Return to Transcripts main page
Amanpour
Edan Alexander Now, In Israel; Interview With Mother Of Omer Neutra Captured And Killed On October 7 Orna Neutra; Interview With Father Of Omer Neutra Captured And Killed On October 7 Ronen Neutra; Interview with NPR International Correspondent Emily Feng; Interview With Axios Chief Financial Correspondent Felix Salman; Interview With Cardinal Michael Czerny; Interview With American Federation Of Teachers President Randi Weingarten. Aired 1:10-2:10p ET
Aired May 12, 2025 - 13:10 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:10:00]
BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: Hello, everyone, and welcome to "Amanpour." Here's what's coming up.
As Hamas released the last living American hostage, I'm joined by the parents of Israeli-American Omer Neutra who was killed on October 7th and
whose remains have been held in Gaza ever since.
And --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT BESSENT, U.S. TREASURY SECRETARY: If we can open up trade to China, have more fair trade toward the U.S. that we could rebalance together.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: -- a reprieve in the dizzying China-U.S. trade war as both sides agree to drastically reduce tariffs for 90 days. I discuss the impact with
journalists Emily Feng and Felix Salmon.
Then, a papal push for peace. Pope Leo XIV calls for an end to war in his first Sunday address. We look ahead at what more we can expect with
Cardinal Michael Czerny.
Also, ahead --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RANDI WEINGARTEN, PRESIDENT, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS: Let's really make high school the gateway to college and career.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: -- the president of the American Federation of Teachers tells Hari Sreenivasan why she thinks schools should encourage some students not
to go to college.
Welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Bianna Golodryga in New York, sitting in for Christiane Amanpour.
Hamas has released the last living American hostage, Edan Alexander, saying it's part of steps towards a ceasefire deal and an end to the Israeli
blockade that has lasted more than two months. Something Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has ruled out at this stage.
It's a moment of hope in Israel, but there are still hostages trapped in the enclave, and their loved ones continue to live in this nightmare. Among
them, the family of Israeli-American Omer Neutra, murdered by Hamas on October 7th. In the 583 days since his remains have been held in Gaza.
And joining me now are Omer's parents, Ronen and Orna Neutra. Ronen and Orna, thank you so much for joining us today. This a moment of hope.
Obviously, you see Edan Alexander, a fellow Israeli-American, they're home in Israel now, soon to be reunited with his family. And I can't think of
two more brave and selfless people than the two of you right now, as you have been fighting for Edan, for all 59 hostages to come home, including
the remains of your beloved son as well. Can you just talk about what this moment is like for you?
ORNA NEUTRA, MOTHER OF OMER NEUTRA, CAPTURED AND KILLED ON OCTOBER 7: Wow. Bianna, it's so emotional really. You know, Edan's family lives here in New
Jersey and we are from New York and our sons share a lot in common. They actually both were on the same post on October 7th. And we knew in
hindsight that they knew each other.
So, we're so, so relieved to see Edan back. We've been alongside his family since October 7th very closely. And we can't wait to meet him. And of
course, there's still a lot of angst about, you know, what is expected in the next few days. And we're really trying to stay hopeful and with the
belief that this just the beginning of the end and the release of all the remaining hostages.
GOLODRYGA: And, Ronen, this had been reported from Hamas as a sign of goodwill, moving forward, the release of Edan Alexander has been also
reported that the U.S. is strongly pressuring Hamas to release the remains of the four other Americans that they continue to hold. Obviously, one of
them being Omer, your son.
[13:15:00]
And I wonder if you can explain to our viewers, we hear time and time again from President Trump, we just heard today before he departed for the region
how moved he was by families. I know that he spoke with you as well about the significance for you to have the remains of your son come home to be
with you, to be reunited. Can you walk us through some of the conversations that you've had with this administration?
RONEN NEUTRA, FATHER OF OMER NEUTRA, CAPTURED AND KILLED ON OCTOBER 7: Yes, sure. Absolutely. And you know, we've heard few officials telling us that
unfortunately dead is dead. And it is true possibly that our son has died on October 7th because he didn't get medical treatment as he was dragged
into the tunnels of Hamas.
Having said that, we are -- we can't stop. And we've told it to President Trump when he called us during the time that we said Shiva (ph), after we
were told that Omer was no longer alive in beginning of December, we told him that he has to help us get him back, that we are not going to rest
until we have his remains buried and we have a grave to go to.
And I think there was a little bit of a surprise in his voice, and I think we've seen throughout the times that we went to Washington, met with him
and his team, that the rhetoric has changed a little bit and they really recognize the fact that there are currently 35 deceased hostages, among
them four Americans. And those hostages are hostages. We are family and that's our son. And we -- he has to come to a proper burial that he
deserves as a hero.
