On today’s program: Morgan Griffith, U.S. Representative for Virginia’s 9th district, talks about the new wave of tariffs that kicked in this week, the president’s call for a new U.S. census, and the latest on immigration. Lt. Col. (Ret.) Bob
SPEAKER 22 :
from the heart of our nation’s capital in Washington, D.C., bringing compelling interviews, insightful analysis, taking you beyond the headlines and soundbites into conversations with our nation’s leaders and newsmakers, all from a biblical worldview. Sitting in for Tony is today’s host, Jody Heiss.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, good afternoon. Welcome to this Thursday edition of Washington Watch. I’m Jody Heiss, senior fellow here at the Family Research Council. Honored to be sitting in today for Tony, and thank you for joining us as well. All right, coming up on this edition of Washington Watch, Israel’s security cabinet is meeting right now. They’re talking about the potential full-scale military occupation of the Gaza Strip. And according to Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, that is exactly the intention.
SPEAKER 09 :
Will Israel take control of all of Gaza?
SPEAKER 01 :
We intend to, in order to assure our security, remove Hamas there, enable the population to be free of Gaza, and to pass it to civilian governments. That is not Hamas and not anyone advocating the destruction of Israel. That’s what we want to do. We want to liberate ourselves and liberate the people of Gaza from the awful terror of Hamas.
SPEAKER 08 :
That, of course, was Prime Minister Netanyahu earlier today with Fox’s Bill Hammer just moments before he actually headed into the meeting. So what would a full-scale takeover of the Gaza Strip look like? I’ll be discussing that in just a little while when I’m joined by retired Lieutenant Colonel Robert McGinnis. He and I will also talk about what may be ahead for Russia and Ukraine following yesterday’s meeting between U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Russian President Vladimir Putin.
SPEAKER 20 :
I do think that the talks that Ambassador Woodcock had with Putin and his team over the last few hours is good because we now have a sense at least of what it is they would require. It may not be what Ukraine can accept, but at least it gives us an outline to work off of. And now we’ve got to see how much we can move the two sides towards each other.
SPEAKER 08 :
That was US Secretary of State Marco Rubio yesterday, and we’ll be talking about all of that a little later in the program. And in other international news, the latest round of President Trump’s tariffs took effect today. The administration insists that tariffs are working. Well, are they? I’ll be discussing the latest on the trade wars when I’m joined in just a moment by Virginia Congressman Morgan Griffith. He is a member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. And speaking of wars, there’s another battle taking place right here in our own country between pro-life state officials and pro-abortion state officials. And right in the middle of it all, Massachusetts is poised to be the next state to embrace a law to protect abortionists who are trafficking abortion drugs into pro-life states. Wow. We’ll be talking about that when I’m joined by pro-life Attorney General Tim Griffin from Arkansas. And then lastly, you’ve probably heard by now about all the commotion taking place in Texas where Democrat House members there are missing in action. We discussed this earlier in the week. Well, if you want to get a better understanding of redistricting, of gerrymandering, and what all the fuss is all about, well, then you want to join us here in just a little while when I’m joined by Hans von Spakovsky of the Heritage Foundation who will lay all that out for us. So as usual, we’ve got a lot to bring your way today. You don’t want to miss a second of it. But if you do, you can always go back and catch it at our website, TonyPerkins.com. I encourage you to check out that website for past programs as well and a host of resources that are available for you. I also want to encourage you now, right now, you want to get some information on our upcoming program. Pray, Vote, Stand Summit. This is a powerful summit. It’s going to be taking place October 17th and 18th in Chino Hills, California. Right now, I encourage you to check out PrayVoteStand.org for all the details on that. All right, let’s jump into our first item for today. The latest round of President Trump’s tariffs are taking effect today. And it’s hitting a substantial portion of the world’s nations with tariffs on a wide, wide range of goods that are imported into the United States. Everything from Japanese cars to Swiss chocolate to spices from India. I mean, you pretty much name it. All of these things are now going to be slapped with additional costs. So how will this affect American consumers at the checkout line? I will hear now to discuss this and more is Congressman Morgan Griffith. He serves on several House committees, including the Powerful Energy and Commerce Committee. He represents the 9th Congressional District of Virginia. Congressman Griffith, always great to see you, my friend. Welcome to Washington Watch.
SPEAKER 12 :
Good to see you, Jody.
SPEAKER 08 :
All right, so your thoughts on President Trump’s latest round of tariffs taking place today. What do you think of it?
