0:00

Call Her Daddy is brought to you

0:02

by Searchlight Pictures, presenting Night Bitch. Starring Amy

0:04

Adams and based on the best -selling novel

0:06

by by Rachel a woman pauses her career

0:08

to be a stay a -home mom, but

0:10

soon, her new domesticity takes a surreal

0:12

turn. Critics rave, Night Bitch Bitch is a daring

0:14

smart film a wickedly funny satire of modern

0:16

motherhood. Amy Adams delivers a brilliant performance,

0:18

her most fearless work yet, in this

0:20

endearing love letter to the journey of

0:22

finding yourself again, and is now nominated

0:24

for a Golden Globe Award for Best

0:26

Actress in a Comedy. letter to streaming only

0:28

on Hulu this Friday. yourself

0:31

again, and is now

0:33

nominated for a Golden

0:36

Globe Award for Best

0:38

Actress in to Assembly Required

0:40

with Stacey Abrams is Media.

0:43

I'm your host,

0:45

Stacey Abrams. Friday. Since the

0:47

election, we've been unpacking

0:49

how the incoming administration

0:51

and Project will actually

0:54

work. work. What's possible? And how and

0:56

how can we respond? As a As

0:58

a reminder, Project 2025

1:00

is the 900 -page blueprint

1:03

blueprint by the by the Think

1:05

Tank, the Heritage Foundation. With

1:08

a with a complicit Congress

1:10

and a compromise Supreme Court,

1:12

their to-do list could undermine everything

1:14

we rely on for a

1:16

a society. From from

1:18

civil rights protections and environmental

1:20

defenses. to public education,

1:22

free speech, and today's

1:25

topic, today's topic, health we think

1:27

about human rights, when we think rights,

1:29

the core of what makes us

1:31

who we are. we are, there is

1:33

nothing more relevant and

1:36

more fundamental than than health care. The

1:38

the ability to participate in society.

1:41

begins with good health. I grew up

1:43

I grew up in a family without health

1:45

insurance. I I grew up knowing

1:47

that if I got hurt, if it if it wasn't

1:49

major, it was going to

1:51

be treated as minor, not because my

1:53

parents didn't care, but because they

1:55

simply didn't have the resources to get

1:58

access to get access to health care. fact, in fact,

2:00

Since I grew up and got

2:02

access to health care, since my

2:04

parents finally have health insurance, I

2:06

can see a night-and-day difference in

2:09

the way our lives are lived.

2:11

And I also feel an incredible

2:13

degree of privilege because I know

2:16

what it means to not have

2:18

health care and to have it

2:20

now. I am also deeply annoyed

2:22

and sometimes outraged, because the fight

2:25

over health care is a fight

2:27

that the people stopping it don't

2:29

have to have. Every elected official

2:32

in Washington DC has health care,

2:34

and it's the height of hypocrisy

2:36

to deny it to others. And

2:38

in the wake of COVID-19, now

2:41

more than ever, we should understand

2:43

how vital and essential health care

2:45

as a human right is. So

2:48

while fighting to protect and improve

2:50

health care in this country is

2:52

not new, here are some of

2:54

the ways that health care may

2:57

be impacted by the next administration.

2:59

One. There is an intent to

3:01

dismantle or gut the Department of

3:04

Health and Human Services, which is

3:06

one of our nation's core agencies.

3:08

And let's be clear. HHS, as

3:10

it's called, has a very broad

3:13

mandate. It's in charge of Medicare,

3:15

Medicaid, the health care marketplace, the

3:17

Children's Health Insurance Program, the Food

3:20

and Drug Administration, the National Institutes

3:22

of Health, the Centers for Disease

3:24

Control and Prevention. They also cover

3:26

the Human Services Society. So TANF.

3:29

the temporary assistance for needy families.

3:31

Head start, child care and child

3:33

support, and that's not an exhaustive

3:36

list. HHS is under attack. Number

3:38

two, they want to split the

3:40

CDC into two agencies, one for

3:42

data collection and one for public

3:45

policy recommendations. And this effectively takes

3:47

away the already limited authority of

3:49

the CDC to provide public health

3:52

guidance. It slows emergency response and

3:54

it could hurt state and local

3:56

governments. that rely on the CDC

3:58

for public health guidance. pandemic. Number

4:01

three, they want they want to tinker with

4:03

the food and drug administrations. Drug

4:05

approval process. For example, For

4:07

away the approval away the

4:09

approval from if a press stone. And

4:11

number four, the state level, the

4:14

goal is to turn Medicaid. Medicaid, the vital

4:16

national care program that covers

4:18

the poor. the poor, the elderly,

4:20

the disabled, and some some

4:22

to turn that to turn that program

4:24

into. grants, which means which means

4:27

states would have further permission to

4:29

deny access to healthcare to the

4:31

most vulnerable in our society. our society,

4:33

states would have less money less

4:35

limited federal accountability. federal accountability.

4:38

Okay, so I've just done a very long list

4:40

of what's at stake. at stake. it's

4:42

not just about what's in the proposed

4:44

policy papers from Project 2025. from Project

4:47

about who Trump wants to put in

4:49

charge of that vast agency. In the

4:51

words of Nobel laureates in in medicine, chemistry,

4:53

and physics and economics, Jr. RFK of the

4:55

at the helm of the Department of

4:57

Health and Human Services put the put

5:00

the public's health in jeopardy and undermine

5:02

America's global leadership in the health

5:04

sciences. This in a This in a letter

5:06

addressed to members of the United States

5:08

Senate, listing the health Secretary

5:10

nominee's most sensationalist conspiracy

5:12

theories on public health.

