CSPAN - Washington Journal 09/07/2025

All Episodes

Previous Next

Sept. 7, 2025 07:00-10:02 - CSPAN

03:01:46

Washington Journal 09/07/2025

Participants

Main

katherine brodsky

31:22

kimberly adams

cspan 29:48

Appearances

chuck schumer

sen/d 02:29

jim banks

sen/r 02:31

john malone

00:56

justice neil gorsuch

scotus 00:39

kevin stitt

01:13

Clips

dr james garrow

00:17

louie gohmert

rep/r 00:07

patrice oneal

00:19

stanley k monteith

00:11

Callers

doc in indiana

callers 00:30

gene in arkansas

callers 00:14

louise in virginia

callers 00:16

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
unidentified		Voting rights correspondent for Mother Jones will talk about his new cover story on President Trump's plans for the midterm elections.
		And author and journalist Katherine Brodsky talks about free speech and censorship in the United States and how advances in technology impact speech, politics, and culture.
		Washington Journal is next.
		Join the conversation.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
		It's Sunday, September 7th, 2025.
		New polling out in the last week reveals an increasing number of Americans have a bleak outlook on the future, especially when it comes to the economy.
		A Wall Street Journal NORC poll found almost 70% of those surveyed believe the idea that hard work will get you ahead in this country is no longer true and maybe never was.
		This morning, we want your take.
		Do you believe in the American dream?
		Our phone line for Democrats is 202-748-8000.
		For Republicans, 202-748-8001.
		And for Independents, 202-748-8002.
		If you'd like to text us, that number is 202-748-8003.
		But please be sure to include your name and where you're writing in from.
		We're also on social media at facebook.com/slash C-SPAN and on X at C-SPANWJ.
		Now, that Wall Street Journal NORC poll had an exclusive in the Wall Street Journal with the headline, Americans Lose Faith that Hard Work Leads to Economic Gains, according to that Wall Street Journal NORC poll.
		Trump is contending with a disconnect between the nation's sour outlook and traditional measures showing a robust economy.
		America is becoming a nation of economic pessimists.
		The new Wall Street Journal NORC poll finds that the share of people who say they have a good chance of improving their standard of living fell to 25%, a record low in surveys dating to 1987.
		More than three-quarters said they lack confidence that life for the next generation will be better than their own, the poll found.
		Nearly 70% of people said they believe the American dream that if you work hard, you will get ahead, no longer holds true or never did, the highest level in nearly 15 years of surveys.
		Republicans in the survey were less pessimistic than Democrats, reflecting the long-standing trend that the party holding the White House has a rosier view of the economy.
		An index that combined six poll questions found that 55% of Republicans, as well as 90% of Democrats, held a negative view of prospects for themselves and their children.
		Some additional numbers from this Wall Street Journal NORC poll found that 28% said rising prices were causing major financial strains in their life, and 32% said inflation was causing minor strains.
		Now, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer referenced that poll in comments he made last week.
		Let's listen.
chuck schumer ▲ ● ▼		Unfortunately, in Donald Trump's America, American optimism is dying.
		This week, a Wall Street Journal NORC poll found the share of Americans who are positive about their future has fallen to a record low, the lowest level in the poll's history.
		The lowest level in the poll's history.
		The sunny American optimism that if I work hard, I'll be doing better 10 years from now than I'm doing today, and my kids will be doing still better than me, is fading rapidly.
		Only one in four Americans believe they can improve their standard of living.
		70% of Americans believe the American dream no longer holds.
		That is a tragedy.
		The great, sunny American optimism, which has fueled us to greatness, which has pushed us to move forward despite crises and obstacles in the way, is dying.
		This is a tragedy and it's a warning.
		And most of all, it reflects how Americans feel under Donald Trump's leadership.
		And it's hard to blame Americans who feel this way.
		When rents go up, when mortgages go up, when the electric bill goes up, I just talked about what they're doing with offshore wind.
		When groceries get more expensive, people don't want a president obsessed with military parades and winning the Nobel Peace Prize.
		They want someone with real solutions, and Donald Trump is stuck in his own little fantasy world.
		There's even another study that said Americans now think they're going to be spending less on Christmas goods this year on Christmas gifts.
		That's when you know something is deeply, deeply wrong.
		Because Americans want to spend more for their children, for their family, for their friends, for their coworkers when it comes Christmas time to buy gifts.
		And it's no accident why we're here.
		A lot of Donald Trump's policies have pushed us here.
		His tariffs are sending prices up.
		They're not creating jobs.
		His big, ugly bill, which he's desperately trying to rebrand, made the biggest cuts to American health care in history and it took away food from hungry kids to give tax breaks to billionaires.
		These are acts of betrayal.
		That's why this big, beautiful bill, they want to rename it, but when American people know what it is, it's a big, ugly betrayal about everything Donald Trump promised.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Now, in terms of what the American dream actually means, there's differing opinions here in the United States.
		Gallup did some polling on this and found that Americans are evenly divided nearly evenly when asked if the American dream is more about opportunity, the ability to improve life through education, better jobs, and other resources, or stability,
		defined as being able to support a family with a job and a safe place to live, showing that about 49% of those polled find that the American dream is more about stability, versus 51% saying it's more about opportunity.
		Now, back to that Wall Street Journal Nork poll, one of the key factors of the American Dream for many is home ownership, and fewer than one quarter of the respondents to that poll were very confident that they could buy a home.
		56% said they had little or no confidence that they could do so.
		Earlier this month, Indiana GOP Senator Jim Banks spoke to the American Conservatism Conference about some of the challenges facing the American Dream, and particularly young Americans.
jim banks ▲ ● ▼		So that's why I was concerned earlier this week when I read something that really bothered me.
		It was a chart that showed that in 1950, half of Americans owned a home and were married by the age of 30.
		Can you believe it that today that number is only 12%?
		The American Dream is not complicated.
		It's really simple.
		You put down roots, you start a family, and you give your kids a better shot than the one that you had, like the one that I lived in my life.
		But the sad reality is that that American dream is almost impossible for so many young Americans today.
		And this is more than just about a political fight.
		It's about preserving the American way of life in this great country.
		If people don't own anything and don't have a home that they're building and investing in, if they don't have a place to call a home, and if we let that life slip away, we lose the heart of what it means to be Americans.
		People have to have something that's worth fighting for.
		And that's why I remember Tucker Carlson saying something a few years ago that I've thought about a lot since.
		He said that the candidates who make it easier for 30-year-olds to get married and have children will win and will deserve to win.
		That's why it didn't shock me that a few months ago watching in New York City that a Democratic socialist won their party's nomination.
		And you can say what you want about the crazy left and people like AOC.
		She's really crazy.
		And this guy in New York as well, I mean, these are radical and crazy candidates on the far left, but they know that the status quo isn't working and their message is resonating.
		The radical left has an uncanny ability to find the wrong solutions to the real problems that people are facing.
		And that's why Republicans have to learn from what's going on in New York City and from the radical left some of these important lessons.
		We cannot make the same mistakes that Joe Biden and the Democrats made on their watch over the last four years.
		Just as easily as we can win new voters in an election, we can lose them if we fail to deliver on our promises.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Once again, our question this morning: Do you believe in the American Dream?
		Investopedia did a calculation of how much many components of the American Dream cost over the course of a lifetime, finding that it now costs about $5 million.
		Investopedia's 2025 report found the American Dream now costs over $5 million per household over the course of a lifetime.
		However, the median lifetime earnings of an individual American with a bachelor's degree is only $2.8 million.
		Some of those components, retirement, costs $1.6 million.
		Health care, over $400,000 over a lifetime.
		Owning a home, close to $1 million over a lifetime.
		Raising two children and paying for college, close to $900,000.
		Owning a new car, $900,000.
		A yearly vacation, $180,000.
		Pets, close to $40,000 over a lifetime.
		And a wedding, also close to $40,000 over a lifetime.
		Let's get to your calls.
		Elliot is in Washington, D.C. on our line for Democrats.
		Good morning, Elliot.
		Good morning, Elliot.
unidentified		I would like to state that I am not confident that the average American can realize the American dream.
		For me personally, I secured a master's degree in public administration, okay, but I am disabled now.
		I'm 63 years old, okay, and I suffered injury, and I'm disabled.
		But my disability check can barely cover my mortgage.
		And if I have to move into the apartment of price of apartments and housing here in Washington, D.C. is astronomical.
		Even in the roughest rundown neighborhoods, a one-bedroom apartment is costing $1,600,000, $1,700 a month.
		Okay, another quandary is that I cannot earn.
		I am still able to do certain work, but I can only earn $22,000 a year before it's going to negatively impact upon my disability check.
		That means that I cannot work a full-time job here in Washington, D.C. because the minimum wage, I think, is $15 an hour.
		So if you work and earn $15 an hour for $40 a week for four hours a week, then your income, W-2 wages, is going to come close to $30,000.
		So I can't work a W-2 wage job because it's going to negatively impact upon my disability.
		Now here it is, the 7th of the month.
		I paid my mortgage.
		No, I haven't paid my mortgage.
		because I had to pay my auto insurance and I had to pay my electric bills and so forth and so on.
		And I have to eat.
		Okay?
		And now I'm short.
		$200 would be to pay my mortgage payment.
		And I'm sitting out here scratching my head, you know, struggling to sleep at night because I'm wondering how I am going to pay my mortgage payment.
		I can't work a full-time job.
		I have a master's degree in public administration.
		The small business administration contacted me about two years ago with a job.
		They offered me a job.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So Elliot, it sounds like housing is the big issue for your lack of belief in the American dream.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Do you still believe in the American dream or do you just feel like it's unachievable for you?
unidentified		It's unachievable for me under these circumstances.
unidentified		I can't enjoy my life because 24 hours a day I concern myself how am I going to pay for my pay my bills.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		David is in Wilmington, South Carolina on our line for Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, David.
unidentified		I wish Elliot well.
		Perhaps he can move.
		I don't know.
		I don't know the circumstances, but it sounds like he worked hard all his life and is facing trouble.
		I wish him well.
		Getting back to basics, the American dream is not really in the Constitution or Declaration.
		It's a great concept, I guess.
		I guess it's defined with owning a home.
		A lot of people are happy renting.
		A lot of people don't want to own a home.
		But get back.
		The federal government's role is to protect the states collectively and individuals.
		And notice that the pursuit of happiness, happiness is not defined in the Constitution, but the pursuit, whatever that means to people.
		So you have to remember that.
		David, what does the American dream mean to you?
		To be free to make a living doing something I love, to actually get paid for doing something I like, or learn to like whatever I'm getting paid for and do it without oppression from religious or other social persecutions for whatever reason or burdensome taxes.
		That would be another crimp on the American dream.
		But about the economy, you have to remember there's individual circumstances, but then there's a collective economy.
		And there's plenty of room left in today's economy for people to pursue whatever their dream is.
		Circumstances vary all over the place, but as a nation, like being on a ship that's either going to make it or sink, the debt is going to further shrink the range of what people can do as individuals.
		We really have to be careful.
		And for years, I've been calling it and saying that the debt is going to really become the major news story.
		And what's going to be really critical is when inevitable spending cuts happen, and that says only can be through Congress.
		And it's Congress that does the budget.
		It's Newt Gingrich that last balanced it.
		Well, him and the rest of the Congress.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So David, since you referenced the economy, I'd like to read a little bit more of that Wall Street Journal Nork poll about that and get your take.
		So 44% of the people polled there found that the economy was, they rated the economy as excellent or good, up from 38% a year ago.
		56% view the economy as not good or poor.
		What do you think, David, of the state of the economy?
		How would you rate it?
unidentified		To me, the state of the economy is how soon we hit the wall with the debt and countries won't lend us money anymore.
		And there's one good thing that President Trump has said that we've been taking advantage of for too long.
		It's like the role of the United States is where the suckers are going to borrow ourselves into oblivion and give the money to the rest of the world for whatever cause.
		Now, the United States is a good country and we do things for international aid much more than other countries.
		But eventually we're going to have to bail out our own ship.
		And whether or not people revolt with the spending cuts is going to depend on the integrity and quality of leadership in Washington.
		And it may take a Jack Kennedy or a Reagan or somebody or Lincoln.
		Of course, you say he divided the country, but that's a whole other story.
		It's going to take leadership to get us through the upcoming crunch.
		And that's the big story is the national debt.
		And there's still room for individuals to have a dream, but that room is going to be shrinking over time, and it won't be a long time.
		That's all I have to say.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Another David, this time in Vancouver, Washington, on our line for independence.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, David.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		I was born here, and I was always looking forward to come to this beautiful country.
		And I succeeded back in 1980.
		I came over, and I didn't have anything.
		Really, I remember having like a little bit over 200 bucks.
		I worked hard.
		I got married, have my kids, now my grandkids.
		It was easier to raise my family back then and become, you know, financially independent.
		And now these days, it's really hard.
		It's hard on my kids, and I'm sure it's going to be harder on my grandkids.
		The way we borrowed money to give it to other countries is just unbelievable.
		We should take care of our own first.
		And if we have any left over, then go ahead and help.
		But my point is, stop borrowing money to help other countries, help ourselves.
		We have lots of poor people in this country.
		We've been supporting Israel since 1948.
		They never paid a dime back.
		I don't get it.
		Billions and billions of dollars going wasted.
		We should keep it here and make this beautiful country of ours much better.
		It's hard for our kids to borrow money to buy a house.
		It's really hard.
		But when I, back in 1980, it was much easier.
		And I don't know how these senators in Congress do their budget at their home, but you don't spend 10 grand when you bring in six.
		It doesn't work.
		Thank you very much for taking my call.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		David mentioned he was born outside the United States.
		And according to that Gallup poll I referenced earlier, Americans born outside of the U.S. tend to see more opportunity in the American dream.
		U.S. adults' birthplace or their parents is a significant factor in how they view the American dream.
		Nearly seven in 10 U.S. adults born abroad say the dream is more about opportunity, as do six in ten of those with at least one parent born abroad.
		In contrast, U.S. adults are evenly split, and that's evenly split between viewing the American Dream as more about stability versus opportunity.
		And that is, again, Gallup polling done for a series this month.
		All right, let's look for Kathy in Potosi, Mixed, excuse me, Potoski, Michigan on our line for Democrats.
		Good morning, Kathy.
unidentified		Good morning, C-SPAN.
		The average home in Emmett County, which is where Potoski is located, is $40,000.
		There's not a tremendous amount of economic opportunity in terms of employment in northern Michigan, although Potoski is a bigger city than many of the surrounding counties.
		I'm looking at a house across the street.
		He bought it two years ago.
		Excuse me.
		He paid $300,000,000 for it.
		I looked on the internet.
		He's asking $430,000.
		No one could afford to buy that.
		It's not economically feasible for the majority of the people.
		What has happened here inside the city limits of Potoski and much of northern Michigan is many of the homes have been bought up and they're short-term rental.
		They rent these places.
		I want them next door.
		A close friend of mine, his family, when he was growing up and he's 70, they lived in one of the units.
		It was like a townhouse.
		And their parents saved, and then they built a house about three miles from here.
		That's not available anymore.
		Those opportunities are gone.
		Short-term rentals have taken the housing market in northern Michigan, turned it upside down, and made some people extremely wealthy in a very short period of time.
		They call them hotels inside of Potoski.
		They're not hotels.
		They don't employ anybody.
		The person, the people that own it next door, she cleans.
		She owns the lawn.
		They don't hire anyone.
		All the revenue goes into their bank accounts.
		And it is so grossly unfair and so un-American.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Some cities and towns have passed regulations limiting short-term rentals in their communities.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Has your town considered anything like that?
unidentified		They have done that, but there are many, many, and this came from one of the city council people, and she's an attorney.
		They're under the radar.
		And, you know, the hotels and motels employ people.
		That's why they're built.
		And that's the way it should be.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So Kathy, because you've mentioned home ownership, I want to read a little bit more from that Investopedia article looking at the lifetime cost of the American Dream.
		And when it comes to home ownership, it says a steady rise in home prices alongside high mortgage rates has made the dream of home ownership costlier than ever, with the median price for a single-family home now at approximately $415,000 in 2025.
		Even with a 20% down payment, a 30-year fixed mortgage at 6.69% would ultimately cost the home buyer nearly double the purchase price to pay off the home, and that's without HOA fees and maintenance costs.
