Speaker 1: Now from our nation's capital. This is Bloomberg Sound On.
Speaker 1: This is a hopeful day, but as I've seen many
Speaker 1: other pro life advocates point out, this is not the ends.
Speaker 1: They're not going to do this to America. There's more
Speaker 1: of us than of Bloomberg sound On Politics, policy and
Speaker 1: perspective from DC's top name. It's very much every one
Speaker 1: of our worst fears realized. The issues of gay marriage,
Speaker 1: of contraceptions are all built top of this idea. Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Sound On with Joe Matthew on Bloomberg Radio Washington is
Speaker 1: Rocks by the leak. Welcome to the fastest hour in politics.
Speaker 1: The story on a looming decision on Roe v. Wade
Speaker 1: has already evolved in its first twenty four hours. We'll
Speaker 1: have the latest for you with reactions from the White
Speaker 1: House and Capitol Hill, and new reporting from Bloomberg Supreme
Speaker 1: Court reporter Greg Store. We'll consider what this means for
Speaker 1: the mid terms, with Harvard pollster John della Volpe joining
Speaker 1: us later from the Milk and Conference and the panel. Today,
Speaker 1: they're back Bloomberg Politics contributors Jeanie Chanzano and Rick Davis
Speaker 1: back together for the hour. Democratic leaders in Washington are
Speaker 1: vowing a legislative answer to what looks like an impending
Speaker 1: Supreme Court decision in validating Row versus Way. Now, we've
Speaker 1: been talking about this since just before we went to
Speaker 1: bed last night. A lot of people woke up to
Speaker 1: it this morning. Reactions have come from every quarter, and
Speaker 1: we're going to cover this for you here before we
Speaker 1: seek a bit of analysis and better understand what's going
Speaker 1: on and what might happen. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer
Speaker 1: spoke this morning from the Senate floor. Here he is
Speaker 1: now that the Court is poised to strike down Row,
Speaker 1: it is my intention for the Senate to hold a
Speaker 1: vote on legislation to codify the right to an abortion
Speaker 1: in law, in line with a White House statement today
Speaker 1: President Biden writing, we will need more pro choice senators
Speaker 1: and a pro choice majority in the House to adopt
Speaker 1: legislation that codifies Row, which I will work to pass
Speaker 1: and sign into law. He spoke more from the tarmac
Speaker 1: at Joint Base Andrews. It was a little bit noisy.
Speaker 1: He's outdoors on his way to Alabama earlier today, saying
Speaker 1: the President here saying this could have much wider implications
Speaker 1: here he is it basically says all the decisions are
Speaker 1: remade your private life, who you're married, whether or not
Speaker 1: you decide to conceive a child or not, whether or
Speaker 1: not you can have an abortion, a range of other decisions,
Speaker 1: whether or not how you raise your child. What is
Speaker 1: this to uh And does this mean that in Florida
Speaker 1: they can decide they're going to pass a law saying
Speaker 1: that same sex marriage is not permissible. It's against the
Speaker 1: law in Florida. So there's a whole it's it's a
Speaker 1: fundamental shift in American Jews persis. We heard from Mitch
Speaker 1: McConnell as well, of course, the Senate Minority leader from
Speaker 1: the Republican side, not talking about the contents of the leak,
Speaker 1: but the leak itself. Here he is this laws auction
Speaker 1: should be investigated, unpunished to the fullest. It's not possible
Speaker 1: the fullest. It's not possible. I'm certain the Chief Justice
Speaker 1: will seek to get to the bottom of this. If
Speaker 1: a crime was committed, the Department of Justice must pursue
Speaker 1: it completely. And we should note the Chief Justice Roberts
Speaker 1: says he's already directed the Marshal of the Court to
Speaker 1: launch an investigation into the source of the league. I
Speaker 1: do wonder if we will ever find out it is
Speaker 1: a relatively small circle here of folks who could have
Speaker 1: done this, who had access to the document pages, the
Speaker 1: pdf sitting right there for the world to see now.
Speaker 1: And that is where we begin with Greg store Bloomberg,
Speaker 1: Supreme Court reporter, the best there is and lucky to
Speaker 1: have him today. Greg. The Court has authenticated this document.
Speaker 1: It's expected to issue a ruling by July. Do we
Speaker 1: have any reason to believe that any justice here, any
Speaker 1: conservative justice, or any for that matter, we change their
Speaker 1: vote on such a serious matter. It's not like they
Speaker 1: just started thinking about it. Well, if there hadn't been
Speaker 1: the leak. Uh, certainly there's a possibility that a justice
Speaker 1: could change his or her mind. That happens all the time.
Speaker 1: And keep in mind this this documents actually a couple
Speaker 1: of months old. It was dated Sary of the tenth.
Speaker 1: It was a first draft. So it's even possible that
Speaker 1: somebody has had already had misgivings about what they've read here. Um.
