeFazio is moving forward, starting to legislate on a piece of legislation that incorporates many of the president's priorities. We will also at the same time continue our talks with members of the Senate.

I can tell you, George, I have spoken with many legislators in the Senate, Republican and Democrat. There is broad desire to have bipartisan agreement. That is good for the country. The president is leading us to, you know, continue to stay at the table. So we won't do this forever. But right now there are good faith efforts on both sides and we're going to continue the work of, you know, doing our job and trying to get a bipartisan agreement.

STEPHANOPOULOS: As you know, a lot of Democrats have a sense of déjà vu. They say this reminds them of the experience the -- President Obama’s experience with healthcare back in 2008 (ph) -- he tried and tried and tried for a bipartisan deal. Basically the clock almost ran out on him and now progressives like Bernie Sanders and AOC say it’s long past time to hold out hope for these negotiations, it’s time for Democrats to put this on the floor and pass it on their own.

RAIMONDO: You know, I hear that, we hear that. The president doesn't agree. This president -- no one knows better than President Biden how to work with Congress, and move to a bipartisan deal. So at this point in time, we're not there yet.

And, again, I can just tell you, talking to governors, talking to many, many private sector leaders, talking to senators, Republican and Democrat, folks want a bipartisan deal. If we don't get there, then we'll consider other options. But it’s way too soon at the moment to say that.

By the way, again, this week, Congressman DeFazio is moving forward. We are seeing progress. I will tell you, if someone told me two months ago that we would be talking to Republicans about a trillion dollar plus deal and still at the table, I’m not sure I would have believed you. So it’s been a month of great progress and we have to stick with it a bit longer to see what's possible.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Of course, one of the reasons President Biden is trying so hard is that you have Democrats like Joe Manchin, Kyrsten Sinema, who are reluctant to support a Democrats-only package. You know you can't pass one without them.

Are you confident they're going to come around if bipartisan talks break down?

RAIMONDO: I think they will. They are very engaged, both of them. They want to do what's right.

The thing that everyone understands and the president has been crystal clear about this is that the red line is inaction, right? We have delayed investments in basic research and development, infrastructure improvements, job training, you know, provision of child care for so long that no matter who I talk to -- Republican, Democrat, business leader, labor leader -- everyone says it is time to make these investments. It is past time to make these investments.

So, yes, I think at the end of the day, there is commitment that inaction is unacceptable, and we will get something big done for the American people that meets the moment and that makes these investments so that we can compete, so that we can thrive, so that we can, you know, create the millions of jobs that the president's vision and package will enable to be created.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Finally, President Biden said on Friday that at least some of the temporary unemployment benefits should expire in September. Republicans like Kevin McCarthy have been saying we have to stop paying people not to work.

Had the extended benefits held back hiring?

RAIMONDO: We hear it anecdotally. But I would say there’s no evidence that they have significantly held back hiring.

Here's what we do know: Those extended benefits have been a lifeline for Americans who have been struggling. They have meant the difference between someone being able to pay the rent or being homeless, someone being able to feed their children or their kids going hungry.

And, look, the jobs report on Friday was a good report. Long-term unemployment going down, wages going up, 2 million jobs created in this president's term so far. The most jobs created ever in the first few months of a presidency.

So they will expire in September. And, you know, I think the economy will continue to strengthen.

But make no mistake about it: they were necessary and they were lifeline for Americans for the past several months during this pandemic.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Secretary Raimondo, thanks for your time this morning.

RAIMONDO: Thank you.

STEPHANOPOULOS: We turn now to the news from Facebook on Friday, that President Trump will be suspended from the platform for at least two years, punishment for his provocation of the January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Trump addressed the ban when he returned to the political stage in North Carolina last night.


DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT: Zuckerberg, that’s another beauty. But they say they may allow me back in two years. No, I’m not -- I’m not too interested in that. They may allow me back in two years.

We got to stop that. We can't let it happen. So unfair.

They're shutting down an entire group of -- not just me, they're shutting down the voice of a tremendously powerful -- in my opinion -- a much more powerful and much larger group.


STEPHANOPOULOS: Let's get a response from Facebook's vice president for global affairs, Nick Clegg.

Nick, thanks for joining us this morning.

You heard President Trump right there. What's your response?