He was one of the first responder to rush to the border to defend Israel during the October 7th attack. He deserves to have a proper burial. We
can't leave him in the rubbles of Gaza. So, we feel that the return of the 59 hostages, now 58, among them 35 remains, is the beginning of the healing
of the Israeli society, the beginning of the healing of the Middle East. And hopefully, getting into a place where Hamas will cease their actions
and we can see Gaza rebuild and Israel getting back to the peaceful life that Israel had before.
And all of this not going to happen unless the hostages are coming back. That's a humanitarian issue, but it's also the urgent issue, 21 living
hostages. The rest are remains, they all need come back, and the sooner the better.
GOLODRYGA: And, Orna, you and Ronen have a unique position of being able to speak with the U.S. government as an American citizen, and obviously, with
the Israeli government as Israeli citizens. And I'm wondering how you respond now to some of the concerns that the family members of the Israeli
hostages who remain in Gaza have right now, and that is without any living American hostages that perhaps President Trump won't have as much of a
dominant role here in pressuring an end to this war. And as you know, many of them don't feel that that same pressure is being reciprocated by Prime
Minister Netanyahu.
In fact, Alon Nimrodi, who's the father of a captured soldier, Tamir, said today to the Israeli media, it's a shame we're not all American citizens.
As dual citizens, how do you respond to that, Orna?
O. NEUTRA: Well, I think it's really unfortunate, you know, that the families feel that that they're getting more attention and more commitment
from the American government. I can talk about the American government and say that we've been assured that they are committed to releasing all of the
hostages.
Just this last Friday, we had 50 congressmen sign a bipartisan letter to the administration, calling for the release of the hostages, the American
hostages, and all the hostages. And we do see this commitment from the side of this administration. And the special envoy, Steve Witkoff and Adam
Boehler just today reaffirmed their commitment to releasing everyone.
And I think there's a realization, like Ronen said, that without releasing all the hostages, real change cannot come, real healing cannot come to the
Middle East. I'm really hoping that the same would go for the Israeli government, that they would take this opportunity. There's an opportunity
for real change, for rebuilding, for creating something new, and it won't begin before all the hostages are home.
[13:20:00]
The Israeli government knows that. And we really hope they take this opportunity that's being presented to them by the mediators right now to
take that path and make sure that they all come back.
GOLODRYGA: And, Ronen, I know you were critical of the resumption of the war back in March, what that meant for the hostages, what that meant for
Omer and his return. And now, the latest developments over the last week or so is Prime Minister Netanyahu threatening to even increase the military
operation even more heavily in Gaza.
If you were to speak to him right now, knowing everything we do, seeing the return of Edan Alexander, knowing that perhaps the president of the United
States when went above his head in making this deal happen, what would you say to him?
R. NEUTRA: Well, like Orna said, there is a true opportunity right now in the region. President Trump is meeting with Arab leaders. I think there is
a unanimous understanding that the war needs to end. I think we've heard President Trump also mentioning that he wants the war to end and he wants
the hostages back.
And I think what I like to tell Prime Minister Netanya is follow this leadership, end this war, bring relief to the Israeli people, bring all the
hostages back, first and foremost, and then let's start a rebuilding process and a healing process. Enough is enough.
The year and a half of war hasn't brought my son remains back. It's time to find a resolution, a political resolution, even if it's in -- risking his
own political position in Israel, that's what bold leadership looks like. And I'm asking Prime Minister Netanyahu to follow the strong leadership
that Trump has shown and follow his footsteps and do whatever it takes to take care of his own people. Just like Trump just took care of an American
citizen who happened to be an IDF soldier.
GOLODRYGA: Orna, I was fortunate to spend time with the both of you just a few months ago in New York. You told me about your son, Omer. I'm just
wondering in these last few moments, if you can tell our audience a little bit about him too.
O. NEUTRA: Oh, you know, yesterday was Mother's Day. That was another difficult day. You know, in another way. Omer was a kind, gentle soul, was
a big guy. Always the first one to make things light and make people feel included and cared for. He was an amazing boy, an attentive son.
You know, I was looking at my texts yesterday of things that he wrote to me on Mother's Day. My heart really -- my heart breaks. He -- you know, and he
did the right thing. He volunteered to serve on behalf of his people. We have a very big family in Israel and he viewed himself as a protector and
he was always willing to give from himself. I think that that really captures who he is.
GOLODRYGA: Well, Orna, you'll always be o Omer's mother, just as you'll always be his brother, Daniel's mother. And just as that community in
Tenafly, New Jersey has been welcoming the return of Edan Alexander, I know your community here in Long Island is long awaiting the return, the closure
for your family of Omen and his remains to finally be with you as well.
