Speaker 1: Do you want to be an American?
Speaker 2: He's got a Plonge show on seven hundred WLW. So
Speaker 2: we've got some breaking news to share with you this
Speaker 2: morning about crime in Cincinnati. Robert Shaw has now been
Speaker 2: charged in the murder with that drive by shooting. They
Speaker 2: killed a thirty four old man by the name of
Speaker 2: Justin Johnson right after Thursday night football. This is on
Speaker 2: Sycamore in front of the in Between Tavern. Happened about
Speaker 2: two am, so people are still downtown celebrating the Big
Speaker 2: Bengals when Shaw was wearing an ankle monitor at the time.
Speaker 2: Does the story sound familiar? Sure? And the reason why
Speaker 2: I was under a house arrest so to speak, was
Speaker 2: carried concealed weapon, illegal gun possession and here he is
Speaker 2: being held on that, being about to go and trial
Speaker 2: on that, and now he's out there doing it again.
Speaker 2: So initially he was released on a twenty thousand dollars
Speaker 2: bond with the electronic monitoring that was back in June. Also,
Speaker 2: the suspect in the Fountain Square shooting last week has
Speaker 2: turned himself in. Twenty four year old Shaquille Ferguson said
Speaker 2: it's self defense because the people that he shot at
Speaker 2: through the window of City Bird Chicken on Fountain Square
Speaker 2: were actually armed themselves and pointing a gun at him.
Speaker 2: The only problem with that argument from Clyde Bennett is
Speaker 2: that mister Ferguson was already on probation in July for
Speaker 2: a violent crime, which means he's under disability and shouldn't
Speaker 2: have had the gun that he shot the window out
Speaker 2: and at the people the City Bird. So we're back
Speaker 2: to this question. Is our probation and monitoring system completely
Speaker 2: broken and beyond repair? On that is the honorable Betsy Sunderman,
Speaker 2: She's a judge in Hamlin County, joining the show to
Speaker 2: discuss here on seven hundred WLW.
Speaker 3: How are you good morning?
Speaker 4: I'm great, how are you?
Speaker 2: I'm doing final though you hear these stories, I'd love
Speaker 2: to not be talking about violent crime in Cincinnati, but
Speaker 2: you know, we have shoes dropping and now we know
Speaker 2: the backgrounds of the individuals and jackets on Robert Shaw
Speaker 2: and Shaquille Ferguson. You have two people yet again that
Speaker 2: should not be armed by law, and yet there they are.
Speaker 4: Yeah, exactly, and if there's, if there are any issues
Speaker 4: with probation monitoring right now, it is interesting for your
Speaker 4: life listeners to know who is in charge of the
Speaker 4: probation officers. It's the judges. The judges hire the probation
Speaker 4: officers and make sure they're doing their jobs. So if
Speaker 4: we're having issues with probation monitoring, I mean, I haven't
Speaker 4: heard this issue before in the past. And it's interesting.
Speaker 4: Now we have a lot of Democrat judges who are
Speaker 4: in charge of the probation department and that seems to
Speaker 4: be the big change, and now we're not very happy
Speaker 4: with probation monitoring. So, for example, about a month ago,
Speaker 4: the Democrat majority of judges and Common Police Criminal Court
Speaker 4: decided to get rid of some of these, well all
Speaker 4: of the probation substations. So there used to be these
Speaker 4: substations in the most violent neighborhoods and people who are
Speaker 4: on probation could go meet with those probation officers there
Speaker 4: and the probation officers could set up shop there and
Speaker 4: they could visit people in their homes. But now the
Speaker 4: Democrat judges have gotten rid of those and they said, well,
Speaker 4: it's more efficient because now our probation officers can all
Speaker 4: be downtown. Well that's true, maybe it's more efficient as
Speaker 4: far as you know, they don't have to drive places,
Speaker 4: but they're not able to monitor people.
Speaker 2: They're not in the community. So now they got it
Speaker 2: a fire further to monitor the people instead of being
Speaker 2: in the neighborhood. It'd be kind of like just having
Speaker 2: one big police station district one as opposed to the
Speaker 2: multi different districts in and around Cincinnati. For cops, you
Speaker 2: put them where the people in the crimes are exactly.
Speaker 4: And if they're visiting people in their homes, then people
Speaker 4: are picking up more violations when the probation officers are
Speaker 4: seeing things in their home. So of course the stats
Speaker 4: are going to show a year from now that there
Speaker 4: are fewer probation violations. But that's because the monitor monitoring
Speaker 4: is going to be subpar, and as we see the
Speaker 4: monitoring get worse and worse, we're going to see people
Speaker 4: out there offending. For example. I mean, I really can't
Speaker 4: speak specifically to a case, but if there's a case
Speaker 4: where someone, for example, is on the ankle monitor but
Speaker 4: has privileges for something, sometimes it's hard to monitor those privileges.
Speaker 4: So like let's say I was on an ankle monitor
Speaker 4: and I had privileges to go to work. Well, that's
Speaker 4: easy because I work at one location, and I work
Speaker 4: from the same time I start and the same time
Speaker 4: I end every day. But a lot of people don't
Speaker 4: have jobs like that. A lot of people, you know,
Speaker 4: maybe they work construction, or they work at a hospital,
Speaker 4: or they work odd hours. And how do you monitor
Speaker 4: someone when they always say, well, I was on my
Speaker 4: way to a construction job.
Speaker 2: Or in the cases this is Betsy Sunderman ferguson the
Speaker 2: Fountain Square shoot at Teddy Bird, this young man has
Speaker 2: a two cases pending for aggravated assault, both with a
Speaker 2: weapon specification. There he shot someone two days prior, allegedly
Speaker 2: in Northside before or he shot the window out in
Speaker 2: Fountain Square and shout at the people there, and yet
Speaker 2: he was on probation from the other one saying, hey, listen,
Speaker 2: as long as you're out looking for a job, it's fine.
Speaker 2: I don't know if that's a good idea. Turn your
Speaker 2: application at City Bird and then turn around shoot their
Speaker 2: window out, albeit not to shoot at the bird's window,
Speaker 2: shoot the people in the bird. But still, I'm pretty sure,
Speaker 2: you know, if I'm doing the hiring that kind of
Speaker 2: behaviors frowned upon.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I guess it depends what kind of job they're
Speaker 4: trying to book, but it's unlikely that that would meet
Speaker 4: the job description.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 4: But by having these rules that seem really tough, but
Speaker 4: then not enforcing them properly, this is the way that
Speaker 4: the politicians can say we're combating crime but really doing nothing.
Speaker 4: For example, like the mayor and his juvenile curfew. Whenever
Speaker 4: a juvenile either shoot someone or get shot, he says,
Speaker 4: we're gonna tighten up this curfew. But then if you
Speaker 4: look at the actual rules of the juvenile curfew, if
Speaker 4: a child is out, if someone under eighteen is out
Speaker 4: and they say that they're on their way to work
Speaker 4: or on their way home from work, you can't make
Speaker 4: them go home, or you can't violate them for the curfew.
Speaker 4: If they say that they are exercising their First Amendment rights,
Speaker 4: which could be the freedom of speech, assembly, they could
Speaker 4: freedom of the press, church, they're.
Speaker 2: On their way to church, Bessie when they shot that
Speaker 2: person exactly.
Speaker 4: And then even if the kid says, you know, I'm
Speaker 4: not I have no exceptions that fits, then the police
Speaker 4: all they can do is say, you know, we'd really
Speaker 4: like you to go home. And if the kid says no,
Speaker 4: then they'd say, well, we'd really like you to go
Speaker 4: to this, uh, this rec center, and if the kid
Speaker 4: says no, they can't, they can't do anything. So it's
Speaker 4: great that the mayor's on TV saying we're tightening up
Speaker 4: this curfew. If if you're there and you're doing anything bad,
Speaker 4: we're going to you. But it's just not playing out
Speaker 4: like that.
Speaker 2: All right. Betsy Sunderman, Judge Sunderman is here on the show,
Speaker 2: and we're talking about probation and monitoring systems. Are they
Speaker 2: broken beyond repair? Robert Shaw, that was the man who's
Speaker 2: now been charged the drive by shooting. They killed thirty
Speaker 2: fear old Justin Johnson after Thursday night football right right
Speaker 2: near the in between tavern on Thursday night Friday morning.
Speaker 2: He was already out on a lot. He was wearing
Speaker 2: the ankle monitor at the time he shot the individual
Speaker 2: in the car. Justin Johnson form what I understand. People
Speaker 2: I know knew this guy and said, yeah, he's a professional,
Speaker 2: you know, seemed to be an upstanding guy who I
Speaker 2: don't know why he and Robert Shaw got into a
Speaker 2: beef and what was over. We don't know that. But
Speaker 2: the background is not Justin Johnson is not a street criminal.
Speaker 2: He's a professional, or was a professional before he was
Speaker 2: murdered in the Shaquille Ferguson shooting at City Bird Chicken.
Speaker 2: He was armed again, had priors, who's out on probation
Speaker 2: for a violent crime, and he shot the window out
Speaker 2: and trying to shoot at the people inside City Bird.
Speaker 2: His attorney, Clyde Bennett cleim self defense. We'll see about that.
Speaker 2: I do I'm not quite sure how that works within
Speaker 2: the law. If you're prohibited from having a weapon because
Speaker 2: you're on probation and you shoot at someone, I'm not
Speaker 2: quite sure that that is going to it's it's not
Speaker 2: like offsetting penalties in the NFL. And then you play
Speaker 2: it over in that regard to Betsy's sentiment though, and
Speaker 2: I think it's interesting in pointing out, because we've talked
Speaker 2: about the problem in its progressivism in Cincinnati, that that
Speaker 2: that's fueling this it's because we want to hands off
Speaker 2: no bail policy and we want to be kindler and
Speaker 2: gentlemen to people who are suspected at crimes because their
Speaker 2: life is already difficult, and well, it just gives the
Speaker 2: sociopaths out there more license to do stuff like this.
Speaker 2: I will point out, however, in both those cases in
Speaker 2: Sean Ferguson, those are both conservative Republican judges that ordered
Speaker 2: them on monitoring, and that would be Judge dink Locker
Speaker 2: and Judge Ruleman. Does that change the math a little
Speaker 2: bit on.
Speaker 4: This, well, I'll tell you those are two of the
Speaker 4: judges who give the biggest bombs. So without being able
Speaker 4: to talk to I can't call them and ask them
Speaker 4: about the case and then talk about it on the videos,
Speaker 4: right right, But I would trust that those judges would
Speaker 4: set appropriate bonds. There's a trifecta that kind of effects
Speaker 4: every time someone's upset about someone being on parole or
Speaker 4: probation and being out there and committing crimes. There's a
Speaker 4: trifecta that affects all this. There's the police, there's a
Speaker 4: probation department, and the judges. So the police are controlled by,
Speaker 4: of course the police chief, who is controlled by the
Speaker 4: city manager, who is ultimately controlled by the mayor. So
Speaker 4: the police department is controlled by the mayor. And then
Speaker 4: we have probation, which I already told you is controlled
Speaker 4: by the judges, the now liberal Democrat judges. And then
Speaker 4: we have the judges themselves, which are now a majority
Speaker 4: Democrat liberal judges. So basically the two groups that are
Speaker 4: controlling all this is the mayor, the city manager, the
Speaker 4: city administration, and the liberal judges. So if we're seeing
Speaker 4: a big change, those are the big changes. Of course,
Speaker 4: we've had a Democrat mayor for probably fifty years, right,
Speaker 4: but the way the mayor is affecting the police department
Speaker 4: is different than ever before. And then all having a
Speaker 4: majority liberal, progressive Democrat judges is new for us in
Speaker 4: Hamilton County.
Speaker 2: Look look look at it. Look at how the mayor's
Speaker 2: office impacted the brawl, and that he was demanding that
Speaker 2: the white guy be charged because he's a white guy.
Speaker 2: We've got to balance things out racially. Apparently, if yourest
Speaker 2: a personal caller, you got aggressed a white guy, even
Speaker 2: though he was the victim. Clearly this whole thing, and
Speaker 2: no one wanted to write that citation and unfortunately made
Speaker 2: a captain down at the Central Business dictor do it
Speaker 2: who wasn't even on the scene. To show you how
Speaker 2: politically motivated those charges were. Just to appease the vocal
Speaker 2: contingent of folks in the community who were screaming about
Speaker 2: restorative justice, which is which is a farce. But relative
Speaker 2: to Robert Shaw, I don't know. This may be a
Speaker 2: tough question. You can either answered.
Speaker 3: You can.
Speaker 2: I understand you have a canon of ethics you have
Speaker 2: to abide by. You can't criticize other judges. But in
Speaker 2: the shawcase, this is a drive by from Thursday night
Speaker 2: football in from of the in between that was under
Speaker 2: Judge Dinkelocker. The guy Robert Shaw was on a twenty
Speaker 2: thousand dollars bond with electronic monitoring and this was from
Speaker 2: a case back in June. His his jacket is this
Speaker 2: nineteen ninety eight six months in prison for coke possession,
Speaker 2: two thousand and three six months for concealed weapon, illegal guns,
Speaker 2: receiving Spoiling Property RSP. And then twenty eleven and then
Speaker 2: again in twenty fifteen he did prison time for illegal
Speaker 2: gun possession. He got twenty thousand dollars bond, an electronic
Speaker 2: monitor ringing out and murdered someone while he was wearing
Speaker 2: the ankle monitor. What would you prescribe what would you
Speaker 2: prescribe as a punishment for Robert Shaw? If we're in
Speaker 2: front of you, let's say, and he was already out
Speaker 2: on bond for another shooting. How many more times do
Speaker 2: you give someone a chance to get out on bond
Speaker 2: even though they have priors involving a weapon, because it
Speaker 2: tells me they're probably just going to do something with
Speaker 2: a gun.
Speaker 4: Again, Yeah, I mean, what do you I mean, what
Speaker 4: do you do with someone who clearly is never going
Speaker 4: to put down a gun?
Speaker 1: Right?
Speaker 4: I mean, this guy, it sounds like he's been in
Speaker 4: prison quite a few times for having guns. He just
Speaker 4: keeps he just keeps picking up a.
Speaker 1: Gun, right.
Speaker 4: I mean, again, I can't speak to this exact case,
Speaker 4: but I do trust judge take a locker and if
Speaker 4: he set that bond, I mean, I don't know, I
Speaker 4: don't know. I can't really speak to a specific case.
Speaker 1: Well, what were you front?
Speaker 2: What would you done?
Speaker 3: Now?
Speaker 2: Again, you have the hindsight that this guy's going to
Speaker 2: murder someone over apparently it's just a beef. It doesn't
Speaker 2: look like they knew each other at this point. We'll
Speaker 2: find out. But what And you can't look in the
Speaker 2: crystal ball and say, well, he's going to go out
Speaker 2: murder someone. You don't know that, because there are probably
Speaker 2: countless people are in the situation that going out and
Speaker 2: do it. But we're talking about stopping this from happening
Speaker 2: in the first place. Should we just say, hey, listen,
Speaker 2: you already had a gun. Speck you go right to
Speaker 2: You're going to hold you and you're not going to
Speaker 2: get out, and you're not gonna be able to walk around.
Speaker 2: And you decide to do something stupid with a gun
Speaker 2: and you shouldn't have a gun. You're going to sit
Speaker 2: in jail until your trial.
Speaker 4: Yeah, well, I mean I would want to look at
Speaker 4: his pre trial services sheet. So every single person who's
Speaker 4: arrested and put into the jail and has an arraignment
Speaker 4: the next morning in front of a judge, a municipal
Speaker 4: judge and pre trial services interviews the person and sees
Speaker 4: if they're a flight risk, sees how much money they
Speaker 4: could afford for a bond. They ask them a million
Speaker 4: different questions about drugs and guns and family members and
Speaker 4: community ties and do they have a job, that kind
Speaker 4: of stuff. And the judge is able to look at
Speaker 4: that sheet. The prosecutor is not able to look.
