WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.740 OK, let's unpack this. Let's do it. Today we 00:00:02.740 --> 00:00:05.459 are diving into, well, a pretty intense stack 00:00:05.459 --> 00:00:07.759 of political sources. Yeah, high stakes stuff. 00:00:08.019 --> 00:00:10.179 Absolutely. We're looking at the raw power plays 00:00:10.179 --> 00:00:14.179 behind some major conflicts. Think a potential 00:00:14.179 --> 00:00:16.940 government shutdown that's maybe about more than 00:00:16.940 --> 00:00:20.219 just funding. And attempts to literally rewrite 00:00:20.219 --> 00:00:23.559 recent history like Jan six. Exactly. And then 00:00:23.559 --> 00:00:26.589 we'll pivot. and contrast all that domestic chaos 00:00:26.589 --> 00:00:29.910 with how some other democracies seem to run things 00:00:29.910 --> 00:00:32.950 maybe a bit smoother, especially elections. Right. 00:00:33.310 --> 00:00:35.710 Our mission, really, is to understand the why 00:00:35.710 --> 00:00:38.250 behind the immediate leverage plays here. And 00:00:38.250 --> 00:00:40.130 gain some perspective. See what's structural 00:00:40.130 --> 00:00:42.929 versus just, you know, the daily drama. Precisely. 00:00:43.109 --> 00:00:45.189 Moving beyond the spectacle to look at systemic 00:00:45.189 --> 00:00:47.689 health, or maybe the lack of it, compared to 00:00:47.689 --> 00:00:49.630 places with different frameworks. Okay, so let's 00:00:49.630 --> 00:00:52.289 start with that present danger. We are... right 00:00:52.289 --> 00:00:54.469 on the brink potentially of another government 00:00:54.469 --> 00:00:56.429 shutdown this week. Classic game of chicken, 00:00:56.609 --> 00:00:58.329 Washington style. And pressure is already on. 00:00:58.390 --> 00:01:00.850 Yeah. Right. The Democratic base is telling Senator 00:01:00.850 --> 00:01:04.129 Schumer, don't cave this time. Yeah, the messaging 00:01:04.129 --> 00:01:07.129 is loud. And look, the early polling seems pretty 00:01:07.129 --> 00:01:09.750 clear on blame. Who's likely to get it? Republicans. 00:01:10.010 --> 00:01:11.810 I mean, the Democrats have a simple line here. 00:01:12.450 --> 00:01:15.969 The GOP controls the White House, the Senate, 00:01:16.890 --> 00:01:20.239 the House. All three. All three. And yet... They, 00:01:20.260 --> 00:01:23.379 quote, can't even fund the government. It's a 00:01:23.379 --> 00:01:25.640 straightforward argument about basic governing 00:01:25.640 --> 00:01:28.950 competence. OK, but here's where it gets, I think, 00:01:29.329 --> 00:01:32.109 really interesting based on the sources. This 00:01:32.109 --> 00:01:33.790 isn't just about budget numbers for everyone 00:01:33.790 --> 00:01:36.090 involved. No, for some, it's seen as a moment, 00:01:36.370 --> 00:01:38.090 an opportunity. Let's talk about Russell Vaught. 00:01:38.170 --> 00:01:40.209 He's the main author of Project 2025, right? 00:01:40.390 --> 00:01:42.489 That's him. And it's important we quickly explain 00:01:42.489 --> 00:01:46.230 Project 2025 for listeners. It's this huge, comprehensive, 00:01:46.310 --> 00:01:49.489 conservative plan aimed at radically reshaping 00:01:49.489 --> 00:01:51.290 the federal government, the executive branch, 00:01:51.430 --> 00:01:53.450 if there's a transition. So Vaught isn't just 00:01:53.450 --> 00:01:55.760 thinking about political strategy here. The source 00:01:55.760 --> 00:01:59.180 describes him more as a policy wonk. And he's 00:01:59.180 --> 00:02:01.260 apparently quite open about seeing a shutdown 00:02:01.260 --> 00:02:04.120 as, and this is a quote, a wonderful opportunity 00:02:04.120 --> 00:02:06.579 to decimate the government. Decimate. That's 00:02:06.579 --> 00:02:08.400 a strong word. What does that mean in practice? 