NICK CLEGG, FACEBOOK VICE PRESIDENT OF GLOBAL AFFAIRS: Well, look, of course, we understand that making a decision like this is controversial. It’s shouted out, if you like, from both sides from those people who feel Donald Trump should be back on the platform immediately and from those who say he should be banned forever. It receives criticism from all sides.

But, you know, in a sense, our job is not to take the decisions with an eye to, you know, which -- which side of the political aisle is going to agree or disagree more with us, but just to do so in a way that is fair, transparent and proportionate, in line with our rules and crucially is responsive to the comments and criticisms that Facebook received when we first suspended Donald Trump from Facebook, from the independent oversight board, who said about a month ago, when looking at this case, they said, look, Facebook was right to suspend Donald Trump because of the exceptional, very grave circumstances in early January on the Capitol.

But that Facebook was wrong to do so in an indefinite way, an open-ended way, and that we needed to come up with clearer due process, clearer standards, clearer penalties, which we’ve now done. We’ve now set out what penalties would apply to what I hope will remain these very rare cases where a public individual uses our apps and services to say things in a way which -- which foments or, in his case, praises rioters who were in -- who were involved in violence ongoing at that very time.

And we’ve now laid out those penalties and explained why we think in this particular case, the most severe penalty is justified. That's a two-year penalty and the timetable I should stress starts from early January, so expires in January of 2023.

And I -- you know, I don't -- for Donald Trump, of course we don't expect him to welcome that decision. We do hope, though, that reasonable observers will believe that we are acting as reasonably and proportionately as we can in these -- in these very difficult circumstances.

STEPHANOPOULOS: You focused on the -- on the comments encouraging the rioters on January 6th. What about the lies about the election? The president repeated a series of those last night again.

If the president gave the speech he gave last night in January 2023, would the suspension be extended?

CLEGG: Well, it's very difficult for me to make sort of hypothetical -- sort of judgments. And I haven't heard the -- the full speech.

What I can say is that we have a whole, you know, range of tools that we used to deal with misinformation, so we work with fact checkers around the world and demote and label content, whether it's, you know, claims about elections or indeed false claims about anything else, which is then clearly labeled for our users so they can see that independent fact checkers have said, look, this is either false or partly false or missing context and so on. So that -- that is something we would apply to people who are not, you know, in active office or not pursuing office as candidates in politics. That -- that is a system which applies to everybody else and would apply, in Donald Trump's case, as long as he's no -- you know, no longer a candidate.


CLEGG: So, of course, there's action that we take on misinformation.

But I've got to be very clear, we -- we don't -- I don't think anybody wants a private company like FaceBook to be vetting everything that people say on social media for its precise accuracy and then booting people off the platform if what they say is inaccurate. We can explain to users that independent fact checkers might find something to be inaccurate. I don't think they want FaceBook to be a -- a sort of truth police.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So the bright -- the bright red line there is encouraging violence, not spreading lies.

CLEGG: Yes. Yes. We've got very clear rules. They're called community standards. Everybody can go online to see them. And one of the brightest of those red lines, as you just implied, is that you cannot -- it doesn't matter who you are, you can be the pope, the queen of England, the president of the United States, you cannot use our services, and I hope most people would think this is reasonable, to aid, abet, foment, or praise acts of violence. And that -- and that I hope most people would agree is something that we just don't want on social media. What, you know, most -- the vast majority of contest on -- on FaceBook is -- is -- is innocent content. It's barbecues, bar mitzvahs, babies. Only about 6 percent of total content actually is related to politics. So the vast majority of reasons that people come on to FaceBook is for good, positive, playful reasons, their kids, their families, their friends, or to run a local business and reach local customers and so on.

And so I think it's right that we should be expected to take action where people in hopefully on the whole rare cases use our apps and services in a way which could lead to real world imminent harm.

STEPHANOPOULOS: You -- you hit on this in your previous answer, is it FaceBook's place to really be having this kind of power over political speech? And Kara Swisher (ph) in "The New York Times" raised this question in an op-ed this week. She said, it's obvious we need to discussion whether the decision to live or die online should be in the hands of a corporate executive with no accountability to speak of, all part of a bigger conversation about consolidation of power and what we're going to do to diminish it.

As you know, there are growing calls on both the right and the left to break apart -- break FaceBook apart.