5:14

health. The incoming decision to

5:16

nominate nominate Kennedy F. Kennedy Jr. to

5:18

be the the Secretary of Health Human

5:20

Services. Services. is indeed a source of

5:22

much anxiety. in the and the

5:25

and scientific communities. So much

5:27

so Nobel laureates, a group a group that

5:29

usually tries to stay out

5:31

of politics, felt compelled to

5:33

up. But there are But there

5:35

are other nominees. I As I mentioned, is

5:37

HHS is huge. list of people whose

5:39

the list of people whose names are being

5:42

put forward. Oz to lead the centers

5:44

lead the Centers for Medicare

5:46

and Medicaid services, and Marty Makari as the

5:48

the head of the FDA. the

5:50

FDA. both of whom have been

5:52

controversial to say the least their their

5:54

respective medical practices. I've

5:56

just just given you a lot

5:58

of information. And right now, like almost every

6:01

day, listening to what's to

6:03

come, can feel like daily

6:05

doom scrolling. And unlike 2016,

6:07

when people talked about resistance,

6:09

this time people have responded

6:11

by saying they need to

6:13

protect themselves first. I totally

6:15

get that. The rule is,

6:17

put your own mask on

6:19

first. But we're not on

6:21

this trip alone. So eventually,

6:23

we'll need to help our

6:25

fellow travelers. I'm here. to

6:27

help us prepare for when

6:29

and how we engage and

6:31

insist. That begins by understanding

6:33

what's really at risk versus

6:35

what's just hateful wishful thinking,

6:37

what impact can these proposals

6:39

have, and what's not being

6:41

said, and as always, how

6:43

do we fight back? So

6:45

let's get straight into it

6:47

with our interview today. epidemiologist

6:49

and a science communicator. She

6:51

is the editor at large

6:53

for Public Health at KFF

6:55

Health News. She produces podcast

6:57

and other content to help

6:59

us understand what's going on

7:01

in public health, and she

7:03

was a regular guest on

7:05

new shows during COVID-19, bringing

7:07

us grounded, reasonable, and actionable

7:09

information when misinformation and disinformation

7:11

met a wave of panic

7:13

and worry. Does that sound

7:16

familiar to anyone? Here to

7:18

keep us all informed and

7:20

sane is Dr. Gounder. Thank

7:22

you so much for being

7:24

here. It's great to be

7:26

here. Thanks, Stacey. Dr. Gounder,

7:28

I have a public health

7:30

crisis question for you. Are

7:32

American politicians and policy makers

7:34

allergic to science? I think

7:36

this is something that is

7:38

very much on the mind

7:40

of those of us working

7:42

in science and in public

7:44

health and related fields right

7:46

now. What we saw during

7:48

the pandemic was really an

7:50

attack on science and public

7:52

health. health because many of

7:54

the conclusions of the science

7:56

were politically inconvenient did not

7:58

reflect well on certain politicians

8:00

and leaders. I do think

8:02

there is room for discussion

8:04

if we start from a

8:06

place of shared understanding facts,

8:08

science, and then to weigh

8:10

what are some of the

8:12

tradeoffs. how do you weigh

8:14

different values, whether it's value

8:16

of human life, value of

8:18

an elderly person's life, value

8:20

of a young student schooling,

8:22

etc. But I think we

8:24

have gotten to the point

8:26

in some of these conversations

8:28

where instead of having a

8:30

conversation about values, we are

8:32

attacking the science or some...

8:34

of those, some of us

8:37

are attacking the science, because

8:39

they don't want to have

8:41

that honest conversation about what

8:43

they actually value. It's more

8:45

convenient. It's easier to say

8:47

the science is wrong. That

8:49

language is perfect, that it's

8:51

when science is politically inconvenient,

8:53

and it's actually a perfect

8:55

encapsulation of one of the

8:57

reasons I started with that

8:59

question. There was the letter

9:01

from the over six dozen

9:03

Nobel laureates about RFK Junior's

9:05

appointment. to lead the Department

9:07

of Health and Human Services,

9:09

and then there's just the

9:11

incoming Trump administration's overall approach

9:13

to public health, which seems

9:15

to be laser focused on

9:17

finding those who reject science

9:19

as a foundation for policy

9:21

making and giving them the

9:23

highest appointments possible. These Nobel

9:25

laureates, though, these chemists and

9:27

medical professionals and economists, are

9:29

very deliberate about pointing out

9:31

that RFK Jr. no credentials

9:33

or relevant experience quote unquote

9:35

in science public health or

9:37

medicine or administration and as

9:39

you pointed out this is

9:41

a question of value so

9:43

how important is it to

9:45

not only have values driven

9:47

decision making and science driven

9:49

decision making how important is

9:51

it to have science and

9:53

scientific knowledge and experience to

9:55

be the secretary of health

9:58

and human service I do

10:00

think could you be a do

10:02

think Health and you be a secretary of

10:04

health and human services without being

10:06

a scientist? have mean, we have one

10:08

right now, you know, but he has other but he

10:10

has other skills he brings to

10:12

the table, being able to manage a

10:14

large administration, understanding sort of institutional

10:16

norms and practices. and So he does

10:18

bring a certain a set. And this

10:20

is where your career civil servants are

10:22

really important, which is to say,

10:24

the scientists, the technical experts. who

10:26

work under numerous different administrations,

10:29

who are not political appointees, who

10:31

are not partisan, you

10:33

can rely on those people to

10:35

help inform your decision -making. inform the

10:37

science, the expertise that they

10:39

are using to advise you, to

10:42

and then make decisions then make be

10:44

partisan decisions, but at least

10:46

informed by that science. Now what

10:48

we're seeing. science. are our conversations

10:50

from the from the incoming his

10:52

and his team about

10:54

eliminating some of those civil

10:56

service protections to make

10:59

it easier to fire, hire,

11:01

whomever they want in

11:03

those scientific, technical expert roles.

11:05

roles. And the problem is if those those

11:07

are filled by people who do not

11:09

have the qualifications, the scientific,

11:11

medical, public health expertise,

11:14

then the person at the top is

11:16

not gonna be appropriately counseled. So

11:18

you don't necessarily counseled. So the leader of

11:20

HHS need to have that expertise,

11:23

but you do need to have people

11:25

who have that expertise to advise

11:27

you. And if we don't have either,

11:29

then we're in real trouble. Well,

11:31

that brings us to the other other

11:33

while a lot of a has focused

11:35

on. on RFK Junior on

11:37

RFK Jr. heading HHS, the two of the

11:40

of the top jobs are

11:42

also under consideration. And one of

11:44

the one of the pending nominees. is is

11:46

the other is Matt is Matt both

11:49

of whom are physicians, are

11:51

but who each have had

11:53

controversial. had controversial behaviors. And there

11:56

have been there have been

11:58

questions about their fealty to sign. scientific

12:00

principles in their work, or the

12:03

implications of their policy proposals. So

12:05

what does their nominations tell you

12:07

about the incoming administration's thinking about

12:09

this? So to your point about

12:12

combining the need for science and

12:14

for policy making, what happens when

12:16

you have a scientist who doesn't

12:18

seem to believe or at least

12:20

live those beliefs? You can have

12:23

differences of opinion as to whether

12:25

you should mandate masking or vaccination

12:27

or whether schools should be closed

12:29

in the context of a pandemic,

12:31

but you should start at least

12:34

with a common understanding of what

12:36

the science is, what we saw

12:38

Jay Bata Charia, who's nominated to

12:40

head the NIH, and some of

12:43

his colleagues Marty Macri, who's now

12:45

nominated to run the FDA. came

12:47

up with estimates of what they

12:49

thought the infection and death rates

12:51

for COVID, their estimates were really

12:54

flawed and very small compared to

12:56

very low, compared to what actually

12:58

played out. And so we do

13:00

need to start with people who

13:02

understand how to make these estimates,

13:05

who understand how to advise us

13:07

and say, you know, these are

13:09

the tradeoffs. you with your values,

13:11

your politics, your partisanship may make

13:14

different choices, but at least start

13:16

with that basic level of understanding.