00:02:08.759 --> 00:02:11.300 It means permanent damage. He's pushing for permanent 00:02:11.300 --> 00:02:15.699 reductions in force RIF. OK, so RIFs, that's 00:02:15.699 --> 00:02:17.900 different from the usual furloughs, right? Furloughs 00:02:17.900 --> 00:02:20.520 are temporary layoffs. Exactly. Furloughs mean 00:02:20.520 --> 00:02:22.520 people eventually come back when the funding 00:02:22.520 --> 00:02:25.560 is sorted. RIF means you're permanently firing 00:02:25.560 --> 00:02:28.300 federal workers. The job itself is eliminated. 00:02:28.520 --> 00:02:31.560 The job ceases to exist. The person is gone. 00:02:31.719 --> 00:02:34.159 The position is gone. And critically, all that 00:02:34.159 --> 00:02:37.300 institutional knowledge just evaporates. Wow. 00:02:37.780 --> 00:02:40.979 So who or what? is being targeted. The sources 00:02:40.979 --> 00:02:43.539 point directly at programs that help low and 00:02:43.539 --> 00:02:45.819 middle income Americans. Like what specifically? 00:02:45.919 --> 00:02:47.639 Think about the administration for children, 00:02:47.819 --> 00:02:51.580 families, aid for low income heating and cooling 00:02:51.580 --> 00:02:54.199 LIHEAP and those vital preschool development 00:02:54.199 --> 00:02:56.960 grants. So basic support systems. Yeah, the source 00:02:56.960 --> 00:02:59.939 uses pretty stark language. These would be chopped 00:02:59.939 --> 00:03:02.819 to mincemeat. The goal seems to be shrinking 00:03:02.819 --> 00:03:05.490 government. by crippling its ability to provide 00:03:05.490 --> 00:03:07.810 that kind of aid. OK, so Team Schumer obviously 00:03:07.810 --> 00:03:10.189 gets the stakes here. They've set up what's described 00:03:10.189 --> 00:03:12.849 as a private war room. Right. Coordinating with 00:03:12.849 --> 00:03:15.889 outside allies unions, progressive groups like 00:03:15.889 --> 00:03:19.389 the PCCC, which focuses a lot on economic issues. 00:03:19.449 --> 00:03:21.629 And their strategy is. Treat it like a campaign. 00:03:22.090 --> 00:03:24.490 They're crafting talking points, the main one 00:03:24.490 --> 00:03:27.669 being Democrats do not want to shut down and 00:03:27.669 --> 00:03:30.289 actively looking for what they call storytellers. 00:03:30.409 --> 00:03:32.789 People who can explain the real world impact. 00:03:32.780 --> 00:03:35.819 Exactly. Put a human face on potential Medicaid 00:03:35.819 --> 00:03:38.460 cuts, for instance. Make it concrete for people. 00:03:38.800 --> 00:03:40.719 And there's a personal political angle for Schumer, 00:03:40.919 --> 00:03:43.319 too, isn't there? Absolutely. If he's seen as 00:03:43.319 --> 00:03:45.400 giving in again, you immediately hear louder 00:03:45.400 --> 00:03:48.800 talk about a primary challenge in 2028, perhaps 00:03:48.800 --> 00:03:51.360 from someone like AOC. The pressure is definitely 00:03:51.360 --> 00:03:54.259 on him internally. OK, let's shift gears from 00:03:54.259 --> 00:03:56.919 this immediate conflict to something maybe even 00:03:56.919 --> 00:03:59.539 more fundamental. controlling the narrative of 00:03:59.539 --> 00:04:02.000 the past. Ah, the Orwell quote comes to mind, 00:04:02.159 --> 00:04:04.280 doesn't it? It really does. Who controls the 00:04:04.280 --> 00:04:06.740 past controls the future. Who controls the present 00:04:06.740 --> 00:04:09.360 controls the past. And that perfectly frames 00:04:09.360 --> 00:04:11.439 what House Republicans are doing now with January 00:04:11.439 --> 00:04:13.259 6th. They're setting up a new committee on Jan 00:04:13.259 --> 00:04:17.519 6th. Yes. Explicitly to redo the investigation. 