Speaker 3: At that sheet.
Speaker 4: I know that because I used to work in that courtroom.
Speaker 4: One thing that we could do is we could give
Speaker 4: everyone access to that information. That might be very helpful.
Speaker 4: I'm sure some of the new prosecutors have different strategies
Speaker 4: than when I was a prosecutor there because now they
Speaker 4: have a different boss.
Speaker 2: So I don't know.
Speaker 4: I mean, giving everyone maximum information and maybe giving the
Speaker 4: media more information. I know the media doesn't see those
Speaker 4: pre trial services sheets. I'm not saying those should be
Speaker 4: turned over to the media, but usually that docket is
Speaker 4: very rapid, and the media kind of leaves confused, like, well,
Speaker 4: why did one person get a low bond and one
Speaker 4: person get a high bond? Right, So maybe making some
Speaker 4: of that more accessible.
Speaker 2: Why isn't I shared with the prosecutor if anyone else.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I don't know.
Speaker 4: It's a good question. I don't know.
Speaker 2: I should know that, but then.
Speaker 4: It should be shared with the defense attorney. If you
Speaker 4: can't share something just with a prosecutor and not the
Speaker 4: defense attorneys discovery, I don't know, maybe there's no time.
Speaker 4: I mean it's a very quick docket. I mean, it's
Speaker 4: probably not as quick as it used to be because
Speaker 4: we not as many people are arrested because there aren't
Speaker 4: that many people in our jail anymore.
Speaker 2: But what I remember wasn't long ago under Sheriff Simon LEAs,
Speaker 2: and I know he's revered this community. I think there's
Speaker 2: something he did was way overreaching. I mean, you know,
Speaker 2: but he was tough on crime for sure. And I
Speaker 2: remember having discussions about we need a bigger jail, we
Speaker 2: need more jail space because we can't house all the people.
Speaker 2: You don't hear that conversation anymore, and that was, like,
Speaker 2: you know, fifteen years ago, twenty years ago, it's simply
Speaker 2: because we're not holding people anymore.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 4: Twenty years ago, sy Lease used to meet with all
Speaker 4: the judges and say, listen, we are bursting at the themes.
Speaker 4: I'm going to have to create some new work details
Speaker 4: and things so we can let the least violent people
Speaker 4: out earlier. And the judges would respond, you know, do
Speaker 4: what you need to do. We're going to do what
Speaker 4: we need to do. You know, we're not going to
Speaker 4: change our sentences. But you know, if you don't have room,
Speaker 4: you got to do what you need to do. I
Speaker 4: can't imagine that conversation is happening now where the sheriff
Speaker 4: is saying we don't have any room, never here, right.
Speaker 4: But even if we did try to arrest another two
Speaker 4: hundred people to fill up the jail. We don't have
Speaker 4: sheriff's deputies, we don't have enough corrections officers. Police officers
Speaker 4: have told me when they arrest juveniles now and they
Speaker 4: bring them to juvenile jail at twenty twenty, we call
Speaker 4: it twenty twenty. Auburn Avenue that most often twenty twenty
Speaker 4: just says we're not going to keep them. We just
Speaker 4: don't have enough employees.
Speaker 6: We just can't keep them.
Speaker 4: Yeah, well, I don't know. Is it a policy issue?
Speaker 4: Is it a staffing issue? Is it people are vilifying
Speaker 4: police correction officers and then no one wants to do it,
Speaker 4: and then that's fulfill the plan to be understaffed and
Speaker 4: to not be able to lock people up.
Speaker 2: I don't know. If you look at the climate and
Speaker 2: CPD right now, we've got a huge number officers retiring,
Speaker 2: even at early ages because they can't stand all the
Speaker 2: politics and the bs and what the mayor's office and
Speaker 2: how much control they have and how their hands are
Speaker 2: tied in a lot of cases, and they go to
Speaker 2: a suburban office or trying to do a latter recruiting,
Speaker 2: and I understand it's difficult because people go, well, the
Speaker 2: money's good. But you know what, on the job in Cincinnati,
Speaker 2: I'd rather stay where I am. It's not attractive to
Speaker 2: them because the climate created by the political ecosystem in
Speaker 2: Hamlin County, but specifically in the city of Cincinnati. She
Speaker 2: is a judge, Betsy Senderman, who's running for office this cycle.
Speaker 2: Will know in a couple of weeks if she wins.
Speaker 2: But it's it's a tough job. But we've got to
Speaker 2: reform this system because ankle monitor the grant and there
Speaker 2: are probably thousands and thousands of people out there that
Speaker 2: abide by the terms of the deal they made with
Speaker 2: the judge and are trying to do the right thing.
Speaker 2: But how do we segregate the most violent people? And
Speaker 2: I'd say, if you have a gun specification history of
Speaker 2: priors with guns like this Robert schaugu I did, then
Speaker 2: I don't understand why we're giving you house arrest essentially
Speaker 2: because chances are you're going to break it. I think,
Speaker 2: if it's a gun speck, we already have laws in
Speaker 2: the books. Let's enforce federal law that if you're prohibited
Speaker 2: because of a felony prior felony from owning a fire,
Speaker 2: are possessing a firearm. Then you go to jail right
Speaker 2: away and there is no release, there is no ankle
Speaker 2: monitoring going on, because you're a menace to society. Betsy Syderban,
Speaker 2: I always appreciate the time and the insight. Thanks again.
Speaker 2: You have a wonderful day.
Speaker 4: Judge Clownix, I like it.
Speaker 2: No, I'm not going back to school. You ain't gonna
Speaker 2: get me there. Hell no, I'm not taking out more
Speaker 2: student loans. I'm I'm on the wrong side of fifty
Speaker 2: and I just finished paying mine off. Betsy, Oh the best,
Speaker 2: take care, see you later. All right. We got a
Speaker 2: news update coming in momentarily and we'll chop it up
Speaker 2: next about what you just shared here. Surprise surprise, guys
Speaker 2: out on ankle monitors and house arrest and they're out
Speaker 2: shooting people. This is what this is. This is the
Speaker 2: government we deserve because we elected them seven hundred w
Speaker 2: well them, Scott flu Shows under wold them. So I'm
Speaker 2: coming off of this foot surgery thing with my ruptured
Speaker 2: perineal tendon that they had to sew back to my foot.
Speaker 2: I've been barely walking around motion somewhere on that because
Speaker 2: I'm stupid. That's why, why, why when't you get that
Speaker 2: fixed right? Because I'm dumb. Pain is my business. I
Speaker 2: embraised pain like a second cup of coffee. Just dumb
Speaker 2: is what it is. So I got the boot out.
Speaker 2: I've got the walking with that scooter. You put your
Speaker 2: knee on, your roll around. It's got a little basket
Speaker 2: on the front of it. Could put bourbon and snacks
Speaker 2: in there. It's nice.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 2: And then the you know, the walking booth, the soft
Speaker 2: cast and then crutches of course too, and so anything
Speaker 2: takes a lot longer to run down the hall a
Speaker 2: second to grab something I've forgotten, Like, I just can't
Speaker 2: walk there. I have to hobble there, tiny Tim on
Speaker 2: his crutches. And uh, you know, of all the great
Speaker 2: medical advances we've had, and we have medical advances coming
Speaker 2: out day to day. I mean it's incredible. Always make
Speaker 2: fun of the you know, the prescription ads on TV.
Speaker 2: A bunch of fat, happy people dancing around at a
Speaker 2: flea market somewhere outdoor festivals, singing about something or another.
Speaker 2: I know it's making them so happy enough to sing.
Speaker 2: Whatever illness it is they have. I have no idea,
Speaker 2: but they seem rather happy and whatever it is, they're
Speaker 2: trying to sell you to ask your doctor about You
Speaker 2: have no idea what it does, what it's for, But
Speaker 2: damn it, I gotta write that down because the jingle's catchy,
Speaker 2: and those people that are dancing look very happy. I
Speaker 2: need me some happy joy juice, if you know what
Speaker 2: I mean. So we have all these modern miracle all
Speaker 2: these inventions. Now you're fat. We've got GLP one. Now
Speaker 2: I get an injection thirty five pounds. Like it's nothing,
Speaker 2: isn't it? Great? Technology solves everything? But there's one area
Speaker 2: that we have not addressed. Where's one area that seems
Speaker 2: to be like this? Somebody can make billions of dollars.
Speaker 2: They came up with an alternative to crutches. Crutches have
Speaker 2: been around forever the Civil War veterans. You know you
Speaker 2: got you gotta a scratch air in your leg and
Speaker 2: one of that doctor comes in and cuts your leg off.
Speaker 2: As there's all you don't want the gang green absolutly bad.
Speaker 2: We're gonna cut your leg off. Here, bite this bullet
Speaker 2: and we're gonna cut your leg off with no anesthetic whatsoever. Okay, Um,
Speaker 2: it's still the same technology. It still somebody goes into
Speaker 2: your armpit helps you well, look like all these years,
Speaker 2: you think they would have come up with an alternative,
Speaker 2: a better solution than crutches. And the crutch that I have,
Speaker 2: it's aluminum. It's got a little rubbery thing at the
Speaker 2: top and a grap certainly like the wooden ones they
Speaker 2: had handed out back during the Civil War. But it's
Speaker 2: the same design. And I don't care how much foam
Speaker 2: you put under your armpit. It your armpits wearing a myre.
Speaker 2: I've worn up by any of that armpit replacement at
Speaker 2: this point, and it's only been five weeks. But there
Speaker 2: is something that really needs to be reimagined and rediscovered.
Speaker 2: And I know we have walkers now, and there's the
Speaker 2: canes with the tripod with the tennis balls on it. Man,
Speaker 2: it's still a cane. I get it. And I have
Speaker 2: you have one of those knee scooters you rolled on
Speaker 2: a nees scooter, but the knee scooter. I'm driving myself
Speaker 2: now and I got to take my boot off getting
Speaker 2: the car, and it's getting the scooter out. I barely
Speaker 2: get the crutches out let alone. A fifty pounds scooter.
Speaker 2: It's nice, it's just not portable. It's just not easy.
Speaker 2: There's got to be a better Somebody need to be
Speaker 2: working on that. If you want to make a lot
Speaker 2: of money. DME is a cab, a very durable medical
Speaker 2: equipment because the up charge with the chargers things a
Speaker 2: small fortune. But the crutch has been around for hundreds
Speaker 2: of years. That's something that somebody needs to look at
Speaker 2: and go, can we make a better version of Can
Speaker 2: we do something to make it easier unless wear and
Speaker 2: tearing your armpits and your wrists than the good old crutch?
Speaker 2: Just some low hanging fruit there for somebody who is
Speaker 2: aggressive and smart and an engineer type. You want to
Speaker 2: make some money, think about redoing the crutch the crutch.
Speaker 2: I just had the honorable Betsy Sunderman on the show
Speaker 2: on seven hundred WLW the latest on the downtown violence.
Speaker 2: And you know it wouldn't be a Monday if we
Speaker 2: didn't wake up and talk about more downtown violence. In
Speaker 2: the two cases in particular here Robert Shaw the one
Speaker 2: charge in the drive by shooting that killed a thirty
Speaker 2: four old man by the name of Justin Johnson right
Speaker 2: after Thursday night football and Sycamore Street by the way
Speaker 2: near the in between. I guess that would be this
Speaker 2: guy was wearing an ankle monitor. He ran an ankle monitor,
Speaker 2: not on twenty thousand dollars bond, by the way, because
Speaker 2: he was carrying concealed weapon and illegal gun possession. The
Speaker 2: shooting at Fountain Square involving twenty year old Shaukill Ferguson.
Speaker 2: This is the thick guy who fired the shots into
Speaker 2: the window of Ceedybird Chicken now claims it was He's
Speaker 2: turned himself in by the way at the behest to
Speaker 2: Clyde Bennett, his attorney, and Clyde Bennett is pulling the
Speaker 2: it was self defense. The people who shot through the
Speaker 2: window of Ceedybird Chicken were actually armed and pointing a
Speaker 2: gun at him. He said. The video hasn't be released
Speaker 2: because it's part of a political cover up. They don't
Speaker 2: want you to hear this. Now other things in Cincinnati,
Speaker 2: the way progressive politics are, is it the one that
Speaker 2: you wouldn't release that video? Why to make this guy
Speaker 2: look bad, to advance the narrative that violence is running
Speaker 2: rampant in downtown and Fountain Square. Now you do the
Speaker 2: exact opposite. It doesn't make much sense. And not only that,
Speaker 2: I don't know how you can get away with a
Speaker 2: self defense argument when in fact your client is in
Speaker 2: possession of a gun he shouldn't had in the first
Speaker 2: place because he was on probation in July for a
Speaker 2: violent crime. So I think the bigger question, in addition
Speaker 2: to the fact that the two judges in the Shaw
Speaker 2: and the Ferguson case are both Republicans and dinkele Locker enrollment,
Speaker 2: is that the system itself is broken. It doesn't work
Speaker 2: because if you know, you can say I'm going to
Speaker 2: go find a job, I'm going to do this, I'm
Speaker 2: going to report to my probation officer. And we've seen
Speaker 2: countless people, countless people who marchai Black. For example, with
Speaker 2: the murder of Patrick Herringer, you know, shouldn't have been
Speaker 2: out and airy was community control, cut the ankle monitor off,
Speaker 2: we got a murder, and it's been a steady drum
Speaker 2: beat to that all summer. I was doing a little
Speaker 2: bit more looking in research and in some states they've
Speaker 2: actually addressed this issue. In some states now in areas
Speaker 2: actually they're cracking down and saying, you know what, we
Speaker 2: got to get tougher when it comes to people who
Speaker 2: violate while wearing ankle monitor, or make it tougher for
Speaker 2: someone to qualify to wear the ankle monitor. If you
Speaker 2: look at the grand scheme, the number of people who
Speaker 2: are on quote unquote house arrest in Hamlin County, it's
Speaker 2: in the tens of thousands. But in that regard that
Speaker 2: it's just a few of them who are violating and
Speaker 2: getting out and committing more crimes while they're allegedly on
Speaker 2: house arrest. So that's not lost on me, but there is.
Speaker 2: And these aren't exactly conservative hotbeds either. Washington, d C.
Speaker 2: New Mexico, Florida is one of them. Florida implemented stricter
Speaker 2: criteria for pro trial detention. I think the one that
Speaker 2: to me carries a lot of weight here and looking
Speaker 2: at what's going on in Florida, for example, that it's
Speaker 2: a house build that I don't know it's past yet.
Speaker 2: But anyway, if you're in being held for dangerous crime,
Speaker 2: for first degree fela in his heart, which should be
Speaker 2: capital murder, life felonies, dangerous crimes, things like that, if
Speaker 2: you're arrested for a dangerous crime, that's a capital felony,
Speaker 2: life felony of first degree felony the state has to
Speaker 2: file a motion for pro prile detention, and so the
Speaker 2: court has to find what they call substantial probability that
Speaker 2: they committed the offense, and not only he said, she said,
Speaker 2: but pretty clear evidence this person is the right person.
Speaker 2: And if that's the case, you get no release whatsoever
Speaker 2: because of well, what we're talking about here. You can't
Speaker 2: have non monetary release, which is the no Bell thing,
Speaker 2: but the discretion about electronic monitoring. You have to have
Speaker 2: monetary bonds. You have to have a lot of cash
Speaker 2: put down, which most of them can't afford. So it's
Speaker 2: a strict one that mandates detention for serious crimes and
Speaker 2: eliminates the option of cash. No cash bail eliminates that.
