1 00:00:00,520 --> 00:00:04,320 Speaker 1: Hi guys, Liz Wheeler here. So after we finish recording 2 00:00:04,480 --> 00:00:07,360 Speaker 1: Verdict every week, Senator Cruise and I sit down and 3 00:00:07,480 --> 00:00:10,000 Speaker 1: get into the nitty gritty of it all on our 4 00:00:10,119 --> 00:00:13,440 Speaker 1: Verdict Plus series called The Cloakroom, where we look at 5 00:00:13,600 --> 00:00:18,159 Speaker 1: political issues through a specifically legal lens. And what I 6 00:00:18,200 --> 00:00:20,560 Speaker 1: want to do today is offer you a sneak preview 7 00:00:20,600 --> 00:00:23,880 Speaker 1: of the latest episode of The Cloakroom on Verdict Plus. 8 00:00:24,160 --> 00:00:26,000 Speaker 1: You can also join us on a weekly basis by 9 00:00:26,040 --> 00:00:29,640 Speaker 1: going to Verdict with Ted Cruise dot com slash Plus. 10 00:00:29,680 --> 00:00:32,199 Speaker 1: If you use my promo code Cloakroom, then you can 11 00:00:32,240 --> 00:00:34,240 Speaker 1: watch for free for the first month of your annual 12 00:00:34,320 --> 00:00:38,040 Speaker 1: subscription that is Verdict with Ted Cruise dot Com slash 13 00:00:38,120 --> 00:00:42,199 Speaker 1: Plus promo code Cloakroom and without further ado. Here's a 14 00:00:42,240 --> 00:00:45,920 Speaker 1: sneak preview of The Cloakroom on Verdict Plus. Hi guys, 15 00:00:45,920 --> 00:00:48,640 Speaker 1: welcome back to another episode of The Cloakroom. I'm Liz Wheeler. 16 00:00:48,640 --> 00:00:51,199 Speaker 1: I'm sitting here with Senator Ted Cruz and Senator I 17 00:00:51,280 --> 00:00:53,920 Speaker 1: want to start today just by saying congratulations, we did 18 00:00:53,920 --> 00:00:56,960 Speaker 1: it again. The left, the mainstream media is up in 19 00:00:57,120 --> 00:00:59,000 Speaker 1: arms over something we talked about right here on The 20 00:00:59,040 --> 00:01:02,400 Speaker 1: Cloakroom last week the cancelation of student loan debt. So 21 00:01:02,480 --> 00:01:04,200 Speaker 1: I think we should start the show just by welcoming 22 00:01:04,240 --> 00:01:07,560 Speaker 1: the Washington Post and Business Insider, who wrote an article 23 00:01:07,600 --> 00:01:11,760 Speaker 1: about your comments, your legal analysis of whether what Biden 24 00:01:11,800 --> 00:01:14,760 Speaker 1: did with his executive order canceling student loan debt whether 25 00:01:14,880 --> 00:01:18,440 Speaker 1: it's legal. They joined the ranks of CNN and MSNBC, 26 00:01:18,640 --> 00:01:21,480 Speaker 1: who came to Verdict plus last month when we were 27 00:01:21,520 --> 00:01:24,920 Speaker 1: talking about Obergefell because of what Clarence Thomas wrote in 28 00:01:24,920 --> 00:01:28,319 Speaker 1: the Dabbs in his concurrence. So before we get started 29 00:01:28,360 --> 00:01:31,160 Speaker 1: on the rank choice voting, which is a fascinating topic 30 00:01:31,240 --> 00:01:34,560 Speaker 1: that Verdict Verdict plus fans have been asking about, I 31 00:01:34,600 --> 00:01:36,080 Speaker 1: want to ask you, why do you think that the 32 00:01:36,080 --> 00:01:39,319 Speaker 1: mainstream media is so up in arms about the legal analysis, 33 00:01:39,319 --> 00:01:40,760 Speaker 1: because that's what we were talking about, right, not even 34 00:01:40,800 --> 00:01:42,880 Speaker 1: the politics, the legality of the thing. Do they know 35 00:01:42,959 --> 00:01:46,240 Speaker 1: that it's illegal, Well, they seem to. You look at 36 00:01:46,240 --> 00:01:49,200 Speaker 1: the Washington Post story they wrote about cloak room, and 37 00:01:49,560 --> 00:01:53,240 Speaker 1: they basically acknowledge that it's contrary to the law. But 38 00:01:53,680 --> 00:01:57,280 Speaker 1: we had an honest and candid discussion about the legal 39 00:01:57,320 --> 00:02:00,360 Speaker 1: impediments there would be to getting a court to reach 40 00:02:00,480 --> 00:02:04,360 Speaker 1: the merits of the dispute and in particular the problem 41 00:02:04,400 --> 00:02:09,120 Speaker 1: of establishing standing. And look, the press likes it when 42 00:02:09,160 --> 00:02:20,679 Speaker 1: any Republican discusses any impediment to principled arguments prevailing that 43 00:02:21,040 --> 00:02:25,080 Speaker 1: that they like that. Gosh, wait that that this illegal 44 00:02:25,200 --> 00:02:28,960 Speaker 1: student loan giveaway. Maybe it survives. I will say, since 45 00:02:28,960 --> 00:02:31,160 Speaker 1: we did the last cloak Room, we talked about different 46 00:02:31,200 --> 00:02:34,000 Speaker 1: scenarios of who might have standing, and I actually reached 47 00:02:34,040 --> 00:02:38,720 Speaker 1: out to a one of the top Supreme Court litigators 48 00:02:38,720 --> 00:02:41,320 Speaker 1: in the country, was a dear friend of mine, and 49 00:02:41,560 --> 00:02:43,960 Speaker 1: he and I were brainstorming a little bit more on 50 00:02:44,120 --> 00:02:47,840 Speaker 1: standing after we did the cloak Room last week, and 51 00:02:47,919 --> 00:02:50,519 Speaker 1: he came up with one more scenario. One one other 52 00:02:50,560 --> 00:02:53,080 Speaker 