Ronen and Orna Neutra, thank you so much for taking the time. We really appreciate it.
R. NEUTRA: Thank you.
O. NEUTRA: Thank you, Bianna.
R. NEUTRA: Thank you.
GOLODRYGA: Well, next we turn to America's economic rollercoaster. President Trump has announced another 90-day pause on the trade war, this
time with China. A breakthrough and weekend talks in Geneva means both Beijing and Washington will slash tariffs on each other by more than 100
percent. Now, both countries have also agreed to establish to continue regular, quote, "discussions" about economic and trade relations.
Wall Street was buoyed by the news and business big and small will be breathing a sigh of relief, but uncertainty still remains. And besides the
nascent deal with the U.K. announced last week, President Trump's promised trade deals are mostly failing to materialize.
[13:25:00]
So, let's get some clarity now with Emily Feng. She's an international correspondent for NPR and has reported on the direct effects the China
tariffs have already had on average Americans. Also, with us is Felix Salmon, that chief financial correspondent for Axios. Welcome both of you.
Emily, let me start with you because I don't know that there was much anticipation in terms of concrete deals that people expected to come from
these two days in Geneva. And yet, here we had a remarkable breakthrough just in terms of a 90-day pause and a 30 percent tariff from the United
States. Walk us through your reaction to the news.
EMILY FENG, INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT, NPR: It feels like deja vu. So, I was based in Beijing in 2019, 2020 when the first trade war with China
began, and we're kind of seeing a position that's bringing us back to those years. Then it was a 25 percent tariff. Now, we have 30 percent American
tariffs on Chinese goods.
There's still no robust agreement on exactly what China and the U.S. will do to deal with the more substantive issues that the U.S. has issues with
things like trade imbalance, investment access to parts of the Chinese economy. All of that is supposed to come through this vague trade
consultation mechanism the two countries agreed to set up.
But right now, we're in this holding pattern. It's been extremely dramatic, and I know that importers and small businesses I've talked to in the U.S.
are relieved that maybe they can get some of their goods to the U.S. without paying tens of thousands of dollars in tariffs now. But it could be
that in 90 days, these negotiations fall through when they're facing double digit or triple digit tariffs once again.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. And that's what the president threatened today, saying perhaps it's not going to go up to 145 percent as the treasury secretary
had even admitted himself, that was unsustainable. But if they can't make any breakthroughs in this 90-day window, then tariffs would continue to
rise.
And, Felix, your reaction, because it does seem like there was immense pressure from President Trump. He will spin this as a win for him, as he
always has. But given that China itself was at the pinnacle of his new trade policy, to go from where he was to come down to 30 percent, that
looks like there was indeed some added pressure on him to come up with a deal quickly.
FELIX SALMON, CHIEF FINANCIAL CORRESPONDENT, AXIOS: There was, and it seems to me that there's been this big tension between Scott Bessent, the
treasury secretary, on the one hand, and like Howard Lutnick, the commerce secretary, and Peter Navarro on the other hand, and the Lutnick-Navarro
axis seems to have lost out to the Bessent axis. There's this feeling in the markets that with Bessent in charge, there's an adult in the room, and
that therefore, tariffs can come down to a vaguely workable level.
And remember, apropos to what you are seeing, the 30 percent tariffs on China are still three times higher than the 10 percent tariffs that are in
place right now on the rest of the world. So, Trump does still get to say that he has enormous tariffs on China, like many, many multiples, probably
in order of magnitude greater than anything that we have historically been used to in the post-war period.
GOLODRYGA: Fine. But, Felix, then walk us through what would've happened if on Liberation Day instead of getting this strange formula that they put
together and getting it wrong and putting all these arbitrary numbers and tariffs on almost every single trading partner we have.
If the president of the United States had come out and said there will be a blanket 10 percent tariff on every single country and China, because we
have long accused them of violating free trade practices and fair trade practices, will be faced with a 30 percent tariff. What would the reaction
been then?
SALMON: Way better than what we're seeing right now. So, that the -- there would've been this massive sigh of relief. The markets would've rallied.
The dollar would not have fallen as nearly as much as it has. There would've been this idea that Trump promised a flawed array of big tariffs,
that he'd delivered on that promise, but it wasn't going to be enough to destabilize the entire global economy, and it wouldn't have injected the
insane amount of uncertainty and unpredictability that we've seen over the past month.
So, everyone would be in a better place. You know, companies trading back and forth between the two countries, would have much more certainty about
what was going on. We wouldn't have seen all of the massive disruptions to shipping, to inflation. Yes, that would've been optimal, but it wouldn't
have allowed Donald Trump to do his sort of art of the deal of like, I like to come out with something crazy and maximal and then bargain backwards.