Speaker 2: I think that's a step in the right direction. I
Speaker 2: think that's something we need here in Ohio and specifically
Speaker 2: Cincinnati address what we're talking about here. I can't speak
Speaker 2: for Cleveland and Columbus and other cities. I can speak
Speaker 2: for Cincinnati, and the idea is that these people who
Speaker 2: are arrested and have long histories. Is the case of
Speaker 2: mister Shaw, which is the guy who murdered the person
Speaker 2: on Thursday night football. After Thursday Night Football, the in
Speaker 2: between sitting in his car. Is this guy had a
Speaker 2: lot of priors, you know, six months for cocaine back
Speaker 2: in the nineties, in two thousand and three, six months
Speaker 2: for a concealed weapon and illegal unpossessioned because of the
Speaker 2: cocaine would prohibit him from having or looking at or
Speaker 2: thinking about a gun at any time in his life.
Speaker 2: And then in twenty eleven and twenty fifteen he did
Speaker 2: more time for legal gun possession. You got the coke possession,
Speaker 2: You went to prison for that, then he got out,
Speaker 2: and then within a few months of that, you had
Speaker 2: a concealed weapon on you, okay, And then he did
Speaker 2: time for that, then he got out, and a few
Speaker 2: years went by, and then within four year period you
Speaker 2: did it twice. I don't know. To me, if you
Speaker 2: had three priors where you had a weapon under disutability,
Speaker 2: why the hell are we giving anyone who is like that,
Speaker 2: even if it's a high bond electronic monitoring in the
Speaker 2: first place, It just to me, they seem extremely dangerous.
Speaker 7: Now.
Speaker 2: I understand right to a speedy trial and that I
Speaker 2: get that, but maybe making the bond about higher, I
Speaker 2: don't know if that would have stopped anything, but probably not.
Speaker 1: Hell.
Speaker 2: It tells me a lot when you are you have
Speaker 2: the ankle monitor on you, you're not even cutting it off.
Speaker 2: You're out there shooting people while you got the ankle
Speaker 2: monitor on. Not particularly bright. It's going to send you
Speaker 2: back to prison, but probably back to prison for a
Speaker 2: few years ago, back out, and you know what, you'll
Speaker 2: do it again. It's like Joe Peshian Casino, I'm stupid
Speaker 2: that way. Prison is my business. Apparently business is good.
Speaker 2: I guess other states like New Mexico and in Washington
Speaker 2: do things similar to this. Not as extremists is in Florida.
Speaker 2: But you can make a case look at that, going
Speaker 2: why are we releasing these people who have have gun priors?
Speaker 2: And then you hear folks like my friend Anna Alby
Speaker 2: who was on last week talking about how we need
Speaker 2: stricter gunlle, we need tougher gun laws. No we don't.
Speaker 2: If I'm sorry, if you got busted for distributing cocaine,
Speaker 2: possession with an intent to distribute, distributing cocaine, you got
Speaker 2: to prison for that, that's felling, which means a lot
Speaker 2: of things, but primarily the big one is you're not
Speaker 2: allowed to have a gun. In your possession. Okay, it
Speaker 2: ends right there, there's no I'm sorry there. What tougher
Speaker 2: gun law do you need?
Speaker 3: Then?
Speaker 2: The bad guys, if you're convicted of felony, you can't
Speaker 2: have a gun, And we have countless people as a
Speaker 2: matter of fact, all the people just about it. I
Speaker 2: think all of the people that we've talked about involving
Speaker 2: these crimes that have given Fountain Square in particularly the
Speaker 2: Central Business District and Cincinnati black eye, all of them,
Speaker 2: I don't think, without exception, have had prior felonies that
Speaker 2: would prohibit them from possessing a firearm. That seems like
Speaker 2: a pretty tough law. Making more laws isn't going to
Speaker 2: stop that. We have a law that says, well, you're
Speaker 2: on house arrest and you're on on bond, you can't
Speaker 2: do the things you're doing. And yet people with the
Speaker 2: monitor on are killing people. That's a pretty strict control.
Speaker 2: I would think, I don't care what the court says.
Speaker 2: I don't care what I signed my life away, and
Speaker 2: I don't care that I struck a deal. I don't care.
Speaker 2: All he care is about immediate gratification. And God only knows.
Speaker 2: Because we're starting to hear more and more come out
Speaker 2: about the thirty four year old man who is murdered
Speaker 2: on Thursday, well Friday morning, Thursday night, right after football
Speaker 2: and Sycamore. And this guy, I guess was a professional
Speaker 2: in some capacity. It wasn't like he was another street thug,
Speaker 2: probably with what happened with Shaquille Fergus in a city
Speaker 2: Bird that he saw other street thugs out there, and
Speaker 2: they street thugs kill each other. You want to kill
Speaker 2: each other, do it in an area where there's no
Speaker 2: one around, don't do it on Fountain Square. But in
Speaker 2: the case of mister Shaw, Robert Shaw, I don't know
Speaker 2: if it was a beef that spilled over from during
Speaker 2: the game or maybe the in between or parking our
Speaker 2: argument of our stupid stuff. But that's the problem with
Speaker 2: this is you get an argument with someone you don't
Speaker 2: know if their sociopaths there are gonna pull out and
Speaker 2: gun and kill you over a parking spot or dispute
Speaker 2: or dirty look or something that was misinterpreted or whatever
Speaker 2: it might be. You know, the whole I was disrespected.
Speaker 2: I get to disrespected daily. That's called being an adult.
Speaker 2: Just full of indiscretions and of course and things that
Speaker 2: just bring you down a few notches. It happened to
Speaker 2: you every day. It's called humility. Settling that with a
Speaker 2: firearm is part of the big problem. But that's what
Speaker 2: happened with Robert Shaw anyway, So we'll find out the
Speaker 2: details of that case. It comes a little bit more
Speaker 2: forward Scott's Loan show here on seven hundred WLW been
Speaker 2: talking a lot about healthcare. Brad Winstrip, of course, served
Speaker 2: in Congress. He is a physician, great guy to talk
Speaker 2: to you about this. I've talked for a while about
Speaker 2: how I disagree with the plan. The Democrats plan for
Speaker 2: healthcare is, well, we'll just take more hard earned taxpayer
Speaker 2: of dollars and subsidize the unaffordable healthcare and call it
Speaker 2: the Affordable Care Act. That's not really a solution. That's
Speaker 2: a band aid. I think we can all a comree that.
Speaker 2: And when you put in that context, which is accurate,
Speaker 2: it's a band aid, Like, well, yeah, I get that.
Speaker 2: I also get the fact that the people who not all,
Speaker 2: but most of them are going to get squeezed on
Speaker 2: this are folks who can't afford healthcare. So all of
Speaker 2: a sudden you look at it and go, we're an
Speaker 2: open enrollment season, and now I may not wind up
Speaker 2: getting those subsidies. And how am I going to afford healthcare?
Speaker 2: I've got a wife, I got a kid, I work
Speaker 2: two three jobs, none of them off for health care.
Speaker 2: I got to buy it on the market. How am
Speaker 2: I going to afford that? I can't afford that? And
Speaker 2: that's a real scare for people. That's the reality of it. Now,
Speaker 2: then you know the politics aside we've got a broken
Speaker 2: system is this makes it worse because we just continue
Speaker 2: to bankrupt America because we're as you know, every time
Speaker 2: you subsidize something, it doesn't make it cheaper or affordable.
Speaker 2: It masks the costs and makes it more inaccessible. It
Speaker 2: drives a deficit up and costs more. College should be
Speaker 2: a great parallel to that. College should be relatively cheap.
Speaker 2: It's all of the incentives and carabouts and seticides and
Speaker 2: grants and money and Funey and the federal government's involved.
Speaker 2: We've got to make it more affordable. And the more
Speaker 2: Democrats screen about college not being affordable and out of reach,
Speaker 2: and we've got to do something about it. We got
Speaker 2: to aleviate debt. Well, someone picks up the tab for that. Debt.
Speaker 2: Probably a lot of the people who can't afford healthcare
Speaker 2: go well, I have no choice. My taxes are there,
Speaker 2: and I have to pay taxes, and that's going to
Speaker 2: go to fund student debt relief. Student loans cost so
Speaker 2: much money, and college is too expensive because it's inflated
Speaker 2: by subsidy, just like healthcare and a lot of other
Speaker 2: things in America, there's the core of the problem. Subsidy
Speaker 2: is what drives the cost up, makes it harder, makes
Speaker 2: compliance harder because of government rules and agencies. And you've
Speaker 2: got to hire as a physician a bunch of people
Speaker 2: behind the scenes just to work with Medicare, Medicaid and
Speaker 2: the insurance company is another factor. It's a nice mare
Speaker 2: for folks. How do we fix that system? Well, I
Speaker 2: know what Democrats are doing. What are Republicans offer? And
Speaker 2: I said for a long time Democrats, I don't think
Speaker 2: it's a plan. I think it's a patch. But at
Speaker 2: least it's something. And it's the only issue when you
Speaker 2: pull Americans that has a higher favorability than the Republicans
Speaker 2: doing that. Everything else Democrats are underwater. I mean think
Speaker 2: Republicans got problems. Democrats got some real problems. They don't
Speaker 2: have any answers, they have no standard. They're directionalists, they're
Speaker 2: twisted in the wind. They've got one thing, and it's healthcare,
Speaker 2: which is why the government shut down. Could shut it
Speaker 2: down over a whole bunch of different things, but healthcare
Speaker 2: is one issue that most Americans have. Majority Americans go, yeah,
Speaker 2: Democrats got a better idea, which is really not a
Speaker 2: better it's just an idea. It's a patch. And then
Speaker 2: that regard, I don't see Republicans happen much, if anything.
Speaker 2: But what are Republicans have to offer? I've been saying
Speaker 2: that for a while. Brad WINSTERP was listening. He said,
Speaker 2: you know what, we've got the plan here. Let me
Speaker 2: share with you what the GOP thinks is the path forward.
Speaker 2: And I'll hear that coming up in just a few minutes.
Speaker 2: Here to the show. On seven hundred WW on a
Speaker 2: beautiful Monday mornings, we get back at the heavy rain
Speaker 2: yesterday and wind, My god, the wind was crazy yesterday.
Speaker 2: It was like Wizard of Oz, like the flags were
Speaker 2: completely bending in the breeze. We got tons of rain,
Speaker 2: which we desperately needed, and now we get a few
Speaker 2: days of drier air. But the cold air has moved in.
Speaker 2: We have gone from summer to officially winter here in Cincinnati.
Speaker 2: When you got out in the morning and go, man,
Speaker 2: I can see my breath. And just the other day
Speaker 2: there was steam rising up from the rising roup from
Speaker 2: the pavement because of the heat. It's like, yeah, that's
Speaker 2: that sinsy. You don't like the weather. Hang on a
Speaker 2: couple days. It's going to change, probably in a couple hours,
Speaker 2: for that matter. So more to that cold part. As
Speaker 2: we head towards fall, late fall, and then winter. We'll
Speaker 2: be here before you know it. So it's a Monday
Speaker 2: morning on a Scot's Loan show on seven hundred w
Speaker 2: WELW at five, three, seven, four, nine, seven, eight hundred
Speaker 2: the Big One talk back on the Art radio app
Speaker 2: here till noon and then a Willie takes over. Not
Speaker 2: sure what he has yet today, but we got lots
Speaker 2: of stuff to cover. As I said, brad winstrips on
Speaker 2: the way. Next, it's also Mental Health Monday with Juliettashare
Speaker 2: at the bottom of the next hour. Hang on for
Speaker 2: more slowly on seven hundred w WELD Do you want.
Speaker 1: To be an American idiot? Slow me?
Speaker 2: On seven hundred WLW Welcome back. It's day nineteen at
Speaker 2: the government check down, I believe nineteen today, and when
Speaker 2: Senators returned to Camp holl by the way today, we're
Speaker 2: all informed, including staffers last week, they're not going to
Speaker 2: get their October twentieth paychecks. So no paychecks today, and
Speaker 2: I can be paid for the remainder of the shutdown
Speaker 2: on the I guess fixing this whole thing in the
Speaker 2: deep seated political but most I think they're right in
Speaker 2: this thing. That's frustrating. Greg Landsman chimed it on this
Speaker 2: making hay and saying, some nearly eighty percent of Americans, Democrats,
Speaker 2: Republicans independence want the Affordable Care Act tax credits extended.
Speaker 2: That's what this is all about. So you know DEM's
Speaker 2: want more the same, more subsidies. But I have a
Speaker 2: questioned for all. Okay, well, we know what Democrats want
Speaker 2: and it's not sustainable. What do Republicans want? That's a
Speaker 2: really good question, and on that is former US Representative
Speaker 2: brad Winstrip Welcome back. How are you.
Speaker 3: I'm doing okay, I'm doing okay.
Speaker 2: I'd be with you. All right, it's Monday that it
Speaker 2: takes a while for the tongue to get going here.
Speaker 2: I have the thoughts it's trying to articulate them on
Speaker 2: a Monday morning. But nonetheless, the GOP pushes a narrative
Speaker 2: I've stamped about and right now it's about okay, illegal
Speaker 2: aliens and wow, this is about fattening insurers, which is
Speaker 2: which is true? I mean, you know this is going
Speaker 2: to make insurers a lot more rich. But the takeaway
Speaker 2: for most people, Brad as simple as a practitioner, doctor yourself.
Speaker 2: Millions of Americans are going to have to pay a
Speaker 2: lot more for their healthcare if Congress doesn't act. You know,
Speaker 2: we're an open enrollment right now. Annual healthcare costs in
Speaker 2: the US are about thirteen four hundred dollars per person
Speaker 2: on estimate. Working people just simply can't afford that. And
Speaker 2: I get that the idea of taking money from Pile
Speaker 2: A and moving to Pile B, it doesn't make things affordable.
Speaker 2: It makes it more expensive. It's just someone else's paying
Speaker 2: for it, that's the problem. But that's something, and I
Speaker 2: think something that working people can hang their hat on.
Speaker 2: What are the Republicans offer? I need, we need a plan?
Speaker 3: Yeah, Well, I mean, first of all, you're asking a
Speaker 3: lot of the taxpayers not like this money's just out
Speaker 3: there and going, oh, here you go. And you're right
Speaker 3: about the part where the insurance companies are the ones
Speaker 3: that are benefiting because with the Affordable Care Act, you
Speaker 3: have so many things that are mandated in the coverage
Speaker 3: and therefore it costs more and then they jack up
Speaker 3: the price. But you know what actually was done is
Speaker 3: money that was taken from the savings supposedly from reducing
Speaker 3: the cost of drugs under Medicare by negotiation quote unquote,
Speaker 3: that savings was then gone to subsidies for the Affordable
Speaker 3: Care Act. None of this makes any sense. We have
Speaker 3: a bigger problem when it comes to healthcare and when
Speaker 3: we talk about it in Washington. In Washington, you mentioned healthcare,
Speaker 3: and everybody immediately start to talk about Medicare, Medicaid, the
Speaker 3: Affordable Care Act and Blue Cross, Blue Shield, etc.
Speaker 6: Etc.
Speaker 3: But they really don't talk about health. Do you really
Speaker 3: hear anybody talking about health or are they just talking
Speaker 3: about a plan. And you know, so what Republicans had
Speaker 3: done we put together what was called the Healthy Futures
Speaker 3: Task Force. Our doctors TACUS put together program. We called
Speaker 3: it Healthiest Nation on the planet. And this is before
Speaker 3: make America healthy again. And you know, to me, it's
Speaker 3: a national security issue for one thing, because we need
Speaker 3: to be a healthier nation if we're going to be
Speaker 3: a strong, strong nation. But you know, we don't put
Speaker 3: any value on the healthy human life. And this is
Speaker 3: what we are talking about, and this is what I
Speaker 3: think we need to do. We put the patient pers
Speaker 3: and you have to start young. You have to start
Speaker 3: educating people. Everyone knows there's an obesity problem in this country.
Speaker 3: Why is that? I mean a friend of mine who
Speaker 3: started the soup, she goes into schools and she says,
Speaker 3: kids don't even know what a vegetable is. What about
Speaker 3: the President's physical Fitness program? Where did that go since
Speaker 3: I was a kid? It is important, and we can
Speaker 3: do that and accommodate those with disabilities. And look, I'm
Speaker 3: grateful to live in a country that has safety nets
Speaker 3: for people. I think that is really important, such as Medicaid, Medicare.