1: group of people that that that would have standing, and 53 00:02:53,120 --> 00:02:57,000 Speaker 1: I think it's probably the strongest case for standing, and 54 00:02:57,120 --> 00:03:01,079 Speaker 1: that is a student loan processor, so so a company 55 00:03:01,120 --> 00:03:04,640 Speaker 1: that is processing student loans. And the reason they would 56 00:03:04,680 --> 00:03:07,480 Speaker 1: have standing is the consequence of forgiving these loans, and 57 00:03:07,520 --> 00:03:10,600 Speaker 1: particularly the loans that are forgiven down to zero, is 58 00:03:10,639 --> 00:03:14,200 Speaker 1: that those companies would face, as I understand it, a 59 00:03:14,280 --> 00:03:17,120 Speaker 1: very significant drop in revenue. That it is real money 60 00:03:17,440 --> 00:03:20,840 Speaker 1: out of their pocket because of the illegal forgiveness of 61 00:03:20,880 --> 00:03:28,000 Speaker 1: the debts. That would almost surely clear the hurdle for standing. 62 00:03:30,840 --> 00:03:34,000 Speaker 1: The downside is if that you have someone that that 63 00:03:34,000 --> 00:03:38,600 Speaker 1: that is processing student loans and administering student loans. They're 64 00:03:38,640 --> 00:03:40,800 Speaker 1: doing business with the federal government. So they may not 65 00:03:40,920 --> 00:03:43,880 Speaker 1: be willing to sue because they don't want to piss 66 00:03:43,920 --> 00:03:48,640 Speaker 1: off the Feds. But legally they would have quite a 67 00:03:48,760 --> 00:03:52,280 Speaker 1: strong argument for standing to be able to make the 68 00:03:52,360 --> 00:03:55,760 Speaker 1: legal argument. And if it gets to the merits, I 69 00:03:55,760 --> 00:03:58,080 Speaker 1: think the executive order gets struck down. I think it 70 00:03:58,120 --> 00:04:00,640 Speaker 1: goes to the Supreme Court and is probably struck down 71 00:04:01,160 --> 00:04:05,520 Speaker 1: six three, the same margins we saw on other lawless 72 00:04:05,560 --> 00:04:08,440 Speaker 1: assertions of power by the Biden White House. So there 73 00:04:08,520 --> 00:04:13,360 Speaker 1: is one group of plaintiffs that likely has standing, but 74 00:04:13,920 --> 00:04:16,640 Speaker 1: time will tell whether they will will have the courage 75 00:04:16,680 --> 00:04:21,039 Speaker 1: to be willing to bring lawsuit to press the claim. Well, 76 00:04:21,040 --> 00:04:24,000 Speaker 1: maybe it'll be courage paired with how hard their business 77 00:04:24,080 --> 00:04:26,360 Speaker 1: is hit if they actually are decimated and they don't 78 00:04:26,400 --> 00:04:29,520 Speaker 1: really have a business left to risk. Yeah, if they 79 00:04:29,600 --> 00:04:32,320 Speaker 1: challenge the FATS, that's very interesting. Maybe we should just 80 00:04:32,320 --> 00:04:34,200 Speaker 1: pause right here and send this little update to the 81 00:04:34,240 --> 00:04:36,840 Speaker 1: Washington Posts, and this little update to Business Insider, so 82 00:04:36,880 --> 00:04:38,880 Speaker 1: they can update their articles to make sure that it's 83 00:04:38,920 --> 00:04:43,280 Speaker 1: fully accurate exactly how we Republicans are going to challenge them. So, 84 00:04:43,640 --> 00:04:45,800 Speaker 1: but can we make sure that the Washington Post are 85 00:04:45,800 --> 00:04:48,200 Speaker 1: paying subscribers? I mean, I mean that they do need 86 00:04:48,240 --> 00:04:50,359 Speaker 1: to pay to keep the lights on here? Of course, 87 00:04:50,440 --> 00:04:52,040 Speaker 1: of course they will. I mean they're here right now. 88 00:04:52,080 --> 00:04:54,640 Speaker 1: They watched last week, So there you go. Okay, this 89 00:04:54,680 --> 00:04:57,719 Speaker 1: week I have a really interesting topic. So Republicans unfortunately 90 00:04:57,800 --> 00:05:01,000 Speaker 1: lost a seat in the House of Representatives in Alaska, 91 00:05:01,320 --> 00:05:03,920 Speaker 1: of all places, there was a special election in Alaska 92 00:05:04,000 --> 00:05:07,680 Speaker 1: and the Democrat ended up winning, defeating Sarah Palin, former governor, 93 00:05:07,680 --> 00:05:10,800 Speaker 1: former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin. And this was a 94 00:05:10,800 --> 00:05:13,600 Speaker 1: little bit of an anomaly in Alaska because of the 95 00:05:13,680 --> 00:05:17,839 Speaker 1: structure of their voting system. They have ranked choice voting. Actually, 96 00:05:17,960 --> 00:05:20,719 Speaker 1: let me back up. In their primary systems, they have 97 00:05:21,000 --> 00:05:24,760 Speaker 1: jungle primaries, which means it's not sorted by party. Republicans 98 00:05:24,800 --> 00:05:27,520 Speaker 1: don't go vote for a Republican, Democrats vote for a Democrat. 