What Do We Owe Each Other?, Part 2: American Democracy and the 2024 Election

Join us for an insightful and dynamic panel discussion on the upcoming 2024 US election, featuring prominent voices in journalism and politics. This event will offer diverse perspectives on the key issues, candidates, and potential outcomes that will shape the future of the United States. Don't miss this opportunity to hear from esteemed experts as they dissect the 2024 election and its potential impact on the United States and the world.

The Rooney Center for the Study of American Democracy thanks the Notre Dame Law School and the Notre Dame Democracy Initiative for co-sponsoring this event.

Thanks for listening! The ThinkND Podcast is brought to you by ThinkND, the University of Notre Dame's online learning community. We connect you with videos, podcasts, articles, courses, and other resources to inspire minds and spark conversations on topics that matter to you — everything from faith and politics, to science, technology, and your career.

• Learn more about ThinkND and register for upcoming live events at think.nd.edu.
• Join our LinkedIn community for updates, episode clips, and more.

Transcript

2 0:06

Welcome to Democracy in the 2024 Election. I'm Matt Aul, a professor in the Political Sciences Department and the director of the Bernie Center for the Study of American Democracy. Back in grad school, I discovered that my job comes with an unusual occupational hazard. Anytime a stranger asks what I do, if I decide to tell the truth, I find myself in conversation about politics with a total stranger. this conversation's always trying to go the same way. Everyone starts with, oh, this is such an interesting time to be studying politics. They do this, every single year, regardless of what's going on. No, This is not particularly unusual, despite what you might have heard on cable news. It's not coming to an end. This is not the craziest time ever in American politics, and the next random midterm election is not the most important election in American history. Every time I have this conversation, I can't help but think of Robert Kennedy's speech a few years before he was assassinated, in which he related an old Chinese curse, may you live the interesting, and really lamented the fact that the 1960s, they've been living through one of those interesting times. Kennedy actually ripped that off from another politician. Austen Chamberlain, who in the years leading up to World War II said that they were under that same curse, living in interesting times. Turns out the whole Chinese curse thing is completely apocryphal. No such saying in China. It can be traced back to the British politician Smolin's father, who in the 1890s gave a speech describing that period as interesting times in which each new day brings new objects of interest. And new objects of anxiety. It's been 130 years, and man, can I relate to that. In an era where we're experiencing intense partisan polarization, widespread disinformation, shocking acts of political violence, and even attempted political assassinations, I'm sorry to report we are indeed living in interesting times. But have no fear. there's a panel to help alleviate our collective anxiety with a series of experts in these interesting times. We're joined today by Pulitzer Prize winner and New York Times columnist, Carlos Dezada, former editor in chief and current editor at large for the Wall Street Journal. Jared Baker, the Reverend, Distinguished Professor, C. Lewis, Distinguished Professor of Clinical Science, Dianne Pinderhughes, and, the namesake of the Brainy Center, former Congressman and Ambassador to WEC, Francis Rainey. And of course, our moderator, Dean Cole of the law school. So please join me in welcoming our panel.

3 2:42

Thank you for the introductions, Matt. Rachel will be here, to put questions to our panel about American democracy and the 2024 election. I want to start, by, suggesting that Americans They've probably learned more from the electoral college over the last four years than they ever learned in school. now we're in a situation where states are solidly red or solidly blue. the election of a President of the United States really comes down to just seven swing states. in fact, I don't think it's outlandish to suggest that the people who come to America will be elected President of the United States. It's true. what do we do about this? Should we revisit campaign finance law so that, people living in California their votes don't really count if California is not in toilet? Should they allow to, get beyond the limits to, candidates running in California? I'll go to Daddy, Corks.

4 3:47

first of all, thank you having all of us here. I understand and applaud the impetus behind the question. Anything that allows for enhanced participation in the democratic system, especially the electoral system, I think is vital. I'd be somewhat hesitant about that particular approach, to it. I think it might be something that addresses symptoms more than causes, right? if you're worried about, voters in other states that are not, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, the seven, being disenfranchised, then maybe we do something about that rather than allowing people to inject more money into those same states, I suspect it might turn, I have a big problem. If the electoral college is the issue, if the way we elect senators is the issue, then I think let's explore those questions. the voters, don't necessarily want to have more money in politics. Pew has done some research on this, and they find that a majority of voters think there's too much money in politics. they actually want there to be less money in politics. And so if we want to be responsive to voters, we might be responsive impulse on their part as well. The last thing, and here I hesitate, speaking in front of Alaska Houdini, but the Supreme Court, it seems to me, has done plenty to allow for additional money in politics, not just the Citizens United case, but more recently the McCutcheon case. which removed limits on aggregate contributions. And so it seems even with those, changes, we still face the issue, the challenge that we started.