13:18

And I think that's also, you

13:20

know, what's scary because we may

13:22

have another pandemic on our hands

13:25

before too long. Unfortunately, we in

13:27

this country have not been managing

13:29

the H5N1, bird flu situation as

13:31

well as we could, and that

13:33

is putting us at risk for

13:36

a pandemic sooner than later. So

13:38

these questions are really quite pressing

13:40

and imminent and imminent. And you

13:42

just pointed out that we are

13:45

already on shaky ground and this

13:47

administration is not only rejecting expertise

13:49

or bringing in people who have

13:51

demonstrated a flawed use of their

13:53

expertise, but there's also as you

13:56

at the top of the conversation,

13:58

this intent to replace civil servants

14:00

who have that expertise with hires

14:02

who are based on loyalty and

14:04

not capacity. You mentioned H5N1 as

14:07

one of the possible outcomes. Can

14:09

you talk a little bit more

14:11

about the implications of this lack

14:13

of capacity when it comes to

14:16

public health, not just in terms

14:18

of pandemics, but just the larger

14:20

public health universe? Well, one of

14:22

the things that I think was

14:24

made very clear during the COVID

14:27

pandemic is we've... very much under-invested

14:29

in public health. Some of the

14:31

areas of real need are data

14:33

systems. When we were dealing with

14:35

public health departments faxing their data

14:38

into the CDC, to Debbie Burks'

14:40

team at the White House, you

14:42

know, that is not something where

14:44

you can get real-time data, quality

14:46

data. Part of the challenge here

14:49

is, and this is something a

14:51

lot of people don't understand still,

14:53

is that public health powers reside

14:55

at the state level. There's only

14:58

so much the government, federal government,

15:00

can do. Yes, the federal government

15:02

provides funding, technical expertise, advice, guidelines.

15:04

But they're not the ones, actually,

15:06

that institute mandates, requirements, or do

15:09

the boots on the ground work.

15:11

And so this creates issues in

15:13

terms of how well health departments

15:15

are funded at the state level.

15:17

Do they have the capacity and

15:20

funding from their state legislatures to

15:22

do what's needed, including the data

15:24

modernization issues? And then do they

15:26

report that to the CDC? So

15:29

they can choose not to report?

15:31

They can choose to report only

15:33

certain things. The CDC has some

15:35

levers that can use, tying some

15:37

of that reporting to funding, but

15:40

in general, they're not usually too

15:42

aggressive with that because of the

15:44

potential harms of withholding funding. Anyone

15:46

who's ever planned a group trip

15:48

knows it can get a little

15:51

messy. With Verbo's trip planner feature,

15:53

you can save and compare your

15:55

favorite rentals, collaborate with co-travelers, and

15:57

organize your trip all in one

16:00

place. Relax. You bucked to funding.

16:02

Verbo. At Walden University we get

16:04

the W. We come here for

16:06

more than just a degree. We

16:08

come here to make an impact.

16:11

We step up when everything is

16:13

on the line and we create

16:15

opportunities. At Walden University we learn

16:17

the skills to get us to

16:19

the next level. Plus with flexible

16:22

online learning we can do it

16:24

on our time. Now it's your

16:26

time. Get the W. Walden University

16:28

set a course for change. certified

16:31

to operate by Chef. It's the

16:33

Get Holiday Ready sales event with

16:35

Hank and Sam from the Ford

16:37

crew. Today, a new shipment of

16:39

inventory. Hang, what's going on? Another

16:42

holler full of new Ford trucks

16:44

and SUVs, Sam. So much SUV

16:46

capability, is that? Ford F series,

16:48

the best-selling trucks for 47 years.

16:50

And a big selection means? Big

16:53

savings? Yep, which means? It's the

16:55

best time to buy? Well, Dove,

16:57

Sam. And time for America to

16:59

get holiday ready with Ford. Based

17:02

on 1977 to 2023 CY Industry

17:04

Report Total Sales. Can you talk

17:06

a little bit more about state

17:08

and local public health preparedness? That's

17:10

one of the issues we try

17:13

to focus on here, on Assembly

17:15

required. We have a lot of

17:17

attention that necessarily needs to be

17:19

turned towards the federal government, but

17:21

often the real levels of power,

17:24

and particularly the accessible levels of

17:26

power, for our listeners, happens at

17:28

the state and local level. So

17:30

can you talk a little bit

17:33

more about how state and local

17:35

public health preparedness works at that

17:37

level? Yeah, so the Constitution does

17:39

not provide public health powers to

17:41

the federal government again. You know,

17:44

the federal government has the right

17:46

to tax and spend to regulate

17:48

interstate commerce, but that's really the

17:50

limits on federal powers and all

17:52

of the other federal powers really

17:55

derive from those two. So if

17:57

you're somebody who's... concerned

17:59

about public health. Yes,

18:02

you should pay attention to national politics, but

18:04

it really is at the state level and

18:06

to some degree the local level that you

18:08

can have the most impact. So the that's

18:10

where I would say pay attention to what's

18:12

happening in the state legislature, what your local

18:14

health department is doing. At

18:16

the state level, we've

18:18

seen increasingly public health

18:20

powers eroded. We've seen

18:23

some of the

18:25

recommendations around vaccination. being

18:28

eroded, where you you

18:30

have increasing non -medical

18:32

exemptions around around so

18:34

what so what need to get to go

18:36

to school. go to school. Another area area

18:38

that you should you should be paying

18:40

attention to to is um, public public

18:42

health versus the economy, public health

18:44

versus industry, always be a

18:47

theme. will always be so it's

18:49

sort of balancing those

18:51

different trade -offs tradeoffs values. But you

18:53

do do see this play out very concretely

18:55

as it is right now with right now with

18:57

H5N1. There's a a reason certain

18:59

states. have reported a reported a lot

19:02

more cases of humans infected. very much It is

19:04

very much related to how much testing

19:06

is happening, the also how much testing of

19:08

the is all the milk. to how This is all

19:10

related to how aggressive the so have chosen

19:12

to be. So you have states like

19:14

Michigan, Colorado, Yeah, they're California. Yeah, they're

19:17

reporting a lot of cases, but it's because

19:19

they're testing so much. And so we don't

19:21

have a clear view into into what's happening

19:23

in other states. And why does it play

19:25

out differently? Well, this is a question a question of

19:27

values to some degree. and wanting

19:29

to wanting to from protect industry

19:31

from what some of the economic

19:33

impacts might be they have a bigger

19:36

a bigger problem on their hands.

19:38

than they want to know. to know. And this

19:40

is also about know, the impact of impact

19:42

of influence of industry in certain

19:44

states on what happens, right? So

19:46

if you have a very powerful

19:48

dairy industry lobby in that state,

19:50

that's going to be very different

19:52

from a state where your political

19:55

interests might be a lot more

19:57

diverse and varied. varied. you think of

19:59

an example or a... time when citizens, or

20:01

local citizens, sort of raised the

20:03

alarm and had an effect at

20:05

the local or state level, because

20:07

sometimes it can feel like industry's

20:09

too big and the problem is

20:11

too big, we can't do anything

20:14

about it, you've spent a lot

20:16

of time advising local and national

20:18

policymakers, when have you seen citizens

20:20

actually take what you use and

20:22

have an effect? We did see

20:24

a very real impact of citizens

20:26

in communities on COVID mitigation measures,

20:28

and this played out differently in

20:30

different communities. There were communities where

20:33

people wanted to reopen businesses, they

20:35

wanted their kids back in school

20:37

as quickly as possible. There are

20:39

places where parents had good reason

20:41

to be very concerned. For example,

20:43

here in New York City, you

20:45

had a lot of parents and

20:47

families of color, lower-income neighborhoods, multi-generational

20:50

households, where they were concerned not

20:52

just for their kids, but for

20:54

other family members in the household,

20:56

what it would mean if their

20:58

kids were back in school before

21:00

a lot of people had been

21:02

vaccinated, what that would mean for...