SPEAKER 12 :
Well, these are all things that he announced that he was going to do in the past. And various nations have come forward. He’s entered into a number of historic deals with Europe, with Japan, etc. And so a lot of these are the taking effect of the deals that he’s made. But then you have countries that didn’t come to the table and negotiate. And That’s what they need to do. The president’s made it very clear that he’s more than willing to negotiate with those who are interested in working with the United States and getting a fair deal for both countries and both institutions, whether it’s Europe or whether it’s Japan or some other country. And if you’re not interested in doing fairness, then we’re not interested in doing business with you. And I think it’s appropriate that the president is putting America as the first priority as opposed to an afterthought when we’re looking at the world economy.
SPEAKER 08 :
Yeah, you know, there was a lot of fear mongering. I think it’s probably the best word when President Trump first announced these new tariffs several months back. But now that we have a little water under the bridge, looking back, what’s your overall assessment of the results, at least so far that we’ve seen?
SPEAKER 12 :
i think it’s working so far i mean obviously we want to be careful that we don’t see consumer prices go up as a result of that substantially what we want to do is bring back american manufacturing that this will help with that i think that’s going to be positive for the country and then it just creates a fair system for us to be able to export our products into some of these countries that have previously had unreasonable limitations or unreasonable tariffs on our products. And now we’re going to look for more reciprocal arrangements. I think that’s appropriate. I think the president’s heading in the right direction. Does that mean everything’s going to work out perfectly? Of course not. Nobody can guarantee that, as you know. But I do think it’s putting America on the right footing for our economy to move forward in years to come. And I think even in the short run, it’s going to work out pretty good.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, I think you hit it right on the head, Congressman Griffith, about fairness. I think the American people probably don’t realize just how unfair the trade system has been around the world towards the United States. And it is refreshing, finally, to have a president who’s addressing that. If I can switch gears with you a little bit, earlier today, President Trump announced that he’s ordered the Commerce Department to begin work on a new census that will not include undocumented immigrants. Your take on that move?
SPEAKER 12 :
Well, I think that’s appropriate. Now, there’s some desire from some to have this all ready by the 2026 elections. I’m not sure the Census Department can get it ready by 2026, but not including illegal immigrants, I think is appropriate. If you’re here and you’re here illegally, you shouldn’t count it. I mean, we even had a Democrat congresswoman say that she needed those people to count for her numbers so that her district would still lean her way or make it easier for her. And that’s not what the census is about. That’s not what the… redistricting process is supposed to be about protecting members I mean it’s supposed to be plus or minus one person in a congressional district and plus or minus one person should mean US citizens not people who have come here illegally
SPEAKER 08 :
Yeah, so dive a little bit deeper into that, the importance and really the purpose of all of this. What’s the impact that you think will take place from cutting illegal immigrants from the count? What is really that all about?
SPEAKER 12 :
Well, it may make a difference within some of the states, but certainly when we get to the next decennial census every 10 years, if we set the stage now and get it straight and we get internal within the states, it means that you’re going to see a shift in the electoral college. It means that you’re going to see several states, California, New York, lose seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. And other states will pick those up, like Texas and Florida. And that’s why the Democrats don’t want to go there. And that’s why they, you know, have relied on illegal immigrants in the census. There’s a legal argument. We’ll have to see what the courts say. But I think the legal argument is on the side of the president in this case. I believe that it should be U.S. citizens and those that we have lawfully allowed into the country who are like green card holders. I think that’s fine to count them, but illegal aliens coming into our country, changing the demographics in such a way that Democrats are able to hang on to a few extra seats in the US House, that’s not what the process is about and not what it’s supposed to be about.
SPEAKER 08 :
Yeah. And so it all comes down ultimately to political purpose that’s been used through the census. And I think you’re spot on here. And, you know, we’ll all wait and see what the court system does with it all. But I think at the end of the day, you have to understand that this impacts people. the various voting districts and illegals are not even supposed to be voting in federal elections to begin with. So why should their presence have an impact on that? So it’s gonna be very interesting to see all this going forward. There’s some other news on immigration. Earlier this week, the US Department of Justice published a list of sanctuary cities, sanctuary states, Counties that are flouting federal immigration laws. Really, what do you think about all of this? What what do you think is going to come about with identifying these cities and municipalities and states and so forth that are sanctuaries?
SPEAKER 12 :
Well, I think it’s appropriate. Now, when they first came out with the list, I think they got a little confused, and they put a number of counties in my district on there because they had adopted sanctuary status for gun ownership, and there was a little bit of confusion on that, and we’ve gotten that all straightened out. But if you’re giving sanctuary to illegal guns, aliens in our country, then I think this list would encourage people maybe not to go to those cities on vacation, not to spend as much money there. And furthermore, the federal government and Congress needs to take a look at whether or not we should eliminate some of their federal funding. And the reason I say that is that we wouldn’t want to take away their federal support for burn grants and things that are helping the police. Because in many of these cases, even if the city or the county has gone over to being sanctuary, the law enforcement is still trying to do their job and I wouldn’t want to see them harmed in any way.
