Lines. That means for democrats, 2027488000. Republicans, we want to hear from you at 2027488001. Is endants, your line independents, your line is 2027488002. You can text us your opinions at 2027488003. And we are always reading your opinions on facebook and twitter cspanwj. President trump is expected to reveal his pick for the Supreme Court later today at the white house, and several news organizations are reporting the picked to be federal judge Amy Coney Barrett. In fact, we will read a couple of paragraphs from the latest bloomberg story announcing their sourcing on the cake, heres what they said President Trump has told associates he will nominate amy barrett to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court, according to people familiar with the matter, a move that could cement conservative control of the judiciary weeks before election day. If confirmed by the senate, barrett in the 48, would become the third justice appointed to the ninemember high court by trump. She is not to be a devout catholic with fervent antiabortion views. Trump plans to announce her nomination at a white house ceremony on saturday, though he could still change his mind, the people cautioned. Lets get more information about this Supreme Court by talking to a Supreme Court reporter, greg storr, who also worked for bloomberg. Before we get to what is going to happen today, what has struck you about the washingtons goodbye to late justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg this week . Guest it has been remarkable. At a surprise given what cultural icon she, was what a hero she was to so many people in this country, primarily liberal people. Was one of the best discussions i have heard of her if she was somebody who would be a very important historical figure even if she hadnt joined the Supreme Court just because of the work she did on gender equality as a litigator before the Supreme Court, and of course, she got on the Supreme Court and had a remarkable impact, and the timing of her death before the election is very poignant and is usually important moment for the country. So there is a lot of emotion being shown by people on both sides. Host several news organizations including bloomberg are reporting the trace of her replacement will be amy coney reporting that the choice of her replacement will be Amy Coney Barrett. What do we know about Amy Coney Barrett . Guest she is a federal Appeals Court judge appointed by donald trump, a former Notre Dame University law school professor. She is a very religious woman, as you mentioned, about will suddenly be a subject of questioning at the confirmation hearings, it was when she was an Appeals Court judge. Sided onmebody who has the right side of cases, thebody who has backed trump on immigrationrelated questions. She generally have a conservative track record. She will be the first Supreme Court justice in a very long time not to have an Ivy League Law degree, she graduated from notre dame law school. She will be very much a source of controversy when she is up before the Senate Judiciary committee. Host we know in the past but some president s have leaked certain names just to see what the public reaction is. How certain army that she is going to be the pick . I noticed in the story that there was a caveat that the president could still change his mind. Guest this is the very unconventional presidency, but one thing that has been conventional is the way he makes judicial selections. Said things like that before neil gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh or picked, and in both ases, the president went with person who was largely expected to be the pick in the days leading up. All signs suggest that President Trump is very happy with this choice. She was somebody he felt very good about when he interviewed her when the opening occurred a few years ago and the white house had been planning in the event that a vacancy was caused by ginsburg leaving the court or dying, about barrett was going to get it. Host the opening of the Supreme Court, the first mondays right around the corner. With Justice Ginsburgs death, that means there is a 44 split. The Supreme Court only has eight justices which means there is a possibility of a 44 split. What cases are you looking at, and how will the court operate with only eight justices right now . Guest the court operated with eight justices for a 14month period when Justice Scalia died. They can get it done. That is where you see moreconsensus rulings. Watching inwill be the event there is not a night justice is the Affordable Care act case, which will be argued a week after the election. If the court hears the case without a net justice and took 44, initial vote, divided was the court tends to do is it, wait forargue the night justice to join the Supreme Court and let him or her decide the vote. The court could also preemptively decide to reschedule the argument and do it when they know they are confident they will have a knife justice. Best ninth justice ninth justice. They have a lot of time to decide cases like this, so unless there is an extended vacancy, i would expect the court ultimately will decide the case with nine justices. Host it is washington, d. C. So everything is revolving around the elections. What does the Supreme Court do if there are election challenges between now and election day or on election day, and if they dont have a new justice seated by the point . Guest it would be a somewhat different situation. A lot of those electionrelated issues may come up as an emergency matter. You may have a federal Appeals Court that decide the issue one way or another. If they have eight justices and if Supreme Court issues the losing side of the court issues a stay and then the Lower Court Decision stays in force, that is a possibility for this election season. The president and his administration have indicated they would really like in ninth justice because they would like to have assurance that they have five votes to block or overturn a lower court ruling. Is a Legal Mechanism for handling those issues. , beyond todays take the President Trump, where we should have our eyes this week and where we should be watching. Guest it will be hard not to look at the pick this week. We have been talking about whether the president should have the right to nominate somebody now and the senate should confirm somebody before the election. Now we will shift to talking about a person. In all likelihood, Amy Coney Barrett and whether she is qualified or whether she should be on the Supreme Court. So the focus will be on her for the next several days. Host we would like to thank bloomberg Supreme Court reporter greg stohr for getting up and being with us. Thanks for your help this morning. Guest take care. Once again, we will spend our first hour talking about President Trumps presumed pick later today of Amy Coney Barrett of the Supreme Court. Lets go to our phones and start with terry calling from therstown, maryland, on republican line. Good morning. Caller good morning, jesse. His is a fabulous pic my heart goes out to the family ginsburg. She is no longer sick, she is walking the gold streets of heaven now. This is a great pick. The first question i would like to ask your future democrat callers, you discussed this in the news article and with your previous guest i have never seen catholic bigotry toward this nominee. Every article or liberal journalist i hear is fretting over her being catholic. I just wonder if it would be the same coverage if this was a jewish or muslim. I dont think so. But for some reason, if you are catholic and you believe in god or the bible, you are unfit to be a justice. But they are fine with biden and harris being president and Vice President. I just see democrats hypocrisy and fear mongering. Thank you, jesse and have a day. Host lets go to our next caller from florence, kentucky on the democrat line. Cd, good morning. Caller i think the concern with Supreme Court nominations anecially now, is encroachment of religious people into our , beginning with hobby lobby, and with the passage of samesex minimum marriage. You really started seeing. Evangelicals especially need to understand nd where mineghts e begin. Have a great day. Host tom on the independent line from florida. Good morning. Caller good morning. I would like to Say Something judicial. I think we should see what kind of judgment this person has or any of the nominees. She should say no, she will not accept the nomination until after the election, her or else. Just waited to see what her fellow americans say in this election. The person they decide on will decide. Bigot,is a selfcentered maybe she will only care about herself and not let her fellow decide, but she should care more about them than herself and every person should look at her judgment in this decision or any other person nominated, and if they dont wait, you will see what they think about their fellow americans. Host during any possible confirmation hearing, one of the questions we will know that will the futurel be nominees position on roe v. Wade. During her 2017 Circuit Court of appeals nomination hearing, judge barrett was asked about roe v. Wade. Here is what she said. Do you think roe v. Wade was correctly decided . Feelnator, i am sorry, i like i cant as a nominee offer an opinion. As i said before, on the rightness or wrongness of any precedent because i dont want to give the impression that it would treat more precedence as more valuable than others. I would apply precedent just resident. Ther or you believe there is a right to privacy under the constitution . The court has quite clearly held that there is. The you agree with the court . Senator blumenthal, i would follow up. Whether i agree or disagree would be beside the point to the discharge of my duties if i were confirmed. You have no personal views as to the right of privacy and of the constitution . The question is whether i have personal views that would be appropriate to share in this context, given the misimpression it would give against whom make up your before mayflower confirmed. If there were a first is there a First Amendment right in the constitution . The First Amendment exquisitely protects the right to free speech. Is there a Free Expression right in the constitution . Yes. I assumed it were asking me about the right to privacy and the due process clause, but of course the constitution protect expressly protects privacy, and the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, for example. What about the right of a woman to determine when and pregnant . E becomes the court has held that while that right is not expressed in the due process clause, it is implied. The court has reiterated that. Griswold was the foundation of roe, and the court has adhered to that view for many years. You would adhere faithfully to that precedent . I absolutely would. And you have no personal beliefs as to whether roe was correctly decided . It is not that i have personal beliefs . Every nominee before you has beliefs about that precedent and many others, but all nominees are united in their belief that what they think about a precedent should not bear on how they would decide cases. We hear that from a lot of nominees. Frankness,n all inevitably, personal beliefs enter into judicial decisions. Anybody who has practiced law, and i have done it for 40 years, knows that judges, with the best of intentions are often influenced by their personal decisions, . Wouldnt you agree senator, i want you to know that you dont have to take my assurance for it. As senator flake said, i have gotten bipartisan sub word with it. Bipartisan support with it. All my colleagues, more than 70 members, hundreds of notre dame alumni, people across the ideological spectrum. If these people, who disagree with me on policy matters, thought i would in the business of imposing my policy beliefs, i would not have received such support. I have conducted myself as a professional medical career and would continue to do so is confirmed. Host let us see what our social media followers are saying about the residents reported sick of Amy Coney Barrett for the Supreme Court. One says, i am sure if trump picked her, she must be the best ebook. I am sure she will kick the separation of church and state in mind. Another post says, great, a wonderful mother and an outstanding and hardworking woman. She will be a great addition to the court. Another post says, is amy barrett does her job according to the constitution, her political affiliation should not matter. Post, the user says, pic number three with the possibility of two more in the second term. Sure looks like winning. Where is joe . From facebook, it says very good choice. We want to know what you think of Amy Coney Barrett for the Supreme Court. Lets go to john calling from republican on the republican line calling from michigan on the republican line. Good morning. Caller my first comment would be, hell yes. It is fun to watch all you liberals running scared. [laughs] yeah, it is. My second comment is i cant wait to see what you are going when youre going to throw race into this one is conversation. Next comment hey, jessie. When are you going to go back to msnbc with your other colleagues . See you later, dems. Ha ha ha , rob lets go to new york on the democratic line. Good morning. Caller good morning. Cspan. U, that was a pretty cynical laugh the last caller left us. Pretty infantile too. Amy, if, this justice, she gets put into the position, she is not going to save mr. If there is a contested election. If he not you know, thinks that by giving her a left time job lifetime job, in his primitive mind, you give someone a lifetime job he will get something for it, he doesnt do anything without thinking he will get something in return. That is the quid pro quo. He is always dealing. But she will adhere to the constitution and she is not going to turn her back on the constitution. To save this man. We have a president who is not just a liar, and i think joe biden ought to come up with a nickname, he can borrow mine is cheatindon. Donna the cheater. Thejust a liar don cheater. If you get a hold of his taxes, i bet you will find enormous cheating. The taxes that have come out from 10 or 15 years ago has shown that he is really not just a liar, he cheats. If you want to vote for a guy who cheats, you ever get into any kind of a situation where someone has left you feeling with the short end of the stick because he had cheated i am in new york, i met half a dozen carpenters, contractors, people who worked for trump over the years who said they simply didnt get paid. And he did a fine job. Host lets go to greg from chattanooga, tennessee on the independent line. Good morning. Pick is athink the pretty good choice. If they are going to go by the constitution, youre going to hear a lot of stuff from the liberals. Roe v. Wade doesnt have anything to do with religion, i dont think. Why do they keep talking about it like that . It is just a personal beliefs about abortion and stuff. Anyway, thats it, thanks. Host betty on the democrat line from virginia. Good morning. Caller good morning, jesse and everybody. I am so thoroughly disgusted. She is the worst pick of all. The main thing is they shouldnt be ticking anybody. They stole one nominee, Merrick Garland from obama. Now they are about to steal another one. They are the most despicable bunch trump, Mitch Mcconnell, and a whole bunch of them. The only decent thing is lisa and susanfrom alaska, collins from maine that said they might not this is the worst thing that could happen, the very worst thing. They should honor Bader Ginsburgs wish that she didnt the anybody picked until new president was installed. Even if she didnt make that wish, this is completely, completely, completely despicable what these people are doing. I hope it backfires on them and they lose very big. She would be the worst pick of all because she is way too conservative. Go to marvin, calling from chattanooga, tennessee on the independent line. Good morning. Caller i have been watching the president ial elections so forth since the 1950s, eisenhower. I was born in the 1940s. I think of her country is going the exact wrong way in trying to decide by gender, aires, bisexual orientation who should be in the position. The constitution would say trying to decide by gender, by race, by sexual orientation, who should be in the position. The best individuals should be placed into the position. When Clarence Thomas was nominated and put on the Supreme Court, and it was directly as a replacement for thurgood marshall, making that a black seat. I think that is wrong, even as a black man i think that is wrong. I am surprised under those circumstances why the Jewish Community is not in arms to put another jewish person on the Supreme Court to replace this person. But as far as this country is concerned, as far as things are this administration has taken this country 200 years back into what we tried for 200 years prior to get away from, and that is setting the deck to make the advantage for one should notwhen that the process at all. Thank you and good morning. Host earlier this week, Senate Majority leader Mitch Mcconnell of kentucky talked a bit about whether the senate would be able to move any of President Trumps and getrough the senate a confirmation vote before election day. Heres what he had to say. Clip] we are already hearing incorrect claims that there is not sufficient time to examine and confirm a nominee. We can debunk this myth in about 30 seconds. As of today, there are 43 days until november 3, and 104 days until the end of this congress. The late, iconic injustice John Paul Stevens was confirmed by the senate in 19 days after this body formally received his nomination. 