21:04

elderly relatives living at home. And

21:06

so what we saw that sort

21:09

of patchwork reopening reflected a lot

21:11

of those local values. And you

21:13

know, some of that was the

21:15

parents, some of that was teachers

21:17

who are concerned from themselves. And

21:19

you know, whether you agree or

21:21

disagree with those particular decisions different

21:23

communities took, you know, regardless of

21:26

that aside from that. That was

21:28

the local community that was the

21:30

local communities that were dictating those

21:32

decisions. Well, let's stay there for

21:34

a second because, you know, I

21:36

talked about the allergy to science

21:38

among policymakers, but there's a second

21:40

strain that seems to have affected

21:42

segments of the general public and,

21:45

you know, Project 2025 and it's

21:47

accolades. They tend to harp on

21:49

the uncertainty of COVID and the

21:51

changes we adapted to. in sort

21:53

of patchwork response, which seemed to

21:55

prove that nothing was true, therefore

21:57

nothing would ever be true. You

21:59

know, there is the, you know,

22:02

first we all wipe down every

22:04

surface and then we realize wiping

22:06

down every surface isn't necessary. And

22:08

opponents of science hold this up

22:10

as, you know, proof that the

22:12

public should turn against the scientist.

22:14

How do you respond to people

22:16

who might be convinced that no

22:18

one is right? without invalidating how

22:21

difficult that time was. I think

22:23

there's a real understanding of what

22:25

science is and the scientific processes.

22:27

I think there are people who

22:29

think scientists are a bunch of

22:31

liberals who already have an opinion

22:33

and they just use science to

22:35

back up that opinion. That is

22:38

not science. Science is, you start

22:40

with saying, I don't know, here

22:42

are some hypotheses, I'm going to

22:44

try to disprove. that hypothesis. And

22:46

then based on what I learned

22:48

from that, I'm going to create

22:50

another experiment and repeat and repeat

22:52

and that means you are going

22:54

to build your understanding knowledge over

22:57

time in an incremental way. That's

22:59

just how science works. You're not

23:01

going to be able to jump

23:03

from this is what I think

23:05

and here's the thing that proves

23:07

it. It just doesn't work that

23:09

way. I think most people find

23:11

that approach to be very counterintuitive

23:14

is not the way we normally

23:16

think. Normally, we think in what

23:18

I would call a more lawyerly

23:20

way, which is to say, we

23:22

already start with this is the

23:24

conclusion that we want to back

23:26

up and then we try to

23:28

find things to support that. And

23:30

that really does also lead to

23:33

things like cherry picking and confirmation

23:35

bias and looking for things that

23:37

will back up what you already

23:39

believe. So basically I'm going to

23:41

translate this into television. We need

23:43

to be more like Dr. House

23:45

than we are like lawn order.

23:47

I think, yeah, I think that's

23:50

a great way to put it,

23:52

yeah. So as a practical matter,

23:54

as a practical translation, if I'm

23:56

having a conversation over the holidays

23:58

with someone who tells me, well,

24:00

we didn't get it right in

24:02

COVID and that's why I'm not

24:04

paying attention to H5N1. That's why

24:06

we don't, it doesn't matter who's

24:09

in charge. What's the pithy response

24:11

that we want listeners to be

24:13

able to give, or at least

24:15

how do they start a conversation

24:17

in a way that reminds us

24:19

all of our high school bio

24:21

classes? Well, I think also to

24:23

be aware of what your pre-existing

24:26

biases and opinions might be. So

24:28

to ask them, well, you know,

24:30

what matters to you? Let's say

24:32

another pandemic breaks out tomorrow. what

24:34

would be your number one, two,

24:36

and three concerns and why? What

24:38

was your experience of the COVID

24:40

pandemic? And I think starting with

24:42

that kind of understanding and being

24:45

aware of why you might already

24:47

have certain opinions, and then also

24:49

just explaining, you know, what is

24:51

the scientific process, I think are

24:53

two different ways to go about

24:55

this. So part of the genius

24:57

of Project 2025 and the effectiveness

24:59

of the Trump administration approach is

25:02

that by targeting everything, our attention

25:04

has nowhere to focus and it's

25:06

nearly impossible to concentrate. And that

25:08

is especially true in this assault

25:10

on health. because HHS is such

25:12

a mammoth agency with so many

25:14

responsibilities. I gave a little bit

25:16

of a primer at the top

25:18

of the episode, but I want

25:21

to spend a few minutes with

25:23

you really making sure we understand

25:25

what the Department of Health and

25:27

Human Services is and why these

25:29

attacks matter. So number one, can

25:31

you break down what we need

25:33

to understand about the agencies within

25:35

HHS? And what are you most

25:37

closely paying attention to? There are

25:40

many agencies within HHS, but I'll

25:42

focus just on three. The three

25:44

big ones are NIH, which does

25:46

biomedical research, the CDC, which is

25:48

the nation's public health, well, main

25:50

public health agency, and then you

25:52

have the FDA, which is in

25:54

charge of food and drug safety,

25:57

most food, you have certain things

25:59

that fall under the USDA. So why

26:01

does the NIH matter? NIH is the

26:03

does the NIH matter?

26:05

NIH is the world's

26:08

biomedical institution and funder. of

26:10

And a lot of that research actually

26:12

happens outside of NIH, actually outside percent

26:14

of the research is actually outside of

26:17

NIH itself. It's awarded. to

26:19

researchers at academic and institutions and

26:21

other institutions to do that

26:23

research. of it's a way of

26:25

really getting a diversity the the

26:27

kinds of questions being asked, the

26:30

the places where they're being studied.

26:32

studied. But we have created a

26:34

system of funding for research. research where

26:36

government funds the earlier research,

26:38

the basic research. and then we

26:40

then we leave it to industry

26:42

to take that research and to turn

26:44

it into drugs and vaccines and

26:47

diagnostics and other products. And I And

26:49

I think what's unfortunately happened

26:51

happened is. we as taxpayers fund what the

26:53

NIH is doing. if you But

26:55

if you don't have the

26:57

pharmaceutical companies, device device et cetera,

26:59

who use that science and then

27:02

translate that into affordable, accessible

27:04

products for the population. for the population, general

27:06

public may not benefit from those

27:08

investments. so I think what part

27:10

of what we're seeing I think a

27:12

real frustration is a real frustration with... this money being

27:14

being spent on research and people

27:17

not necessarily feeling the tangible benefits. Now

27:19

I would say Now I vaccines are

27:21

a great example of a very tangible

27:23

benefit. of a 20 plus

27:25

years of research on mRNA vaccines. on

27:27

We had no idea that had was

27:29

gonna come along, but we were very

27:31

lucky to have had that research we

27:34

were already in the have had where we

27:36

could then pivot to using those

27:38

for a and we were able to

27:40

develop vaccines very quickly for COVID. And

27:43

it's a platform that's really ideal

27:45

for pandemics because you can so

27:47

quickly because you those

27:49

for the next those for the

27:51

next So So you have Then you

27:53

have the you have the CDC, the

27:55

role of the CDC is as

27:58

a funnel, frankly, is of funding to.