CLEGG: Yes, I don't -- I don't think actually chopping up a company deals with any of these difficult issues of the role of political speech, incitement to hatred and violence and so on. That -- it doesn't matter whether the company's big or small, those issues will always be there.

So my own view, for what it's worth, is, the answer is not break up, the answer is regulation. And to that extent I strongly agree what the -- what that commentator just said, which is it's -- in the end it's not, you know -- American democracy does not belong to Silicon Valley. Is belongs to the American people. And the people who should set the rules for how American democracy plays out and where the line should be drawn on what speech is and is not acceptable shouldn't -- exactly shouldn't be private companies, it should be legislators and lawmakers in D.C. and around the world, answerable to their own people. These are big societal decisions.

And, look, in the absence of regulation, in the absence of consensus from lawmakers on where we should draw the line, we have tried our best, we're very open about the community standards that we abide by, we've created -- it's the first of its kind anywhere. No other Silicon Valley company has done this, this independent oversight board to hold us to independent account.

But all of that, I agree, is an inadequate surrogate for what in the long run we need, which is societal rules set by democratic process, by lawmakers, not by private companies.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Nick Clegg, thank you for your time this morning.

CLEGG: Thank you.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Roundtable is next. Plus a look at the New York mayor’s race from Jon Karl. Stay with us.



FORMER PRESIDENT MIKE PENCE: January 6th was a dark day in the history of the United States Capitol.

President Trump and I have spoken many times since we left office. And I don't know if we'll ever see eye to eye on that day. But I will always be proud of what we accomplished for the American people over the last four years.


STEPHANOPOULOS: Former Vice President Pence in New Hampshire this week, downplaying his differences with President Trump over the course of their partnership.

President Trump, of course, returned to the political stage last night as well with that speech in North Carolina. Let's talk about it on our roundtable. We've got Rahm Emanuel, Donna Brazile, Wall Street Journal columnist Jason Ryan -- Riley, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and author of a new book, "Maverick," a biography of Thomas Sowell, and former Libertarian member of Congress Justin Amash.

And, Congressman, let me begin with you. The New York Times has an interesting analysis of President Trump this morning. They call him "diminished, but dominating" at the same time. He had to give up, basically, his blog this week. He still has a hold on the Republican Party.

You served with a lot of Republican members of Congress. How do you explain it? What do Republicans do about it?

AMASH: Well, over the last couple years I've really seen it take off. I mean, when I first got to Congress, I could see this nationalist sort of movement starting to swell. And by about 2015, it took hold of the Republican Party in a -- in a pretty big way.

At first a lot of these members of Congress, when Donald Trump took office, were doubtful about him. They would make fun of him in private. They'd criticize him. They'd insult him. Even I thought they were going too far, you know, and I was a big critic of Donald Trump. And I couldn't believe some of the things that were said about him.

And then around two or three years ago, around, you know, the beginning of 2019 or so, I saw people really start to shift. And the party really became Donald Trump's party completely.

And that's going to be the way it is over the next few years. I don't think -- I don't think we're going back to a different kind of Republican Party.

STEPHANOPOULOS: One of the remarkable things about that, Rahm Emanuel, is, usually, when presidents are defeated, a first-term president is defeated, the party tends to abandon them.

In this case, it appears that the GOP is doubling down.

RAHM EMANUEL, ABC NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Yes, I want to be the first on this platform. I wanted to be done discussing this man in 2020.


EMANUEL: I don't want to be doing this. But, that said, he will not...



EMANUEL: No, no, it is reality.

That said, look, if I were the Democrats right now -- and, yes, you are right, George. A Republican president -- any president goes off and works either on their books or takes a project, like Jimmy Carter, Habitat For Humanity, does some other goodwill work.

This has always been about Donald Trump. Donald Trump is always about Donald Trump. And that's what he's continuing.

But if I were the Democrats, I'd force every Republican right now, do you believe he will be reinstated? Put him back on the ballot, because, in the swing districts, he is an albatross around the Republican Party. And I would continue -- they're trying to flip the cultural issues our way.

I flip them right back and make Donald Trump the albatross around the Republican Party, which it is, since he will not let it go.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Jason Riley, what Rahm is referring to there is this talk that President Trump, that former President Trump is telling associates he believes, at some level, he's going to be reinstated as president maybe as early as August?

JASON RILEY, "THE WALL STREET JOURNAL": Yes, you hear that talk, you watch the rally last night, George, and then you hear Republican leaders in Congress say the problem is Liz Cheney.