Speaker 1: And then the next question is, well, now that it's
Speaker 1: leaked out, does that make it more or less likely
Speaker 1: that somebody might shift positions? And you know, there's a
Speaker 1: pretty good argument that this might kind of lock people
Speaker 1: into into position where they were because they don't want
Speaker 1: to look like they have they have caved to the
Speaker 1: pressure that everybody is feeling right now. Justice Roberts went
Speaker 1: out of his way to statements to credit the workforce
Speaker 1: at the Court, describing them as intensely loyal to the
Speaker 1: institution and dedicated to the rule of law. I'm sure
Speaker 1: you read this this morning, Gregg. You went on to
Speaker 1: call this a singular and egregious breach of trust. What
Speaker 1: is this doing inside the court knowing they have a
Speaker 1: leaker amongst them? Well, the Chief Justice has to be
Speaker 1: torn in a in a major way. He's both trying
Speaker 1: to protect the institutional integrity of the Court and to
Speaker 1: say that, um, you know, the vast majority of people
Speaker 1: don't do stuff like this, and yet there is this,
Speaker 1: if he put it, egregious breach of trust. Um, you know,
Speaker 1: there have been a number of of much smaller leaks
Speaker 1: in recent years. The Court has become leakier, uh, And
Speaker 1: there are plenty of signs that relationships within the quarter
Speaker 1: are becoming more fractious. And this cannot help things here
Speaker 1: and and undoubtedly within the Court. There's there are a
Speaker 1: lot of ill feelings about what has happened here and
Speaker 1: probably a lot of questions. Probably the justices are very
Speaker 1: much wondering where this came from. Trust shaking. We have
Speaker 1: no reason to believe that this investigation will be made
Speaker 1: public anytime soon, right, I mean, how would this actually
Speaker 1: be gone about? Well, we're really an uncharted territory here.
Speaker 1: The Marshal will look in into it. I would imagine
Speaker 1: that if if they come to a conclusion, we will
Speaker 1: get some information. Uh. But but I'm really just speculating
Speaker 1: because it's not like you or I have ever seen
Speaker 1: anything like this before, So there's not really a roadmap
Speaker 1: we can expect the court to follow. What a day, Gregg.
Speaker 1: Great to have you with us, Gregg Store. We couldn't
Speaker 1: do this without them, Bloomberg Supreme Court reporter check your
Speaker 1: terminal for his byline. Over the course of this story,
Speaker 1: and we bring in the panel with Bloomberg Politics contributors
Speaker 1: Jeanie Chanzano and Rick Davis with us on a very
Speaker 1: important day here, Jeanie. Senator Schumer and President Biden, who
Speaker 1: we just both heard from our talking about legislation today
Speaker 1: to codify the right to an abortion. But they don't
Speaker 1: have the votes for that in the Senate, do they
Speaker 1: They do not. But we heard Senator Schumer say today
Speaker 1: that he wants all Senators to go on the record
Speaker 1: having to vote, you know, for he hopes, or against
Speaker 1: that codification. And I think he is right about that politically,
Speaker 1: because this is a right. I can't tell you how
Speaker 1: many young women I spoke to on campus today and
Speaker 1: these are not, you know, all liberal because they're they're
Speaker 1: a whole range of political, you know, ideologies. And even
Speaker 1: the tone of this draft granted it's a draft decision,
Speaker 1: and the lack of sort of respect for how embedded
Speaker 1: this right is in the lives and the bodies of
Speaker 1: women is really troubling to a lot of people. And
Speaker 1: so I think Senator Schumer and others on Capitol Hill
Speaker 1: are saying, we want you to go and say that
Speaker 1: you are going to take this right away from people
Speaker 1: after half a century. Is that what this comes down to,
Speaker 1: rick that the Democrats don't really have a lot of
Speaker 1: options here. Oh, this is really just rhetoric at this point.
Speaker 1: They've got to try to make the best they can
Speaker 1: of it. That everyone was caught by surprise but Democrats
Speaker 1: very much in a defensive posture on this issue right now.
Speaker 1: They have to play catch up. They have not had
Speaker 1: this as a focal point of their parties push with
Speaker 1: women voters, especially for or quite some time, so all
Speaker 1: those kinds of political alliances and organizations need to on
Speaker 1: their side really get started. It is interesting that Republicans,
Speaker 1: certainly in the Senate, haven't used this as an opportunity
Speaker 1: to say victory for pro life forces. Instead, they are
Speaker 1: keen to investigate the source of the leak, Which what
Speaker 1: do I think that quoters are going to be uh
Speaker 1: interested in? Well, I think that they they really do believe,
Speaker 1: you know, that the court um should have been able
Speaker 1: to put this out on their own time, and I
Speaker 1: think they believe that it would have been better later
Speaker 1: on when there weren't some of these active primaries going
Speaker 1: on that would distract from uh, frankly, some of the
Speaker 1: problems of the of the Biden administration they're having on
Speaker 1: economic issues. So I I just think it was not
Speaker 1: what Republicans wanted at the time that it was released.