28:00

state and local health departments. So

28:02

that's, you know, a lot of

28:04

the funding does not stay at

28:06

CDC. It goes down to the

28:09

ground. But then also to collect

28:11

data from the state and local

28:13

health departments to analyze that, to

28:16

feed that back to the states.

28:18

We've already talked about some of

28:20

the data issues there, to also

28:23

help develop guidelines. And it's not

28:25

just for vaccination, but for any

28:28

number of public health issues to

28:30

provide guidance and technical support to

28:32

the states. CDC cannot mandate or

28:35

enforce any of that. That is

28:37

again at the state and local

28:39

level. And then you have the

28:42

FDA and where people will be

28:44

most familiar is the FDA's role

28:46

in approving drugs. This is also

28:49

something that I think people don't

28:51

understand is the FDA. Take generics,

28:53

for example. RFK Jr. has expressed

28:56

frustration that the FDA is somehow

28:58

blocking people's access to generic medications

29:00

for additional indications, so using existing

29:03

medications for additional uses, those sorts

29:05

of things. And it's not the

29:07

FDA, it's. Essentially a market failure

29:10

where pharmaceutical companies, again, are the

29:12

ones that pay for the clinical

29:14

trials, the studies, that determine whether

29:17

something is safe and effective, they

29:19

then take that data, they send

29:21

it to the FDA an application,

29:24

and they say, will you approve

29:26

this medication for this purpose? And

29:28

so if there's not a profit

29:31

incentive for these companies to do

29:33

so, the FDA is never going

29:35

to be able to approve that

29:38

medication. Now, the FDA is partially

29:40

funded by fees on these companies

29:42

when they submit an application. That's

29:45

a decision we've made. So we

29:47

could decide we're going to use

29:50

more taxpayer money for vetting these

29:52

applications. We've decided to partially fund

29:54

it with these fees. And we've

29:57

decided that this kind of approach

29:59

to funding R&D for drugs, diagnostics

30:01

vaccines. etc. We want that in

30:04

the private sector. And that is

30:06

going to have certain implications for

30:08

what becomes available to people, how

30:11

excessively and how affordably. So let's

30:13

go back to the CDC for

30:15

one second. When we hear about

30:18

dividing the CDC, what does that

30:20

mean and why should we be

30:22

worried? So this is very much

30:25

focused on some of the conversations

30:27

we've had around COVID and vaccines,

30:29

that's really where this is coming

30:32

from. So there's a desire by

30:34

some to divide the CDC into

30:36

a scientific data gathering institution and

30:39

then an institution that makes the

30:41

recommendations and policies. The idea being

30:43

recommendations and policies may be more

30:46

political because you are talking about

30:48

values at that point. How do

30:50

you value life at what cost

30:53

financially, what you know, what implications

30:55

it has on society? And so

30:57

there's a desire to create a

31:00

firewall, so to speak, between who

31:02

publishes the data, gathers the data,

31:04

and who is making the policy

31:07

recommendations. When I think about all

31:09

of these agencies and how they

31:11

enter to wine, One of the

31:14

conversations then is how easy is

31:16

it to do this? And I

31:19

know you focus on public health

31:21

and not necessarily the ends and

31:23

outs of congressional action, but how

31:26

easy would it be to divide

31:28

the CDC or to allow the

31:30

FDA to rescind the polio vaccination

31:33

authorization? Are those things that take

31:35

a lot of time? Are those

31:37

things that are imminent? Is it

31:40

something that happens by executive order?

31:42

Can you talk a little bit

31:44

about? how public health actually gets

31:47

changed in this country? Yeah, so

31:49

some of this would need to

31:51

be congressional action. Some of it

31:54

could be done by the Secretary

31:56

of HHS and by executive order

31:58

by the president. This is

32:00

a very is a very heavy

32:02

lift to do something like this.

32:04

You've had a number of

32:07

CDC directors who've tried to reform

32:09

the agency numerous times. numerous

32:12

is a very time a very

32:14

very challenging thing to take

32:16

on. thing to take on. in terms

32:18

of congressional action, you would need

32:20

that in order to split off

32:22

certain functions from the CDC and

32:24

to fund these things independently. and to

32:26

In terms of the FDA In

32:29

terms authorization for polio

32:31

vaccines. for It

32:34

really depends it really

32:36

what degree to what

32:38

incoming incoming HHS HHS

32:40

and FDA commissioner commissioner

32:42

would have been institutional norms. Now,

32:44

do they have the power

32:46

to? have the power to single -handedly do some

32:48

of these things. of these things? Yes, but

32:50

but that would be really extraordinary

32:53

to see an FDA FDA an

32:55

HHS or taking that kind of action

32:57

and that there are. of action

32:59

and that there are withdrawing

33:01

an approval, You would you would

33:03

definitely see lawsuits from

33:05

the pharmaceutical companies that produce

33:08

these products these if there

33:10

was there of of rescinding of

33:12

approval. And they would have

33:14

standing in terms of is

33:17

there actually science to

33:19

support whether these actions are

33:22

and -based and warranted.

33:24

also throw out there that and

33:26

I would also throw out there that

33:28

there are budgetary implications, and that

33:30

means Congress gets involved, and and someone,

33:32

let's say, say, Mitch McConnell. flags

33:35

that he he is very unhappy about

33:37

the threat to the polio vaccine polio vaccine,

33:40

his of power is whether or not

33:42

something moves through, even though he's not

33:44

going to be the majority leader. the he

33:46

has a vote in the vote in

33:48

a little bit of influence. bit of want

33:50

folks to understand that. to understand

33:53

that the straightforward demand

33:55

for action not necessarily translate

33:57

into. into of

33:59

that. being taken. Would you

34:01

agree? No, I do agree.

34:03

Because right now you have

34:05

budgetary lines for the CDC,

34:07

you do not have budgetary

34:09

lines for these separate agencies

34:11

that they're proposing, so you

34:13

really do need to have

34:15

congressional action to implement that

34:17

kind of split. Fantastic. So

34:19

health is not simply the

34:21

ability to know what diseases

34:23

and threats are out there.

34:26

You know, it's also about

34:28

the ability to get help.

34:30

And that means we also

34:32

have to pay attention to

34:34

the health care access side

34:36

of things. So for example,

34:38

Project 2025 proposes to roll

34:40

back the progress that the

34:42

Biden administration has made in

34:44

reducing drug prices. It also

34:46

wants to accelerate the privatization

34:48

of Medicare, which older and

34:50

disabled Americans rely on. And

34:52

they want to break up

34:54

Medicaid and to block grants,

34:56

which will set fixed amounts

34:58

that go to states, regardless

35:00

of the actual cost of

35:02

health care or the size

35:04

or needs of the population.