It's ridiculous. You wonder what planet they're living on. There's this hope that Donald Trump will fade away. But that is putting hope above experience. That sounded like a campaign rally to me, what I heard last night.

And to Rahm's point, in 2016, Donald Trump won suburbanites and he won independents. In 2020, he lost both of those groups. That is the Republican Party's problem. They need to get those groups back. And nothing I heard last night is going to help them with those groups.

EMANUEL: And he not only lost them in 2020. He also lost them in 2018.

And so my view is the fact is, if he's not going to go, it's an albatross about the Republican Party. I would -- for the benefit of the country and the Republican Party, I wish he would disappear. But I would now take this and force the Republicans to answer this question, from Senate to gubernatorial to congressional, because it is an opportunity to once again remind them.

Joe Biden's message is, we have turned the page on COVID and the economy to a different era. And Donald Trump won't let the past go. So, hold -- make the Republican Party own the past.

STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm going to press you by posing the question to Donna Brazile.

Is that the right strategy, or has there been too much focus by Democrats on Donald Trump?

DONNA BRAZILE, ABC NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Democrats can't help but focus on Donald Trump, because he has not only framed what the modern Republican Party looks like; he is also leading the modern Republican Party.

I mean, you came to Capitol Hill in 2011, at the height of the Tea Party movement, and then Donald Trump. There's no other playbook right now but to continue to make Donald Trump the central organizing principle that Democrats will focus on.

But Republicans need Donald Trump to keep their base intact, to keep the fund-raising intact, and also to make sure that they have a strong message for 2022.

AMASH: But I think this is a mistake for Democrats. I think it's a mistake to keep viewing everything through the Trump lens.

Trump is dominating the Democratic messaging. And while the Republican Party may not be growing -- maybe it's stuck. It is where it is. I don't think the Democratic Party is growing. Look at the number of people who are saying they're independents now.

So as long as Donald Trump is the focus of the Democratic Party, and the party is not growing, the Republican Party can still win in a two-party system. I'm trying to change that with the Libertarian Party.




AMASH: Yes, but that's the reality of it.

So I think Democrats have to have another message.

EMANUEL: I think we're -- what's going to play out is -- and we saw this Friday -- President Biden's going to talk about the economy, talk about managing COVID, and as a distinct turning of the page from the past.

That doesn't mean you let Donald Trump just disappear. But the economy will be the focus, as it should be. And the good news for the Democrats, unlike in 20 -- in 1982, 1994, or 2010, where the recession had ended, but the recovery had not begun, Democrats will go into the midterm with a strong economy.

And the leader of that voice will be Joe Biden: This is what we have done. And we got to continue.

And there will be a message at the congressional level, which will be at the knee level, which is, Donald Trump won't let the Republican Party go.

And I would just start -- it doesn't mean it's dominant. Right now, do you believe the president will be reinstated? And put the people who don't want -- put the Republicans in this vise between not abandoning him and knowing he's costly.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Jason Riley, you brought up the problem for Republicans right now, losing independents, losing suburbanites.

On the other hand, Donald Trump was able to cut into the Democrats' majorities with African-Americans, Latinos, Asian Americans.


According to the Democratic strategists, the problem here seems to be that as the Democratic Party has taken on more college educated whites, it’s become more progressive and far more progressive than the black Democrats and the Asian Democrats and the Hispanic Democrats.

And the Asian and Hispanic numbers are particularly startling if you're a Democrat. I believe that Donald Trump did better among Asians than any Republican candidate over the past couple of decades.

So, this is a man who went around saying China virus and yet still was able to increase his number among Asians. It’s quite remarkable.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Donna Brazile, how big a problem?

BRAZILE: It’s a problem. But, look, Democrats recovered from 2016 when we had a precipitous drop and turnout among those groups. But the challenge in 2022 is that Democrats have to basically do what Joe Biden did in 2020, which is have a single message on the economy, on the recovery, and to try to make sure that grassroots Democrats are capable of hearing that message and not just listen to the noise, but understand the signal that is coming from the White House.

Joe Biden is hugely popular among the Democratic base. He's hugely popular despite all of the Republicans and libertarians, but he needs to make sure that he delivers on everything that he promised in 2020, and I think Democrats will come back home.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Justin Amash, with the partisan lines hardening, is there any room for third way, the kind of third way you said you want to (INAUDIBLE) in Congress?


