In this episode of Washington Watch, Tony Perkins delves into the intensifying conflict between the United States and Iran, with military actions showcasing the might and strategy of America’s defenses. As tensions soar, the implications for global oil prices and domestic policies are explored, particularly within the context of the Strait of Hormuz. The strategic planning among House Republicans is also highlighted, focusing on legislative priorities aimed at addressing both national and global issues.
SPEAKER 06 :
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, Washington Watch with Tony Perkins starts now.
SPEAKER 07 :
Day 11, and as you know, we’re doing something that nobody ever thought was possible to do. Our military is the best, it’s the most powerful in the world, They’re hitting them very hard. Right now, they’ve lost their Navy. They’ve lost their Air Force. They have no anti-aircraft apparatus at all. They have no radar. Their leaders are gone. And we could do a lot worse.
SPEAKER 12 :
That was President Donald Trump earlier today, making it clear the United States is not finished with its military campaign against Iran. Welcome to this March 11th edition of Washington Watch. I’m Tony Perkins. Thanks so much for joining us today. epic fury is intensifying with renewed strikes against Iran, raising the stakes overseas. Meanwhile, here at home, House Republicans are wrapping up their three-day policy retreat in Florida, where they’ve been mapping out their political and legislative strategy heading into this year’s midterm election. Congressman Randy Fine will join us with the inside scoop on what the Republicans have discussed at the retreat. And later, Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri joins me to discuss his new Safeguarding Women from Chemical Abortion Act. a bill that would remove the deadly abortion pill, Mifeprestone, from the market. As airstrikes continue across the Middle East and tensions with Iran escalate, shipping in the Strait of Hormuz is under increasing threat. Three ships have been struck by what are believed to be Iranian drones. Joining me now is Washington Stand reporter Casey Harper. Casey, all right, give us the latest on today’s developments in the conflict.
SPEAKER 25 :
Sure, Tony. Thank you. So we actually saw the United Nations condemned Iran, an interesting move, for their attacks on Gulf states. And then all eyes have turned to the Strait of Hormuz. As you mentioned, three cargo vessels hit overnight. They’re not exactly sure what it was, but it was likely drones. They called them unknown Now, the Strait of Hormuz, as you know, is one of the most important shipping lanes in the world. A fifth of all oil for the globe goes through there. So it’s really been shut down by this war. And if that continues, it’s going to have huge economic impacts and gas prices in the U.S. have already risen. Iran knows that. And they’ve actually threatened that oil could go up to $200 a barrel, which is more than double what it was just a few weeks ago before this war started. Now, even worse, Iran has reportedly placed dozens of mines in the Strait of Hormuz. Sea passages are very difficult to find. You can use a very small boat to place these mines. So it’s very hard for the U.S. to keep track of it. And of course, that deters commercial shippers from using this even more. Now, President Trump has suggested that this campaign is pretty close to over. We’ll see if that’s the case. But here here’s a clip, actually, the president earlier today speaking to reporters about the conflict.
SPEAKER 07 :
Look, we dug out. just about all of their mine ships in one night. We’re up to boat number 60. I didn’t realize they had that big a navy. I would say it was big and ineffective. But every one of their ships, just about all of their navy is gone at the bottom of the sea.
SPEAKER 25 :
So far, Tony, there hasn’t been any indication that ships can sail safely through the Strait of Hormuz, which means, and likely means, high gas prices for Americans in the near future.
SPEAKER 12 :
You know, it’s interesting, Casey, back during the Obama administration, I remember meeting with former military leaders who were discussing the threat of the Strait of Hormuz when it came to our energy dependency upon that region. And that was a part of what fueled the first Trump administration in domestic production to get us off of that Middle Eastern oil. Unfortunately, it looks like we’re back to some degree after the Biden administration dependent upon Middle East oil. All right. I want to switch gears. House Republicans wrapping up their annual policy retreat in Florida, where they gathered to plan their legislative priorities and strategy for the rest of the year. What were the main takeaways, Casey?
SPEAKER 25 :
Sure, Tony. We can actually combine these two stories because President Trump is speaking right now and he’s talking about how these gas price increases that we mentioned are only temporary and that Republicans are focused on affordability, which is a big theme of these really high-stakes strategy meetings that you referenced going into these very important midterm elections. So House Republicans are reportedly looking to enact one last piece of legislation taking on these affordability concerns head-on. They want to show that Democrats are shutting down the government while Republicans are making lives more affordable for everyday Americans. Now, House Speaker Mike Johnson and President Trump are looking to retain the House by also going after Democrat Party’s image. Actually, new polling shows that 52 percent of Americans view Democrats unfavorably. They’re also shifting their stance on immigration a bit. They want to talk less about mass deportations and keep more focus on these violent offenders who are being deported, and there’s plenty of them to highlight. Republicans are really shifting from mass deportations to affordability, low taxes and pushing Democrats on their high tax and soft on crime policies, which we’re seeing, Tony, in places like Virginia and New York City, both crime and tax policies that don’t appeal to moderate voters.