		However, those statistics have yet to dissuade many Americans from wanting to own their own home.
		Some 85% of respondents to our survey indicated that home ownership is part of their dream.
		Christopher is in Jasper, Texas on our line for Republicans.
		Good morning, Christopher.
unidentified		Hello, can you hear me?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Yes, do you believe in the American dream?
unidentified		Oh, I believe in the American dream.
		The American dream to me, it's about guarantees, about opportunity, it's about the promise of equal outcomes, in my opinion.
		It's like freedom, you know, taking risks to build something, you know, lasting without government standing in the way.
		You know, my grandparents saw America like as a place where hard work could outpace circumstances.
		And that it's still true.
		But, like, only if we protect personal responsibilities and our faith and our family and free enterprise, the dream isn't fading.
		I believe it's being crowded, you know, by bureaucracy.
		And I'm a surveyor, and so a lot of people live above their means.
		That one man, he said he was 63, and he was living in a place with really high expenses.
		Well, you can buy a piece of land, an acre, and buy it for $25,000 or $6,000 an acre, wherever you can find it, and then put a trailer on it, and then do your septic and everything.
		Probably be about another $15,000.
		And then, boom, you have a $100,000 house and a piece of land that you can sell for $100,000 with the trailer and everything.
		It's totally possible to have a life.
		It's just whether you're willing to live below your means or whether you're willing to struggle in the day-to-day pace without really trying to find an outcome.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Next up is John in Leland, Mississippi on our line for independence.
		Good morning, John.
unidentified		Personally, I just want to first say I'm African American.
		And so I believe in the American dream because I've seen it become possible.
		I've been successful myself.
		But I also want to say that it's a significant thing.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Can you please turn down the volume on your TV, John, and then please continue?
unidentified		Okay, I'll just turn it down.
		First of all, I want to say that I think there's a total different situation when we talk about African Americans because we've been here 400 years and everything has been put against us.
		Our leaders have been killed.
		I mean, we had to, during slavery, we were killed if we tried to read.
		Now our descendants, some 300 some years later, we have to pay to educate ourselves.
		We haven't had any help.
		The CIA putting drugs into our community, the government, Jaguar Hoover felt that the number one problem was a black messiah.
		So it's not Russia, it's not China.
		It's black people getting together.
		That's your number one problem.
		And it reflects that.
		Anytime you gave 2 billion acres to immigrants and you haven't given black people an inch, come on now.
		I mean, it's like all the other races have gotten together and they're saying, well, we're going to just keep black people down.
		We're going to enslave their people, work them forever, and we're never going to give them anything.
		And how can you expect, I love America.
		I'm a soldier, but I love this country.
		But America deserves the worst to happen to it if it doesn't take Israel's responsibilities.
		Who are we?
		Are we any different from Iraq or anywhere else to do people like this and think that I mean, what makes you think all these people came here under the 14th Amendment calling themselves Americans, but they're really not Americans?
		That was meant for black people.
		All these people come here and have a kid and they're entitled to everything that American is.
		Come on now.
		I think that everybody's so tribal that they just, you know, they expect they're their own race.
		So they're not going to care about what African Americans are.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Kathy is in Hanover, Massachusetts on our line for Democrats.
		Good morning, Kathy.
unidentified		Good morning.
		What my concern is in terms of the American Dream is really, anyway, is people buying up all these properties and renting out to renters, right?
		Because the rents are all going up.
		And everyone's saying no one can afford to buy a home.
		But what I see coming up is all the office buildings that are no longer rentable because many people work from home, they're all going to be bought up by landlords and they're not going to be converted into actual home ownership.
		They're going to be converted into apartments.
		And as an older person, what I see now is eventually you're going to stop working.
		You're not going to have money to pay rent, basically.
		You're not going to be generating income, and no one has a home to put over their head.
		So my concern is that all the landlords who are buying up properties to rent, there really is only so much money you need in life.
		As far as new cars, don't buy new.
		If you can't afford a child, I wouldn't have a child and definitely don't pay for their college education.
		So that's me.
		Thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Manny is in Daytona Beach, Florida on our line for Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Manny.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
		The thing that I would like to start with, I'm a self-taught philosopher.
		Even in my high school yearbook, it said I was a philosopher.
		Basically, it goes back to the way we think.
		We can think about things we can do or things we can't do.
		Most people are afraid to take responsibility for their own life.
		I wrote a book called The Art of Falling in Love with Your Time on Earth.
		And life is a choice.
		You can choose to take responsibility.
		I can remember when I was a kid and, you know, we didn't have any money.
		We went to the Salvation Army.
		I went with my mother.
		My dad left, and we'd get five or $10.
		But it's like, hey, this is my life.
		So, you know, I'm going to get what I make out of it.
		So my choice is to find what I love to do and then give it 100%.
		But if we just, you know, like I believe in God.
		So if God made me in this situation, I'm a white male, older white male, well, then I got to do my best.
		If I was black, I would do my best.
		So, you know, God doesn't make mistakes.
		So what I say is to learn to love yourself.
		My book's called The Art of Falling in Love with Your Time on Earth again.
		It's on Amazon.
		But, you know, why not become your best friend instead of your biggest enemy?
		We're always thinking about what's wrong.
		How about what's right?
		You know, we're here.
		So, you know, like this song goes, I hope you dance with life because, you know, that's a choice.
		So thanks for your time.
		I really appreciate it.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Robert is in Telmedge, Ohio on our line for independence.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Robert.
unidentified		Well, hello.
unidentified		How are you doing this morning?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good, thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Do you believe in the American Dream?
unidentified		No, ma'am.
		I sure don't.
		I'm going to tell you why.
		I'm an African-American man, and it seemed like I have been so hard.
		I have worked so hard.
		I worked 26 years of my life.
		And it seemed like trying to buy a home these days.
		Where I say in Talmudge, Ohio, the average is like $400,000 for somebody.
		It's so crazy.
		I'm like, why is this so crazy?
		And, you know, with the legals and everything like that.
		And, you know, I know they're trying to do stuff for them for their families.
		And I condone that.
		But the thing is, why don't they do anything for black Americans?
		Black Americans, we're on the bottom of everybody's foot.
		And it's crazy to me.
patrice oneal ▲ ● ▼		And, you know, I just want black Americans, we need to stick more to each other and quit being with the Joneses, owning everything, you know, trying to own everything.
unidentified		We don't own anything in this world.
unidentified		But, you know, I just pray for black America.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Roy is in Florida on our line for Democrats.
		Good morning, Roy.
unidentified		Good morning.
		The American dream is, I guess, what you make it.
		I'm 77 years old.
		When I first started out, I was 23 years old when I bought my first house.
		It was a double, so I had somebody else to help it out.
		Hello?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Yes, we can hear you, Roy.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Continue.
unidentified		Okay.
		And I've always lived kind of below my means.
		And I looked through over time.
		I retired when I was 51 and went back to work.
		I lived on my sailboat for 14 years.
		I became a ship's master.
		And I worked at that.
		But the American dream today, because savings has gone totally awry.
		When I first started working, I was told buy U.S. savings bonds.
		They paid 8%.
		Every seven years, they doubled in value.
		Today, if I buy double these savings bonds, they pay 0.00001%.
		I don't want to gamble with the stock market.
		I've never been to Vegas.
		And it really gets me that there's a lot of people that want to do away with the safety net of Social Security and have people go into a 401k.
stanley k monteith ▲ ● ▼		Well, what caused us to have Social Security was the Great Depression, which was the failure of the banks in the stock market.
unidentified		Why do we have a cap of $160,000?
		After you've made that much, you don't have to pay Social Security.
		When I first started working, that was $6,000.
		And I remember the first time that I didn't have to pay.
		It was about November of one year.
		There was a lot of overtime.
		And all of a sudden, my paycheck changed.
		And I went to payroll, and I said, what is this?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So, Roy, you've mentioned several economic trends.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		And I want to play a clip of California Democratic Representative Sarah Jacobs, who posted a video on Instagram about the declining American dream as well as growing economic hardships and the need for change.
unidentified		Here's the story of why I got into politics.
		My grandfather was the first in his family to go to college.
		He was able to graduate from college and graduate school debt-free.
		He then went on to work at a public university, and he fundamentally changed the way that we communicate because he wouldn't settle for the way things have always been done.
		And he continued to ask why.
		That's what he always taught me.
		But for too long, politicians from both sides of the aisle have told us actually that we do need to settle, that we have to choose between freedom and security or the environment and prosperity.
		But it isn't true.
		We don't have to choose and we don't have to settle for the way things have always been done.
		I ran for Congress because I believe that our systems are broken, that they aren't working for enough people and they aren't helping people enough.
		And that we can, in fact, we must do things differently.
		My family got to live the American dream.
		But for too many families, that dream is just a mirage.
		So it's time for all of us to come together and build a new American dream, one that doesn't leave anybody behind.
		And I know that together, we're going to be able to do it.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Back to your calls on whether you believe in the American dream.
		Dave is in Dana Point, California on our line for Republicans.
		Good morning, Dave.
unidentified		Yes, when I was a kid in the 80s, there were a lot of people that was saying to me, you know, everything's so expensive.
		How are these kids going to be able to buy a home and live the American dream?
		And I got really upset when I went home and I said, mommy, mommy, mommy, I'm worried.
		I'm not going to be able to live the American dream and buy my own house.
		And she said, oh, David, don't worry about a thing.
		Only worry about what you have control over, which is what you say and what you do.
		Now, this is how easy it is to get the American dream.
		It's as easy as ABC123.
		This is how it works, David.
		A, get yourself through as much school as you can get through.
		Then step two is find yourself a job, work really, really, really, really, really hard at it.
		Then step C is save your money.
		And that's how you get the American dream, your American dream.
		That's how easy it is.
		And guess what?
		She was right.
		I couldn't believe it.
		That's how it's done.
		Everybody I know who gets their American dream does it that way.
		It's that simple.
		So that's all I have to say to all you crybabies out there that blame others for your choices that you make that don't work out for you.
		It's pathetic.
		Go Trump.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Calvin is in Bowie, Maryland on our line for Democrats.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Calvin.
unidentified		Yes, hi.
		Again, I am a black man.
		I want to say that as well.
		But I do believe in the American Dream.
		I have been, and I tried to pass that information down to my two daughters as well.
		One of them adhered to it.
		The other one decided not to.
		So, but I have been able to accumulate three homes that I currently rent out.
		And so again, like I said, I believe in the American Dream.
		If you take your time and make sacrifices, you can do a lot of these things.
		And you can see the American Dream come true to you as well.
		Thank you very much.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Terry is in Claremont, California on our line for Republicans.
		Good morning, Terry.
		And can you please turn down the volume on your TV, Terry, and then go ahead with your comment.
unidentified		Yes, the point I would like to make is that the entire masses of the United States in reference to the population is being lied to.
		They've been lied to since the late 60s.
		The American Dream has been gone, or rather dead, since the end of 1965.
		This is a myth.
		The so-called American Dream was never, never promised for African Americans.
		Let's get that straight first.
		The African American population and community, they were always meant to be, by white supremacists, a permanent underclass.
		This is why it doesn't matter how much they cry, how much they seem to whine, or whatever happens.
		And also, let me reiterate this.
		This is one of the reasons why all of their leaders were assassinated, because this is all a part of one big plan to keep and to make African Americans a permanent underclass.
		White, educated white people know this.
		A lot of educated black people know it, and maybe even Asians, and so on and so forth.
		But I'm just telling you the facts.
		Nobody's going to give me a Nobel Peace Prize for saying this, and I'm not saying it to earn one, but I'm telling the truth.
		This is why you see things the way they are.
		And also, the last thing I would like to reiterate, this is all a big propaganda scam.
		This is why you see, see, this is the design of America.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		What is the propaganda scam?
unidentified		The propaganda scam is to bring all of the immigrants now that you, this is why you see all of the Latino immigrants primarily coming into America and other immigrants from all over the world because they're coming here to take the places of several folks have brought up the tie-in between race and the American dream.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Some of that Gallup polling that I referenced earlier broke down how people of different racial backgrounds view, define the American dream in terms of whether it's more about stability versus opportunity and found that racial and ethnic background plays a role in how Americans interpret the American dream.
		Majorities of black, Hispanic, and Asian American adults say the American Dream is about opportunity, while white Americans lean slightly towards stability.
		And this is a chart there showing that with for Asian Americans in particular, 66% see it about opportunity compared to 58% of black Americans, 57% of Hispanic Americans, compared to 48% of white Americans who skew slightly towards viewing the American Dream more about stability.
		Scott is in Ithaca, New York on our line for independence.
		Good morning, Scott.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
unidentified		How you doing?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Fine, thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		What do you think of the American Dream?
unidentified		I think it kind of has two basic parts.
		Part is that stability part, and part is, I think, the housing market part.
		The stability part is, I think, the ability to pay your bills and be comfortable and get by on a budget and things like that, which I think is very difficult for a lot of people right now.
		I think that part of the equation is something where some people are able to dig in and live kind of miserly and do the best they can.
		And sometimes multiple family members pitch in and help.
		The housing part is more complicated because, like somebody mentioned before, the average housing prices have just, the inflation of the numbers are just ridiculous.
		And it wasn't helped by people that flipped houses.
		There were people that bought houses at, let's say, like even in my area for about $275,000, $280,000, then flipped them and flipped them again.
		And now those same houses, the last time they were sold, were like over $400,000.
		And they were actually only worth maybe $250,000, $260,000, maybe.
		And so now we have this housing inflation.
		And I don't know the right answer, but when you played the video of the politician, she did all the, we're going to be strong and we're going to do this.
		And it was kind of like the long time ago they came out with some fake commercials for politicians that just smile and shake hands and everything.
		She didn't really say anything in that video to solve the problem.
		But we do need to try to solve that problem.
		I don't know if it's going to take activist kind of real estate investors to like start to help lower prices.
		But that part of the American dream is probably the most difficult thing to deal with, in my opinion.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Next up is Michael in Lancaster, California on our line for Democrats.
		Good morning, Michael.
unidentified		Yes, the American Dream, I grew up in Mississippi with my grandfather, and he had about 80 acres of land.
		And all of his descendants, all his, I'm third generation, and we all went out to work hard.
		He showed us to work hard.
		And right now, the majority of my siblings, well, my cousins and everyone that's my age, we all have accomplished buying property.
		I now live in Lancaster.
		I own four homes.
		I have two back east, two here in California.
		And actually, I own six, but a couple, I don't really count.
		But I worked hard.
		I did without some things.
		You know, people would make money.
		They got to have a new car all the time.
		I drove my car.
		I drove a 95,000.
		I still have it, a 95-Chevy pickup.
		And I drove that for 20 years or 30 years now.
		And I sacrificed and I put my money back into the American Dream.
		And when I grew up, though, in Mississippi, it was everyone dreamed of going up north to somewhere, getting a job with benefits, having retirement and things like that, medical.
		And all those things are gone in the past now.
		There's not many jobs out there to where the medical is there for you.
		You have to, you know, acquire your own medical.
		You have to acquire other benefits that you want in life because the rich are now taking the money.
		You know, now an owner of a company, he takes all the money and puts it back into his pocket.
		When back in the day, you could go get a job and the job would give you benefits and then you could kind of do something with your life.
		Now it's really hard.
		And I own property, but it's really hard to go out and buy property.
		Here in Lancaster, the average house is $400,000 to $500,000 here in Lancaster.
		And I see that as impossible.
		And I mean, I rent my property out, but I had to sacrifice to do that.
		And so I think a lot of it is.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Michael, a couple of other callers have referenced people who own a lot of several properties and the fact that people are renting out properties instead of selling them as contributing to the housing crisis.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		What do you think about that?