Speaker 1: So I think that that ultimately is going to be
Speaker 1: one of the one of the issues for Republicans. A
Speaker 1: contrasting responses really have been something here, Genie with as
Speaker 1: as we've heard clearly in not only what we're describing,
Speaker 1: but in the sound that we played for you. And
Speaker 1: this started with, you know, the hot takes last night
Speaker 1: on Twitter from lawmakers and a lot of other people,
Speaker 1: Liberals outraged talking specifically about the impact on lives on policy,
Speaker 1: Republicans outraged, calling it an attack on the independence of
Speaker 1: the court. Is that where we're going from here? I
Speaker 1: think so, And you know that, you know, it's fascinating
Speaker 1: because you read Aledo's draft decision and the crowds outside
Speaker 1: the court and the people protesting and the noise on Twitter.
Speaker 1: That's exactly the reason he says that the Court needs
Speaker 1: to stay out of this, that it's too hot, The
Speaker 1: Court has no role in this, handed over to the
Speaker 1: state legislators, handed over to Congress. So in some way,
Speaker 1: all of the protesting underscores exactly what he is trying
Speaker 1: to say. And you know, we heard it today, people
Speaker 1: like Elizabeth Warren, you know, sounded more emotion nal and
Speaker 1: angry probably than we've ever heard her before. And I
Speaker 1: would just add to what Rick said, I think the
Speaker 1: reason Republicans are focusing on who leaked is because they
Speaker 1: don't know the impact this is going to have in
Speaker 1: the mid term. They are set to have a bang
Speaker 1: up year. They are set to take the Senate, take
Speaker 1: the House, do really well, and now a monkey wrench
Speaker 1: has been thrown into it in the in the form
Speaker 1: of this issue of abortion. And if this cost them
Speaker 1: numbers and even cost them one or both houses, that's
Speaker 1: something they just you know, it would be stunning at
Speaker 1: this point because they're set to do well well, let's
Speaker 1: get to that rick. The conventional wisdom right now is
Speaker 1: that this mobilizes Democrats. That certainly increases Democratic turnout, a
Speaker 1: majority turnout in an off year. But does this does
Speaker 1: this change the calculus for this campaign cycle? Sure? Um uh.
Speaker 1: It's been well reported that Democratic party enthusiasm you know,
Speaker 1: people willing to vote, has been significantly lower than Republicans
Speaker 1: this cycle. Part of the reason why people think there's
Speaker 1: gonna be so much of a red wave, especially in
Speaker 1: the in the House of Representatives. That being said, um uh,
Speaker 1: this throws a monkey wrench into Republicans ability to potentially
Speaker 1: get those women, suburban voters that have been coming back
Speaker 1: to the fold and some of these elections we've had lately. Uh,
Speaker 1: you know, the governor young in election in Virginia demonstrated that.
Speaker 1: And so anything that that that diminishes the number of
Speaker 1: women voters for Republican caucuses creates danger for Republican candidates
Speaker 1: in America. And we have to have almost as many
Speaker 1: women as men, and uh and and or at least
Speaker 1: offset by the same almoss and and without that, um,
Speaker 1: some of these races just aren't going to be able
Speaker 1: to get to the finish line. Rick and Guinie are
Speaker 1: with us here on the Tuesday edition, a special edition
Speaker 1: to sound on as we focus specifically on this story
Speaker 1: for the hour, the fastest hour in politics, This is Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: Your question to me was, did I debate the contents
Speaker 1: of Roe versus Way, the outcome and Rove as his way?
Speaker 1: Do I have this day and opinion a personal opinion
Speaker 1: on the outcome and Row versus Way? And my answer
Speaker 1: to you is that I do not. Well. Do I
Speaker 1: understand that you may overrule it or you may sustain it.
Speaker 1: I have no agenda. Can you tell me whether Roe
Speaker 1: was decided correctly? Center Again, I would tell you that
Speaker 1: Roe versus Wade decided as a President, United States Supreme Court.
Speaker 1: It has been reaffirmed. The reliance interests considerations are important
Speaker 1: there and all of the other factors that go into
Speaker 1: analyzing precedent that have to be considered. It is a
Speaker 1: precedent of the United States Supreme Court. Have your views
Speaker 1: on whether Row is settled precedent or could be overturned?
Speaker 1: And it has your views changed since you were in
Speaker 1: the Bush White House Centator, I said that it's settled
Speaker 1: as a precedent of the Supreme Court entitled the respect
Speaker 1: under principles of starry decisives. One of the important things
Speaker 1: to keep in mind about Roe v. Wade is that
Speaker 1: it has been reaffirmed many times over the past forty
Speaker 1: five years. Do you agree with Justice galleys view that
Speaker 1: Row was wrongly decided? So, Senator, I do want to
Speaker 1: be forthright and answer every question so far as I can.