99 00:05:27,560 --> 00:05:30,280 Speaker 1: Everyone's in this primary together, and then the top four 100 00:05:30,320 --> 00:05:34,839 Speaker 1: people compete in the general election and it's ranked choice voting, 101 00:05:34,880 --> 00:05:37,240 Speaker 1: meaning you have to have over fifty percent of the vote. 102 00:05:37,279 --> 00:05:39,039 Speaker 1: It's not just the person with the most. You have 103 00:05:39,080 --> 00:05:42,359 Speaker 1: to cross that threshold. And if someone doesn't cross the threshold, 104 00:05:42,360 --> 00:05:45,200 Speaker 1: which no one does when you have four people, then 105 00:05:45,600 --> 00:05:47,840 Speaker 1: you go to the ranked choice, You pick a second 106 00:05:47,839 --> 00:05:51,200 Speaker 1: and a third choice. It's very messy, it's very weird, 107 00:05:51,520 --> 00:05:55,200 Speaker 1: and it resulted in even though the two Republican candidates 108 00:05:55,240 --> 00:05:58,960 Speaker 1: combined had sixty percent of the vote and the Democrats 109 00:05:59,000 --> 00:06:01,520 Speaker 1: combined had forty per son of votes, the Democrat is 110 00:06:01,600 --> 00:06:05,800 Speaker 1: going to Washington, DC. Give me your top down zoomed 111 00:06:05,800 --> 00:06:09,120 Speaker 1: out analysis of I guess ranked choice of voting, Like, 112 00:06:09,160 --> 00:06:12,839 Speaker 1: what's going on here? Well, ranked choice voting, I think 113 00:06:12,920 --> 00:06:19,920 Speaker 1: is a terrible design and it is intentionally anti democratic. 114 00:06:20,000 --> 00:06:22,880 Speaker 1: So you can understand where these so called reforms came from. 115 00:06:23,960 --> 00:06:27,800 Speaker 1: They come from enlightened good government folks that want one 116 00:06:27,839 --> 00:06:31,200 Speaker 1: of two things to happen. They either a want Democrats 117 00:06:31,240 --> 00:06:35,280 Speaker 1: to win or b, at the very minimum, they want 118 00:06:35,320 --> 00:06:38,920 Speaker 1: moderates to win. What they don't want to win our conservatives. 119 00:06:39,320 --> 00:06:43,000 Speaker 1: All of this is designed to stop conservatives from winning. 120 00:06:43,279 --> 00:06:46,600 Speaker 1: And the reason you see these lefties pushing these reforms 121 00:06:47,680 --> 00:06:50,160 Speaker 1: is that when you actually have free and fair elections, 122 00:06:50,200 --> 00:06:55,120 Speaker 1: and the voters vote with some regularity, they vote to 123 00:06:55,240 --> 00:06:59,839 Speaker 1: elect conservatives, and so this is all designed to rig 124 00:06:59,880 --> 00:07:03,479 Speaker 1: the election, to make it incredibly difficult to an elect 125 00:07:03,480 --> 00:07:06,640 Speaker 1: a conservative. This is designed to change the rules. It 126 00:07:07,240 --> 00:07:12,080 Speaker 1: is in the same general family as ballot harvesting, as 127 00:07:12,200 --> 00:07:16,240 Speaker 1: universal mail in voting. All of these things are designed 128 00:07:16,240 --> 00:07:18,680 Speaker 1: to make it harder for a Republican to win, harder 129 00:07:18,720 --> 00:07:23,800 Speaker 1: for a conservative to win, and it the reason they're 130 00:07:23,840 --> 00:07:27,720 Speaker 1: implemented is the so called reformers don't like what the 131 00:07:27,800 --> 00:07:30,640 Speaker 1: voters do when they're actually giving a straight up choice. 132 00:07:30,640 --> 00:07:33,480 Speaker 1: So you look at this election. Number one, you had 133 00:07:33,480 --> 00:07:35,840 Speaker 1: the jungle primary. You had all of the Republicans and 134 00:07:35,840 --> 00:07:39,040 Speaker 1: Democrats on the ballot together. If you had, like most states, 135 00:07:39,080 --> 00:07:43,600 Speaker 1: had a Republican primary and a Democratic primary, then Republican 136 00:07:44,280 --> 00:07:49,200 Speaker 1: voters could select their choice their preferred candidate. Democrat voters 137 00:07:49,200 --> 00:07:52,600 Speaker 1: could select their choice, and you would have one major 138 00:07:52,680 --> 00:07:56,560 Speaker 1: party nominee from each party. The reason that you see 139 00:07:56,560 --> 00:07:59,560 Speaker 1: places like California do a jungle primary as they recognize 140 00:07:59,600 --> 00:08:03,440 Speaker 1: weight conservative Republicans win primaries and then crap. When they 141 00:08:03,440 --> 00:08:05,800 Speaker 1: win primaries, they turn around and win the general election. 142 00:08:06,080 --> 00:08:08,280 Speaker 1: So let's do the jungle primary to make it harder 143 00:08:08,320 --> 00:08:13,120 Speaker 1: for that conservative to win Alaska, though, did put the 144 00:08:13,120 --> 00:08:16,200 Speaker 1: whole thing on steroids with rank choice voting, because if 145 00:08:16,240 --> 00:08:20,920 Speaker 1: you look at the numbers, and here, let me pull 146 00:08:21,000 --> 00:08:27,720 Speaker 1: up the numbers, so sixty percent of the voters voted 147 00:08:27,960 --> 00:08:37,360 Speaker 1: for Republicans. However, the breakdown this is taking a seconds, 148 00:08:38,320 --> 00:08:44,080 Speaker 1: all right, So the first round of voting, forty point 149 00:08:44,080 --> 00:08:48,760 Speaker 1: two percent voted for the Democrat, thirty one point three 150 00:08:48,840 --> 00:08:53,000 Speaker 1: percent voted for Sarah Palin, and twenty eight point five 151 00:08:53,080 --> 00:08:56,200 Speaker 1: percent voted for Republican Nick Begget. So if you add 152 00:08:56,280 --> 00:09:00,960 