Speaker 3: There's safety nets for us overall. But we shouldn't be
Speaker 3: bragging about putting more people into what is the government
Speaker 3: program safety net. We should be bragging when fewer people
Speaker 3: need it, because then they may have good insurance, and
Speaker 3: there's a lot of things that go along with that
Speaker 3: that we want. We want to reward prevention, we want
Speaker 3: to increase education. We want early diagnosis of things and
Speaker 3: so that people have access to physition that can make
Speaker 3: an early diagnosis. We have a physician shortage and we
Speaker 3: need to increase those that are graduating in medical school,
Speaker 3: and we need more Marcus Welbys by the way, And
Speaker 3: you know, we've got a system in place today that
Speaker 3: it's becoming all hospital based and controlled under that way,
Speaker 3: rather than the guy who's just down the street that
Speaker 3: will take care of you and knows you. So these
Speaker 3: are the things that we're for. And you know, I
Speaker 3: like home care, I like telehealth. I don't want it abused.
Speaker 3: I want it to be good. Where's transparency in medicine?
Speaker 3: You know, people are going into surgery. I have my
Speaker 3: patients say, you just had surgery, right, you know how
Speaker 3: much is this going to cost? Well the insurance company
Speaker 3: often to say, well, we'll let you know after you
Speaker 3: have it. And it's like, well, this is what I'm
Speaker 3: going to do. Why can't you tell the patient how
Speaker 3: mu's going to it's going to cost them? These are
Speaker 3: problems that are that are out there, and people should
Speaker 3: be able to know what their costs are going to be,
Speaker 3: make decisions, work with their doctor to make make decisions.
Speaker 3: And the other thing is we're driving towards innovations, chores
Speaker 3: and better treatments keep people healthy. When people are healthy,
Speaker 3: they can go to work. I mean, we have a
Speaker 3: problem putting people into the military today because our youths
Speaker 3: are a problem.
Speaker 2: Today. Seven out of ten Americans today right now, all
Speaker 2: of us, seven out of ten of us bred robs.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 3: This is the problem, and that's what you need to address,
Speaker 3: not just the Affordable Care Act. So the debate can
Speaker 3: go on, and this is what the shutdown is over,
Speaker 3: and you talk about people losing their jobs, et cetera,
Speaker 3: et cetera. You know, this continued resolution did not stop
Speaker 3: the subsidies. That's at a later date. So now you're
Speaker 3: doing all this shutting down the government. Well, what you're
Speaker 3: fighting for isn't even in play yet.
Speaker 2: It cost another trillion dollars to keep the government open
Speaker 2: seven more weeks. What are we getting for that? Wolver
Speaker 2: a trillion dollars? That's again, it's that's always a question, right,
Speaker 2: it's taking you know, it's All you're doing is transferring.
Speaker 2: The problem we know subsidy, for example, college is heavily subsidized.
Speaker 2: How's college working out? Is college affordable? The answer is
Speaker 2: hell no. If you subsidize something, all you're doing is
Speaker 2: you're you're taking the cost and passing against other people.
Speaker 2: And I know that's how our healthcare system is set up.
Speaker 2: But with compliance, you mentioned burnout. For example, physicians are
Speaker 2: leaving not because they don't love practice and medic and
Speaker 2: helping people. It's because there's so much between them and
Speaker 2: the actual practicing of medicine with compliance and bureaucracy, Medicare, Medicaid,
Speaker 2: insurance companies, they don't have time for it.
Speaker 3: Thank Scott. I know a guy in the rural areas.
Speaker 3: He doesn't take insurance for primary care. They can pay
Speaker 3: him with eggs if they want to. When you're on
Speaker 3: insurance plans, if if somebody gives you eggs, you might
Speaker 3: be in trouble for that, because like you're taking a pride.
Speaker 2: I like direct primary care. I think that's I think
Speaker 2: that's a great thing.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and I think there's ways of making that in medicaid.
Speaker 3: But that's the topic for another day. But what's the
Speaker 3: return on investments. I mean, that's what we need to
Speaker 3: be looking at. And you brought that, well, what does
Speaker 3: that do? Are we healthier because we subsidize the Affordable
Speaker 3: Care Act? Now we're becoming a healthier nation?
Speaker 6: No, we're not.
Speaker 3: And so there's no return on investment with what they're
Speaker 3: what they're talking about there. And I look at something
Speaker 3: like we've got to cure for hepatitis, see what like
Speaker 3: five ten years ago, and I remember in Washington, the
Speaker 3: immediate reaction is what is that going to cost? Well,
Speaker 3: if it cost twenty five thousand dollars and you're avoiding
Speaker 3: the two hundred and fifty thousand dollars liver transplant, there's
Speaker 3: a good return on investment. The problem we have in
Speaker 3: Washington is the Congressional Budget Office, which people live and
Speaker 3: die by too often, doesn't know how to do that.
Speaker 3: They actually met with us, doctor Scott, and they said, well,
Speaker 3: we don't know how to do that, and we actually
Speaker 3: got a bill in place that you can over ten
Speaker 3: years look at things like that to see the return
Speaker 3: on investment, because guess what, people that get hepatitis are
Speaker 3: no longer getting liver tramp right right? I mean, you
Speaker 3: know you can see the savings there and see that
Speaker 3: all right, let me know there are things we can do.
Speaker 2: Brad Winstrip US representative retired. He's a physician, as you know,
Speaker 2: and I'm it's per great person. Talked about the government
Speaker 2: shutdown and it's over healthcare. Democrats want the Affordable Care
Speaker 2: AC TAXI critics extended for people. If you're talking tens
Speaker 2: of millions of people who rely on this thing. And
Speaker 2: I for a while now, I've been questioning, okay, so
Speaker 2: what's the GOP plan?
Speaker 1: Then?
Speaker 2: I you know, I want to pick the best plan.
Speaker 2: I think it's flawed. I think it's faulty. I think
Speaker 2: subsidies make us pay more than we should. It's more bureaucracy,
Speaker 2: it's more red tape. But it's something you can go, hey,
Speaker 2: we're going to subsidize your healthcare because you can't afford
Speaker 2: it right now. And I've questioned, okay, what is the
Speaker 2: GOP alternative? Give me a good alternative, and for a
Speaker 2: long time, and I hear what you're saying, Brad, but
Speaker 2: it's it's maha right. It's prevention over treatment. It's access
Speaker 2: to healthcare, telehealth and competition, and that's going to just work.
Speaker 2: Force shortages and of course price transparency with President Trump
Speaker 2: in the first term got his hands around in the
Speaker 2: sample size. Maybe too early to tell because I think
Speaker 2: it just all the final components that wasn't to effect
Speaker 2: last year. But that's a good thing. But when I
Speaker 2: look at that whole thing, you know, to me, Brad, sorry,
Speaker 2: it doesn't seem like it's a it's an answer. It's
Speaker 2: it's observations, it's platitudes. We know what's wrong, but we
Speaker 2: can't fix it again. Democrats are shifting money from wildpod
Speaker 2: to another with subsidies, right, and that's but it's not
Speaker 2: making us healthier. But you're talking about, all right, if
Speaker 2: we started this today, because habits are hard to break,
Speaker 2: as we know, that's that's great for that's great for
Speaker 2: a newborn, for a young kid. Hitting this message with
Speaker 2: thirty forty fifty sixty year olds, I think it's missing
Speaker 2: the plate simply because all right, well, that's if we
Speaker 2: teach people to be healthier, that's great. But I have cancer, now,
Speaker 2: I have als, Now I'm in a wheelchair. Now, my
Speaker 2: mom has diabetes, my uncle has cancer. What can you
Speaker 2: do for me right now? Today? This is long term
Speaker 2: and changing a mindset. That's great and we should be
Speaker 2: doing that, but that doesn't help people today. That's the
Speaker 2: problem with this plan because it's not aude.
Speaker 3: But nobody's talking about getting rid of taking care of
Speaker 3: people in generally in general. And instead of just having
Speaker 3: break it fix it, we try to prevent it. And
Speaker 3: that's where the real cost savings is. That's where there,
Speaker 3: that's where there's the return on investment. And you have
Speaker 3: to start it sometimes, and that's why I say you
Speaker 3: start with the youth. You know, we have to educate
Speaker 3: our children. You know, what about health class. I mean,
Speaker 3: that's just that's just the start. And you know, when
Speaker 3: you talk about the Affordable Care Act in general, you
Speaker 3: know what they're what we're finding is there's people on
Speaker 3: there that have other insurance and there and there are
Speaker 3: illegals on there, and our taxpayers don't want to pay
Speaker 3: for that. They just don't. Why should they. You're paying
Speaker 3: for people that don't pay any taxes and pay into.
Speaker 2: One hundred percent. But it doesn't address the issues people
Speaker 2: can't afford healthcare today. And you know, you may look
Speaker 2: at hey, subsidies, I get it's driving everything up, but
Speaker 2: I need this now. I mean we're in enrollment season
Speaker 2: or close to it, and people are afraid. They're you know,
Speaker 2: if your healthcare costs quadruple, no one can afford that.
Speaker 2: If I had to pay thirteen four hundred, which is
Speaker 2: the average, that's not affordable for most Americans. So this
Speaker 2: addresses things in the future and taking care of yourself now.
Speaker 2: If you if you're an adult and you need health care,
Speaker 2: which we all do at this point, I don't thought
Speaker 2: I don't, and nothing's making you cheaper. We need to,
Speaker 2: and I think that's where Republicans is one of the
Speaker 2: few things that Trump's losing the war on, right, And
Speaker 2: this is why Democrats are falling on this hill, Brad
Speaker 2: is because healthcare is the only thing that they win
Speaker 2: on that they're on the right side of with the
Speaker 2: American people. Everything else they're upside down losing the trumpet
Speaker 2: underwater on so they plant the swag and rally around it.
Speaker 2: I get the political nature of why they're doing this,
Speaker 2: but it also is the fact that health care sucks
Speaker 2: in this country. I would like Republicans are something a
Speaker 2: concrete plan to get it fixed, kind of like you know,
Speaker 2: Trump does something and hey, we're going to put them
Speaker 2: under his he put a man on the moon in
Speaker 2: the week, right, if there's are nineteen sixty nine, we
Speaker 2: need a plan like that. We need a man in
Speaker 2: the moon strategy to fix healthcare in the next few years.
Speaker 3: Okay, well, let's talk about that for a second. So
Speaker 3: you have the Affordable Care Act, and it's like so
Speaker 3: many other plans, and I can tell you this first
Speaker 3: stand from patient frustration. What do insurance companies do? They
Speaker 3: delay your care and they deny your care. Why you
Speaker 3: talked about doctors leaving because we get tired of having
Speaker 3: to get prior authorization. These are all things that need
Speaker 3: to change, and they can be changed now. They can
Speaker 3: be changed now. Congress can do this, and we need
Speaker 3: to streamline. I have a bill called the Safe Step Act,
Speaker 3: and that's been out there for twelve years and we
Speaker 3: can't get it through. What does it do. It just
Speaker 3: allows the doctor to say, this is the medicine that
Speaker 3: my patient needs. It's not on your formula, but this
Speaker 3: is what they need. And here's why. Instead of writing
Speaker 3: for the prescription that you want your patient to have,
Speaker 3: waiting for the insurance company to approve it, telling them
Speaker 3: that's telling you it's not approved. This is not good
Speaker 3: for help. These are all the things that are taking
Speaker 3: place and that has taken place within the Affordable Care
Speaker 3: Act and everywhere else, and so to feed the monster
Speaker 3: doesn't make any sense. We need to change the monster
Speaker 3: as well.
Speaker 2: Why is there no political power to do that? Though?
Speaker 2: I mean you mentioned something. I love what you just
Speaker 2: proposed there, But why is that? Why is that bill
Speaker 2: languishing for twelve years? Brad? What what's holding that up?
Speaker 3: Because because the insurance lobby is pretty strong, and they
Speaker 3: get to some people and say, oh, you know, you
Speaker 3: can't do that, that's that's not good, it's going to
Speaker 3: be a waste of money, and blah blah blah, and
Speaker 3: then they blame doctors, doctors just they're getting kickbacks from
Speaker 3: these companies and which isn't true. It's not true. But
Speaker 3: this is the political narrative that's being held out there
Speaker 3: and this and who suffers?
Speaker 6: Patients?
Speaker 3: Yeah, patients are the ones that suffer. If you think
Speaker 3: the insurance lobby isn't huge out there, then just wonder
Speaker 3: why they're getting the subsidies to begin with. They're making
Speaker 3: a lot of money off this rather than competing, and
Speaker 3: maybe they have a little less profit that.
Speaker 2: Now falls in the area of campaign finance reform. The
Speaker 2: little action that's a whole, that's a whole separate. Well,
Speaker 2: that's what's true script of the system. I get that
Speaker 2: these represent companies that have people that they hire and
Speaker 2: their shareholder value, all those things go in. That's just
Speaker 2: kinunt of they shouldn't have a voice. But when they
Speaker 2: hold senators and congressman hostage, that's a different story. And
Speaker 2: that's you know, the cost is driving up. They're making
Speaker 2: the money off the middle and that's why there's no
Speaker 2: impetus to change things because both Republicans and Democrats are
Speaker 2: the ones that are are being enriched through campaign donations
Speaker 2: and everything else with the people we're trying to uh
Speaker 2: decrease their reliance on that's driving the cost of healthcare up.
Speaker 2: And if that's the case, is that it's never going
Speaker 2: to be solved.
Speaker 6: Is it?
Speaker 3: But you have no and you have to shift in
Speaker 3: there arrative until you can look at it, until you
Speaker 3: can determine and claim that we as a country want
Speaker 3: the return on investment to be a healthier nation and
Speaker 3: that means taking care of things acutely, but it also
Speaker 3: means preventing and coming up with treatment securityvations. This is
Speaker 3: common sense stuff. Just throwing more money at an insurance
Speaker 3: company doesn't make any of those individuals on that plan healthier.
Speaker 6: That's a fact.
Speaker 3: And so if reducing the subsidies makes them have to
Speaker 3: be more competitive, I know it makes it more difficult.
Speaker 3: We want it to be more affordable and that goes
Speaker 3: to the transparency and accountability and all the things. And
Speaker 3: I think I sent you the information of what we're
Speaker 3: trying to do and trying to make a common sense.
Speaker 3: This is putting patients first, and that's not what's happening
Speaker 3: is putting insurance companies first, not patience and their health.
Speaker 3: And that is the narrative has to change. If we
Speaker 3: should be asking providers in the providers, insurance providers and
Speaker 3: the Affordable Care Act, what have you done to make
Speaker 3: America a healthier nation? What about your plan makes America
Speaker 3: healthier because they have coverage that's that's delayed and denied.
Speaker 3: We've got to do better, and just just feeding the
Speaker 3: monster doesn't make sense to a lot of people, and
Speaker 3: it doesn't do the patience any doesn't.
Speaker 2: Okay, but what do you say somebody hears it goes
Speaker 2: that's all well and good, but I'm worried about tomorrow
Speaker 2: if these tax credits expire and they just simply die,
Speaker 2: I can't afford healthcare for me, my spouse and my
Speaker 2: two kids. What do you say to that, Yes.
Speaker 3: You, well, maybe you can if you can get the
Speaker 3: plan that you choose, if you can go out and
Speaker 3: shop for the chance that plan that you choose, it
Speaker 3: doesn't have things in mandates mandated in it. You know,
Speaker 3: for the little sisters of the poor to have to
Speaker 3: get contraceptive covered, that doesn't make any sense.
Speaker 6: Stop.
Speaker 3: There's problems within that proproblems. I get that, and and
Speaker 3: that's not a free choice for people. And you know
Speaker 3: that that creates a problem too. So you've you've got
Speaker 3: over certain people a monopoly of what they have to buy,
Speaker 3: and it isn't cost effective for most people. And so
Speaker 3: if they have to compete, it makes a whole whole
Speaker 3: lot of difference. If they have compete compete, A lot
Speaker 3: of people would say, you know what I can pay
Speaker 3: for my day to day I just want catastrophic that's
Speaker 3: that's all. I want to have service.