Speaker 1: I think on that question, you know, I'm going to
Speaker 1: invoke Justice Kagan's description, which I think is perfectly put
Speaker 1: when she was in her confirmation hearing, she said that
Speaker 1: she was not going to grade precedent or give it
Speaker 1: a thumbs up or thumbs down. And I think in
Speaker 1: an area where precedent continues to be pressed and litigated,
Speaker 1: as is true of Casey, it would be particularly um,
Speaker 1: it would actually be wrong, in a violation of the
Speaker 1: canons for me to do that as a sitting judge.
Speaker 1: Justices Thomas, Gorset, Kavanaugh, and Barrett in that order responding
Speaker 1: and not always answering questions about Roe versus Weight in
Speaker 1: their confirmation hearings. It's important to hear their words right
Speaker 1: on a day when well, some people are accusing them
Speaker 1: of lying or misleading the Senate on this issue. There's
Speaker 1: nowhere else you're gonna hear that than right here today
Speaker 1: on sound on here' Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer today
Speaker 1: on the floor. Several of these conservative justices, who are
Speaker 1: in no way accountable to the American people, have lied
Speaker 1: to the U. S. Senate, ripped up the Constitution, and
Speaker 1: defiled both precedent and the Supreme Court's reputation. Wow, and
Speaker 1: so we bring that back the panel for their take
Speaker 1: on this. Bloomberg Politics contributors Jeanie Chanzano and Rick Davis Rick,
Speaker 1: what what are we gonna do? Hold the justices and
Speaker 1: contempt of Congress? Well, I don't think you can hold
Speaker 1: them in contempt A Congress. I think that they all
Speaker 1: had the back door wide open on these questions as
Speaker 1: they were going through confirmation. And and again it just
Speaker 1: shows you that part of that confirmation process is not
Speaker 1: necessarily indicative to what a justice is going to do
Speaker 1: when he gets on the bench and when he or
Speaker 1: she gets on the bench. So we've had lots of
Speaker 1: justices change their minds based on uh, lessons and experience
Speaker 1: they gain on the bench from when they were appointed. So, uh,
Speaker 1: that's just a fact of life. Lifetime appointments liberate people. Uh,
Speaker 1: And I would say you have a very liberated Supreme
Speaker 1: Court these days. Well you know, I'm I'm kidding about
Speaker 1: the content part here, Jeanie, But like, why are we
Speaker 1: going here right now? Why pursue this narrative? Where does
Speaker 1: that indicate how few options? Uh, the Democratic majority has
Speaker 1: at the moment. You know, you just listened to that
Speaker 1: montage you just played, and it's quite stunning. These are
Speaker 1: people who are incredibly well educated. They have they are
Speaker 1: law professors, they are judges, they are attorneys at the
Speaker 1: highest level. The idea that they have no opinion on
Speaker 1: Row is absolutely absurd. Everybody as an opinion on Row,
Speaker 1: and you don't need to go to law school to
Speaker 1: have one. And I think I have to say give
Speaker 1: Amy Coney Barrett credit. She had the best non response
Speaker 1: following Kagan, which is I'm not going to give it
Speaker 1: a thumbs up or thumbs down. The problem here is
Speaker 1: not these people, necessarily, it's the process. When you have
Speaker 1: a process where you tell people we're going to parade
Speaker 1: you before the Senate. If you dare to answer the
Speaker 1: question the way that you actually think you won't get
Speaker 1: the job. Most people aren't gonna give you the answer,
Speaker 1: uh that that you want, and so they're not going
Speaker 1: to give you the honest answer. They're going to bow out.
Speaker 1: Then they don't have a response. And that's what's happened. Um,
Speaker 1: you know, ever since people realized what happened to Robert
Speaker 1: Bourke because he was honest and he didn't get the job.
Speaker 1: So the process is broken, it doesn't work, and the
Speaker 1: American people are suffering for it. So does this change
Speaker 1: the whole conversation in future hearings, future confirmation hearings, Rick,
Speaker 1: and we never know when we're gonna get one. Does
Speaker 1: it change the whole conversation around the Starry decisive the
Speaker 1: idea of precedent, Why does that even matter? Then? I think, uh,
Speaker 1: we're really confusing what's happening today in the Supreme Court
Speaker 1: around abortion and any process that has anything to do
Speaker 1: with confirmation. This is not a confirmation issue. The members
Speaker 1: of the Congress, member the Senate can ask all the
Speaker 1: hard questions they want on any time they want it,
Speaker 1: and ultimately they're an advice and consent. And anybody who
Speaker 1: thought these justices who uh primarily were appointed by George
Speaker 1: Bush and Donald Trump, we're not going to take on
Speaker 1: abortion as an issue, whether it was a full uh
Speaker 1: takedown of brov. Wade or or some tweak that allowed
Speaker 1: states to decide themselves. Uh, And we still don't know
Speaker 1: that for certain uh would be considered incredibly politically night,
Speaker 1: which is why Democrats were so anxious to try and
Speaker 1: look at court packing as an option. It wasn't because
Speaker 1: they believed anything they were told in in confirmation hearing.
Speaker 1: It was because they knew that this court was going
Speaker 1: to be active on these issues. And the minute this
Speaker 1: court took up this case, you knew Row was in danger.