00:04:17.980 --> 00:04:21.019 The stated aim is, well, to rewrite history. 00:04:21.339 --> 00:04:23.399 Rewrite it how? What's the new story supposed 00:04:23.399 --> 00:04:26.660 to be? Basically, shift the blame away from former 00:04:26.660 --> 00:04:29.519 President Trump. point the finger anywhere else. 00:04:29.540 --> 00:04:32.480 Democrats, the FBI, maybe Antifa, Speaker Emerita 00:04:32.480 --> 00:04:35.709 Pelosi. Anyone but him. And Speaker Johnson is 00:04:35.709 --> 00:04:37.709 on board with this. Reportedly pleased, yeah. 00:04:38.029 --> 00:04:40.110 He's quoted saying the previous committee's work 00:04:40.110 --> 00:04:43.370 was rigged. So key members are already signaling 00:04:43.370 --> 00:04:45.769 they want to overturn the central finding of 00:04:45.769 --> 00:04:47.750 the original committee. Absolutely. Folks like 00:04:47.750 --> 00:04:52.329 Loudermilk, Higgins, they seem focused on hitting, 00:04:52.449 --> 00:04:55.029 like you said, the UNDO button on the conclusion 00:04:55.029 --> 00:04:57.290 that Trump's rhetoric was a cause of the riot. 00:04:57.589 --> 00:04:59.709 Could this backfire? Does bringing it all up 00:04:59.709 --> 00:05:01.750 again actually help them? Well, that's the potential 00:05:01.750 --> 00:05:04.459 scray sand effect. mentions right yeah meaning 00:05:04.459 --> 00:05:06.860 by trying to suppress or change the narrative 00:05:06.860 --> 00:05:09.000 you actually draw more attention to the original 00:05:09.000 --> 00:05:11.660 event it reminds people especially independence 00:05:11.660 --> 00:05:14.040 in the middle who didn't like what they saw on 00:05:14.040 --> 00:05:16.399 TV that day all right remind some of the actual 00:05:16.399 --> 00:05:19.720 images yeah violence exactly it might not play 00:05:19.720 --> 00:05:21.800 out the way they hope with the broader electorate 00:05:21.800 --> 00:05:23.980 and it sets up some internal drama too doesn't 00:05:23.980 --> 00:05:26.860 it with Representative Raskin? Yeah, Jamie Raskin. 00:05:26.920 --> 00:05:29.259 He was on the original Jan 6 committee, and he's 00:05:29.259 --> 00:05:31.000 going to be on this new one, too. So he gets 00:05:31.000 --> 00:05:33.720 a front row seat. And he's already asking, basically, 00:05:34.019 --> 00:05:36.259 OK, which conspiracy theory are you guys actually 00:05:36.259 --> 00:05:38.879 going to land on? Is it NT for this week, the 00:05:38.879 --> 00:05:42.139 FBI next week? They kind of need to pick one 00:05:42.139 --> 00:05:44.040 story and stick to it, right? I think it'd be 00:05:44.040 --> 00:05:46.319 fascinating to watch that unfold. OK, let's turn 00:05:46.319 --> 00:05:50.560 now to a different kind of power play. Retribution 00:05:50.560 --> 00:05:54.300 aimed at The corporate world. Ah, yes, the Microsoft 00:05:54.300 --> 00:05:57.079 situation. Trump demanding Microsoft fire Lisa 00:05:57.079 --> 00:06:00.220 Monaco. Yes, the former deputy AG who supervised 00:06:00.220 --> 00:06:02.519 the prosecution in his classified documents case. 00:06:03.139 --> 00:06:05.779 The source presents it as pretty straightforward 00:06:05.779 --> 00:06:09.420 retribution. And the leverage being used is stark. 00:06:09.759 --> 00:06:11.959 Extremely direct. It's basically hint -hint Microsoft. 00:06:12.180 --> 00:06:13.899 You have many government contracts that could 00:06:13.899 --> 00:06:16.379 be canceled on a whim if you do not obey me. 00:06:16.779 --> 00:06:18.819 Using those contracts as a weapon. It really 00:06:18.819 --> 00:06:21.060 does sound like corporate blackmail, plain and 00:06:21.060 --> 00:06:24.199 simple. But the question is, how credible is 00:06:24.199 --> 00:06:27.420 that threat, really? Could the government realistically 00:06:27.420 --> 00:06:29.779 just switch off Microsoft? Well, that's where 00:06:29.779 --> 00:06:32.220 it gets nuanced. It depends on the type of contract. 