 This is American Issues Take One. My co-host is Tim Appichella and we have Kimi E. Dave Foster and we have Chuck Crumpton, all to talk about abortion. This is an update on abortion in America. It's very important we cover this. It's very important we not forget about it. Bob's is a year old that has had profound effects on various issues and aspects of American society and we need to take a snapshot of it. We have to see how it's changed things and we have to see how it will change things. Welcome to the show, all you guys. Let's talk about what, you know, Dobbs, let it go to the states. You have no right to an abortion under Dobbs. So let's let the states do stuff. So the question I put to you, Chuck, is what have the state legislature has done in the past year? And for this I will flash a map which shows you where the level of restriction is in America and you can see the brown states are very restrictive and the blue and green states are not so restrictive. Hawaii is not so restrictive but less not so restrictive than other states and it is really a patchwork. But two things, one is this map shows you that most of the restrictions are in the American south in the hinterland and I really would like your thoughts about that, Chuck. And the other thing is we talked about gun violence last week and, you know, the really interesting parallel here is gun violence, you know, and I like to compare this map with what's happened in gun violence where the shootings, the mass murders are really in the same states in large part that anti-abortion restrictions are in. We need to understand why the parallel. So Chuck, what have the state legislatures done since the case was decided? Well, if you look at the map you just showed, you see that almost all of those dark red extremely restrictive states are Republican controlled legislatures and in many cases, governorships as well. The other good thing about the connection you're drawing here, which is a really, really important one, is up until very recently, in fact, this particular Supreme Court constituency, public health and safety was legally a top policy issue in almost every sector of the law, whether it was environment, whether it was healthcare, whether it was anything else. This Supreme Court, its majority, have essentially scrapped that. Women's and family's health and safety took a major hit with Adobe's decision. And while we can't necessarily blame all of it on stale mail and pale control, that's a major factor here. Is this class oriented? Is it race oriented? I don't think there's any question about that because if you look at the people it impacts the most harshly, those are the people with the least access to healthcare, with the least access to transportation, to get healthcare available, with the least access to the technology resources, to make even telehealth care available. So my mind, there's no question what's going on, there's no excuse or justification for it. We have the wrong people making really, really critical leadership policy decisions. Well, Kimmy, let's go to you for a minute. What do women and families and girls, what do they do now? If they happen to be in one of those brown states, which have very restrictive provisions, even more restrictive than ever before. So query, what do they do? Because there are some states that punish anyone who collaborates with them in crossing a state line and make some both criminals. So what is happening on the ground? Do you have any idea? Yeah, we do. I sit with the director, I sit with the affiliate for Planned Parenthood Alliance advocates, so that covers Hawaii, Alaska, Washington, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky. So we have a pretty wide smarga's board of kind of your range of rights there. And to Charles's point, it's affecting obviously the people that have the least resources the hardest. Because while there are some states that are willing to serve as border clinics, you see that kind of like Chicago is right now the blue beacon for that area. There are some people that are still wanting to take the risk to drive them across state lines. But that's that's supposed is that you can take a day off of work. You have childcare, if you already have children, you have the resources to find a ride. If you have to drive, let's say more than six or seven hours in either direction, you have somewhere to stay that night, which is no more money out of your pocket. So in a lot of those cases, unfortunately, what we're seeing is either people that are putting everything they have into getting a medical procedure that should be freely available, or they're not able to access the care that they should be able to get. I think it was last week or a couple of weeks ago, the New York Times did a follow up story on a seventh grade Texas girl who is starting this school year with a baby. She's the victim of rape. Her mom knew something was wrong. I mean, all of the signs there pointed towards what should have been illegal abortion. But because she's in Texas, it's not an option. So to your question, Jay, about what they're doing, they can't do a whole lot. Wow, it changes their lives, doesn't it? It changes their lives forever. And I think to Charles's point, it doesn't just change their lives. It keeps them in the cycle of poverty. And it keeps them in the cycle of not being able to access the resources that they need to break out of that. So you've changed not just this generation's life, but I'm not saying that the child of that young girl cannot break out of it herself, but you're starting from well below the ground level zero there. So it makes it much harder for future generations. And the secondary effects too, Tim, right? I mean, that child won't be able to get the education she might otherwise have. And so she's really taken out of any productive role in our society. And if you multiply that by maybe millions, that changes our society and it changes our economy. How is it changing our economy? I don't know so much our economies. Jay, what I see is a barbaric act from these state legislatures. Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Kimmy mentioned Texas. It's not just the ban on abortion, but it's no exemptions for rape or incest. Jay, this is barbaric. And I think there's a direct correlation to the fact that evangelicals have gotten control of the GOP party and their wish list and their agenda has been firmly footed in the GOP. And God knows what's next. I suspect in a very short order, you'll see an attempt to reverse same-sex marriage. I think that's right over their horizon. And what do you say about this barbaric take on how women should be treated? And speaking of this young girl that has been impregnated and forced to carry the baby to term, look at the psychological scarring and damage that she'll have to carry for the rest of her life. Not just missed opportunities in education, but the psychological scarring of being forced to have a child when she's been raped. I really have a hard time finding words to describe my disgust in the GOP party and certainly with these state legislatures. We're going to talk in a minute about exactly how that affects the public and its view of the GOP party. So Chuck, there are various profit and nonprofit organizations that offer women's health that have offered women's health services, like Planned Parenthood, for example. How has this affected them? How has it affected the organizations, the individuals who have offered those services? And are they surviving? Are they still out there fundraising? Are they raising money these days? What are they doing? That's a good question. The direct impact is overt and obvious. It's basically shut down many, if not all of those clinics in most of those dark red brown states. But there's a secondary impact, which Kimmi's Insights brought up, and that is that for those who are most vulnerable and least accessible to the resources, they don't even know where to look. And healthcare providers are going to be afraid and intimidated against advising them or connecting them with services, even in a location where that's legal. Yeah, you anticipated my next query. And that is, how does this affect the medical community? I saw one article that said young doctors out of medical school will not choose to go to those red brown states. They won't practice there. It's not only a political statement, it's a practical statement. Because what I think they're saying to themselves is, it looks like the state legislature in that state is going to tell me how to practice medicine. They think their medical judgment is better than mine. And so I am not going to go into that. I'm not going to practice in those states. Now, this has a secondary effect beyond just the availability of doctors who will do abortions. This has an effect on medical care in those states. No, that's absolutely true. And the impacts have already been seen to a very, very large extent in rural areas, which had a lot of trouble getting enough doctors in the first place for many, many reasons, pay, practice, remuneration, contacts. But it's also now starting to impact urban areas because these are statewide prohibitions. And they're putting in penalties for those things, in some cases, criminal penalties that are intentionally designed to intimidate and scare healthcare providers from providing information essential to not just the physical health, but exactly what you talked about, the mental, emotional well-being of their patients and their families, and by implication, their communities, their schools, their neighborhoods, all of those things. So Tim is right. I mean, the adjectives he applies are correct. This is a direct attack on the things and the values that connect us and provide us with not only the physical, but the mental, emotional help that enables us to get through tough times together. I have a question for you. That is a very interesting question. When Samuel Alito wrote this opinion, when that court voted for the Dobs case, was this predictable or is this a surprise to them? I don't think there's any question that once that group, dominated by Alito, secondarily by Thomas, got control of the majority and got Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Gorsuch to go along with them on just about everything. They're the hammer driving that court. And Chief Justice John Roberts has little, if any, influence on that court's direction anymore. So there is no moderate. Interestingly, Anthony Kennedy, former Justice who retired at an unfortunate time, came to watch the arguments in some of those cases, including Dobs and including the gun case. And his own clerks are the ones who have been turning the case Kavanaugh courses against the direction that he tried to engineer as a balancing act. There is no war balancing between public and private health, including reproductive rights. How can you say you're pro-life if you're pro-gun? And you watch children being shot down in