unidentified		I don't necessarily think it's contributing to the housing crisis because the neighborhood I live in, and I live in a mixed neighborhood, the neighborhood I live in, a lot of my neighbors say that, hey, I can't afford a house or I don't want to buy a house if they don't put themselves out there.
		I was in my 40s before I bought my first house because I had that same attitude that I didn't want to put money into a house.
		I was afraid.
		And I noticed a lot of my neighbors and people like that.
		I had a neighbor.
		He told me, every time I see you, you're going to work.
		Well, I got up and I went to work and then I sacrificed and bought a house.
		He didn't want to buy a house.
		He said, I can't afford a house.
		Could afford the same house I could at the time.
		And a lot of people would rent instead of trying to buy property.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Let's hear from Virginia in Waldorf, Maryland on our line for Republicans.
		Good morning, Virginia.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I think in the housing, just I'm looking for a house now, and I can honestly tell you they'll put them on the market where I can afford to buy them and in the range of $150 to $200.
		And then they did so far, three houses have been purchased cash right out from under me.
justice neil gorsuch ▲ ● ▼		And it's because flippers and developers come in and buy them up, flip them, and then move them out of the average price of what Middle America or Lower Middle America can afford.
justice neil gorsuch ▲ ● ▼		So listening to all these people, these 80 acres, I'm sure he sold those 80 acres.
unidentified		So it's very difficult because I don't hear anybody really addressing the fact that Middle America, they don't even qualify for housing.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		And so what does this make you think about the American dream, Virginia?
unidentified		I don't believe it exists anymore.
justice neil gorsuch ▲ ● ▼		I think that flippers and developers, as I said, are moving the market far beyond what Middle America and Lower Middle America can afford.
justice neil gorsuch ▲ ● ▼		I know coming up, I'm 75, and I know coming up through the 50s, anybody.
unidentified		I had a neighbor that worked at Conemac Stadium.
		He made minimum wage.
		He had a house, two children, and his wife stayed home.
		So that's how we've progressed as a society.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Patricia is in Sherman Oaks, California on our line for independence.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Patricia.
unidentified		Good morning.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		What do you think of the American Dream?
unidentified		Well, I tell you, I was someone who was born in the late 50s, and my father came out of poverty from the South Bronx and was extremely successful, paid 90% in taxes, was happy to do it.
		We lived beautifully in Beverly Hills and in Malibu, and I went to private schools.
		He was happy to pay the taxes because a rising ship lifted all boats.
		And that was sort of the way I grew up and the way I thought it would always be.
		I have children that are 30 years apart.
		And I can see how difficult it is compared to my older children who were beneficiaries of being able to go to school, even expensive schools, but parse out their loans.
		And to my youngest child, who's 21 years old, who just graduated college and wanted to be a lawyer and now has been going to be dealing with the Trump issues, which are not going to give them as much.
		She wanted to be a lawyer, so she would have to take out expensive loans, more loans for law school.
		And she can't afford it.
		She would not qualify.
		And so the dream is different for her.
		For my generation, although not particularly for me, but my generation is going to be a huge transfer of wealth to the kids of those and some grandkids.
		And then I just don't, it's not going to happen for my seven children, but it's going to happen for most people.
		They will be able to give that down.
		And so I think that for me, Although I have been a Democrat and I've never really been a Republican, but as soon as I could vote independent, I could vote independent.
		But I'm now leaning more towards the Democratic Party because I think the Republican Party is producing a fear mentality that I did not grow up with.
		We always felt like we could do whatever we wanted.
		We could go out in the streets and protest for whatever we wanted peacefully and not fear sort of retribution or people talking about taking our citizenship away if we were people with any kind of fame or notoriety and probably not.
		I mean, I've become afraid now to voice my opinion.
		I think it's become maybe something that was around before I was a conscious being before the sort of FDR and all the changes that came in.
		But I don't feel confident anymore.
		And I also don't like the fact that we are, even though I live in California, we've had state-strong sort of pollution laws.
		They seem to be taking that away, although they said it would be states' rights, and they're trying to sort of take away it all.
		So I just, I feel much less enthusiastic for my younger kids who are really struggling with student debt.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		And because you mentioned education, Patricia, I want to play a clip because last month on Fox News, Oklahoma Republicans, Governor Kevin Stitt, the incoming chair of the National Governors Association, talked about how he thinks education reform can help people achieve the American dream.
kevin stitt ▲ ● ▼		You know, I tell people this: rich people already have school choice.
		They move to the best neighborhoods, they put their kids in the best schools, they can afford private schools.
		But COVID woke me up to the fact that, you know, working families don't have those same options.
		And if you happen to be in a zip code with low graduation rates, with low test scores, what is that family supposed to do?
		And so we passed a law that allows every family to have $7,500 to go to a private school, a school of their choice.
		We passed open transfer.
		So a person in a failing school district can choose to go to a different public school.
		So we're so excited about putting parents in charge, not the government, in our education system.
		And guess what?
		That's a free market principle that when you create competition, everybody has to get better.
		Okay?
		One side of the aisle thinks that you should have government-controlled everything.
		And that is not the way that we need to run this country.
		Back to the American dream.
		We have to incentivize and we have to encourage young people in entrepreneurship and free markets and giving them an incentive to go chase their American dream.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		And we're still getting your thoughts on whether you believe in the American dream.
		Let's hear from Cheryl in Dayton, Ohio on our Line for Democrats.
		Good morning, Cheryl.
unidentified		Hi, thank you for letting me speak today.
		I am a realtor, and I wanted to say something first about the housing crisis.
		The housing crisis is because there aren't enough houses to go around.
		The inventory is extremely low.
		And if people will remember, when Kamala was running for president, she was going to help us with affordable housing all through the United States.
		And that would have put housing, affordable housing, that would have leveled out the rising prices of housing.
		We cannot blame it on flippers.
		We cannot blame it on the people who are trying to make a buck on rentals.
		I have a short-term rental, and the reason it's a short-term rental is because when I rent a house out, I've always only had one house that I rent out, but the renters tear it up so badly that any money that I would have made off of that property, I have to put it back into the property just to make it rentable again.
		So I have gone to the short-term rental because in this area there is quite a bit of construction, and also the nurses are contract nurses at the hospital.
		So it gives them a home-like experience while they're here in this city working or close by.
		So I don't make a bunch of money off of it, but at least they don't tear my house up.
		So as far as the American dream, I think the American Dream is still going to be there for people who voted for Trump because, and white people.
		And I really took offense for the African American people when that man said to quit whining.
		And not just the African American people, but anybody who has struggled on minimum wage jobs to feed their family.
		And for someone to say that, they probably don't even have enough money left over to put in a savings account.
		And I think that was just very unthoughtful of that person.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Debbie is in Sanford, Maine on our line for independence.
		Good morning, Debbie.
unidentified		Good morning.
		This is unreal.
		It's like I'm 70 today.
		Happy birthday.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Happy birthday.
unidentified		Well, thank you.
		But you know what?
		To hear this, the American dream is there.
		It's like how much you want to put into getting your dream done.
		It's like I was married at 18, and then I got divorced 20 years later.
		My house got paid off in 25 years.
		And it's like I was a waitress almost 40 years.
		I had two jobs, and I did it on my own.
		I strive to make it happen.
		The American dream is there.
		How bad do you want it?
		You know, it's like, it's just ridiculous to hear these people, woe is me, woe is me, woe is me.
		But you know what?
		Do something about it.
		You can get it done.
		You can have a dream.
		So what is a dream?
		Materialistically?
		You know, it's like, just be happy and thankful and blessed for what you have.
		And it's like, you know what?
		Just open up your mind and just, you know, just enjoy life.
		Enjoy your family.
		And things, if you have that knack and that aspect to do, you know, to do good and to, you know, be thankful and do good for people and give it back.
		You know what?
		You'll be blessed ten times fold.
		You truly will.
		And thank you for listening to me.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Kevin is in Staten Island, New York on our line for Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Kevin.
unidentified		Good morning.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Do you believe in the American dream?
unidentified		Oh, yes, I wholeheartedly do.
		I was in the United States Navy.
		I did two tours overseas.
		And I have achieved the American Dream.
		My family was in farming.
		I continued after I briefly did my step in the Navy.
		And the American Dream is out there.
		Under the Obama administration, with the Obama agenda, we suffered in farming.
		But I have three separate properties in different areas, Texas, California, and Arizona, from which we farm.
		And I've seen my brothers who didn't go into the farming business, but rose through the ranks through Fire Department in New Jersey, Jersey City, which, as we know, is one of the most highest states in the Union to be taxed.
		He's young and he still struggles, sends his kids through private school.
		But the American Dream is out there.
		As far as these other people, if you want to work and you want to achieve your goals in life, it's there.
		It has nothing to do with race, religion, or creed.
		Wherever you come from, you come to this country.
		My family came from Sicily in the 1800s, built a home in Jersey City and built the pastry business and stuff.
		And we prospered thereafter.
		I mean, you do right now have some severe taxes in the state of New Jersey.
		That's why I moved to Staten Island, New York.
		But I mean, everything is out there.
		I'm senator in New York, and I travel to Texas.
		I travel to California, travel to Arizona, you know, where I farm at.
		And, you know, if you want to achieve something, you're going to work for it.
		And a lot of these younger kids today, you know, excuse me, early retirement.
		I mean, what do you want to retire at 40 years old for if you know you're going to have a minimum amount of money coming from your Social Security?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So, Kevin, we are just about out of time.
		So thank you for your call and for everyone who called in this segment.
		Coming up later on, we're going to have a discussion about free speech in the United States with author and journalist Katherine Brodsky, who is the author of No Apologies, How to Find and Free Your Voice in the Age of Outrage.
		But first up, Mother Jones National Voting Rights Correspondent Ari Berman will join us to discuss his new cover story on President Trump's plans for the midterm elections.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		This week on the C-SPAN networks, the House and the Senate are in session.
		The House and Senate will work on their versions of 2026 defense programs and policy legislation known as the National Defense Authorization Act.
		On Tuesday, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett launches her latest book, Listening to the Law, with a book signing hosted by the Reagan Foundation Center on Civility and Democracy.
		And then on Wednesday, the director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Michael Kratios, will testify before the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Subcommittee on President Trump's artificial intelligence strategy.
		And on Thursday, watch C-SPAN's live all-day coverage of the September 11th commemoration services for the National 9-11 Memorial in New York City, the National 9-11 Pentagon Memorial in Washington, D.C., and the Flight 93 National Memorial in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
		Watch live this week on the C-SPAN networks or on C-SPAN Now, our free mobile video app.
		Also, head over to C-SPAN.org for scheduling information or to watch live or on demand anytime.
		C-SPAN, Democracy, Unfiltered.
		And pass precedent.
		Why are you doing this?
		This is outrageous.
jim banks ▲ ● ▼		This is a kangaroo quarrel.
unidentified		This fall, C-SPAN presents a rare moment of unity.
		Ceasefire, where the shouting stops and the conversation begins.
		Join political playbook chief correspondent and White House Bureau Chief Dasha Burns as host of Ceasefire.
		Bringing two leaders from opposite sides of the aisle into a dialogue to find common ground.
		ceasefire this fall on the network that doesn't take sides only on c-span america marks 250 years and c-span is there to commemorate every moment from the signing of the declaration of independence to the voices shaping our nation's future
		We bring you unprecedented all-platform coverage, exploring the stories, sights, and spirit that make up America.
		Join us for remarkable coast-to-coast coverage, celebrating our nation's journey like no other network can.
		America 250.
		Over a year of historic moments.
		Only on the C-SPAN networks.
		Washington Journal continues.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back.
		We're joined now by Ari Berman, who's the National Voting Rights Correspondent at Mother Jones Magazine.
		Welcome to Washington Journal.
unidentified		Good morning, Kimberly.
unidentified		Thank you for having me.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		What does it mean to be the national voting rights correspondent at Mother Jones?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		What exactly do you cover?
unidentified		Well, I cover voting rights in all its various forms, which used to be a pretty obscure beat, but has now gotten a lot more attention given the news.
		So I cover changes around voting laws, efforts to make it more difficult to vote, things like gerrymandering that have been in the news, anything that affects voting in the election system.
		That's what I cover.
		I've also written three books, Herding Donkeys, Give Us the Ballot, and Minority Rule.
		So I do a mix of shorter and longer form journalism.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So you have a new cover story publishing early next week called Project 2026, Trump's Plan to Hijack the Next Election.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		What are your biggest concerns heading into the midterms?
unidentified		My biggest concern is that Trump is preparing and is in the process of interfering in the midterms in a way that no other president, Republican or Democrat, has ever done before.
		We've seen Trump in recent weeks lean on states to redraw their maps mid-decade to give more seats to Republicans.
		We've never seen a president do anything like that before.
		Redistricting is supposed to happen at the beginning of the decade.
		The idea that it would just happen in the middle of the decade simply because Trump wants more seats in Congress is truly unprecedented.
		Issuing and threatening to issue executive orders to do things, like he says, try to ban mail voting, end voting machines.
		We've never seen a president do anything like this before.
		Sending federal troops into heavily Democratic cities, places like Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., possibly Chicago next.
		That could be a prelude to having federal troops guard the polls, try to check people's IDs when they vote, potentially intimidate Democratic constituencies.
		So my overall concern is that Trump is a very authoritarian president, and he's now using his authoritarian tactics in a way to try to influence the next election to benefit his party in a way that is extremely unusual and disturbing for an American president to do.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So you've talked about the things that you say President Trump wants to do in the upcoming election, but has it actually gotten any harder to vote or to register to vote in recent years?
unidentified		Well, it has if you look at what has happened at the state level, because states have passed a lot of different policies, from making it harder to obtain a mail ballot to making it harder to cast a mail ballot to making it more difficult to register to vote to cutting back on the amount of time that people have to vote, to closing polling places, removing voters from the rolls.
		We've seen all of that in recent years from states like Texas and Georgia and Florida.
		But Trump wants to go further.
		He doesn't want this to just be a state issue.
		He wants this to be a national issue.
		He wants to nationalize these efforts to make it more difficult to vote.
		As he said, he wants to ban mail voting.
		He wants to eliminate voting machines.
		He's already issued an executive order that, for example, would require you to have a passport or a birth certificate to be able to register to vote, something that millions of Americans don't have or don't have ready access to.
		So yes, it has become more difficult to vote in certain states in recent years, but Trump would like to go a lot further.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Now, you mentioned the action at the state level when it comes to voter registration and voter ID laws, but much of the way that we run our elections in this country is managed at the state level.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Does that provide any kind of insulation or backstop against some of these things that you're concerned about?
unidentified		Yes, depending on what state it is and what that state is doing.
		I mean, we've also seen efforts to make it harder to vote and to overturn elections at the state level as well.
		One of the examples that I cite in my piece is a North Carolina Supreme Court race from 2024, in which the Republican judicial candidate, Jefferson Griffin, spent months trying to overturn that election of the eventual Democratic justice, Allison Riggs.
		And it was very much like what Trump tried to do in 2020, trying to overturn the election.
		But this time, Griffin was actually able to persuade both the North Carolina Court of Appeals and the North Carolina Supreme Court to try to overturn that election before a federal judge, and interestingly enough, appointed by Donald Trump, stepped in and said the state board of election had to certify that election.
		So we've seen these kind of efforts at the state level as well.
		But yes, there is some level of insulation.
		And there is a tension here because Trump is trying to do these things on a federal level, require proof of citizenship to register to vote, allegedly trying to end mail voting, to ban voting machines.