19 days from start to finish. Justice sandra day oconnor, another iconic jurist, was confirmed 33 days after her nomination. The late Justice Ginsburg herself, it was just 42 days. Justice stevens entire confirmation process could have been played out twice. Twice between now and november 3 with time to spare. And Justice Ginsburg herself could have been confirmed twice between now and the end of the year with time to spare. The senate has more than sufficient time to process it nomination. Nomination. History and precedent make that perfectly clear. Host lets go back to the phone lines and see what you think about President Trumps pick, supposing pick of Amy Coney Barrett for the Supreme Court. Lets go to earl from redding, california on the republican line. Good morning. Caller good morning and thank you for the opportunity. From what i know and what i have heard about her on her resume, she is probably a pick for the gop, for our president and for our party. I watched what i consider a funeral on the steps of the Supreme Court, and the most powerful man in the world went to give his respects to this justice, and, you know what, you can hate the man, but what you solemn moment, all your yelling and what have you, shame on you. Shame on you for what you did. And i want you to know something, if obama was president and you went through a protest to protect the man from harry reid taking their land and their water rights in a nevada called bunker very, you would be bunkerville, even be sitting for two years in jail naked in the cells. Time. You for the host lets go to judy, calling from richmond, michigan on the democrat line. Caller yes. I am so amazed that the democrats i could never be one again. What you have done for trump. Administration it doesnt bother you guys at all . You should respect your president until he is done. You have done nothing but backstab him and make up scrap all the time. Unbelievable what you guys do. I pray he gets four years and gets four more extra. Host lets go to paul calling from forest lake, minnesota on the independent lines. Good morning. Caller boy, that last call is hard to follow. I have been an independent voter all my life and i think with the Republican Party is doing in light of the merit garland process Merrick Garland. Rocess is glaring hypocrisy how people can still line up in support of this most corrupt resident we have had in my lifetime, who is a con man but most of all of bully, is just amazing to me. That is all up got to say. All i have got to say. Host mike is calling from ohio on the democratic line. Caller good day, jesse. Know ifonder, i dont there is another judge coming out of the Federalist Society over there with leonard leo who is in charge of all the dark money. Also, this thing on abortion, i just wonder how many grandfathers would be proud of their grandbaby if their granddaughter was raped by some crazy killer or some other type of person. And ill tell you Something Else , the reason these people that are calling in to support this judge, the republican side, the reason they sleep like a baby right now is because i baby hasnt developed any morals yet. I am surprised also why he didnt appoint jerry falwell, jr. To this position. Because that is one of their types. You have a good day, jesse. Thank you. Host lets go to bernard calling from rutherford college, North Carolina on the independent line. Good morning. Caller good morning. The thing that bothers me most seeing situation is, that the court has lost its way in the fact that i was taught that the original purpose of the court was determined if the law was constitutional. Was to determine if the law was constitutional. Not it seems like return to the court to make laws. In the case of abortion and the obama care law, both of these laws were reviewed by the Supreme Court. Both laws were found to because additional. Therefore, if the court chooses to again expanding them, it seems like they are going against her own decision, which has already been made. It just seems like that would be against the courts purpose, which is not to make laws, but simply determined that a law is constitutional, which has always been done. Thank you, jesse. Host lets go to mike calling from North Carolina on the independent line. Good morning. Caller good morning, sir. Kudos to the previous caller, my fellow north carolinians. He made good points about the original purpose of courts, and that is, as Justice Roberts has said and other judges have said, their job is to be unbiased, to call balls and strikes. That is their purpose, not to make law. I think judge barrett is eminently qualified. Her colleagues, including many liberals have written numerous articles about her legal qualifications, her legal mind, her ruling, so on and so forth. So that is without question, ok. We can get into the politics of this, and there is a lot of politics in this, but, after what the democrats on the Judiciary Committee did to Brett Kavanaugh, all right, i have a feeling there is an old saying that karma is a you know what. Payback is you know what. This is karma coming back on them, ok . It really truly is. They behaved despicably in the way they treated Brett Kavanaugh and the lies that were proven to be lies or manufactured fantasies or whatever, to try to tear that man and his family down, were despicable. If i could make one comment, sir, thank you for allowing me the time and the privilege to call into the show it would be nice if people drift off topic the topic here this morning is the qualifications, i guess, or even why trump is ticking the judge. When they start drifting off into accusations of what trump is or his past, or if he didnt pay carpenters it would be thatif you guys just rein in a little bit more as hosts of the show. Keeps people on track or cut them off if they make a root or racist comment. Steer them. Say, what is your opinion on Justice Barrett . Guess thatture to most people calling in are just angry that they are not getting their way. They dont know any thing about this woman whatsoever. They dont know her legal or judicial history in any way, shape, or form. Trump picked her, she is conservative and she is a therefore, she must be evil. When you go off into the territory the whole show just disintegrates. From lets go to dawn texas. She is really not qualified. Don. I think we lost lets go to another from us cruisers, new mexico on the independent line. ,ood morning from las cruces new mexico on the independent line. Caller if you listen to the Appellate Court hearing, two of the most interesting questions are from Sheldon Whitehouse and al franken. Questioning, he brought up a group that Amy Coney Barrett gave a lecture to in that group has been declared a hate group by the southern poverty law center. What al franken was pointing to was her lack of judgment in the groups she chooses to give to. Ches the second person who had interesting questioning was Sheldon Whitehouse. What Sheldon Whitehouse has pointed out is the role of the Federalist Society in the appointment of so many of these judges. If you look at these Appellate Court justices, the District Court justices, and the now Supreme Court justices, kavanaugh, gorsuch, and now ofrett, they are all members the Federalist Society and have been appointed to them. And all of them have had lobbying in the millions of dollars for their appointment. When Sheldon Whitehouse was talking to larsen, who was also at the Appellate Court hearing, he asked, what are you getting in return . Why would a group spent approximately 60 million for you to be named 16 million for you to be named the judge . What do they expect . Is there a commercial return, a return in terms of the judgments , in terms of social justice . What are they getting . My point of view, it is case beme that a rico brought against the Federalist Society and the role that they have in the appointment of judges. Host politico has a story this morning talking about the possible democrat reaction to the pick of Amy Coney Barrett would be in the senate, with some democrats saying they dont plan to give the pick the traditional meeting that President Trumps and other sjudicial picks have gone to the court. This is in response to 2016 when many republicans refused to meet with Merrick Garland, former president Barack Obamas nominee. Democrats are unanimous they will not support considering any justice before the elections, but many in the caucus are weighing whether it is appropriate to give trumps nominee the same Cold Shoulder that garland received from republicans for years ago. There has also been discussion about boycotting the confirmation hearings, but Judiciary Committee democrats have reached a consensus not to so, according to a source familiar with the afternoon committee call. Bottom line is democrats are grappling with how to respond to mcconnells controversial moves to shift the court to the right using any power he has, and even talk on the left of expanding the Supreme Court should they take power in november. It is not clear that the party is prepared to respond with explosive countermeasures. Te Majority Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer spoke about what this could mean for the future of the senate as an institutional body. Here is what he had to say. [video clip] sen. Schumer i worry for the future of this chamber if the republican majority proceeds path. His if the Senate Majority over the course of six years fills two Supreme Court seats using completely contradictory rationales, how can we expect to trust the other side again . How can we trust each other if one push comes to if when push comes to shove the other side will doublecross their own standards when it is politically advantageous . Tell me how. Tell me how this would not spell the end of this supposedly great deliberative body . Because i dont see how. , one wayonly one way for this chamber to retain its dignity through this difficult chapter. There is only one way for us to have some hope of coming together again, trusting each other again, lowering the temperature, moving forward. And that is for four brave Senate Republicans to commit to rejecting any nominee until the next president is installed. That was Justice Ginsburgs dying wish, and it may be the senates only last hope. Lets go back to some of our social media followers and see what they have to say about President Trumps expected pick of Amy Coney Barrett for the Supreme Court. Here is what exercise just because a justice is a conservative doesnt guarantee that the legal opinions will reflect that. Seemsr text says, acb highly qualified. It would be interesting to know who biden would nominate if it were his choice, then we could scrutinize that person too and make a comparative judgment. Another text i totally support the president s choice for the Supreme Court. It is his job and hes doing it. Another says democratic politicians asked has nothing to do with judge Amy Coney Barrett being an active are practicing catholic. The double standard rationale by republicans for allowing President Trumps nominee to be voted on during a National Election year while not allowing president obamas nominee the same consideration in 2016. Lets take a couple of calls and see what think about President Trumps pick of Amy Coney Barrett for the Supreme Court. Lets go to dan calling from the independent dust from independence, oregon on the democratic line. Good morning. I am a catholic, and it was an altar boy with the catechism and all the other good stuff, right, and i wouldnt choose a catholic woman to do this. Because she is supposed to follow catholic mandates. That is, follow what you husband says and a few other things. Republicans cannot be trusted. Dont believe a word they say. Secondly, anybody who would vote for trump is still a racist. Hank you host lets go to jerry calling from livingston, tennessee on the independent line. Good morning. Caller good morning. I just want to say, this is not really about roe v. Wade, this affordableng the care act. People need to stop and think what happens if they lose all coverage of their preexisting illness. This is the most dangerous time in a long time, because if you have no coverage of the illnesses you already have, what insurance the you have . During her 2017 Circuit Court of appeals nomination hearing, judge merrick was asked about the religions role in court decisions. Here is what she said. [video clip] when is a proper for a judge to put her religious views above the law . Let me start with you very last question and say never. It is never appropriate for a judge to impose that judges personal convictions, whether they derived from faith or anywhere else, on the law. This article i wrote as a law student has gotten a lot of attention since my nomination, so i would like the opportunity to put it in context. I put that law review article knows a thirdyear law ago. Nts 20 years it was a project by professor had underway and he invited me to work on it with him, and i was complimented that i he thought i was up to the task of being a research assistant, but i was very much a junior partner in our collaboration. Say thatcould i sitting here today, that that article and its every particular reflects how i think about these questions today, with, as you say, the benefit of 20 years of experience and also the ability to speak solely in my own voice . No, it would not. But i continue to stand and vehemently believe the core proposition of that article, which is that if theres ever a conflict between a judges personal conviction and a judges duty under the rule of law, it is never permissible for the judge to follow their personal convictions in a decision of the case rather than what the law requires. That article emphasized that point repeatedly, and i are here to that today. Host lets go back to our phone lines and see what you think about pres. Trumps supposed to pick of amy barrett for the Supreme Court. Lets go to steve of the republican line. Caller thank you for taking my call. I wish he would bring to the attention of your listeners this morning you would bring to the attention of your listeners this morning what fox news has brought to the attention of your viewers, and that is under the circumstances, what has been the result through history, how often has this occurred in the presidency, the residenc how often have you had the senate in one party and the president held by another party and you will find there is plenty of precedent for what is happening now. I havee other question to ask is, is this legal . It is totally legal what is going on. It was totally legal under obama nomination, that the senate did not follow through with it, that they rejected to even consider it. After all, who controlled the senate at the time, the republicans did. It is totally lawful for what is happening right now. And in so far as schumers statement of trust, how can we ever trust him again well, i broken, the trust was in the last three years when it became obvious that the democrats were trying to pull a coup, actually overthrow duly elected president in their russiarussiarussia hop in conjunction with our intelligence services, the c. I. A. And the fbi. It ended up in impeachment hearings and they didnt even pursue the matter, even though they said they had plenty of evidence. Richard schiff said he had lots of evidence. They chose not to even pursue that issue. It was all a hoax. So the trust was broken at that time. Never be established. We have a Marxist Democratic Party that once they get in power, they will do things to stay in power just like all do,atorship governments just like all communist governments do, they will change the filibuster, they will make washington, d. C. A state, puerto rico a state, they will do away with the electoral college, they court. Ack the supreme they will change the voting age to 60 and make 11 Million Immigrants citizens. 