Return to Transcripts main page

Smerconish

Shutdown Expected To Extend Until Next Week; Sen. Chris Coons, (D-DE), Is Interviewed About Government Shutdown; Polarization Has Erased Moderates From Congress; When Blue-Collar Democrats Began Drifting Right. Is Gen Z Unemployable? Aired 9-10a ET

Aired October 04, 2025 - 09:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SERIGNE MBAYE, CHEF, DAKAR NOLA: An African word, ki ngombo, which means okra.

So in Senegal, we have this dish called soupou kanja.

So as you can see the pot is almost coming to a boil.

So soupou means soup and kanja mean okra. The soupou kanja is pretty much the classic New Orleans gumbo. Classic New Orleans gumbo's okra and seafood.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN ANCHOR: You could just say -- "New Orleans Soul of a City" premieres tomorrow night at 10:00 p.m. on CNN. Thanks for watching. See you next Saturday. Smerconish starts now.

[09:00:39]

MICHAEL SMERCONISH, CNN ANCHOR: Hand me the phone book. I'm Michael Smerconish in the Philly burbs.

The late, great William F. Buckley once said, I would rather be governed by the first 2,000 people in the Manhattan phone book than the entire faculty of Harvard. I'm feeling the same way about Congress. It's day four of this government shutdown, more than 700,000 federal workers are being marginalized by the grandstanding of elected officials seeking to curry favor with their base.

I know how we got here, back in March, Democrats agreed to temporarily fund the government, but now where a continuing resolution is needed to keep the government open, they're demanding Republicans make concessions regarding health care. Specifically, they want an extension of enhanced Obamacare subsidies that were part of the COVID stimulus package set to expire this year, and a reversal of Trump cuts to Medicaid and other health programs in a battle over which types of immigrants are eligible. My heart is with the Democrats. I like to joke that the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare, is the worst system of supplying health care to Americans, except for all the alternatives. Socialism? Hardly. As first suggested by the Conservative Heritage Foundation, the ACA requires that everybody have health insurance, just like you need car insurance.

And that includes the young invincibles because with the buy in of healthy Gen Zers, the overall insurance pool has the stability to insure those with preexisting conditions. It makes sense. With everybody covered, the incentive exists for health insurers to participate in exchanges where customers can go Allah Amazon and make purchases that are best for themselves and their families.

I'm an independent contractor with both CNN and Sirius XM. This is how and where I get my health insurance. And there's nothing Mamdani about it. But while like the Democrats I'm protective of the ACA, their efforts to shut down the government violate my time and place rule. Because Republicans have advanced a clean, continuing resolution. This is not the time and place to litigate health insurance policy.

The objective should be to fund the obligations already made by the Congress. And if the result is catastrophic insurance losses and premium hikes for consumers, the solution should come in next year's midterm election. Meanwhile, 700,000 federal employees are being used as pawns. It's not fair to them and will only discourage others from seeking federal employment as well as damage Americans faith in the workings of their government.

But let's not lose sight of how we got here. We aren't governed by some random sampling from the phone book, it's worse. We're governed by those who have a vested interest in a process that rewards extremism. Incendiary speech raises money, soundbites get you booked in the polarized media and partisan voices have outsized influence over primary voters, especially in closed primary states. And that's the vicious cycle of our modern American politics.

And no, it hasn't always been like this. Maybe you've heard the saying, the past is a foreign country? Our political past is more like a different planet. As I've often noted, as recently as the Reagan 80s, according to the National Journal, 60 percent of the House and Senate comprised of moderates. Back then, Reagan and Democratic House Speaker Tip O'Neill regularly clashed.

But when it came down to it, these adversaries managed to make deals. As Tip O'Neill's son put it in the New York Times, "No, my father and Reagan weren't close friends. But famously, after 6:00 p.m. on quite a few work days, they would sit down for drinks at the White House. But it wasn't the drinks or the conversation that allowed American government to work. Instead, it was a stubborn refusal not to allow fundraisers, activists, party platforms, or ideological chasms to stand between them, and actions, tempered and improved by compromise, that kept the country moving."