SPEAKER 08 :
So what do you think is going to happen with all of this? I mean, we now have a published list, and fortunately, as you mentioned, I wasn’t aware of the sanctuaries for gun owners, but we have the list coming up of some of these sanctuary cities and states and so forth. What’s the next step? What do you anticipate the Department of Justice to do? Is it going to be, as you just suggested, of perhaps cutting back on some funding of these or… I what what is going to transpire with this list, you think?
SPEAKER 12 :
Well, that would be up to the executive branch what they do with the list. What I would suggest that they do is that they take a look at this list. This is a. This is the first step that they put these folks on notice in the various counties and cities and say, you know, we may very well have to withhold some of your funding. I mean, you and I are both from southern states and you know, Those states back in the 1860s didn’t want to follow the federal law or were worried about what was going to happen with federal law and they decided they weren’t going to follow it. And it didn’t work out so good. And the same thing is true here. If you’re not following federal edicts, then you shouldn’t be getting federal money and you probably need to be ready for the federal government to take more action. I would start with the money and then we’ll go from there.
SPEAKER 08 :
Thank you so much, Congressman Morgan Griffith of Virginia. Always great to see you and great to have you on the program. We appreciate it very much.
SPEAKER 12 :
Thank you. Good to see you.
SPEAKER 08 :
All right, friends, coming up next, retired Lieutenant Colonel Bob McGinnis will be joining me to break down all the latest in the war between Israel and Hamas, as well as Ukraine and Russia. So stay tuned for that. We’ll be back in a moment.
SPEAKER 04 :
The family is the oldest, most tested, and most reliable unit of society. It is divinely created and sustained. And yet, there are those who are always tampering with its values and structure. That’s why we need organizations like the Family Research Council that can effectively defend and strengthen the family.
SPEAKER 22 :
Family Research Council began over 40 years ago, like all great movements of God, with prayer. Today, rooted in the heart of the nation’s capital, FRC continues to champion faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview.
SPEAKER 24 :
FRC is one of those bright lights that helps us focus on true north. And I shudder to think had they not been here that it could have been worse, worse, worse.
SPEAKER 06 :
The Family Research Council is key. It’s one of a handful of groups that I think will determine whether our children live in a country that enjoyed all of the freedom and all the opportunity that we enjoyed in this great land.
SPEAKER 03 :
It’s just a wonderful parachurch organization that doesn’t seek to take the place of the church, but it seeks to assist the family and the church as we try to move forward successfully, not in a defensive mode, but in an offensive mode as we seek to live our lives according to the Holy Scriptures.
SPEAKER 23 :
FRC is not going to be whooped. You know, we’re going to fight. We’re going to take a stand. And again, we don’t retreat.
SPEAKER 09 :
You will never see in front of this building here in Washington, D.C., a white flag flying. We will never step back. We will never surrender. And we will never be silent.
SPEAKER 13 :
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen His glory. Family Research Council invites you to join our Stand on the Word Bible reading plan as we reflect upon the life of Jesus, the Word who dwelt among us. Come with us and discover the glory of the Word. Read the Gospels and witness the life-changing story of Jesus, His life, death, and resurrection. Come read how Jesus transformed the lives of common people and how those same people transformed the known world through the power of the Holy Spirit. Come with us for 10 to 15 minutes a day and read the entire New Testament before the new year. Find our Bible reading plan and daily devotionals from Tony Perkins at frc.org slash Bible. Join us and stand on the word.
SPEAKER 08 :
You’re tuned in to Washington Watch. Thank you so much for joining us today. I’m Jody Heiss, an honor to be filling in for Tony this month. All right, ahead of the Israeli Security Cabinet’s meeting today on the potential full-scale military occupation of the Gaza Strip, Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu confirmed during an interview that Israel does indeed plan to seize temporary control of the Gaza Strip. So what are the potential impacts and implications of such a move? And what would it involve? Well, joining me now to discuss this is retired Lieutenant Colonel Robert McGinnis. He’s Senior Fellow for National Security at FRC and author of Preparing for World War III, A Global Conflict That Redefines Tomorrow. Wow. Colonel McGinnis, welcome back to Washington Watch. Great to see you, sir.
SPEAKER 14 :
Good being with you, Jody. Thanks.
SPEAKER 08 :
Okay, so what do you make of this potential takeover plan? First of all, is it feasible? And secondly, is it one that you think can actually be accomplished?