SPEAKER 12 :
Yeah, it’s going to be… What’s happening in the Middle East, domestic issues being affected by the price of oil. I think people have to understand the long-term implications of this. So I think it’s incumbent upon Republicans to articulate why the actions the president is taking are so important. All right, Casey, thanks so much for the update. Thanks, Tony. All right, let’s get an inside perspective on the House Republican policy retreat. We’re joined now by phone Congressman Randy Fine, who has been participating in the annual gathering. He’s a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. He is also a part of the Judea and Samaria Caucus, which the Family Research Council helped launch. He represents the 6th Congressional District of Florida. Congressman Fine, welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks for taking time to step out and join us.
SPEAKER 14 :
Thank you for having me. It was a busy couple of days.
SPEAKER 12 :
It was. So give us the main takeaways of what took place in the meeting.
SPEAKER 14 :
Well, I mean, the president spoke to us on the first day, and that speech was broadcast live for everyone to see, laying out all of the things that we have done and the things that we need to do. And then we talked about what our priorities should be moving forward, both electorally and policy-wise, talking about the need to make America, to highlight the contrast between Republicans and Democrats. I think one of the things that’s very clear is Democrats’ priorities are protecting terrorists, protecting criminal illegal immigrants, and protecting Somali pirates. And Republicans are focused on cutting taxes, making America safe, and making sure our government functions. And we just need to hammer that home over and over and over again.
SPEAKER 12 :
Let’s talk a little bit about the intersection of the foreign policy with what’s happening in Iran and the domestic concerns with rising energy prices. Was there discussion about how to articulate why this is so important in the steps that this administration has taken to take on Iran and that existential threat that they pose to not just that region, but literally to most of the world if they were to obtain that nuclear weapon?
SPEAKER 14 :
Well, there was a little bit, but not a lot, because I think the sense of my colleagues and I is that this conflict will be measured in additional days. weeks this is not something that’s going to go on for months if you look at Iran the number of drones and rockets and missiles they’re firing each day continues to decline each day and they’re still firing some but the rate is slowing every day and I don’t think that’s because they’re trying to save them I think it’s because they’re being destroyed and their capabilities are being degraded so I think there is a sense that we will bring this in for a landing and fairly soon, and that will not only lower energy prices back to where they were, but they will come lower. Because something Americans need to understand is there is a two-tier oil price system, what China was paying and what the rest of the world was paying. China was buying oil at below market prices because they were buying it from Venezuela and they were buying it from Iran, where the oil was sanctioned. And so Iran had to sell it at discounted prices. Everyone else was paying it at market prices, which was much higher. Well, as that oil comes onto the world market, China will have to pay more because they’ll now have to pay market prices. But because there’s more oil on the market, market prices will come down. And so I think there’s a sense that over the next days, weeks, this will come in for a landing. Iran will choose to join the Western world. And I think the energy price issue will go away.
SPEAKER 12 :
And that will bring a situation of stability in the Middle East that we have not seen in, well, half a century. This could be huge because this allows the United States then to shift a lot of its focus to the Pacific realm, the Pacific region, where China is more of a threat. So this could be a big game changer for the United States and our national security.
SPEAKER 14 :
I think should we succeed in Iran, it will be a game changer akin to the falling of the Berlin Wall, because it will largely eliminate the chief sponsor of Muslim terror around the world. it will make the Middle East peaceful, which is something that has eluded everyone. But it will also have dramatic effects on our other two global adversaries, Russia and China. Russia is dependent on Iranian drones for its war with Ukraine. You lose that, maybe that changes that conflict. And China has been reliant on, again, discounted energy from places like Iran and Venezuela. You lose that, that may change that calculus. So it is a transformative thing for the world, and it makes America safer again, more prosperous again, and stronger. And it would be a huge win, and I think that’s where we’re going to end up in the coming days and weeks.
SPEAKER 12 :
Well, we’ve seen administration after administration just kind of kick the can down the road for the next administration or the next generation to have to deal with Iran. I applaud the Trump administration for taking this head on. Congressman Fine, I want to go back very quickly to the policy retreat. There had been some talks about a second reconciliation package following the passage of the one big, beautiful bill, but it sounds like that now is no longer on the table.
SPEAKER 14 :
No, no, I wouldn’t say that. I mean, the Speaker absolutely made clear, and I don’t think I’m betraying confidences in saying that, he would like to do a second reconciliation. And some of my colleagues got quite animated. They’re like, we can pass a reconciliation bill with just our votes. So that’s absolutely on the table. The challenge is Democrats hate America, so we don’t need to get a majority of the House to pass it. We have to get unanimity among Republicans. Because, look, we could do a reconciliation bill that would cure cancer, and Democrats would complain about what that would mean for cancer treatment centers and graveyards. I mean, so we have to pass a bill that we pass by ourselves. And so there is work to be done on that. But the overwhelming sense of the conference is we would like to do it. What can go in it, that’s still unknown.
SPEAKER 12 :
Well, that was the big accomplishment thus far has been the first reconciliation bill. Let’s talk about something that the House has focused on past a couple of times. And the president now has said he’s making it a top priority, and that is the Save America Act. Give us the discussion surrounding that.