Bismarck famously observed, politics is the art of the possible. But today there are very few adults left in the room because a kid might take his ball and go home. But adults are supposed to understand you can't get everything you want. The point of negotiation is not to utterly destroy the other side, but to reach an agreement you can live with, even though you feel you gave up something. And that's what's missing in Washington today.

That's what Washington is supposed to do when operating properly. And it wasn't that long ago when we could expect at least some spirit of compromise. But gradually that spirit has eroded and more recently, both parties have shifted to the extremes, even since the last shutdown in 2018.

[09:05:16]

As pointed out by Carl Hulse in the New York Times this week, dealmakers who once ruled the landscape have gone the way of the dodo. Quote, "The Democrats from red states who decried the shutdown strategy as a foolish miscalculation and pressed for an immediate reversal in the showdown with President Trump seven years ago are long gone. The ideological makeup of the party has shifted to the left, and Democrats are now bracing for an extended confrontation with the White House and congressional Republicans despite the clear political risks. The same dynamic is at play in the GOP, which has lurched to the right under Mr. Trump and no longer sees room for compromise."

There are very few exceptions, members who act with civility and with independence. I think that Chris Coons is one. That's why I've invited him to be on today's program.

It's important to note that the parties, the parties have changed, not the people. What Morris Fiorina, author of "Unstable Majorities," calls party sorting, the electorate is pretty much the same as it was 50 years ago, but the two parties have become more ideologically uniform and further apart fueled by the partisan media.

Here are some milestones that I think illustrate what I'm describing. Go back to 1964 Southern Democrats, the Democrats filibustered, the Civil Rights act for 57 days, 27 Republican senators joined the northern Democrats to break it. Indeed, Republican sword -- supported the Civil Rights Act Republicans in higher percentages than the Democrats. In 1972, environmentalists targeted the dirty dozen anti- environment members of Congress. Five of them were Democrats, including the Interior Chair who then lost his primary.

In 1981, President Reagan's tax cuts passed with the help of 48 House Democrats. In the 1990s, gun control legislation was often blocked by Democrats like John Dingell, a board member of the NRA. And then the century turned. Everybody suited up in their party uniform.

2001 President George W. Bush passed his tax cuts, Reagan had 48 Democrats, Bush had only 13. 2010, President Obama passed the Affordable Care Act with zero, a blue Tarski of Republican support. 2022 President Biden's Inflation Reduction Act followed suit. Another straight party line vote, not a single Republican joined Democrats on that bill to address climate change, health care and taxes. And this year, when President Trump won passage of his big beautiful bill, not a single Democrat was supportive. Reflecting on what William F. Buckley said, maybe it was a bad sign 10 to 20 years ago when they stopped giving out phone books because since then the age of cross party coalitions is over and compromise is the new C word.

Joining me now to talk about it is Democratic Senator Chris Coons of Delaware, who maybe right now is wondering why he accepted my invitation.

Senator Coons, thank you for being here. You said on the eve of the shutdown, quote, "I'm usually one of the first to walk across the aisle and say, let's find a solution, let's find a way out of it." How come not this time?

SEN. CHRIS COONS (D-DE), VICE CHAIR, SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON ETHICS: Well, Michael, thank you. Thanks for a chance to be on and thank you for that thorough review of the history of partisanship and bipartisanship in recent years. I'm just going to start by reminding you that as recently as two and three years ago, we had a president who was signing into law the most significant bipartisan pieces of legislation in decades. So it's not as if bipartisan dealmakers and the possibilities of bipartisanship have disappeared. But this most recent election has put in place a president and a majority who are utterly uninterested in it.

I regularly interacted with President Trump and his White House in his first term. We haven't spoken once since the inauguration. I used to hear from his legislative affairs office, from different cabinet members in his first term, not once in this administration. And the point you just made, that the most important focus of the Trump legislative initiative this Congress was this -- was the so called big, beautiful bill and it passed without a single Democrat is right. And what was the most important thing that bill did?