GOLODRYGA: Well, that's one way of looking at it. But, Emily, in terms of the lasting impact, just the uncertainty of the last month or so has had
not, only here in the United States obviously around the world, what impact are you seeing? I know you've reported on it on some companies and
consumers already.
[13:30:00]
FENG: There's a lot of uncertainty about whether the stability of the U.S. as a global economy is something that businesses investors can rely on. And
to Felix's point, I mean, to get to the current agreement that we have with China, it's been an incredibly painful and very, very uncertain process.
And for the Chinese whose economy is also starting to be hit by these tariffs, they're still wondering what the heck the U.S. wants. Is it to
reach a purchase agreement where Allah kind of the phase one trade deal of early 2020 where the U.S. wanted China to buy $200 billion worth more of
goods, is that the end goal? Because that didn't happen.
China didn't end up buying more stuff from the U.S. In fact, they're probably less inclined to invest and to buy in the U.S. now that the U.S.
has shown itself to be kind of a variable trade negotiator, or is it to open up parts of the Chinese economy to American investment, which might be
a national security concern for some regulators here in the U.S.
So, this still an ongoing process. It's very, very unclear where it's going, and it feels very, very unsafe. No matter if you're an American
business person or if you're a Chinese exporter that's looking at global trade.
GOLODRYGA: Right. Felix, because none of the underlying concerns that this administration had expressed going into Liberation Day seemed to be
addressed here and that is bringing manufacturing back to the United States, a complete rebalance in trade here. That isn't this. So, do we know
yet if that is still the ultimate goal of this administration or if the president was so spooked by the reaction that he saw that perhaps he will
settle ultimately at a 10 percent base tariff and 30 percent with China?
SALMON: I don't think this administration is ever going to settle on anything. It's not a stable administration. It's unlikely to ever stick to
one thing for years on end and not change it. Your guess is as good as mine, whether the next move in tariff rates between the U.S. and China is
going to be up or down. I genuinely have no idea, but what I can tell you is that the main thing that Donald Trump has managed to do is put tariffs
on the agenda as the number one mechanism that he likes to use to solve just about every problem that he sees, and he sees this as a positive deal.
I don't think that he sees this as a means to an end, but I do think that Scott Bessent would like to see the Chinese government really moving away
from exports as the big driver of their economy to domestic consumption. And if they can try and persuade the Chinese to make internal structural
reforms along those lines, I think Bessent, for one, would be happy.
GOLODRYGA: Emily, how are the Chinese -- how is -- are the trade negotiators who were in Switzerland over the weekend taking part in these
talks? How are they portraying this outcome?
FENG: They're showing it as a sign of mutual respect between the two countries. They've said basically kind of glowing positive things about the
weekend talks that they were candid, in depth, constructive. There's been remarkable coordination in the public statements from both countries, both
delegations, which is kind of unusual, but I want to know, I mean, I think this more economic pain than maybe trying to bargain for in the second
Trump term.
But they've been preparing for something like this and preparing for more economic resilience and trying to move themselves away from an economy
that's reliant on exports for at least the last six years. So, this not something that's caught China by surprise.
The degree to which maybe, you know, the level of tariffs that the U.S. imposed on Chinese goods might be surprising to them and the speed at which
this has happened, but it's something that China has been trying to prepare and gird itself against for many, many years now by shoring up their own
supply chains, bringing manufacturing for things like intermediate goods back to China as well.
GOLODRYGA: Do we know, Emily, yet the impact that this or what role, if any, sort of the rare earth material restrictions that China put in place
over the last few weeks and the export controls that they put on certain U.S. companies? Is that factored in at all in the outcome of these
negotiations?
FENG: That was not put out in the public readouts. It was not mentioned by both sides and press conferences today. I'm sure this on the negotiating
table, but this also something that's much more slow moving and I think will not be reflected in the initial talks.
GOLODRYGA: And yet, important details for investors, for companies --
FENG: Absolutely.
GOLODRYGA: -- for businesses to digest as they make their plans going forward. Felix, how much of this do you think was driven, not only by what
the president had heard from some of the country's top executives about what a prolonged trade war with China could look like in just the coming
days, empty store shelves, higher prices, a recession, but also what his fellow Republicans and Congress have been warning him about their concerns
as to what this could mean in the midterms, in the months to come from their own constituents who are very worried?
[13:35:00]
SALMON: Right. We've definitely seen a bunch of anger at Republican members of Congress, who, by the way, like they're not completely Trumpist, there
are still a lot of laissez-faire, libertarian free traders on the Republican side of the aisle in Congress, and they hate tariffs. They just
don't like talking about that in public anymore.