SPEAKER 14 :
Yes, I think it can be accomplished. It will not be easy, which is why the top generals have been warning Prime Minister Netanyahu that this could – James H. S. Really become something more like a Vietnam style quagmire if we’re not careful now keep keep in mind the IDF already occupied 75% of the Gaza Strip and so it’s the additional 25% that they would have to take over they’d have to move. clearly at least a million Palestinians southward. And then, of course, they’ll have to provide all sorts of provisions, the infrastructure, which would include hospitals and camps and feeding more people, obviously, which has been a problem up to now. And then, of course, the military offensive, going after well-rooted, well-informed encamped Hamas fighters that may die to the very end and take really a cost against the IDF that they’ve already paid to a certain degree. So it could be ugly, but I think that the options here are not very good.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, even as you speak, I believe it’s still going on. The security cabinet meeting is still taking place even as we talk right now. And I can only imagine some of the options like you just mentioned that are being discussed, what it’s going to take for them to accomplish the goal. Among other things, though, do you think that they’re going to need some sort of buy-in, if you will, from Palestinians who are there, who are frankly tired of the Hamas tyranny?
SPEAKER 14 :
Well, certainly the loss of life, the loss of personal effects, you know, is something they have to come to grips with. And the options, like I said, Jody, are not very good. Unfortunately, a lot of Hamas people are subterranean. There are many miles of tunnels underneath, and they’ll have to be rooted out, which will take a while. And of course, the Palestinian people will have to move elsewhere. And unfortunately as well, the Jordanians, the Egyptians, and others in the Middle East have been unwilling to take refugees from Gaza because they have a pretty bad reputation even amongst their Arab brethren. So these are issues that no doubt that the Prime Minister is dealing with with his own people now and trying to figure out what the best course of action is.
SPEAKER 08 :
Wow, very, very complicated. So what happens on this end of things? What are some some ways that President Trump and his administration can rise up right now and support the Prime Minister and his goal?
SPEAKER 14 :
Well, Certainly, we’ve already provided $60 million worth of humanitarian relief, and we’ll need to increase that perhaps as they move south and the IDF moves in. At the same time, there’s a whole diplomatic issue. The UK, France, other nations have demonstrated that They want to embrace the idea of a Palestinian state, a two-state solution. Unfortunately, this just gives encouragement to Hamas to hang on as much as they can. So I would think that that’s something we’re going to have to do diplomatically to help the Israelis to finish off Hamas. No one in Israel wants Hamas to survive just because of its carnage in the past and the future would be something tantamount to what they’ve seen in the past. So this is a very humbling time for everybody involved.
SPEAKER 08 :
Yes, it is in a very fragile time as well. If I can shift gears with you, Lieutenant Colonel, over to the war between Ukraine and Russia. Yesterday, President Trump reportedly told European leaders that he plans to meet with Russian President Putin in person and then later a trilateral with Putin and Russia. Ukrainian President Zelensky. What are the expectations you think for these talks? What are they hoping to come out with? I mean, at the ultimate, I know ceasefire, but I mean, it’s probably not going to happen right away. So what do you think are the expectations going into these talks?
SPEAKER 14 :
Well, of course, we’re assuming this isn’t a ploy by Putin to agree to meet with Zelensky and Trump in order to delay what President Trump has put in place, and that is sanctions and tariffs. We’ve already reached out and touched the Indians who have been buying a lot of Russian energy. And of course, that has kept the war machine in Moscow moving forward. And so I think Putin wants to delay that or put it to an end. Will he come to the negotiation in the United Arab Emirates, as indicated, perhaps? Will he agree to peace? The conditions, according to Secretary Rubio, are pretty significant. They have to be overcome before President Trump will entertain the idea of sitting down with those two leaders. Because clearly up to this point, Putin has said he wouldn’t meet with Zelensky, and yet And that’s one of the conditions. So we’ll have to work those out. This is a quagmire itself that has lasted much longer than anybody expected beginning in February 22. And now here we are in August of 25.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, and of course, the sanctions are to take place tomorrow. So that certainly tightens the screws a little bit more on Putin. And it’s going to be very interesting to see how all of this goes down and shapes up. I want to thank you, retired Lieutenant Colonel Bob McGinnis, for your insights and your expertise on all of this. Deeply appreciate you joining us today on Washington Watch.
SPEAKER 14 :
Thank you, Jody.
SPEAKER 08 :
All right. Wow, so much happening all around the world. It literally seems like fireworks are everywhere. And it’s not just abroad. We have a lot taking place right here on our own soil, specifically our next topic. We’re going to deal with what’s happening with life. Battles between official leaders in pro-life states versus official leaders in pro-abortion states. Well, Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin will join me next to highlight what his state is doing to stand for life.
SPEAKER 21 :
Download the new StandFirm app for Apple and Android phones today. You can join a wonderful community of fellow believers. We’ve created a special place for you to access news from a biblical perspective. Read and listen to daily devotionals, pray for current events, and more. Share the Stand Firm app with your friends, family, and church members. And of course, stand firm wherever you go.
SPEAKER 02 :
At Family Research Council, defending the family isn’t just a mission, it’s our daily calling. Every team member at FRC uses their God-given talents to stand for biblical truth, protect life, and uphold religious freedom.