It cut taxes for billionaires and profitable companies, the most profitable companies. And it ended access to health care for millions of Americans, which is starting to take effect at the end of this year and then two years later. Why pick a fight over health care right now? Because the costs are finally hitting home for millions of Americans.

[09:10:09]

Here in Delaware, our insurance commissioner has made it clear that the Affordable Care Act exchange, the Obamacare exchange, those rates are going up 30 percent. And as you said earlier, if you push the healthy folks who can still afford to be a part of that health insurance pool out of coverage, it ends the Affordable Care Act. Trump's first term was largely about trying to repeal Obamacare. As I'm sure you remember, my friend John McCain ended that effort. Now they're trying to end access to affordable health care for millions through this method. What's the consequence?

All of us will have more costly health insurance. All of us will face greater wait times in emergency rooms. And as of this week, all of us are facing higher costs for prescription medications because of Trump's tariffs. I don't like a shutdown. I don't think this is good for our country. I don't think it's good for our military. I don't think it's good for compromise. But we have to see some movement towards reversing these cuts.

I understand that compromise means we won't get all of them, but when the Senate Republican majority agreed with Mike Johnson, Speaker Johnson from the House, and stepped back from appropriations negotiations, I said we've got to find a moment and leverage to get back to the table on cutting the disaster -- on reversing the disastrous cuts to NIH and the CDC and working together to reverse these disastrous cuts to affordable health care for Americans.

SMERCONISH: OK, quick reaction. I think the timeline doesn't support you insofar as you're a month off, meaning when open enrollment begins on November 1st, and now the rubber meets the road in the mailbox, people are going to wake up to what Senator Coons is saying. I don't think they're there yet. And I don't think you can keep the government shut down for an additional month.

Second point is, if everything you're saying is accurate, and by the way, I believe in the accuracy of what you're saying, then Republicans will be due for a shellacking in the midterm election. What's wrong --

COONS: Yes.

SMERCONISH: -- with that being --

COONS: They will.

SMERCONISH: -- the way to handle this?

COONS: So waiting until insurance rates are locked in and not changeable and negotiating in November and December and waiting until millions of Americans suffer the loss of health care, higher health care costs, longer wait times isn't what Democrats do because we want to fix the problem. On the floor of the Senate, talking to a group of Republicans and Democrats this week, one of them said, why are you guys trying to help us fix this problem if it's really such a big political win for you? And I said, because we don't want the American people to suffer.

You're absolutely right, Michael, the right thing to do from a narrow, partisan political sense is to just fold our arms and say, you wait and see, when health care costs go through the roof, people are going to be mad. When rural hospitals close, people are going to be mad and will benefit in the next election. But I don't want to wait --

SMERCONISH: Well, I think --

COONS: -- until those hospitals close. I just met this week --

SMERCONISH: All right.

COONS: -- with the head of the Delaware Hospital Association. They're freaking out over the costs to health care for Delawareans. And I want us to have a focused conversation this week that will hopefully put us on a path towards negotiating a resolution.

SMERCONISH: OK. I watched that video and I recommend others do it as well in your social media. I'm hoping the government reopens and these issues get negotiated because come November, I think people are going to recognize the strength of what you're saying.

Thank you for being back here. I wish we had more time, Senator Coons.

Joining me now to talk about this is David Wasserman, the senior editor and elections analyst for the Cook Political Report with Amy Walter. He's recognized as one of the nation's top election forecasters.

David, it occurs to me there's a new definition of moderate these days in Washington.

DAVID WASSERMAN, ELECTION FORECASTER: Yes, that's right. Look, 15 years ago in the Senate, there were 17 states with senators of different parties, which meant that they kind of had to work together to get things done for their states. Today there are only two states that have split Senate delegations, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Fifteen years ago, there were 23 senators from parties that were opposite what the presidential candidate in their state won. And today there are only 11 senators from parties won by presidential candidates of the opposite states.