AMASH: Yeah, absolutely. I think Americans are really tired of this stuff. I think they're tired of two parties that don't get anything done. They look at Washington and these parties just fighting nonstop. And one party is about owning the libs, one party is about owning the MAGAs and there is no real policies being enacted that help the American people.

Most of the those going through Congress end up being messaging bills or one party dominating the message and running something through roughshod over the other party.

So, we need a -- we need a third party. We need a strong third party because there are independents out there who are looking at this mess and they want something else. What about ending the wars? What about civil asset forfeiture? What about qualified immunity?

There are -- there are Democrats who talk about this stuff, but Democratic Party doesn't get any of it done. What about cutting spending and making sure that our tax code is reasonable?

We want low taxes but we don't have a system where there are corporations that don't pay any taxes. Libertarians care about this stuff. The Republicans don't seem to care that much about it. They're spending through the roof and cutting taxes on the biggest corporations while keeping taxes high on a lot of other people.

STEPHANAPOULOS: Rahm Emanuel, the president is trying for a different kind of third way. He’s not giving up hope as you just heard Secretary Raimondo talk about on getting this kind of bipartisan deal on infrastructure.

What do you say to those Democrats who say this is just Lucy and the football, it’s never going to happen?

EMANUEL: Well, in the White House, you have many roads. I think the most -- first of all, here's conclusion, there’s going to be infrastructure. There’s going to be infrastructure.

STEPHANAPOULOS: Bipartisan deal?

EMANUEL: That's a different question.


EMANUEL: That is -- no, what I mean by that is everybody's collapsing two arguments into one. There is going to be an infrastructure and dramatic increase in investment and the president is going to be able to say we not only created jobs but we started investing in America again. Number two, how he gets it done.

When you -- and I think what is happening in the House with Peter DeFazio is Democrats are saying, we have a second track.

STEPHANANPOULOS: That said appropriations bill --


EMANUEL: Right. So, there’s two different tracks. They're both happening simultaneously. I think if you watch the news and, you know, legislative process from both ends of Pennsylvania.

They're saying we don't want to get up from the table, we want to do it this way. We offer you ever opportunity, I’m not getting -- but I thought the president was very smart on the tax proposal, because it makes harder for the Republicans to say we don't agree with this process.

That said, we have an alternative route here, we want you in this, et cetera. So to me, A, it will happen, how it happens is a different question.

RILEY: The Biden administration's problem is not that they can't get to 60 votes with Republican support. It’s that they can't get to 50 votes without Republican support. They don't have their own ducks in a row because moderates like Manchin and Sinema are holding out.

I mean, I think the problem here is that Joe Biden's legislative agenda is more ambitious than his mandate justifies it being. He won by not a lot. And he's got a spending agenda out there, a climate agenda out there I think that far surpasses what the voters want out of him.

And now, you're seeing where those divisions are. He can't get his own Democrats in order. Not about Republican obstruction here.

STEPHANOPOULOS: If you look at the polls, he seems to have the voters with him. You may not have the legislators with him.

But, Donna, I think Jason still brings up an important point right there. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema -- Secretary Raimondo thinks eventually they’re going to come around.


STEPHANOPOULOS: A lot of Democrats doubt that.

BRAZILE: Well, I think, first of all, Joe Biden is acting in good faith. He's trying to bring Republicans to the table. He has reduced his overall spending from $2.3 trillion to now $1 trillion.

Pete DeFazio is going to move that bill because everyone knows that it's going to expire in September, our transportation authorization, so something will happen.

But here's the bottom line. If Democrats don't go big then, guess what, voters are going to say come home because you're not able to deliver. I think, at the end of the day, Biden will be able to deliver on his promise to basically upgrade our infrastructure across the board.

STEPHANOPOULOS: This does seem to be the dilemma for the president. He's got to get something done.

AMASH: Well, honestly, though, the legislative process is not working at all. You know, I -- I just left Congress not long ago. There is no legislative process. I heard the commerce secretary say we've got a legislative process. The legislators are working. They are not working. What we have is a few people, some in the House, some in the Senate, they work on everything. They decide everything. And then they negotiate directly with the administration. And then it -- it gets rammed through with twisting arms. You know, they -- they go and they tell the other members of Congress, hey, get on board or else. There is no discovery process in Congress anymore.