SPEAKER 14 :
Well, the House is frustrated. I mean, we’ve passed this now a couple of times. Americans overwhelmingly believe that you should have to show a voter a photo ID to vote and you should have to prove that you’re a citizen when you register. This is a justifiable concern because Joe Biden let in tens of millions of people in four years and a lot of blue states gave out driver’s licenses and Social Security numbers. So concern over this is real, but the Senate won’t act on it. And so a number of Republican members have come out and said, I’m one of them. We will not vote for Senate bills until they make this happen. We have the majority in the Senate. You know, go back to a Mr. Smith goes to Washington style filibuster and let’s get this done. There is a great level of frustration at the Senate’s inability to work on this.
SPEAKER 12 :
Well, and just a handful of Republican members of the House could stop legislation from making its way through the House that comes from the Senate. So hopefully they’ll be listening. Congressman Randy Fine, I want to thank you for joining us. Always great to talk with you. Appreciate your insights and inside information.
SPEAKER 14 :
I appreciate you having me.
SPEAKER 12 :
All right, Congressman Randy Fine of Florida. All right, coming back, we’re going to talk about something that is really growing. A lot of people don’t know about it. It’s predictive markets. It’s a form of gambling, but it’s cloaked in business terminology, and it’s very dangerous. The Ohio… When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them.
SPEAKER 05 :
A decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident. That all men are created equal. That they’re endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.
SPEAKER 12 :
That among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men. Deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Happy 250th. Happy 250th. Happy 250th. Happy 250th birthday, America. May God bless America. You see, America has freedom for a purpose. The question is, are we living by that purpose today? See, the founders understood we as a nation would be accountable to God for what he had granted to us. They sought freedom for a purpose, and that freedom was given to us as a nation for that same purpose, to serve God, to honor him, and to live as a people under his authority.
SPEAKER 23 :
At the 2026 National Gathering for Prayer and Repentance in Washington, D.C., members of Congress, state leaders, evangelical leaders, and intercessors from across the nation united as one voice in prayer.
SPEAKER 09 :
Heavenly Father, thank you so much for this gathering. We do repent. And we ask for your continued favor and blessing over our nation, even when we don’t deserve it.
SPEAKER 05 :
I thank you that because of the shed blood and the glorious righteousness of your Son, Jesus Christ, a sinner such as myself can boldly approach your throne. You said that you helped the humble, and we are asking just now that you would help us, Lord.
SPEAKER 26 :
We pray that you humble us, help us to follow after you with all our hearts so that we can see righteousness exalted in this nation and this nation restored to you. We know that it’s not by our power, it’s not by our might, it’s by your spirit.
SPEAKER 12 :
Freedom has a name. His name is Jesus. And freedom has a purpose. It is to honor and glorify you. We pray that we would return to that purpose. Amen. Welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks so much for tuning in. All right. Kind of ran out of time there in the last segment. This week, a federal court ruled that the predictive platform, Kalshi, is subject to Ohio’s gambling laws, like PolyMarket, the largest cryptocurrency-based prediction market. Kalshi offers users a platform across diverse industries where users can essentially wager. Now, they argued that it’s contracts, so it should be treated differently as a financial trade rather than gambling, thereby allowing it to skirt state gambling laws. Now, these predictive markets have mushroomed, and there is bound to be some fallout. Joining us now to discuss this is the Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost. General Yost, welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks so much for joining us.
SPEAKER 11 :
Good to see you again, Tony.
SPEAKER 12 :
So you called the judge’s ruling a big win for Ohio. What do you make of this case? And before we get into the particulars of it, just kind of explain this, because most people are not aware that this is taking place.
SPEAKER 11 :
Yeah, so this is actually, oddly enough, kind of a child of the Great Recession. You’re Listeners and viewers may remember things called derivatives and credit swaps. These are basically contracts that derive, come from a financial contract, and so people used them as hedging opportunities, and they were unregulated at the time. So today there is a federal law that talks about these things, and Cauchy is saying, hey, the federal government preempted the states and said, you guys aren’t in charge anymore. We’ve taken the field, and the federal law is the law throughout the land. The problem with that is it used to be, and has always been since the founding of the republic, gambling was not a federal issue. It was what we call a police power that was reserved to the states. So that’s what this case was about. Did the federal government preempt the states? And the federal court in our case said no, they decidedly did not.
SPEAKER 12 :
So explain, what’s the difference between gambling and these predictive markets when it comes to sports contracts?
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, my feeling is that there’s not a lot of difference. In both cases, you’re basically making a wager about the outcome of some future event, and you either make money or lose your money based on that wager. Now, the… Kaushik contended that it was basically a derivative that should have fallen under the aegis of the federal government. We don’t think that that’s what it is. And in fact, when you’re making… a derivative about what’s going to happen in a ball game. That’s kind of classically bookmaking. It’s classically sports betting, which Ohio did legalize a couple of years ago. But our laws apply to that. Kaushik said that those laws don’t apply to them.
SPEAKER 12 :
So essentially they’re operating however they want, is what they want to be able to do.