Speaker 1: And talking about with Rick and Jennie pulled that thought
Speaker 1: Rick Davis. President Biden already struggling with young voters. What
Speaker 1: effect might this have? Now we'll look at new research
Speaker 1: from the Harvard Kennedy School coming up. I'm Joe Matthew.
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg. We're fascinated by poles around here, of
Speaker 1: course as we inch toward November, but on a day
Speaker 1: like this they take on new meaning. That's why it's
Speaker 1: a pleasure to bring in John Della Volpi, director of
Speaker 1: polling at the Harvard Kennedy School's Institute of Politics, author
Speaker 1: of the book Fight How gen Z is channeling their
Speaker 1: fear and passion to save America's joining us from the
Speaker 1: milk and conference right now as the Harvard uh Kennedy
Speaker 1: School Institute of Politics, that with a massive piece of
Speaker 1: research called simply the Harvard Youth Poll. It's for this
Speaker 1: season and it's the forty three edition. John, it's great
Speaker 1: to have you with us year before we dig into
Speaker 1: what you were seeing here in this research. Does a
Speaker 1: headline like today with regard to the Supreme Court in
Speaker 1: Roe v. Wade move opinions or move people historically to
Speaker 1: become single issue voters in a campaign season like this,
Speaker 1: I think it does. Gentle Again, thanks for having me.
Speaker 1: What we've found specifically in this research over the last
Speaker 1: couple of decades is the younger people. But I think
Speaker 1: it's fair to say that older Americans as well vote
Speaker 1: when they can see a tangible difference of engagements. And
Speaker 1: sometimes that's a positive, sometimes that's a negative. And what
Speaker 1: we've seen so far over the last you know, twelve hours,
Speaker 1: twenty four hours around this document from the Supreme Court
Speaker 1: is that is that this is likely to be highly
Speaker 1: motivational for specifically young people who are unsure whether or
Speaker 1: not they're going to participate because um, they can now
Speaker 1: see in very tangible ways the difference than engagement mix,
Speaker 1: and that I think will be a significant driver to
Speaker 1: increase participation frankly across um all all all partisan groups
Speaker 1: in November. Well, that's important. It would run counter to
Speaker 1: some of the trends that you had been seeing. We're
Speaker 1: talking eighteen to twenty nine year olds, John, and in
Speaker 1: your poll had found that they believe that political involvement
Speaker 1: rarely has tangible results. That was up to thirty six
Speaker 1: percent they think their vote does not make a difference
Speaker 1: to your to your point just now up to only
Speaker 1: approve of the job President Biden is doing all these
Speaker 1: then could really turn on this news today is what
Speaker 1: you're seeing, I think absolutely could really add some energy
Speaker 1: specifically to the one of the places where up until
Speaker 1: this point, President Biden has been frankly under under performing.
Speaker 1: You know, UM, we we had we have not seen
Speaker 1: UM specifically of the last six months, the traditional generation
Speaker 1: gap UM that we would expect from from democratic office holder,
Speaker 1: which means that here she typically receives stronger marks with
Speaker 1: the younger folks, folks and older folks here, you know,
Speaker 1: present Bind's approval have been has been relatively flat across
Speaker 1: all groups. But Joe, let's also remember that that UM
Speaker 1: is not what people are voting for in Neuvember. People
Speaker 1: November voting for a Democrat versus Republican and oftentimes, you know,
Speaker 1: as we could see and also in this and other research, UM,
Speaker 1: the differences are stark between how they rate the present
Speaker 1: today versus how they rate a Democrat versus Republican November
Speaker 1: approval though, is that's pretty rough. That could be any
Speaker 1: old pole that the President is kind of looking at,
Speaker 1: scratching his ed saying, God, I brought you infrastructure, I
Speaker 1: got you out of COVID, what else do you want?
Speaker 1: Here I realized we don't have build back better yet.
Speaker 1: But what is it actually among young people who feel
Speaker 1: like their vision has not been fulfilled? Their the promises
Speaker 1: you hear in many cases that that that Joe Biden
Speaker 1: made on the campaign trail have not been fulfilled. Is
Speaker 1: that what you're hearing. It's a lot of I think
Speaker 1: expectations Joe and and also and also communication generally. Yeah,
Speaker 1: our students wrote a series of questions to follow up
Speaker 1: and the general sense I'd say is that they view
Speaker 1: younger people view the president as being relatively ineffective. You
Speaker 1: know that that's uh, that's bad news. The good news
Speaker 1: for for for for for Biden is that they don't
Speaker 1: necessarie really see it in relation to UM misunder misalignment
Speaker 1: on values, or something that's more systemic. You know. I
Speaker 1: think if if the administration can prove that they're making
Speaker 1: progress on the issues that you know, people care about,
Speaker 1: then I think there's an opportunity to turn this around.
Speaker 1: This is not unfamiliar place to folks in the Biden world.