Speaker 2: Right right as well? It should should have enough on
Speaker 2: the side. We heard that analogy before about well, if
Speaker 2: you had if your health insurnch for like your car insurance,
Speaker 2: church have car insurance when you need new wipers, for example,
Speaker 2: or gasod be covered under insurance, and that's not what
Speaker 2: it's there for. It's for catastrophic needs for Unfortunately, so
Speaker 2: many people don't have the savings set aside to be
Speaker 2: able to afford anything. Above that, the healthcare system is
Speaker 2: a mess and it doesn't sound like it's changing anytime
Speaker 2: soon because of the deep pockets that really control things,
Speaker 2: and that'd be hospitals, insurance companies, big pharma, medical professional
Speaker 2: groups and the like have their stakeholders on this as
Speaker 2: well and have the leverage able to influence lawmakers, which
Speaker 2: is why good ideas like that bill you had, Brad
Speaker 2: just sit there and shrivel up and die because it's
Speaker 2: not in their best interest. Brad winstrop Us representatives retired
Speaker 2: now in private practice. I don't know if we solved
Speaker 2: an any Maybe we answer some questions here, but I
Speaker 2: think we solved anything today.
Speaker 3: Well, I will tell you this that there there's a
Speaker 3: group in DC that is talking about Brad. Can you
Speaker 3: get involved if we can maybe put together a collaboration.
Speaker 3: It's not part of the government. Where you have pharma. There,
Speaker 3: you have hospitals. There, you have physician specialty.
Speaker 2: Represent table if you will, and a round.
Speaker 3: Table front of Sea Span, not sitting in front of
Speaker 3: Sea Span, going getting your five minutes, and it's to
Speaker 3: satisfy your baby.
Speaker 2: That's all dog and pony. I get hey, Brad, I
Speaker 2: got to get going. I thank you for the time.
Speaker 2: Be well.
Speaker 3: Always a pleasure.
Speaker 2: Thanks gott love my friend. Thanks. So we're running late.
Speaker 2: We've got to get to a news update. Lots to
Speaker 2: chew on there or maybe not. You go okfs to answer,
Speaker 2: and I gotta pay my stuff today. I feel you
Speaker 2: seven eight or wway.
Speaker 5: Everyone needs help every now and then, and she's here
Speaker 5: to help us get our heads right.
Speaker 2: This is Mental Health Monday with mental health expert Julie Hattershire. Yeah,
Speaker 2: we do it on Monday because that is a struggle
Speaker 2: day for most people. Now, if you got your bleep
Speaker 2: together and every day is a holiday, every day is
Speaker 2: good and you're probably the envy of most modern brains.
Speaker 2: But that's not how it works. Julie Hattersh here, I
Speaker 2: hope to trust you had a good weekend, all.
Speaker 7: Right, Yeah, it was a really good weekend.
Speaker 2: How is your good? Fine? Just tobbling around, that's about it.
Speaker 2: I can't do it, stare out the window like a
Speaker 2: drooling fool. But maybe another couple of days so maybe
Speaker 2: I can crawl as opposed to sit there and not
Speaker 2: move at all. So hey, you know what. And then
Speaker 2: there are people with real sickness in ls in the world,
Speaker 2: so I don't feel so bad. I'm good, We good,
Speaker 2: we good. There's a story ripped from today's headlines. And
Speaker 2: I know we'd often to talk about political stuff, but this,
Speaker 2: I mean it's political, but I think there's a also
Speaker 2: something else going on here. So by now you've heard
Speaker 2: about the leaked telegram chat of twenty eight thousand plus
Speaker 2: matches between young Republicans. I think it was on a
Speaker 2: platform and a social platform, and there there are comments
Speaker 2: about Hitler, praising Hitler, racial slurs, gas chamber jokes, horrific,
Speaker 2: horrific things in there from a ledge of the future
Speaker 2: of the Republican Party. Bad look for Republicans, because if
Speaker 2: you don't like Republicans or on the other side, you say, well,
Speaker 2: that's about right for these guys. But I think there's
Speaker 2: somebody to be said about who's doing this and why.
Speaker 2: I mean, this is extremely difficult to talk about, I know,
Speaker 2: but I think it also gets back the fact that
Speaker 2: a lot of people there's their online persona and then
Speaker 2: there's real life persona. I just wonder how many of
Speaker 2: these people believe what they said, and if they weren't
Speaker 2: just trying to get a rise and be an edge
Speaker 2: lord and get a rise from the people in that
Speaker 2: particular circle. I think it's an interesting sociological thing that's
Speaker 2: going on here.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I agree with you.
Speaker 8: So I read through some of this and did little research,
Speaker 8: and of the eleven people on that chat, three of
Speaker 8: them were women, and eight of them were between.
Speaker 7: Twenty four and thirty five. So when people say, you know.
Speaker 8: It's just kids being kids, I want to point out
Speaker 8: that these are the young Republicans, but they're not teenagers.
Speaker 8: Many of them have jobs that are in lower levels
Speaker 8: of political office, and in fact, one is a state senator.
Speaker 6: In Vermont and his wife.
Speaker 8: So these are not kids in the sense that they've
Speaker 8: been portrayed as kids. But yeah, it's really hard to
Speaker 8: know from reading through what I read through whether they
Speaker 8: actually believe this and meanness to the extent that they
Speaker 8: said it or whether it's just sort of the common
Speaker 8: language of their group.
Speaker 6: You know what I mean, right, right right?
Speaker 2: And to PICL, you know, young anything young professionals, for example,
Speaker 2: typically means people forty under. But that is also a
Speaker 2: broad spectrum. Is that it does an eighteen year old?
Speaker 2: How much does an eighteen year old have in common
Speaker 2: with a forty year old? So it's not like it's
Speaker 2: a specific demographic, not just gen zers, but there's also
Speaker 2: millennials in there too, So young is basing any group
Speaker 2: under forty?
Speaker 6: Exactly? Yeah.
Speaker 8: And so as I was reading through this and keeping
Speaker 8: in mind that you know, prefrontal cortexas don't develop until
Speaker 8: early twenties and then maybe a year or two later
Speaker 8: than that, we've still got some people in this that
Speaker 8: may not have full comprehension of the potential consequences of
Speaker 8: what they're saying. But then as I'm continuing to read,
Speaker 8: there are more than once it says, you know, if
Speaker 8: this gets leaved, we're in bad trouble. So some people
Speaker 8: in this definitely had some sense of what the potential
Speaker 8: consequences could be, but some of the stuff that they
Speaker 8: wrote was just shocking. And the question you asked me
Speaker 8: is how much of this do they actually believe versus
Speaker 8: how much of this is.
Speaker 6: Just you know, in group languaging.
Speaker 7: And I don't have an answer for you for that.
Speaker 7: It's really distressing to.
Speaker 2: Think about, right, But you wonder because it is younger people,
Speaker 2: and again not a teenagers here. There's generally teenagers spunk
Speaker 2: of a damn about politics. They know they don't like stuff,
Speaker 2: but they don't know why. It's not till you get
Speaker 2: older you go, oh, okay, I get what's going on here.
Speaker 2: It's politics in the fact that this is online culture though, right,
Speaker 2: is that we are in these individual silos. Now, if
Speaker 2: I am a I don't know, a blind agnostic who's
Speaker 2: into a fifth century pottery, I can find a group
Speaker 2: online of like minded people. Before I'd be kind of
Speaker 2: the freak and ostracized. But now I find my own
Speaker 2: group online. And that's the upside of it. But the
Speaker 2: downside is more tribalism. Is this one of those deals
Speaker 2: where everyone in this echo chamber espouses the same political ideology,
Speaker 2: but it's just trying to basically roast or outrage other people.
Speaker 2: And the more you outrage, the more it looks like
Speaker 2: you are. I guess more of a believer in the cause,
Speaker 2: and it just becomes this self fulfilling prophecy that's anchored
Speaker 2: by well, how outrageous can I be because I'm with
Speaker 2: Kindred Spirits. Isn't this all about tribalism and wanting to
Speaker 2: belong to a group?
Speaker 8: I think that's a big piece of yeah, and trying
Speaker 8: to see just how far you can push the envelope. Okay,
Speaker 8: so I make this joke, I say this word, I
Speaker 8: say this thing, and people are giving me thumbs up
Speaker 8: and piling on positively, or people are giving me thumbs
Speaker 8: up and thumbs down and piling on negatively. So now
Speaker 8: I'm trying to test the boundaries and figure out are
Speaker 8: their boundaries.
Speaker 6: And what are they?
Speaker 8: And what we do online is very different than what
Speaker 8: we would do in person. So you would say something
Speaker 8: terrible in person, and there might be people who would
Speaker 8: give you pushback or a disgusted look, or or there
Speaker 8: might be some indication that that wasn't okay. But if
Speaker 8: you do that in the online world, sometimes all you
Speaker 8: get is dead air. So there's no negative. The dead
Speaker 8: air is the negative, which is not the same as
Speaker 8: people saying, hey, it's not okay to say or conversely,
Speaker 8: you say something in real life.
Speaker 7: When people are yeah, absolutely.
Speaker 6: Go more with that.
Speaker 8: So it's about finding out where you sit, I think,
Speaker 8: to some extent, and test the boundaries of just how
Speaker 8: far things can be pushed, where are the edges here,
Speaker 8: and how provocative can I be and still be part
Speaker 8: of the group.
Speaker 2: In the pre digital age, I will say that you
Speaker 2: know you would you may be at a rally or
Speaker 2: something like that and you have a sign or I mean,
Speaker 2: let's face you. Okay, let's say that there's the real life,
Speaker 2: in real life version, this would be let's say a
Speaker 2: Nazi rally or something. All right, okay, so I'm going
Speaker 2: to go up there and like what we saw over
Speaker 2: and even in the summer, right, Look how many people
Speaker 2: showed up and yelled at them, threatened them, brought guns
Speaker 2: to the dance and want them the hell off of
Speaker 2: that overpass. Everyone did except them. You have now real
Speaker 2: time feedback from your comments and your beliefs. Do I
Speaker 2: really believe this? Well, they did everything they could to
Speaker 2: sell this ideology that no one was buying. But online
Speaker 2: you don't have those repercussions. You're not going to get
Speaker 2: punched in the face. You're not going to get physically threatened.
Speaker 2: You might digitally, but it's the same as a compliment.
Speaker 2: It doesn't matter. It's different when you're saying that someone's
Speaker 2: these things they're facing. And that's really what's changed about
Speaker 2: the digital age.
Speaker 8: That's really what's changed about the digital age is that
Speaker 8: now with the Internet, we can say things that we
Speaker 8: wouldn't say to someone in real life, and we can
Speaker 8: have very.
Speaker 6: Limited consequences to that.
Speaker 8: And if we happen to be in a group where
Speaker 8: that is the norm, then not only do we get
Speaker 8: limited consequences, but here are our people, and we're saying
Speaker 8: it to our people, whether it's positive or negative, whether
Speaker 8: it's left or right or center, we're talking to our people,
Speaker 8: and we're getting more affirmation for that than we might
Speaker 8: otherwise in a more mixed group. And we don't have
Speaker 8: to affiliate with people online who aren't like us as
Speaker 8: we would in the real world in a job or
Speaker 8: in a social situation where there are people who aren't
Speaker 8: like us. Can be as as groupy as we want
Speaker 8: to be online because those are our folks.
Speaker 2: We've always had these kind of groups, Julie, But at
Speaker 2: the same time, I think they're more prevalent. It seems
Speaker 2: like this's happening with impunity now. I think COVID had
Speaker 2: a lot to do this because of the lockdown, because
Speaker 2: we were all islands or by ourselves. We still got
Speaker 2: stuff done, just learned to live online a lot more
Speaker 2: and there's no going back.
Speaker 8: It really changed everything long term. I don't know about permanently,
Speaker 8: but certainly long term it changed everything. I mean, I'll
Speaker 8: tell you from my own profession there as therapist who
Speaker 8: went totally online during COVID, and we'll never.
Speaker 6: Go back to seeing people in person.
Speaker 8: And so if you just look at you know how
Speaker 8: many people stopped working in person and are now only
Speaker 8: working online, So you can't. You don't have the same
Speaker 8: social interaction with people you're not choosing to interact with
Speaker 8: as you do if you go into an office every day,
Speaker 8: or you go into a factory every day, or.
Speaker 7: You go out into the world in.
Speaker 8: A different way now than we did before COVID for sure,
Speaker 8: and I think it definitely made us more in groupy
Speaker 8: and less diverse in the people that we spend time
Speaker 8: with because we don't have to to the same.
Speaker 6: Degree that we used to.
Speaker 2: Right, Okay, that makes sense. She's Julie Hattershoes, she's a
Speaker 2: licensed mental health therapist from here in Cincinnati. On the
Speaker 2: Scotsland Show it's Mental Health Monday, and I don't on
Speaker 2: Mental healthy. This really is in a sense that we
Speaker 2: have traded digital relationships or face to face ones. And
Speaker 2: I think maybe that's the big takeaway is that, and
Speaker 2: I'm sure you treat or see people and hear about
Speaker 2: from people who are in the same boat, is that
Speaker 2: if you get a steady diet of these echo chambers
Speaker 2: and that takes over your real life and reality, it's
Speaker 2: probably going to lead you some male health issues.
Speaker 8: Well it does, and also it leads to some relationship challenges.
Speaker 8: So I'm not even going to say if you get
Speaker 8: a steady diet of these echo chambers, I'm just going
Speaker 8: to say people are losing the ability to interact with
Speaker 8: each other effectively face to face. The more time we
Speaker 8: spend online, the more time we don't have to make
Speaker 8: a phone call to a customer service rep to get
Speaker 8: something done, or make a phone call to schedule an
Speaker 8: appointment for something, the more that we don't actually have
Speaker 8: to go out into the world and interact with people
Speaker 8: on a consistent basis, we're losing some of our social skills,
Speaker 8: or at least they're changing and they're becoming more.
Speaker 6: Online social skills.
Speaker 8: And the problem is that then if you forget where
Speaker 8: you are and you say something in the real world
Speaker 8: that you would only drop in a chat online, suddenly
Speaker 8: you get some negative pushback for that. But we're losing
Speaker 8: the ability to interact and relate with each other face
Speaker 8: to face.
Speaker 6: And I see that in my practice a lot.
Speaker 8: I see people who are so isolated and so lonely
Speaker 8: despite the fact.
Speaker 6: That we're more connected and I use air quotes around
Speaker 6: that word than ever before.
Speaker 8: And the thing is that we're connected often to people
Speaker 8: who think like us, and not connected to people who
Speaker 8: don't think like us. So there's no real world fact
Speaker 8: checking or pushback for some of the things we.
Speaker 6: Say and do.
Speaker 2: That's interesting because so what you're saying is like people,
Speaker 2: for example, who I don't know, maybe they're you know,
Speaker 2: Trump seems to be the bit and it could be
Speaker 2: anything in right now, it's Trump, Like I'm a big
Speaker 2: Trump fan, and I only associate with people online who
Speaker 2: are in the real world I know people who aren't,
Speaker 2: and then I don't associate even family members and we've
Speaker 2: seen relationships break off over who's president United State. I mean,
Speaker 2: it's it's so stupid and myopic that you're gonna you know,
Speaker 2: you're losing family members and friends for a long long
Speaker 2: time over who got voted in the office or who
Speaker 2: didn't win. It doesn't make any sense to me, but
Speaker 2: for those people it does. And that to me is
Speaker 2: that detachment from online versus real life.
Speaker 8: Yes, and that detachment from a reality check that not
Speaker 8: everybody thinks and feels the way that you do, and
Speaker 8: that people who don't.
Speaker 6: Think and feel the way that.