		But the Constitution is very clear that the states, with some oversight from Congress, set rules for elections.
		And so when Trump is trying to do these kind of things through executive order, he's running into difficulties in the courts because they're saying that this power is something that the president doesn't actually have.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Just sticking with the states a little bit longer, is anything happening at the state level to protect election integrity, in your opinion?
unidentified		In certain states, yes.
		I mean, you had bipartisan coalitions in past elections who have stood up and prevented elections from being overturned.
		You had, for example, the Secretary of State of Georgia be very vocal in defending the election, the integrity of the election in 2020.
		You've seen those coalitions hold in 2022 and 2024.
		So I think there has been a movement of election officials trying to say that the system is secure.
		There is no widespread voter fraud.
		People should feel confident that their ballots are secure.
		But we've also seen people who tried to overturn the 2020 election, take positions of power, first at the state level, serving as state election officials, serving on election boards that certify elections, serving in roles like Secretary of State, State Attorney General, things like that, governors.
		And now we've seen them at the federal level.
		I mean, people who worked to overturn the 2020 election are now serving in the highest roles of the federal government under a president who led the push to overturn the 2020 election.
		So yes, states are doing things to try to protect the integrity of the election, but they are running into a federal government that is not trying to protect the integrity of the election.
		And that's a very big challenge for the states right now.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		You've made a couple of references to the president's efforts to get rid of mail-in voting.
		He posted about this on Truth Social, saying, I am going to lead a movement to get rid of mail-in ballots.
		And also, while we're at it, highly inaccurate, very expensive, and seriously controversial voting machines, which cost 10 times more than accurate and sophisticated watermark paper, which is faster and leaves no doubt at the end of the evening as to who won and who lost the election.
		Now, how important is mail-in voting in the United States right now?
unidentified		Very important.
		I mean, tens of millions of people use it.
		Fewer people use mail-in ballots than vote in person.
		And obviously, it's gone down somewhat since the pandemic.
		But there are states like Oregon, like Washington, that do elections entirely by mail.
		There's also people that vote by mail in very high rates in swing states, places like Pennsylvania, places like Florida.
		Nearly a third of voters cast their ballots by mail in some of these key swing states, places like Arizona as well.
		And it's proved very safe.
		And the thing is, until President Trump tried to make an issue of mail voting and attack mail voting, it was actually used more by Republicans than Democrats.
		So mail voting has really been a bipartisan issue until recently.
		There's a lot of Republican constituencies that use mail voting, elderly people, more rural constituencies.
		These tend to be more Republican voters.
		And they use vote by mail because it's more convenient for them.
		It might be harder to get to a polling place.
		So people rely on mail voting.
		There's no evidence it leads to fraud.
		And there are some Republicans that are uncomfortable with Trump's attacks on mail voting because, like I said, a lot of Republicans use it.
		And one of the reasons why Republicans did better in 2024 was that they embraced all the different methods of voting.
		Trump and his allies softpedal their attacks in 2024.
		And they urged people to vote early, to vote by mail if that was most convenient to them.
		So trying to roll this back, which by the way, the president doesn't have the power to unilaterally do, it's not just something that's going to hurt Democrats.
		It's going to hurt all voters, including many Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		You wrote recently this story on Trump's orders.
		Missouri Republicans plan to gerrymander a black lawmaker out of office.
		This is one of several redistricting fights playing out across the country.
		Many people are familiar with what happened recently in Texas.
		Can you talk about what's happening in Missouri and what this might mean for the midterms?
unidentified		Yes.
		So first off, I just want to reiterate how unusual this is.
		Redistricting is supposed to happen at the beginning of the decade.
		So the idea that it's happening in the middle of the decade is extremely unusual.
		And the president basically going around state by state by state and saying, you need to do this, is even more unusual.
		So we saw what happened where the president pressured Texas Republicans to draw a new congressional map that is expected to net Republicans five more seats.
		But that is not enough for the president.
		He is now going state by state by state.
		Missouri is the next state following Texas to do this.
		They just convened a special session last week.
		And what they're trying to do is they're trying to draw one additional Republican seat.
		They're doing this by attempting to dismantle the seat held by Representative Emmanuel Cleaver, a Democrat from the Kansas City area.
		He was a former mayor of Kansas City.
		He's represented basically an urban Kansas City district for 20 years.
		That district would now stretch all the way 200 miles to rural Missouri, and it would be a lot more Republican.
		And that way, Republicans would control 90% of seats in Missouri in a place where Trump only got 58% of the vote.
		So they would have many more seats than the Republicans support in the state.
		And Trump's not stopping with Missouri.
		He's allegedly bringing leaders from Kansas and Nebraska to the White House this week.
		He's leaning on Indiana.
		He's leaning on Florida.
		And again, this is just extremely unusual that the president would lean on these states to redraw their maps mid-decade.
		And Democrats are trying to respond.
		But this whole effort was really launched by the White House in an extremely unprecedented way.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		If you have a question for Ari Berman, who's a national voting rights correspondent at Mother Jones, you can call in Democrats 202-748-8000.
		Republicans 202-748-8001.
		And Independents 202-748-8002.
		Before we go to calls, Ari, I want to point to another piece of yours.
		The nation's landmark voting rights law just turned 60.
		It may not survive Trump.
		You're talking about the Voting Rights Act.
		What do you mean?
unidentified		What I mean is that the Voting Rights Act is really on its last legs right now.
		It's been weakened in a number of different ways by the Supreme Court.
		This was a law that transformed American democracy, that helped so many people who were disenfranchised in the Jim Crow South register and cast ballots for the first time.
		It was supported for many years by a very large bipartisan coalition in Congress, but it's been steadily weakened by the courts.
		And right now, there is a case pending before the Supreme Court from Louisiana that would basically rule that districts that are drawn to help elect a person of color, such as a black member of Congress in Louisiana, may be unconstitutional under the Voting Rights Act.
		And given how weakened the Voting Rights Act has already been by the courts, this would essentially deal a deathblow to the Voting Rights Act.
		In conjunction with another case that could come before the Supreme Court, that could rule that private plaintiffs, groups like, for example, the ACLU or the NAACP, don't have the power to bring lawsuits to enforce the Voting Rights Act.
		Only the federal government could be able to do that.
		Well, the federal government doesn't bring that many lawsuits to enforce the Voting Rights Act.
		And also, if the federal government's hostile to the Voting Rights Act, like this current administration is, there would basically be no litigation under the Voting Rights Act.
		So it's very sad that a law that is 60 years old that transformed American democracy that had so much bipartisan support over the years is really on its last legs.
		And I think that if the Voting Rights Act suffers, American democracy is going to suffer as well.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Let's hear from Mike in Heartland, Wisconsin, on our line for Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Mike.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I just want to bring up more of a local issue that happened in Milwaukee where somebody cheated the election.
		And it's not the national election that we necessarily have to worry about.
		It's people cheating their local elections, which in turn affect the national election.
		This woman worked, she works for the City of Milwaukee Police Department.
		She, and you could look this up.
		It's a pretty recent story.
		I would hope that you would look it up to maybe get better details.
		She listed a different address so she could vote in a different district.
		The district that she worked in, that there was something on the ballot to give her a 3% raise.
		Now they found out that it wasn't her primary address.
		So you have people now, and this is where voter ID laws would be a good thing, where you would have caught that, that no, you can't vote here, and we wouldn't have to deal with investigations and all this stuff.
		And I would appreciate it if I could maybe respond to your response.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Can you give me a little bit more information about this case in Milwaukee?
		I am trying to find a link for it.
		Can you just give me a little bit more information?
unidentified		I mean, it's about someone that worked for the police department.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		I think I've found it here.
		Okay, let's look at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's coverage of this.
		Milwaukee police employee charged with election fraud for lying about her address according to a complaint.
		This is a story from August 25th.
		I'll just read a little bit of it to give some key points here.
		The Milwaukee Police Department's former community relations engagement and recruitment director has been criminally charged with election fraud.
		Marcy Patterson, 45, has been living outside the city of Milwaukee, but voting in Milwaukee elections and using her 80-year-old mother's Milwaukee address to receive increased pay according to a criminal complaint filed August 25th in Milwaukee County Circuit Court.
		And it looks like she was living in a different town at the time, according to prosecutors.
		And she's charged with one count of election fraud, voting by a disqualified person, which is a class one felony and punishable by not more than $10,000 or imprisoned up to three and a half years or both.
		She resigned on July 21st from her job with the police department.
		Okay, and what was your question again, Mike, just so we can let Mr. Berman respond?
unidentified		I'd like, just like to hear his opinion on that.
		I mean, the Democrats really like to push that there's not as much fraud as they think and that, you know, that it's not happening.
		And that voter ID is somehow suppression to certain groups of people when we need IDs to get on a plane, buy alcohol, all these things, rent a car, all these things, just to buy a car from the dealership.
		You need an ID.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay, so let's let Mr. Berman respond.
unidentified		Well, I'm not familiar with this specific story.
		I was on vacation at the end of August, so that might be why I missed it.
		I should point out Wisconsin has a voter ID law like Mike wants.
		So they have the kind of security that he's calling for.
		And they caught this.
		So that showed in this sense that the system worked.
		I think no one's arguing.
		I'm certainly not arguing that there's no voter fraud, that it never happens.
		There clearly are cases where it occurs.
		This seems like a fairly unusual case in that someone was trying to vote in such a way that directly benefited him or her, which is usually not something that is directly on the ballot.
		But I think that the idea is not that it never occurs, but that it doesn't occur in the numbers that some people are suggesting, where people are saying there's tens of thousands or millions of fraudulent votes.
		Like, for example, the president has claimed that's the kind of fraud that has never been proven to actually occur, where both Democratic and Republican officials and nonpartisan people have looked into this and they've never been able to substantiate those kind of claims.
		And so I would just say this seems like an isolated case.
		It seems like an unusual case.
		It was something that was caught, and Wisconsin has the kind of election security laws that, by and large, Republicans actually want.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Mike, I know you wanted to respond.
unidentified		I do just want to say that the reason why Wisconsin has strong voting laws is because we have a somewhat decent Republican legislator that actually puts forward stuff like this.
		And we have Democrats that lead Milwaukee that there's always a late voter dump every election.
		They're the last county to finally finish things.
		Everyone else, Madison.
		And we have Republicans that stand up for stuff like this, where the Democrats in my state are the ones that are pushing the idea that strong RID laws are somehow suppressive.
		So that's where we come from in Wisconsin.
		And maybe you should keep in touch with Wisconsin.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		All right.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Any further thoughts, Mr. Berman, before we move on?
unidentified		Well, I just want to say I've been to Wisconsin many times to report on elections there.
		So I'm quite familiar with the voting laws in the state.
		The reason why Milwaukee has its results come in late is because they're not actually able to process mail ballots until election day.
		And so they get all the votes on election day and they get all the mail ballots.
		And it takes time to be able to do that given the volume of votes in that state.
		They have asked the Republican-controlled legislature to allow them to process these mail ballots ahead of time, like happens in many other states, including Republican-controlled states like Georgia and Florida.
		But they are unable to do so.
		Therefore, it's really, interestingly enough, the Republican legislature's fault that Milwaukee has to report so late.
		And so this is the kind of thing where there could be bipartisan agreement.
		If both parties were interested in striking some kind of deal, there could be bipartisan agreement so that votes would be counted earlier and there wouldn't be these kind of conspiracy theories about quote-unquote vote dumps and things like that.
		But unfortunately, in some states like Wisconsin, those bipartisan deals have not been made.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Anne is in Bar Harbor, Maine on our line for Democrats.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Anne.
unidentified		Hi, thank you so very much for this very important topic.
		I know that the guest is addressing structural and systemic significant voter suppression.
		I would like to address societal voter suppression in terms of the notion that voting is an individual exercise in personal expression instead of a strategic joint exercise in taking power.
		And so that potential Democratic voters on the left follow pipe dreams and purity tests and Pied Pipers, while Republican right-wing voters hold their nose, vote for Donald Trump, and win the Supreme Court.
		And this drives me a little crazy.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Any thoughts, Mr. Berman?
unidentified		Well, I mean, I think I would have to look at more specifics to really understand what Ann is talking about.
		But I do think that generally speaking, Republican voters think more long-term about the impact of the election and less about who the specific candidate is.
		As Ann mentioned, a lot of Republicans, particularly in 2016, didn't like Trump, but they held their nose and voted for him because they cared about things like the Supreme Court.
		And that had a huge impact on American politics because Trump has been able to appoint three people to the Supreme Court.
		And that has given Republicans a 6-3 majority on the court.
		That has helped their party in a lot of different ways, including ruling in the middle of the 2024 election that Trump didn't have to stand trial for inciting the insurrection on January 6th, which I believe had a huge impact on how the election went.
		Whereas Democrats tend to be more focused on individual candidates and the merits of those individual candidates and the personalities of those individual candidates.
		And so, in that sense, I think it's true that Democrats are more focused on who the candidate is and what they represent and whether they check all these different boxes for the voters.
		Whereas Republicans are willing, not all of them, but some of them are willing to accept some flaws in their candidates to achieve bigger things that they want.
		For example, like being able to control a majority on the Supreme Court.
		I definitely think that's a fair point.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		David is in Chadburn, North Carolina, on our line for independence.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, David.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		Mr. Barbara, I was had a question.
		I remember back in the 2020 election, there were some several.
		I remember one person in particular, they had the voting booths out where you could do your mail-in voting.
		And the person was at the box just standing there for seemed like five, ten minutes, dropping letter after vote after vote after vote after vote into the machine.
		And, you know, another thing would be like.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Sorry, David, did you mean a voting machine or a drop-off box for mail-in ballots?
unidentified		I'm sorry, a drop box.
		Okay.
		My concern is mail-in voting.
		The box was there, and she was standing there, just kept putting in the votes in the box, of course, you know, a drop box.
		And then all of a sudden, you know, you see all these votes that come in for the election for Biden, and there was like more votes than anyone in the people in America, the voting, the people allowed to vote in America.
		And I was just wondering, Mr. Barbara, what are your thoughts about that?
		I know you said you felt like there was a small percentage of fraud, but without ID, how do you feel about ID?
		I guess would be my question.
		How do you feel about ID, voter ID?
		Well, North Carolina has a voter ID requirement.
		So that is another state where if people vote by mail, they're going to have to provide some form of ID, and that's going to be checked by election officials.
		And in some states, you're able, for example, to collect mail-in ballots from communities that are not able to get to the polls that easily.
		For example, you might be able to collect it from elderly voters or from people from disabilities.
		You can take those mail ballots, you can put them in a drop box, but election officials are going to confirm all that information.
		They're going to make sure that people are who they say they are in the end.
		And North Carolina, under both Republican and Democratic leadership, has not had a long history of fraud with some exceptions.
		And so I'm not opposed to ID as long as it's something that everyone can get.
		And for 90% of the public, it's not going to be a big deal because they have a driver's license or some form of ID.
		But I think for the 10% that don't, for one reason or another, it can be burdensome because if you don't have an ID, you often have to have underlying documents like a birth certificate.
		That can be harder to obtain.
		It can cost money to obtain.
		There are people that don't drive or that are elderly that no longer drive, that may not have access to these kinds of things.
		So I think it's not a big deal for most people, but for a small subset of people, it could be a bigger deal.
		I think there has to be some kind of safety net for those people to make the IDs readily accessible.