Speaker 1: up Palin and Begett's number together, you yet right at 153 00:09:01,440 --> 00:09:03,840 Speaker 1: right at sixty percent. So sixty percent of the voters 154 00:09:03,880 --> 00:09:07,760 Speaker 1: voter Republican. Forty percent of the voters voted Democrat. What's 155 00:09:07,800 --> 00:09:11,400 Speaker 1: the outcome? The Democrat gets elected? Why is that? Well? 156 00:09:11,480 --> 00:09:16,840 Speaker 1: Under ranked choice voting, the third place finisher, who was 157 00:09:17,440 --> 00:09:24,840 Speaker 1: Nick Beggitch, He's third, so he's eliminated, and they look 158 00:09:24,960 --> 00:09:28,400 Speaker 1: to the voters put a second choice. The Beggitch voters 159 00:09:28,400 --> 00:09:32,000 Speaker 1: put a second choice, and they allocate those second choices 160 00:09:32,040 --> 00:09:36,840 Speaker 1: to whomever they put. Well, as it so happens, fifty 161 00:09:36,920 --> 00:09:39,800 Speaker 1: point three percent of the Beggach voters put Sarah palin 162 00:09:39,880 --> 00:09:42,520 Speaker 1: As as their second choice, so that so half of 163 00:09:42,559 --> 00:09:47,720 Speaker 1: Begitch's votes got allocated to Sarah palin Twenty eight point 164 00:09:47,720 --> 00:09:52,600 Speaker 1: eight percent put Peltola, who is the Democrat, as their 165 00:09:52,640 --> 00:09:57,440 Speaker 1: second choice, and then what really had a big impact, 166 00:09:57,480 --> 00:10:00,920 Speaker 1: twenty point nine percent didn't put us choice. They voted 167 00:10:00,920 --> 00:10:04,040 Speaker 1: for Beggage and they left it blank. The consequence of 168 00:10:04,080 --> 00:10:08,239 Speaker 1: this is, even though sixty percent voted Republican, a Democrat 169 00:10:08,320 --> 00:10:13,200 Speaker 1: gets elected. And it's that, as I said, is by design. 170 00:10:13,280 --> 00:10:16,360 Speaker 1: The people who put this in place wanted either Democrats 171 00:10:16,400 --> 00:10:20,079 Speaker 1: to win or at the very worst, moderates to win. 172 00:10:20,840 --> 00:10:25,120 Speaker 1: So you compared this to ballot harvesting or vote harvesting, 173 00:10:25,160 --> 00:10:28,320 Speaker 1: which I find very interesting because ballot harvesting and vote 174 00:10:28,320 --> 00:10:31,280 Speaker 1: harvesting is something that has to be dealt with at 175 00:10:31,320 --> 00:10:34,559 Speaker 1: the state level, and many states have outlawed that practice. 176 00:10:35,000 --> 00:10:37,760 Speaker 1: Is ranked choice voting something that should be outlawed by 177 00:10:37,800 --> 00:10:43,440 Speaker 1: states to protect against. Well, this outcome absolutely. Look it's 178 00:10:43,440 --> 00:10:48,040 Speaker 1: a bad way of doing elections. People. It doesn't present 179 00:10:48,080 --> 00:10:50,680 Speaker 1: an election as a binary choice. At the end of 180 00:10:50,679 --> 00:10:53,599 Speaker 1: the day, you're choosing between one person or another, and 181 00:10:54,080 --> 00:10:57,760 Speaker 1: only one person can win. And what happens with ranked 182 00:10:57,840 --> 00:10:59,760 Speaker 1: choice voting is you end up you look at some 183 00:10:59,800 --> 00:11:01,920 Speaker 1: of the game theory at economics, you end up with 184 00:11:02,000 --> 00:11:07,280 Speaker 1: people voting in ways that the outcome is perverse and backwards. 185 00:11:08,440 --> 00:11:16,640 Speaker 1: Elections should be about making choices, and the people who 186 00:11:16,720 --> 00:11:20,679 Speaker 1: push these reforms know that they know that the outcome. 187 00:11:21,440 --> 00:11:24,840 Speaker 1: The reason they want to change the way elections are 188 00:11:24,880 --> 00:11:29,360 Speaker 1: done is they don't like how the voters vote. They're 189 00:11:29,440 --> 00:11:32,320 Speaker 1: trying to prevent the voters from voting the way they 190 00:11:32,360 --> 00:11:34,880 Speaker 1: would vote if they were given the ability to do 191 00:11:34,960 --> 00:11:36,840 Speaker 1: so in an ordinary election. I will say, by the way, 192 00:11:36,840 --> 00:11:45,680 Speaker 1: as an aside, on an infinitely less consequential stage, I 193 00:11:45,840 --> 00:11:52,440 Speaker 1: actually participated in a ranked choice voting election in which 194 00:11:52,480 --> 00:11:58,200 Speaker 1: I lost the election by one vote. And I'll tell 195 00:11:58,200 --> 00:12:03,160 Speaker 1: you the story. I said it was infinitesimally less important. 196 00:12:03,160 --> 00:12:04,600 Speaker 1: But as when I was in college, I was at 197 00:12:04,640 --> 00:12:08,000 Speaker 1: Princeton and I was very active in the American Whig 198 00:12:08,040 --> 00:12:12,280 Speaker 1: class Ophic Society, which is the world's oldest debating and 199 00:12:12,360 --> 00:12:16,040 Speaker 1: political society. I was the chairman of the class Opic Party, 200 00:12:16,040 --> 00:12:20,040 Speaker 1: which was the conservative party that was founded by William Patterson. 201 00:12:20,080 --> 00:12:22,480 Speaker 1: It was one of the signers the Declaration of Independence. 