SPEAKER 11 :
Exactly so. And that’s part of the problem. You’ve got two industries that are essentially doing the same thing, competing for the same base of customers. One’s got heavy regulation. One does not. That’s not really a free market. That’s a fettered market.
SPEAKER 12 :
To me, what these look like, it’s gambling cloaked in business terminology, and they’ve put this forward as a construct of business, but in fact, it’s just gambling by another name. And the economic and societal consequences are just the same, whether it is predictive markets or it’s going to your local bookie and gambling.
SPEAKER 11 :
Exactly so. If you don’t have the money for rent because it went to the bookie or the sports book or the predictive market, it’s the same thing. You know, I just heard earlier today somebody say, well, this is democratizing the truth. Predictive markets are basically taking everybody’s sense of what’s going to happen and democratizes the truth. I find that such an offensive phrase, Tony, as people who believe that there is such a thing as objective truth and it doesn’t change. It’s not one thing for one person or another thing at a different time. It’s offensive to think that democracy has anything to do with truth. Truth is just truth.
SPEAKER 12 :
And the truth is that gambling has negative consequences for society as a whole and individuals in particular. This particular case in Ohio, this was an injunction that was placed. The case has not been completely adjudicated yet. What are the next steps?
SPEAKER 11 :
So procedurally, Kalashe asked for a temporary restraining order against Ohio saying, make them not enforce their law against us. The judge said, no, you didn’t meet your burden of proof. I think what will happen next, because we are still free to enforce the law in Ohio, is that they will seek an emergency stay and an appeal to the Court of Appeals. And because these cases are starting to pop up around the country, I think this is probably eventually headed for the Supreme Court.
SPEAKER 12 :
Just about a minute left, General Yost. Is there concern that Congress might get on board with these predictive markets?
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, if they do, then at least we have the democratic process, the representative process where people can be heard and proper safeguards can be put into place. But we already do have, I don’t think it was a terribly good idea, but we’ve got sports gambling. Perhaps Congress should put some additional guardrails or regulation around sports predictive markets, at least as far as they are impacting sports betting. But what we shouldn’t do is have lawyers playing tricky games with words and saying, well, this word means what we’re doing and up is down. If we’re going to have an elephant in the room, let’s not hide it in a mouse hole, as Justice Scalia famously once said.
SPEAKER 12 :
Yeah, agreed. General Yost, thanks so much for joining us. Always great to see you. It’s good to see you, too. Thank you, sir. All right. Attorney General Dave Yost, everything has moved toward gambling and these predictive markets. Very concerned about where this is headed. We’re going to be exploring this a little bit more in the days ahead because I think Congress actually needs to head it off and stop it. Coming up next, the abortion pill front and center on Capitol Hill. We’ll talk about it with Senator Hawley. Don’t go away.
SPEAKER 13 :
I think all people really need to have this type of education.
SPEAKER 17 :
Well, I can tell you that it’s been an amazing course, period. I think this course is a reminder that a biblical worldview should really impact everything. It impacts our government from the federal to the state to the local. It should impact what we’re doing with our families and with our work.
SPEAKER 18 :
God and Government is a video-driven, Bible-based training course from Family Research Council that explores the connection between biblical principles and American government. In this six-session video series, FRC President Tony Perkins equips participants with a practical understanding of civil government from a biblical worldview.
SPEAKER 13 :
I would encourage all people to take it. I almost wish I would have took it earlier that I could have taught my kids this. I wish I had known these things when we were homeschooling because I think children and my adults now would just greatly be influenced by that information.
SPEAKER 24 :
So I’m an attorney, and for me, it gives me some direct practical knowledge of what I can do to try to impact my legal community, to make better legislation, to try to encourage legislators to make choices that have a biblical worldview, which is what we really want.
SPEAKER 02 :
Any pastor would benefit from taking this course because we are dual citizens, right? We are citizens of the kingdom of God, but we’re also citizens of this great land, and that comes with responsibility.
SPEAKER 17 :
Even as someone who has been involved in these types of issues for a while, you’re learning little bits and pieces of new stuff all the time. But it’s also approachable enough that newer people, younger people, high school, college students, they can really glean something from this. So… I would encourage everybody to take this course, whether it’s the videos, whether it’s doing it in person, bring your Bible study group through it, bring your homeschool group through it, and equip yourself for these challenging days ahead.
SPEAKER 18 :
View the course at frc.org slash God and government or on the Stand Firm app.