And so we've had this surge in straight voting in just the last couple of cycles that has led to a total polarization and of not just the House, which is up every two years, but the Senate, which is up every six years. And in the House, it's even more dramatic in the Obama -- heading into the Obama first midterm, there were 83 members from congressional districts won by the opposite party's presidential candidate. Today, there are only 16 members, 13 Democrats and three Republicans from crossover districts who have any incentive to get together and get things done. So this shutdown is taking place during a very different set of political circumstances from previous ones.

[09:15:33]

SMERCONISH: And it's gotten a lot worse just in the last couple of years. If I mention the personalities, I think that sometimes that illustrates the point. Joe Manchin would be at the top of my list. Lamar Alexander would be on my list as well. I'll give you one from each side of the aisle just pointing to people who were like Coons, like Senator Coons of the sort, willing to get in a room and get it done.

Who -- so my question to David Wasserman, knowing the complexion, the makeup of the House and Senate so well, is who can we look to now in the Senate as brokering this kind of a deal?

WASSERMAN: Well, I think we probably know how this shutdown ends. And the hint was three Democratic senators who broke ranks and voted to --

SMERCONISH: Right. WASSERMAN: -- avert a shutdown. John Fetterman from Pennsylvania, Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, Angus King from Maine. And look, fundamentally, Democrats are a party that is incentivized by some of their primary base because I think it's absorbed a lot of previous moderates from the Republican Party to embrace pragmatism and keeping open, whereas Republicans are a party that's more hostile to a functional federal government. Democrats want to see things open. And so I do think you'll see Democrats after a while fold and argue that they'll take their fight to the midterms.

They do have a better chance of regaining some power, at least in the House, especially because the administration, President Trump, Russ Vaught, they're just mass layoffs of federal workers but they're also targeting funding for projects in blue states. And at some point, I think Democrats are to try and claim a messaging victory that they were able to shift the focus nationally onto health care and in particular Medicaid cuts and the looming Obamacare cliff, which are potent issues for them next November.

SMERCONISH: David Wasserman, as always, we appreciate your expertise. Thank you for being here.

What are your thoughts if you're at home? Hit me up on social media. Follow me on X, subscribe to my YouTube channel.

Of course your heart is with the Dems, it usually is. Foster, I'm nuanced, OK? I'm not here to -- do I just say this every week, I'm not here to carry anybody's water. The Affordable Care Act, so maligned and yet intuitively makes so much sense. Let's all get insurance.

If we all have insurance, hey, we can take care of the people among us with preexisting conditions. Here's a radical idea, let's set up an exchange. And just as we all are akin to going on Amazon and buying a product, we can buy our health insurance there.

When I did it, when the Affordable Care Act first rolled out, I had 26 different choices. They only came from a handful of carriers, but nevertheless, I could go through each one of them like I would -- like I was buying a mini fridge and decide, oh, that's the product for me. And meanwhile, people are hoisting Gadsden flags, don't tread on me. Really? Don't tread on you?

Why? Because you want to show up in an ER without insurance and burden me? No. Everybody get insurance.

Gen Z, they call it self-care and authenticity. Hiring managers call it a problem. Is this generation really unemployable or just misunderstood? Suzy Welch has inspired today's poll question at smerconish.com. We're going to get to it later in the program.

Here it is. Will Gen Z, like previous generations, eventually find its footing?

And decades before Donald Trump, blue-collar Democrats began to leave the party, the hard hat riot marked that shift. A milestone moment. Could history be repeating itself now but with Hispanic voters? We'll ask the man who wrote the book on the subject.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And you take that flag and throw it on the floor and step on it. You just made it personal.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are the second American Revolution. We are winning.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I approve of what you're doing because it's going to cause a revolution, but not your kind, my kind?