3 5:14

So let me ask you, Jerry, do you think the electoral college as per old special, this. It's the thing that's very much up to people in the 43 states that are in the

5 5:24

I'd like to very much for the invitation to be here. It's always a pleasure for me to be here. Although I have lived in the United States for more than 30 years now. I love coming to Michigan. My personal connection here is that I have five daughters, three of whom are graduating One of whom is currently a sophomore. She didn't promise to be here this afternoon, but apparently Friday afternoon football weekend, she had better things to do. I agree with Carlos. doing anything that actually further facilitates the infusion of large amounts of money, into US elections is probably not a good thing. And the Electoral College has become controversial in the last few years. I was in Florida in 2020, when we had the, extraordinary, Bush v. Gore, runoff after the election as a vote, which we're doing for five weeks. Of course, that was the, what was so striking about that election, of course, remember that was Bush. Gore won slightly more of the popular vote, than, than Bush. And thanks to a 500 margin vote, Florida, Bush won the election. And, everybody at the time was thinking, my God, this is a freak. we never had elections like this again, so close and where one candidate, wins the popular vote, loses the electoral college. I would say, with so much of American life, the rink has become the norm. and now we have these extraordinarily close elections, time after time, to create not only political dissatisfaction, but obviously, legal questions and challenges. I was reading recently, about Nikita Khrushchev, who was the leader of the Soviet Union and became, General Secretary of the Communist Party after Joseph Stalin, after a power struggle if you haven't seen the Death of Stalin movie, I advise you, look at it, it gives you a little bit of a taste of what we're doing. Khrushchev was leader of the Soviet Union for almost 10 years, in the context of talking about the differences between Western democracy and Soviet democracy, He said, the real problem with free elections Is that nobody knows who's going to win them. as I was reading that, I thought, actually, no, you know what, that has actually taken that state's blood and out, because not only in this country can we not know who's going to win an election before it's taking place, We don't actually know who's won an election after. So I think understand the concerns about the electoral college. And by the way, if we get another election, this will be, it is remarkable. if Trump would win in November, it would be, I think that's right. It would be this, and not putting the popular vote. If he won the electoral college, In seven elections Democrats have won the popular vote. it would be the third time, three of those occasions they've been beaten in the electoral college. I do understand concerns, there are a number of reforms You could make. You could make, the allocation of votes in the electoral college by state proportionate to the state's vote you could do what two states currently do, which is to divide. the electoral vote up by congressional districts. there are reforms you can make if you want to. The only thing I'd say in defense of the electoral college, and it is becoming harder to defend, for a lot of people is, it does reflect the federalism of the United States. The founders were very keen to ensure that this was not, a single polity, but that it reflected the various, cultures, political cultures and characters, and the autonomy of the various constituent seats. that is why the Electoral College is formed as it is tied to representation in Congress and significantly over represents small states and under represents the larger states. while I understand the concerns about the Electoral College, there is something worth reflecting on what made America so successful and stable for 240 years. one of those things is the federalist system, is the fact, again, I come from Britain where there is no federalism, Britain is a whole unitary state and creates its own problems as a result. So I think you should reflect on the advantages that the elective college represents, as well as the demerits of it.

6 8:54

Professor Brianne, is the elective college a problem?

7 8:57

there are a lot of problems, I would say that, your initial question of that should be. the issue of campaign contributions. contribution limits to enable Americans to get more involved in elections. my first reaction to your question was, yes, but tell that to the Supreme Court. the court has not, been, willing to put any constraints on spending. so that's one element. the electoral college is a problem in the sense that, overrepresentation means that, the representation of millions of people in California, is ignored and the representation in many other, larger states that, include more, people of color, by African Americans, by, New York, California, the Southern states tend not to get represented in the same way the Electoral College creates a system of power that advantages the smallest portions of the population.

3 9:54

I think the response to that might be that, one out of every nine Americans is a Californian and if we eliminate the Electoral College, we'd have We've all been Californians.

4 10:08

I've been to California. As opposed to Pennsylvania?

3 10:11

Ambassador Reedy, so you've served in Congress. what are your thoughts about the role of the Electoral College in these, elections?

8 10:19

I think the Electoral College is doing exactly what the founders set it up to do. And I think it's important. In our separation of powers, in our system of protecting the big from the small and small from the big. That we allow it to function the way it is. Otherwise you're going to have California, Chicago and New York collect everybody. And I don't think American people deserve that. And I don't think that stands for anything. with that said, on campaign finance, I have some time invested in that. when I was on George Bush's, finance team, another gentleman in the showroom, our budget, 2, 464 million. there's a little paper this week that Ohio Pennsylvania and Michigan are going to spend almost 300 million in their Senate campaign. Dayton Cormick told me that he expects them to spend 400, 000 between him and Casey in Pennsylvania. So something's dreadfully wrong. And it's empowering a bunch of lobbyists and special interest people who exert an inordinate amount of influence on many of our legislators. And that's a real problem in and of itself. The other problem is non disclosed contributions. You may not know this, but there's a section in the election now, which is allows you to give you a certain kind of pack, not disclose what you gain. I would be absolutely use that.

3 11:37

you mentioned the legislators. I want to talk a little bit about state legislatures. And right now, I think we're witnessing. various states that are having one party or the other moves to affect the election process. for example, in Georgia, we're seeing moves by Republican legislature, Republican governor, to enact election law reforms that are, Arguably, intended to, suppress votes or, some party that they're intended to make a vote more honest, to keep, non citizens from voting. Professor, Pinderhughes, what do you think about, these measures are they likely to succeed for Republicans or has the influx of Northerners into Southern states? been so great that it overwhelms, that

7 12:26

there are a couple of, Bits of information I can share that, for example, 2021, the, Republican voting law changes put in place to limit black voters, and, some examples limit the ability of the state election board and secretary of state to enter into certain consent orders, the secretary of state shall be a non voting ex officio member of the state election board, which in the past, the, secretary of state had been a voting member, Revises provisions relating to the quorum of such an award to require the Secretary of State, require the Secretary of State to support and assist the state election awardee. All of my things that have been intended to, constrain, the ability of election officials. To operate in a nonpartisan fashion. Now that's 2021. There've been a number of other actions that have been taken since then that are even more aggressive to limit, state election officials abilities to protect the rights of a people vote. whether or not the migration to the South from the North will make enough of a difference. people like, Stacey, Abrams ability to transcribe a number of, voting rights, organizations, whether she will be able to have an impact, whether the large number of black, voters who have been migrating to the South will make a difference and will be able to counter some of these, laws is a very important question. I would guess that, the effort of the Republican Party to, given the Republican governor, given the Republican election officials, to put constraints on those black voters, particularly black Democratic voters will, and that's a question for me. think there's some possibility. They'll be able to resist, but, they've been working very hard at putting in restraints on, the ability of voters to participate in a regular way. One example is not giving voters water when they're standing in line and the, Georgia has been known to be a state that voter registration, voter participation tends to produce very long, times that people have to wait to vote. We don't see that in many other states. it's a problem.