		We've seen in some states, for example, have required IDs, but then have closed DMV offices, for example, or don't have a lot of DMVs.
		In states like Texas, for example, that are quite big, you might have to drive 200 miles to be able to get in an ID.
		So it can be burdensome for some people.
		I don't think it's the only problem with our election system.
		I think there are things that are bigger deals, for example, banning mail voting, cutting the number of polling places, those kind of things I think would be much more burdensome than an ID law.
		But I do think for a small subset of the population, it can be a burden.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		George is in Purcellville, Virginia, on our line for Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, George.
unidentified		Thank you.
		I've been in election office for about 20 years in Virginia.
		And I always think if all the states do the way Virginia does it, we'd be in pretty good shape.
		We get, say, paper ballots, we may start with 2,000 paper ballots and we get 1,500 cast.
		We have to show we have 500 ballots left over.
		There's spoiled ballots and things like that.
		But it seems like a good system.
		And people show an ID to vote.
		That doesn't seem to be a problem.
		And I just figure it's a great system.
		And I don't know why these other places have so many problems.
		I think the one concern is ballot harvesting when people go to a nursing home and gather a bunch of ballots.
		I don't know if that's a legitimate way to vote.
		But thank you, C-SPAN.
		You're the best.
		I send you a little bit of money now and then.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Thank you.
unidentified		Thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead, Mr. Berman.
unidentified		It was George who was calling, right?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
unidentified		I want to thank him for his election work.
		It's really important to have people volunteer to take these kind of positions.
		It's often unglamorous work.
		It's become more difficult in recent years.
		But, you know, our election system functions by ordinary people doing things like becoming poll workers, becoming election officials.
		So I always want to thank people that do that kind of work.
		And yeah, Virginia has a good system.
		They have a lot of time to vote early.
		They have security measures in place to try to make sure people say they are who are voting.
		It's a system that both Republicans and Democrats have done well under.
		I think there's a misperception that if you make it easier to vote or you change voting laws, that it's going to help one party or another.
		But we've seen in Virginia them adopt a number of election reforms.
		And in recent years, Republicans have done well in high turnout elections in Virginia.
		And Democrats have done well in high turnout elections in Virginia.
		So the idea that if a lot of people vote, it's going to benefit one party or another, I think is an increasingly outdated idea.
		So I do think that that's one state that people could look to in terms of having well-run elections.
		And I appreciate the caller for making that point.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		You were referencing the importance of volunteering and the poll workers that we have across the country and the other election workers.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Can you talk a little bit about the United States Election Assistance Commission, which you've also written about, and the role that they play in the elections?
unidentified		Yeah, they basically advise states on voting procedures.
		They issue guidance to the states and they help states with things like funding, that kind of thing.
		They're basically a resource for the states that came out of the 2000 election in Florida, where there are a lot of voting problems.
		And the idea was that there should be some kind of federal agency that would interlink with the states for best practices.
		Now, recent years, Trump has tried to change the Election Assistance Commission.
		For example, he issued this executive order in March that I said would require proof of citizenship to register to vote for federal elections, things like a passport or a birth certificate.
		So not just your ID, but documents that fewer people have or carry around with them to be able to register to vote.
		He wanted that to go through the Election Assistance Commission.
		He also issued a part of the executive order that didn't get that much of attention that called for rescinding certification on current voting machines and calling on them to adopt new technology, which interestingly enough is not actually available.
		So basically, states were going to be required to adopt voting technology that is not possible for them to actually be able to adopt.
		And experts worried that would then be something that Trump would use to claim there was fraud in the election.
		And that also went through the Election Assistance Commission.
		So this is an example of a pretty obscure government agency that not a lot of people know about, but that has become quite important in terms of how our elections are run and how these fights over voting are playing out right now.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		David is in Los Angeles, California on our line for independence.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, David.
unidentified		Yeah, hi, Ari.
		I just wanted to make a couple factual statements and clear up some misinformation.
		In California, a lot of the Trump supporters say that illegal immigrants are voting.
		The problem with that is in order to register to vote in California, you have to have a social security number.
		You can actually go online and prove that.
		And they don't give social security numbers to illegal immigrants.
		I had to register my mother to vote, and we ended up having to register her.
		And I typoed one of her social security numbers, and it rejected it.
		So there is obviously a misinformation about understanding the difference between voting and registering to vote.
		So the mail-in ballots, in order to receive a mail-in ballot, you have to be a registered voter.
		That's another bit of misinformation.
		People think they're just mailing out these ballots.
		They're not.
		You have to actually be a registered voter, which means you have to have a social security number.
		So this is a lot of the misinformation that's going on out there.
		And lastly, I just want to point out, having a mail-in ballot is probably one of the most informed ways that you can vote.
		I was able to sit down at the table, dinner table, and go through every single candidate, every single measure, and study and reference and educate myself.
		And it's some of the most informed voting I've ever done.
		Just wanted to point that out.
		Thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Your thoughts, Mr. Burman?
unidentified		The caller made a number of good points.
		You're right.
		There's been a lot of misinformation out there about people voting illegally.
		President Trump claimed a very high profile that he lost the popular vote in 2016 because 3 million people voted illegally in California, that 3 million undocumented immigrants cast ballots.
		That was subsequently looked into.
		No one was ever able to substantiate anything like that.
		It doesn't actually make any rational sense why someone who's here, presumably, if they are here legally, they're here to work and provide a better life for their family, that they would risk deportation, time in jail, simply to cast a ballot.
		So there's no evidence of it.
		It also doesn't make any kind of rational sense from a cost-benefit analysis.
		And it also is a good point about mail voting, that there are procedures in there to confirm who people are and why they should be receiving a mail ballot and why their ballot is counted in the first place.
		People think that there's no rules around mail-in voting, but people's identities are confirmed by mail simply like they're confirmed through voting in person.
		It's just that you're voting in a different kind of method.
		And then, lastly, the point about having more time to vote by mail.
		I think that's certainly true.
		I think all of us have stepped in the voting booth, even someone like me who's a national voting rights correspondent.
		And there's been things on the ballot that we might not know that much about.
		There might be some obscure local resolution that we don't know that much about.
		And you always say, Oh, I wish I had more time to research that.
		I didn't realize that was going to be on the other side of the ballot, for example.
		And mail voting gives you that kind of benefit.
		So I always tell people to vote the way that they're most comfortable with.
		But I think the voting system works best when people have as many options as possible.
		That's kind of true in life itself.
		That if you need more time or you can't make it to the polls, mail voting is a great option.
		Early voting is also a great option if you don't have time to vote usually on a Tuesday in November, which is a workday for many people.
		You have time to vote early.
		You might be able to vote on the weekend, or you might be able to vote sometime during the week when it's less busy.
		Or if you like to vote in person on Election Day, you can still do that.
		No one's saying you can't do that, but we're increasingly moving to a system where the majority of people are voting before Election Day.
		And I think it's really important to point that out: that more options is something that will ultimately lead to higher turnout and a better democracy as a result.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Jim is in Florescent, Missouri, on our line for Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Jim.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I don't know if you have the ability to pull up a map of the state of Illinois, but I'd like to ask Ari what his thoughts are.
		Because I'm in Missouri, but Illinois is right across the river.
		They've got 14 Democrat seats, three Republican seats in that state.
		So the ratio there is about 83%.
		If Missouri changes their gerrymandered districts, it would go from about 75 to 87, 88.
		And how come you haven't commented on a lot of the Democrat areas that are heavily gerrymandered, like the state of Illinois?
		Some states out east are 100% Democrats, like Massachusetts.
		So you tell me there's no Republicans in Massachusetts.
		Where were you when they were doing this?
		But you're here now to complain about what the Republicans are doing.
		All they're doing is pushing back a little bit on what the Democrats have done for years.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead, Mr. Berman.
unidentified		Well, Kimberly, I have to say, I think there's a distinction between redistricting or gerrymandering as it happens after the census, which is when it's supposed to happen, which both red and blue states do.
		Yes, Illinois is absolutely gerrymandered, but other Republican states are gerrymandered as well.
		That's within their rights to do as long as it doesn't violate other voting rights laws.
		What I'm saying is this kind of mid-decade gerrymandering is very, very dangerous.
		What red states are now doing, they are redrawing maps they themselves drew at the beginning of the decade simply because President Trump wants them to redraw them.
		And that is very ahistorical, very dangerous.
		I believe it's going to lead to a race to the bottom in both red and blue states.
		And you're going to get a situation in red states, there's going to be virtually no Democratic representation.
		In blue states, there's going to be virtually no Republican representation.
		It's going to be very hard to find any kind of middle ground.
		Moderates are going to be squeezed as a result.
		And so think people are pointing, for example, to Illinois, but Illinois drew those maps at the beginning of the decade.
		That doesn't mean they're defensible, but they follow the normal process.
		This is an abnormal process that is going on now.
		And Missouri Republicans drew those maps in 2021.
		They made the determination that those were the maps they wanted.
		And they're simply redrawing the maps now because President Trump has leaned on them and pressured them.
		And to me, that is a form of election interference by the President of the United States that goes beyond simple redrawing of the maps that happens at the beginning of the decade in both red and blue states.
		And so I think we have to draw a distinction between redistricting as it happens after the census and mid-decade gerrymandering to benefit one party, which is basically unprecedented for the president of the United States to call on state by state by state to do something like this.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Cecilia is in Birmingham, Alabama on our line for Democrats.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Cecilia.
unidentified		Yes.
		Hi.
		Yeah, I wanted to ask about the voting machines that add up the votes in each state.
		Is there any particular oversight on the voting machines that add up the votes for each state?
		Because I had been hearing that some of these voting machines can be hacked.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Mr. Berman, do you have any thoughts on that?
unidentified		Well, generally speaking, I can at least attest to the way it works in New York.
		I don't know every other state, but generally speaking, in most states, voting machines have paper backups, meaning that you cast your ballot in the machine.
		In New York, you put it in your machine, and then you get a receipt to show that you voted.
		And so it's a voting machine with a paper backup.
		And I think that's the best way to do it.
		If we moved to pure paper balloting, that would introduce a level of human error that is not available with voting machines.
		So it would take longer and there would inevitably be mistakes.
		But if we moved to voting machines with no paper backups, then people would have less certainty that their ballots would be counted.
		So generally speaking, these machines are secure.
		Sometimes what happens is election officials will have voter registration lists, something like that, that might be targeted.
		That is one of my concerns that I point out in my article, that there have been efforts by the Russians, by the Chinese, by the Iranians to access voting machine equipment.
		Maybe it might not be the results themselves, but voter registration lists, something like that.
		One of the things the Trump administration has done is it's cut back efforts to prevent foreign election interference, things that were worked on at a bipartisan level in both the Obama, first Trump and Biden administrations.
		And I think it's worrisome at a time when the world is becoming more dangerous, that our cyber security efforts are becoming more porous.
		That is something that worries both Democratic and Republican election officials.
		And I think it's something that has had bipartisan support in the past, and it's unfortunately become politicized under this administration.
		The idea of protecting us against foreign election interference.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's all the time that we have for this segment.
		Thank you so much to Ari Berman, who's a national voting rights correspondent at Mother Jones Magazine, also author of the book Minority Rule, the right-wing attack on the will of the people and the fight to resist it.
		Thank you so much for joining us.
unidentified		Thanks, Kimberly.
unidentified		I appreciate it.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So coming up, we are going to speak with author and journalist Katherine Brodsky, who's the author of No Apologies, How to Find and Free Your Voice in a Age of Outrage.
		And we're going to talk about the state of free speech in the United States.
		But first, we're going to have open forum.
		And so you can start calling in to share your thoughts about the news of the day.
		Our line for Democrats is 202-748-8000.
		For Republicans, 202-748-8001.
		And Independents at 202-748-8002.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		Tonight on C-SPAN's Q&A, Liberty Media Chairman and cable TV pioneer John Malone, author of Born to be Wired, discusses his life and entrepreneurship.
unidentified		He also talks about his many successful business ventures, competing with Ted Turner and Rupert Murdoch, the value of philanthropy, and living life as a high-functioning autistic.
john malone ▲ ● ▼		I still, to this day, I don't like to be in crowds or in groups of any size.
		I really enjoy people one-on-one.
		I enjoy talking, you know, but I really am uncomfortable in any kind of situation.
		Like I said, I would pay a fortune to avoid a cocktail part.
unidentified		John Malone with his book, Born to Be Wired, tonight at 8 p.m. Eastern on C-SPAN's Q ⁇ A. You can listen to Q&A and all our podcasts on our free C-SPAN Now app or wherever you get your podcasts.
		There are many ways to listen to C-SPAN radio anytime, anywhere.
		In the Washington, D.C. area, listen on 90.1 FM.
		Use our free C-SPAN Now app or go online to c-span.org/slash radio on SiriusXM radio on channel 455, the TuneIn app, and on your smart speaker by simply saying play C-SPAN Radio.
		Hear our live call-in program, Washington Journal, daily at 7 a.m. Eastern.
		Listen to House and Senate proceedings, committee hearings, news conferences, and other public affairs events live throughout the day.
		And for the best way to hear what's happening in Washington with fast-paced reports, live interviews, and analysis of the day, catch Washington today, weekdays at 5 p.m. and 9 p.m. Eastern.
		Listen to C-SPAN programs on C-SPAN Radio anytime, anywhere.
		C-SPAN, Democracy Unfiltered.
		Washington Journal continues.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back.
		We're in open forum, ready to hear your comments on the news of the day.
		One story we've been following, that ICE raid in Georgia, and here's a story in CNN with the latest, that the South Korean workers detained in Georgia ICE raid to be sent back to South Korea following negotiations, an official says.
		The South Korean workers detained during a massive immigration raid in Georgia Thursday will be returned to South Korea on a chartered flight following negotiations, an official announced Sunday.
		Negotiations for the release of the detained workers have been concluded after swift responses by the relevant ministries, business agencies, and companies, said South Korean Presidential Chief of Staff, Staff Kang Hookseek.
		However, some administrative procedures remain, and once they're completed, a chartered plane will depart to bring back our citizens, he added.
		The workers were among 475 detained Thursday during a large-scale immigration raid at the Hyundai Metaplant in Elabel, Georgia, which houses an electric vehicle battery plant operated jointly by South Korea-based companies Hyundai and LG Energy Solution.
		About 300 of those detained are South Korean, officials said.
		Now, to your stories that are of interest to you in open form.
		Nicholas is in Minnesota on our line for Democrats.
		Good morning, Nicholas.
unidentified		Oh, yes.
		Hello.
		We were talking about elections earlier.
		I just wanted to brag about Minnesota.
		We've got the best and most secure elections here in Minnesota.
		Well, I'm kind of proud of that.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		What do you think makes them particularly good?
		Okay.
		Sarah is in Mogador, Ohio on our line for Republicans.
		Good morning, Sarah.
unidentified		Yes.
		You and I know how true this is in the African-American community.
		This is Obama.
		We know that more than half of all black children live in single-parent households, a number that has doubled, doubled since we were children.
louise in virginia ▲ ● ▼		We know the statistics that children who grow up without fathers are five times more likely to live in poverty and commit crime, nine times more likely to drop out of school, and 20 times more likely to end up in prison.
unidentified		They are more likely to have behavioral problems or run away from home or become teenage parents themselves.
		And the foundations of our communities are weaker because of it.
		You know, this came from Obama in 2008 on Father's Day.
		And Jesse Jackson in June told him he better shut his mouth because he can't speak the truth.
		I just listened to this guy about the Democratic Party and why we vote for Trump.
		I don't vote for Trump because I'm MAGA, because I'm this, because I'm that.
		I vote for Trump because he's trying to make this country a better country.
		Capitalism.