AMASH: And this is a real threat to the American people. This is a real problem for America, that the way we get legislation done nowadays is we stick a commerce secretary in a room with some Senate leader, they decide everything, and then they tell everyone, this is the package, take it or leave it. There is no amendment process. In the House we haven't amended anything since 2016 on the House floor. There's been no process altogether.

And this is really dangerous for the United States of America. This is dangerous for the people.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Rahm, you've served in the White House. You've served in Congress. I know you probably disagree with a lot of what the congressman just said there --


STEPHANOPOULOS: But he's -- but, at the same time, though, is his analytical point correct, have we become more of a parliamentary system?

EMANUEL: Yes. Well, let me say this. One is the comment that nothing gets done. While I generally agree, we did respond unbelievably well both to the economic recession that COVID created and COVID. So you -- it's a mixed bag. It's not one thing or the other.

The second is, there is a historical pattern where the legislative process used to be run only by chairman, has now been consolidated and the speaker's officer, the majority leader's office, and that is the process that both Democrats, Republicans had happened.

And it's not just take it or leave it. There's a lot -- if you have only four vote majority in the House and no vote -- one vote majority in the Senate, it is -- you cannot run on a just take it or leave it approach. And there's -- and I think the speaker has done a tremendous job, and the Senate majority leader, in garnering the votes necessary to address the challenges. There are more challenges than what the legislative process is up to at this point. But the idea that they're doing nothing or haven't met the challenge, we are a year after -- if you take a look at COVID, with the vaccine developed, distributed, on a major system, and we're growing at a faster pace economically and wages growing faster than anybody thought just 12 months ago. So the idea that nothing gets done is not accurate. There are more challenges that Congress is not meeting is also an accurate description.


AMASH: There's -- there's no amendment process. That sounds like take it or leave it to me. So, you know, I -- I -- I understand what you're saying.

EMANUEL: Well -- well don't go into -- listen, I -- you're forming a third party.


EMANUEL: Unsolicited recommended, don't go into the battle cry there is not amendment process. It's just not a carrying message for the process. It just --

AMASH: Well, there's currently -- there is currently no amendment process. And it -- whether Republicans and Democrats think that's OK, I don't think most Americans think that's OK. They send representatives to Washington to represent them. We talk -- we're going to talk about voting rights, right? People are concerned about voting rights. We're sending members of Congress to Washington who have no say in the process altogether. They're told, this is the piece of legislation, take it or leave it. I can't believe how many times I was -- I was handed a piece of legislation, it might be hundreds of pages, you get half an hour to read it. It might be thousands of pages, you get a day to read it. And they say, this is the legislation.


AMASH: You can't change it. You can't amend it.


AMASH: And then people say, oh, well, we care so much about voting rights, well, people aren't able to represent them in D.C.

EMANUEL: Well, I'll give you one example. I mean because it's relevant to this conversation, which is, healthcare took 12 months. The idea that there wasn't a legislative process in that is just not true.

STEPHANOPOULOS: And the question in the end, Jason Riley, is how much do people care about process versus what is actually happening in their lives? And the Democrats seem to be betting on the fact that, as Rahm was pointing out, COVID is receding, the economy is rising, that should be good enough.

RILEY: Well, I -- I -- I -- I -- I don't think that the American people voted for Joe Biden to carry out the spending proposals that he's putting forward, these climate proposals that he's putting forward. I think that's overreach.

At the same time that they elected Joe Biden, they also increased the number of Republicans in Congress. They also split the Senate 50/50. And I think that the Biden administration's agenda ought to reflect just how closely divided this country is. He's running like he thinks he has FDR-like majorities and that he just ran all over his opponent in the election.

RILEY: That didn't happen. And -- but if you look at his agenda, you'd think it did.

BRAZILE: No, he ran on a vision of taking this country out of the 1950s and bringing it into the 21st century. That's why the majority of the American people voted for him.

While he didn't have coattails at the state and local level, he did run on a very clear picture of how he wanted to transform the economy, how he wanted to deal with racial inequities, how he wanted to deal with climate change. So I think the majority of Americans understood that Joe Biden had a vision.

Now, I agree that the sausage-making doesn't look as appetizing as some boudin that I've eaten in Louisiana in terms of the legislative process.