35:06

What are you concerned about

35:08

when it comes to this

35:10

administration's impact on health care

35:12

access? And how would you

35:14

process this information as a

35:16

layperson? Well, if you read

35:18

Project 2025, they literally spell

35:20

out that the cost of

35:22

Medicare and Medicaid combined since

35:24

1967, which is when these

35:26

programs were started, is about

35:28

$17.8 trillion, and the U.S.

35:31

deficits... for that same time

35:33

period are $17.9 trillion. So

35:35

in other words, they are

35:37

pretty clear in that they

35:39

think that Medicare and Medicaid

35:41

are the principal drivers of

35:43

our national debt. And if

35:45

we want to eliminate our

35:47

national debt, we need to

35:49

dramatically scale back, if not

35:51

eliminate Medicare and Medicaid. That's

35:53

essentially what's implied in what's

35:55

written in Project 2025. There

35:57

are several strategies to try

35:59

to scale back spending one

36:01

of which is as you

36:03

mentioned privatization of Medicare a

36:05

lot of people who have

36:07

Medicare Advantage plans may think

36:09

they're getting a very good

36:11

deal. They get dental vision

36:13

benefits, maybe other perks thrown

36:15

in, and it's great until

36:17

they need to see a

36:19

doctor, they get hospitalized, and

36:21

then realize that their coverage

36:23

is actually really inferior to

36:25

what they might have had

36:27

if they had traditional Medicare.

36:29

You mentioned the... Medicare's authority

36:31

to negotiate drug prices under

36:34

the Inflation Reduction Act. This

36:36

is an area where the

36:38

incoming administration is under pressure

36:40

to roll back that authority.

36:42

Then this has very tangible

36:44

impacts for people. One of

36:46

the drugs that was likely

36:48

going to be in the

36:50

next round of drug negotiations

36:52

is semaglutide, also known as

36:54

Ozempec or Wigovi. A lot

36:56

of people are desperate. to

36:58

get access to that medication

37:00

for people even if they

37:02

don't have diabetes or cardiovascular

37:04

disease, but simply because they

37:06

have obesity. And it will

37:08

be up to the incoming

37:10

administration to finalize that rule,

37:12

whether they will or not

37:14

we don't know. But then

37:16

if they do, and they

37:18

don't make use of that

37:20

lever to negotiate down drug

37:22

prices for, you know, including

37:24

the GLP1 drugs, that would

37:26

have huge cost implications for

37:28

Medicare. So it's a little

37:30

hard to know how each

37:32

of these pieces will play

37:34

out. With respect to Medicaid,

37:36

you mentioned block grants to

37:39

the states. That's a great

37:41

way if you're looking to

37:43

cut your Medicaid costs, federal

37:45

spending on Medicaid, to do

37:47

so. What we're also seeing

37:49

are conversations about reducing the

37:51

federal amount that's being... provided

37:53

for that. So both states

37:55

and the federal government put

37:57

money in for Medicaid. But

37:59

if we see a reduction

38:01

in the federal contribution, some

38:03

states that have expanded Medicaid

38:05

may reverse that decision. We've

38:07

seen more and more red

38:09

states expand Medicaid, North Carolina,

38:11

for example. And that's because

38:13

there was an understanding that

38:15

this actually was. good for

38:17

their bottom line. And it

38:19

had an impact not only

38:21

on patients, but also on

38:23

rural communities where prior to

38:25

expansion of Medicaid, many rural

38:27

hospitals were really in financial

38:29

trouble, so many still are.

38:31

But we've seen many of

38:33

these facilities close and Medicaid

38:35

was a lifeline to many

38:37

of these facilities to keep

38:39

them open and also to

38:41

keep many of those jobs

38:44

at those health facilities still

38:46

available. So those are some

38:48

of the things that we

38:50

could anticipate with respect to

38:52

Medicare and Medicaid. Adverbo, we

38:54

know that planning a group

38:56

trip comes with more than

38:58

its fair share of challenges.

39:00

With trip planner, you can

39:02

save and compare your favorite

39:04

rentals. Collaborate with friends and

39:06

family and even vote on

39:08

your favorite bookings. It's your

39:10

one-stop shop for organized trip

39:12

planning. Because we think you

39:14

should spend less time stressing

39:16

over vacations. and more time

39:18

enjoying them. You can thank

39:20

us later. Ferbo Private Vacation

39:22

Rentals. Relax. You booked a

39:24

verbal. At Walden University, we

39:26

get the W. We come

39:28

here for more than just

39:30

a degree. We come here

39:32

to make an impact. We

39:34

step up when everything is

39:36

on the line, and we

39:38

create opportunities. At Walden University,

39:40

we learn the skills to

39:42

get us to the next

39:44

level. Plus with flexible online

39:47

learning, we can do it

39:49

on our time. Now it's

39:51

your time. Get the W.

39:53

Walden University, set a course

39:55

for change. Visit Walden-U.D.U. to

39:57

learn more. Certified to operate

39:59

by Sheb. If If

40:01

you're ready to elevate your driving

40:03

experience, the first -ever Kia K4

40:05

is worth is look. It combines

40:07

style and performance and a sleek,

40:09

futuristic design, featuring star -map LED

40:12

headlights map an available panoramic display.

40:14

For unforgettable looks, for XM comes

40:16

standard in every Kia K4,

40:18

bringing you closer to what you

40:20

love. you Plus, with an available

40:22

190 an available engine, the Kia

40:24

K4 delivers everything driving everything Learn

40:27

more at kia.com more at

40:29

kia.com/ K-4. So

40:32

you know a lot and you you know

40:34

a lot. all over the world, all

40:36

over the US. You You have

40:38

been all over the world, all over

40:40

the U .S. you

40:43

decided to take

40:45

your experience in epidemiology.

40:47

information in a way that is channeled

40:49

it into sharing information in a

40:51

way that is extraordinarily accessible.

40:54

You and I met the midst the

40:56

midst of the COVID pandemic

40:58

and and you invited me to

41:00

be on a podcast. But it

41:02

was was an important an important

41:04

conversation because you're just a

41:06

really fantastic communicator. on really

41:09

complicated issues. Was there an

41:11

Was there an inciting incident for you

41:13

that made you decide? not only have to

41:15

not only have to know what I know, I need

41:17

other people to understand what I know. so it was

41:19

a process of was really to process of years

41:21

of it come to this point, but

41:23

I think some of it was what

41:25

I experienced working in Southern Africa. career

41:27

I started my career working in

41:29

global health and tuberculosis and HIV. HIV. was

41:32

often asked to moderate hall

41:34

hall meetings, meetings with

41:36

patient advocates, informing policymakers,

41:38

both overseas, as well

41:40

as on the the the

41:42

So that sort of planted of

41:44

planted the seed, but then from

41:46

had pivoted from global health

41:49

to domestic health 2012, was an

41:51

2012, was an of commissioner of health

41:53

at the New York City of Health.

41:56

of we were dealing with

41:58

massive cuts to public. health

42:00

funding in the aftermath of the

42:02

08-09 recession. And in year one

42:04

on that job, I was tasked

42:06

with having to cut essentially 20%

42:08

of my Bureau of 250 people.