I will say that you are absolutely right, the prospect of empty shelves, especially at Walmart and Target, they -- the CEOs of Walmart and Target
went to meet Trump and they said at the back-to-school season, which we're buying for right now, there won't be backpacks. There won't be t-shirts,
there won't be sneakers, people are going to blame you for that. I think that hit home much more than what you were talking about rare earths.
Rare earths, honestly, they don't matter. They have this name that makes them sound that they matter, but they're very cheap and you can get them.
But things like backpacks and T-shirts, people really notice.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. And hence the president sort of snide comments. They got a lot of pickup about not needing 30 dolls, just two and only five pencils.
Felix, while we have you, I do want to ask you something that, that's a bit of a different subject, but it's something that's garnered a lot of
attention too in just the past 24 hours, and that is the Trump administration apparently set to accept a luxury plane from the Qatari
royal family that will be retrofitted to use as Air Force One.
Aside from just the optics and the legal questions perhaps at play here, what do you make of this? I mean, there's also a lot of security concerns
as well.
SALMON: None of this makes any sense, Bianna. Like it makes no sense at all. Well, it makes sense on the level of this being described as a flying
palace. It is very opulent on the inside. The interior design is great. Other than that, it makes no sense.
The amount of time it takes to convert this into Air Force One. Air Force one is a flying command center. It has weaponry, it has secure
communications. It has a whole bunch of stuff that Boeing is already working on building a new Air Force One on an existing 747. He does not
want to go back to scratch and try and do that with a brand-new plane, which by the way, probably already has a bunch of weird spy stuff put in
there by the Qataris that they're going to need to go over very carefully to take out before then they put in the new stuff.
It would take longer to get the -- this plane up in the air and it would take the -- to get the Boeing plane up in the air. And then, by the time he
does get up in the air, he's barely got any time left in his presidency, it then is meant to get transferred to his foundation, what his library
foundation. No one knows what his library foundation is supposed to do with a $400 million plane. He says he is not going to be flying it, but that
makes sense because it can barely fly anywhere. These planes are so enormous, they can't land in the vast majority of airports in the world.
It costs -- because it's so enormous, it costs roughly. $40 million a year just to sort of keep it going. None of this makes any sense.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. But if you ask the president, as he was asked today, he said to quote him, "You'd be stupid not to accept a plane like this." We'll
see. We'll see where this story ends up. Felix Salman and Emily Feng, thank you so much.
SALMON: Thank you.
FENG: Thank you.
GOLODRYGA: Well, now, to the Vatican where Pope Leo XIV is letting his voice be heard. In his first Sunday address, making a plea for peace in
Ukraine and Gaza. And today, addressing the media. He called for the release of imprisoned journalists worldwide.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
POPE LEO XIV (through translator): The suffering of these imprisoned journalists challenges the conscience of nations and the International
Community, calling on all of us to safeguard the precious gift of free speech and of the press.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: Ukraine's President Zelenskyy also says he's spoken with the pope and has invited him for a visit. Now, these are just the first actions
by the new head of the Catholic Church. But what do they say about the once Cardinal Robert Prevost to end his priorities?
Joining me now to discuss is someone who took part of the conclave that elected him, Cardinal Michael Czerny was appointed by Pope Francis in 2019
and served as Pope Francis' top aid on migration and development. And he joins me now from Rome. Cardinal Czerny, thank you so much for taking the
time.
Can you just give us an insider's view of how this all played out? How Cardinal Prevost came from being a cardinal born in the United States who'd
lived in Peru for decades, becoming a dual citizen, ultimately then becoming the next pope, Pope Leo, XIV?
CARDINAL MICHAEL CZERNY: Well, all I can say is that we're very, very happy with how the conclave turned out. And we firmly believe that God guided us
in our choice, which we made with the best of our abilities. So, with our - - all our background, everything we knew. And so, we are very, very happy to have, a very -- a wonderful pope at the head of the church again.
[13:40:00]
GOLODRYGA: And clearly, it was a firm consensus coordinated around in a very timely manner the selection of Cardinal Prevost. Did you know him well
before, and can you tell us about his demeanor or what can you tell us about his demeanor throughout the conclave?
CZERNY: I can't tell you about his demeanor throughout the conclave because we have sworn an oath not to talk about the conclave, but I can tell you
that he's a soft-spoken thoughtful listening person. I would underline the word listening. He's usually the one who speaks the least and listens the
most, and this very, very promising.
This what Pope Francis -- you could say if you ask Pope Francis, tell us in one word what is going to really help all these problems that we face
inside and outside the church, he would certainly say the word listening. So, to have a listening Holy Father is a great, great, great blessing for
the church and for the world.