But the fact that he is trying to...

EMANUEL: We're all invited.


BRAZILE: ... move this agenda when Republicans simply have no agenda. Think about it. I mean, the Republicans campaigned on no platform in 2020. The Republicans have basically put all of their eggs in the Donald Trump basket, hoping that it will, you know, produce more chickens.


STEPHANOPOULOS: That is going to have to be the last word today.

EMANUEL: I agree.


Thank you all very much. Great discussion.

Up next, this year's biggest political race so far is coming soon, as voters head to the polls to choose New York City's next mayor. Jon Karl confronts the leading candidates, when we come back.


STEPHANOPOULOS: Jon Karl takes on the New York mayor's race, next. We'll be right back.



REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ (D-NY): Maya Wiley is our number one choice.

We have already tried Giuliani's New York. What that got us was a New York that was harder to afford and a New York that criminalized young people and put them into lifelong carceral cycles.

It ends now. These are the stakes. Maya Wiley the one. She will be a progressive in Gracie Mansion.


STEPHANOPOULOS: There, you see AOC endorsing civil rights attorney Maya Wiley in New York's mayoral race, hoping to make Wiley the clear progressive choice.

Early voting in the Democratic primary starts this week. And with 13 candidates in the hunt to replace Mayor Bill de Blasio, voters will also navigate a new rank choice voting system.

We're going to have more on that after this report from chief Washington correspondent Jon Karl.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Welcome to the second debate with the Democratic candidates in the primary race for mayor of New York.

JONATHAN KARL, ABC NEWS CHIEF WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In New York this week, eight candidates on the stage vying for one of the biggest political prizes of 2021, spread apart, but in person and together, a sign that, in politics too, life is getting back to normal.

DIANNE MORALES (D), NEW YORK MAYORAL CANDIDATE: I'm not a career politician. I'm not funded by a PAC.

KATHRYN GARCIA (D), NEW YORK MAYORAL CANDIDATE: I have been your crisis manager.

ANDREW YANG (D), NEW YORK MAYORAL CANDIDATE: We need change and a fresh start.

KARL (on camera): This race is a classic New York free-for-all, but it's also the largest election anywhere in the country by far since the end of the Trump presidency and since we have turned the corner on the pandemic.

(voice-over): Back to normal, but there's something surprising happening in progressive New York City. While you might think this would be a race to the left, the leading candidates are talking tough on crime, opposing tax hikes, and about keeping businesses in New York.

Last year's defund the police rallying cry, not here, not now.

(on camera): What would you do to the overall budget for the NYPD?

GARCIA: I have not been planning to make changes to the budget. We will look at them from whether or not there are efficiencies to be found. But I believe we need to have our patrol strength on the streets of New York.

So, what happened with the whole defund the police movement that was so big just last year?

YANG: Defund the police is the wrong approach for New York City. Most New Yorkers I talk to are very, very concerned about what's going on in their neighborhood. And, if anything, they want to see more officers. And we need to go on a recruitment drive citywide for more officers.

KARL (voice-over): Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams is campaigning as a former cop, who was also a victim of police brutality as a teenager.

ERIC ADAMS (D), NEW YORK MAYORAL CANDIDATE: I'm Eric Adams. I'll be a blue-collar mayor. I'll rebuild our economy, while tackling violent crime, and bring New York back.

KARL (on camera): What's the number one issue in this race?

ADAMS: Our public safety. No one -- because public safety is really the foundation for all the issues. We can't turn around our economy if we're not safe.

KARL (voice-over): There are progressives in this race.


KARL: Maya Wiley just got a big endorsement from Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

OCASIO-CORTEZ: Everybody, Maya Wiley!


KARL: Wiley says she would take a billion dollars out of the police budget.

WILEY: We are going to stop the hiring in the next two police cadet classes. As I have said, we have a police department that is bloated.

KARL: That has been a tougher argument to make when the city is in the midst of a rise in crime.

The overall crime rate in New York City is up more than 20 percent since last year, and shooting incidents are up more than 70 percent.

We caught up with candidate Andrew Yang on the campaign trail in Brooklyn, where he turned a heckler at a press conference...

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I want him to tell me what he's doing right. I would support him.

... into a potential supporter.


KARL: Yang is something of the celebrity candidate, breaking through in large part because he is well-known from his run for president last year.

Lately, he's become the biggest target.