3 14:39

Is there a legitimate reason why these measures are being put in place? Is there an argument, Gerald?

5 14:45

I'll push back a little bit on what Fred says. for example, although those Georgia, voting law changes made in 2021 were described by Democrats as, Jim Crow 2. 0 to, suppress black voting. It was striking that in the 2022 midterms, the turnout was significantly higher, including black voters. It's higher, it had ever, it's actually highest I think they'd ever been in a midterm election. black voters voted in larger numbers than they voted in previous midterm elections in, 2018, 2019, 2018, 2040, depending on when the Senate race was. and the African American Democratic candidate won, again, won actually by a slightly larger share of vote than he won in, in 20, 20 when there was a special election for the same seat. there are concerns about voters registering, who are not residents. there were limited numbers of cases of that. As we know, Donald Trump made a big deal of it in Georgia about after the 2020 election there was no significant evidence of widespread fraud. But I do think, tightening some of the rules. around voting, particularly around things like early voting, to minimize the risk of fraud. It's what, happens in almost every other country. other countries have rules about introducing identity when you go to vote. You have much more limited time frames in which to vote But even in this election, early voting has already started. Mail in balloting, which has become very widespread here, is notoriously, susceptible to fraud. So I think, there is a case for, significantly tightening the rules around voting, particularly in an age, when there is so much controversy and Doubts about the legitimacy of elections. And if you can do what you can to make sure that these elections are conducted, then you are going to limit the ability of people when Donald Trump comes out and tries to say, actually, it's fraudulent voting, if you've taken very tough measures against fraudulent voting. You have a better chance, I think, of securing a higher level of confidence in the vote.

3 16:31

Cross, do we have, white supremacism fraudulent voting

4 16:35

I don't think that we've determined that. I always find it interesting when politicians say that they're merely responding to widespread concerns when, in fact, they've often fostered those widespread concerns to begin. and so that, that is, is something that you've seen in recent years in Georgia, what you're seeing is not just legislative. you change, laws taken out by the legislature, you're seeing the state election board, more recently, introducing rules, to the conduct of the election, for instance, in the last few weeks, the state election board in Georgia is now requiring, county level officials to do a manual count not just the machine count. and that could delay the reporting of the results by several days. if three independent, poll workers don't produce the exact same count, then there has to be a continuous recount. At the same time, they've allowed county level officials. to delay certification if they have, cause to suspect irregularities. And of course, the uncertainties you're creating by introducing the manual, can create those concerns about irregularities. and coincidentally, three of the five officials, on the State Board of Elections, are being name checked by one of the major presidential candidates in his rallies, right? And so those kinds of things can create, the kind of uncertainty that politicians say they're immediately responding to when often they are fostered.

3 17:53

are we responding to, widespread fraud or is this a reality?

8 17:58

I have not seen, as the gentleman just said, any documentable, verifiable evidence of massive or widespread fraud. There's always a few in every state, bad ballots thrown outside, et cetera. But the issues that have been touched off here at Georgia are important for the whole United States. This business of hand counting ballots and the electronic age delaying completion and process for as much as a week makes zero sense to me. I think it's going to create more uncertainty in the middle of a climate where uncertainty is not our friend. Stability and certainty are. I don't have any problem with, ID to vote. All around the world you have to have an ID to vote. In Mexico, they've got a picture in there, and you go up, they compare you to it, and you sign right under it, and your ID number has to match what they've got on the book. In Iraq, you should probably see it on TV, and you go out next to them, and they all go away. we can make sure that the people that should vote get the vote. how you got it in?

3 18:50

Jerry and Diane mentioned, Blackvote in Georgia and, by all reports, Blackvote will be, critically important, in determining the outcome in Georgia. Are there other states where the black vote is going to make a difference in determining the outcome? We just talked about Georgia and maybe North Carolina. Yes, I

5 19:13

mean, in a close election, obviously Georgia's, I think, there'll be a lot of swing states, I think does have the largest proportion of black voters. yes, the turnout at any break, will matter. the last two elections were decided by 35, 000 people in four states, three or four states, I think it was 2016, voted for Hudson rather than Donald Trump, she would have won out of a total of 135 million votes In 2020, Biden in just three states. He would have won out of 160 million cars. So these are the margins we're talking about. And if you look at the polling in the swing states every single swing state, every one of those seven Key states that everybody's focused on. The margin is between 0. 1 in favor of one candidate and 2. 1 in favor of another candidate. Georgia, I think has the largest number of black voters in one of those states, but I don't think it equals Carolina. It'll be, quite significant. The northern states, and I've got a few Pennsylvania. Wisconsin and Michigan feel like voters, but it could, when you have an election decided by a few thousand votes, potentially, in a few states, than every single. Every single facets of turnouts of, of electoral behavior is potentially determinative.