16changed the voting age to and they will make 11 Million Immigrants citizens. Host lets go to frank of the independent line, good morning. Caller thank you for taking my call. I cant tell you how much i appreciate that open forum you guys provide for us. That we have found in documents of which the constitution is one of those, the following of the cause edition is probably the most important thing we do for the safety of the nation. As the Founding Fathers intended , we should look forward to possibly into but more civilized fashion if we could. The other threats that i see to the nation, which would be clear and present dangers, would be the objections i have to a press that distorts or facts instead of presenting them as they are, and then, of course, the weaponization of our institutions. Those are real threats. The following of our basic documents is our safety. Thank you. Host a caller had a question about the history of nominations year. Election the American Bar Association journal has actually written a story that talks about that. I will read a couple of paragraphs about. Times,hor wrote that 29 there has been an open Supreme Court vacancy in an election year, or in a lameduck session before the next president ial inauguration. The president made a nomination in alternate cases. 1968mes between 1796 in president s have fought to fill in Supreme Court vacancy in an election year, while their party controlled the senate. 10 of those came before the election. None of the 10 were successful. By contrast, when the president and senate were from opposite parties, there have been 10 vacancies resulting in a postelection nomination. The president made the nomination before election day but only one of those was confirmed by the senate controlled by the opposite party, that was president Grover Clevelands nomination in 1888. Advocates on the left side president lincolns decision not to fill the vacancy created by taneyeath of roger b in 1864 until after lincoln won. The next day. On wednesday, President Trump made the case of confirming the Supreme Court before the election. Heres what he had to say. [video clip] they have the full complement of the Supreme Court . Is a fair question. I think it is important. I think this will end up in the Supreme Court and i think it is important that we have nine justices. And i think the system will go very quickly. I will be submitting at 5 00 on saturday the name of the person that i chose to this most important of all positions. And i think we should go very quickly. You see the republicans are very united. As far as the timing is concerned, we were elected. We have a lot of time. One justice was picked in 19 days. 19 days. We could do for pop at that rate, or five we could do 4 at that rate, or 5. It is better that you go before the election. This scam the democrats are theing will be before United States Supreme Court and i think having a 44 situation situation. Od i dont know that you get that, i think it should be 80 or 90, but just in case it would be more political than it should be, i think it is important to have a knife justice. Host lets get more calls i think it is very important to justice. Nth host lets get some more calls in. Lets go to anita. Caller thank you for letting me join in on the call. I am a lifelong democrat and voted democrat all my life and i am disappointed in how their response has been to all of this going back to 2016. I presumed a lot of people expected hillary trump to be elected which is why there was a hold off on the Supreme Court nomination to leave it up to the new president clinton. And we know, of course, that didnt happen. But i think President Trump is doing his Due Diligence and his responsibility by nominating is Supreme Court justice. Barrett will be properly vetted. She seems to be a very viable candidate who would be a constitutionalist, someone who would be fair and balanced and for viewstical person that are leftwing or right wing downwing, however you want to call it, but a fair and balanced judge and a good court. N to our supreme host lets go to michelle calling from manchester, ohio on the independent line. Caller good morning. Thank you for taking my call. I am 50 years old, and this is the first year that i have registered to vote. I have always left it in gods hands. Godve always felt as if would take care of us. This year, i dont feel that way. I am going to vote. Amy, imagine being in her seat. Everybody is arguing about this, but imagine her sitting there in that seat, if she does take the seat. She is going to deal with all of this. I mean, i pray for her. I pray for this country, and i hope to god that when i go to that that i do it the way god intended. And thank you for taking my call. Host lets go to edmund, who is calling from pennsylvania on the republican line. Edmund, good morning. Yes, i just wanted to let you know that i came across an article on the internet, that when obama was president , the democrats had a majority in the , and he asked ginsburg and also toldre her about the majority that the democrats had in the senate, and it would be a good idea that thate they would elect a younger justice. And he was hinting to ginsburg that she should resign but she didnt take a hint and she didnt even respond. So i think the problem lies with the democrats from the standpoint of what happened when they had the majority in the senate. They couldve had their own choice. That is all i had to say. Host lets go to mark calling from bloomington, california on the republican line. Caller good morning. I am a democrat but i voted for trump last time, probably for immigration reasons. It is a different story now. Here you have a president running an empire in broad daylight and nobody is doing anything about it. It is outrageous. Half his people are already in jail. He knows hes going to jail if he loses. The election is print, trying to cause all this chaos does the election is rigged, he is trying to cause all this chaos. That cspan and all these obligations are giving trump all this airplay. Everything that comes out of his mouth, all of it is vitriol and lies. He cant stop lying. It is outrageous. Host robert is calling from mount pleasant, pennsylvania on the republican line. Good morning. Caller good morning, and thank you for letting me speak. I have to commend a lot of the colors for their comments, and i would like a lot of the callers for their comments. I would just like to say that missed barrett couldnt be any better. Do not consider the fact that she is a woman or the fact that she is white. Do not consider the fact that she is catholic, that has nothing to do with it. Listen to the woman speak. Listen to the woman self reflect on her past, and you can tell that she is going to be fair and an excellent pick. As far as the democrats trying to reject her because it is not fair, it wasnt fair that the democrats drug down this country for the past three and a half years with these allegations for impeachment. It wasnt fair for a lot of their actions against judge kavanagh. Fair,they want to cry not that yet they have to self reflect on their actions and islize that, for one, this legal. It is lawful. . S it a good pick it was certainly is. Has it been done before . Es, more times than not that is what i wanted to say. Thank the callers especially the gentleman from North Carolina earlier for the recovered what i wanted to say in detail. Time. You for your host james is calling from washington, d. C. On the democratic line. Good morning. Caller good morning. How are you doing, sir . Host just fine, go ahead. Caller is it even about the Supreme Court nomination . Have three we branches of government, and if anybody went to high school or grade school, they know that. Makes legislative branch the laws and the executive branch signs the law into law and the Supreme Court makes sure the law is constitutional. So my whole thing is, the republicans in 2006, when president obama was in office, they had 10 months before the election when Justice Scalia like, no,y, and, its were not going to allow obama to make a pick. So, what is the problem . Are the republicans hypocrites . Host kathryn is calling from honolulu, hawaii on the independent line. Good morning. Caller good morning. I agree with that last caller. I have no idea why mitch could say that the current president can pick, however, they wouldnt allow that for obama. Sounds like he is a hypocrite. I have been a republican most of my life. I am thoroughly disgusted with trump. And still is corrupt to this day, we have no record of his taxes. Thank you. Host lets go to brian calling from geneva, illinois. Good morning. Caller thank you. I would just like to say, i am on the coveted voters of america, i always will for the guy that won. So i am sort of in the middleoftheroad. But trump is without a doubt the worst thing that ever happened to america. He is so destructive. The votingng system is being destroyed. There are 200 lawsuits out there because of trump. The tip of the iceberg of how disruptive and corrupt he is. I am a christian, and i never thought this way about anybody, but i actually want him to die, and i feel very guilty about feeling that way, we would like to thank all of our callers on that segment this morning. The supreme how court battle will play out. Later on, or week long battleground state series wraps up with a focus on the grand canyon state of arizona. That conversation will be with the arizona Capital Times. Eporter first, yesterday, Congress Held a Memorial Service for the late Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in statuary hall here, the rabbi reflected on Justice Ginsburg life, the law and hurt religious tradition. In the chambers of Justice Ginsburg, hangs a framed piece of art that reads fedec justice, justice, you must pursue. A command in the 16th chapter of deuteronomy. The rabbinic tradition assigns meaning to every single word in the torah. There must be a reason why fedec justice is written twice. The repetition here teaches even ezra, i meet people rabbi that time and time again, all of the days of your life you must pursue justice. This was how Justice Ginsburg lived her life. Justice did not arrive like a lightning bolt but rather allugh dogged persistence the days of her life. Real change she said, and during change happens one step at a time. She faced many obstacles in her life, even from a young age. The valedictorian of her high school class, she gave no graduation speech. Instead, she grieved at home with her father after burying her beloved mother one day before graduation. Her family had already suffered terrible loss with the death of her sister when Justice Ginsburg was only 14 months old. Ginsburg kept rising. A full scholarship to Cornell University and only one of nine women in her Harvard Law School class. After transferring to columbia law school, she graduated first in her class yet she could not find a job. No firm in new york would hire her because she was a woman. Deterobstacles did not her. She pressed on. As she said in an interview with her dear friend Nina Totenberg i get out of law school with top grades, no law firm in the city of new york will hire me. I end up teaching. That gave me time to devote to the movement of evening out the rights of women and men. Washington journal continues. We are back with James Wallner who is here to discuss both the upcoming Supreme Court confirmation battle and its impact on both institutions. Good morning. Guest good morning. Host remind our viewers what ther street interview and tell us what you did when you worked in the senate . R Street Institute is a fabulous Public Policy Research Institute in washington, d. C. Many people may never have heard of it. Asis relatively new as far think tanks and washington, d. C. And it really is asked ordinary. It explores solutions, Pragmatic Solutions and its motto is free markets and Real Solutions and and not overly ideological it really tries to take a step back and look at whats not working in our policies and our society and why havent we figured out how to fix it. Thats what i do there at the governance department. Its a really great place. To go toge you the website and check it out. I work in the center for over a decade i love the institution and i wept like a baby when i left my last day. I probably shouldnt say that a National Television but on its worst day, the senate is next ordinary institution. When i was there, i ran the Steering Committee for a number of conservative senators, mike lee was the chairman when i left and pat toomey was the chairman prior to him. As also the registered legislative director for jeff sessions. Host we seem to be on the cusp of another bruising Supreme Court confirmation fight. How did we get here again . Guest it certainly appears that way. I think many people expected that this could at least happen when Justice Ginsburg died. When the news was announced, it was a mad scramble. My own feeling was we should have taken longer and reflected on her before jumping 30 seconds later to how it will play out in the senate. I think we have all been waiting for Something Like this either for Justice Ginsburg or any other justice. There is an election coming up. The majority leader of the senate, Mitch Mcconnell and other Senate Republicans have made it clear that if this were to have happen, they would try to push a confirmation through the senate. We have been talking about this for a while now. Its not entirely unfamiliar. Host have we seen a situation similar to this in the past where a