42:10

So 50 people out of 250,

42:12

that's huge. And what I realized

42:14

coming out of that was we

42:16

will not fund public health if

42:18

people don't even understand what it

42:20

is. People at least need to

42:22

understand what it is. And then

42:24

you can decide, is this something

42:26

valuable or not? But I would

42:28

argue that coming out of the

42:30

pandemic, people still don't understand what

42:32

public health is. They often confuse

42:34

public health and health care. And

42:36

so that's really what motivated me

42:38

was I wanted people to be

42:40

armed with the facts to be

42:42

informed citizens and then to make

42:44

decisions, you know, however they want

42:46

to, based on that information. Okay,

42:48

so here's your platform. Tell people

42:50

the difference between public health and

42:52

health care and how they should

42:54

describe it when they're sitting around

42:56

the dinner table. Yeah. So health

42:58

care is what people are more

43:00

familiar with, right? It's what happens

43:02

in the clinic, in the hospital.

43:04

It is very individual patient focused.

43:06

Public health is largely funded by

43:08

the government, which is in contrast

43:10

to health care. Much of health

43:12

care is in the private sector

43:14

in this country. Not all of

43:16

it, you know, Medicare is a

43:18

great example. Medicare, by the way,

43:20

is socialized medicine, which people don't

43:22

want to hear, but it is.

43:24

largely taxpayer money, some philanthropic foundation

43:26

money, maybe some public-private partnership, but

43:28

most of public health is taxpayer

43:30

dollars. It is looking at health

43:32

from a population, public, hence public

43:34

health perspective. And so it's not

43:36

decision-making for an individual patient. And

43:38

I think this is one area

43:40

where people got frustrated during the

43:42

pandemic because you had these blanket

43:45

recommendations for... how do we reduce

43:47

disease and death at the population

43:49

level? And some people would say,

43:51

yeah, but that's not me. And

43:53

so they would not see themselves

43:55

at being at risk, for example.

43:57

are not necessarily thinking about not

43:59

just what, say, COVID infection means

44:01

for them, but what it might

44:03

mean for the people around them.

44:05

And so those are just different

44:07

ways of how do you weigh

44:09

risk and benefit of certain different

44:11

things. Another way to think about

44:13

public health is it's all the

44:15

stuff that does not happen in

44:17

a clinic or hospital. It's all

44:19

the stuff like. What's your air

44:21

quality? Your water quality? What is

44:23

the safety of your neighborhood? Is

44:25

it so violent you can't go

44:27

out for a walk and exercise

44:29

in your neighborhood? What is your

44:31

access to healthy food? You know,

44:33

those are the kinds of things

44:35

we think about in public health,

44:37

and that's not something you address

44:39

with a prescription pad or a

44:41

surgery. A lot of our levers

44:43

in public health are really about

44:45

policy, and how do you shift

44:47

the needle through policy? Which

44:49

brings us to the doing

44:51

section of this conversation. You

44:53

have been such a thoughtful

44:55

partner to powerful people, but

44:57

as you pointed out, you've

44:59

also been doing that work

45:01

with local organizations, with town

45:03

hall meetings, helping citizens understand

45:05

their power. How do we

45:07

as individuals push back and

45:09

meet this moment? We know

45:12

there has been a recent

45:14

tragedy. where vigilante justice seemed

45:16

like a solution to someone.

45:18

But we know that that's

45:20

not the answer. So how

45:22

do we think about what

45:24

else we can do? We

45:26

know we talk about voting

45:28

and for some that didn't

45:30

seem to work this time,

45:32

it does work, it just

45:34

doesn't work all the time

45:36

in the ways we want

45:38

it to work. But how

45:40

do we talk about starting

45:42

at the local level using

45:44

public health as the point

45:46

of entry? Give us our

45:48

marching orders, what do we

45:50

do? You know, with respect

45:52

to the United Health Care

45:54

CEO's assassination murder, I found

45:56

that profoundly disturbing because it

45:58

speaks to how disempowered either

46:00

this highly educated privileged

46:02

young man, how disempowered

46:04

he felt in fighting the

46:06

issues with our healthcare system. yes

46:08

our healthcare system is horrible.

46:11

We spend more than any other country

46:13

in the world. We have the worst

46:15

outcomes of any high income country. And

46:17

by the way, by the itself only

46:19

predicts about 10 to 20 of of

46:21

life expectancy of people's health outcomes. And

46:24

so a lot of what needs

46:26

to be done to improve people's health

46:28

is not in healthcare. care, again,

46:30

it's in public health. not in It's about

46:32

Again, 90 of the game is in

46:34

public health. 80, 90% of the game is in

46:36

really upset me about

46:38

that incident. that incident was

46:40

are so disempowered that they

46:43

feel like they have no choice

46:45

but vigilante justice but political violence. And

46:47

that's a very scary place

46:49

to be be people don't believe

46:51

in voting and government institutions in

46:53

meeting with their local officials. Yes,

46:56

Yes. all of that takes time. It

46:58

does take time to get informed, to

47:00

understand the issues, to reach out to

47:02

those people and to talk to them.

47:04

But I think that is where we

47:06

really need to be encouraging people to

47:09

get involved to be those things. people to get

47:11

involved is do those things. DC

47:13

might might seem very far away. And a

47:15

lot of the action is not in

47:17

DC for these issues. It is in your

47:19

state, it's in your city. Get Get involved

47:21

at that level. In In New York City,

47:23

for example, we have these community health

47:25

boards and I've met with a bunch of

47:27

them over the last couple of years

47:29

during the pandemic to educate them. last These

47:31

are concerned citizens who are really trying to

47:33

do what they can to make their

47:35

communities healthier. who are really trying to that,

47:37

again, to time. It takes lots

47:39

of people. healthier. And that's where you can

47:41

have a very tangible impact. of people, but

47:43

that's really the level at which I

47:46

would encourage people. The powers

47:48

are there. These are really,

47:50

encourage people. kitchen table concerns people

47:52

have, like like it's happening, I I

47:54

don't know, with with near

47:56

the school school goes

47:58

to goes to school it's What's happening with

48:01

gun violence in your neighborhood? It's

48:03

the opioid overdoses, you know, your

48:05

neighbors, you're talking about so and

48:07

so lost their son. These are

48:09

things that are very tangible to

48:12

people where you can get involved,

48:14

and it doesn't have to be

48:16

a partisan thing. Dr. Saline Gounder,

48:18

thank you so much for joining

48:20

us here and informing us here

48:23

at Assembly Required. At Assembly Required,

48:25

we encourage the audience to be

48:27

curious, solve problems. and do good

48:29

through a segment we call our

48:31

toolkit. Now, we're going to fight

48:34

the allergy to science and information

48:36

by being curious. During my time

48:38

in the Georgia State Legislature, I

48:40

relied heavily on KFF News, and

48:42

it's still my go-to. KFF News

48:45

is an independent source with news

48:47

and health policy research, so sign

48:49

up for their newsletters at kff.org/email.

48:51

You're going to notice that today

48:53

I'm doing things a little differently.