SPEAKER 12 :
Welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks so much for joining in on this Wednesday. By the way, I just got this. This was handed to me. We’ve been talking about the pray vote stand chapters that our goal in the next 10 years is have a chapter in every county. anchored in a church, every county in America. Just had 10 more just joined. Two new local chapters. We want to congratulate them. Shiawassee, Michigan, Burlington County, New Jersey, Kane County, Illinois, Clark County, Nevada, Putman County, Tennessee, Montclair, California, Knox County, Ohio, Loudoun County, Virginia, Hall County in Georgia, and Seminole County in Florida. So If you’d like to find out about how you can establish a PrayVoteStand chapter in your county, simply text the word CHAPTERS to 67742. That’s CHAPTERS to 67742. Join this rapidly growing movement as we look to begin to change America from the bottom up. Again, text CHAPTERS to 67742. All right. As the Trump administration continues to keep in place a Biden era policy that allows dangerous abortion drugs to be illegally trafficked across state lines, states are actually suing the FDA over this policy. But. Lawmakers on Capitol Hill are now stepping up. This week, in fact, today, legislation was introduced to take the abortion drug Mifeprestone off the market. Just hours ago, Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri announced the Safeguarding Women from Chemical Abortion Act. A companion bill will be introduced in the House later this week by Tennessee Congresswoman Diana Harshberger. So, Is the abortion drug, this Mifeprestone, reaching the end of its shelf life? Joining us now to discuss this by phone, Senator Josh Hawley, who serves on the Senate Health Committee. Senator Hawley, welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks for joining us.
SPEAKER 16 :
Thank you so much for having me.
SPEAKER 12 :
All right, Senator, tell us about the bill, what it seeks to do.
SPEAKER 16 :
The bill is very simple, Tony. It would just bar Mifeprestone, the chemical abortion drug from use in abortions anywhere in the United States. This drug is inherently dangerous. It is inherently prone to abuse. Today, we heard from survivors of the drug, women who have been coerced or tricked or lied to into taking the drug. We heard about the horrible. health effects it had on them, of course, on their unborn children. And also the fact that, you know, the companies that make this drug and their foreign corporations are profiting, Tony, to the tune of billions of dollars a year. They don’t care that it’s ruining women’s lives. It’s time to put a stop to this and it’s time to bar this drug from use in abortions.
SPEAKER 12 :
I mean, the FDA, despite this information, 11 percent adverse effects for women who take the drug, the FDA has continued to keep in place this Biden era policy. Now, just last week, I believe it was Missouri, the latest state that is suing the FDA in court. The Department of Justice had an attorney wanting to essentially dismiss this policy. suit from the state of Missouri, saying they need to give the FDA time to do their research. Well, I think you have been quoted as stating that research has not started.
SPEAKER 16 :
That’s my understanding, Tony. And I think that this is the reason, one of the reasons Congress needs to act. I mean, the truth is, is that the FDA over the last 20 years has systematically rolled back any kind of safety restrictions on Mifeprestone. It’s essentially unregulated now. And as you just referred to, for more than one in 10 women who take this drug, they will end up in the emergency room with a potentially life-threatening event on their hands. This is a very dangerous drug. And the bottom line is only Congress can act and give us some clarity on this. If Congress says we’re going to take Mifeprestone off the market for abortion, that’s how it’s going to be. No future liberal administration will be able to roll that back. It will be in the law, and that’s what we need to do to protect women’s health.
SPEAKER 12 :
I mean, that’s a good point to make because what we’ve seen thus far, it’s been policy going all the way back to the Clinton administration in the 90s. And it has gotten, with each administration, successively weaker in terms of protecting women and certainly protecting the unborn. So you have a House companion bill. I think the prospects could actually be stronger in the House. What do you think?
SPEAKER 16 :
No, I think so. I’m delighted that we’ve got movement on both sides of the Congress. And listen, I think that this has got to be a top priority for anybody in Congress who calls himself or herself pro-life. The truth is 70 percent of abortions in this nation are conducted using Mifepressone, using the chemical abortion drug. Right now, it doesn’t matter what the state’s law is. It doesn’t matter what voters in the state vote on. The drug gets mailed into your state no matter what.
SPEAKER 12 :
if we don’t stop that nothing that a voter or a state legislature does will ever make a difference we have got to take this inherently dangerous drug off the market and this is a measure that the family research council wholeheartedly supports because it does address this issue of the adverse health effects of women it also as you pointed out senator addresses the issue of the undermining of state pro-life laws But one thing we didn’t mention, Senator Hawley, is you said 70% of abortions now are by the abortion pill. We’ve actually seen a rise in the number of abortions in this country post Roe. Most people think it’s the opposite.
SPEAKER 16 :
More abortions now than ever before. More abortions now than when Roe was the law of the land. And every year, Tony, it goes up. And if you look at 2023, more than the year before. 2024, same thing. Year over year. And what’s driving that increase… is the chemical abortion drug. It’s turning mailboxes into Planned Parenthoods. You think about it, every mailbox in the country now, the drug can be mailed right there. You do not need a doctor’s approval, rather. You do not need a physician visit. And this is why 12 different men have been indicted criminally for lacing their girlfriend’s food or drink with Mifeprestone. You talk about abuse. This drug is incredibly easy to abuse. It’s inherently dangerous. It should be off the market for abortion.
SPEAKER 12 :
the FDA’s aiding and abetting is what they’re doing by this policy. Senator Josh Hawley, thanks so much for joining us. Thanks for having me. All right, folks, text LIFE to 67742 and add your voice to this. LIFE to 67742. Don’t go away. We have state leaders that want to keep the deadly drugs out of their states. Maybe if these abortion pills were coming by boat, the administration would change its tactics. It’s time to respect the rights of the states, and it’s time to end death by mail.