(on camera): Man, harsh cover in "New York Magazine": "Who Really Wants Andrew Yang to Be Mayor?"

What's up with that?

YANG: Well, a lot of people, apparently, because we have the most individual grassroots donors right here in New York City than any other candidate.

KARL (voice-over): Yang says public safety is not just about recruiting more cops, but also turning around the city's pandemic-ravaged economy.

What about taxes?

YANG: Right now would be the wrong time to raise taxes here in New York City. We do have $12 billion in federal aid or so, and a lot of families now are looking around wondering whether this is the place for them to raise their family, to build a business. We cannot give people more reasons to start looking at places like Florida because the reality is we need people who make a lot of money to pay their taxes right here in New York City.

KARL: But the tough on crime, pro-business, no tax increase approach sounds a little bit like the early Mayor Bloomberg and maybe even Mayor Rudy Giuliani back in the day.

YANG: I certainly admire Mike Bloomberg a great deal, and one thing I want to take from his example is hiring a group of world class managers who are not ideological, just results-oriented, just solving problems and getting things done for New York.

KARL: As Yang faces criticism he has no real experience to be mayor, the candidate who seems to be rising fastest is Kathryn Garcia.

GARCIA: And for 14 years, my job has been to solve problems for New York. And I’ve got no plan to stop now.

KARL: The city's former sanitation commissioner, Garcia's campaign is strikingly non-ideological. Her message is that she can do the job. She also says schools should be fully reopened already with in person classes.

Is there some resistance from the -- from the teachers unions on this?

GARCIA: Yeah, I don't understand this. They're eligible for vaccinated. We have -- our infectivity rate is almost zero at this point. We know from the beginning that young children weren't transmitting. We can do this safely and we need to do this safely.

KARL: The Democratic primary is less than three weeks away. Whoever wins will face the daunting challenge of governing a place long ago called the ungovernable city, and facing some of the toughest times in decades.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I’ve brushed (ph) with people who carry knives on our subway system trying to assault someone. I’ll be done if I can’t listen (ph) with every day people.

KARL: Is that -- is that good training to be mayor of New York?



STEPHANOPOULOS: Thanks to Jon for that.

And as we said, voters in New York City will encounter new type of ballot in this race. Instead of voting for one candidate, they can rank up to five in order of preference.

So what determines the winner? Could rank choice voting mean that the person who gets the most votes won't actually become mayor?

FiveThirtyEight’s Nate Silver analyzes.


NATE SILVER, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT.COM: I’m going to mix it up and give you the answer right up front. I buy that rank choice voting could change the outcome.

A recent Public Opinion Strategies poll found entrepreneur Andrew Yang initially had a 19 to 18 lead over Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams.

The poll, however, simulated the rank choice process, and in New York City, voters can rank up to five candidates.

If nobody receives over 50 percent of first choice votes, the candidate with the fewer votes is eliminated and those votes default to the next choice. The process is repeated until a winner emerges.

In that poll, for example, Adams eventually pulled ahead of Yang 52 to 48 by picking up more second and third choice support.

I know that sounds complicated. But it’s really affected the candidate’s strategy. Instead of appealing to just one constituency, you want to have broad-based support.

So, it could help someone like Yang who tried to cultivate support among everyone from Asian-Americans to orthodox Jews. It also explains his silly stance on Twitter like liking (ph) his favorite restaurant. He just wants you to remember his name so he's somewhere in your top five.

And it seems to be working. Yang is looking at twice as much Google search traffic as other front-runners like Adams and former Sanitation Department Commissioner Kathryn Garcia.

Another theory, it could help a progressive candidate like civil rights lawyer Maya Wiley because the progressive vote is splintered. In the Public Opinion Strategies poll, for example, she gained a lot of support when another progressive, City Comptroller Scott Stringer, was eliminated.

My advice simply to make sure you know all five of your choices. Studies show that anywhere from 10 to around 25 percent of voters in rank choice elections don't fill out their entire ballot. If you do that, you could be throwing away your chance to determine New York City's next mayor.


STEPHANOPOULOS: It’s going to be an interesting experiment. Thank you, Nate.

We'll be right back.


STEPHANOPOULOS: That is all for us today. Thanks for sharing part of your Sunday with us.

Check out "WORLD NEWS TONIGHT" and I'll see you tomorrow on "GMA."