Speaker 1: This is where he was at the end of primary
Speaker 1: and we know that UM the results were completely different
Speaker 1: by November, where almost two thirds of people under the
Speaker 1: age of thirty voted for I can remember conducting what
Speaker 1: was build at one point as an exit interview with
Speaker 1: Joe Biden and New Hampshire John which tells you a lot.
Speaker 1: As he headed for South Carolina. You've found overall forty
Speaker 1: of Americans under thirty prefer Democrats maintain control of Congress.
Speaker 1: Is that number historically low for young people? Well, it is, well,
Speaker 1: you know, it's historic. It's it's low relative to two
Speaker 1: thousand eighteen for sure. So and I think that's the
Speaker 1: that's the appropriate um uh, you know, election to to
Speaker 1: to to compare it with But among those young people
Speaker 1: who are likely to vote, you know, Democrats move up
Speaker 1: to fifty five per cents. So so there is a
Speaker 1: gap between the likely voters and all young Americans. But
Speaker 1: um still, I think that you know, for for the
Speaker 1: Democratic how for the for Democrats to to have an
Speaker 1: opportunity to kind of maintain their their slim holding the House,
Speaker 1: that the number needs to start with a six, you know,
Speaker 1: in the next poll that we conduct, which will be
Speaker 1: in the fall. Now are you constantly rolling here? You've
Speaker 1: already heard from some people you said in the last
Speaker 1: twenty four hours. Yeah, where We're constantly whether it's through
Speaker 1: the quantitative work we do at the Institute of Politics
Speaker 1: or through focus groups for all the conversations you know,
Speaker 1: and and and looking at other data. Of course, we
Speaker 1: are constantly in touch with younger people. The next official
Speaker 1: Harvard Youth Poll forty four will be out, um, you know,
Speaker 1: in the two week period before the next midterm got it.
Speaker 1: I'm I'm deeply curious to see what those numbers are,
Speaker 1: as I'm sure you are as well. Uh. The poll
Speaker 1: two thousand, twenty four eighteen to twenty nine year olds,
Speaker 1: organized with undergrads from the Harvard Public Opinion Projects, super
Speaker 1: supervised by this man right here, John Della Vulpi. John,
Speaker 1: it's really great to talk to you again. We thank
Speaker 1: you for your insights joining us live from the milk
Speaker 1: In Conference. Been a busy place here and glad we
Speaker 1: could make that happen. We'll reassemble the panel next. Rick
Speaker 1: and Genie weigh in on what we just heard as
Speaker 1: we also consider this idea of dropping the filibuster once again,
Speaker 1: but waits, they don't have the votes. I thought we'll
Speaker 1: get into that with the panel next. On Sound On,
Speaker 1: I'm Joe Matthew This is Bloomberg. You're listening to Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: You sound on with Joe Matthew on Bloomberg Radio. The
Speaker 1: headline on the terminal Ocastio Cortes Sanders ripped Cinema on
Speaker 1: filibuster over abortion. Man, it's getting ugly already here as
Speaker 1: Representative Alexandria Costio Cortes and Senator Bernie Sanders reading from
Speaker 1: the terminal for you here call on Democrats to challenge
Speaker 1: one of their own, Senator Kirsten Cinema when she's up
Speaker 1: for re election. This is not a mid term story
Speaker 1: because of yes, her resistance to ending the filibuster. This
Speaker 1: has been a big part of the conversation here today
Speaker 1: the Coastio Cortes tweeting quote, we could protect Row tomorrow,
Speaker 1: but Cinema refuses to act on the filibuster. Until that changes,
Speaker 1: she can take a seat talking about women's access to healthcare.
Speaker 1: Hold everyone contributing to this disaster accountable, GOP and them
Speaker 1: obstructionists included. She should be primaried. This idea of dropping
Speaker 1: the filibuster came up in the White House Press gaggle today.
Speaker 1: I call it that because they were on Air Force
Speaker 1: one on their way to Alabama Press Secretary Jensaki speaking
Speaker 1: on Air Force one. Here she is. There has been
Speaker 1: a vote on this. It failed. It did not have
Speaker 1: even fifty votes, which means even if the filibuster were overturned,
Speaker 1: there would have not have been enough votes to get
Speaker 1: this passed. Okay, reality check as we reassemble the panel,
Speaker 1: Rick Davis, Jennie Chanzano, Bloomberg Politics contributors. That is the truth, Rick, Right,
Speaker 1: when this comes down to math, what are we actually
Speaker 1: talking about here? Yeah, the Democrats can't pass a fixed
Speaker 1: to row because they don't have the votes and the
Speaker 1: Democratic caucus to do that. And they got to go
Speaker 1: find a bunch of new Democrats who have an opinion
Speaker 1: on uh, pro life that our pro choice that is
Speaker 1: gonna match what Ocasio Cortes is talking about. I mean
Speaker 1: to dump on cinema like that. Who isn't the course
Speaker 1: of their problem right now is UH is really unexplainable
Speaker 1: other than the fact that she's got a tough re
Speaker 1: election fight and that may explain her anger today. Well
Speaker 1: speak to that for a minute, Rick, You know Arizona
Speaker 1: politics as well as anybody. Uh, how much of a
Speaker 1: threat could this be to Kirson Cinema's career. Oh, I
Speaker 1: don't think. I don't think there is a threat to
Speaker 1: Kirston Cinema's career right now. I mean, you think about
Speaker 1: all the things that are gonna happen between now in
Speaker 1: four when she's going to seek reelection. There's already Democrats
Speaker 1: line up to to run against her in the state
Speaker 1: because of her position on not willing to increase taxes.