		Get rid of people living off the system.
		That is the problem.
		I've seen it in my family and the people in my family, all they do is drain their parents if the parents have any money.
		You need to grow up, get married, get a job, and then maybe you can buy a home.
		You can't do any of this stuff as a single parent.
		It's impossible.
		So quit expecting to live off the government.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Sue is in Taunton, Massachusetts on our line for independence.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Sue.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I wanted to address the Massachusetts election system.
		We don't gerrymander.
		The last time we redistricted was in 2021, which is appropriate a year after the census.
		And people who talk about, you know, getting ballots mailed to houses all the time, I can only speak for Massachusetts, but in my state, what we mail is a ballot mail application, which needs to be signed multiple times, and the address and the signatures are all checked.
		And that's stating that you want a mail-in ballot.
		Once they've confirmed that you are who you say you are, then the ballot is mailed to you.
		But it's not going to matter in 2026 because I'm firmly convinced we're not going to have an election.
		There is going to be some quote national emergency calls because he knows he's in big trouble if we have midterms.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Next up is Gerald in Stockbridge, Georgia on our line for Democrats.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Gerald.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
		Yes, I kind of agree with that last caller.
		There needs to be some sort of something that we can do to stop this man from interfering with our election.
		It started in 2016 when he was talking about a regular election, elections.
		And he's putting it out there in the ether, and people are buying into it.
		I think they're all complicit in terms of the Republican constituents.
		However, there needs to be something that we can do in this country to stop this man from interfering with our elections.
		Thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Debbie is in Missouri on our line for Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Debbie.
unidentified		Good morning.
		We need to have national laws for the national elections for Congress and President, at least the guideline, and to show to prove that people are voting of their own volition, that somehow they're going to have to be in a carol with privacy so that they're voting themselves.
		And if they vote by mail, they're going to have to give a fingerprint or some way to prove citizenship.
		It can't just be willy-nilly voting on their coffee table at home.
		If they have the local election with a lot of referendums and initiatives and stuff that they need to read over, I don't care about the local elections, but the national elections need to be done securely.
		That's all I have to say.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Next up is Frank in Utah on our line for independence.
		Good morning, Frank.
unidentified		Good morning, Kimberly.
		My call this morning is all about C-SPAN.
		I want to congratulate you and all the other hosts on how you keep your composure when these over-the-top radical, rabid callers come in and screaming and yelling and saying that you're too much on the Democrat side.
		I don't like either party.
		I'm skeptical of both for good reasons.
		And some of the guests you have on, I really can't stand them.
		But I'm glad you have them on.
		And I like to listen to all the callers and their opinion because that gives me the pulse of the nation and how things are going and helps me make up my mind when it comes time to vote.
		And I have one other suggestion.
		I really love your set.
		It really needed to be updated.
		But on a lighter note, I'd like to say I can't stand your theme song.
		It is just nervous symphony music.
		And every time you play it in between segments, I always hit the mute button.
		And I wondered if next time you go to a staff meeting, if you talk it over with the rest of the staff and your editors and everything to see if you could come up with a better theme music for your show.
		I think it'd be a big improvement.
		But I'll keep watching.
		I love what you do, and thanks a lot.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		I'll pass that feedback along.
		Mark is in Albany, Vermont on our line for Democrats.
		Good morning, Mark.
unidentified		Hello.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Hello.
		Go ahead.
		You're an open forum.
unidentified		Yeah, well, I disagree with him.
		I think the music is great.
		I love the violins and all that other stuff.
		First of all, Mark, are you still there?
		Yeah, my brain was kind of stuck here for a minute.
		I'm thinking of so many things at one time.
		it.
		I think the Republican Party.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Let's hear from Loran in Nebraska on our line for Republicans.
		Good morning, Loran.
unidentified		Yes, I am.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Yes, go ahead.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		You're an open forum.
unidentified		Yes, I am Lauren from Nebraska.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay, and what thoughts did you want to share?
unidentified		I just want to say I'm tired of people talking about this is a democracy.
		It is not.
		We are a Republican.
		A republic.
		Our nation is governed as a republic.
		It is not a democracy.
		It is a republic.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		And why do you think that distinction is important?
unidentified		Well, I think we have to let people know that we are a republic, not a democracy.
unidentified		We are a republic.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Let's hear from John in Alabama on our line for independence.
		Good morning, John.
		Can you please turn down the volume on your TV and then go ahead with your comment.
		John?
unidentified		All right.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		All right, while we wait on that, let's hear from Michael in Detroit, Michigan on our line for Democrats.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Michael.
unidentified		Yes.
		I said Troy, Michigan, but they said Detroit, Michigan.
		But that's okay.
		One of the things that I wanted to bring up is this.
		The Republicans are always talking about the deficit and how with, I think, $30 trillion in a deficit.
		A lot of that money is kicked back to five major companies that support the Defense Department, like Raytheon, Lockheed, Boy.
		And they need to look into that.
		And the Defense Department has failed five audits, I think, in the role, the Pentagon.
		So if you look at the money that they have gotten out of the federal government, how could that money be used in education, health care, housing?
		And most of the people that support them are Republican.
		Second of all, I wanted to say this.
		They talk about crime in the streets.
		The greatest amount of crime is done by corporations and business people.
		They have made the businessman the new hero.
		They almost worship business and the offspring wealth.
		It's not the government is supposed to help the people against businesses because they lie, they cheat.
		If you look at the impact of what the business corruption does in this country compared to the average individual criminal on the street, it's not even comparable.
		The business be watched.
		And in the Middle East, they say there's a saying that goes like this.
		In the marketplace, that's where the devil runs rampant.
		Businesses lie.
		And I just pointed out, look it up.
		I want you to do it because you get on your computer, look it up, and see how much money goes from the Pentagon.
		That goes to those five major corporations that Eisenhower said the congressional as well as the military-industrial complex is one of the greatest thieves in this country.
		I thank you for listening to my comment.
		Have a good day.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Phil is in Leesburg, Virginia, on our line for Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Phil.
unidentified		Well, good morning, long time listener of your great, great programming.
		I don't know if the previous caller was an independent.
		I suspect he may have been, which is the only issue I want to put forth.
		You might as well get rid of the independent category Democrat, and I'm sure you're aware.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Phil, your line is cutting in and out a bit.
unidentified		Could you repeat what you just said?
		Oh, yeah.
		All I said is most of your independent callers are Democrats, and you might as well get rid of that category.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Was that your only comment?
unidentified		Got it.
unidentified		All right.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Then let's hear from Carol in Piquet, Mississippi, on our line for independents.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Carol.
unidentified		Good morning.
unidentified		How are you?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		I'm good, thank you.
unidentified		How are you?
		For the college, just called in and said that independents are Democrats.
		That's not true.
		But I'm calling in to say that people calls in that speak about child support, disabilities, and things like that.
		I was a single mother, two young ladies, and I had one that was giving me a lot of problems.
		I had her in my car, brought her to the police station, and I said, child in need of supervision.
		And they put her in juvenile overnight.
		And when she came out, they straightened her out because her father was never there available for her.
		He had went to court, but he never stood up to be a man.
		And I'm a white lady.
		So anybody that calls in to think that it's just black, no, it's white also.
		A lot of white men do not stand up for their children.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Ruth is in Maryland on our line for Democrats.
		Good morning, Ruth.
unidentified		Good morning.
		First-time caller.
		I do believe in the American dream.
		I was a teenage parent at age 15.
		At age 19, I bought my mother and my daughter a house and moved them out of public housing.
		At age probably 35, I own 10 properties, seven in D.C., three in Maryland.
		And I am a real estate broker.
		And I just want to say that I do believe in the American dream.
		Thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Mike is in Glendale, Rhode Island on our line for Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Mike.
unidentified		Yes.
		I'm calling.
		I would like to see a police officer put in every school in our country and arm him with an AR-15.
		I think that's the solution that we have to put out there to protect our children.
		I don't hear anybody talking about it or trying to get something like this done.
		And I think that almost, I could almost guarantee that's going to stop these mentally disturbed people to attack our children in schools.
		So I don't know why we're not doing it.
		And that's basically what I'm trying to get at.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Next up is Ronald in Hope Mills, North Carolina on our line for independence.
		Good morning, Ronald.
doc in indiana ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		And can you turn down the volume on your TV, please, and then go ahead with your comment?
gene in arkansas ▲ ● ▼		I just have a question, and it's not any particular president, but I would like somebody more learned than I am to answer this question.
louie gohmert ▲ ● ▼		If President of the United States was a Russian asset, what would he do?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		What are your thoughts on that, Ronald?
doc in indiana ▲ ● ▼		Alienating our allies is one of them.
		Firing all the attorney generals that they're investigating things that would be a problem.
		I'm getting tugged out here, but it's just I'd like somebody more learned than I am to think about that question.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Jerry is in Sewell, New Jersey on our line for Democrats.
unidentified		Good morning, Jerry.
		You know, when I listen to the callers here and they talk about I'm a registered Democrat, and I have never been more disappointed in the Democrat Party and the Democrat callers that call in.
		You know, when you talk about corruption, in the election, I voted for Joe Biden in the primary.
		And all of a sudden, it was discovered that, and everybody knew it, that the man was off in some other land somewhere.
		And the news media covered it up, and everybody covered it up.
		And then all of a sudden, we got Kamala Harris.
		And I guess the Democrats were okay with all that switching around.
		I was not.
		And I was very disappointed.
		So I think that the Democrats better wake up because you're getting screwed.
		Thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Kay is in Louisville, Kentucky, on our line for independence.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Kay.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I'm calling because I'm deeply concerned about the threat to the closing of rural hospitals.
		That's been in the news a lot with the prediction that something like 338 of those hospitals will close as a result of the cuts that are in the Budget Reconciliation Act that was passed in July.
		So I called to express the opinion that those hospitals can be saved if the nation would enact a Medicare for all system.
		An improved Medicare for all system, a national single-payer plan, would assure that the operating costs for the hospitals that are needed in our country would be met, and we would end this terrible crisis where millions and millions of people are threatened with loss of their hospital.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		For some further information on what Kay is mentioning there, the American Hospital Association released this back in June, an analysis of rural hospitals at risk due to cuts in the OBBA.
		Data from the Cecil G. Shep Center for Health Services Research at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill shows that health care cuts under consideration at the time, the bill eventually passed, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, could place over 300 rural hospitals across the U.S. at risk of closure, conversion, or service reductions.
		That data was requested and released on June 12th by Senate Democrats.
		Substantial cuts to Medicaid or Medicare payments could increase the number of unprofitable rural hospitals and elevate their risk of financial distress.
		The Cecil G. Shep Center for Health Services and Research wrote in response to requests for information on the OBBBA's impact on rural hospitals.
		In response, hospitals may be forced to reduce service lines, convert to a different type of health care facility, or close altogether.
		Cutler is in New Hampshire on our line for Democrats.
		Good morning, Cutler.
unidentified		Good morning.
		A gentleman from Nebraska called up and said we are indeed a republic, and that is the case.
		But a republic is a representative form of government.
		People are supposed to represent us.
		And we have a party that is not representing the people.
		They are representing the current president.
		And anything he says goes.
		So forget Republicans, Democrats, it could be the country first.
		And I have a suggestion for the media.
		The current president and many of our elected officials are media hungry.
		They love being in the spotlight.
		And I think if we took a two-week hiatus and didn't cover the president or the people who are not representing us, that would be a good thing.
		Just a suggestion.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Teresa is in Guilford, Indiana, on our line for independence.
		Good morning, Teresa.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		I just kind of wanted to add to what the lady was talking about about the hospitals.
		I'm a nurse, and I'm already seeing the impact that these hospitals are having regarding, I believe it's the fear of these hospitals closing.
		You used to see, I live in a rural area.
		I have rural hospitals all around where I live, and I've seen closure of labor and delivery at one of the hospitals, another hospital that was starting to build a new facility has completely stopped.
		We see a lot of Medicaid patients come in to our facilities.
		We see a lot of patients in our emergency room come in.
		We don't get a lot of reimbursement for that.
		We've seen raises stopped for our nurses.
		We've seen a lot of cutbacks to our ancillary staff already, and they're not backfilling those positions.
		They were talking about in the big beautiful bill that they were going to give $50 billion to these hospitals, to the rural hospitals.
		What is $50 billion going to do to all these rural hospitals?
		There are so many in the country.
		$50 billion is not going to do anything for these hospitals to operate efficiently and to save these hospitals.
		I don't know if they know how much it costs to run a hospital for these nurses, the ancillary staff to keep these hospitals afloat, but that's not going to cut it for these hospitals.
		And I'm terrified that these patients are not going to get adequate care when you go to a bigger city hospital.
		Some of these patients are going to have to travel so far that if they want to have a baby, if they're having a heart attack, something like that, the wait time.
		For instance, if you're going to go to a children's hospital, if you're going to go to a university hospital, the wait time in their waiting room can be hours.
		People don't have hours.
		And some of these hospitals in a bigger city are not, some of them are falling apart, actually.
		And it's just not sufficient.
		Our government does not go in and see this.
		And I feel like it's just a money-making issue.
		They want to protect.
		Basically, they're billionaires.
		And I think that that's one reason that they can cut this.
		And it's not fair to the people that rely on our rural hospitals.
		They are extremely important to our communities around here that have been around for decades and decades.
		And I don't see a great solution to this big, beautiful bill that $50 billion is going to help them stay afloat.
		And it is terrifying.
		We have a lot of nurses in our community, ancillary staff that are going to lose their jobs.
		They're going to shut down.
		And we see this.
		And our nurses are scared that this is going to happen.
		We're seeing it now.
		The nurses that are retiring in these rural hospitals, you can see it on the job boards.
		We used to hail.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		I just want to get to one more person before we have to finish up open forum.
		Link is in Danville, Illinois, on our line for Democrats.
		Good morning, Link.
unidentified		Hello.
unidentified		Good morning.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Can you please turn down the volume on your TV and then continue?
unidentified		Jay Network.
		I'm sorry.
		Yeah.
		About this big rural hospital and big beautiful bells.
		Yes, it will.
		Sorry.
		Well, East Front, obviously, rural hospitals have enclosed many hospitals, especially one in, well, a few in central Illinois, eastern and central Illinois.
		I really think that still is a mistake and it will drive down the economy of our country, even and ruin our health care.
		That's all I have to say.
		Thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And that's all the time that we have for open forum.
		Coming up next, we're going to have a discussion on free speech in the United States with author and journalist Katherine Brodsky, who's author of No Apologies: How to Find and Free Your Voice in an Age of Outrage.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		This week on the C-SPAN Networks, the House and the Senate are in session.
		The House and Senate will work on their versions of 2026 defense programs and policy legislation known as the National Defense Authorization Act.
		On Tuesday, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett launches her latest book, Listening to the Law, with a book signing hosted by the Reagan Foundation's Center on Civility and Democracy.
		And then on Wednesday, the director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Michael Kratzios, will testify before the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Subcommittee on President Trump's artificial intelligence strategy.