[09:19:41]

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Richard Nixon will seize this moment and shift the Republican Party from blue bloods to blue-collars. The hard hat riot is a microcosm of the polarization that will come to define American life.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SMERCONISH: Fifty-five years ago, New York City's skylines were rising and so were tensions. On May 8, 1970, in what came to be known as the Hard Hat Riot, thousands of construction workers poured off steel beams building the World Trade Center and into the streets of Lower Manhattan, where they clashed with student protesters demonstrating against the Vietnam War, a riot that symbolized something deeper than one day's unrest. It was an early, emblematic moment in the realignment of white ethnic blue-collar voters, many of them lifelong Democrats. Democrats who began drifting away from the party of Roosevelt and toward Richard Nixon and later Ronald Reagan. Their children and grandchildren, many without college degrees, would go on to become a reliable base for Donald Trump.

Today, the same question looms, are Hispanic voters following the path of those earlier ethnic Democrats? In 2024, Trump won a majority of Hispanic men and even naturalized Hispanic Americans, a shift that rattled Democrats who once believed demographics alone guaranteed their future.

[09:25:08]

This is a story of party alignment seen through a historical lens. The Hard Hat Riot as milestone, the diploma divide as divider. And the Democrats struggle to connect with working class that no longer believes the party speaks for them.

David Paul Kuhn joins me now. He literally wrote the book on it, "The Hardhat Riot, Nixon, New York City and the Dawn of the White Working Class Revolution." He's also the producer of a terrific brand new PBS documentary of the same name.

David, thanks for being here. Much of what today defines our politics began in this era. Explain.

DAVID PAUL KUHN, AUTHOR, "THE HARDHAT RIOT": In 1964, Lyndon Johnson won roughly 6 in 10 working class Americans. By 1968, the FDR coalition that he had inherited and cemented was fracturing tremendously. By 72, it's entirely fractured. And it was Richard Nixon who would seize a breach that was cultural, that was somewhat economic. And that breach that Richard Nixon would seize, moving the Republican Party towards a working class that had once defined the Democratic Party.

And shockingly for the time, what Nixon called the party of big business would suddenly start to win over blue-collar Americans, the very icons of what was the FDR coalition and beginning the politics and the polarization that defines our day.

SMERCONISH: Right. So now walk me to the present. What does this chapter, as interesting as it might be and the film footage is amazing, what's it got to do with where we are in 2025?

KUHN: Well, you know, first it should be said that sometimes with the distance of history, it's easier for us to consider what polarizes us. In other words, Richard Nixon was every bit as polarizing as Donald Trump is today. And it's -- but with now many decades later, just like we can look at him in many new ways, we can also deal with the polarization that divided America to a greater extent by the late '60s and early '70s. And perhaps by considering the polarization that began in the -- in that era and again would come to define our own time. It allows perhaps the beginning of empathy, the beginning of understanding that both sides came to certain issues with causes and a valid outlook that was true in terms of their own life experience.

And in terms of today, as you began this segment, what is happening with Hispanics, which is truly not only Hispanics, it's happening with other minority groups, but especially with Hispanics, that has tremendous echoes with what happened in this era to the white ethnics, what were called white ethnics, really Irish, Italian, Eastern Europeans, who had a very similar immigrant trajectory as Hispanics, similar role of -- large role of Catholicism, similar strong family units. In other words, Democrats should be shaking. This is an existential crisis for the party and it's helpful to understand where we are now, you know, to look back and to see how we got there.

SMERCONISH: Well, I'm reminded in reading your book, I'm reminding that there was a culture war at stake beneath the Vietnam War, right? And that led to these white ethnics literally climbing off steel I- beams on that day in 1970 to go fight the college protesters because their kids were the ones that were serving in the war. But wherein lies the similarity with Hispanics of the modern era? Make that case, but do it quickly.

KUHN: There's a sense back then and today that there are expendables. Whether it was the people who brought the delivery food during the COVID crisis, whether it's the people that we -- that go to war for us, we have a quote unquote expendable class, whether we like to realize it or not, and that is our working class. They are treated in a way that alienates them both socially and economically.