Speaker 1: I would say that is a much more salient issue
Speaker 1: in in Arizona for her than it is against her
Speaker 1: when she seeks reelection. She's never budged this uh filibuster
Speaker 1: deal here, Genie, I can't imagine that this would change
Speaker 1: her mind. But the daggers are coming out here. That's
Speaker 1: not always a good look. It's not And you know,
Speaker 1: I was very glad. Jen psaki Um was, you know,
Speaker 1: very cogent and sober about this. The reality is, Number one,
Speaker 1: they don't have the votes, as Rick said in their
Speaker 1: own caucus to pass this. Number two, even if they did,
Speaker 1: if they get rid of the filibuster and if they
Speaker 1: could codify Row, if the Republicans take the Senate and
Speaker 1: the House, which they are likely to do in the fall,
Speaker 1: that could be overturned just as quickly. That's the argument
Speaker 1: of people like Joe Manchin and Kristen Cinema in terms
Speaker 1: of not approaching filibuster reform. So you know, it is
Speaker 1: not as black and white or cut and dry as
Speaker 1: they as you know, Alexandro Castio Cortez is suggesting as
Speaker 1: if we get rid of this, we catified row and
Speaker 1: that's it. The right could go away just as quickly
Speaker 1: if the Republicans and when the Republicans take the Congress,
Speaker 1: is the statement from Senator Cinema. Quote protections and the
Speaker 1: Senate safeguarding against the erosion of women's access to healthcare
Speaker 1: have been used half a dozen times in the past
Speaker 1: ten years and are more important now than ever. Unquote uh.
Speaker 1: That also is the argument she has delivered consistently here, Rick,
Speaker 1: that doesn't seem to matter to other members of her party,
Speaker 1: that this can slap back on you. That's right, and
Speaker 1: and and it will right. I mean, the minute you
Speaker 1: start cracking open the Fillibus rule for this, then then
Speaker 1: it's kitty bar the door. And then it's anybody who
Speaker 1: wants to pass a tax increase or anybody who wants
Speaker 1: to change the statute. But then it's just in reverse. Uh,
Speaker 1: you can't put that genie back in the bottle. And
Speaker 1: so once this genie is out, you've got to watch out.
Speaker 1: As a democracy, it helps to erode those institutions that
Speaker 1: help us govern as a as a group of people
Speaker 1: with common interests. And so all those folks who say
Speaker 1: there and wring their hands about wild democracies under assault,
Speaker 1: well then quit talking about and in the filibuster, because
Speaker 1: what the filibuster forces you to do is work together. Jennie,
Speaker 1: what's the next move for the administration here? We heard
Speaker 1: some brief remarks from the president. Uh, and of course
Speaker 1: we heard explicit remarks from Chuck Schumer and Democrats on
Speaker 1: the Hill who held a news conference today, you know,
Speaker 1: promising legislative action in some you know, talking about the filibuster.
Speaker 1: Not that that was the president. You heard the White
Speaker 1: House's line on that. But is it going to get
Speaker 1: to the point where we're not being honest, that that
Speaker 1: the administration is not being honest with Democratic voters about
Speaker 1: what's possible? Um? You know, listening to what Jensaki that
Speaker 1: cut you just played, I think she was very honest, um.
Speaker 1: And you know, I think the administration is going to
Speaker 1: use this to make the case they should be making,
Speaker 1: which is that elections matter. We are in this position
Speaker 1: because from their perspective, they don't have enough Democrats in Congress.
Speaker 1: Go to the polls, vote, get them in there, and
Speaker 1: then we can make these reforms. We can even beat
Speaker 1: a filibuster. So I think they are going to make
Speaker 1: that argument, and I think that's the right argument to make.
Speaker 1: We're in a democracy. You've got to get people into
Speaker 1: positions of changing the law before you can change that law.
Speaker 1: I also think we're going to continue to hear about
Speaker 1: filibuster reform, but also court packing. We had the Supreme
Speaker 1: Court commission put together by the President. I think they're
Speaker 1: going to continue talking about that. I think they should
Speaker 1: talk about the exceptions clause. I think they'll talk about
Speaker 1: a lot of those things. But the reality is you've
Speaker 1: got to vote in the mid term election if you
Speaker 1: want to see change in Congress, and if you're a
Speaker 1: Democrat and you want this codified, you've got to get
Speaker 1: enough Democrats in that office. And that means in West
Speaker 1: Virginia and Arizona, you can't choose progressives because they won't win.