SPEAKER 05 :
Here at Family Research Council, we face many threats to the family. Threats that have been with us for some time. Abortion, the gender ideology threat, the attacks on marriage, the attacks on parental authority, and the attacks on religious freedom. We have to promote, support, strengthen, and incentivize family growth so families take their place in society in a place of honor.
SPEAKER 18 :
I’m defending the family by working in the Center for Biblical Worldview to provide cutting-edge research and resources for pastors, ministry leaders, and Christian parents.
SPEAKER 17 :
Through my work at the Washington Stand, I passionately defend what God has defined for marriage and family. I don’t see the Washington Stand as just a place to talk about cultural events. It’s a place to share biblical truth with the perfect outlet to advance and defend what God has defined as good, true, and beautiful.
SPEAKER 15 :
Because of you, we’re able to frame things in such a way that help Christians stand for truth on the things that matter most, like life, faith, family, and freedom.
SPEAKER 17 :
Thank you for standing with us.
SPEAKER 05 :
Thank you for your support. It is so critical to the work that we at Family Research Council are doing day to day as we support and strengthen the family. So thank you.
SPEAKER 08 :
Welcome back to Washington Watch. I am Jody Heiss. And thank you so much for being with us today. All right. I want you to hear how I want to introduce our next guest here. I want you to hear the backdrop. Last week in Massachusetts, Democrats there in the State House and the Senate announced that they had come to an agreement on radical legislation, friends, that would give legal cover to abortionists from lawsuits in other states. And this legislation would also help these abortionists conceal their identities when they’re shipping abortion drugs into pro-life states. And to make matters worse, as if that were not bad enough, it would also require Massachusetts Hospital to perform so-called emergency abortions. I mean, this is truly just disturbing stuff. And quite frankly, it’s legislation like this that pro-life state attorney generals are calling on Congress to take action. And here now to discuss this is one of those attorney generals from Arkansas, Tim Griffin. Attorney General Griffin, welcome to Washington Watch. Thank you so much for joining us.
SPEAKER 11 :
Thanks for having me on. I appreciate the opportunity to talk about this.
SPEAKER 08 :
Yeah, it’s a big deal. And so I just laid out what’s happening in Massachusetts. So give me your reaction to this Massachusetts bill that, frankly, the governor there is expected to sign into law.
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, it’s more of the same, and some of the predicate is really false. So I’ve got the article here where the governor says that this is all about making sure that people in Massachusetts are getting the health care that they need. The letter that we wrote Congress regarding the shield laws and this Massachusetts law does some of what we’ve been concerned about. But that letter that the AG signed to Congress is not about Arkansas AG or another states AG reaching into a state regarding their policy or their law. It’s about states like Arkansas enforcing our own laws. And not being hampered from that. And here’s the backdrop. As a general matter. Law enforcement, AGs, state police, prosecutors, federal, state, across the country, red state, blue state, generally speaking, we work together. We work cooperatively. If there’s a crime in one state and another state needs access to records or whatever, there’s all sorts of cooperation, collaboration. That what’s happening here is an exception to that general rule. So what they’re trying to do is, as you mentioned, hide the identity of some of the people who are encouraging Arkansans, people that live in my state, to break our law. right there’s also in some of these states new york’s another one there is an attempt to put up roadblocks to cooperation for example we may want to issue a subpoena in another state and what these shield laws do is they say we’re not going to help We’re not going to help Arkansas reach out and enforce their laws the way you normally would, whether it be a consumer issue, which is usually a civil issue, or whether it be a criminal issue, we normally would get that cooperation. But these shield laws and these policies of these left wing governors and legislatures in these states are basically saying on this issue on the sanctity of life we are not going to cooperate with people like me in getting me information and allowing me to uh subpoena records or what have you and so I actually am an advocate for the states being in charge of the abortion issue, the Dobbs case, but this is not about that. This is about the federal government putting a law in place that will enable states to enforce their own laws regarding their citizens. Absolutely.
SPEAKER 08 :
Let me ask you this. We’ve only got about a minute or so left. There’s no question that what you bring up, there is a role for the federal government to get involved in this in spite of the fact that we’re being told it’s a state issue, it’s a state issue. There’s a role here for federal government. What is your response to these abortion doctors who claim that they’re providing, doing a public service by defying the law? We’ve only got less than a minute.
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, look, we know that abortion pills are not safe and effective. We also know that the fact that they’re admitting violating the law in the same sentence where they say they’re doing a public service, I think, speaks for itself. As I said, it is very routine for states to enforce their laws and to work with other states when necessary to enable that enforcement and in this case these states are so anti-life are so pro-abortion that they want to set all of that cooperation aside and ensure that their individual that their doctors or others can market abortion and conduct.