GOLODRYGA: And why -- Pope Leo, Cardinal Prevost to you up until just last week, why do you think he is the right man for this role right now? Well,
because we believe that and we experience that God guides us in this choice.
It's not a -- it's not like a convention where you line up your supporters and you give your speech. It's a different kind of process. It's very
human, very spiritual process. We put our whole selves, our heart and soul into it. And the result is a great -- it's a gift from God and is -- the
Holy Father chosen with God's help by the college of cardinals.
GOLODRYGA: What do you make of this sort of unspoken norm that had been just accepted that there wouldn't be an American pope, given America's
dominance as a global superpower in the world, that perhaps there would be too much influence over the Vatican, and yet, that was proven wrong?
CZERNY: That was proven wrong because the criterion of nationality, race, color really has nothing to do with the selection and election of the Holy
Father. And secondly, if I may change what you said slightly, we don't think of him so much as an American pope. We think of him as a pope from
the Americas, and that's not the same.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. So, you'll have to forgive me because being here in the United States, there has been a lot of interpretation and jubilation, I
have to say, and pride in having an American-born pope. As you know, his brothers have given a number of interviews. It is just stunning. And I have
to say some of the best footage I've seen recently of then-Cardinal Prevost sitting at baseball games and just enjoying his favorite White Sox team
there in Chicago. So, this going to take getting used to here in the United States. But your point is taken.
In these early few days, can you walk us --
CZERNY: If I could interrupt?
GOLODRYGA: Yes.
CZERNY: No. But I would just say that the people of Peru, and especially of his diocese of Chiclayo are just as happy and just as excited.
GOLODRYGA: Yes, of course.
CZERNY: And they -- that doesn't take anything away from the joy in the United States or the joy here in Rome or throughout the world. But I really
like to think of him as our new pope from the Americas.
GOLODRYGA: And listen, the common theme here is joy, because you're right, with the bandwidth we have at CNN, we had reporters all over the globe and
we had many there in Peru who spoke with those locals who had gotten to know him so well and they were equally excited at his appointment there as
pope.
Can you walk us through what these early days are in terms of a political or a functioning, a working inbox? I keep talking about political because
we use that word, inbox, for newly elected officials, but here it's a bit differently. Some -- what are some of the top priorities here for Pope Leo?
CZERNY: Well, actually, again, because he's not a political leader I don't think that that way of thinking helps very, very much. It's true that three
months, six months, nine months from now, we'll look back and say, oh, from the balcony he said this, or to the journalists, he said that, and that was
a premonition or a foretaste of something that he's doing now in July or next October.
[13:45:00]
But don't read him as if he was a policy person. He's not a policy person. He's a spiritual a spiritual leader. And he's making each step, he's taking
each step, he's making each move on the basis of the situation, the circumstances, his convictions, and above all, his faith in Christ and his
hope for the church and for the world.
So, I can't give you a political reading because it's not a series of political statements. He's not -- this not like the famous first hundred
days that you have in different administrations. So, I can't give you a political reading. But I can give you a very joyful reading that each step
is a message, you might even say it's a revelation and it's a source of joy and hope. And those of us who are privileged to work here, we'll do our
best to carry on with the -- with his leadership and guidance.
GOLODRYGA: Where can we expect to see some commonalities and then some differences perhaps in style and priorities and issues that Pope Leo
chooses to speak out about in terms of his relation to his predecessor?
CZERNY: I think the one very sound reading that you can make is this, that while Pope Francis known for his focus or emphasis on migrants, vulnerable
migrants, although in fact his approach was much broader than that, but that's what he was known maybe principally for. Whereas Pope Leo, by
choosing the name he did, is including the very important issue of the how and the dignity and the humanity of migrants is protected as it should be
at every step. He's including that in the larger issue of work.
And maybe you know the great encyclical of his predecessor, Pope Leo XIII, being encyclical called Rerum Novarum, which is about human work and he's
including migration in the bigger issue of work, which is of concern to the vast majority of us on this planet. How are we going to earn our living?
How are we going to live our lives when there are nearly no jobs?
That's a question that so many, many, many people are facing. And he -- by this choice of his name, he is signaling that he's going to seek to lead
the church to accompany people everywhere in the enormous -- facing the enormous challenge of how -- as I see, how are we going to live? How are we
going to have a decent life when there are fewer and fewer jobs, and especially fewer and fewer interesting jobs?
GOLODRYGA: An enormous challenge at that. And of course, we all hope and wish him nothing but success. Cardinal Michael Czerny, thank you so much
for joining us.