3 20:25

Let me ask about another swing state, Arizona. in Arizona, recently the State Supreme Court revived, the enforceability of, an 1864 abortion. That banned virtually all abortions. And that decision was met with an effort by the state legislature, to overturn, or repeal that law, as well as, an effort to defeat two of the, Supreme Court justices in a potential election. What role will the abortion debate play in the future? Arizona, Carlos.

4 21:00

There's an interesting contrast there. Since the Dobbs ruling two years ago, you've seen state level measures, in support of abortion rights, having a lot of success, even in states that you might otherwise think would be more conservative, such as Kansas. Arizona now has one, which would enshrine row level protections for abortion rights, forward. yet Trump is. Up five points or so in Arizona, depending on what polls, sometimes it's a little more narrow in others. When you look at the New York Times, Siena poll, about, swing states, that abortion rights are considered, the top issue for about 18 percent of voters in Arizona, below the economy, below the board, That may help square that circle. what seems clear is that both presidential campaigns have a similar theory of case, right? it's a winning issue for Democrats. It's a losing issue for Republicans. and that because Kamala Harris is campaigning actively on it, talking about codifying Roe, whereas Donald Trump is doing this sort of odd thing where he's, doing his very kind of direct appeals to women saying, your life's going to be so great. It'll be so safe. Prices will be low. You wouldn't even think about abortion anymore. Don't worry. the irony of that, of course, is that it took the Democrats losing. on the big issue, Roe, to make it a winning electoral issue. And it took the Republicans winning on the big issue, Dobbs, to make it a political, weight on them.

3 22:19

Are there other swaystakes where Worsham's gonna make it difficult to this outcome? Sure.

7 22:25

Wherever there's a question of what are the most important issues. Abortion may not be the top issue, but, in North Carolina, when asked, if people thought it should be, mostly legal or somewhat legal, 63 percent of voters said, it should be legal. And, in fact, all of the swing states ends up with abortions. It's at that level, 63 percent or so, around that level. North Carolina, Arizona, and Georgia,

3 22:56

I'm sorry to interrupt you, but is that enough to sway, are voters voting on that?

7 23:01

That's a fair question. that's not the most important issue, but when asked what they think about it as an issue, 62 percent say yes. Whether that would be enough to, swing that vote, we'll see. That's all I can say.

8 23:14

Yeah, I would imagine you're going to be some people who are, seriously spun up on that issue that may override the more enduring pocketbook issues that seem to threaten many people in this country. There's a bit of a disconnect on the pocketbook issues because the so called urban elites. And people in this room have, access to a broad range of investment opportunities. unfortunately, it's even heightened already pervasive inequality On the other hand, if you're out there working for the living, like a carpenter or something, you don't have very many options where to put your money in. Inflation's just been killing you for about 10 years. And so when those people say. When the newspapers, no offense, say, oh, no, inflation's low, things are great. you go talk to an iron worker somewhere and he's going to say, no, food costs more, education costs more, cars cost more, my rent's gone up, or my house costs more. They're not happy campers. And those are some of the ones I think that had pushed this blue collar ship to Trump.

5 24:14

Dean, the two very quick things, one, obviously, even Where there aren't specific abortion measures on ballots in some of the states, which, for example, already have them, like Michigan, there are, there is some evidence that there are fairly significant numbers of voters, several, the mythical suburban woman in Mexico, but, the, this has been raised to the level of kind of political mean, but the suburban women voters were very concerned about the election and what the Republicans might do, so they can make a difference there. The other thing to watch, which I think Michigan, it's not strictly swing states. But it's Florida, of course. Florida does have a horseshoe measure. Oh my god, that's a foul thing. And, it is quite interesting. Although, Trump, I think, won by seven points in quite comfortably. Florida used to be a swing state, and now think of it as pretty solidly, a red state. But the polling actually does, remember Ron DeSantis was re elected governor 60 percent of the vote just two years ago. but it is interesting to see, that the polling there is close, again, probably not unlikely to go to, unlikely to go to Kamala Harris, but the latest polling I've seen has Trump only about a four or five point lead in Florida. And there is some political commentary that says that, that might be to do with the fact that there is this, this measure on the ballot, which would be very restricting on what she. And where, which you probably expect to go down by heavily, it might encourage significant numbers of, of pro choice voters to come out and vote and may, may vote for Harris. So it's, it'll be an interesting thing to see, again, how large that will pump the margin.

8 25:35

That's right. yeah, that, you have to be real careful when you start to break down voters about Florida. It's a much more complex place than many people think. There were over 300, 000 more Republican votes in Dade County than had ever been cast, and that's how Trump went for it. And those are the Venezuelans that have migrated and are very, they're very focused on freedom, like the Cubans. the continuing impact of war on Venezuelans in South Florida, overcompensating for the other Latins along the I 4 corridor, that's a game changer if we're just trying to get Florida ready. Again, there will be people like in Bulgaria that are going to have abortion as their main issue, when we go, when we're

3 26:15

going into that. Ambassador, you mentioned these migrants who are now lawyer, Republicans in Borno. but, one of the issues facing swing states like Arizona, Is illegal immigration, non voters, but, people coming across the Southern border, and neither the Biden administration nor the Trump administration that preceded it has had an effective solution to, addressing, the immigration, crisis as some people refer to it. And in fact, the Weizler reports that, the immigration bill was in Congress And in fact, Vice President Harris, mentioned this during the debate, that the immigration bill that was in Congress was opposed by President Trump, in part because, he felt that, or he was accused of, wanting to preserve the issue of immigration for the election. although he argued that it was a bad bill. Which was it? Is it a bad bill, Carlos, or was Trump, Banking on immigration is an issue.