SPEAKER 22 :
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, alongside Senator Lindsey Graham, led a press conference on Capitol Hill urging the Trump administration to end the Biden-era policies that have allowed dangerous abortion drugs to be shipped across state lines. They were joined by state attorneys general, pro-life advocates, and multiple Republican congressmen.
SPEAKER 15 :
There are more abortions today in the United States than when Roe versus Wade was the law of the land. And why is that? It’s because of the chemical abortion drug, Mifeprestone. Nearly 70% of the abortions that are committed in the United States today are committed because of Mifeprestone.
SPEAKER 03 :
The federal government is allowing a chemical abortion pill to be sent through the mail that wipes out every state unborn protection law in the land.
SPEAKER 18 :
It’s harder to ship alcohol in this country than it is to ship the abortion pill.
SPEAKER 10 :
And that should never be the case. This is a drug that takes the life of every child. So there is always a death that’s involved in this drug, but is also incredibly dangerous for the mom as well. We think that we should require a doctor to be able to get access to this drug.
SPEAKER 04 :
As a doctor, I think it’s essential that there be human contact before the pill is prescribed.
SPEAKER 21 :
It’s not about a national abortion ban. It’s about validating Dobbs and preventing other states from nullifying the legislative policy choices that have been made by our states and facilitating the illegal, unethical, and dangerous drug trafficking of abortion pills into our states without any medical oversight whatsoever.
SPEAKER 03 :
We can simply fix this if we have the courage to do it. So what are all of us telling the administration? You’ve been a great pro-life president, Mr. President. It’s now time to deal with this issue.
SPEAKER 15 :
We want to protect life, and we want to give voice to the American people and their right to protect life state by state, city by city, and yes, here in the United States Congress. That’s what this fight is about.
SPEAKER 22 :
Let your voice be heard. Text LIFE to 67742. Sign the petition. Tell the Trump administration to act.
SPEAKER 20 :
The Stand Firm app brings trusted Family Research Council resources together in one place. Stay informed with news articles from the Washington Stand, watch interviews from Washington Watch, explore courses produced by FRC, and find many other resources to equip you to engage culture and government from a biblical perspective. Download the Stand Firm app today by texting APP to 67742 or by searching for Stand Firm in your app store.
SPEAKER 12 :
Welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks so much for joining us again. If you’d like to add your voice to a petition that’s going to the FDA regarding mephiprestone, text LIFE to 67742. And you haven’t heard the last of this. We were going to stay on this until we succeed in protecting women and unborn children. Our word for today comes from Numbers chapter 1. And they assembled all the congregation together on the first day of the second month, and they recited their ancestry by families, by their fathers’ houses, according to the number of names from 20 years old and above, each one individually. So Moses assembled the people as they were about to begin their journey into the promised land. He registered them individually by family and by their ancestry. Interesting. A recent survey by Ancestry.com found that half of Americans can only name one or none of their great-grandparents. At the same time, the U.S. Census Bureau reports that roughly one in four children in America, about 18 to 19 million, live in a home without their biological father present. When identity becomes disconnected from family, young people are often left trying to discover who they are on their own. The consequences appear across society. Research consistently finds that about 90% of homeless and runaway children come from father-absent homes. Around 60% of youth suicides involve children who grew up without a father. And most youth in correctional facilities come from homes without a resident dad. These statistics are not merely numbers. They represent lives searching for stability, belonging, and identity. When the family weakens, the effect ripples outward to communities, institutions, and to the entire nation. To find out more about our journey through the Bible, text Bible to 67742. That’s Bible to 67742. Okay, as the conflict between the U.S. and Iran continues to rage, there has been growing concern over the danger posed by Iranian-linked sleeper cells here inside the United States, especially following four years of the open border policy of the previous administration. But it’s not only the countless masses that entered the country that are a concern, but also those who left and could later return. And we’re talking about those who were born in the U.S. but are now being raised in other countries like China. And that was highlighted yesterday during a Senate Judiciary Committee on birthright citizenship for illegal aliens and tourists.
SPEAKER 19 :
This really began in mass around 2013, 2014. That’s when it really took off. So if you do the math, you’re potentially looking at anywhere from between 750,000 to 1.5 million U.S. citizens that are being raised in China because these children are born here. As soon as they are capable of flying, they are flown back to China, and that is where they will be raised.
SPEAKER 12 :
That was Peter Schweitzer, who is the president of the Government Accountability Institute and the author of The Invisible Coup, How American Elites and Foreign Powers Use Immigration as a Weapon. He was testifying yesterday on Capitol Hill, and he joins us now. Peter, welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks so much for joining us.
SPEAKER 19 :
Great to be with you as always, Tony. Thanks for having me.
SPEAKER 12 :
All your work is intriguing. I look forward to reading. I have not read the book, but I look forward to reading it. You go quite in-depth on issues related to China. Let’s start with what is known about what China has been doing through birthright citizenship. I mean, this is not just something they happen to be here on vacation and have a baby. This is intentional. Talk about it.