justice is being replaced within months of an election day, this close to an election day . Is this something we have encountered before and is there a precedent for the situation . Guest there isnt in the modern era. Democrats have criticized republicans as well as others for something they think is unprecedented. I would suggest it is unusual. Mid19 70s, according to the Congressional Research service, the average number of days between nomination and confirmation vote for Supreme Court justice is a little bit over 69 days. Right now, we have 38 days by my last count starting tomorrow before the election day. That certainly is less than the average number. However, if you go back to the beginning of the republic in 1789, its not unprecedented. The norm for the first part of the republics history was the confirmation process was quite quick. End ofas acting, at the a congress, if you look at marbury versus madison that many are familiar with where John Marshall established with judicial action the concept of judicial review with regard to the Supreme Court. That arose from a situation where a federalist majority in congress which had just been voted out by the voters created a whole new branch of the judiciary, a new level of Circuit Courts. Then president adams who had also been voted out still was on the Circuit Court. This kind of thing has happened in the past but we have to go a long way back to get there. Host lets talk a little about the process and the history about the process. Then Senate Majority leader harry reid employed what was called the Nuclear Option back in 2013. Lets see what he said back then. [video clip] the American People believe congress is broken. The American People believe the senate is broken. I believe the American People are right. The 113ths congress, congress, the United States has wasted an unprecedented amount of time a procedural and partisan obstruction. As a result, the work of this country goes undone. Should be passing legislation that strengthens our economy, protects american families, instead we are bringing wasted hours and wasted days between filibusters. We are burning wasted days and wasted weeks between filibusters. Even one of the senates most basic duties, confirmation of president ial nominees, has become completely unworkable. President , there has been unbelievable, unprecedented obstruction for the first time in the history of our republic. Republicans have routinely use the filibuster to prevent president obama from appointing a prospective candidate or confirming judges. What first of all, tell us that Nuclear Option was that harry reid was talking about and removal hasits change the senate and this confirmation process. Guest i was on the floor when the majority leader harry reid gave that speech. I remember it very well. For your viewers, the senate rules are a bit unique. They are different than the house. Under the rules, any senator can speak or be recognized to speak as long as the senator wants to speak or be recognized to speak, you cannot call a vote. If no one is speaking, you can call the boat. If you want to have a vote, even though he sensed her wants to speak or speaking, you have to file cloture under rule 22 which is a way to end debate over the objections of other senators. Majority ofs 3 5 votes, typically 60 senators. Reid was referring to where he had final cloture or have been forced to file cloture and that takes time. Were not a lot of filibusters at that time because every time harry reid filed cloture, he would threaten to use the Nuclear Option and republicans would back down and vote for cloture to end debate and it was only at the end in november where harry reid finally follow through and use the Nuclear Option because republicans said we dont want to end debate. It seems that the place to decide whether or not you want to end debate is on the senate floor. I think those are completely legitimate debates. Host how did the removal of the Nuclear Option affect the confirmation fight and why werent Supreme Court justices involved . Why werent they included in that argument over cloture . Guest originally, the Nuclear Option which is essentially the senate using his constitutional powers under article one, section five to make up its own rules, it was using that power to change its rules essentially and harry reid didnt have the votes among democrats. It takes 51 votes to get around the senate rules. He didnt have the vote so he had to leave out the Supreme Court because there were some democrats who are concerned about the situation this would put them in. Right now is a great case in point. Fastforward to 2017, republicans did the same thing but they used it to expand the exemption from the 60 vote threshold in debate to the Supreme Court. Now here we are. It has not eliminated cloture or the requirements to get cloture. Its still there and it takes time but has reduced the number of votes required to end debate from 60 two essentially 51. It has removed some of the minority leverage in the confirmation process. Host let me remind our viewers that they can join on and on the conversation. We will use the regular lines james, i cover the Senate Judiciary committee for a long time. There have been back and forth with democrats and republicans over judicial nominations but specifically, Supreme Court nominations for years. You could almost take it all the way back to the nomination of robert bork. Be a process in which we wont have these arguments back and forth over has to the Senate Confirm a nominee from the white house or whether the democrats or republicans, whoever is in charge, can just block a president s nominee . The controversy we see over Supreme Court nominees in recent decades is related to what we expect from the court. Increasingly, we expect the court to resolve the most controversial issues. Today, people on the left and democrats are upset and they are worried and they should be in their perspective because they say this justice could affect what law is in this nation for the neck generation. Thats got to be frightening to the American People because the court is something that is not susceptible to popular opinion. It cannot be held accountable in aresame way and justices for life. In a democratic republic, that is a very, very concerning thing where you make policy, you make of for an entire nation selfgoverning citizens by an institution that cannot really be held accountable. Past,d submit that in the the Supreme Court was not considered in this light and thats when you saw the confirmation process go quickly. Games madison was nominatin justices and one was confirmed and later said i dont want this job. Level of what we expect the Supreme Court to do that speaks to the controversy. As far as whether or not the senate can or cannot consider a Supreme Court nomination, while the president has the power to appoint or nominate, the senate has the power to confirm under the constitution. The constitution give the senate only the power to decide how it will exercise its duties. James madison as president in the was talking about senate and the president that are alike in the same manner that the house in the senate are alike with regard to legislation. They both exercise their power independently and they both coequal and coordinate. Just as no one would expect the senate has to take up every bill the house passes, or somehow has to vote in every bill, the senate doesnt have to vote on every president ial nominee. There may be other reasons why it should but its not constitutionally required to do so. Host lets ask our viewers to join in on the conversation. Sean is calling from columbus, ohio on the democratic line, good morning. Caller good morning, gentlemen. I just have a question if you go back to the last six president s, it looks like it is104 republican to democrats as far as nominations is that correct . Host guest guest it certainly seems we have had a lot of republican president s but i dont have the numbers in front of me but it sounds like we have had republican president s and there have been vacancies on the court so that would make sense they would have more opportunity to appoint justices. Caller that brings it back to the point about the ethics part. If you look at the nominations that go through quickly, the vote is pretty much the majority , 70 or 80 votes for ones that go quickly but anything that takes 46 months seems to go down party lines. To me, to shove this through within this time, judges will have three judges appointed and they held one back for year so he would have that opportunity, to then cry that democrats will stack the justices. Have now, what we stacked justices . 63 is a pretty big majority . Guest although i would add that the concerns you see about the court relate to cases where they are down really divided. Where they are narrowly divided. Most of the cases the court picks up and heres are going to be decided on much larger majority basis. Than justother ways simply expanding or packing the court to get around a majority you dont like. This relates to congress. Congress has a lot of power here. The people are not powerless because they have a direct say over who six in congress and they can make their views known to the representatives in Congress Much more quickly. If you go back to the progressive era, they were pushing back against the court and other parts of our system that they felt were unaccountable. In the 1950s, conservatives who didnt like the warren court were aggressive in urging congress to use this other tool at its disposal to limit what the court could do. The idea that somehow the American People are victims of what the court does and if this happens, there is no other recourse is not supported by American History. Lets go to honolulu, hawaii on the republican line. Good morning. Caller good morning and thank you, cspan. Nancy pelosi recently mentioned that the democrats have arrows in their quiver regarding the which looks like a slamdunk. What are those arrows in the democrats quiver . They dont seem to have any lifeline. Are they trying to panic everyone again . Thank you. Guest thats a great question and i wish i was recording this from your nextdoor neighbors house in hawaii. Ive never been but it seems like a wonderful place. With regards to what the democrats can do, its a great question. Somee already alluded to of the idea that the democrats or congress have tools to protect themselves from the court on the back end after a justice has been confirmed. We have use those tools at different times in this nations history. On the front end, this is an important point we typically see the process is something thats been decided we look at and we saved this is where the members are and therefore that is what will happen in the outcome is done. It looks like the republicans will be able to confirm a justice in the next 38 days. I would add that politics is not something that is foreordained in a free society. Its the nature of the process and how the process unfolds that ultimately informs how it will be resolved. There are two ways this process would be different. During the hearings, information could come out that change the minds of members or their constituents and creates a new environment. Senators emma Democratic Senators, could use their different powers under the senate rules to affect and ultimately change the narrative or change the frame in which this debate is being adjudicated inside and outside the senate and create a new frame and create new terrain on which the fight is more favorable to them. They certainly have some tools but its an uphill battle. Nothing is guaranteed in politics. Any time you are trying to change the status quo, its always an uphill battle. Host you and i have watched Senate Confirmation hearings for years. There are always certain things that Supreme Court nominees say in front of the Senate Judiciary committee and you and i have gotten used to some of those answers. One of our viewers has a question they sent in on twitter. Guest it looks like we could be getting there. President trump nominee, circuit is a judge amy barrett hero of the prolife movement, a conservative prolife judge and this will be a flashpoint. Roe v. Wade has been a flashpoint since it was handed down. We have gotten President Trump back in the 2016 campaign and was asked by a reporter if he would nominate a justice who would overturn roe and he said of course, i dont like it. That was earth shattering that someone said that out loud. That was not would either side talked about. Recently, we have senators holly and kotten who have come out and said they would not vote for a nominee unless they confirmed they opposed roe and would overturn it in writing. If you look at the trendline, it appears we are headed that way. I would submit to your viewers that that should be expected. Over time, if we increasingly take issues out of the public realm, out of the political sphere come away from congress, issues the American People are concerned about, they may not agree with them but they are concerned about them on both sides, it is only natural to expect eventually that it will swing back the other way and for the American People to say we care about these issues and therefore, we will take the only opportunity we have to impact the court which is really the confirmation process and demand answers. Its not necessarily a good thing with regard to what the judiciary does but i think its something that is expected. Host lets talk to bill calling from newfield, new jersey on the independent line, good morning. Caller good morning. I have three comments to bank. Everything isis worded in a way to make you feel reality,ptable when in if you look at the situation and understand whats going on, you dont understand. Hello . I thought i was cut off. As i understand it, the decision they took her to court and its my understanding she didnt want an abortion. Is, thed comment are against the Supreme Court nominee mostly because they dont want abortions. They say a woman has a right to choose. What the woman is choosing is to bring what life or death from her womb. The third comment is planned parenthood. Thats a bad choice of words. I would like to know how many babies planned parenthood has delivered and sent home with the parents. I believe the answer would be none. Thank you for taking my call. That thisould submit is a great example of why the American People are concerned. You of people on both sides of believetion issue and deeply in these issues and they believe they have a right to adjudicate these views and those views should be adjudicated in a place with a can ultimately bring pressure to bear and participate in the process. The Supreme Court in roe v. Wade effectively remove the issue from the political sphere and said you can no longer adjudicate them. Its interesting how the nature of decisions and how they are made in the courtroom and the house and the senate is that they are related to specific disputes which is what the caller just mentioned. There is a particular case and circumstance and there are particular things revolving around that case. Addression is meant to not particulars but generalities, dress all people in all situations and be binding on everyone impacted. A judicial decision is not an ideal venue or an ideal forum to make law for this nation. Callingts go to eric, from rome, georgia on the democratic line, good morning. Caller thank you. The constitution was flawed from the beginning. It was a white racist manifesto written by all weight men and were slave owners. Think about a couple of cases. Ferguson and dred scott, the constitution is open to interpretation. Roe v. Wade could be right or wrong. Is only thing that matters which