4 27:16

I think that it was a bill that covered a lot of what, Republican lawmakers said they wanted. and, I imagine that we're not for the, the serendipity of an election year, that this is something that it could have moved forward. What's interesting when you think about the immigration debate in terms of this election now Is how the discussion of immigration has, even though the issues you raise are very salient, it's shifted beyond the border, right? Immigration is about immigrants who are affecting, enriching, complicating, transforming communities around the country, right? The, the big policy, for Trump in 2016 was build the wall. The big policy for Trump now in immigration is mass deportation, right? The wall is about keeping people out. Deportations are about kicking people out, right? he talks about, if the wall is about protecting, now it's about, what do you say? Immigrants are poisoning the blood of the country. It's about purifying the country in some way. it's a real evolution in the way immigration issues being discussed. in the United States. The interesting thing about it is that I think it's, it's quite obvious that a lot of American voters are ready, even eager for a more borderly, but also more restrictive immigration policy. you can say that's out of xenophobia or just out of a sense of like. a border in the conditions in which it has been under much of the Biden years, for instance, feels like a country out of control. And it could be a very big winning issue for Republicans. if they would focus on some of the things that some of them say they want to do, like skills based immigration, tough border enforcement, but instead they get in these detours, Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, that, that make their position on immigration feel not to borrow the idiom of Democrats now, but feel weird, feel extreme in, in, in some way. But overall, I think you see a real shifting consensus on immigration policy across both parties. Four years ago, all the Democratic candidates in the primaries raised their hands and said they wanted to decriminalize border consent, right? That would not happen. That would not happen today.

3 29:20

Jerry, does my question, mischaracterize President Trump?

5 29:24

A little, I think, yeah. I would say, take issue a little bit with your, description that neither Trump or Biden, really dealt with the, illegal, the immigration problem. that's truly in an absolute sense, but if you look at the numbers, In the three years after the pandemic, the first three years of Trump's administration, I think the number of, encounters with undocumented people was about two million, maybe two and a half million. In the first three years of the Biden administration, it's seven and a half million. I don't think it's much question that when Biden came in and immediately undid all of the pandemic and pre pandemic measures, executive orders, That Trump had introduced and sent a signal to the world, hey, America's open. I think that's not surprising that you think there's a surge in illegal migration. And second, I would also say, it's not xenophobic to oppose, illegal, immigration, or indeed to favor restrictions on legal immigration. I think that's one of the one of the, one of the, one of the things that I think Democrats have really been blindsided on, in this country, and it's particularly the support among Hispanics for Donald Trump. A lot of people, Democrats, have took Hispanic voters for granted, assumed they would vote. But as you mentioned, Dean, there was a vote of Hispanics, exactly as Ambassador says, the Hispanic vote in Florida is very complex and, probably best left alone, but if you look at the results in Texas, along the border in Texas, those key congressional districts, Trump's numbers were trumped better than any Republican has ever done, in that, in those cities along, along the Texas, Mexico border, and the reason is very simple, which is that, People gone through the legal migration process, I have. I'm American. I'm very proud American. I'm overseas too. She's, she was born here. So she's a, she's a native American. She can be president United States. I can't, I'm forging, but, you may recall that it's forged in the United States, when you go through the litigation process, it's a lengthy, Complex, expensive, stressful process to go through meat and migration. And when people see other people, coming into the country without being apprehended, being able to work and live and enjoy benefits and all those other things, and then maybe ultimately one day, getting amnesty. They're the, they feel, it's the immigrants, it's the, many of the immigrants who've been through that process who feel most hostile to illegal immigration and most hostile to administration issues that do nothing to stop people from coming in illegally. we need to be very careful. Some of the things Carl said is right. Some of the language, the ridiculous language that some people use, Donald Trump in particular, uses about migrants is disgusting. but I don't think that should, should obscure us to the larger fact that a country. A country is, it's almost what defines a country, to have control of its borders. If you're going to essentially take the position that you know what anybody can come in, you no longer have. You no longer have, a, you no longer have cohesion, you no longer have, you no longer have the rule of law. And if you take that approach and you create a kind of disorder that we've seen, particularly out of New York City, New York City is to some extent, suffering from huge numbers of migrants. Many of them with legitimate cases, I'm not saying they don't. But the disorder, the, the overcrowding, the problems that creates, a country must have the right something. Decide who comes into us, who is allowed to come in legally and become a legal citizen. I do think that's why so many people are so unhappy with this administration. Why, despite some of his language, so many people are willing to sit with Donald Trump?