Speaker 8: You do can actually be good people and you might
Speaker 8: actually have to work with them and interact with them,
Speaker 8: or be a family member or.
Speaker 6: A friend to them, or go to school with them.
Speaker 8: And so we're losing the ability to hold opposing viewpoints
Speaker 8: as being equally valid as ours, and we're starting to
Speaker 8: dehumanize and other eyes people who think differently than we do.
Speaker 2: Well, well, yeah, I'm sorry when we establish like you know,
Speaker 2: saft zones on college campuses where I can espouse my
Speaker 2: you know, actually my first amounmer, right, but you can't
Speaker 2: challenge me that you know, that that predates and that
Speaker 2: overshadows in my opinion, we're talking about day hear digital,
Speaker 2: but it feeds in the whole same thing is, do
Speaker 2: you want to shelter our children who eventually become adults
Speaker 2: so much that they only have their views reinforced and
Speaker 2: never be challenged to think another way or see someone
Speaker 2: else's that that's dangerous and it leads to those those.
Speaker 8: It does, it leads, It definitely can lead to this.
Speaker 8: These litmus tests for you in or are you out?
Speaker 8: And these belief systems that if you disagree with me,
Speaker 8: if anyone disagrees with us, they are bad or wrong,
Speaker 8: we dehumanize, we otherize them. We don't have the ability to,
Speaker 8: as they say in politics, work across the aisle. We're
Speaker 8: losing the ability to say, you and I disagree on this,
Speaker 8: but we still have to work together to get this done.
Speaker 6: Whatever that happens to be.
Speaker 8: And we're becoming very tribal, to use your word from
Speaker 8: earlier in the segment, we're becoming very tribal. And that
Speaker 8: can be a strength, but it more often than not,
Speaker 8: I think is a deficit because we're losing diversity of
Speaker 8: thought and diversity of representation, and we're losing our abilities
Speaker 8: to deal with people who think and feel and operate
Speaker 8: differently in the world.
Speaker 6: Than we do.
Speaker 2: Also the ability to negotiate, to realize we have differences
Speaker 2: in come to common ground. I mean, I think it's
Speaker 2: not a coincidence that we same day we're talking about
Speaker 2: this business. I mean, look at the shootings on Falun Square,
Speaker 2: Look at the one we just had on Thursday after
Speaker 2: the football game. People are willing just okay, I'm in
Speaker 2: an argument over something stupid and not even a street
Speaker 2: total strangers and pick up a gun and shoot them
Speaker 2: because what because they looked at you differently or you
Speaker 2: thought they said something, or a parking spot, whatever it is.
Speaker 2: Rather than just you know, argue you're getting a fight
Speaker 2: or discuss it, somebody's going to pick up a gun
Speaker 2: and shootcho. This is cut from the same fabric.
Speaker 6: I think it's very similar.
Speaker 8: It's all part of a continuum of increasing uncivil discourse
Speaker 8: in our country, in our society. It's increasingly becoming extremist,
Speaker 8: it's increasingly becoming violent word wise or action wise, and
Speaker 8: it's decreasingly becoming cooperative and collaberative and negotiated. And so yes,
Speaker 8: I think it's all part of the continuum of uncivilizing
Speaker 8: our civilization.
Speaker 2: Julie Hatters share, I don't know if you see this
Speaker 2: in your practice, or maybe you've heard stories from colleagues
Speaker 2: and the like it are there people that are realizing, Hey,
Speaker 2: I've got a digital problem. I've got to get some
Speaker 2: help mentally and this or I guess I see a
Speaker 2: mental health therapist about this above all, Also that's changing
Speaker 2: my you know, changing my or or someone's forcing someone
Speaker 2: to go to therapy because they've isolated themselves. To the
Speaker 2: point is that actually has that become a thing over
Speaker 2: the years in practices like, yes, yeah.
Speaker 6: It has.
Speaker 8: I have a lot of people, a lot of couples
Speaker 8: I see in fact that I suggest going on a
Speaker 8: digital diet or a digital detox because they're spending so
Speaker 8: much time with their face on the screen that they're
Speaker 8: not actually connecting with themselves in life and with other
Speaker 8: people in life, and it's creating problems in relationships, it's
Speaker 8: creating problems in mental health in individuals who get so
Speaker 8: sucked into the screen that they're not actually connecting with
Speaker 8: folks in their life and doing things outside, like actually
Speaker 8: outside the house, but outside of their screen. Becomes very
Speaker 8: isolating and it's meant to. I mean, the stuff online
Speaker 8: is meant to keep you there. That's what they want.
Speaker 8: They want you to stay there. They don't want you
Speaker 8: to go out and you know, paddle canoe or take
Speaker 8: a bike.
Speaker 6: Rider, engage and have lunch with the friends.
Speaker 2: Engagement, that's what it's all about. And engaging. But then
Speaker 2: you get more of the diet of what you subscribe
Speaker 2: to and want to see, and so the algorithm minosis
Speaker 2: and feed you more of it to keep you on
Speaker 2: on longer. The problem is there's a definite mental health
Speaker 2: component to this. The more you spend, the more it
Speaker 2: hurts your mind. Now and the other thing too is
Speaker 2: you may not see it right is how many people
Speaker 2: have done that and go, well, that's not me. I
Speaker 2: just is what I like and not realizing that this
Speaker 2: we're talking about you.
Speaker 8: Exactly, and we are not. We humans are not designed
Speaker 8: to live in isolation, and yet so many of us
Speaker 8: are isolated from the world, and our primary relationship is
Speaker 8: through a screen, and we are not. Our brains and
Speaker 8: our bodies are not designed to live in isolation. We're
Speaker 8: designed to live in community with other people, our friends,
Speaker 8: our families, our coworkers, our neighbors, and this keeps us
Speaker 8: connected again in air quotes, but also so incredibly disconnected.
Speaker 8: It's not good for us mentally, emotionally, relationally, it's not
Speaker 8: good for us physically. There are so many things that
Speaker 8: it's like anything you know, too much of anything is bad.
Speaker 7: And this is another example of that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, as the young Republicans chats like, it's got so
Speaker 2: narrow and so so tribal that you know, if you
Speaker 2: step back and look at and go, what what the
Speaker 2: hell is? What what am I reading here? This is
Speaker 2: and not suspecting that someone at some point of all
Speaker 2: those people in that chat would and so either be
Speaker 2: exploited or I've heard it maybe the blackmailed a little bit,
Speaker 2: but still, I mean it's it's they're your words, and
Speaker 2: somebody's going to get a hold of that. We'll definitely
Speaker 2: use it against you. But it's a bigger problem. It's
Speaker 2: the more connected we become as a world digitally, the
Speaker 2: more lonely we become an individual relationships. I think that's
Speaker 2: the takeaway here. If that's you're something to love, definitely
Speaker 2: need to talk someone like Julie hattersh here, she's at
Speaker 2: beconnected dot Care. Hey, Juliet be connected dot care if
Speaker 2: you want to reach out question for a future topic
Speaker 2: on mental health Monday. I always appreciate the insight and the
Speaker 2: good stuff as always be well, take care all right,
Speaker 2: Gotta get to a news update and when a return
Speaker 2: on seven hundred WLW. Last week we had the governor's
Speaker 2: ban on what do we call it intoxicating hemp beverages
Speaker 2: and products because they may have on the hands of kids,
Speaker 2: you know, using the children to enact prohibition as nothing new, Uh,
Speaker 2: but this part of a bigger problem is is just
Speaker 2: how slow the government is to legislate, control and regulate
Speaker 2: things that go into our body, whether it's those drinks
Speaker 2: or edibles I'm talking about, or something like a nicotine
Speaker 2: pouch which you put in your lip and you get nicotine.
Speaker 2: It's not smoke, it's not tobacco much much safer, but
Speaker 2: you're getting the nicotine delivery system. You're getting nicotine without
Speaker 2: the harmful byproducts of tobacco. Well, much like what's happening
Speaker 2: in Ohio, it's happening nationwide. With Trump's FDA, he wants
Speaker 2: he wants to fast track some of these products, these uh,
Speaker 2: nicotine pouches and the problem is now the market is
Speaker 2: flooded with black market products as well. She writes about
Speaker 2: this for a reason and why we need to fast
Speaker 2: trak regulation a lot quicker than the FDA has in
Speaker 2: the past, and Trump's trying to do it. Her name
Speaker 2: is Sophia Hamilton. She joins the next next on the
Speaker 2: show to talk about that. Just ahead, seven hundred WWT Cincinnati, Don't.
Speaker 1: Want to be American Scott Flum Show.
Speaker 2: This is seven hundred w LW Welcome to the show.
Speaker 2: So Mike DeWine issued his Delta ad Intoxicating hamp emergency
Speaker 2: band that kicked in last week. But that's a emblematic
Speaker 2: a bigger problem. Uh, and it's the problem is a
Speaker 2: it's a slow to move government right that drives the
Speaker 2: black market. The reason why he had to do that
Speaker 2: band was because the legislator's been dragging their feet for
Speaker 2: a long time. They had a caravat for hemp, and
Speaker 2: then somebody figured out a way to go, hey, we
Speaker 2: could take some of the low level TCHT and hemp
Speaker 2: and process it and as long as we derive the THHD,
Speaker 2: which is the psychoactive ingredient and weed the stuff that
Speaker 2: gets you high, we can make these products and then
Speaker 2: you know, for example, fifty West rolls out of beverage.
Speaker 2: Many companies are doing it. That's CBD infused, cannabis infused,
Speaker 2: and you get a decent buzz, kind of like alcohol
Speaker 2: without the alcohol side effects. Money and people like it. Well,
Speaker 2: kids are getting a hold of this in the smokeable
Speaker 2: and edible form in some Roague carryout stores and around
Speaker 2: the state, which of course happens when you have a
Speaker 2: black market that's created by government overregulation and the government's
Speaker 2: low to move, and the end result is now adults
Speaker 2: can't have nice things either. No one wants kids getting
Speaker 2: high at the same time as an adult. I've kind
Speaker 2: of earned that right. So this fits into something else
Speaker 2: that's going under the Trump FDA. They're fast tracking reviews
Speaker 2: of tobacco. Companies are in the nicotine pouch game now
Speaker 2: because we are people are smoking tobacco, as you know,
Speaker 2: so they're going to go, hey, we got to make
Speaker 2: our money, We'll do nicotine pouches, things like zin and
Speaker 2: stuff like that. That's all well and good, but the
Speaker 2: problem is it's much like Ohio is doing with the
Speaker 2: CBD stuff. Is that the slow moving government the plot
Speaker 2: and government legislature simply can't get on the way and
Speaker 2: create rules that make access available to other companies, and
Speaker 2: then the end result is you have some black market
Speaker 2: folks getting their products into well convenience stores, for example,
Speaker 2: just like we do in Ohio when it comes to CBD.
Speaker 2: Kind of a long setup there, I apologize. She's Sophia Hamilton,
Speaker 2: she writes in Reason magazine about this. Also she's a
Speaker 2: fellow with Young Voices. Good morning, how are you.
Speaker 5: I'm doing great, Thank you so much for having me
Speaker 5: this morning. I'm excited to chat a little bit about
Speaker 5: this scary market changes that we're seeing with not only
Speaker 5: nicotine couches, but like as you were saying, with cannabis
Speaker 5: as well.
Speaker 2: It's two sides of the same coin, right, I mean,
Speaker 2: that was the world's longest setup. I apologize, But it
Speaker 2: all comes together because it's the problem is the slow moving,
Speaker 2: plotting government. And we live in an on demand society.
Speaker 2: People sample something, and they see something, they read something,
Speaker 2: they eat, they drink a wow. I like this a lot.
Speaker 2: Where can I get it? Well, all of a sudden,
Speaker 2: you have an exploding consumer market for that, and we
Speaker 2: get it. Whether it's a CBD infused to THC CBD
Speaker 2: infused drink, or whether it's a nicotine pouch, somebody's gonna
Speaker 2: rush in legal orly illegal to fill that void. What's
Speaker 2: happening relative to nicotine. We know what's going on with
Speaker 2: THCHC here in Ohio, but what about the nicotine patch game.
Speaker 5: Yeah, so nicotine policy is changing all across the country.
Speaker 5: We have some seats that are incredibly strict and how
Speaker 5: to have a lot of bands where they limit ages
Speaker 5: percentages of nicotine flavors. And then you have a different
Speaker 5: regulatory regene at the spiral level where they are very
Speaker 5: slow to improve quality products that have been on the
Speaker 5: international market for decades and that we know are safe,
Speaker 5: and so consumers are trying new products like nicotine pouches.
Speaker 5: They've been on the US market for at least a decade,
Speaker 5: but they haven't had full SDA approoval and that's a
Speaker 5: whole it's a whole process to get the official stamp
Speaker 5: of approval from the SBA. So American consumers have been
Speaker 5: able to try these products and realize, oh yeah, I
Speaker 5: really like the nicketine pouches. They're a lot smoother than base.
Speaker 5: There's less downside all of these all of these great things,
Speaker 5: the FDA hasn't moved as fast as consumers have. They
Speaker 5: they've moved out of snail's pace, and so consumers have
Speaker 5: dried this product, decided that they liked it, and it's
Speaker 5: hard to get what they want because of all of
Speaker 5: the state restrictions on flavors. So who's kind of infilled
Speaker 5: that demand where the states staate block access the listit market,
Speaker 5: and so we're seeing a bunch of counterfeits explode onto
Speaker 5: the scene where they look e doctly like the old
Speaker 5: products that people know, but there's new flavors and that's
Speaker 5: exactly what consumers want. But they don't know that they're
Speaker 5: getting a sketchy.
Speaker 2: Product, right because they haven't the process. Well, there's a
Speaker 2: fine line of balance there, and I get whether it's
Speaker 2: what Mike DeWine's doing here in Ohio. It's the exact
Speaker 2: same argument we're doing with the THHG and the intoxicating
Speaker 2: hemp as we call it, and what's going on with
Speaker 2: nicotine edibles and the pouches, and that is the government
Speaker 2: will tell you, well, hold on, we need to research
Speaker 2: you and to make sure this stuff is safe to
Speaker 2: be consumed by people. You don't know that if you
Speaker 2: go to your comedience store, you don't know if a
Speaker 2: product has been tested or not. And that's that's part
Speaker 2: of the problem.
Speaker 5: Right exactly. Well, I think most consumers go into a
Speaker 5: store and they see something on the shelf and they go, oh, yeah,
Speaker 5: this is this is perfectly safe they're getting. It's getting
Speaker 5: told to me, and there's there's there's there might be
Speaker 5: some risks, like they know when they buy cigarettes or
Speaker 5: when they buy a vase, when they buy any sort
Speaker 5: of products, that there's a downside, but they aren't going
Speaker 5: in there thinking that it could be a counterfeit. And
Speaker 5: I think that's where it's really scary and dangerous, is
Speaker 5: that they think that they're buying a real product, and
Speaker 5: with the nicotine pouches, they it's a harm reduction tool.
Speaker 5: They think that they're buying something that's safer for them,
Speaker 5: and really it's it's a counterfeit and and it's it's
Speaker 5: not meeting the needs. And the reason the reason why
Speaker 5: we have all of these restrictions on the nicotine pouches
Speaker 5: is what they always say is for the safety of children.
Speaker 5: So children aren't getting these products. But we we've all
Speaker 5: been teenagers. We know how, we know how teams are.
Speaker 5: They're going to get their hands on what they want
Speaker 5: to and now the market is even more dangerous because
Speaker 5: the market is filled with counterfeits because we restricted it
Speaker 5: for the safety of these teams. But now the teams
Speaker 5: are getting what they're getting the counterfeit.