judges on the bench. This is what republicans have realized. Obamacaret overturn through legislation so they go to the courts. They have already been the activists. Its not enough. Stop and maintain White Supremacy and white privilege, you have to have the courts on your side. Thats how trump got elected and bush got elected. Supremacist racist document and it needs to be tore up and the only thing that matters is how to judge this. I certainly understand the frustration and i think this gets back again to what happens when you make decisions that affect everybody in america in a place where americans cannot effectively participate. The constitution was certainly flawed. I dont know that anyone would disagree with that. If you look at lincolns first inaugural address when he was but its an outstanding speech and its directed to this issue any speaks directly about dred scott any makes this point that if we let the courts ultimately decide everything in this nation, then we are not actually following the constitution. We are not actually following the separation of powers which says there are no rulers in america. The majority doesnt rule and the minority doesnt rule. Whats interesting about the Health Care Case which gets to one of the contradictions in the president s confirmation battle is that republicans dont agree on repealing the Affordable Care act. They havent since the beginning even though that was their rhetoric. They have punted this issue to the court. Justice scalia, a leading conservative on the court until he passed away recently, once told conservatives, dont expect us to strike this law down if you keep funding it which i think is a great example. Congress likes to shirk its duties, avoid exposing its duties, avoid exposing his division by asking the court to make decisions on issues that it ultimately doesnt want to act on. The consequences are that it frustrates the American People and makes them more apathetic or angry. From lets go to teresa tennessee on the republican line, good morning. Caller good morning. Comments, the republicans blocking merit garland was the greatest political move of all time. If democrats have the senate now, they would do exactly the same thing and you know it. As far as the liberal justice, you had Ruth Bader Ginsburg since 1994 and she is the most liberal justice of all time. Liberal and to be a have these liberal ideas but its not ok to have a conservative justice thats allowed to stand up and say yes, i do not support abortion. What is the difference . Its time for us to have our chance. She is not going to overturn roe v. Wade. Wade isnow that roe v. Never going to be overturned but we can slow it down. We can make motions to slow down roe v. Wade but its not going to be overturned. Thats a fallacy you keep throwing out there. You will always be able to kill the babies. Guest this gets to what congress can do on the back end. One thing congress can do, it can control how the court makes its decisions. It can structure the decisionmaking problem process of the course. The process right now is for justices decide inside the court and its called granting cert and congress can pass a law that it will say eight justices to decide. If it took eight or seven instead of four, it would be very difficult for the Supreme Court to even take up a case concerning roe v. Wade. I think you are right that there are other ways that the democrats in congress in particular can make it hard to overturn roe and i think republicans themselves probably would not like to be confronted with this decision in congress either. Its very easy for them right now to maintain a pure position on this issue. If all of a sudden, it went back to the political sphere, my guess is the unity you would see with republicans would not be there. As far as Merrick Garland, it appears to have been good politics. It was perfectly acceptable under the constitution. The one thing i would quibble with is when Mitch Mcconnell said we need to let the people decide, we needed to let the people decide. In reality, is the senates decision and the people dont Pick Supreme Court justices via a referendum. Maybe they should. The people could try changing that. It put him in this position unnecessarily where he has to go through a contorted justification to try to appear that hes not being a hypocrite when the senate all along has the authority to decide who to confirm and who not to confirm. You dont have to justify it by. Pointing to the people host back in 2017, senator mcconnell came to the floor with Justice Gorsuchs nomination and brought up the Nuclear Option and what senator reid said. Whatt you to listen senator mcconnell said back in 2017 about the Nuclear Option. [video clip] the senate has considered the nomination of judge neil gorsuch for many weeks. We have seen his impressive credentials. We have reviewed his incredible record. Onhave heard glowing praise a nearly daily basis from colleagues and students, from ,udges, newspaper editorials from democrats and republicans. Independentuch is and hes fair. He is beyond qualified and he will make a stellar addition to the Supreme Court. In the Legal Community seems to argue otherwise. And yet, our democratic colleagues appear poised to block this incredible nominee with the First Successful partisan filibuster in American History. Move,ld be a radical something completely unprecedented in the history of allsenate and out of proportion to the imminently qualified judge who is actually before us. Again, then again, this is not really about the nominee anyway. The opposition to this particular nominee is more about the man that nominated him and the party he represents than the nominee himself. Its part of a much larger story , another extreme escalation in the neverending drive to politicize the courts and the confirmation process. Its a fight they have waged for decades with a singular aim securing raw power no matter the cost of the country or the institution. It underlies why this threatened filibuster cannot be allowed to succeed or continue for the sake of the senate, for the sake of the court and for the sake of our country. Host what was the impact of senator mcconnells move there on the neil Supreme Court nomination . Guest the impact was you could no longer filibuster Supreme Court nominees so now it takes a simple majority, 61 and most situations to end a filibuster instead of 60. It wasnt necessarily needed. The senate has other tools to end debate. The senate operate for a long time, hundreds of years, without interfere method to because the senate can only speak so long. You have provisions in the rules that require talking filibusters for senators to actually stand up on the floor and filibuster. The majority doesnt like to use those because it requires lots of effort on their part. Instead, they would rather say i ask unanimous consent on a vote and its time to have about an of someone else says no for whatever reason, legitimate or not, that becomes obstruction. I think thats what you are seeing now is you have no reason to ask unanimous consent anymore so there is no leverage the minority has to try to get the process to unfold how it would like. Therefore, you have no negotiations in the process gets more increment us that it has in the past. I would encourage her viewers, whenever you hear senators speak about unprecedented behavior, always look between the words. Look back and see because there have been filibusters of Supreme Court nominees in the past and there has been obstruction of all kinds of nominees. The senate has not taken action on Something Like 12 nominees, just refused to take action. Nothing is necessarily unprecedented but the question is, all of these qualifications on filibuster, i think its important in this time that before we jump to conclusions, we look at the data and try to understand how the different parties, the different sides in the debate or using it to justify their position. Host lets continue to talk more about the process. One of our social media followers has a question had tools inats 2016 to force a vote on Merrick Garland. They chose consciously not to use those tools. I think they made the same calculation that republicans were in thinking that Hillary Clinton would easily win and liberals were not happy with Merrick Garlands nomination and they could get a better nominee in the future well getting an issue on which to attack republicans in the here and now which was 2016. With regards to the hearings themselves, the constitution gives the senate the authority to decide under article 1, section five how it will conduct its proceedings, no one else. The senate has use that power to create rules that structure is confirmation process which is how it provides advice and consent on Sabrina Court nominees. One of those rules, rule 26, says the nominee is referred automatically unless the senate otherwise orders to the Judiciary Committee. In the Judiciary Committee, the nominee must reported must be reported or discharged before the senate can act. Within the Judiciary Committee, the rules regulate what can happen there and the judiciary members can change those rules. Thees say it takes chairman has to have advance notice before scheduling a hearing but the chairman doesnt have to schedule a hearing. The chairman working with the ranking minority member can schedule a hearing without advance notice. What the committee has to do is not a hearing but they have to have a business meeting where all the members get together and they have to decide whether or not to report this nominee to the full senate for debate and consideration. You guys should confirm this nominee or not but we are sending him along anyway or without a recommendation. They might not take a position or the Judiciary Committee can simply take no action. If the committee decides to take no action, the senate must discharge the Judiciary Committee by voting on the senate floor to do so. They can take steps but the rules in place now will dictate what kind of steps are needed before you can have a final vote. Host lets go back to some of our callers and start with beverly from east elmhurst, new york, on the democratic line, good morning. Caller hello, i would like to say good morning to everyone. I would also like to say that i success withett a her nomination and i would also like to say she is a woman just like i am. I was raised in the catholic house, catholic religion, i went to catholic school, Catholic High School and during that time, one of the things i always heard about god is that he gave us choice. I am a devout catholic, i go to church every sunday, and i believe in choice. Making abelieve in choice for a woman. This is her choice between her god, her husband or her boyfriend or whoever and herself and her doctor. Those are her choices. I hope ms. Barrett, as a woman, will consider all of those things when this comes up. Hopefully, roe v. Wade will not be overturned and women will continue to get choice. Thats what i believe in. I wish her well and im glad a woman will be sitting there because when it comes to the sort of thing, they are more equal and have more empathy for women. Judge barretts catholicism was a flashpoint in her last nomination. Religious freedom is a bedrock of this nation and its founding. Its something that has been woven throughout our history. When we question a nominees religion and you have seen this time and time again, it speaks to not an antipathy toward that particular religion, although some might disagree, it speaks concern orr, a issues that are important will be decided in a place where i cannot see, i cannot participate, i dont know how it will unfold and im not going to have any recourse. Therefore, the only thing i have at my disposal is to make inferences based on a nominees religion. In reality, every human being has the opportunity to make a choice in how they will act and decisions they will make. I would hope our justices, regardless of who nominates them, or the kind of people who can separate the law from their own personal beliefs and make decisions based on what the laws passed by congress and the constitution says. Callingts go to edward from cedar rapids, iowa on the republican line. Good morning. Caller good morning. Agree i would like to with the caller from new york. Im a Firm Believer and everybody has a right to choose. Nobody has a right to tell you what your choice should be. Ok . I would like for our guest to explain in simple terms for all the viewers what it would take to overturn roe v. Wade. Secondly, should we eliminate the Nuclear Option . Overturning roe v. Wade in the courts would require a case or controversy to emerge through the courts to be heard by the Supreme Court with argument on either side and the Supreme Court to issue a decision that reverses the president. The court doesnt reverse president very often. It does happen. Precedentsan reverse but you have to have a litigation strategy to do so. The other thing is congress can take steps to make it very hard for the court to reverse precedents or try to pressure the court in other ways in doing various things. As far as the Nuclear Option, with regard to the confirmation process, it has already been used. The filibuster for judicial nominees has been effectively unlimited. What hasnt been a limited is the filibuster for legislation which would be relevant if the democrats wanted to pass legislation expanding the size of the court, if the democrats wanted to take the Supreme Court building away. Any other thing like decreasing the number of justices required to hear cases, any kind of legislation that the senate and the house pass that impacts the aurt, that would require filibuster proof majority or 60 votes in the senate. They would have to eliminate that. Host since you brought it up, i want to exploit the topic. Some democrats have floated the idea of court packing. If joe biden wins the president ial election, adding more seats to the bench so joe more could nominate supposedly liberal justices to the Supreme Court. Is that plausible . Could that happen . Guest anythings possible in politics. 2020 alone should have taught us that. Its important to maintain an open mind toward what could happen in the future. Court packing that constitutionally congress can do. The name itself is a negative term. It arose from the 1930s when fdr was having a lot of his new deal legislation struck down by the Supreme Court. He didnt like it so he pressured congress to increase the number of justices on the court so he could get around them. It has a negative connotation because of that episode. In reality, the constitution allows the senate to make decisions and the house as to the size of the court. The court has not always had nine justices. 