SPEAKER 08 :
Thank you so much. Attorney General Tim Griffin of Arkansas. Well done Sir. Thank you for standing strong and thank you for joining us today on Washington Watch. Our friends coming up next Heritage Foundation’s Hans von Spakovsky is going to join me with a deeper dive into the Texas redistricting saga. You don’t want to miss it. Stay tuned.
SPEAKER 19 :
Family Research Council is committed to advancing faith, family, and freedom from the East Coast to the West. So FRC is going to Southern California for this year’s Pray, Vote, Stand Summit, October 17th and 18th at Calvary Chapel, Chino Hills. Join us for this powerful gathering of Christians desiring cultural renewal and spiritual revival. The Pray, Vote, Stand Summit brings together Christian leaders, issue experts, and government officials for a time of prayer, inspiration, and action. Together, we will seek God’s guidance for our nation and engage in meaningful discussions on the intersection of faith, government, and culture. If the spiritual foundations and the cultural walls of our nation are to be rebuilt, we all have a role to play. May we each find our place on the wall as we build for biblical truth. Register now at PrayVoteStand.org. That’s PrayVoteStand.org.
SPEAKER 07 :
Jennifer, it’s so exciting to be here with you today talking about our new book, Embracing God’s Design. Who is actually going to benefit from reading this book in your view?
SPEAKER 15 :
There are so many different audiences that can benefit. The first one are counselors themselves, because we have some material in there where we really address the gender dysphoria diagnosis and what is wrong with it. We have information for people who are wanting to go back to embracing God’s design for their life.
SPEAKER 07 :
This is really magical to have the therapist and the individual who suffered come together and write about why this is happening and why we’re seeing this.
SPEAKER 15 :
And we brought all of that experience to the table. We want to see people walking in the fullness of who God has called them to be and not a false identity.
SPEAKER 04 :
Order today at embracethedesign.com.
SPEAKER 16 :
How should Christians think about the thorny issues shaping our culture? How should Christians address deceitful ideas like transgenderism, critical theory, or assisted suicide? How can Christians navigate raising children in a broken culture, the war on gender roles, or rebuilding our once great nation? Outstanding is a podcast from The Washington Stand dedicated to these critical conversations. Outstanding seeks to tear down what our corrupt culture lifts up with an aim to take every thought and every idea captive to the obedience of Christ. Whether policies or partisan politics, whether conflict in America or conflict abroad, join us and our guests as we examine the headlines through the lens of Scripture. and explore how Christians can faithfully exalt Christ in all of life. Follow Outstanding on your favorite podcast app and look for new episodes each week.
SPEAKER 08 :
Hope you are having a great day. Welcome back to Washington Watch. I’m Jody Heiss, an honor to be filling in today for Tony. Before I dive into this last segment, I want to again encourage you to join FRC and a host of other like-minded believers for our PrayVote Stand Summit. It’s going to be taking place on October 17th and 18th this year in Chino Hills, California. Friends, this is an incredible event, a powerful event, bringing Christian leaders and experts on various issues together, government leaders. There’ll be times of prayer, tons of inspiration, calls to action. So if you’ve not already registered, I want to encourage you to do so today. To learn more about it and to register, visit PrayVoteStand.org. Okay, the saga of the runaway Texas Democrats. It all continues. In fact, earlier today, Republican Senator John Cornyn announced that FBI Director Kash Patel has approved his request to help state and local law enforcement locate those runaway Texas Democrats who fled the state in an attempt to prevent the Republicans there from redistricting. Well, the State House Democrats are attempting to prevent the Texas State House from achieving a quorum, which is necessary for them to do business and to redistrict. So what is the redistricting effort in Texas all about? Well, joining me now to unpack all of this is Hans von Spakosky. He is the election law reform initiative manager at Heritage Foundation and senior legal fellow at Heritage when meets the third Center for Legal and Judicial Studies. Hans, always great to have you. Thank you for joining us on Washington Watch.
SPEAKER 10 :
Well, John, it’s nice to actually talk to you again since you and I have known each other a long time.
SPEAKER 08 :
Long time and man, I just always have utmost respect for you and this issue. I think it’s important for our viewers and listeners try to wrap their brain around what all is going on here. And there’s of course there’s been a lot of attention this week on these Texas House Democrats and what they’re doing. But let’s start if we can. Hans, if you can just explain for us what redistricting is all about in the issues that are at stake here.
SPEAKER 10 :
Well, redistricting is when the state legislature in almost every state, although there are exceptions to some states, draw the boundary lines of political districts in the state. And that’s usually everything from congressional districts, of course, to the boundary lines of the state legislative districts. What’s at issue right now in Texas? are the congressional districts. These were drawn up in 2021 after the 2020 census, but the reason this is going on now, five years later, after the 2020 census, is frankly because of some changes in the law and the fact that the Justice Department has warned Texas that it has got to fix problems with four current congressional districts in the state of Texas, which, frankly, unconstitutionally, illegally used race as a predominant factor when they were drawing the lines. And you can’t do that.