00:06:32.339 --> 00:06:35.540 OK. Contracts for, say, new software projects, 00:06:35.660 --> 00:06:39.259 maybe those could be shifted perhaps to a competitor 00:06:39.259 --> 00:06:42.779 like Oracle. It would be disruptive, but doable. 00:06:43.060 --> 00:06:45.519 But what about the core stuff, like Windows? 00:06:46.500 --> 00:06:49.540 Uh, now that would be, as the source puts it, 00:06:49.920 --> 00:06:53.180 an extreme disruption. Imagine the federal government 00:06:53.180 --> 00:06:55.899 trying to migrate tens of thousands, maybe hundreds 00:06:55.899 --> 00:06:58.439 of thousands of computers off Windows and Office 00:06:58.439 --> 00:07:00.600 overnight. Yeah, switching to Linux or something 00:07:00.600 --> 00:07:02.720 else across the board. Yeah. That's a massive 00:07:02.720 --> 00:07:05.800 undertaking. months, maybe years of effort. Exactly. 00:07:06.060 --> 00:07:08.259 So while maybe not impossible, it's disruptive 00:07:08.259 --> 00:07:10.160 enough to be a very potent threat, especially 00:07:10.160 --> 00:07:12.740 against a big publicly traded company like Microsoft 00:07:12.740 --> 00:07:15.720 that cares about stability and, you know, public 00:07:15.720 --> 00:07:18.740 perception, boycotts, shareholder reaction. It 00:07:18.740 --> 00:07:21.079 just creates this incredible contradiction around 00:07:21.079 --> 00:07:23.459 free speech, doesn't it? Oh, absolutely. The 00:07:23.459 --> 00:07:26.279 same person who expressed outrage over being 00:07:26.279 --> 00:07:29.980 banned from Ake's Twitter for inciting violence 00:07:29.980 --> 00:07:32.720 is now actively trying to pressure a private 00:07:32.720 --> 00:07:35.740 company to fire someone, and even going after 00:07:35.740 --> 00:07:38.199 critics like comedians. But how does the public 00:07:38.199 --> 00:07:41.220 feel about this kind of pressure? Well, there's 00:07:41.220 --> 00:07:43.420 a new poll, the Economist YouGov, that sheds 00:07:43.420 --> 00:07:45.879 some light. It shows a really large majority. 00:07:46.579 --> 00:07:50.139 68 % of Americans find it unacceptable for the 00:07:50.139 --> 00:07:52.439 government to pressure broadcasters or publishers 00:07:52.439 --> 00:07:55.480 to remove content or shows. So broad opposition 00:07:55.480 --> 00:07:58.500 to government censorship. Very broad. Interestingly, 00:07:58.860 --> 00:08:01.220 even among Republicans, a majority opposes it. 00:08:01.240 --> 00:08:03.620 There may be a bit more ambivalent if it's their 00:08:03.620 --> 00:08:05.980 guy doing the pressuring, but still the baseline 00:08:05.980 --> 00:08:08.379 principle against government interference holds 00:08:08.379 --> 00:08:11.029 strong for most people. the immediate focus, 00:08:11.149 --> 00:08:13.730 the daily headlines, are driven by these threats, 00:08:14.250 --> 00:08:16.769 personal fights, shut down deadlines. Yeah, immediate 00:08:16.769 --> 00:08:19.550 conflicts, retribution, attempts to rewrite history. 00:08:19.990 --> 00:08:22.629 But does focusing only on that obscure the bigger 00:08:22.629 --> 00:08:25.850 picture, the underlying rules. And that's the 00:08:25.850 --> 00:08:28.110 perfect pivot. Let's talk about those rules. 