Speaker 2: Product right right, So what it would happen basically politically speaking,
Speaker 2: is a lot of progressives, for example, and some conservatives
Speaker 2: what we'll talk about, well, this is why we need
Speaker 2: a strong FDA, and this is you know, you're you're
Speaker 2: just gonna fast track all this stuff and put all
Speaker 2: these more poisons on the market, and they're getting on
Speaker 2: the market anyway, to ignore the what the black market
Speaker 2: is created, whether it's THC drinks or edibles or in
Speaker 2: this case, nicotine pouches and pretty much everything else. They've
Speaker 2: they've got to meet consumer demand head on, and you
Speaker 2: don't do that by Okay, in five years, we're gonna
Speaker 2: have research and we'll find out whether or not we're
Speaker 2: all lot of this stuff and that's gonna get polluted
Speaker 2: down by lobby groups and everything else, or just simply
Speaker 2: you know, if you're if you're anti edible or vape
Speaker 2: or nicotine, You're you're gonna shoot this thing down. Whatever.
Speaker 2: The the corporate policy is, so to speak, the party policy.
Speaker 2: So this stuff have to be faster. We got to
Speaker 2: do a better job of saying, Okay, well it's not
Speaker 2: the best thing you can put in your body, but
Speaker 2: at least there's mercury or serious harmful chemicals in it.
Speaker 2: We need to test this stuff and screen it much
Speaker 2: much faster. But that's the reality here.
Speaker 6: Can we actually change that, though we definitely can.
Speaker 5: These products have been available in the europe market for chuckies.
Speaker 5: We know that they're safe. We don't need to going
Speaker 5: through a whole new approval process. We can look at
Speaker 5: these markets that we know and trust and say, okay,
Speaker 5: here's the research that they've produced. It's good to be
Speaker 5: on the US market. Let's fast track it and approve it. Instead,
Speaker 5: they're doing the same thing where they did with spates,
Speaker 5: where they blocked good things from getting on the market
Speaker 5: that we knew we're safe and that we knew consumers wanted,
Speaker 5: and instead of approving things, they went and attacked the counterfeits,
Speaker 5: which needs to happen. You need to get the counterfeits
Speaker 5: off the market, but they're ignoring why those counterfeits are
Speaker 5: on the market, and that's to fill the designs of
Speaker 5: the consumers. And so we're seeing the same issue with
Speaker 5: nicotine couches, where they're attacking the counterfeits, but they're not
Speaker 5: addressing why the counterfeits popped up first. And so they
Speaker 5: really do need to address the approval process to get
Speaker 5: good quality products on the market that adult consumers want,
Speaker 5: and that includes flavors, that includes choice in nicotine percentages.
Speaker 5: And you can't just put this desire to have prohibition,
Speaker 5: especially among teenagers, to harming adult consumers because everyone will
Speaker 5: be worse off if you take away that change.
Speaker 2: And that was Governor Mike Dewines cry here is this
Speaker 2: is about the children. The child. We got to save
Speaker 2: the children because children, I get. Okay, Well, well what
Speaker 2: about the retail around of the Sophia Hamilton. You know,
Speaker 2: if I'm a retail what's the retail's perspective on this
Speaker 2: or some instiga. I don't care what's in it, even
Speaker 2: if it's poison. I'll sell it to him because I
Speaker 2: need to make money my carry out. It's certainly not
Speaker 2: all retailers. I don't see the big box stores or
Speaker 2: you know, the Krogers of the world, for example, shelving
Speaker 2: this stuff. But you know, at the same time, the
Speaker 2: little guy at the corner, what's the process for them?
Speaker 2: They're trying to keep their head above water to I
Speaker 2: get it, but I don't think i'd want to make
Speaker 2: my money, you know, selling the kids. Some people are
Speaker 2: going to do that. Seems like it's an enforcement issue.
Speaker 5: Yeah, there are enforcement issues, but they're smart. They're going
Speaker 5: to find someone who's above the legal age to buy
Speaker 5: the product for them or have a fake idea. There's
Speaker 5: definitely ways. It's really not that complicated for them to
Speaker 5: find ways to get these products in a reliable manner.
Speaker 5: And I think it's fairs not want teenagers to be
Speaker 5: using these products, especially if they've never used other nicotine products.
Speaker 5: You don't want to get them addicted. But they're going
Speaker 5: to do what they want to do. At the end
Speaker 5: of the day, they're going to drink even though drinking
Speaker 5: age is at twenty one. Aids to consume nicodinie and
Speaker 5: tobacco is also at twenty one, and we were all
Speaker 5: in college at one point.
Speaker 9: But I just this this desire to go through tulibition policies,
Speaker 9: and we've seen them fail time and time again with
Speaker 9: so many different substances. Is the silliest thing in my mind.
Speaker 5: We've seen it fail. Why are we trying to do
Speaker 5: it again? Because it's hurting retailers, like you said, it's
Speaker 5: hurting consumers, it's hurting the companies, and it's hurting the
Speaker 5: local economies because you get so much money from taxes
Speaker 5: on these products, right, and so you're trying to prohibit
Speaker 5: it and you're putting it into the black market where
Speaker 5: you're the state is no longer able to get the
Speaker 5: accise taxes from these products. So it's really just the
Speaker 5: loose situation all around.
Speaker 2: No question. And you know the fact of the matter
Speaker 2: is the government can never keep up with demand. They
Speaker 2: need to move a lot faster, be a lot leaner.
Speaker 2: That makes capitalism work better. Certainly, we don't want poisons
Speaker 2: going to convenience stores or our bodies. We assume that
Speaker 2: a lot of stuff is tested. But the way the
Speaker 2: model set up, the big tobacco companies that have all
Speaker 2: sorts of research and development and backing and money coming
Speaker 2: or talking billions, and publicly traded companies, they can afford
Speaker 2: to play the regulation game like Zen, for example, simply
Speaker 2: because they have the what about the mom and pop
Speaker 2: the entrepreneurs. And the same is true when it comes
Speaker 2: to THHD and fused drinks. You know, I mean, you know,
Speaker 2: Anheuser Busch may be able to put a product out
Speaker 2: that rivals at but something like fifty West here in Cincinnati,
Speaker 2: when they roll a THHC infused product, they don't have
Speaker 2: the backing, the wherewith all the R and D to
Speaker 2: be able to afford all the regulatory red tape to
Speaker 2: get the government seal of approval. That just stemy small
Speaker 2: and mid sized businesses, doesn't it exactly?
Speaker 5: Going through the approval process takes good years and countless
Speaker 5: countless dollars. Zen just speaking, the first company to be
Speaker 5: approved to market to adult consumers in the US their
Speaker 5: nicotine pouches in January of this year. The first company.
Speaker 5: They're a giant company international, and that took in years
Speaker 5: and years to get that first stamp of approval. That's
Speaker 5: not even the end process. Most companies cannot wait that long,
Speaker 5: and so it's an incredibly difficult process to go through.
Speaker 5: It's also very very confusing and long, and the sea
Speaker 5: is has a huge backlog or records long backlog, and
Speaker 5: most companies just cannot survive that weight to get the approval.
Speaker 5: And that's where you're seeing good competition get for shout
Speaker 5: of the way, while we have the door wide open
Speaker 5: for counterfeits where we don't know what's what's even in
Speaker 5: them because there's no there's no approval process, there's no
Speaker 5: regulation there.
Speaker 2: I know what no one's saying. Nicotine is you certainly
Speaker 2: you can get sick. You can overdose on nicotine for
Speaker 2: that matter too. But you know, it seems to me
Speaker 2: a better alternative than traditional tobacco would be VP products,
Speaker 2: but especially nicotine pouches that you put between your lip
Speaker 2: and gum. It's not a cant it's not a carcinogen
Speaker 2: in the way that the traditional snuffs and dip and
Speaker 2: smoking is. And so you know, if you're worried about
Speaker 2: the future generations and lung cancer and cancer as well,
Speaker 2: this seems like to be a good alternative. It's that perfect.
Speaker 2: I'm not saying it doesn't have harmful effects, but it's
Speaker 2: certainly a lot less than what the alternative is or
Speaker 2: the traditional methods are.
Speaker 5: Exactly. It's a harm reduction tool because it is more
Speaker 5: safe than the other products that are out there. So
Speaker 5: if you're going to be consuming nicotine, this is the
Speaker 5: safest way that you can do it. And there's still downsides.
Speaker 5: You can have some irritation, stomach upside, but you know,
Speaker 5: I'm sitting here drinking of coffee and there's similar downside
Speaker 5: to coffee as well with nicotine. So this is really
Speaker 5: the safest way that you can consume the product. And
Speaker 5: it's it's funny to see all of the restrictions when
Speaker 5: you can easily go and buy a pack of cigarette still,
Speaker 5: and so all of these, all of these barriers that
Speaker 5: we're putting up to a less harmful product and placing
Speaker 5: more taxes on it.
Speaker 9: It's it just does not make sense if the end
Speaker 9: goal is to have people consuming in a safer way.
Speaker 5: It really does seem like the end goal is prohibition
Speaker 5: and abstinence from any subject.
Speaker 2: Well, I think the other leg of the stool here
Speaker 2: between you know, companies and the government of the fact
Speaker 2: of the the big business that is the health prevention
Speaker 2: people or the health the health people. Right, the long
Speaker 2: association heard association where association it might be, is when
Speaker 2: the vaping trend started to take years and years ago.
Speaker 2: What surprised me is some of the same people that said,
Speaker 2: oh my god, we've got to sue tobacco companies out
Speaker 2: of existence and they're they're killing people and they are
Speaker 2: vaping seemed a good way to wean yourself off of
Speaker 2: traditional tobacco. And yet they fought just as hard as
Speaker 2: they did against traditional tobacco, is it against vape? And
Speaker 2: some of them are fighting against nicotine pouches And I'm like,
Speaker 2: that's a much safer alternative to what you got. So
Speaker 2: if you, you know, if you stamp out the problem,
Speaker 2: not that you know, we I don't know what the
Speaker 2: smoking levels, but they're nowhere near where they used to be.
Speaker 2: Now your organization sees too, Is this so we have
Speaker 2: to find the next boogeyman in order to keep our funding.
Speaker 5: Exactly exactly And what they will never say is that
Speaker 5: they'll never point to the tobacco studies that are done
Speaker 5: at the national level that show our youth in adult
Speaker 5: smoking rates are at a historic flow. They will never
Speaker 5: point that out. And why is that? Because of new
Speaker 5: products like nicotine pouches, And they just want to demonize
Speaker 5: this because they think it's from the same old big
Speaker 5: tobacco of two decades before. And know these these are
Speaker 5: companies that want to have safer alternatives for or their
Speaker 5: for their client base because they know what their consumers want.
Speaker 5: And I'll go when I testify on these issues to
Speaker 5: state legislators. The people that are arguing against against access
Speaker 5: to these good products are not based in reality. They
Speaker 5: really are, I think, just trying to keep their jobs,
Speaker 5: arguing against big tobacco in their minds right, and they
Speaker 5: will argue that nicotine is as harmful and astive as
Speaker 5: substances like heroin. And I hear that line so many
Speaker 5: times and it's the funniest thing to me. But it's
Speaker 5: sad because they think it's rooted in reality.
Speaker 6: It's any bits.
Speaker 2: Laugh at the the What we got to do is
Speaker 2: to save the children because children are being corrupted in
Speaker 2: their bank And do agree, you know could children should
Speaker 2: not be buying intoxicating hemp products your carry out, But
Speaker 2: that is not a reason to shut the entire industry
Speaker 2: down because somebody adults enjoy it. Uh, you know, whether
Speaker 2: it's THG drinks or nicotine pouches or vaping, it's the
Speaker 2: same predictable argument from the Pearl clutters about you know,
Speaker 2: protecting the show. We've got to shut that on protected children,
Speaker 2: damn it, what the adult market wants. We've got to
Speaker 2: do this to save the children, which they're doing at
Speaker 2: the behest of well, the big health organizations as we mentioned,
Speaker 2: as well as the big tobacco companies that are getting
Speaker 2: decreasing revenue from tobacco here in the States, and so
Speaker 2: they supplant that income and keep their shareholders happy with
Speaker 2: something else. With us. Nicotine pouches are vape that shouldn't
Speaker 2: price out the little guy though, and that's what's happening here,
Speaker 2: whether it's fifty West or you know somebody who's selling
Speaker 2: vape juice to a local supplier. Anyway, Sophia Hamilton writing
Speaker 2: about this in Reason she's with the Young Voices and
Speaker 2: thanks again, so we appreciate it.
Speaker 5: Thank you so much for having me on Scott. I
Speaker 5: appreciate it.
Speaker 2: Be well, good stuff there, and that's the libertary inside
Speaker 2: of me coming out. And I'm not saying you open
Speaker 2: it all up and it's a free There has to
Speaker 2: be reasonable amounts of testing to make sure the product's
Speaker 2: safe as safe as it could be. But It shouldn't
Speaker 2: take thatdes and it shouldn't be only available to the
Speaker 2: big pocketed companies. You can afford that Scott's Loan show
Speaker 2: with News on the way. And when we returned, what
Speaker 2: the no King's protests refused to accept the protesters and
Speaker 2: I get what you're complaining about when I sort of do.
Speaker 2: It's a bunch of people complaining about different things. And
Speaker 2: that's not one unified protest that just comes out as
Speaker 2: we hate Trump. We'll get into that next seven hundred
Speaker 2: WLWT Scott Flung Show, seven hundred. That lou hest is fascinating,
Speaker 2: absolutely fascinating. That ladders leaning up against the building. Already,
Speaker 2: no one saw that coming. You saw a ladder there went.
Speaker 2: It's kind of security issue and somebody breaks in. When
Speaker 2: then what seven to ten minutes took off with a
Speaker 2: portion of the French Crown jewels and Napoleon jewels. That's
Speaker 2: pretty Uh, it's actually a pretty pink Panther. I'm not
Speaker 2: talking about the Steve Martin one. I'm talking about the
Speaker 2: oldscho If you're old enough, remember, uh was that Peter
Speaker 2: Sellers in the Pink Panther movies? The minute that story
Speaker 2: broke well, you have France. We have a jewelized Where
Speaker 2: is inspector gluso? That's not the med dig All right,
Speaker 2: go look it up, kids, go look it up. Home
Speaker 2: stretcher will he takes over at twelve o'clock. And uh,
Speaker 2: this weekend we had the No Kings rally. I did,
Speaker 2: actually I did the Little King's rally myself. I was
Speaker 2: rallying for some Little Kings because start on Friday afternoon
Speaker 2: and don't until Saturday night. Anyway, looked like pretty decent
Speaker 2: turnouts this weekend if you're into protests and estimated I
Speaker 2: think they said seven million nationally, big group of people
Speaker 2: at small riverfront Park and elsewhere. And uh, I know
Speaker 2: our Republicans will brand this is a hate America rally.
Speaker 2: I mean, come on, you know some people may hate
Speaker 2: America in that group, sure, but I mean one could
Speaker 2: say it's a hate America rally. You could say the
Speaker 2: same thing about Jay six, you know, trying to unsuccessfully
Speaker 2: subvert the Constitution, because the MyPillow guy said so that
Speaker 2: just seems like hack politics and a hacked defense. I
Speaker 2: don't you know. I thought the No Kings rally was
Speaker 2: stupid for different reasons because typically in these things. It's
Speaker 2: just the it's it's a bunch of aggrieved progressives with
Speaker 2: different causes and different you know, anger points and talking
Speaker 2: points and assorted beefs under the common threat of we
Speaker 2: hate Trump, and it's just more of the same participant
Speaker 2: in groups include you had the a c LU there,
Speaker 2: you had teachers unions, you had the Human Rights Campaign,
Speaker 2: you had Indivisible and move on. I'm not quite you're indivisible,
Speaker 2: but move on, we know goes back to the move
Speaker 2: on from the war. Nonetheless, it's a bunch of people
Speaker 2: with various indifferent interests, but the same hate for Trump,
Speaker 2: I guess. And that doesn't to me. It's like, okay, well,
Speaker 2: what else is new? What else do you have? It's
Speaker 2: not like one central thing. It's just well, you know,
Speaker 2: it is alone. It's fascism, that's what it is. It's
Speaker 2: it's fair. I mean, just look at the Young Republican
Speaker 2: chats for example. That's fascism. It's you know, Trump's a
Speaker 2: lot of things, and some of it I like, some
Speaker 2: of it I don't like. But the whole tired fascism trope.