202 00:12:23,280 --> 00:12:25,880 Speaker 1: The American Whig Party was founded by James Madison, the 203 00:12:25,880 --> 00:12:30,480 Speaker 1: father of the Constitution. I ran for president of the 204 00:12:30,520 --> 00:12:36,160 Speaker 1: American Whig Class offic Society, which is the entire debating society. Unfortunately, 205 00:12:36,160 --> 00:12:41,800 Speaker 1: Whig Clio used ranked choice voting, so at the end 206 00:12:41,840 --> 00:12:44,160 Speaker 1: of the first round of voting, I was leading. I 207 00:12:44,280 --> 00:12:49,840 Speaker 1: had fifty two votes. The second place candidate had forty 208 00:12:49,840 --> 00:12:52,760 Speaker 1: four votes, so I had won by a sizable margin. 209 00:12:52,840 --> 00:12:56,960 Speaker 1: On the first round, the third place candidate had nineteen votes. 210 00:12:58,160 --> 00:13:01,760 Speaker 1: Because the third place candidate was eliminated, those nineteen votes 211 00:13:01,800 --> 00:13:07,400 Speaker 1: were reallocated. Of those nineteen votes, five had me in seconds, 212 00:13:07,440 --> 00:13:11,640 Speaker 1: so my fifty two went to fifty seven, and fourteen 213 00:13:11,960 --> 00:13:15,600 Speaker 1: had the second place finisher as their second choice, and 214 00:13:15,640 --> 00:13:18,000 Speaker 1: so his forty four went to fifty eight and I 215 00:13:18,040 --> 00:13:22,040 Speaker 1: lost fifty eight to fifty seven. And I gotta tell you, 216 00:13:22,280 --> 00:13:26,280 Speaker 1: at twenty years old, it sucked then, and I gotta 217 00:13:26,320 --> 00:13:29,040 Speaker 1: say it sucks for Sarah Palin. Sarah as a friend 218 00:13:29,040 --> 00:13:32,400 Speaker 1: of mine, I like Sarah. I am sorry for the 219 00:13:32,440 --> 00:13:36,520 Speaker 1: outcome that happened that and it sucks even worse for 220 00:13:36,559 --> 00:13:39,400 Speaker 1: the people of Alaska. That's funny that you phrase it 221 00:13:39,480 --> 00:13:41,319 Speaker 1: like that, because when you're telling this story about losing 222 00:13:41,320 --> 00:13:43,120 Speaker 1: by one point, that's the only thing that came into 223 00:13:43,160 --> 00:13:45,240 Speaker 1: my head. Just Wow, that really sucks to lose by 224 00:13:45,280 --> 00:13:47,840 Speaker 1: one point, even if it's a college debate society, that 225 00:13:47,880 --> 00:13:50,440 Speaker 1: really sucks to lose it in this way. How did 226 00:13:50,480 --> 00:13:53,439 Speaker 1: Alaska specifically end up with a system like this? Who 227 00:13:53,559 --> 00:13:56,480 Speaker 1: is the they that are behind these reforms? So there's 228 00:13:56,559 --> 00:14:01,360 Speaker 1: some dispute about that, But there was a referendum effort 229 00:14:01,400 --> 00:14:03,520 Speaker 1: to put it on the ballot and the voters voted 230 00:14:03,559 --> 00:14:06,040 Speaker 1: for it. Now you could say, well, gosh, isn't that 231 00:14:06,120 --> 00:14:10,679 Speaker 1: consistent with democracy? Yes, in a sense, the voters put 232 00:14:10,720 --> 00:14:13,640 Speaker 1: it in place, But I am not at all convinced 233 00:14:13,640 --> 00:14:17,240 Speaker 1: the voters understood what the consequences would be. I'd be 234 00:14:17,320 --> 00:14:21,920 Speaker 1: willing to bet people are astonished today. That's sixty percent 235 00:14:21,920 --> 00:14:24,120 Speaker 1: of the voters in Alaska voter for a Republican and 236 00:14:24,200 --> 00:14:29,200 Speaker 1: the result is the Democrat wins. This is designed to 237 00:14:29,400 --> 00:14:35,360 Speaker 1: deceive voters, and and I think election mechanisms that are 238 00:14:35,400 --> 00:14:40,440 Speaker 1: designed to deceive voters are not good mechanisms. They they 239 00:14:40,480 --> 00:14:44,280 Speaker 1: frustrate the operation of democracy. It seems like this is 240 00:14:44,280 --> 00:14:47,760 Speaker 1: one of those things that conservatives and states across the country, 241 00:14:47,840 --> 00:14:50,880 Speaker 1: not just Alaska, should check and make sure that this 242 00:14:50,960 --> 00:14:54,920 Speaker 1: is not an effort that's being exerted in their localities 243 00:14:54,920 --> 00:14:57,000 Speaker 1: in their states, to make sure to protect against this, 244 00:14:57,040 --> 00:14:58,480 Speaker 1: because that's that's the thing. That's what we saw with 245 00:14:58,520 --> 00:15:01,160 Speaker 1: Mark Elias right in in the summer of twenty twenty 246 00:15:01,200 --> 00:15:03,440 Speaker 1: before the presidential election, when all of these all of 247 00:15:03,480 --> 00:15:05,880 Speaker 1: these changes to election laws in different states, especially the 248 00:15:05,920 --> 00:15:08,840 Speaker 1: swing states like Pennsylvania and Arizona and Georgia and Wisconsin, 249 00:15:09,160 --> 00:15:11,800 Speaker 1: people didn't really see it coming until it was too late. 250 00:15:11,800 --> 00:15:14,120 Speaker 1: This might be signaled to people to make sure your 251 00:15:14,120 --> 00:15:16,560 Speaker 1: state's not doing this so that it doesn't become too well. 252 00:15:16,560 --> 00:15:20,920 Speaker 1: And these kinds are reformed jungle primaries and rank chase 253 00:15:21,080 --> 00:15:25,440 Speaker 1: choice voting, or in Alaska's case, both combine together. They 254 00:15:25,440 --> 00:15:32,520 Speaker 1: are often supported by self described moderate Republicans because those 255 00:15:32,640 --> 00:15:36,200 Speaker 1: moderates are frustrated that when they run in primaries against conservatives, 256 00:15:36,200 --> 00:15:38,800 Speaker 1: more often than not, they lose. So like, all right, 257 00:15:38,880 --> 00:15:41,760 Speaker 1: let's change the rules so that we don't lose. So 258 00:15:41,880 --> 00:15:48,200 Speaker 1: moderate Republicans sometimes support these reforms to prevent conservatives from winning. 