00:08:28.629 --> 00:08:31.149 Our sources frame the U .S. election system as, 00:08:31.149 --> 00:08:34.389 quote, American exceptionalism and not in a good 00:08:34.389 --> 00:08:37.000 way. Ouch. but may be accurate when you look 00:08:37.000 --> 00:08:39.899 globally. So we've got five potential reforms, 00:08:40.139 --> 00:08:42.440 things actually used successfully in other democracies, 00:08:42.779 --> 00:08:44.500 that would be completely revolutionary here. 00:08:44.559 --> 00:08:47.860 Let's tick through them. First one. Ban all corporate 00:08:47.860 --> 00:08:50.799 campaign donations. Just get big corporate money 00:08:50.799 --> 00:08:53.360 out entirely. Is that common elsewhere? Very. 00:08:53.440 --> 00:08:55.639 It's illegal in many established democracies. 00:08:55.980 --> 00:08:59.139 Canada, France, Japan, just to name a few. In 00:08:59.139 --> 00:09:01.580 Canada, zero corporate contributions allowed. 00:09:01.840 --> 00:09:04.220 Zip. And individual limits are really low, too. 00:09:04.299 --> 00:09:07.960 Around $7 ,750 Canadian. Wow. Okay, second point. 00:09:08.360 --> 00:09:10.419 Limit the length of campaigns. Our perpetual 00:09:10.419 --> 00:09:12.960 cycle is a huge driver of cost. How short are 00:09:12.960 --> 00:09:15.129 we talking elsewhere? Well, get this. Japan, 00:09:15.289 --> 00:09:18.289 the official campaign, is 12 days. France, 14 00:09:18.289 --> 00:09:21.570 days for presidential runs. The UK, usually five 00:09:21.570 --> 00:09:24.029 to six weeks. Weeks, not years. So the proposal 00:09:24.029 --> 00:09:26.429 here is simple. Pretty much. Ban campaign spending 00:09:26.429 --> 00:09:29.149 before, say, January 1st of the actual election 00:09:29.149 --> 00:09:31.230 year. Drastically shortens the paid campaign 00:09:31.230 --> 00:09:34.090 season. All right, third idea. Spending caps. 00:09:34.610 --> 00:09:37.190 Put actual limits on how much can be spent. Again, 00:09:37.610 --> 00:09:40.950 very common. Canada, France, the UK all have 00:09:40.950 --> 00:09:43.389 caps. Canada's limit for national parties in 00:09:43.389 --> 00:09:46.870 2021 was roughly 30 million U .S. dollars. Compare 00:09:46.870 --> 00:09:49.850 that to U .S. presidential spending. It's orders 00:09:49.850 --> 00:09:52.210 of magnitude different. But we have the Supreme 00:09:52.210 --> 00:09:54.110 Court issue here, right? Citizens United and 00:09:54.110 --> 00:09:56.710 all that. Spending money equals speech. That's 00:09:56.710 --> 00:09:58.710 the huge barrier in the U .S. But the source 00:09:58.710 --> 00:10:02.320 points out a potential... constitutional workaround. 00:10:02.460 --> 00:10:05.200 Which is? Congress actually has the power under 00:10:05.200 --> 00:10:07.740 Article 3, Section 2, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution, 00:10:08.159 --> 00:10:10.940 to strip the Supreme Court of jurisdiction in 00:10:10.940 --> 00:10:12.840 certain types of cases. Wait, Congress can tell 00:10:12.840 --> 00:10:15.279 the Supreme Court you can't rule on this? In 00:10:15.279 --> 00:10:17.600 specific areas, yes. It's called jurisdiction 00:10:17.600 --> 00:10:19.980 stripping. So Congress could theoretically pass 00:10:19.980 --> 00:10:22.440 campaign finance reform laws and include a provision 00:10:22.440 --> 00:10:24.600 saying the Supreme Court can't review those specific 00:10:24.600 --> 00:10:27.740 laws. Effectively making the law immune to being 00:10:27.740 --> 00:10:30.080 overturned by SCOTUS on free speech grounds. 00:10:30.269 --> 00:10:33.690 That's the theory. It's legally complex, politically 00:10:33.690 --> 00:10:36.110 explosive, but constitutionally permissible, 00:10:36.289 --> 00:10:39.710 according to this analysis. Fascinating. Okay, 00:10:39.750 --> 00:10:42.649 fourth reform idea. Public funding of campaigns. 00:10:43.169 --> 00:10:45.990 Taking the reliance off private donors. How does 00:10:45.990 --> 00:10:48.669 that work in practice? Different models. Sweden 00:10:48.669 --> 00:10:51.529 provides something like 80 -90 % of party funding 00:10:51.529 --> 00:10:54.490 through public grants. Germany uses a matching 00:10:54.490 --> 00:10:57.590 system for smaller individual donations. The 00:10:57.590 --> 00:10:59.809 point is to reduce the influence of big money. 