1769 y been since 1869. There is no right or wrong number of justices. The clouds did not part and down came seven catholics that said there should be nine catholics. We often talk about this in terms of there being nine justices because thats just what we have grown used to. There is precedent for almost anything in american politics. Its helpful to keep that in mind. It does not require a constitutional amendment to change the size of the court. Can they exactly change the size of the courts . Is it something that just requires a bill passed by congress and signed by the president . What would be the process to add extra justices to the Supreme Court . Guest you can add justices or subtract justices, i think its important its not just the authority on the courtside is absolute other than the chief justice who is mentioned in the constitution. I suppose you could have one justice but other than that, they can be added or subtracted. [no audio] caller let me ask, the people in south america, they dont practice abortion. Thats why they come up. They can feed their children. How is it so hypocritical that you wont think of what to do with those people . Maybe they shouldnt come up here but should we help them because they dont practice abortion . It seems like its hypocritical. And when a woman has a baby when that baby gets to be 16 years old and be a hoodlum, then you want to kill it. Think the caller makes an interesting point with regard to republicans and their views on abortion. You have very unified Party Positions on abortion. We think they are very cohesive on this issue. I would submit the reason we think they are cohesive and most republican officeholders do in fact oppose abortion. There are number of activists on both sides of this issue they feel passionately about it. I would submit that the level of cohesion on this issue in both parties speaks directly to the fact that they dont have to deal with the issue. They are able to speak about it in very broad terms. If you were to all of a sudden throw this issue back into the political arena and the legislative and the arena in congress or the state legislatures, my guess of the outcome would not be so blackandwhite. It would look very different i would think and i think republicans in particular, you would see of much more nuanced position on this issue when having to confront it directly. We saw this phenomenon with health care. When republicans believed they had no ability whatsoever to impact the fate of the Affordable Care act, they were unambiguously opposed to it. They said we will repeal obama care. Once they were confronted with the issue and had the power to do something about it and all of a sudden the specifics of the consequences and Everything Else come out on that issue, the same people lose said we want to repeal it all of a sudden started changing their tune, speaking about it in a much more nuanced way. When they finally failed in their effort to do so, there seven your quest, they dropped it. I havent heard a republican mention the repealing of the Affordable Care act since that effort. Again, we should stop and think . Ow unified are the parties are we really unable to resolve these issues in the political sphere or do we need rulers in the courts to do it for us . Host i want to talk one more thing about process with you. We have seen most of the senate but not every member talk about what they will do when voting for a Supreme Court nomination before election day. Lets say it goes past election day into a lameduck session. Does moving a Supreme Court nomination in a lameduck session after an election change anything . Guest starting with the constitution, i think the answer is no. Adams, this is something the past. However, i think it changes some things at least on the republican side. Republicans and conservatives in particular have long been opponents of lameduck sessions. They have been very aggressive in opposing things like big omnibus spending bills in lameduck sessions and other things. Maybe im wrong on this but i would like to think that if you have a situation where a resident who has been voted out of office is nominated to serve on the Supreme Court and a senate and senators who have been voted out of office and then vote on someone to serve on the Supreme Court intake of a lifetime appointment, that appears to be a slightly different thing than what we see now. Its constitutionally permissible but it completely takes the people out of the process in what is already a process where they have very little say in the first place because Supreme Court justices serve for life and you cannot hold these people accountable for their decisions after you have already held them accountable. They are gone so there is no recourse. Host lets see if we can get in a few more calls before the top of the hour. Reston, virginia on the democratic line, good morning. Caller good morning. Mcconnell has no honor in the Republican Senate has no honor. Say different parties, the present and the senate. They said we would let the people decide. This is what they said. Now its different because they want to put him in there. Its not about roe v. Wade, its about health care. A lot of Companies Come to him from the Health Care Sector and thats what people have to understand. They want to repeal obama care. The pharmaceutical companies are a hind mcconnell. Mcconnell destroyed the senate. The senate does not represent the majority. Days theye majority are the minority and i think the senate should be abolished. Doing,e republicans are they have no honor. The word means nothing. Man telling the post office, taking money from the pentagon and giving it to the wall, doing whatever he wants. It seems we have no law to stop the executive branch from doing whatever they want. Guest if you look at what mcconnell said, it raises an interesting point. It was an unforced error on his part. He need not have said that. He had every authority to lock garland and by saying i want to block garland, thats Mitch Mcconnell making the decision and he is the one who should be held accountable versus hes just doing what the people want, he is a vessel. Going back to 1888, that was the last time that we had the last precedent where someone was a president of a Different Party and confirmed a justice for the Supreme Court and somehow that was not legitimate but mcconnell simon say nicely goes back to the beginning of republican uses the average number of days required before confirmation vote can be held in the senate floor to justify going quickly. Both sides use this historical precedent selectively to make their case in in contradictory ways. The republicans have flipflopped on their position between 2020 and 2016. The democrats have as well. The democrats spoken tark to in stark terms in 2016 how this is illegitimate and unconstitutional and how the republicans are stealing a Supreme Court from president barack obama. If it was true in 2016, it appears to be true in 2020 as well. In reality, the republicans had every right to not have a vote on Merrick Garland in 2016 and democrats are perfectly justified in calling for them not to have a vote on the nominee this year and vice versa. The senate gets to decide these issues. If the American People dont like them, the American People should get new senators. From lets go to carol lansdowne, pennsylvania on the independent line, good morning. Caller good morning, thank you. I would like to make an observation about the phrase its the womans right to choose. I just thought of this. In a highly function civilized society, biblical principles and higher principle should outweigh convenience. We are not meant to live by convenient, popular and selfserving slogans like the womans right to choose as to who lives and dies. The actual time to choose and to make a responsible choice is before women and men put themselves in a position to have a baby. Thats my comment, thank you. There are certainly higher moral issues and laws and those are certainly powerful things and they are things that people believe in differently. In the american context, what ultimately cover governs as the constitution that gives us a framework to make these decisions and provide the space for us to adjudicate these issues. It doesnt dictate how we should ultimately decide on these issues per se. That something we have appeared to have lost sight of in the modern europe. It speaks to why the Supreme Court nomination process has gotten so contentious. We believe the constitution should only allow outcomes that we support and should not allow outcomes we oppose. In reality, the constitution, the beauty of the constitution is that it gives us an opportunity to come together as equals to adjudicate these positions and ultimately make decisions as equals. Thats what selfgovernment is all about. The callers right, its on each and every one of us to decide how we want to make those decisions and what those decisions ought to be and its on each and every one of us separate from the body politic to justify our own actions and our own views in our own minds. Callingts go to vivian from tennessee on the democratic line, good morning. Caller good morning. I was calling to say three brief messages right quick. Number one, i am a product of my greatgrandmother being raped by white men. I am a lightskinned black woman. Back then, they didnt have a choice for abortion. They set up your talking about they dont want the woman to have an abortion. They are out there not helping the people here and now. People are starving and dying now. They are not helping them. They are dying from this pandemic that our president lied about and they dont want to give them the money for the families. Families are out on the street and people are starving and are in food lines. Do the republicans care . No they dont, they dont want to give 600 to help people live, thats a lifeline. They need to stay at home and feed their children and pay the utility bills but when it comes to the rich, they give to the women, theese white white men say they dont want abortion, you are not helping the people either. Guest one of the things the caller is talking about here is very relevant to the process. The process plays out in a certain way because all of us are unique individuals and we all have different viewpoints on the world in reality. The process are allows us to come together to make each other aware of our views. It gives us an opportunity and a space to try to reconcile those hopefully and if not, to at least be reconciled to the outcome and recognize that our concerns were adjudicated and yes, you may have lost but no one wins everything all the time. Thats the very nature of our system. With thee problems very truncated or expedited process and it will be interesting to see if there is enough time for this process to play out or whether it will be truncated and expedited, is whether or not it can infect reconcile peoples views. It may say i may not support this nominee but hes a product but shes a project of our system and thats the way it supposed to work and everyone had a different opportunity along the way and this ultimately is the outcome. Richard russell said something similar at the similar the end 4 civil rights debate when you try to filibuster and stop this bill. He didnt succeed, thankfully. He urged his colleagues to recognize this as the law of the land. He had his say an effort and he lost. Thats the way it works sometimes. If the process doesnt allow that, then we never have that moment of closure and being reconciled to the outcome, and you end up getting very real and justified frustrations that anger and ultimately cast the entire system as illegitimate. To thankwould like james welner who is the senior governance fellow for talking with us. Thanks so much for spending time with us. Guest you for having me. Host coming up our battleground series stops ends with a visit to arizona. Dylan rosenblatt and samara klar from arizona join us. Stick with us. We will be right back. I believe we should be stronger than we now are. I believe we should have a Strong Military force. I believe we can increase our strength all over the world. I dont confuse words with strength. Something that is for the purpose of defending the security of this country against surprise attacks and we can never express regret or apologize to anyone eerie anyone. The first televised debate between john f. Kennedy and Vice President richard diction. Sunday morning at 9 00 eastern, we will look at the event with live discussion on how the debates came to be, the issues, the candidates, and how the debate set the tone for future president ial campaigns. Live on American History tv on cspan3. The first president ial debate between President Donald Trump and former president Vice President joe biden, watch live. Pres. Trump biden is recklessly campaigning against this vaccine. All it is is for political reasons. Isen, his whole deal catastrophic shutdowns. Inmer Vice President biden his own words recorded by bob woodward, the president back in february that this was an extremely dangerous communicable disease. Think of that. Across dinnere empty chairs across dinner tables because of his selfishness. Debateh the first tuesday. Stream at cspan. Org debates or listen live on the cspan radio app. Journal n washington journal continues. Host we have been focusing on key battleground states. In the final day, we turn the focus to the grand canyon state of arizona where Dillon Rosenblatt of the arizona book arizona Capital Times, joins us. Good morning. Guest good morning. Host how did arizona become a battleground state question mark historically, it has been republican leaning and has voted for president every year in 1952, except for bill clinton. Guest it really goes back to as far as 2010. That was the last year the republicans in arizona really just dominated with voter turnout compared to the democratic turnout. Each year since, democrats have slowly cut into that lead and as we progressed to the 2016 16 election, that is where democrats started to pick up key ists and in the county that considered 60 of arizonas electric. In 2016, they picked up two seats electorate. In 2016, they picked up two seats. Turnout trended between democrats and publicans. Arizona flipped not only and republicans. Oneona flipped not only seat but three other seats as well. From the 2018 Election Results and the fact that Hillary Clinton only lost in arizona by that the margin keeps shrinking and shrinking and that will be within 1 or 2 whoever wins this coming election. Host what is causing the margin to shrink, a demographics change , a change of politics within the state . What is making that shift in the state right now . Guest im sorry, i cant quite hear you. Im having audio problems. Host can you hear me now . Guest a little bit, yes. Host what is causing that shift we are seeing in the electorate in arizona . Is a demographic old shift, and age shift, a generational shift . Guest a lot of it is demographic old. The latino and spanish population in arizona continues wins a lottor in who of election seats, but also across the entire country, the were women who are republicans and maybe still are are now trying to rethink things. That is what we have seen on the legislative level here, where republicans dominated in just about every single legislative district, and now arizona is about to be ready to flip blue almost on every single level, because of the suburbs. Valley, of the east mesa, chandler, you have a booming Tech Industry that is causing a lot of these flips. You have people moving from different states. A placey, california is of export for people to come to arizona, because taxing for Small Businesses different. All these factors are ending up together and causing what we now consider arizona as a battleground state and what cnn state foreaning blue president. Host we are going to open up special lines for the segment. If you are supporting joe biden and Kamala Harris, your number is 202 7488000. If you are supporting President Trump and Vice President pence, your number is 202 7488001. If you are undecided or support other candidates for president , your number is going to be 202 7488002. And we are going to open up a special line for arizona residents only. We want to hear from you, 202 7488003. Dillon, what are the main issues for the president ial race in arizona right now . Guest health care a big issue. I see that as a bigger issue for the senate race in arizona for the president , immigration, as arizona is a border state with mexico. President trump and Vice President pence have come to arizona many times over the past several months. Each one taking a trip to yuma, which is a big border