		And on Thursday, watch C-SPAN's live all-day coverage of the September 11th commemoration services for the National 9-11 Memorial in New York City, the National 9-11 Pentagon Memorial in Washington, D.C., and the Flight 93 National Memorial in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
		Watch live this week on the C-SPAN networks or on C-SPAN Now, our free mobile video app.
		Also, head over to C-SPAN.org for scheduling information or to watch live or on demand anytime.
		c-span democracy unfiltered tonight on c-span's q and a liberty media chairman and cable tv pioneer john malone author of born to be wired discusses his life and entrepreneurship
		He also talks about his many successful business ventures, competing with Ted Turner and Rupert Murdoch, the value of philanthropy, and living life as a high-functioning autistic.
john malone ▲ ● ▼		I still, to this day, I don't like to be in crowds or in groups of any size.
		I really enjoy people one-on-one.
		I enjoy talking, you know, but I really am uncomfortable in any kind of situation.
		Like I said, I would pay a fortune to avoid a cocktail party.
unidentified		John Malone with his book, Born to Be Wired, tonight at 8 p.m. Eastern on C-SPAN's QA.
		You can listen to QA and all our podcasts on our free C-SPAN Now app or wherever you get your podcasts.
		Washington Journal continues.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back.
		We're joined now by Catherine Brodsky, who's the author of the book, No Apologies: How to Find and Free Your Voice in an Age of Outrage.
		She's also the host of Forbidden Conversations podcast.
		Welcome to Washington Journal.
katherine brodsky ▲ ● ▼		Thank you so much for having me.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Can you talk a little bit about your personal background?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		I understand you've had quite a journey.
katherine brodsky ▲ ● ▼		Yes, thank you for asking.
		My journey actually began in the former Soviet Union in what is Ukraine.
		I was born there and my family grew up there, you know, during the reign of the Soviet Union and ended up moving around a bit, eventually ending up in Canada.
		I also spent a lot of time living in New York and visiting many different parts of the world.
		And it was something where, you know, especially when we consider the topic, topics that I currently write about a lot, like freedom of speech, that's something that has really influenced my work quite a bit.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Can you talk about that?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		How has that experience influenced how you approach this writing and the topic in general?
unidentified		Sure.
katherine brodsky ▲ ● ▼		And I think I grew up in a household that was essentially, you know, I was one of those typical rebellious teenagers where my parents constantly told me about their life in the Soviet Union.
		And, you know, I thought they were over-exaggerating things and that some of the things that they had experienced would never happen in any, you know, of the Western countries that I was familiar with living in because I was quite a young child when we left.
		But, you know, for them, that experience was actually involved a lot of restrictions.
		It was a low trust society, so you didn't know who you can say, what you can say.
		You know, that typical animal farm thing where everyone's equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
		My family is Jewish, so we experienced a lot of discrimination based on that.
		And, you know, in terms of people's speech, you know, you don't know if you end up paying with your life, you know, end up in a gulag somewhere for saying the wrong thing.
		And the other thing that we would see is a lot of subversiveness in art and with writing, where people tried to say the things that they wanted to say without ending up in jail.
		So there were a lot of creative ways to do that.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		And so, how do you think that shapes the work that you do today, especially in terms of your professional activities?
		You're an author, journalist, essayist.
		How do you incorporate that background and that experience into your writings?
katherine brodsky ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I think for me, it's really listening to more subtle cues as to what's happening.
		For me, the big realization was that what happened in the Soviet Union and what has happened in numerous other countries where speech was taken away, that could happen anywhere.
		We're not necessarily safe in the West just because it's better here in that regard.
		That it takes a small minority often, but a small and radical minority to take over the discourse, to take over policies and laws and where culture goes, because a lot of people are basically silenced and are afraid to speak up and actually say what they mean.
		And we can see that in other countries as well.
		Like, for example, during China's cultural revolution, you know, it wasn't that most people agreed, but it took, you know, if children were turning in their parents and denouncing their parents or their professors, there's a chilling effect.
		And sometimes these kinds of revolutions, they'll start, you know, culturally rather than necessarily being led by the governments.
		But then around the world, we're seeing just a lot of enroachment, a lot of kind of attacks on free speech.
		And a lot of that is also coming through different laws.
		So we have a lot in the UK, in Canada, in Ireland, and other parts of the world.
		And in the U.S., the U.S. is so unique that it has the First Amendment.
		But even that, to me, that isn't guaranteed.
		And you hear people talking about changing the Constitution.
		There's a lot of people, there's a growing trend of intolerance where people are saying, well, for speech that is offensive, people can, you know, maybe should be punished.
		And there was a survey or a study that was done at Yale University that was really shocking where about 50% of the students agreed that there is some speech that is so offensive that it could merit the death penalty.
		So culture can change.
		And, you know, what had happened in the Soviet Union can absolutely happen today as well if we're not careful.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		How would you describe yourself politically?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		And do you consider yourself an advocate?
katherine brodsky ▲ ● ▼		I'm an advocate for, you know, I would say for certain principles like free speech.
		I'm an advocate for having better conversations and discourse, for having greater tolerance, for personal freedoms.
		But politically, I sort of identify more like a liberal, maybe a centrist kind of liberal.
		And it's something, it's interesting because politics wasn't something that I grew up really thinking too much about.
		I sort of knew approximately where I stood.
		And I like to kind of mishmash, you know, good policies wherever I find them.
		But I feel like today in today's environment, it's become that political identity has become something we're so utterly fixated on that we start to identify each other.
		Like the first thing that we do when we meet somebody isn't to just figure out what their personality is like, what they like to do, you know, what their passions are, what they believe.
		It's very often where they stand politically, and then we maybe get to know them as a person if they pass the filter test.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		You're also an advisor to an organization called the Pro-Human Foundation.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Can you tell us about that group and their work?
katherine brodsky ▲ ● ▼		Sure.
		So the foundation was actually co-founded by Darrell Davis, who's this amazing, you know, he's an inspiration and kind of a role model to me, has been for years.
		He is, you know, a jazz musician and a civil rights activist who he's most famous for basically getting people who were members of the KKK to give them their hoods because they end up quitting as they got to know him.
		And, you know, they a lot of them didn't even know somebody was black and had all these kinds of ideas and thoughts in their head that once they got to know him, they couldn't really hate him.
		And so that was really inspirational to me.
		And so the Pro-Human Foundation focuses on really our shared humanity and what makes us unique as individuals.
		And then working through the demonization and the division and radicalization that we're seeing in the world today.
		And they do a lot of educational programs and leadership programs and work with a lot of people in different communities to really bridge that divide and have better discourse.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		You're the author, as we mentioned at the top of the recent book, No Apologies: How to Find and Free Your Voice in the Age of Outrage.
		And you say that the book is about silencing culture and threats to freedom of speech in the West.
		How is freedom of speech being threatened in the West and by whom?
katherine brodsky ▲ ● ▼		Sure.
		Well, and we have different, this is what I think people often don't understand is that they see it very clearly, those threats, when it comes from their political, from the opposite political side, but not when it comes from their own.
		So in the West, we have a lot of laws.
		For example, in the UK, people can get arrested for memes.
		There was a comedian who was just arrested, I believe, last week for writing something on X that was offensive, and he got arrested for that.
		There was a woman whose story is one of the things I talk about in my book.
		She got arrested for citing a rap lyric, which was just a tribute to her late best friend who really loved the rap song.
		It was just the N-word that she quoted, the entire lyric, including the N-word.
		She got arrested.
		Charges were later dropped, but damage was done.
		So we're seeing things like that in Canada.
		There's a whole bunch of restrictions on, for example, sharing news articles and also the Online Harms Act.
		In Ireland, there's like pre-crime basically.
		So if they think that you might, if you have something on your computer, maybe even wrote it as a fiction, essentially you can get arrested for having offensive material, you know, or hate speech on your computer.
		And then in the U.S., you know, we've seen a lot of restrictions.
		So, for example, during the pandemic, we saw voluntary, so-called voluntary requests to censor certain information by the government.
		But of course, when the government tells big tech, well, this is one thing that we want you to look at, and this is one thing we want you to take off, that's a whole lot of pressure that's coming from a government that has actually enormous power over them.
		And so, they were even censoring information that was true in the interest of public safety.
		And then we had like the disinformation governance board that was launched, which was you know compared to the Ministry of Truth of 1984 or the book 1984.
		So, that was something that was going on, you know, during the Biden administration.
		And then, of course, today with Trump, you know, just I think like last week, there was an executive order signed to ban flag burning, which, you know, I don't like flag burnings.
		I don't think that's the best way to make your grievances known, but it is still part of free expression.
		And so, banning that, I think, goes against that.
		You have things like in the press pools bans on certain outlets.
		So, for example, with the Associated Press, because they wouldn't call the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America, they get banned, which sends this message of, you know, you have to comply or you lose your access.
		We've seen the whole visa situation with student activists speaking up about Gaza.
		And it's something where, you know, I know it's a bit of a complex situation legally because of their student status and they're not necessarily citizens.
		But at the same time, it does go against the spirit of the law.
		And do you really want to restrict speech for all these people who have maybe different kinds of visas and not yet citizens?
		So we have things like that.
		And then I was very triggered, as they say.
		There was a tweet from Donald Trump just as I saw it very recently where he was saying how he would take away Rosie O'Donnell's citizenship.
		And then the White House account retweets that and also, you know, chimes in.
		And I know it was meant to be trolling, but the idea of like trolling a private citizen, which is, you know, she's a public figure, but she's still a private citizen, and the president doing that, and the White House doing that with a threat to take away one's citizenship.
		So targeting someone for their speech, even if they don't have the intention of taking away that visa or sorry, that citizenship, that is to me very alarming.
		And regardless of what side you're on, should be alarming.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		I want to read a bit, an excerpt from your book about your own journey in sort of speaking out more about these issues.
		And you write, seemingly overnight, certain narratives started to dominate not only public put, but also in many cases, private discourse.
		By now, we are all familiar with these narratives, the ones that see everything through the lens of race, gender, and sexuality and that define people accordingly.
		Like many, I had deep concerns about the way words were being twisted and identities were being weaponized, but I kept my concerns hidden and unexpressed.
		And then gradually, I made the decision to speak up a little, at least in person, in private conversations and spaces.
		Even so, it felt good.
		Finally, I was speaking the truth as I was seeing it: that this burgeoning ideology and many of the policies and proposals and social pressures connecting with it were at best illiberal and at worst authoritarian.
		To my surprise, I wasn't alone in my thoughts and reflections.
		The term authoritarian has been thrown around a lot lately.
		Can you talk about why you think that some of these policies that you're seeing are illiberal and potentially authoritarian and what it was like for you getting to this point of starting to speak out about it?
katherine brodsky ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I think to me what I'm saying is when I use the words authoritarian is when you are told that you can only use certain words.
		There's a massive difference between being, you know, told, hey, look, maybe this language is a little bit outdated.
		What do you think of this?
		And maybe explaining things to people and getting them on your side by having really good arguments.
		And I think most people want to, you know, to treat people well.
		They want to express themselves in ways that aren't undermining people or hurting people.
		And most people are going to listen to it.
		But what's been happening and what I was seeing in the culture, and also we're seeing that institutionally because these very specific words are being used and this is happening so quickly.
		And it feels like it's because of social pressures.
		This new language that we were seeing, and this is something that I've been really trying to track a lot, is the evolution of language.
		We're seeing it happen so quickly and it feels forced as opposed to, you know, language certainly changes over time and we change our usage, but it doesn't usually come so quickly.
		And it doesn't come with this like, you know, essentially, if you don't comply, socially, if you don't comply, you will be ostracized, you'll lose your jobs, there'll be pylons.
		I have my own.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		It's a cancel culture, yeah?
katherine brodsky ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, essentially it's cancel culture.
		I mean, it doesn't always, you know, it's not always the situation where somebody, you know, is mass attacked, right?
		Sometimes it's little things.
		I see, we see a lot of self-censorship because of people's fears culturally, institutionally, of what's going to happen to them.
		So we see like, I think it's something like 40% of students.
		There was a survey by FHIR, which is a free speech organization.
		They conducted a large survey on college campuses in the U.S. in 2022, 22 and 23.
		And they found that 40% of students are uncomfortable disagreeing with their professors.
		That means that they're limiting, you know, the free exchange of ideas in a place where that really is something that should be held in such high regard, where we should be able to, you know, discuss anything and have counters.
		And what we're having, what we're experiencing is that there is no real conversation about really difficult topics because people are afraid to say what they mean.
		And by the way, when they say what they mean, they might be wrong, right?
		It's okay, but they can say the wrong thing.
		But part of the importance of being able to say the wrong thing is that somebody will then come and join that conversation and give you more context and you learn more through that and you change your own thinking and you test your own thinking.
		So when that's not happening in the culture, that's a broken culture.
		That's a culture that doesn't grow.
		It's a culture that regresses.
		So I'm seeing a lot of that, especially when I wrote the book.
		I think we were at the peak of that happening and cancel culture happening where, you know, the stories in my book, they're people who kind of made it.
		They fought back.
		But the stories that are not in my book are all the people who didn't.
		And I had spoken to so many people who, because of a little bit of wrong thing, right?
		They were never able to actually get, you know, continuing their careers.
		They lost their social networks.
		They lost their jobs that they loved, including artistic jobs, that like that's your passion and what you express, and you can't.
		And then that stifling effect.
		You know, you see it in, for example, in TV writing rooms, where if there's one person that seems like they're going to report you for microaggression, there are people who will self-censor themselves and not play.
		But writing and creativity and art is all about playing and exploring and pushing boundaries and should be done in a way that's not, you know, ideally is not hurting other people.
		But at the same time, in that writing room, you should be, anything should go and without the fear that your life is going to get destroyed.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Well, if you have a question for Catherine Brodsky about free speech or her book, our line for Democrats, 202-748-8000.
		For Republicans, 202-748-8001.
		And for Independents, 202-748-8002.
		We have a question from Kevin on X.
		It says, criminalizing speech as hateful, mortally wounded, genuinely free speech.
		Can it be revived?
katherine brodsky ▲ ● ▼		Can it be revived?
		I mean, I don't think it's dead.
		So I don't think it's dead, but I think there is this backlash.
		So I think it's going this very extreme way is what I'm seeing, where, especially on a platform like X, because it's like almost absolute free speech, though, you know, some posts will get taken down and others won't.
		It doesn't always make sense.
		But essentially, I think people are embracing their free speech to say things maybe not in the way that maybe one would hope, where it's about discourse and discussing really difficult, complex, challenging, controversial topics.
		Sometimes it's people just, you know, saying terrible things.
		But at the same time, that is the price of free speech is having that opportunity to say whatever people want to say, even if we think it's like offensive speech, where we really need to be careful.
		And this is where it's, you know, I'm really concerned because we're having this cultural pushback now, but legally, we're seeing more and more controls around free speech.
		I think the pressures have been good on big tech platforms where they, you know, because there is all this public pressure, there is more easing on some platforms, maybe less on others.
		I think they also have the right to dictate what rules they want to have on these private platforms on their own, and people can decide whether they want to be on a platform where anything goes and maybe you see some things you don't love or you want a more protected environment where everything's nice and comfortable.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Another question we received on X or comment, I should say, free speech debates are always timely, especially with tech changing the game so fast.