CZERNY: Thank you. It's a pleasure to be with you. Thank you so much
GOLODRYGA: Thank you. And we'll be right back after this short break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:50:00]
GOLODRYGA: Now, as President Trump dismantles the Department of Education with billions of dollars in proposed cuts, our next guest says the
struggling public school system could be pushed to the breaking point. Randi Weingarten, the president of the American Federation of Teachers
wants to offer an alternative future for U.S. education, one that could prepare students for pathways besides college. She joins Hari Sreenivasan
to discuss her vision and the obstacles standing in the way.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
HARI SREENIVASAN, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Bianna, thanks. Randi Weingarten, thanks so much for joining us. Last week you wrote an op-ed in
The New York Times, the title was, "Stop Trying to Make Everyone Go To College." Why did you write this piece? Why are you proposing this now?
RANDI WEINGARTEN, PRESIDENT, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS: What we've been seeing a lot of late, meaning for the last like five years, is that 40
percent of kids who graduate from high school don't go to college.
Now, there's lots of reasons for it, but that's a lot of kids, and that only 60 percent of those who go to college actually graduate within eight
years. So, we're doing a lot of things to make sure that college is a real pathway, but what we are saying is let's open up the aperture and let's
have other pathways as well. Let's have career pathways. That can lead to pre-apprenticeship programs, can lead to trade programs, cyber programs,
healthcare programs. There's 4 million healthcare jobs or will be in the next 10 years.
And let's start that in high school, not after high school. When kids have guidance counselors, when they have people that could actually help them.
And what we've seen is that in the career tech ed programs that I've taught and others have taught, there's a 95 percent graduation rate and a 70
percent rate of kids going to college. So, what we are saying, it's let's really make high school the gateway to college and career, to both and
instead of just to college.
SREENIVASAN: So, why do you think it is that we have the type of matriculation rates and the type of college entrance that you're talking
about?
WEINGARTEN: Well, I think there's a lot of reasons, and I think it's part of the really false narrative that is going on right now that's assaulting,
you know, the -- all this assault on universities, the assault on knowledge. I think what you're seeing is that people don't see the
pathways. When you see a level that great, 40 percent, it means it's not just about college being not affordable, it's that they don't see it, they
don't feel it, they don't believe it, they don't feel empowered, and we're seeing this with boys -- you know, significantly with boys right now, the
disaffection, the disorientation, we're seeing it in rural areas as well.
[13:55:00]
But for me, seeing that data, we have to find a way to make sure we meet kids' needs. And the last thing I'll say is this. COVID really broke us
all. And I think we have to find ways to make schools, K-12, engaging and relevant to kids. Since basically the late '90s early 2000s, we've had an
accountability system that's been very focused on testing, not on experiential learning or -- you know, or critical thinking or things like
that.
And I think what's happened is during COVID, kids felt like, OK, we don't have to go to school. And it is incumbent on us to make schools safe and
welcoming and engaging and relevant to young people. And I think that what I've seen with the career tech ed programs that we have helped foster plus
that others have done, is that it gets kids engaged. It creates critical thinking, problem solving, skills of resilience, practical skills. But most
importantly, kids have fun and they feel confident and they feel agency.
SREENIVASAN: What kind of systemic changes would we need to try to scale that so it's a standard path?
WEINGARTEN: I think one of the things we need is to change the accountability system so that performance-based assessments are going to be
very valid, because the way you're talking -- when you're talking about career tech ed, when you're talking about pre-apprenticeship programs, when
you're talking about alignment to industry, performance-based, stackable credentials, micro credentials are really those that can show
accountability very easily and very quickly. You know, when you know it, you do it in terms of hands-on learning. So, that's one.
But the second is, and you know this frankly as well as I do, schools and school districts have a hard time changing unless they get the permission
structure to change. So, we also have to deal with the stigma that -- you know, that this kind of work is really valid and important work. And if a
kid chooses to go in the direction of, you know, a career path, you know, community college, doing an LPN program to a nurse program, for example, or
advanced manufacturing, we have to, as American society think about that as just as important as a first step to other kinds of career paths.
And so, I think that there's an issue about stigma. There's an issue about expense in terms of making sure that districts really align with colleges
as well as with businesses, and then there's an issue of accountability. I think it's those three things.
SREENIVASAN: I wonder right now there is fairly reasonable bipartisan support for, you know, apprenticeships and implementing career and
technical education and I'm thinking of Secretary of Educational Linda McMahon. She tweeted, apprenticeship programs are a pathway to successful
career. So, if Republicans and Democrats can kind of agree on this, what's slowing it down?
WEINGARTEN: Well, first off you can't cut $330 billion from the student loan system and from the Pell Grant system, which could actually pave for
some post-secondary opportunities. So, the administration has to decide that they actually want this more than a rhetorical tweet or statement.
They have to invest in it. And so, we have to invest in the kind of career paths and the kind of laboratories and things like that, as well as giving
students the opportunities so that they can go to a post-secondary, you know, apprenticeship program or even a post-secondary community college.