Speaker 2: Every time there's a Republican it's fashion. Reagan was a fascist,
Speaker 2: when I was younger, and then every Republican between is
Speaker 2: a fascist. It's fascism is closer ideologically to communism, you know,
Speaker 2: So you have Marxist socialism, you have capitalism, liberal capitalism,
Speaker 2: that's a blend of that. So and then all you're
Speaker 2: doing is to you're taking public and private sectors and
Speaker 2: putting under a central government and central ideology. So privately, yeah,
Speaker 2: you can have private industry, but the ultimate authority is
Speaker 2: the state, and so you've got a lot of censorship.
Speaker 2: And I just I don't see how someone who has
Speaker 2: a track record of being anti authoritarian and a capitalist
Speaker 2: is a fascist. That's again, Dondrup, you call what you want,
Speaker 2: but fascist is such a it's such a character, that's incorrect.
Speaker 2: You know, Fascists winn to point judges and jurists who
Speaker 2: want to minimize the authority in federal government. It's exact opposite.
Speaker 2: The real problem, though, are the executive orders. Now we've
Speaker 2: had a decreased, believe it or not, of all things,
Speaker 2: in the number of execut doors issue if you look
Speaker 2: at presidencies over the last twenty years, and recent presidents
Speaker 2: have seemingly man they're just doing everything by executive order,
Speaker 2: which is sure like for the front part of the
Speaker 2: front loadings increased thematically, Like Trump signed I think one
Speaker 2: hundred and forty three executive orders in the first hundred days,
Speaker 2: Franklin Roosevelt saying ninety nine. But by the way, Franklin
Speaker 2: Roosevelt is the goat when it comes to executive orders.
Speaker 2: He wrote over thirty seven hundred of them during his
Speaker 2: years as president. Of course, that spanned an ungodly amount
Speaker 2: of time. He was in office for like forty five years.
Speaker 2: And you know most you're going to get now is
Speaker 2: two two terms, so that with a grand assault. However,
Speaker 2: I think part of the issue here is the numbers
Speaker 2: have declined, but they become more political, and they're front loaded,
Speaker 2: and it's all part and parcel to send you to
Speaker 2: the politics to discuss most of us, it'd be the
Speaker 2: partisan warfare to just make a lot of sense. You can
Speaker 2: talk about well, for example, Obama himself, DACA is a
Speaker 2: Obama edict, so was a clean Power Plan, but also
Speaker 2: the Affordable Care Act. A lot of that got done
Speaker 2: because well, let's face it, the executive order and then
Speaker 2: Biden picked right back up on this other thing got
Speaker 2: ChRI Oh my God, he's subverting congresses. He's a titan,
Speaker 2: and he's a fascist because he's a king because he
Speaker 2: just writes these executive orders. Hold up just a second,
Speaker 2: they're skipping now. You got to point that dirty uder
Speaker 2: the stick at yourself somewhat here, because your boy Biden
Speaker 2: in his first month signed I think twenty executive or
Speaker 2: was like somewhere are on twenty in the first two days,
Speaker 2: I think, first forty eight hours, and he went nuts
Speaker 2: with the pen and one of the things he was
Speaker 2: into was DEI. So this whole anti woke field that
Speaker 2: came about is because of he writing single handedly executive
Speaker 2: orders leading to the DEI policies that have been refuted
Speaker 2: now by Republicans who are in charge. It's like, okay, well,
Speaker 2: you're celebrating the fact that Biden and expanded DEI training
Speaker 2: in that the you know, uh, there's equitable treatment in
Speaker 2: the government workforce when it comes to people, and uh,
Speaker 2: there's advanced pay to address racial and gender pay gaps
Speaker 2: and all this other noise and nonsense. Then about half
Speaker 2: the country are more disagree with like the gender pay gap. Well,
Speaker 2: you know gender Okay, why do women make less than men? Well,
Speaker 2: women take time out to have kids, or they leave
Speaker 2: the workforce for a while and then raise kids and
Speaker 2: come back to the workforce later like my wife did.
Speaker 2: Should you just pick up where you left off? And
Speaker 2: they're like, well, just because of age, now you get
Speaker 2: x amount of how you get paid the same as
Speaker 2: a person who's been in that position a lot longer
Speaker 2: than you have to No, of course that doesn't make
Speaker 2: any sense. I mean, if that were the case, no
Speaker 2: one would ever hire a guy. Everyone in the workforce.
Speaker 2: If you're a woman, you're willing to work for less,
Speaker 2: you know, seventy seventy cents on seventy seven cents on
Speaker 2: the dollar. Companies above us want profit right, And if
Speaker 2: you look at the botom lines, so well, why we're
Speaker 2: hiring guys, We just hired a bunch of women. They're
Speaker 2: willing to work for less. It's the same reason we
Speaker 2: outsourced jobs of different countries because of the wage scale.
Speaker 2: Is the stupidest argument ever. But that's something he signed
Speaker 2: into law by executive order or Climate Action for that matter.
Speaker 2: You know, canceling the first thing he did, cancel the
Speaker 2: Keystone XL pipeline. Well, how's that looking when we know
Speaker 2: we're getting our fuel from our enemies. How's that looking?
Speaker 2: Gas prices up here? Four or five dollars? Again, not
Speaker 2: a good idea. It's not a good look, Joe. You know,
Speaker 2: you can wish that we're all in a new energy
Speaker 2: economy where everything's a windmill or a battery or whether
Speaker 2: the sun or whatever, but we're not anywhere close to
Speaker 2: doing that right now. We still have a good one
Speaker 2: hundred plus years of relying on petroleum. Just the way
Speaker 2: things are set up doesn't mean you can't do better
Speaker 2: and work towards it. But again with the subsidy that
Speaker 2: winds up costing a lot more, and again with the
Speaker 2: pushing the agenda rather than reality. But the same people
Speaker 2: are out there protesting in the No King's rally. We're
Speaker 2: celebrating Joe Biden and Obar Barack Obama for Affordable Care Act,
Speaker 2: which is again more subsidy. But climate and DEI and
Speaker 2: all these things. Where were you? Why are you protesting
Speaker 2: the fascism in the king then, when the king on
Speaker 2: your side, your king, was doing all this stuff. So
Speaker 2: I look at this and I just kind of smile
Speaker 2: and laugh because I realized the nonsensical nature of partisan
Speaker 2: politics and the culture wars feed into this whole narrative.
Speaker 2: You Ca'm sorry, it seems disingenuous to me for you
Speaker 2: to be protesting and burning an effigy the president, and
Speaker 2: I certainly am not the biggest Trump fan of this
Speaker 2: radio station. Some stuff I look at it and go
Speaker 2: pretty good. Other stuff I look at, I go, I
Speaker 2: don't get it. The tariff, I don't get it. Some
Speaker 2: of the stuff he says. I get it, but I'm
Speaker 2: calling it like I see it. And if you're gonna
Speaker 2: be out there upset that this guy is a dictator
Speaker 2: in your opinion, and a fascist and whatever other ist
Speaker 2: it is wrongly labeled, I'll add then I would suggest, Okay,
Speaker 2: where were you when your guy was doing this just
Speaker 2: a few years ago. Nowhere to be found, because it
Speaker 2: supported things that you believe in your core, and that
Speaker 2: indeed is the problem. That's why we need a rule
Speaker 2: of law and things to a plot all of us
Speaker 2: the same way. I suppose, it's like turning a blind
Speaker 2: eye towards our it's our guy, so he can cheat
Speaker 2: the system and do the same things. Now we're accusing
Speaker 2: the other side of you, much like what's going on
Speaker 2: with the young Republicans Tech scandal. There are a lot
Speaker 2: of outrage Democrats and enters our outrage Republicans too. But
Speaker 2: you know, let's not forget. We also just went through
Speaker 2: this period where we had we had lawmakers with some
Speaker 2: avowed anti semitism publicly being anti Semitic, and there wasn't
Speaker 2: any fallout from that from from your party or Charlie
Speaker 2: Kirk's assassination or anything along those lines. It's just, you know,
Speaker 2: you'll taller if you're drinking the political kool aid. You
Speaker 2: will tolerate your side's beliefs and then of course absolutely
Speaker 2: obliterate the other side when they're guilty of something that
Speaker 2: didn't defend you previously. It's just while the rest of
Speaker 2: us in the middle just throw our hands up and go,
Speaker 2: this is stupid. Where are we getting with all this?
Speaker 2: We're getting nowhere. And whether it's Trump or Biden, they
Speaker 2: both you know, they're using executive orders aggressively when there
Speaker 2: is gridlock. They got to focus on the core issues
Speaker 2: to their constituency. And you're gonna get court challenges and
Speaker 2: there's gonna be some reversals in there as well. And
Speaker 2: now it seems like court spends a lot of time
Speaker 2: reversing the executive orders, and then this is why the
Speaker 2: President gets up and says, this is why we got
Speaker 2: to change things. Otherwise nothing can get done. And we've
Speaker 2: got this incredible gridlock in our country that I don't
Speaker 2: have to tell you have a government shutdown. That shut
Speaker 2: down over well, an issue that's not going away anytime soon.
Speaker 2: As I pointed out, we're shutting the government down over
Speaker 2: the core issue is healthcare. And the reason why we're
Speaker 2: doing that is because it's the one single issue that
Speaker 2: Democrats have on their side. Everything else they lose to
Speaker 2: Trump and the GOP on when it comes to public opinion.
Speaker 2: They've got one thing. Well, I think it's the equal
Speaker 2: pay thing, you know, workplace that that doesn't really that's
Speaker 2: not getting a lot of traction because look at how
Speaker 2: well women are doing from college on upward. You're excelling.
Speaker 2: Good for you, that's good. Unfortunately, I think it comes
Speaker 2: at the expense of a lot of young men. And
Speaker 2: at the same time, one of the other issues that
Speaker 2: they have is healthcare. They went on healthcare, they have
Speaker 2: a plan, No, they've got a band aid, they've got relief.
Speaker 2: A subsidy doesn't fix the problem. That healthcare is too
Speaker 2: damned expensive, but at least it's something to go, Hey,
Speaker 2: we're giving you temporary relief to help you pay your
Speaker 2: healthcare bills. I talk to Republicans about this, and it's well,
Speaker 2: we need to get America healthy again. Okay, that's great.
Speaker 2: Well we also need to we have more accountability, and
Speaker 2: we need more competition. Okay, awesome, we need to do that.
Speaker 2: You're right, how does that pay my bill that's due tomorrow?
Speaker 2: And I think that's what most Americans look at, right, Okay,
Speaker 2: I get that the Affordable Care Act is broken and
Speaker 2: it's just a band aid fix. We're just taking money
Speaker 2: we don't have and spending it on this temporarily so
Speaker 2: you can get to the next page. It's like a
Speaker 2: paycheck loan for healthcare. It's what it is. It's gonna
Speaker 2: get It's not gonna solve the problem. It's gonna get
Speaker 2: you to the next payday. Okay. But that's something that
Speaker 2: I think working people, a lot of Americans look at.
Speaker 7: Go.
Speaker 2: I don't like it. It cost us more money, but
Speaker 2: till we fix the problem. Fine, but we're not fixing
Speaker 2: the problem. And for republic have an alternative to healthcare,
Speaker 2: sure would love to hear something rather than going, we
Speaker 2: got to make America healthy again. Great, we'll teach kids
Speaker 2: to eat carrots, we will tea which, by the way,
Speaker 2: I think Michelle Obama tried to do that and then
Speaker 2: she got left out of the building on relic. We're
Speaker 2: gonna make kids eat carrots again. Uh, politics is such
Speaker 2: a joke. So I look at the whole thing and
Speaker 2: all right, well, what's the alternative. Well, we're gonna teach
Speaker 2: people how to take how to have a stake in
Speaker 2: their own health and so they do know need too much,
Speaker 2: and they do the right thing and they exercise. Awesome,
Speaker 2: That's that's one good. But what about the forty or
Speaker 2: fifty year old now that can't afford the subsidized HEALTHCA
Speaker 2: the healthcare without a subsidy. Those are great solutions and
Speaker 2: maybe ways to prevent future generations from independent on healthcare,
Speaker 2: But it doesn't fix the here and now, even temporarily.
Speaker 2: So I don't think that's much of a plan. It's
Speaker 2: a platitude. It is what it is. Why not just
Speaker 2: come out, let's say we're gonna blow the healthcare system up.
Speaker 2: The problem, of course, is it's going to be the
Speaker 2: lobby groups. It's going to be the healthcare insurance lobby,
Speaker 2: the doctor's lobby, the pharmaceutical lobby, lobby, lobby lobby that
Speaker 2: gets in the year of lawmakers, both on the left
Speaker 2: and right, and make sure that we have this crappy
Speaker 2: system because whether it's you know, single pair, double pair,
Speaker 2: triple pair, whatever, they're fat and happy and so let's
Speaker 2: not rock the apple cart. The other thing I think, too,
Speaker 2: is that we don't fix the system simply because if
Speaker 2: there's any fallout whatsoever, the party that's responsible for enacting
Speaker 2: the changes, even though they may wholly be better than
Speaker 2: what we have right now, they're going to wind up
Speaker 2: paying in an election if somebody gets sick or somebody
Speaker 2: gets left out, or what about that. And you don't
Speaker 2: have carve outs either, So what's the point of having
Speaker 2: a politician. Whole goal of politics and politicians are what
Speaker 2: is to get carve out subsidy and relief for your voters,
Speaker 2: not the other guy, but your voters. And so I
Speaker 2: just don't see a system or healthcare changes anytime soon.
Speaker 2: The simple solution would be to go, you're no longer
Speaker 2: allowed to provide healthcare in your workplace. I take an
Speaker 2: executive order, take some big stones too, and it's pretty
Speaker 2: ballsy to go, all right, you're not in the business
Speaker 2: of supplying healthcare, go find it on the free market,
Speaker 2: and that would increase competition, it reduced costs, transparency, other
Speaker 2: government nonsense of go away. And then the people who
Speaker 2: really fell between the cracks, which is a lot of people,
Speaker 2: by the way, we could afford to pay health care
Speaker 2: for them and and still have money left over to
Speaker 2: put towards the deficit. It's an easy solution. But the
Speaker 2: problem is lobbyist, it's Congress, it's politics that are ingrained,
Speaker 2: and this is why we'll have more of the same.
Speaker 2: And for most of us, it's just frustrating, a frustrating
Speaker 2: exercise in a sense that we can see a way
Speaker 2: to make a change here, and that is make more
Speaker 2: of a libertarian kind of argument and going. You buy
Speaker 2: your health insurance on the free market, as you do
Speaker 2: your car insurance, your renter's insurance, your life insurance, whatever
Speaker 2: insurance it, insurance for your dog. It's all in the market.
Speaker 2: It's transparent, it's easy, you pay for it out of
Speaker 2: your own pocket. Used to be that way. And then
Speaker 2: we attach it to employment and that's a whole nother thing,
Speaker 2: especially in the gig economy, because now people want to
Speaker 2: do their own thing and not have to do a
Speaker 2: nine to five, which is a huge boon for our economy.
Speaker 2: On top of this as well, save money and grower economy.
Speaker 2: Sounds like a plan, but this is where we stand
Speaker 2: right now. So the No King's Little King's protest, whatever
Speaker 2: it is, again, it's just more of the same, more noise,
Speaker 2: a bunch of a grieved people with the only commonality
Speaker 2: between them is a fact they don't like Donald Trump
Speaker 2: because he's a fascist, although he's really not. And when
Speaker 2: our guide did the same thing with executive orders, we
Speaker 2: just turned a blind eye, which is the hypocrisy of politics.
Speaker 2: This is a perfect leading for Bill Conningham coming up
Speaker 2: at twelve oh six right after news here on the
Speaker 2: home of the best Bengals coverage seven hundred WWT Cincinnati