259 00:15:48,480 --> 00:15:51,000 Speaker 1: But when the moderates are doing so, they're also rolling 260 00:15:51,000 --> 00:15:54,160 Speaker 1: the dice because they're increasing the chances that the Democrat 261 00:15:54,200 --> 00:15:57,560 Speaker 1: wins also, and they're willing to say, all right, in 262 00:15:57,680 --> 00:16:00,800 Speaker 1: order to stop the voters from electing a dam I'm conservative. 263 00:16:01,120 --> 00:16:03,400 Speaker 1: I'm willing to hand it over to the Democrats and 264 00:16:03,800 --> 00:16:10,800 Speaker 1: the nuts that. I don't think the voters want that outcome, 265 00:16:10,880 --> 00:16:13,080 Speaker 1: but I do think there's some politicians who are okay 266 00:16:13,080 --> 00:16:16,280 Speaker 1: with that outcome. Well, that's what happens when you're when 267 00:16:16,360 --> 00:16:18,920 Speaker 1: politicians don't have principles, then they're willing to hand it 268 00:16:18,960 --> 00:16:21,720 Speaker 1: over if they lose power themselves, they're they're willing to 269 00:16:21,760 --> 00:16:23,840 Speaker 1: hand it over to people with even fewer principles. Let's 270 00:16:23,840 --> 00:16:25,840 Speaker 1: do a question from Verdict plus because this is a 271 00:16:25,880 --> 00:16:27,920 Speaker 1: great question and I'm interested in your answer as well. 272 00:16:28,160 --> 00:16:31,400 Speaker 1: It's from Date Date go Forth, who says, what are 273 00:16:31,440 --> 00:16:34,560 Speaker 1: the chances that the new assault Rifle Band bill passes 274 00:16:34,600 --> 00:16:38,320 Speaker 1: the Senate? If it passes, would it be constitutional? What 275 00:16:38,400 --> 00:16:40,680 Speaker 1: would it mean for everyday Americans trying to buy guns 276 00:16:40,680 --> 00:16:42,680 Speaker 1: in the future. He says, I've been listening since day 277 00:16:42,680 --> 00:16:44,640 Speaker 1: one and love the podcast. Keep up the good work, 278 00:16:46,960 --> 00:16:50,920 Speaker 1: thank you. So the chances that the assault the so 279 00:16:51,000 --> 00:16:54,440 Speaker 1: called assault weapons band passes the Senate at least right now, 280 00:16:54,480 --> 00:16:59,000 Speaker 1: are essentially zero. It's not going to pass. The reason 281 00:16:59,080 --> 00:17:00,840 Speaker 1: it's not going to pass is as long as we 282 00:17:00,840 --> 00:17:03,120 Speaker 1: have the filibuster, it would take sixty votes to pass. 283 00:17:04,320 --> 00:17:07,760 Speaker 1: It's not going to get sixty votes. The last time 284 00:17:07,840 --> 00:17:13,679 Speaker 1: we voted on it was twenty thirteen. Dianne Feinstein was 285 00:17:13,800 --> 00:17:16,560 Speaker 1: carrying it at the time. It was her bill. It 286 00:17:16,600 --> 00:17:19,600 Speaker 1: was a Democratic Senate. There were a majority of Democrats 287 00:17:19,600 --> 00:17:22,440 Speaker 1: in the Senate. We voted on it and it only 288 00:17:22,480 --> 00:17:24,879 Speaker 1: got forty four votes on the floor of the Senate. 289 00:17:24,920 --> 00:17:27,160 Speaker 1: So even though Democrats had a majority on the floor, 290 00:17:27,200 --> 00:17:31,240 Speaker 1: it got zero Republicans and it didn't get all the Democrats. 291 00:17:31,280 --> 00:17:35,000 Speaker 1: There were several Democrats who voted against it. It does 292 00:17:35,080 --> 00:17:38,760 Speaker 1: speak volumes that in the wake of the horrific school 293 00:17:38,760 --> 00:17:42,040 Speaker 1: shooting in Vivaldi, the Democrats didn't even try to push it. 294 00:17:42,080 --> 00:17:44,560 Speaker 1: I think they recognize they don't have the votes. They 295 00:17:44,600 --> 00:17:46,280 Speaker 1: may they may not even have the votes in their 296 00:17:46,280 --> 00:17:48,960 Speaker 1: own conference, but there's no way they have the votes 297 00:17:49,000 --> 00:17:51,479 Speaker 1: on the floor of the Senate. It's why they they 298 00:17:51,520 --> 00:17:55,400 Speaker 1: pursued other gun control strategies instead of a so called 299 00:17:55,440 --> 00:18:00,119 Speaker 1: assault weapons ban. One of the reasons why it can 300 00:18:00,200 --> 00:18:02,119 Speaker 1: get a lot of support. So we had one in 301 00:18:02,160 --> 00:18:07,000 Speaker 1: effect for ten years, and it expired, and the Justice 302 00:18:07,040 --> 00:18:10,879 Speaker 1: Department studied it, you know, came out of Bill Clinton, 303 00:18:10,960 --> 00:18:13,520 