Transcript: Sen. Chris Van Hollen on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan," Nov. 24, 2024
The following is a transcript of an interview with Sen. Chris Van Hollen, Democrat of Maryland, on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" that aired on Nov. 24, 2024.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Welcome back to Face the Nation. We're now joined by Maryland Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen, good to have you here.
SEN. VAN HOLLEN: It's great to be with you, Margaret.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So, in these final days of democratic control, the Senate and the White House has a long to-do list. Congress has to fund the government by the end of December, pass the defense bil l-the NDAA- and extension to the farm bill. And I know Democrats want to confirm as many judges as possible. What's top of your list?
SEN. VAN HOLLEN: Well, all of those are on the list. Top of my list is also the disaster relief funding- emergency Relief. We had big parts of the country hit by hurricanes and other natural disasters. In my state of Maryland, we had the collapse of the Key Bridge in Baltimore. So we've always taken the approach that the whole country will be there to help fellow Americans in need. The President has now submitted a $100 billion emergency disaster relief plan that includes funding for the Key Bridge. So I hope that we will get that done by the end of the year. People need that relief, and they need it now.
MARGARET BRENNAN: That's about $8 billion for the bridge alone. Is that right?
SEN. VAN HOLLEN: Not for the bridge alone. This- that's part of the Emergency Relief Fund that includes approximately $2 billion for the bridge.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And you're relatively confident that this can be delivered on?
SEN. VAN HOLLEN: I hope that all of our colleagues, Republicans and Democrats alike will support disaster relief. We've always had the philosophy" all for one and one for all" when Americans get hit by these disasters, I hope we will stick with that position.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, we also are looking at a new Congress very soon, and as you know, a new commander-in-chief. Republicans will have the majority in the Senate with 53 seats, so they don't really need Democratic votes to confirm many of the picks that Mr. Trump has been making to run agencies. But from what you've seen to date, are you in favor of any of them, your colleague, Marco Rubio, as Secretary of State, for example. Or this new choice to be labor secretary?
SEN. VAN HOLLEN: Look, my view is this is what the vetting process is all about. The hearing process. The Senate, of course, under the Constitution, has the job of advising and consenting on nominations, and I take that responsibility very seriously. I have been troubled by some talk that President-elect Trump wants to short circuit that constitutional approach using this recess appointment device, and it will be really important that the new Republican leader in the Senate uphold the Senate's prerogatives under the Constitution and not try to do it and run.
MARGARET BRENNAN: We'll stay tuned to see how that plays out. Let's turn to the Middle East. You said that President Biden's inaction to halt the horrific humanitarian situation inside of Gaza is a stain on his administration that it's shameful. Is there anything in these final weeks that could be done to erase that stain?
SEN. VAN HOLLEN: I think there are things that can be done, and I should emphasize that I supported President Biden's decision to travel to Israel in the aftermath of the brutal Hamas attacks of October 7 of last year and stand with the people of Israel as they confront this threat. But I also wish the President had effectively used US leverage to essentially assert his own positions. We've seen this pattern where President Biden makes demands of Prime Minister Netanyahu, only to be ignored or slapped down entirely, and then President Biden sends more bombs and more money. That is not an effective use of leverage. So, I do hope in these closing months, the President will finally make more effective use of American leverage to at the very least uphold American law, to insist that the Netanyahu government allows humanitarian aid into Gaza and they use our weapons in a manner consistent with the laws of war.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So you take a nuanced and specific stand on that upholding, US law. This is often characterized, though, as being for or against helping Israel. There were 19 senators, you were one of them who voted this past week to pause specific shipments on three different groups of weapons, offensive weapons, to Israel. You said the State Department is reviewing 500 incidents where US weapons were used and caused unnecessary civilian harm. The State Department has said Israel is doing things to fix the situation, which is why weapons continue to be greenlit. Are you suggesting that's a lie?
SEN. VAN HOLLEN: I'm suggesting that the President of the United States is not fully complying with American law on this question. If you look at the letter that was sent by secretaries Austin and Secretary Blinken to Israeli authorities in October, you look at that final paragraph, you'll see that they're complaining about the fact that there is no effective mechanism right now for getting to the bottom of claims of civilian harm. The State Department has, as I said, about 500 as you said. And we haven't gotten the bottom of those.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Why?
SEN. VAN HOLLEN: Because the process is broken, and I would argue that there's not been the will to fix the process, because a lot of people don't want the process to produce the obvious answer, which is, there have been many cases where we've seen US weapons used in violation of international humanitarian law. In fact, if you go back to the NSM-20 report earlier this year, the Biden administration said specifically that there was a high likelihood that US weapons were being used in violation of international law, and yet they've done nothing in the intervening period to enforce that.
MARGARET BRENNAN: When I pressed US officials on this privately, they've said, "What do you want us to do? You want us to put in a halt for a few weeks and then Donald Trump reverses it. What's the point?" How do you respond to that?
SEN. VAN HOLLEN: Well, the point is, they should have been doing this for a much longer period of time. The President had ample opportunities over the last year. There are many people in the administration, senior level- at the senior level, who told me that this war was going to come to an end back in January. You know, I met with hostage families on numerous occasions who have been calling out Prime Minister Netanyahu for not agreeing to a cease fire and a return of their loved ones. Minister Gallant, the defense minister of Israel was fired because he wanted to prioritize the return of hostages, and yet, President Biden has never called out Prime Minister Netanyahu–
MARGARET BRENNAN: – Why?--
SEN. VAN HALLEN: –for his obstruction on this, even though those families I've met with are calling him out.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Even post-election, why do you think he won't do that?
SEN. VAN HOLLEN: I really don't know. I just don't know why the President of the United States has not been willing to make more effective use of American leverage to assert his own stated objectives. I mean, he's been ignored on other things too, right? He wants the PA to be the nucleus of governance in a post-war Gaza--
MARGARET BRENNAN: -- the Palestinian Authority--
SEN. VAN HOLLEN: He wants a two-state solution. Prime Minister Netanyahu has not only ignored those he's gone out there and bragged about how he's blocking President Biden's efforts, and yet the blank check just keeps on coming. So what my colleagues and I are saying is, let's just pause these transfers of offensive weapons, certain ones, until Prime Minister Netanyahu and his government come into compliance with American law. These are American laws on the books. So this is not about whether we support Israel or not. Of course, we support Israel. It's about whether our support is used in a manner consistent with American law and American values.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Senator Van Hollen, thank you for explaining your position. Thank you. We'll be right back.