7 32:42

And DeRuse? There is the case that there was a significant negotiation between the parties in Congress on immigration and, they developed a program of, a reform That was ready to be approved, and the, Republicans were, discouraged from supporting it by Donald Trump. a lot of the issues that you're talking about were, according to the coverage, addressed in that policy. And there was pushback that this should not be done. The other thing I want to say is, it's not as if, the immigrants are coming and that they're not able to find work. A lot of Immigration is a result of people wanting to come and find work, and many businesses need their employment, need their presence. And it's not as if that's something that, is they're taking jobs from Americans. that's the general pattern. Tendency to be able to use that argument that this is a problem. there's lots of work that needs to be incorporated and out in the bar, employment would be in great difficulty, and I would argue that's. Suddenly, people tend not to talk about the ability of the immigrants that are coming to contribute to the American economy. a combination of what was the policy that was proposed, what was negotiated between the Democrats and Republicans said yes, we want it. Except, Trump said, no, don't do it because that will affect my ability to win the election. Secondly, what's the role of immigrants in the American economy? If you don't talk about both of those things, it's not a fair representation. We'll talk

4 34:22

about pros. Can I just add briefly one thing on this, on this topic? Jerry mentioned how onerous and intensive and complicated the, the naturalization process is. It's also beautiful. It is, I've been living in the United States for decades as a green card holder. I didn't think I had to become a citizen. I did it. it was one of the most emotional days of my life and being surrounded by my family. My, my, friends and, and people from all over the world who were in this room in Baltimore with me. swearing in, and if you ever want your faith restored in the American experiment, attend a naturalization ceremony. the other thing I'll say is that we talked a lot about, what Latino voters do in Dade County, what black voters do in North Carolina. I think it's useful to remember that, that demography is not always destiny. I remember the, 2008 election of Barack I was told that the coalition of the Ascendant, this multicultural coalition of voters were going to, capture the White House for the Democrats in perpetuity. that is not what happened. and even now you see, especially among young male Latin Latino voters, there's a lot of Trump curiosity. Kamala Harrison certainly do it as well, even among those voters than say Joe Biden may have done just according to polling. So I think it's useful to, in election season in particular, we start slicing and dicing, Americans even more so than we do every other particular week. and I think it's just good to remember that, that voters are complex.

3 35:51

given what's been said about, Venezuelan voters voting, Republican and other, voters voting Republican, is it a mistake for Republicans to oppose, immigration in any main order? Yes. Yes. That's

8 36:08

how I think it is. I think that the last portion that tried to solve this problem you need to turn to, to the Afton set. And it's a combination of the hardcore right wing and a few labor unions. And it would have called for strengthening the border, both with technology and Meat, steel, here to call for a, legal and honest, open and above board, processed. People could come in, processed, disclosed any problems in their background. They were clean. They could come in here and work. They would have rights, and they would, have the opportunity to pursue that during the crossfire. It would also have tightened up the asylum. Which have been expanded in many ways by federal courts to accomplish a much broader way of denigration than the law reads, that you've probably read. if we could have done that, it would have been really good. But we didn't. Now we have the conundrum that the professor mentioned. Needing workers is drastic. I'm an employer. There's no employer in this country that couldn't use decent workers. And we have a bunch of them that want to come in here. By and large, a lot of them are come from within 600 miles of our board, which means they get back to the family death. So we've, we should figure some way to harness that. the Biden V did a lot of good things, no doubt. It had the one thing that, that Bob and neither had it I've for it or not probably would. is that the limits on who, how many people could come in per year? We're still way high. They're not gonna solve problems. We've got to shut that border down and then let the people in that we can vet and then distribute. And that would be a lot of help. There's still plenty of opportunity for work, as you can see.

5 37:45

yeah, I think the ambassador's exactly right. And on the bill in particular, so to address it, I think, although Trump's intervention was as ever, politically driven. I'm pretty certain that I'm exposed to quite a lot of Republicans in Congress at that war, not across the house, precisely because of the point the ambassador raises, which is that the number of, the limit, the number of, of, the migration number. Above which, these strict limits will be imposed, which is still way too high for many Republicans. But again, just being, sorry to push back a little bit on your question. You said, is it wrong, does it make any sense for Republicans to be against immigration? I don't think Republicans are against immigration. I don't even think Donald Trump is against immigration. When you speak to him, there is a, he has expanded the number of, H1B visas that were made available when he was president. If you look up his programs for us, you can believe it. he favors, he favors quite a significant increase in the number of, legal migrants. But it is illegal. It is illegal immigration, and taking tougher measures to oppose it. And again, I'm not defending some of the plans that Donald Trump has, and I'm certainly not defending the language that he uses, but it's that illegal immigration that I think the Republican Party is. Pretty well unified in, in CountingDown.

3 38:49

So one of, one of the, opponents to the, to, a prior, attempts to, to control immigration, Ambassador Rooney, mentioned labor unions. I want to ask a question about labor unions now. The blue wall that is, that put Joe Biden in Vis in its 2020 Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin is also the home of, traditional strength of, of labor unions, Pennsylvania, steel workers unions, Michigan Auto Workers Unions, and, Teamsters. Recently, although the auto workers and steel workers endorsed Vice President Harris, the Teamsters refused to endorse a candidate this time around. In fact, for the first time in decades, they didn't endorse a Democratic president. What role is, are Lincoln Union Generals playing in this election, particularly if they're not unified behind one, down to the crows?

4 39:48

Let's start with me, there we go. Yeah, I one thing that just contextually is too, that is important to point out is. relatively speaking, the declining power of labor unions in America, right? when I was a kid, about a quarter of all workers were in unions. Now it's going to be 10%. that matters. that's significant. I think, a union like the Teamsters was in a bit of a pitbull this time around because a lot of its members like Trump, and the head of the RNC, he says he wasn't invited to speak at the American convention, but he did it. And we normally think of Democrats as typically being close to labor, closer to labor. but you do have at least rhetorically, something of a transition in the Republican party, especially in the Senate is folks like Josh Hawley, JD Vance, speaking in far more pro labor, economic populist kind of terms, which have scrambled the politics of labor, in ways that make it less. less predictable than it was before. so this is not an area of expertise, but I think that it's one of those areas, where the, and, you can see it in, in relation to, to tariff policy, and other things that, that deal with manufacturing, for instance, where the positions of the party have gotten more, less predictable, more complicated in ways that, might give, those unions, a little bit more, more sway in being able to pick and choose their moments.