Speaker 1: was in effect ten years, it expired, the Justice Department 304 00:18:13,520 --> 00:18:18,920 Speaker 1: studied it and concluded that it had no statistically significant 305 00:18:18,960 --> 00:18:22,240 Speaker 1: effect on violent crime, that it didn't actually reduce violent 306 00:18:22,280 --> 00:18:27,919 Speaker 1: crime in any measurable impact. And I'll tell you a 307 00:18:28,000 --> 00:18:31,880 Speaker 1: story about that. So twenty thirteen, on the Judiciary Committee, 308 00:18:31,920 --> 00:18:35,920 Speaker 1: we're having hearings and Diane Feinstein is pitching her bill 309 00:18:36,000 --> 00:18:38,560 Speaker 1: and I'm arguing against it. And I'm a brand new 310 00:18:38,640 --> 00:18:41,879 Speaker 1: baby freshman. I mean, I mean, I'm just there. And 311 00:18:41,960 --> 00:18:44,880 Speaker 1: in fact, when she and I are arguing, at one point, 312 00:18:44,920 --> 00:18:47,480 Speaker 1: she loses her mind and says, you know, I am 313 00:18:47,520 --> 00:18:49,879 Speaker 1: not a fifth grader, our sixth grader. I am not 314 00:18:49,920 --> 00:18:52,680 Speaker 1: a sixth grader. She gets very bad because I asked 315 00:18:52,720 --> 00:18:55,560 Speaker 1: her a substantive question about the Second Amendment, and apparently 316 00:18:55,560 --> 00:18:57,480 Speaker 1: in the Judiciary Committee, you're not supposed to do that 317 00:18:57,520 --> 00:19:04,040 Speaker 1: to another senator. And subsequently I was debating with Al 318 00:19:04,160 --> 00:19:09,880 Speaker 1: Frankin truly a charming soul, and and that was tongue 319 00:19:09,920 --> 00:19:13,439 Speaker 1: in cheek. If that did not come across Um, and 320 00:19:13,600 --> 00:19:16,480 Speaker 1: I pointed out that DJ, well, we'll see from the 321 00:19:16,520 --> 00:19:19,399 Speaker 1: Washington Post headlines after this whether or whether the humor 322 00:19:19,440 --> 00:19:23,800 Speaker 1: came across or not. Well. I pointed out that the 323 00:19:23,880 --> 00:19:27,400 Speaker 1: hearing that that DOJ had studied the assault weapons band 324 00:19:27,440 --> 00:19:29,639 Speaker 1: that was an effect for ten years, included it had 325 00:19:29,720 --> 00:19:35,520 Speaker 1: zero statistically significant effect on violent crime. And Al Franken 326 00:19:35,640 --> 00:19:38,159 Speaker 1: came and argued, that's not true, that's not true. It 327 00:19:38,240 --> 00:19:40,199 Speaker 1: had an enormous effect. I remember what he said, but 328 00:19:40,240 --> 00:19:42,199 Speaker 1: he was he was quite worked up, saying that what 329 00:19:42,240 --> 00:19:45,359 Speaker 1: I said was not right, and and I in turn 330 00:19:45,480 --> 00:19:49,280 Speaker 1: responded that you know, given this study, anyone who argues 331 00:19:49,320 --> 00:19:52,560 Speaker 1: that there is a measurable effect on violent crime is 332 00:19:52,600 --> 00:19:58,080 Speaker 1: engaged in sophistry. A couple hours later on the Senate floor, 333 00:19:58,119 --> 00:20:00,080 Speaker 1: I'm standing on the Senate floor and Al frank And 334 00:20:00,160 --> 00:20:04,119 Speaker 1: runs up to me and said, you accused me of 335 00:20:04,160 --> 00:20:08,840 Speaker 1: engaging in sophistry. I didn't know what that meant, but 336 00:20:08,960 --> 00:20:11,800 Speaker 1: I went and looked it up. And now I'm really mad. 337 00:20:13,119 --> 00:20:19,639 Speaker 1: And I got to admit I was genuinely speechless. I'd like, yeah, okay. 338 00:20:20,760 --> 00:20:28,040 Speaker 1: Um and and Al later wrote a book entitled Giant 339 00:20:28,240 --> 00:20:31,480 Speaker 1: of the Senate. Um. I joked at the time that 340 00:20:31,640 --> 00:20:33,640 Speaker 1: it was a perfect title. It was only missing one 341 00:20:33,680 --> 00:20:39,320 Speaker 1: word um. But he had an entire chapter in his 342 00:20:39,440 --> 00:20:45,040 Speaker 1: book devoted to me that was called sophistry. So so 343 00:20:45,160 --> 00:20:49,560 Speaker 1: it uh. I found it quite amusing that for lefties, 344 00:20:49,600 --> 00:20:53,399 Speaker 1: they seemed to to to believe that if they his 345 00:20:53,440 --> 00:20:55,719 Speaker 1: whole book tour, he basically just did a stand up 346 00:20:55,800 --> 00:20:59,600 Speaker 1: routine insulting me, which apparently works to sell books to 347 00:20:59,640 --> 00:21:03,040 Speaker 1: liberal Democrats like like like it is. I think he 348 00:21:03,480 --> 00:21:05,680 Speaker 1: thought it was a good way to sell books. Well, 349 00:21:05,720 --> 00:21:07,280 Speaker 1: I mean, in a sense, you almost have to respect 350 00:21:07,400 --> 00:21:09,320 Speaker 1: him for admitting that he didn't know what the word meant. 