48:56

You see, we've gotten quite a

48:58

few listener questions that have a

49:00

running theme. First, Ed Bogue wrote

49:02

an email titled How to Be

49:04

an Activist with Social Anxiety. He

49:07

writes, since the election, I felt

49:09

energized to help defend human rights,

49:11

but severe social anxiety has been

49:13

a major barrier for me. Even

49:15

when it's just low-stakes small talk,

49:17

my throat gets so dry that

49:20

I can barely speak, that I

49:22

can barely speak. and years of

49:24

customer service work hasn't helped me

49:26

overcome this. How do I get

49:28

involved and make a difference when

49:31

so much of the work is

49:33

about connecting people? Number two. Muyan

49:35

Chen wrote about wanting to be

49:37

politically engaged even though she just

49:39

has a green card. I came

49:42

to the US from China more

49:44

than 10 years ago and now

49:46

work as a researcher in a

49:48

national lab. Being a foreign national

49:50

with a green card now. It's

49:53

been quite stressful to watch the

49:55

events unfolding, but it seems difficult

49:57

to do any... anything

49:59

about it legally. I'm I'm

50:01

wondering if there are anything such as as

50:04

volunteer opportunities that I can contribute

50:06

to. to. And number

50:08

three, a caller whose name I whose name

50:10

I didn't quite catch. in and left in

50:12

and left a voicemail responding to Cox

50:14

Cox Richardson episode. She writes,

50:16

I've writes, I've been getting

50:18

myself and my small online community

50:21

call call our representative every day day

50:23

leave messages with them with well

50:25

as well as an email. Just kind of of

50:27

letting them know, you know, know. what we think and

50:29

what we need from them. from them. And so

50:31

I'm just wondering. wondering, Are there specific folks

50:33

we can be calling and writing? and writing?

50:35

I the idea of a bunch of us doing. doing

50:37

this this kind of small thing together. We've

50:39

been We've been calling individual members

50:41

that we can, also writing and calling

50:44

our senators about Trump's nominations to

50:46

his nominations to but just looking for any other

50:48

ideas for folks to call. for folks to

50:50

call. Now, normally this is where where answer

50:52

your questions or you resources on what

50:54

to do about what we just discussed,

50:56

like public health. health. But today, we're going

50:58

to begin a capsule course. grassroots

51:00

grassroots organizing, Ed's social anxiety

51:03

means we just find a different

51:05

way for him to contribute

51:07

to the cause, like setting up

51:09

agendas up agendas resources. resources. For Muyan, her

51:11

her expertise can be a

51:13

major asset in finding

51:15

information and developing communication systems. systems.

51:17

for our our phone warrior, you're

51:19

in the midst of

51:21

convening advocates to push our

51:23

agenda for good. good. Because

51:25

here at Assembly required, we

51:27

know we can start

51:29

solving problems by showing up

51:31

and taking Over the

51:33

next Over the next several episodes, we're

51:35

going to use this segment. to talk

51:37

about concrete steps that we

51:39

can take take towards that

51:42

political leaders do their

51:44

jobs. jobs. Federal action will

51:46

obviously matter, and absolutely

51:48

it's important. What I hope

51:50

you've heard over these many episodes is that

51:52

we're here. is to win. to win.

51:54

However, winning won't be fast, and

51:57

it will require many of us

51:59

across the country. to take on

52:01

different parts of the problem and

52:03

combine our successes. And that means

52:05

often working at the local level

52:07

so we can one day have

52:09

federal impact. This is not in

52:11

lieu of federal action. It's in

52:13

addition to. Let's get started. Our

52:16

first step is identifying the issue

52:18

that matters to you most. Is

52:20

it your state's refusal to expand

52:22

Medicaid? Book bans in your local

52:24

school district. A food desert that

52:27

seems to be growing. Do you

52:29

need to launch a tenants union?

52:31

Pick one as your tester pancake.

52:33

The issue that you want to

52:35

start with. So over the holidays,

52:38

your task is to decide on

52:40

the issue you want to tackle.

52:42

Be as specific as possible about

52:44

the problem. And also, be as

52:46

local as you can with the

52:49

solution. If the city council can

52:51

solve it, start there. If it's

52:53

the county commission, know it. Does

52:55

the state have jurisdiction? If so,

52:57

that's your target. Take the time

53:00

to know who's in charge and

53:02

who can make the change you

53:04

want to see. This is called

53:06

power mapping. So find out as

53:08

much as you can about the

53:11

issue, who's responsible, and who else

53:13

is already working on it. Check

53:15

social media and Google to see

53:17

if anyone else is talking about

53:20

this issue. Write it all down

53:22

and let's get ready to go

53:24

to work. As we close

53:26

I want to share one last listener comment

53:28

and this is from Emily Drake. She writes,

53:31

I wanted to thank you, first of all,

53:33

for answering my question a few weeks ago.

53:35

After hearing your answer and listening to this

53:37

week's episode about the education system, I have

53:40

decided to go back to teaching public school

53:42

and to get involved as much as possible.

53:44

I taught public school for seven years and

53:46

I've had a few years off. staying home

53:49

with my kids, but I think it's a

53:51

good time to go back and use my

53:53

skills for good. So thank you. I appreciate

53:56

all you do. Well, thank you,

53:58

Emily, for sharing sharing

54:00

telling me how you're

54:02

getting to work. And

54:05

if any of you want to

54:07

tell us what you've learned, how you've

54:09

solved a problem, or how learned, rejoined

54:11

the fight, send us an email or

54:13

how you've rejoined.com us leave us a voicemail. Your

54:16

questions and comments might

54:18

be featured on the pod.

54:20

us a Our number is

54:23

213 and comments -9509. is 213-2939509. I say

54:25

thank you. Thank you

54:27

for listening. Thank you for

54:29

engaging. Thank you for letting

54:31

us know that we're coming

54:34

together and we're getting to

54:36

work. and we're That wraps up

54:38

this episode of Assembly episode of

54:40

Abrams. I'll meet you here

54:42

next week. Abrams. I'll meet you here next week.

54:44

Assembly Required with Stacey Abrams is a with

54:46

Stacey Abrams is a cricket

54:48

media production. producer Our lead show

54:51

producer is and our associate our

54:53

associate producer is Paulina Kiral Polaviv is

54:55

our our video producer. This

54:57

episode was recorded and mixed

54:59

by Evan Sutton. Our theme

55:01

song is by Vasilis Votopoulos.

55:03

Thank you to to Matt DeGrote, Kyle Seglin,

55:05

Tyler Boozer, and and Samantha Slossberg

55:07

for production support. Our executive

55:10

producers are Katie are Katie Long, Madeline

55:12

and me, Stacey Abrams. Abrams. At

55:33

Walden University, we get W. We're We're

55:35

not here to have our

55:37

hands held. We're here to lend

55:39

lend ours, we want to create

55:41

positive change on the world around

55:43

us. And Walden University teaches

55:45

us the skills to make it

55:48

happen skills to time. Now,

55:50

it's your time. Learn the

55:52

skills. Make an impact.

55:54

Get the W. Walden University.

55:56

Set a course for

55:59

change. Visit change. .edu to learn.

56:01

More. Certified to operate by Chef.