00:11:00.009 --> 00:11:03.570 Makes sense. And the fifth one. This one feels 00:11:03.570 --> 00:11:06.230 really different for the US. Mandatory voting. 00:11:06.409 --> 00:11:09.049 Making it illegal not to vote. Essentially, yes. 00:11:09.330 --> 00:11:11.950 Where? Requiring eligible citizens to participate. 00:11:12.129 --> 00:11:15.090 Around 27 countries do this. Australia is probably 00:11:15.090 --> 00:11:17.350 the best known example. How do they enforce it? 00:11:17.649 --> 00:11:20.049 Usually with small fines for not voting without 00:11:20.049 --> 00:11:22.629 a valid excuse. It's not about jail time. It's 00:11:22.629 --> 00:11:25.639 about establishing a civic duty. Wow. That seems 00:11:25.639 --> 00:11:28.539 so counter to the American idea of voting as 00:11:28.539 --> 00:11:31.500 a right you can choose not to exercise. What's 00:11:31.500 --> 00:11:34.070 the claimed benefit? It's a potential game changer 00:11:34.070 --> 00:11:36.549 for who participates. It typically boosts turnout 00:11:36.549 --> 00:11:38.769 for maybe 60 percent in voluntary systems like 00:11:38.769 --> 00:11:41.529 ours up to 90 percent or more. 90 percent. Yeah. 00:11:41.950 --> 00:11:45.389 And critically, that extra 30 percent or so often 00:11:45.389 --> 00:11:49.190 represents less intensely partisan voters, people 00:11:49.190 --> 00:11:51.830 who are busy, maybe less engaged daily, more 00:11:51.830 --> 00:11:54.250 moderate. So it brings in the middle. Exactly. 00:11:54.629 --> 00:11:56.970 It potentially increases the electorate by half 00:11:56.970 --> 00:12:00.029 with people who aren't diehard partisans. Politicians 00:12:00.029 --> 00:12:02.769 then arguably have to appeal. more to that center 00:12:02.769 --> 00:12:04.629 ground rather than just playing to their base. 00:12:04.730 --> 00:12:06.850 But there's a patch, right? You can't just mandate 00:12:06.850 --> 00:12:08.990 voting if it's hard to vote. Absolutely crucial 00:12:08.990 --> 00:12:11.169 condition. Mandatory voting has to be paired 00:12:11.169 --> 00:12:14.809 with making voting incredibly easy. Think long 00:12:14.809 --> 00:12:18.129 voting periods like 30 days, maybe vote by mail 00:12:18.129 --> 00:12:21.129 standard, plenty of locations. Accessibility 00:12:21.129 --> 00:12:23.610 is key. Is there proof this linkage matters? 00:12:24.309 --> 00:12:26.470 Yeah, Venezuela provides a sort of reverse case 00:12:26.470 --> 00:12:28.649 study. They used to have mandatory voting and 00:12:28.649 --> 00:12:30.870 turnout was around 83 percent. They got rid of 00:12:30.870 --> 00:12:33.289 it and participation dropped to 61 percent. Make 00:12:33.289 --> 00:12:35.549 it optional and hard and people drop out. Okay, 00:12:35.590 --> 00:12:37.509 let's quickly touch on a couple of other political 00:12:37.509 --> 00:12:40.049 maneuvers mentioned. NYC Mayor Eric Adams dropping 00:12:40.049 --> 00:12:43.080 out. Yes, quite abruptly. And the source suggests 00:12:43.080 --> 00:12:46.179 Trump is now trying to maneuver things by getting 00:12:46.179 --> 00:12:49.080 the official Republican candidate, Curtis Sliwa, 00:12:49.419 --> 00:12:51.940 to also drop out. Why would he do that? To try 00:12:51.940 --> 00:12:53.860 and create a clear head -to -head race between 00:12:53.860 --> 00:12:56.580 the progressive candidate Zoran Omdani and Andrew 00:12:56.580 --> 00:12:59.539 Cuomo, perhaps seeing Cuomo as easier to beat 00:12:59.539 --> 00:13:02.039 or work with down the line. Any suggestion of 00:13:02.039 --> 00:13:05.320 what Sliwa might get in return? Speculation mentioned. 