351 00:21:09,359 --> 00:21:12,480 Speaker 1: That's really hilarious. But it's also hilarious to see liberal 352 00:21:12,520 --> 00:21:16,040 Speaker 1: democrats who are anti free market taking advantage of capitalism 353 00:21:16,280 --> 00:21:18,720 Speaker 1: to sell books based on their insults against you. You 354 00:21:18,800 --> 00:21:21,760 Speaker 1: gotta love the whole thing. One last question. So you 355 00:21:21,800 --> 00:21:24,080 Speaker 1: say that the assault rifle band has very little chance 356 00:21:24,119 --> 00:21:26,200 Speaker 1: of passing in the time, What about the gay marriage bill? 357 00:21:26,240 --> 00:21:32,080 Speaker 1: What are its chances? I don't know. That is actually 358 00:21:32,119 --> 00:21:36,000 Speaker 1: a good question. We I think the odds are good. 359 00:21:36,000 --> 00:21:38,040 Speaker 1: We're going to vote on the next month. Schumer said 360 00:21:38,080 --> 00:21:39,280 Speaker 1: he's going to bring it up for a vote. He 361 00:21:39,280 --> 00:21:41,199 Speaker 1: hasn't done it yet. It could be as soon as 362 00:21:41,240 --> 00:21:43,080 Speaker 1: next week. He hasn't told us what we're voting on 363 00:21:43,160 --> 00:21:48,080 Speaker 1: next then Schumer controls the floor. For it to pass, 364 00:21:48,200 --> 00:21:52,120 Speaker 1: they've got to hold all the Democrats, and they've got 365 00:21:52,119 --> 00:21:58,080 Speaker 1: to get ten Republicans. Several Republicans have publicly said that 366 00:21:58,160 --> 00:22:02,200 Speaker 1: they would vote for the bill to get to ten. 367 00:22:02,320 --> 00:22:06,119 Speaker 1: I can tell you we are having vigorous arguments in 368 00:22:06,160 --> 00:22:11,000 Speaker 1: the conference about it. I and several others are pushing 369 00:22:11,119 --> 00:22:14,439 Speaker 1: for an amendment to the bill that would be a 370 00:22:14,520 --> 00:22:20,360 Speaker 1: strong protection of religious liberty because the bill has written 371 00:22:20,560 --> 00:22:26,480 Speaker 1: would have enormously harmful consequences for religious liberty. It would 372 00:22:26,520 --> 00:22:31,399 Speaker 1: result in five oh one C three tech status being 373 00:22:31,440 --> 00:22:37,960 Speaker 1: denied to universities that embrace a biblical definition of marriage, 374 00:22:38,320 --> 00:22:42,159 Speaker 1: to churches that teach a biblical definition of marriage, to 375 00:22:43,000 --> 00:22:47,920 Speaker 1: charities that follow a biblical definition of marriage. This bill 376 00:22:47,960 --> 00:22:53,919 Speaker 1: without a religious liberty protection would have massive consequences across 377 00:22:54,080 --> 00:22:59,600 Speaker 1: our country, weaponizing the Biden administration to go and target 378 00:23:01,000 --> 00:23:07,800 Speaker 1: universities K through twelve schools, social service organizations, churches and 379 00:23:08,040 --> 00:23:11,240 Speaker 1: strip them all of their taxics. A status that is 380 00:23:11,680 --> 00:23:16,280 Speaker 1: enormously consequential. I don't know if we'll succeed in getting 381 00:23:16,320 --> 00:23:18,800 Speaker 1: the vote on that amendment, and I don't know how 382 00:23:18,840 --> 00:23:22,920 Speaker 1: the vote will shake out. But I'm a no regardless, 383 00:23:24,119 --> 00:23:30,280 Speaker 1: But this what its prospects of success are on the 384 00:23:30,320 --> 00:23:34,240 Speaker 1: Senate floor. I hope it doesn't pass, but I don't 385 00:23:34,280 --> 00:23:37,720 Speaker 1: know what will happen. And shame on any Republican who 386 00:23:37,720 --> 00:23:40,040 Speaker 1: claims to be for limited government but would support a 387 00:23:40,040 --> 00:23:43,359 Speaker 1: bill that targets people of faith. I can tell you 388 00:23:43,520 --> 00:23:46,760 Speaker 1: I'm arguing vociferously to my colleagues. Look, I get some 389 00:23:46,840 --> 00:23:50,199 Speaker 1: of you, you know or in purple states, and you 390 00:23:50,280 --> 00:23:54,479 Speaker 1: want to show how you know touchy feely, and you 391 00:23:54,520 --> 00:23:57,919 Speaker 1: are okay, great, put out a statement, but don't vote 392 00:23:57,920 --> 00:24:00,680 Speaker 1: for a bill that will be used as a weapon 393 00:24:01,320 --> 00:24:06,879 Speaker 1: to target and persecute churches and universities and religious schools 394 00:24:06,920 --> 00:24:12,320 Speaker 1: and Catholic charities. The harm from this bill would be massive. 395 00:24:12,760 --> 00:24:14,919 Speaker 1: It's it's a shame to see it. It really is 396 00:24:14,920 --> 00:24:17,320 Speaker 1: sad to see it. And the fact that Schumer's not 397 00:24:17,359 --> 00:24:18,760 Speaker 1: telling you when you're going to vote on it, I 398 00:24:18,800 --> 00:24:21,199 Speaker 1: think tells us what we need to know to the 399 00:24:21,280 --> 00:24:24,240 Speaker 1: verdict plus community. This is the second cloak room in 400 00:24:24,240 --> 00:24:26,040 Speaker 1: a row that we've used or that I've chosen to 401 00:24:26,119 --> 00:24:28,240 Speaker 1: use your topics. We did the Convention of the States 402 00:24:28,280 --> 00:24:30,560 Speaker 1: and then we did ranked choice voting, so keep those 403 00:24:30,600 --> 00:24:32,680 Speaker 1: ideas coming. I love to hear what you guys care about, 404 00:24:32,840 --> 00:24:35,880 Speaker 1: what you're thinking about, what questions you have. I'm Louise Wheeler. 405 00:24:36,119 --> 00:24:37,680 Speaker 1: This is the cloakroom on Verdict plus.