7 41:11

They

3 41:12

had better use them.

7 41:13

I'm a little uncertain about this, in the sense that It's, you're right to point out the fact that the, Teamsters, for example, didn't take a position on candidate, lots of subgroups within the Teamsters have been coming out in support of Harris. Some of them have, that's for sure. in states like Pennsylvania and Michigan, there's no question that it's an important issue for the state as a whole and the election college. But it might, there, there are other cross cutting factors. The role of Palestinians in a state like Michigan, a long coded, independent or not, they wouldn't vote on the primary four of the Republican, the Democratic candidate. we'll have to see whether the labor issues, the racial, ethnic issues, the ethnic issues in Michigan in particular, catch each other out. Which is a possibility.

5 42:04

Sure. Can you talk about those? Yeah. Just, one thing we should obviously be careful of is the seamless between public sector unions, predominantly white collar public sector unions, and what we used to call sort of blue collar traditional, industrial unions. The white sector unions have been enormously important, obviously, to the Democratic Party. Now those public sector unions are still enormously important. Teachers unions, other public employees. Units raise huge amounts of money very quickly in organizing, and will continue to be. And secondly, to, on Carlos's point, and to so develop that distinction between blue collar and white collar unions. because of this point that the people like Joshua Lee and J. D. Mance are making much more of an explicit, effort of outreach to unions, but also broadly to working class voters. Reflects the, simply, the dramatic realignment we've seen in democratic trends in terms of voting in this country over the last, steadily over the last 20 years, but particularly accelerating, in the last five or 10 years. when I was a young man and first came to the United States, the, unions were working class people, were heavily democratic. They're going to democratic, they're enormous numbers. They thought there was. representing their economic interests. That was its primary and economic issue. The kind of professional classes, the public sector or private sector, tended to be conservative, tended to be more likely to vote Republican in very broad terms. In the last 10, 15 years, we've just seen this dramatic flip there now, where more and more working class voters now, as a result, emphasizing cultural issues of identity, issues of national Solidarity, are voting, and of the, social issues are in many much greater for Republicans. The Democrats are very much the party now of, dare I say, it was a sort of a Marxian term, they lost the party of the, the ruling classes, very much the party of the elites. And again, just look at, for example, if you want them clear, it's a demonstration of that. Look at, look at the, look at how people vote according to whether or not they've got a college degree. the gap between, college degree, people with college degrees and without college degrees and their voting day is wider and it's going to be in 2024. Goodwill polls even widened the 7 million for people culturally overwhelmingly voting Democratic and people without culturally overwhelmingly voting, Republican, again, in larger numbers than we've seen in the last two elections. So it's part of, so this issue of unions and what role they play is getting caught up, I think, in this broader political realignment, which I expect will continue. We may see, again, In the, in those northern industrial, Rust Belt states as they go in the election, we may see, that's, Trump of course famously won those states in 2016, and that's the key to his election. And I think once again, whether or not he wins in those states, and is able to pull enough of those working class voters to polls,

3 44:45

So I want to ask, I'm going to switch gears and ask a question about foreign policy. So I'm going to start with the person, with the ambassador in front of us today. so Ambassador Rudy, it's, have articulated, what I think are distinctive positions on foreign policy, and in particular, President Trump has expressed that, dissatisfaction or skepticism about our, our, commitments abroad and in particular NATO, our commitment to defend Taiwan in the event of the Chinese invasion, and other, American commitments abroad. President, Vice President Yarris, we don't really have a lot of information about her, about foreign policy positions other than what she articulated during her, acceptance speech in the Democratic National Convention that she talked about Israel's right to defend itself, but to moderate its response. in a humanitarian way, what are the things, that we should be worried about with regard to foreign policy, depending on who wins this election?

8 45:48

about everything. Just about everything. The world is built this way. It's not, it's been created by some bipartisan foreign leadership quite frankly. And we, we've shown weakness. In the face of heinous authoritarian rulers, like in Vermont, like in Enduro and in Venezuela. And that really gets, makes them worse than they would've been. And now law powering these Houthis, Saudi Arabia, we're trying to get Saudi Arabia to go kill'em off and they couldn't do it. So now we're down there, they shoot a$300 drone to us, we shoot backward the Patriot missile, we gotta improve the economics of how we're gonna take on this. And now you have the. The, Iran backed activities of Hezbollah and Hamas, are responding in part to President Trump's very successful effort to bring the moderate Sunni Arab states into a diplomatic relationship with Israel, which drove Iran crazy. And every other Shia, okay? Shia in Syria, Shia in Lebanon. And how are we going to deal with that? we have our proxy, Israel did. And I do worry that Paris, based on some things she said, and her allegiance to Biden, now she's never going to say, I'm not for supporting Israel. That would be a political tap. I think she's going to be yin and yang a little more, like Biden has, as far as, we really can't have, innocent people killed. no one wants innocent people killed, but when Hamas and Hezbollah are using the basement of hospitals as their command post, innocent people better get killed. And I worked very hard during the war, 2006, to try to make sure that Israel could polish those guys off, Hezbollah, and not let them order. So that's a problem to me is the Middle East right now. The, the, Activity with China, I'd say I'm not sure any of the armadillos know how to dig at China. We need Ronald Reagan back there to dig at China.