It was true then, it is true now. And until we fully understand and digest and face the hard lessons of history and some of the mistakes made along the way towards great victories or great social improvements. Until those hard lessons of history are understood and cease to be repeated, Democrats will find themselves continuously reliving a troubled present.

SMERCONISH: And by the way, the next night after the riot, the Hard Hat Riot, the Knicks won the NBA crown. It's just a little Easter egg in there for people to think about and you deal with it in the -- in the book and the documentary.

Thank you, David. Appreciate it very, very much. Good luck with the PBS documentary.

Let's see what you're all saying via social media. From the world X, we have this, I think the Democratic Party is no longer the Democrat -- the Democrat Party is no longer the Democratic Party. I see the subtlety now. I'm not sure why they can keep running under the moniker or the Democratic Party when they are clearly running as socialists.

Well, I mean, some of them are, right? And I think that's where the passion lies. I mean, replay my commentary from the outset of this program. Passion lies on the extremes.

You can say the same thing about conservatives and Republicans or progressives and Democrats. Overlooking the fact that according to Hidden Tribes, big study several years ago, 8,000-person sample, 86 percent of us -- you know, this is going to be my answer. Do I even have to say it? Eighty-six percent of us are not on the extremes. Only 14 percent, according to Hidden Tribes, look it up, it's still accurate today, are the extremists.

But their voices, they provide, the clickbait. They provide the radio shows. They provide the television product except for this one. And they have undue influence over primary voters and that's why the politicians suck up to them.

There it is in a nutshell. I know, pretty frustrating. How do we beat it? Oh, how do we beat this? We beat this by engaging those of us who are not represented by the polar extremes and just don't surrender the playing surface to the loudest mouthpieces.

Your social media reaction to my commentary and this program thus far is right around the corner. Is Gen Z unemployable? NYU professor Suzy Welch says only two percent have the values that employers are seeking. We'll ask her what that means for the future of work.

Please, when you're voting on the poll question at Smerconish.com, will Gen Z, like previous generations, eventually find its footing, sign up for my free and worthy daily newsletter. You will get the work of prize-winning illustrators like Steve Breen.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:36:27]

SMERCONISH: Hey, please follow me on X and subscribe to my YouTube channel. And then you can participate in the program by putting up some social media reaction that I react to during the course of the program. Guys, I don't see it. So, put it up there so I can respond to it. Hello.

Gen Z wants different things out of life. They don't want to follow the same old rules.

Right. And, Nancy, we're going to get to this in the next segment of the program but it's pretty stunning. And I should -- I should make this clear Suzy Welch -- it's not as if she has written an opinion piece for the "Wall Street Journal" that has caused this kerfuffle. Her initial sample size was 45,000 respondents.

So, it's -- it's a data analysis. And what's the conclusion? The conclusion is that only two percent of Gen Zers are valuing what employers are most looking for. You know, they are valuing recreation and self-care. Employers want achievers.

It's a great time to be one of the two percent. And my question is whether they'll snap out of it. You know, you could have said the same thing about boomers or Gen Xers or fill in the blank. More social media reaction. What do we have?

I'm sorry but I'm lost as to why Rs should be blamed when almost every one of them voted to keep the government open and most Ds voted against them.

I'm not -- I'm not blaming the Rs. I'm telling you that I believe that the Democrats are correct in fighting for the Affordable Care Act. The Affordable Care Act is so maligned and so misunderstood. But just my opinion, they shouldn't be shutting down the government to do it especially because they're a month off.

This is what I was trying to explain to Senator Coons. In a month when people get premium notices and now realize, oh my God, my premium is going up 20 percent, what are we going to do about this? But to do it now, I think just makes the Democrats the obstructionists.

They're the ones keeping 700,000 people in a furloughed status. And just wait if we get another 10 days and troops, you know, our military don't get paid or just, God forbid, if TSA agents start calling in sick.

Just like, get it together, be adults. We've already made these commitments. Fund the government and turn the machines back on. That's what I'm saying.