SPEAKER 08 :
So Texas has really been ordered, I guess is the right word, from the Justice Department to do this. Is that correct?
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah, that’s right. And when they did this back in 2021, they thought they were obligated to do so, to draw up what they call coalition districts. So these are districts where two different racial minority groups, when combined together, are more than 50% of the voters in a district. They thought they had to do it. Why? Well, because the Court of Appeals that covers Texas, that’s the Fifth Circuit, had issued a decision almost 40 years ago saying that those kind of what they call coalition districts are protected and required by the Voting Rights Act. Well, last August, in another case coming out of Texas, Galveston County, the Fifth Circuit said, you know what? We made a mistake. when we decided that, and these kind of political alliances between different racial groups, that is not covered and not protected by the Voting Rights Act.
SPEAKER 08 :
Wow. So here we go. We have a host of Texas Democrats who have fled the state trying to prevent a quorum so that legislative action can’t take place. And I mentioned coming into this segment that Senator Cornyn has asked the FBI to get involved. Let me ask you, can the FBI or some other federal agency actually charge Illinois state officials for actively harboring these Texas Democrats?
SPEAKER 10 :
Well, they can’t, but they can help the state of Texas locate these folks and potentially get extradition of them. The reason for that is that the last time the Democrats did this walked out to prevent a quorum was was also back in 2021, and why did they do it? Well, they didn’t want to vote on election integrity reform bills that Texas was passing, including putting in a voter ID law. So they changed the rules, they changed the law in Texas that say that legislators who abscond are not only subject to arrest, they can be fined $500 a day. If when arrest warrants are issued, Jody, you know that state arrest warrants, no matter what they’re for, if someone flees a state, the FBI always steps in and tries to help a state find somebody who has violated state law, and that’s the situation here.
SPEAKER 08 :
This is just absolutely fascinating how this is unfolding. And of course, Texas Governor Greg Abbott has ordered these Democrats, as you just mentioned, arrest on civil warrants. So if you can, Hans, what’s the difference like in a case like this between a civil arrest warrant and maybe a criminal arrest warrant?
SPEAKER 10 :
Well, with a criminal arrest warrant, the only difference is that you can’t be charged criminally when you’re brought into court. A civil arrest warrant, you can be arrested, you can be brought back to Texas, and you can be fined. They just can’t put you in jail for it. So if they can find these folks, they can bring them back to Texas. And, you know, it’s not just the FBI that’s involved, but the very legendary Texas Rangers, who also are now involved in trying to find these folks and bring them back. Now, the thing is, remember, this was a special session, Jody, and you know what that is. They weren’t in regular session. The governor called them in. That special session, I think, has only got about another week and a half before it expires. But even if they can’t get enough Democrats back to get a quorum, the governor, Governor Abbott, has the power under the state constitution of Texas to call another special session. And he can keep doing that one after another, one after another, until they can get enough Democrats back actually to form a quorum and to vote on this plan, which has five new congressional districts.
SPEAKER 08 :
Wow. So is that what you anticipate ultimately is going to happen? It sounds like these Democrats fleeing are actually just trying to buy time until the special session expires. So do you think the governor is going to just call another special session?
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah, I think he will. And I think he will use that to, like I said, try to round them up enough to bring them in. Again, going back to history, 2021, when they fled the state to avoid a vote on election reforms, eventually they brought enough of them back, enough of them came back so they could hold a vote. on that particular bill, which, by the way, was then challenged in court, as you would expect. And just within the last couple of days, the same Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals upheld that law, saying it was perfectly legal, perfectly constitutional, and was not discriminatory or unlawful, as Democrats had claimed. As you know, they’re making the same kind of claims right now.
SPEAKER 08 :
So what’s going to happen with that, your guess?
SPEAKER 10 :
I think this plan eventually is going to pass. They will get sued, but I think if they get sued, the state of Texas, they’re going to lose. Because like I said, all of this is being done to comply with a new decision by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. And I don’t think that any lawsuit filed by Democrats, which will eventually get to the Fifth Circuit, I don’t think the Fifth Circuit is going to say that somehow this new plan was wrong when in fact, the legislature drafted up in order to comply with a decision of the Fifth Circuit.
SPEAKER 08 :
Wow, that’s fascinating. So in the process here, do you think we’re going to see some of these booted from their office for this stunt? I know that’s on the table as well.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah, there is a statute in Texas that Ken Paxton, the Attorney General, has cited, and so has the governor, that allows a local court to declare that a particular legislator has abandoned his office. Now, in order to do that, the attorney general’s got to actually file a lawsuit, and a court will make that determination. And Paxton has warned that if folks aren’t back by Friday, the 8th of August, then he will start filing lawsuits to try to convince local judges that these folks have abandoned their seats, which would then give the governor the ability to potentially appoint replacements and then have a special election.