SPEAKER 19 :
Yeah, it’s happening on a couple levels, Tony, but here’s what we know. We know that the Chinese Communist Party is actually encouraging members of their party and elites to do this. They’ve written about it. They’ve explained the quote-unquote 14th Amendment rights that Chinese people have and their ability to do this, to basically have their girlfriends or wives give birth in the United States. That child will be granted citizenship. Then they are raised in China, and when they turn 18, they’re going to be able to vote in our elections, donate to political campaigns, apply for government jobs. And the people that are doing this in China are not political dissidents. They’re not allowed to leave the country. These are military officers, intelligence officers, etc. So one component of it is this birth tourism, where they come to the United States and give birth. The other one that I think is even more insidious involves surrogacy, And this is when senior CCP party officials contract with an American woman to carry their child, which they do. They pay the women $50,000, $60,000. The child is born. The child is now a U.S. citizen having been born here, but also the biological mother is American. But then that child again goes back to China, sometimes not even picked up by the parents, and they are raised in China. We don’t have numbers for this, but there are a couple of really kind of frightening numbers that I can point to. One is that there was a senior CCP official in California who has some real estate there who had 26 children. through this surrogacy approach. There’s another gentleman that was profiled in the Wall Street Journal who’s had more than 100 children through American surrogates. So this presents a national security problem and I think also a humanitarian crisis in a very real way for these children.
SPEAKER 12 :
All right, let’s go. I want to unpack this. We’ve got a little time to talk through this because this is startling. It’s stunning. Number one, as you said, from the humanitarian standpoint, these are children we’re talking about, but they’re like pawns in a political game of espionage in some ways is what it sounds. Let’s go back first to the numbers of the birthright tourism. What are we talking about numbers there? Do we have any idea what the numbers are?
SPEAKER 19 :
Well, here’s the interesting part. Our federal government doesn’t track this. When you give birth in the United States, the federal government, nobody collects the nationality of the parents. So we actually have no idea. The numbers that I cited before the Senate subcommittee are based on Chinese estimates. And I don’t think they have a particular reason to exaggerate this. The Chinese government estimate is that every year for the past 13 or so years, at least 50,000 Chinese nationals have done this, giving birth in the United States, or it can be on a U.S. territory like Saipan. But there are other estimates that are far higher. There’s a Professor Barbonas from Australia. He’s very close to China, travels there, researches this subject all the time. He believes it’s closer to 100,000 a year. And then there are private Chinese research firms that believe in certain years it spikes even much higher than that. One research firm said in 2018 they believe 180,000 Chinese babies were born here. So part of the problem is, Tony, we don’t know. The estimates from Chinese sources, I would think, could potentially even be understating it. They wouldn’t have a reason to exaggerate it. But part of the problem is we simply don’t know. And that is why this, I think, is such an insidious and effective approach to subversion. I would add, Tony, that they used to do this in Hong Kong, China, they were doing this. And then in 2013, the government of Hong Kong banned birth tourism in that territory because they said the Chinese were using this as a means of subversion. And I think they were right about that.
SPEAKER 12 :
What country would allow this to happen? I mean, you have somebody that has no credible claim to citizenship in this country that has happened to come over here, give birth, and that child automatically has citizenship. I know the longtime political debate that has raged around this, but most of that has been about those that are on our southern border. This is being used as a weapon against our country.
SPEAKER 19 :
Yeah, there’s no question about it. And of course, there are other countries that are doing it, I don’t think on the same scale as China. Certainly there is a Russian birth tourism. You also see it from some Middle Eastern countries. But China is really, I think, the main player here. And it’s going to be very interesting in the Supreme Court decision on birth tourism. If they come back and say that birthright citizenship is absolute, that if you are here, you are within the borders, you are allowed to do this, then we are in deep, deep, deep trouble. Because the problem with birth tourism is it’s very hard to stop it. When a woman shows up at the border and she is pregnant, she can be asked by Customs and Border Patrol. She can be denied entry. But during the Obama and Biden administrations, they explicitly told people with customs and border patrol that if somebody came through that was pregnant, do not ask them whether they’re coming to give birth, just wave them through. So this is a serious national security concern that really demands attention. And I’m hoping the court is going to be reasonable and recognize that the constitution is not a suicide pact. that there should be the ability of the executive and or the legislative branches to put limitations on what birthright citizenship really means.
SPEAKER 12 :
So, Peter, when is the court expected to make a decision on this topic?
SPEAKER 19 :
I think they’re going to hear the case in April, and it would probably be sometime this summer. I will say in the panel discussion, there were some very, very good lawyers that were debating the fact that the 14th Amendment does not say that it is absolute, and that there’s this notion of being in domicile. That that’s essentially what they were saying when they said under the jurisdiction thereof in the 14th Amendment. So I think there’s going to be a lot of compelling legal arguments presented. But again, I think the court has to look at this. This is not just simply a question of people who have entered the country illegally and may be working here and may have families here. This is a problem of people who literally have no connection. Their children have no connection to the country other than the fact that their mother happened to have been here for a fleeting moment to give birth for the sole purpose of getting citizenship for their child.