And the issues raised by Democrats, either Republicans will come to the negotiating table in a month when their phones start ringing because of the escalating premiums, or they'll take a shellacking, Obama's word, President Obama's word, in the midterm election. That's it.

Still to come, parents at job interviews, interns walking out of meetings. What? Just growing pains or proof that Gen Z really is unemployable? Yes, this is the poll question at Smerconish.com today. Will Gen Z, like previous generations, eventually find its footing? Sign up for that newsletter so that you'll get the work of Rob Rogers, who drew this for us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:43:40]

SMERCONISH: Suzy Welch has created quite a debate with a widely discussed essay in the "Wall Street Journal" asking, is Gen Z unemployable? Her research found that the values hiring managers want most, achievement, learning, and a strong desire to work, show up only among two percent of Gen Zers. Instead, most young adults prioritize self-care, authenticity, and helping others.

"Fortune" noted the resulting mismatch. Young workers are often seen as ill-prepared or unwilling to adapt to professional expectations. One in six business leaders say they're reluctant to hire recent graduates. Three quarters call them, unsatisfactory hires.

Suzy Welch created NYU's most popular business course, meeting Gen Z on their own terms with a class on purpose, and the stories back it all up. "Fortune" reported that some young adults have even brought their parents to job interviews, in one case at Bank of America. Others had to be taught basic workplace etiquette like how to accept a meeting request or handle a lunch with a senior manager.

So, is Gen Z really unemployable, or is the workplace the one that needs to change? Joining me now is Suzy Welch, the author of "Becoming You" and director of NYU's Initiative on Purpose and Flourishing. Suzy, so Gen Z does not value what employers value. I want to make clear, this is based on data. This is not like you, with anecdote alone, just offering an opinion.

[09:45:05]

SUZY WELCH, PROFESSOR, NYU STERN SCHOOL OF BUSINESS: Exactly. I mean, this is 100 percent deeply researched data driven finding. We didn't know what we were going to find when we set out. We used a tool called the Values Bridge which ranks people's values from one to 16. It's available to the public.

We had 45,000 people take it at the time of the study. Seventy-five thousand people have taken it now. And then we looked at the values generation by generation. So, we had a listing of all of Gen Z's values one to 16.

And then because I work with young people, I thought, well, wouldn't it be very interesting to see which values hiring managers are actually looking for? So, we conducted a second survey of 45 -- of 2,500 hiring managers, and we showed them all the values with their definitions and said, what are you looking for? When you crunch the numbers that's where the two percent comes out.

SMERCONISH: Right. And you're totally wired among business leaders. When you took your data to business leaders, they were like, yes, we know. We see it.

WELCH: That's right. I mean, they were absolutely -- the biggest reaction was, this is confirmation. That number is very small. It's -- you know, this is what we were feeling. It's amazing to see it quantified.

And then since the article ran, I have been deluged with letters from business leaders, executives, hospital heads, heads of law firms saying, this is exactly the problem we're experiencing.

You know, if I had said to people, it's only two percent, no one would have believed me. Now we have the data to confirm it, and they are frustrated. They're dismayed.

In some cases, they're just -- they're just strapped. They can't do the work. They need people to work alongside them, and they can't find those individuals.

SMERCONISH: OK. Words that I don't often say here on the program, let me quote Socrates. Put that up on the screen so that Suzy knows what I'm making reference to. Our youth -- our youth now love luxury, they have bad manners, contempt for authority, they show disrespect for elders, and they love to chatter instead of exercise. Children are now tyrants not servants of their household.

Two thousand words -- 2,000 years old, pardon me. A tale of old this time. Some people are hearing this and they're saying, oh, come on, you could have said it about the boomers and everybody else. They'll snap out of it. You say, what?

WELCH: I say, possibly. But I think, you know, oldsters have always complained about the newsters. For sure it was all the way back in Socrates' time. I would say the difference now -- there's two big differences, and they matter a lot.