Speaker 1: When's the march on Washington, Genie, I'm asking you seriously,
Speaker 1: I think it's going to be soon, and I think
Speaker 1: it should. You know, this language of Aldo's draft opinion
Speaker 1: is stunning. You know, at one point he says he
Speaker 1: doesn't pretend to know how the political system and society
Speaker 1: will respond to the decision. Reminded me very much of
Speaker 1: Dread Scott and Roger Taney's argument, will just strike down
Speaker 1: the Missouri compromise and just see how it goes, and that,
Speaker 1: of course walks us into the Civil War. We've been
Speaker 1: here before with with the Supreme Court. They've made disastrous
Speaker 1: opinions in the past. They should be cognizant of what's
Speaker 1: going to happen next. And for him to say he's not,
Speaker 1: I think his shame on him. So I think there
Speaker 1: should be a merch Rick Davis. The vision of the
Speaker 1: visuals of a million, maybe more women on the National Mall.
Speaker 1: Maybe this is the biggest march. And I'm this is
Speaker 1: pure speculation on my part, but we know this is coming,
Speaker 1: maybe the biggest display of of of humans gathering that
Speaker 1: we've ever seen here in the Capitol. Would moments like
Speaker 1: that change the calculus and the conversation within campaign's Democratic
Speaker 1: and Republican in the mid terms, certainly heats it up politically, Joe.
Speaker 1: I mean, bringing that kind of firepower to the mall
Speaker 1: is always awesome, you know, from a political point of view.
Speaker 1: I would remind everybody that every year since since Roe
Speaker 1: was decided in the early nineteen seventies, UM, there's been
Speaker 1: a march for life on January. So it's not like
Speaker 1: we haven't seen this play out. This is an old,
Speaker 1: somewhat tired political ploy that everybody has on both sides
Speaker 1: of the issue, to try and use their political power
Speaker 1: to generate change. I would I would remind you too
Speaker 1: that that even though all this has been going on
Speaker 1: for such a very long time since nine and seventy four,
Speaker 1: that there's been virtually no change in public opinion on
Speaker 1: the issue of abortion in the last forty years, and
Speaker 1: so people are pretty much convinced as to where they're
Speaker 1: gonna be, and all the marches on Washington hasn't changed
Speaker 1: it today. Well, so, if you're a Republican, then being
Speaker 1: called by Chuck Schumer to vote on this, uh, just
Speaker 1: to make a statement, is that actually good politics for
Speaker 1: a Republican right now? I mean, obviously a pro life Republican. Uh,
Speaker 1: someone who has made this part of their platform is
Speaker 1: I'm I'm assuming and embrace the opportunity. But maybe not
Speaker 1: every lawmaker will wreck. Yeah, I don't think every lawmaker will.
Speaker 1: And certainly early indications on this are that that there
Speaker 1: seems to be kind of a hesitation to really sort
Speaker 1: of get the pots and pans and clang them together. Now, look,
Speaker 1: if this Supreme Court does what this this this document
Speaker 1: indicates they will do, there will be massive unhest in
Speaker 1: states who will now have to decide what their state
Speaker 1: policy is going to be about abortion. And that is
Speaker 1: probably what a lot of these members are concerned about,
Speaker 1: because the last thing they had on their minds was
Speaker 1: going home at the end of this election cycle and
Speaker 1: right before a presidential campaign having legislation in their legislatures
Speaker 1: or on a ballot issue on abortion in their state.
Speaker 1: All news is local, Genie goes the line here. That's
Speaker 1: going to be the case with much more attention paid
Speaker 1: to state legislatures right in gubernatorial races because of this.
Speaker 1: That's right, And you know, the good Mocker Institute is
Speaker 1: saying about twenty two to twenty six states. Um, you know,
Speaker 1: if this reversal goes forward. Are going to have trigger
Speaker 1: laws which which you know, reverse with with real reversed.
Speaker 1: And of course we have about thirty six governors races
Speaker 1: on the ballot. All of those candidates will be asked
Speaker 1: what their states are going to do. And you talk
Speaker 1: to people in Texas, they tell you they've been living
Speaker 1: in a post row world already and what that has
Speaker 1: meant for women who don't have the means to travel
Speaker 1: across the border. You listen to those stories. It doesn't
Speaker 1: decrease the number of pregnancies or unwanted pregnancies. It increases
Speaker 1: the amount of stress that these usually poor women are
Speaker 1: under while they try to negotiate a really difficult process.
Speaker 1: That's what we're up for in this country. If this
Speaker 1: comes through. And this is day one, Genie and Rick,
Speaker 1: thank you for your honest opinions here in important analysis.
Speaker 1: My goodness, on this third of May. Who would have
Speaker 1: thought we'd be talking about this at this time even yesterday.
Speaker 1: Things are changing that fast. That's why we're here on
Speaker 1: sound on the fastest hour in politics. I'll meet you
Speaker 1: back here tomorrow. I'm Joe Matthew. This is Bloomberg