SPEAKER 12 :
And, Peter, just a final question on this topic. If the court does not come down on the right way on this issue, the only alternative would be an amendment to the Constitution, would it not, which would be very difficult in this environment?
SPEAKER 19 :
Yeah, it would be. I mean, one of the findings in my book is that the Democratic Party sees mass migration as fundamental to their political survival. Those are not my words. Those are their words. So they’ve made a political calculation. They need mass migration because new migrants that come in overwhelmingly vote for Democrats. It’s at about 85%. according to their own estimates within the Democratic Party, because most migrants tend to have a more collectivist view of the role of government. Now, that evens out over time, but it takes 20 or so years. So it’s a huge electoral advantage for Democrats to have mass migration. That’s why they’re fighting so hard for it.
SPEAKER 12 :
But it’s a cultural and political genocide is what this does when this comes in. The speaker actually made a comment related to this yesterday at their retreat talking about Sharia law being incompatible. Play clip number one.
SPEAKER 08 :
There’s a look. There’s a lot of energy in the country and a lot of popular sentiment. that the demand to impose Sharia law in America is a serious problem. That’s what animates this. And that’s the language that people use. It’s a different language than I would use. But I think that that’s a serious issue. Sharia law and the imposition of Sharia law is contrary to the US Constitution.
SPEAKER 12 :
I mean, that’s a part of what we’re talking about here is bringing in ideologies and understandings that are incompatible, that run counter to the American way of life and the American political system.
SPEAKER 19 :
Yeah, and Tony, what’s happened is with mass migration, people come, they bring their families, they also bring political networks. And these political networks, whether it’s involving the Muslim Brotherhood or China or Mexico, these political networks are giving one message to migrants that have entered the country, whether legally or illegally, and that is do not assimilate. I quote in the book numerous officials from CARE, which is of course an organization you’ve talked a lot about on this program, and in speeches before Muslim groups, they say point blank, we can never be full citizens of this country, the United States. We cannot accept these institutions. We cannot accept this way of life. We are in this country as Muslims for one purpose, and that is to change the country both politically and spiritually. Or if you look at Mexican officials, Mexico has this network of, think about this, elected officials from Mexico that live full-time in the United States, that serve in the Mexican Senate and in the Mexican Parliament. And I quote them as saying that Mexicans that come to the United States even legally who want to embrace American values, they are attacked and ridiculed in their own community for being traitors to Mexico. The problem is the mass migration, but this fight to prevent assimilation, which has been so key to our ability to absorb immigrants.
SPEAKER 12 :
That is the real issue. That’s the heart of the issue is the assimilation because a lot of people, well, not a lot of people, many evangelicals, Christians use the Bible as justification for allowing people to come into the country. They failed to recognize that in the Old Testament, the provisions for allowing foreigners to come and reside is to adopt the ways and the customs of the host country. So there’s that assimilation that has to take place. Without that, you can’t be a country. And I don’t think it’s mean spirited. I don’t think it is whatever term you want to use to say if you want to be a part of this country, fine. But if you want to destroy it or change it, you have no right to come.
SPEAKER 19 :
Yeah. And the other thing that’s clear is that a lot of these NGOs, these non-governmental organizations, which are pushing for greater migration, a greater number of refugees, when you look at their literature, what they say is their motivation in part is to have a, quote, transformative effect on the receiving country, end quote. That’s us. We’re the receiving country. They see this as a mechanism for political change. In other words- They haven’t been able to convince Americans to embrace the values they want us to embrace. So they want to import them. And they’re open about the fact that this is a tool that they can use.
SPEAKER 12 :
It’s a weapon. It’s a weapon. It’s not a tool. Peter, we had 30 seconds left. Your book. Tell us about the name of the book and how folks can get a copy of it.
SPEAKER 19 :
Yeah, it’s called The Invisible Coup. Had a great reception so far. Been number one on the New York Times bestsellers for three weeks. You should be able to buy it anywhere. We’ve had a lot of great meetings, met with President Trump, Secretary Rubio in the Oval Office, and many people on Capitol Hill. We’re expecting to see more action on these issues. So appreciate any thoughts. You can go to theinvisiblecoup.com and give me your comments about the book after you’ve read it.
SPEAKER 12 :
Well, every book that you’ve written that I have read has been outstanding. Peter Schweitzer, thanks so much for joining us. Always great to see you and always appreciate your insight. God bless, Tony. Thanks for having me. All right. And folks, thank you for joining us as well. And until next time, I leave you with the encouraging words of the Apostle Paul, founder of Ephesians 6, where he says, when you’ve done everything you can do, when you’ve prayed, when you’ve prepared, and when you’ve taken your stand, by all means, keep standing.
SPEAKER 06 :
Washington Watch with Tony Perkins is brought to you by Family Research Council. To support our efforts to advance faith, family, and freedom, please text GIVE to 67742. That’s GIVE to 67742. Portions of the show discussing candidates are brought to you by Family Research Council Action. For more information, please visit TonyPerkins.com.