town in arizona. Health care is being in play and gratian is big in play what you will see everywhere is what we are still dealing with over the past six months, which is the covid19 pandemic. That is a big factor on how people are going to end up voting in november. It is how they think donald trump has handled this virus. Arizona is one of the states that over one monthly does not that overwhelmingly does not think he did as well as he could have. Arizona is one of the first stops he made after the bob woodward case, where he said he would downplay the virus. He came at an indoor rally packed with thousands of people, nobody wearing masks. People are stirring to realize that starting to realize that now, all the things that could have been done. It will be a huge factor in how people vote. Host like you said, President Trump has visited arizona, but since it is now a battleground state, has joe biden or Kamala Harris visited . Guest no, they havent. Joe biden has not been in arizona since he gave the eulogy of john mccain back in 2018, eight months before he announced he was going to run for president. Kamala harris has participated by video. Joe biden has participated via video but have not had boots ground boots on the ground. Himself, the Vice President , the second lady, ivanka trump, don jr. , and eric have all visited arizona in the past six months. Democrats republicans worry they are going to lose state. Democrats worry they are going to lose the state. If they are worried, why isnt joe or Kamala Harris here . It will draw conclusions to how Hillary Clinton entered wisconsin in 2016. Aroselets start with and calling from sun city, arizona. Good morning. Caller thank you very much. I have worked the elections in arizona and have been a troubleshooter and will be a troubleshooter for the upcoming election. We have an amazing system in Maricopa County. Have one third predominantly republic and then one third independent and one third democratic. Democratic registration is up 17 . That is the group that has grown the most. We have an amazing county reporter. I have every confidence that our election is going to be fair, assessable. We start voting 21 days out, and we have the ability to mail in or drop off early ballots or actually come on site and do early voting as well as on election day. I am very confident that at least in Maricopa County, we will have an excellent upcoming election. Host go ahead and respond, dylan. Illon. Guest everything said is accurate. I think the specific turnout for registration is in the august , republicanp 35 about 32 , democrat about 31 other. It is usually flipped where you have independent and other is more than democrat, but we had a in march we have to register it a party to vote. 2. 5 million registered voters in Maricopa County crossed recently. Margin at about 4 or maybe less that separates republicans and democrats who are registered to vote in arizona. In that margin for the past several election cycles, what matters is not just being registered to vote, but going to vote. Arizona is a great vote by mail system that has been around since the 1990s. Everyone across the board will talk about how great it is we have options. Ballots will be sent out to registered voters who requested a male and ballot or the or on the or are on the permit absentee ballot. Election ore the for 14 days before the election, both can be started to be tabulated. You will see a lot of votes counted at 8 00 on election day. Host that was going to be the next thing i wanted to talk about. In 2018 in the general election, nearly 80 of the vote in arizona were mailin ballots. Like you said, they are counted before election day. Octoberting begins on 7. Given everything we have heard from mailin ballot team from the white house and the president , how is that process going in arizona . Guest 2018 is a perfect example. About 80 voted by mail. A lot of them came in early. The problem is that it is not all the votes that are going to especially tod confidently say and any election official will confidently say, the election is not over on november 3. It will take maybe up to a week or longer to count all of the votes for the coming election. It does not mean there is anything nefarious going on. It happens every election cycle. Challengednt in 2018 and election and thought that dems were finding the ballots randomly that were for democrats. All of the early ballots came in and they counted them. Election day totals came in, the people who dropped off ballots like a day or two for election or on election day, because they have same date drop off at any polling place, those other ones that take a lot longer. We have provisional ballots, where you can pick one up if you have an issue with a ballot or for another reason, which take time to tabulate. That is why we saw a bunch of different republicans leading the statewide races in the 2018 election who then ended up losing the election. Lust by a pretty significant margin. The 2018 u. S. Senate race with Kyrsten Sinema who was behind and then two days later she took the lead and ended up winning by tens of thousands of votes. We should expect to see the same, especially for the president ial election. Maybe not the senate, because that seems further split than biden versus trump, but everybody should be prepared to not have official winners on Election Night in arizona. Host i want to show the viewers a couple president ial ads running in arizona right now. Here is the ad playing for President Trump followed by the ad playing for joe biden. [video clip] we started with 20 employees and under President Trump, we exploded to over 250. I credit President Trump for everyone of those jobs. Joe biden hasnt done anything but ship our jobs overseas. Joe biden hasnt done anything but enrich his own family. He has done everything he can to work across against the American People. Im donald trump and i approve this message. The coronavirus, what would joe biden do different leak . Listen to doctors from the start, restore the pandemic office, open 10 mobile testing sites per state, produce safety gear, and extend obamacare enrollment. When i am president , we will be better prepared, respond better, and recover better. Which one of those two candidates are playing better with seniors in arizona . Guest advertising in arizona has been really tricky. There was a time when the president his team pulled all advertising in arizona for a week. It looked like he was short on money and it was just an odd week of not seeing any advertisements on him. I am not sure which its harder. I think biden and the biden team are hoping that his ads were a lot more, especially since he is not visiting the state. That is coming to what is the big difference here, attack ads can only do so much. From a political consultant i have spoken to, attack ads convince you to not vote for that candidate but do not convince you to vote for the person running the ad. That is something i found to be believable. I think the president running all of these ads and putting out and ifn ads in arizona biden is only going to do one, it will be tough to see a democrat winning for the First Time Since 1996. Host the widow of arizona senator john mccain, cindy mccain, came out and endorsed joe biden. Will that make a difference in arizona . Guest again, because of how close it is, anything can happen. It was kind of expected cindy mccain would endorse him, but now she said that when biden comes to the state to campaign, she is going to assist him in whatever he needs. We had former republican senator , who endorsed President Trump. I dont think that will have much of an impact, but jeff flake is a mormon and we have a former republican congressman who just endorsed joe biden recently. We have former republicans and mccain people who endorsed joe biden over the current sitting president. Was just the last needle to anoint the president. Every time to annoy the president. Every time he talked about john mccain, he talks about how they didnt get along and he wasnt a fan. Hearing that, cindy mccain endorsed biden. I am sure it hurt trump. Arizona, they respect the mccain family. It is going to make an impact. I dont know how much of an impact, but in arizona it is going to make an impact. Host lets start with more arizona colors. Allers. You fori want to thank voice. G me to hear my the reason i am voting for biden and harris is because i think democracy is on the line. I am voting because of health and itself. The number of people that are dead in this country come over 200,000 people, we cant forget that. I want people to imagine how their lives were this time last and the handling of this pandemic is just terrible. This man has corrupted everything in our government he has touched, every branch, the judicial, the congress, just everything he has put his hands on he has corrupted. We need to get back to democracy. We have to save our democracy, and we literally have to save lives in this country. Host go ahead and respond. Guest it is a valid point. The pandemic is a big thing that voters are going to respond to. There is talk of democracy on the line. Another is the Supreme Court vacancy that now exists. I dont pay too close attention to polling, because there are a lot of flaws you can find in flaws. One thing i found interesting is more arizonans trust joe biden to make the Supreme Court pick and not donald trump, chai found interesting. Which i found interesting. More people think that i can handle the coronavirus better than President Trump has. Biden tweeted before the first trumpn arizona before how would mess things up by rolling back protections. Arizonans are responding to this. The same with the republican oven or, for a while you might still be the only governor who was pulling less than the pollingt cold less than the president. Forgs have taken a turn good and it is not over by any means, but the numbers look so much better than they did, because they were that bad. Arizona was one of the worst states hit by this, where we were being compared to countries around the world. Arizona has a population of 7 million was being compared to countries that have 50 Million People have 7 million was being compared to countries that have 50 Million People. The president and our governor just going back and forth with arizona andn washington is just an example. The data does not support that. Host lets go to pam who is calling from apache junction, arizona. Good morning. Caller hello. Can you hear me . Host we can hear you. Go ahead, pam. Caller i am a registered democrat and i am voting for biden and harris. The main issues are the Affordable Care act, the way the pandemic is been handled. I actually had to watch the governor of washington, michigan, new york to get guidance. I do have some friends who are democrats and they are women and they are around my age. Also the payroll tax has been deferred. That funds Social Security, which trump has said he is going to continue that if he is elected. Is ahe wall ok, there big waste of taxpayer money going to the wall. Reallocated by the Trump Administration to fund that wall. In my opinion, why do we spend our time, taxpayers money taxpayersmoney, we have a diverse population here. That is just a total waste. Host go ahead and respond. I heard a lot of talk about the wall and i am assuming that is why is trump and arizonans paying for that . Is that correct . Host that was part of her statement, yes. Guest i have heard from voters and Political Consultants and politicians, it is something trump hammered home in his 2016 campaign. That is one thing he is slowly trying to show he can get done. A lot of the wall was built before trump came president , and now it is slowly making progress and it is his way of being able to come up to yuma, which is a battleground area, which is a way he can rile up the base and the people who are going to vote for him and the voters are still as energetic as they were in 2016. It is a way he can get voters to be energized and to want to turn out to the polls and vote for him. Deborah,s talk to calling from arizona. Caller i am going to go bidenharris as well, Democrat Voter here. I am looking at being here in just for arizona two years, i have watched the state though down with the pandemic and just how the governor has handle it. I had to get information from my old state and listen to news from everywhere else on how they were handling it just to get information, because i feel he suppressed it. I was horrified at how people came out and trump came out to the church with all of those anddren and young people, all of those people were packed in. I want to know if anyone has information, how many of those people were affected by him traveling here. Has he ever paid his money from the campaign for all of the stops that he makes . He ever reimburse the state of arizona. Ask yourself are you better off a year ago and you are today . Respond, dild and lon. Guest what i said, all the people calling in seem to be bringing up the pandemic and it is are you better off than you were . A lot of people say no. Six months, everyone in their homes, businesses closing. Unemployment is abysmally low. Arizona is the Second Lowest state for unemployment benefits. The governor has made no to raise those. People are losing their jobs and homes. It is chaotic in the state of arizona with how many people have been affected, even without testing positive, just how they have been affected by this virus. Is that something that has affected someone . If they are a registered voter, they are going to vote based on what is in their heart and how they are feeling with how things have gone over the past six months. Thankwe would like to arizona Capital Times reporter Dillon Rosenblatt for being with us this morning and walking us through the battleground state of arizona. Thank you for being with us. Caller thank you. Host more on arizona with the university of Arizona School of government and Public Policy professor, samara klar. Here are two ads running in arizona. [video clip] i have seen a vision of Joe Bidens America. Broken glass, boarded up windows, the devastation and cities, gripped by unspeakable violence. It is just another day in Joe Bidens America. Destruction, billions of dollars of damage. Innocent people attacked, hurt, killed. I thought my family would be safe. We live in a good neighborhood, surrounded by good people, nobody is really safe in Joe Bidens America. Protesters taking over the streets and cities being burned to the ground. They are governed by biden supporters. It could come here. How long do you think you will be safe in Joe Bidens America . It is very communitybased. From day one when it hit, we lost 70 of our sales. It is tough to survive, that is part of being an entrepreneur. You wake up every day just to be going. The policy has been set by the Current Administration and has been very confusing. I applied for loans and just didnt get it. I saw companies that were customers of mine get millions of dollars. Meanwhile, i am just doing what i can to survive. President trump has failed this community this country and so many levels. To be a later to be a great leader, you have to talk to everybody and listen. Joe biden gives me hope, because he is a unifier and a listener. I believe is the man who can help turn this country around. Back, and we will continue our discussion on the battleground state of arizona. This time we are joined by university of Arizona School of government and Public Policy professor samara klar. How are you this morning . Guest i am doing well how are you . Host i am great. There is near parity between registered voters between republicans, democrats, and independence why . Guest the republicans have a