1 47:41

I

8 47:42

mean, we talk out on both sides. And can you understand when they do try to do something, right? Which Biden's tried some things, as did Trump, to do some things with China. They picked the wrong weapons. I'm not a believer in terrorists. They've never worked for anybody in the history of the world. But supply chain realignment, denying China the ability to sell certain things in our country, developing capability to, to make those things elsewhere. Those are real. Those are certain. Those can be done. And some of the things that we're taking, doing now, in some of the bills that Biden quite frankly put forth are enabling us to get back into chip business. So we should be doing that. And the last thing, we've got to have the backbone. To fight our large corporations in this country and believe in large corporations. Okay. But it took Delta and Marriott exactly one hour to take down their websites that showed Taiwan on it when China raised its formal protests. that's not leadership. Companies were beating on both Trump and Biden to have loopholes to the tariffs. Tariffs are going to become a boondoggle for lobbyists to get in and get their little cubbyhubble of an exception. That's another reason.

3 48:47

Diane Pitter, I saw you shaking your head when I was asking my question.

7 48:50

I mean I can't say anything other than this is an ambassador and certainly my efforts of trying to figure out how to answer your question ended up about the same place. Number one, we're in a lot of difficulties. some of Trump's comments. Assumptions, we didn't mention Putin, specifically in your questions, but, he assumed, Trump assumes he's going to settle, the Ukraine situation before he's even inaugurated. No, that's not a solution. North Korea, he and Kim Jong un can resume their love affair. it's a real, it's a real scary, situation. There's no easy answers for either of the candidates, I think. At least one of these issues. around the Middle East, North Korea, they're all problematic. And I'm talking, the ambassador said it I'll just quote him. there's been bipartisan corporate fault on these issues. They're all in some difficulty. So I agree with this.

5 49:49

Yeah, I don't disagree. Look, I think that the world is a very, is in a very troubling state right now. What we really have going on, is this, de facto or increasingly well established, okay, Euro alliance between China, Russia. Iran in particular and North Korea. and they are challenging, the West's, traditional power, the United States, most importantly, traditional power, Russia and Ukraine, Iran by supporting the efforts of both Hamas and Hezbollah against Israel. and China continues to challenge, the U. S. and the Asian allies, Asian, U. S. Asian allies in all kinds of ways, in the Pacific. And I, and North Korea, meanwhile, is doing its own thing, but also, supplying, various countries with various weapons. And so far, unfortunately, they're making all the progress. They're making all the running. Russia, I'm very much hoping that we'll continue to support Ukraine, but I'm not sure that what's gonna be in terms of what Ukraine is trying to achieve. Because Russia's strength is just, so I don't see it. we and NATO are not prepared to put, our lives, our servicemen and women's lives at risk there, so they're gonna, they're gonna get more or less what we want there. I worry about what's happening in the Middle East, especially with, so many countries, the mood in Europe is very empty, it's really, right now, and I think Israel is under tremendous pressure, and I do worry about whether Harris will be as staunch in our support of Israel. And China again is, although it's economic challenges, it's not strategically being significantly challenged by the U. S. My view about it in terms of the difference between the two and this, I'm worried about both of them in terms of foreign policy. I think Harris will continue just I don't, with great respect to her, she's not really paid a lot of attention to foreign policy. she's got some good foreign policy advisors around her that I think would be, fine. They will follow a very conventional, foreign policy that's characterized most of U. S. foreign policy since the end of the Cold War, which is to work with alliances, not really probably face up to the sort of really significant challenges the U. S. faces. With Trump, it's all personality. it's, exactly as the professor said, is he in love with, Kim Jong un? Does he think he can get it? It's all about doing a deal, and I don't think this is the, I don't think doing a deal With Russia or the Ukraine or with China, Taiwan or with Iran over, you might even do it, where Israel is, is good. So I worry about both candidates. Like one is too, predictably conventional, following pulses that really haven't really succeeded in the last 10 years. And the other is just too unpredictable and et cetera. I'll just end by saying, I still have faith that things will turn out right in the end. And, Winston Churchill subscribed to various people, but it's famously, Winston Churchill was supposed to have said, the U. S. can always be reliable to do the right thing, but only after it's exhausted every other chance.

3 52:26

You know what I mean? as we're running out of time, Carlos, I want to give you the last word on Sean Paul's influence.

4 52:33

What to add after this? We need to think not to just to be navel gazing and get an anger in what's happening here in November. polling suggests that, Americans give a slight edge to Kamala Harris on matters of foreign policy in terms of, dealing with, with enemies, with, dealing with China, dealing with the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East. That said, voters in swing states give the edge to Trump on those same issues. so it made me that, Paris holds an overall advantage and Trump pulls the advantage in the places that, that not. all I would do is try to think of it in near term and long term challenges. Gaza is right now, Russia and Ukraine is right now, longer term, I think, the question of what kind of world you want to live in a world where China sets the rules of the road on, how the international system functions on economic and political issues, is less a world I want to live in than one in the United States, attempts to set those rules. I think, that challenge is significant. I think in Paris might fold a slight, edge, in at least the willingness to deal with. Traditional or conventional, alliances. Trump's unpredictability is often sold by Republicans as a good thing. Leaders don't know what he's going to do. So they won't, they won't get involved, but actually his susceptibility to flattery, for instance, makes them really rather predictable in times. and that's part of the, part of the difficulty there, though, I, I worry saying too personality based. But in the end, that's what people vote on. People, we can talk about grand theories of foreign policy and national system, people vote, the party or the person.

3 54:06

with that, I'd like you to all to join me in thanking our panel.