We have to work with industry to actually have the jobs and the pre- apprenticeship programs and the internship programs, we have to do all of that.
SREENIVASAN: Since the president has taken office again, the administration's taken several steps to dismantle the Department of
Education, as you pointed out. And you know, we literally have an executive order to the secretary of education trying to tell her to prepare for the
department's closure. Can you help explain to our audience members what are some of the trickle-down effects if there is no Department of Education?
[14:00:06]
WEINGARTEN: So, there's very practical effects, but let me first talk about the symbolic effects. We started -- Johnson did, post-Brown versus Board of
Education, the focus on opportunity through the Elementary and Secondary School Acts 60 years ago, the education function in the United States
government was a way of saying post-World War II.
This is about opportunity. This is about helping all our kids succeed. So, this is the first President who's basically said, no, not, no, we're not
going to do it anymore. That's crazy. In a world of that's constantly changing, that's constantly innovating, for us to out-compete China, we
have to out-educate China.
And so, that's what the -- that's what the federal role in education does. So, the knock-on effects, the -- if you get rid of the Department of
Education, I mean, you and I could probably find a whole bunch of efficiencies that the department should do -- could do and should do.
But the evisceration is not efficiencies. And what I'm most concerned about, just like I've seen in this, you know, push on reconciliation to get
rid of essentially every single bit of how we help young people finance going to college. That's what they're getting rid of. Every single bit of
it. How -- what happens when they get rid of $100 billion of education funding that goes to the states and local communities, like all of the
Title One money.
What happens if they block grant? Which is what their proposal is? What happens to the kids that get reading specialists right now because of Title
One money? Twenty percent of the funding that goes to Mississippi comes from Title One. One out of every $7 that districts spend around America
comes from the federal Department of Education.
So, what I'm worried about is I'm worried about the withdrawal of a focus on opportunity for all. And the second thing I'm worried about is the
money. When you take one out of every $7 away from young people, who's going to make it up? Tax increases in local communities, or if you don't
make it up, who are the kids that really get hurt?
The same kids we've been talking about all day, the kids who are poor, kids who are disabled, kids who are trying to learn English. Kids are going to
college, who -- whose parents can't afford it, kids who are getting this Perkins money, this career tech-ed money. That's who's hurt.
SREENIVASAN: Look, the supporters of the President might use your very statistics against you and say, look, if this system was not broken, why
aren't we graduating 100 percent of the kids from high school? Why aren't they going on to college or whatever it is? Right, so --
WEINGARTEN: Well, that's why -- that's why I'm focused on career tech-ed, because I see the statistics, and I see that 95 percent of the kids who are
going to these career tech-ed programs are graduating from high school, graduating from high school on time, and 70 percent are going to college.
So, what we're trying to do is look at the things that work and actually say, why do they work? What's going on? And once we see that they work,
let's do more of it. Not as an either or, but a both/and. And that requires resources.
SREENIVASAN: What's wrong with the idea that the administration has to push these education dollars back out to the states, and considering the
curriculum and so forth, is usually decided by the state and local communities on what kinds of curriculum a child reads or studies and how
they do. Why not push the money closer to where the student is versus a centralized system?
WEINGARTEN: Ninety percent of the money in America that goes to education comes from state and local dollars. The issue here is that we want that
money going to kids, not going to voucher systems and not going to other places.
SREENIVASAN: Why do you think the voucher system -- I'm thinking specifically in Texas right now, Governor Abbott signed a significant new
piece of legislation that is going to change Texas education for quite some time. Why do you think its picking up traction in places like Texas and
Florida?
WEINGARTEN: Well, when you go to the voters, the voters reject it. The Texas legislature rejected it five times two years ago.
[14:05:00]
And then, people, billionaires like Jeffrey Yass actually spent a lot of money to oust those legislators. And in fact, what is happening right now
is rural legislators are really opposed to this. If you look at the statistic -- if you look at polling results in Texas and other places,
people do not want to defund their public schools.
And in fact, if you look at the NAEP scores in places like Florida, the NAEP scores have tumbled in the aftermath of what we've seen as an increase
in these voucher programs. I -- you know, I am married to a rabbi. People want to go to religious schools. They have the right to do that. That is
their right. That's their American right. That's their right personally and socially.
I want the kids who go to public schools to have the resources that they need to have the opportunity to which they are entitled. And every time
this question goes to voters, it's voted down.
SREENIVASAN: Randi Weingarten; President of the American Federation of Teachers, thanks so much for your time.
WEINGARTEN: Thank you.
GOLODRYGA: And that is it for now, thank you so much for watching and goodbye from New York.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
END