00:13:05.480 --> 00:13:07.360 Head of the Voice of America has a potential 00:13:07.360 --> 00:13:09.480 carrot. Pure speculation at this point, though. 00:13:09.679 --> 00:13:12.559 And quickly. Maryland gerrymandering. Governor 00:13:12.559 --> 00:13:14.940 Wes Moore. Yeah, the Democratic governor there 00:13:14.940 --> 00:13:17.460 apparently has a chance to redraw the map and 00:13:17.460 --> 00:13:20.000 potentially eliminate the state's only Republican 00:13:20.000 --> 00:13:23.000 House seat held by Freedom Caucus chair Andy 00:13:23.000 --> 00:13:25.940 Harris. But he's hesitating. Doddling, as the 00:13:25.940 --> 00:13:28.019 source puts it, possibly concerned about the 00:13:28.019 --> 00:13:30.159 state constitution's requirement for districts 00:13:30.159 --> 00:13:32.620 to be compact and form, which could invite legal 00:13:32.620 --> 00:13:35.259 challenges. And finally, Rudy Giuliani settling 00:13:35.259 --> 00:13:38.960 with Dominion. Yes, settling that huge $1 .3 00:13:38.960 --> 00:13:41.440 billion dollar defamation lawsuit. The terms 00:13:41.440 --> 00:13:43.860 aren't clear. especially given his other massive 00:13:43.860 --> 00:13:47.120 judgment, the $148 million to the Georgia election 00:13:47.120 --> 00:13:50.059 workers and apparent financial issues. Right. 00:13:50.460 --> 00:13:52.899 So speculation is either Dominion wanted to avoid 00:13:52.899 --> 00:13:56.299 further legal costs or maybe a wealthy ally helped 00:13:56.299 --> 00:13:58.259 bail him out. We don't know the details. OK, 00:13:58.360 --> 00:14:01.039 so wrapping this all up. We've looked at these 00:14:01.039 --> 00:14:04.919 immediate, intense conflicts, the shutdown fight, 00:14:05.240 --> 00:14:08.059 the pressure on Microsoft. The Jan 6th rewrite. 00:14:08.159 --> 00:14:10.600 Often driven by very personal motives, retribution 00:14:10.600 --> 00:14:13.840 or specific ideological goals like Vought's desire 00:14:13.840 --> 00:14:16.279 to decimate government functions. Then you contrast 00:14:16.279 --> 00:14:19.200 that with the structural discussion. These fundamental 00:14:19.200 --> 00:14:22.279 reforms used elsewhere campaign finance limits, 00:14:22.720 --> 00:14:25.759 shorter campaigns, public funding, even mandatory 00:14:25.759 --> 00:14:28.179 voting. Things that change the actual rules of 00:14:28.179 --> 00:14:30.759 the political game aiming for broader participation 00:14:30.759 --> 00:14:33.120 and less influence from concentrated money or 00:14:33.120 --> 00:14:36.259 power. So here's the final provocative thought 00:14:36.259 --> 00:14:38.549 maybe. for you listening, what does it really 00:14:38.549 --> 00:14:40.909 say about the U .S. political system right now? 00:14:40.929 --> 00:14:42.870 Yeah, that we're so caught up in the immediate 00:14:42.870 --> 00:14:45.250 drama. Who gets blamed for the shutdown this 00:14:45.250 --> 00:14:47.789 week? Who's attacking who? Well, these fundamental 00:14:47.789 --> 00:14:50.409 structural rules of the game, how campaigns are 00:14:50.409 --> 00:14:52.990 funded, who gets to vote easily, even how much 00:14:52.990 --> 00:14:55.789 power the courts have over political questions 00:14:55.789 --> 00:14:58.690 seem almost untouchable, almost off the table 00:14:58.690 --> 00:15:01.470 for serious discussion. Is maybe the biggest 00:15:01.470 --> 00:15:04.190 knowledge gap in American politics simply not 00:15:04.190 --> 00:15:06.129 realizing what's actually possible? What other 00:15:06.129 --> 00:15:08.269 successful democracies are already doing differently? 00:15:08.690 --> 00:15:09.210 Food for thought.