		Curious to hear Catherine's perspective on where we're headed.
		And before you respond, Catherine, I want to point to a piece that you wrote for Skeptic titled Outsourcing Our Memory, How Digital Tools Are Reshaping Human Thought.
		And I'm wondering if maybe you can bring some of those ideas into your response to Blake Analyst.
katherine brodsky ▲ ● ▼		Sure.
		I mean, I think the digital tools that we use, very often we don't predict the consequences.
		So we embrace this new tool because it's exciting, it helps us do things better, it's creative, and ultimately what happens with our minds and what happens to us socially, that's not something that we consider.
		So twofold.
		So with my memories, in that article, I talk a lot about how it's literally rewiring how we are thinking and we are outsourcing the process of how we write, how we think, how we build ideas, what we remember and what we don't, what we choose to, what we don't to machines, often without thinking that through.
		So it's really important for us to be able to determine, okay, what are the things that are important for us to put that work into versus letting ChatGPT do it?
		What memories we want to have?
		Do we want like our primary contact number in case of an emergency?
		Because our technology can fail and probably will.
		We want that in our brains and we want to keep our brains active and thinking.
		And then we have this technology that's coming in that's going to store our memories.
		And then with the same thing with social media platforms and AI, I think that's having a profound effect on how we also communicate.
		So, you know, you have a situation where ideally, you know, the answer to bad speech is more good speech and sunshine is the best disinfectant.
		Those are usually the phrases that get thrown around.
		And in theory, they're great, but I think technology has really changed that.
		So we have, you know, we have an incentive structure where the things that get shared are things that are, you know, rage bait and things that are very polarized, very political, sensationalist, and divisive.
		So I think in very large part why we have this level of divisiveness is actually because of these platforms.
		And then you throw in AI and AI, you know, A, can be used by foreign players and has been used to, you know, with all the bots and things like that to push certain narratives and amplify division that's already there and make it bigger.
		It changes our sense of reality because, you know, my algorithm might be one thing, your algorithm is something else.
		And we're not even seeing a shared version of reality.
		And on top of that, like say I am shown for a month, like stories about knife crime in New York.
		I'm just a random example.
		Well, I'm going to think New York is extremely dangerous and people are constantly getting stabbed.
		But is that actually the reality statistically?
		It's not necessarily true.
		So certain narratives are over-amplified.
		And then we have this thing where false stories, they travel far quicker and are shared far more than true stories.
		So there was, for example, a study in 2018 in Science magazine that showed that false stories are 70% more likely to be shared.
		And viral stories, I mean, they can reach, they can travel about 10, 20 times faster than a true story as well.
		And we don't have a mechanism necessarily always to correct things.
		Like if somebody publishes this was false, very few people see it compared to the original thing that's that's a false claim.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Let's hear from Jonathan in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on our line for independence.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Jonathan.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Wonderful, important and timely conversation.
		Really appreciating what August is having to say.
		I would just add that free speech is not really free.
		It's very expensive, actually.
		It's owned by, you know, like the media in this country is owned by five companies.
		I think that when we think about freedom of speech, we need to think about the idea of how do we feel about speech we don't like, because that's the speech that actually needs to be protected.
		And I think often we don't think about free speech in that way.
		We think about the speech we want to hear.
		And free speech is how do you feel about hearing the speech that offends you?
		In the current time when we're sort of having these sort of pushbacks against free speech, the use of anti-Semitism to shut down dissent on college campuses is very similar to the McCarthy era.
		You know, we've seen this before.
		And that's usually about protecting war, people who like war, people who profit off war, the military-industrial complex.
		And then the use of anti-Semitism, well, there's an active genocide on a Semitic people called the Palestinians, is just bizarre.
		And being a Jewish person and having to hear that word thrown about so often, anti-Semitism, well, there's a live genocide, and those people have no humanity.
		They have no representation in our media.
		They have no representation on C-SPAN.
		None.
		It's just infuriating to me.
		Like, that's where I rage.
		I don't rage when people have ideas that I disagree with.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Jonathan, I want to give Catherine a chance to respond to some of these points you're making.
katherine brodsky ▲ ● ▼		Sure.
		So thank you for the comment.
		And we probably have some disagreements on this particular topic.
		However, I think where we share an agreement is that it is as free speech is for speech you don't agree with as well.
		And I definitely think there is certainly in the way that the word racist was being misapplied.
		I certainly know that there's a lot of real cases of anti-Semitism, which I think people should be able to have conversations about and call out, even if there is a difficult situation in the Middle East where a group of people are dying.
		It is also something that does get weaponized in certain instances as well, just like the word racist, where racism does exist and there are people who experience it and they should be able to talk about it.
		But it is also a word that sometimes gets misapplied and is weaponized to shut down speech.
		So I think it's similar in that way.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		What do you think of how particularly charges of anti-Semitism were deployed against particularly those protests on college campuses against the war in Gaza?
katherine brodsky ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I mean, I am somebody who has a different view on that particular issue.
		However, I do think that there were, and I mentioned this earlier too, I mean, the deportations, for example, of students who are in student visas, I think there's an argument that can be made if somebody is certainly inciting violence, which goes against the First Amendment, which is a very hard bar, by the way, legally to meet.
		But there is a difference between that and somebody, you know, chanting certain things.
		I do think there is an overreaction in terms of how people are targeted for their speech.
		And so that is something that I, you know, I have to be consistent in my defense of free speech.
		So it is indeed something where, regardless whether you like it or not, you should be defending.
		And I think people, you know, what's interesting to me is that for the most part, a few years ago where I would hear people defending free speech were conservatives, which was kind of shocking to me personally because I, you know, I grew up in a very liberal environment.
		I went to a very liberal school.
		And free speech was just such a fundamental thing that we were taught and, you know, talked about a lot and debated a lot and held very dear.
		And then, you know, you suddenly hear people say, well, there should be no free speech.
		And, you know, some speech, you know, free speech is good, but not hate speech.
		Well, then you don't believe in free speech.
		And at the time, I was hearing really conservatives more suddenly starting to fight for free speech.
		And then when the campuses, the protests started, and once they started to sort of come under attack, you know, suddenly the same people that I felt were trying to shut down free speech because their free speech was under attack.
		Now they were suddenly proponents of free speech.
		And I'm glad to have more people, you know, defending free speech.
		But I think it's so important for whichever group to really look at it as a fundamental principle that you defend no matter whether it's your speech that's being shut down or somebody else's.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Earlier we were talking about cancel culture and another question on X. For many people, it's quite rational to watch what you say to avoid personal and professional repercussions.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		What would you advise to those who believe that for themselves?
katherine brodsky ▲ ● ▼		I think one should be able to choose for themselves what they feel comfortable with.
		I think it's important for us to really speak the things that we think are important because that shapes how, you know, how we have healthy discourse around really complex issues that we as a society cannot solve if we stay silent.
		Also, when people stay silent, we don't have a sense of what people really believe.
		Only people who are incredibly vocal, which tends to be more the fringes and the more the radicals.
		So we don't know what the average person believes if they're just afraid to speak.
		That said, you know, I think that each individual has to choose for themselves what they feel comfortable with.
		And, you know, for a long time, I didn't necessarily feel that comfortable being public about my views on different things.
		I still have a lot of fear around that because there are consequences.
		But also, I think it's really important.
		And I think you have a much more authentic relationship with yourself, the world, your friends, if you're able to be honest about what you think.
		That said, you can also be very thoughtful about what you think.
		And there's a difference between saying something because you're exploring an idea or trying to make somebody understand what you believe versus, you know, just trying to be hurtful to other people, which I think is not necessarily a great thing.
		And while people are free to do that, I would probably not recommend that.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Can you tell us about your podcast, Forbidden Conversations?
unidentified		Because I believe this is what you try to do there.
katherine brodsky ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, exactly.
		So my podcast, Forbidden Conversations, is all about having these kind of challenging conversations about different topics.
		You know, the guests that I've had on, I sometimes agree with them, sometimes I don't.
		It's really about having the conversation.
		And I remember, I think my first, very first episode that I did was on the trans issue, which was probably the one that I was most afraid to speak about.
		And I don't have any kind of like radical views there, but just to have that conversation was scary.
		And it shouldn't really be.
		Not when people are coming in good faith, they're not being hateful or trying, you know, you should be able to talk about things.
		So, and I've had now that kind of that conversation on that particular topic with people with very different opinions and different experiences.
		I've talked to people, somebody who is a cult member.
		I talk to someone who's like, you know, sees how the economic world order, she uses that term, changed, you know, vaccine injury, which doesn't mean that like everybody's injured, but people have their own experiences, and I think we should be able to talk about that.
		Comedy, all sorts of topics.
		Having discourse that's a little bit challenging, a little bit scary, but having that conversation in good faith.
		And I think that's an important distinction because you have like debate formats where people want to destroy each other.
		You don't have a lot of conversations where it's good faith to just try to understand the other person.
		You don't have to agree with them, but understand what it is that makes them tick and give grace to each other and try to steel man each other's arguments to try to best understand and represent.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Terry is in Dixon, Illinois on our line for Democrats.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Terry.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
unidentified		Yeah, I'm calling in reference to.
dr james garrow ▲ ● ▼		I understand the U.S. Open received or sent out an email to all the networks telling them to censor to the American people when the president is announced.
unidentified		You know, due to, I don't know, some of the scandals that swirl around this administration.
unidentified		My question is, have you looked into this?
dr james garrow ▲ ● ▼		And who ordered the U.S. Open to send this email out?
unidentified		Did this come from the administration?
unidentified		That's what I want to know.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So just because this might be new information to some folks, here's some reporting on this in the Hill.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		U.S. Open asks broadcasters not to air possible reaction to Trump at final match.
unidentified		That's according to reports.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		This is originally reported by several outlets, including the New York Times.
		Excuse me.
		The United States Tennis Association, the host of the U.S. Open, asked broadcasters not to air distractions that may arise from President Trump's attendance at the Sunday opening ceremony for the men's singles finals match, multiple outlets report.
		With respect to broadcast coverage, the president will be shown on the World feed and in the Ashcourt feed during the opening anthem ceremony, read an email to broadcasters first obtained by Bounces and reviewed by multiple outlets, including the New York Times.
		We ask all broadcasters to refrain from showcasing any disruptions or reactions in response to the president's attendance in any capacity, including electronic news gathering coverage.
		It reportedly continued.
katherine brodsky ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, to be honest, I'm not familiar enough, but it doesn't sound to me like something that would have come from the Trump administration, because just because I imagine they wouldn't mind having reactions and coverage, so it's probably much more to like have less distractions, less focus on Trump because a little bit more of that article says the message comes after A 2015 appearance from Trump warranted jeers from the crowds.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		And so it seems that maybe some follow-up information there.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		But go ahead.
katherine brodsky ▲ ● ▼		No, I mean, that might be.
		I'm not sure.
		I mean, obviously, I don't think wherever that order comes from, I mean, it's certainly controlling free media coverage.
		And I don't think that's a good way to go.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Bill is in Reading, Connecticut, on our line for Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Bill.
unidentified		Yes, hi.
		I pretty much agree with everything you're saying.
		During the Biden administration, on the day he was inaugurated, my Twitter account was canceled.
		And I tried to get a new one back, and that was canceled as well.
		And I didn't say anything that I would consider cancelable.
		I mean, it was just basically my opinion on a variety of issues.
		And Facebook, I found the same situation when I would make comments about the Hunter-Biden laptop.
		That was entirely censored.
		I wasn't allowed to post anything about it.
		And it continues to this day.
		And my question to you is: how do you feel about private, like Facebook?
		They hide behind the fact, well, we can censor you because it's our right to decide.
		And they have these fact checkers, which are essentially, you know, why are they given the discretion of finding out what is true?
		It just doesn't make any sense at all.
		And do you think the government should step in to take this ability away from them from censoring people?
		That's essentially it.
katherine brodsky ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I mean, I wouldn't recommend the government step in.
		I do think that private platforms should have the right to decide for themselves.
		But then you have public pressure and public interest, which may cause them to have a different view.
		I do think there should be a lot of transparency about what's going on.
		When it came to censorship on Twitter, you know, with the Twitter files and all of that, I think the big concern for me was that there were directions coming from the government.
		So there was a whole pressure mechanism.
		The same thing was happening with Facebook.
		And I would say, you know, I think it's such a slippery slope if we start telling private companies what they can and cannot publish.
		There are certain legal requirements that they have to abide by, but everything else, I think they can determine.
		What I would like to see these companies, though, and maybe that does require some regulation, is a lot more transparency about, you know, their algorithms, how things work, and also our own choices.
		You know, so if I go on a platform, I would rather, you know, I can choose, hey, I want the quiet, peaceful mode.
		I only want to see content that comes from people that, you know, I follow versus somebody might, somebody else might say, I want to see it all.
		Show me everything.
		And I think having more control over our own experience and more transparency is Where maybe the government can introduce some regulations, but I wouldn't want to go in the direction of like, okay, we tell them exactly what we should do.
		And then in terms of fact-checking, I mean, you do have some interesting systems that are not perfect.
		You're never going to get a perfect system.
		I do like community notes on X.
		I think we're going to have more, probably, you know, I don't think we should go in the direction of banning any of censoring content, but providing more context, especially if we're dealing with like disinformation or false things, giving people more opportunity to see more context, or if, you know, somebody put in a false date or a picture that isn't from the place that they're claiming it is,
		those kinds of things can be corrected with something like community notes or with AI systems and things like that while maintaining the content on the platforms.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Well, thank you so much.
		Catherine Brodsky is host of the Forbidden Conversations podcast and also the author of the book, No Apologies: How to Find and Free Your Voice in the Age of Outrage.
		Thank you for joining us on Washington Journal.
katherine brodsky ▲ ● ▼		Thank you so much for having me and thank you so much for the questions.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Yes, and thank you to all of our callers today.
		And we are going to be back with another edition of Washington Journal back here at 7 a.m. Eastern tomorrow morning and we hope you'll join us then.
		Have a great day.
unidentified		Weekends bring you BookTV, featuring leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books.
		Here's a look at what's coming up this weekend.
		Historian Kari Winter, with her book, The Blind African Slave, recounts the life of Jeffrey Brace, an enslaved man who won his freedom through his service during the Revolutionary War.
		The author is joined by Jeffrey Brace's descendant, Rhonda Brace.
		Then, Harvard University professor Joyce Chaplin talks about Benjamin Franklin as a scientist and how the stove he invented in 1742 became a popular product in and beyond the United States.
		And Yoram Hazzoni argues that nationalism is necessary to protect democracy and freedom around the world in his book, The Virtue of Nationalism.
		Watch Book TV every weekend on C-SPAN2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at booktv.org.
		C-SPAN, Democracy Unfiltered.
		We're funded by these television companies and more, including Cox.
		When connection is needed most, Cox is there to help.
		Bringing affordable internet to families in need, new tech to boys and girls clubs, and support to veterans.
		Whenever and wherever it matters most, we'll be there.

▲