SPEAKER 08 :
Wow, incredible. I wish we’d go on with this, Hans, but let me move on. Another big issue, yesterday President Trump instructed the Commerce Department, we talked about this a little bit earlier today, but to start work on a new census. Can you take us a little bit deeper into that, explain to us what this is really all about?
SPEAKER 10 :
Robert B. Well, you know, nor what the Constitution says is you have to have a census, at least once every 10 years, but there’s nothing that prevents the federal government from doing one more often. Robert B. This is actually justified doing a mid year census for for two really important reasons. One, Jody, as you know, we are one of the most highly mobile societies of any Western democracy. People move a lot. That is such a factor in Texas, for example, that since the 2020 census, the Census Bureau itself estimates that more than 2 million new residents have moved to Texas, huge number. But here’s the other big problem with the 2020 census. In 2022, the Census Bureau put out a report admitting that it had made serious errors Stephen Russell, Ph.D.: : In the 2020 census, they had over counted eight states had under counted the population of six states and those errors were so large that. Stephen Russell, Ph.D.: : Texas was actually cheated out of an additional congressional seated should have gotten Florida was cheated out of. Two, the Census Bureau didn’t count more than half a million residents of the state. Those errors and those mistakes are another, frankly, good reason why we ought to do another census.
SPEAKER 08 :
Wow. And this census this time will not count illegal immigrants. That likewise plays in all of this, what you’re talking about, doesn’t it?
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah, it does. And that’s a significant factor. As I’m sure you know, if, for example, states started using citizen population to redistrict instead of total population, it would very much change the political boundaries of many congressional districts, particularly in places like Texas and Florida.
SPEAKER 08 :
So from your perspective, what does the Constitution? Where is where is that on this side of the issue between counting just citizens versus those who are here illegally?
SPEAKER 10 :
Well, we’ve been, we’ve actually, until recently, been asking on the U.S. Census whether or not somebody is a citizen or not. In fact, the first president to recommend that, and it got on the Census, was Thomas Jefferson. It was only during the Obama administration that they decided to take that question off so that we wouldn’t have any information about it. States can use citizen population for redistricting if we want to change apportionment. uh when the census bureau determines how many um members of the u.s house each state has right now that formula it’s a federal statute it’s based on total population that’ll take a change in the law passed by congress to change the apportionment formula from total population to citizen population they should do that that is the only thing that’s fundamentally fair to citizens who get to vote in our representational republic.
SPEAKER 08 :
Yeah, otherwise you have foreign interference. Yes, exactly right. Yeah, absolutely. Before I let you go, Hans, I wanted to throw this out to you real quickly. The Fifth Circuit, you mentioned them a while ago. They ruled that Texas can enforce state law that invalidates mail-in ballots that are submitted without proper voter ID. Unpack real quickly the significance of that for us.
SPEAKER 10 :
Well, that’s really important. As you probably know, Georgia passed a very similar requirement, and so have a lot of other states. Many states that had put in an ID before you can vote in person had a huge hole in that security, which was so many people are voting with absentee ballots, and they didn’t have to show an ID for that. And absentee ballots… as the court says in this case, are one of the biggest sources of election fraud in elections throughout the US. So putting in an ID requirement is extremely important in protecting the honesty and fairness of our elections.
SPEAKER 08 :
Yeah, I mean, this is common sense. We have to provide IDs for everything. Why would we not want IDs for the perhaps one of the most important things that a citizen can do in our country? Vote. It just seems like this ought to just be common sense and readily accepted. But there’s always a reason behind it, why they don’t want it.
SPEAKER 10 :
Right. That’s right. And listen, the American people, they disagree on many issues. This is one they all agree on. Overwhelming support for acquiring an ID.
SPEAKER 08 :
Overwhelming. Thank you so much, Hans von Spakovsky from the Heritage Foundation. Your expertise is always welcome on Washington Watch. We appreciate it very much. Thank you for joining us.
SPEAKER 10 :
Sure. Thanks for having me.
SPEAKER 08 :
All right, friends, that wraps up this edition of Washington Watch. Hope you have a fantastic rest of your evening. We look forward to seeing you again tomorrow right here on Washington Watch.
SPEAKER 22 :
Washington Watch with Tony Perkins is brought to you by Family Research Council and is entirely listener supported. Portions of the show discussing candidates are brought to you by Family Research Council Action. For more information on anything you heard today or to find out how you can partner with us in our ongoing efforts to promote faith, family, and freedom, visit TonyPerkins.com.