Number one is the magnitude. Two percent is a very little amount. I mean, I think when I was coming along, probably they were behind closed doors saying, oh, that generation is driving us crazy. But maybe it was 50 percent of people they were complaining about. You know, most of them are OK. But gosh, 20, 30, 40 percent of them are just impossible.

Ninety-eight percent is a big number. So, I think it's a magnitude issue. I think the second dynamic that makes this a little bit more, uh-oh, is that A.I. is coming for the jobs that Gen Z would ordinarily have taken, entry level jobs.

And so, that number matters because there's fewer and fewer jobs, and then there's fewer and fewer people to fill those jobs. It's a -- it's a bigger problem. It used to be that eventually the economy could absorb everybody, no matter what their values were. Now, it's a little bit -- and maybe not a little bit but a lot of it problematic.

SMERCONISH: I want to -- I want to show you -- we're limited on time. I want to show you what jumped out. I read your report. Put it up on the screen so that everybody else can see what I'm about to make reference to.

OK, so here are the top -- you know, the 16 things that the Gen Zers value. Number one, leisure self-care, recreation. Number two, self- expression, authenticity. Number three, altruism. Number four is affluence.

How do you get to be affluent if your values are as they are reflecting? Give me the 30-second answer.

WELCH: Yes. This is why students ask me all the time. They come up to me and they say, Professor Welch, I've got -- eudaimonia is number one and affluence is a number four. Is that a problem? And I say, do you promise not to kill the messenger?

I think this is possibly why it's going to work itself out. But people's values generally don't change, OK? They're going to have to suppress them and that's not really a very good recipe for a happy life. So, I think the years ahead are going to really show us how this problem, this cultural phenomenon, works itself out.

SMERCONISH: Suzy, it's really fascinating. Thank you for being here.

And by the way, everybody else, this is the poll question. Put it up on the screen. Suzy has inspired today's poll question at Smerconish.com. Will Gen Z, like previous generations, eventually find its footing?

Sign up for the newsletter as you're casting your ballot. You'll get the work of Jack Ohman and -- that's Jack and Scott Stantis.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:53:57]

SMERCONISH: OK, there are the poll results so far at Smerconish.com, 25,997. Will Gen Z, like previous generations, eventually find its footing? All right. Nearly eight in 10, optimistic in saying, yes, they'll get it together.

By the way, a quick response to those who say it's always the complaint -- you know, the older people always talking about the younger people. To the extent, I would argue, this is different. Why would I say it's different? Because of the impact of technology, an ongoing theme that we address here so often, because of -- I was going to say, artificial intelligence being on the horizon but it's -- it's here already, political dysfunction.

My kids haven't known any climate, politically speaking, other than this climate of dysfunction. And I throw climate change into that mix as well. I mean, you know, these are all heavy issues. OK. Social media reaction. What do I have?

Because they are lazy and are glued to their phones. I work with Gen Z at a big box improvement store. As a supervisor, I spend much of my time trying to find them, calling out for -- right -- lazy.

I get it. We're on a roller coaster to hell. Is that better than being on a highway to hell?

[09:55:01]

I'm not sure. I think I've already addressed that. I get it. That's the Socrates complaint, the kids today. I do believe things are different because of the factors that I just ran through. More social media reaction. Make sure you're subscribing to my YouTube channel and following me on X.

The government will never reopen and that's the Republican plan.

I think it's -- I think the -- look, the cracks were already in formation when Masto, Fetterman, and Angus King, you know, broke ranks. So, if you ask me, what's about to happen? I think it changes within the next couple of days, fingers crossed. I hope so. I want the government to be back up and running.

The president could very easily overplay his hand. I mean, if vote, all of a sudden, starts firing people, and if TSA folks don't show up and military folks don't get paid, I mean, I don't know where it goes. Let's -- let's hope they all get in the same room, act like adults and work it the heck out. OK?

If you missed any of today's program, you can always listen anywhere you get your podcasts. Thank you for watching and see you next week.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)