little advantage. It is a state that is usually pretty close. Republicans have always had a lead. It has not been deeply red, but republicans consistently outnumber democrats. This year could be very different. Is really anyones guess as to who will win. I dont know about due to registration numbers alone, because just ration numbers have changed, but what we because registration numbers have not changed. Host we have a high number of registered independence in arizona independents in arizona. How do they vote . Guest generally independents are in ideological lunch. Bunch. We see a vast majority of independents do favor one of the two parties. Independents seem to be split down the middle. In arizona, they seem to be favoring joe biden. They stayed with the democratic lat form, but they dont feel connected the democratic platform, but they dont feel connected. Independentca, the voters, they prefer one of the two parties. They dont feel sufficiently compelled to identify with that party. That could be a problem if they dont want to volunteer or tell friends and family who they are voting for. On election day, they can reliably show up and vote for their party. Host so explain to us a little bit about the influence of voters who move into arizona, because we have talked a little bit earlier about voters coming from california. But voters who come from other places, both older and younger, what is their influence on the voting chances for biden and trump in arizona . Guest there have been democratic demographic shifts in arizona. There is a growing portion of latino voters in the electorate. They favored the Democratic Party. The more latino voters we have in arizona gives more of a benefit to joe biden and the democrats. We have always seen an increase in College Educated voters in arizona which could be good for democrats. Moving here people from california, retirees from the north eat, michigan northeast, michigan, new york. They have come from largely blue states. Our numbers of registered voters didnt shift that much. It is possible the real impact of the shift is yet to be seen, but we are seeing a clear move towards democrats, not only for the president ial race, but for the senate. This may be the first year since the 1950s arizona has two Democratic Senators in washington. Host so lets talk about arizona and the covid pandemic. As the number of covid cases thatases in arizona, does help the democratic nominee . Does that hurt President Trump question or will not trump . Guest this is the number one issue that americans and arizonans are concerned about. Not only the Public Health crisis, but wondering when the kids will get back to school, whether they will get the jobs back. One quarter of arizonans in a study, say they have lost income due to the coronavirus and are concerned about the economy. This is the Biggest Issue for most here. Donald trump disapproval numbers for the coronavirus is high for arizona. They are not impressed with trump or the governor on how they handled it. Was an overwhelming positive responses to the way their own mayors have had handled the coronavirus. On lamenting mask mandates, the majority of democrats and mandatings on masks, the majority of democrats and republicans are wearing masks. The they want from coronavirus is not what President Trump has been giving them. I think it does help the democrats in the state. Host lets let the viewers take part in this conversation. We will open up the special lines. If you support buyingharris, you are going to be 202 7488000. If you support trump, pence, you are going to be 202 7488001. If you support someone else, we want you to call 202 7488002. Arizona residents, call 202 7488003. Our first color code is caller is michael. Caller i am a democrat. I am a veteran. Have any when you look at them. Texas, they are. Iving women abortion people say they want free choice, but now they are going to charter schools, taking money from public schools. Taking money from the seniors and medicaid like i am. They want to put it in the general fund. Were 12 appropriations and only one didnt get approved right now. The relief package, the didnt host go ahead and respond. Guest the audio wasnt strong. Could you summarize. Host what he was talking about at the end was the relief will coming out of congress and going back to talking about covid. What is the sponsor in arizona with the federal the response in arizona with the federal response . Number ofreasing the weekly benefits in arizona was huge for voters here, because the economy has been hit hard. Dramatic shut and a lot of people lost their jobs. A lot of people were expecting the second went the second stimulus to come out and it hasnt. Republicansd disapproved with how he has dealt with the pandemic. Host here is a question from a follower on social media. Controls the Arizona State house, senate, and governor, into the trump and biden teams have legal staff in arizona yet . Guest the interesting thing about the Republican Party is themmost republicans view as moderate. We have a republican governor. Havea democratic democratic mayors. Representation in a survey, we asked respondents how they review emigrants and republicans in state. Democratic as more conservative than nationally. Our state parties are relatively moderate compared to the rest of the country. Callingts go to rodney from albuquerque, new mexico, and supports President Trump. Good morning. Caller good morning. I wanted to let you know that i am american, hispanic, gay conservative who really believes in trump. What i hear from the democratic dont takeat they responsibly for themselves. They put the finger on President Trump, but not talking about taking responsibility for your own self. Marcheseen in gay right where the people running for the Democrat Party are marching, and i always tell people, what have they done to us . When it came to gay marriage it wasnt obama who passed it for us, it was the community who got it. It. A wasnt going to do they played the game with us. I alwayshe virus believe what Thomas Jefferson once said. He said, i would rather have freedom than to lose it. I see when biden talks about mandating a mask for everyone, it is my responsibility to choose what i want to do at times. If i want to wear a mask, i will wear it. If i dont want to come everybody has the right to do what they feel is right. If you dont feel right going to the store, dont go. I go for my grandparents but we need to take responsibility for ourselves instead of pointing fingers at the president. President has only so much to do for each state. Host go ahead and respond. Guest the masked mandate is an in arizona, the majority of republicans said they prefer to have a mask mandate. Just over 50 . But with democrats it is an overwhelming majority. It is a divided issue here. ,ith respect to civil rights lgbtq rights and other rights, the next president or potentially donald trump have the opportunity to fill that. We have issues that make this election were difficult. Host here is another question from a viewer about arizona politics. Populationing latino in arizona primarily immigrants from mexico, or are people moving from more diverse countries, and does that affect the diversity of their political views . Where i cant speak to they are coming from specifically. We have a lot of immigrants from expo, but around from mexico city, but also from other states. There is a big advantage for the democrats. It is to their advantage that we are seeing more voters. Certainly ideological issues as with other groups. Host thats talked to william calling from phoenix, arizona, and he supports the biden ticket. Good morning. Caller good morning. I would just like to say that based upon what ive heard out of Donald Trumps own mouth, he ruined partmpletely of the economy out here in arizona by not taking care of this covid19 problem that weve had. I would like you to speak to what it has done to the economy of the Hospitality Industry here in arizona. Worked in it parttime i currently now lost my job or i work for 18 years as a parttime employee. I will hang up and listen to your response. Guest as i mentioned, coronavirus, not only the Health Component but the economic component, is a huge issue here in arizona. A large present of republicans and democrats have lost jobs. They are not happy with the response that President Trump has given for the coronavirus. You mentioned hospitality specifically, arizona has a big industry. The winter months are coming up and knowing knows if they are going to be employed. Lets talk to norman, who is calling from arizona. Good morning. Caller good morning. I would like to talk about the wall. I still live in the town i was born in 74 years ago. And that while wasnt here and we never had any problems. People would come and return home. A lot of them dont return home now. I remember when i was young, my dad left my mother with six children and she worked all of the time we are a mixture of immigrant family. ,very time i went to that house that woman fed me. All i want is a job and an opportunity all they want is a job and an opportunity and they are good people. Donald trump is a racist. Go ahead and respond. Guest for immigration, arizona s views we see among support as that they path to citizenship. There is a program that donald trump try to eliminate. Are with their party. A quarter of my publicans a quarter of republicans say they are for it. We can compare it. For immigration, there is a distinction between arizona and the rest of america. Also say immigrants help the culture of arizona. We see a lot of moderate views on both sides. Is moreer wall supported by republicans than democrats. Host can we tell how women iners are going to break arizona in the president ial election . Arizona has two women senators, including one who will be on the ballot. Guest there are a lot of women harrise we had kamala on the democratic side. What i got my research was that to support rather than they will support women. What i mean is they will reach across the aisle with someone who doesnt agree with them ideologically. Republican women and Democratic Women hold views that you may , reproductive rights, we see a lot of big differences. Partisanship seems to make a difference. As being often defined more supportive of the Democratic Party and that is true broadly. White women support the Republican Party consistently. Minority and white women voted bush. Ump, romney, mccain, if that trend continues, we should see white women voting the Republican Party. But this is an on predictable and unpredictable here. Nonwhite women overwhelmingly support the Democratic Party and that is a trend that is getting stronger and stronger. If the electorate becomes more diverse, women on the whole will become more of a democratic stronghold. Host lets talk to craig who is from chandler, arizona. He supports President Trump. Good morning. From chandler, arizona. Was a i am better off i year ago. There are a lot of hightech jobs here. Biden can never help the economy like trump did. We saw what obama and biden did to us before, and there was no hope. I saw the violence in scottsville, looting and destruction. Is spot on. Biden will destroy us. We need to vote to keep mick mcsally as the republican in senate. Because the democrats are going to try to impeach again. That is for certain. We need all the republicans that we can. Thank you. Guest there are a lot of voters in the population asking the question, how am i feeling today as opposed to a year ago. There are some who think they are just as well off are better. The vast majority of americans dont feel that way. Many people are not in that is then and i think that population. The caller mentioned and what we found was republicans and democrats are divided on whether not they support protests in favor of racial injustice. And emma kretz tend to feel the opposite and democrats tend to feel opposite. Of johnat is the legacy on voters views on arizona . We know of john mccain on in arizona. We know that cindy mccain endorsed joe biden. Former republicans like jeff flake endorsed biden. Ont is the legacy of mccain this election coming up . With independent leaning considered ad maverick and not aligning with either party. He showed that in later years. Also speaking out very vocally against trump. Both flake and cindy mccain have indocin have endorsed joe biden. They are moderate independents and they feel arizona is a moderate state. Lot of nuance within how Arizona Democrats and republicans feel about the policy issues. Who isets talk to mary, calling from las vegas, nevada. She supports joe biden. Caller trump is not a republican, and he is not a conservative. He is an opportunist and he is an autocrat. I am worried about Social Security. He said out of his own mouth that if you give me four more years, i am going to get rid of the fica taxes. That will be the end of Social Security as we know it. And then he says i will do an executive order and protecting preexisting conditions. It takes work to put the health plan together. Now he is going to court they are going to court. There are 18 republican states going to court on the 10th to disband preexisting conditions and the whole Affordable Care act. Of get read read preexisting conditions, your private insurance policy will be affected by that. Premiums are already starting to go up. Lets look at what he is putting in office. He knew about the virus early on in january. He admitted as much to bob woodward. You can hear the audio out of his own mouth. Then you have pences aid. Nowis a whistleblower because she sat in on the Task Force Meetings and is a lifelong republican. Trump says, maybe the covid is a good thing, because as a politician he has to shake hands and i dont want to shake the hands of all of these disgusting people. These disgusting people are the people supporting him. Host go ahead and respond. Guest what is essential here is not donald trump should have guarantee in any way of getting the senate. That is why this election has become so contentious. There are a large number of states where problems are interested in moving. Are more others republican than they were in the past. We are seeing donald trump with a two point deficit in a place. Ike texas trump and biden pulling equal in polling equal. Host we samara klar would like to thank samara klar host we would like to think samara klar for being with us. Thank you so much. Host we will remind you that later on today, we will go live to the white house, where President Donald Trump is expected to make his Supreme Court nominee announcement. That is live today at 5 00 p. M. Eastern. You can watch on cspan, cspan. Org, and free cspan radio app. Thank you for being with us today. Continue to wash your hands and state safe, everyone. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] you are watching cspan, your unfiltered view of government, created by americas Cable Television company as a Public Service and brought to you by your television provider. Coming up this morning on cspan, candidate profiles of President Trump and former Vice President joe biden utilizing footage from cspans video library, after that a forum on the legacies of women in the judiciary including Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Here is cspans candidate profile of President Donald Trump. Utilizing the cspan video library, we are going to take a at the political career of donald j. Trump and his early career. Joining us is julie pace, the for theon Correspondent Associated press. And jon jon, chief correspondent news and new book front row to the trump show. Let me begin with you. Has donald trump in the last 3 1 2plus yeaha
vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.