schools. That's really an interesting economy. So let me ask you though, was this predictable? We have chaos now. No question about it. We have legal chaos. We have social chaos and arguably we have economic chaos, or we will. Was this predictable to the court? Yeah, I look to Kimmy and Tim for their thoughts, but clearly predictable. The direction has been going on for over 40 years since the Reagan advent of moving power away from the people it has disserved the most and more exclusively with wealth into the hands of those who have abused it the most. That's continued for 40-something years and there's no indication that that direction is changing as much as anyone, Joe Biden or the Democratic party or anyone else tries to resist it. Kimmy, your thoughts on that question, was it predictable? Absolutely. I think one of the most common misconceptions, with the average person, if you're not a conlaw nerd or just immersed in that space in general, is that they were shocked when the Dobs decision came out. And people that are occupying that space, the healthcare providers, the Planned Parenthoods, the Lilith Fund, all of those advocate groups, they were not shocked. They saw it coming a mile away, not just because I mean to Charles's point, the makeup of the Supreme Court. I mean, the second Trump was elected, my biggest fear, that's actually not entirely fair because, man, I had a lot of fears that day. But there, my biggest fear was not so much what he would do as both a person and just kind of a terrible human being. It was how he would reshape the courts because that is, if you look at the three branches of government, that's the one that takes the longest to swing back because it's the one that's supposed to be the most constant. Consequently, the laws that they pass at both the state level, federal level, Supreme Court level, were stuck with those for a very long time. And they're the ones that shape society. And I think kind of as a larger thing, if you get away from just the what's this predictable with respect to the Dobs decision, absolutely. I mean, they've been shipping away at women's reproductive rights, people's reproductive rights for a long time. And I think it's very telling where it's kind of like, okay, well, they lost on gay marriage. Next thing they looked at was abortion rights, which they took down. Which I think to another one of your questions today that you either had or you may have alluded to is kind of like, are some states going to start dropping the abortion issue because it's kind of obviously a losing ticket on the ballot and you have to legislate your way through it. I think the next thing up with respect to individual rights is your right to choose what gender you want to be to attack on transgenders is an ecological jump. And it's just become a very systematic approach towards tearing down people's individual rights, which to your juxtaposition with the gun argument, it's, it would be comical if I weren't living in the same country. You know, where it's like, you don't get to have the right to choose what you want to do with your body. In some cases, you don't have the right to choose if you want to change genders. But God forbid somebody take away your weapon of war because you have the right to that unalienably. It's ridiculous. It's irrational for sure. And you know, a good part of the country recognizes that it's irrational. Even Republicans recognize it's irrational. So Tim, this has got to be having a political effect. You know, we spoke before about the Republicans in California, reconsidering their platform on abortion, I'm not sure what they can do about it nationally. But this has got to be having an effect on the political environment in the country. Are there indications of that? Or will there be? Yeah, I think I just recently saw a poll that there's two main points that's energized a Democratic Party. One is a fear of losing democracy for an autocracy. And the other one is reproductive rights. So unfortunately, this heinous movement in our country is actually being now beneficial on a political basis, which I don't care for that either. But it seems to energize many, many women in this country and a lot of men too. And I'm glad to see that happen. But it's the wrong topic to use as a political wedge. Well, maybe I can take a moment and ask you what exactly motivates this kind of insanity, this irrationality that we have on this issue where people around the country are, and this goes to guns too, you know, as Kimi mentioned, what motivates them? Is this religion? It's one's desire to impose their religious thoughts and morals and behavior upon other people, whether they're the same ilk or not. It's funny, I just read an interview about Pope Francis chastising American Catholics, particularly the very conservative ones, saying that you are in favor of ideology and you're losing your theology. And there are many Catholic bishops in this country that are directly opposed to what Pope Francis is saying. I mean, to the point where they're out and out saying, no, we're not going to listen to you. You're washed up. We don't like the way you're heading the Catholic Church. So it is religion, Jay, and it's time to create the wall between a theocracy and a democracy. And it's way overdue. And we've led it way too long. And I'm sorry, but President Reagan is the one that let the camel's nose under the tent with the moral majority way back in the 1981, 1980s. W. Bush at his inauguration said, I'm going to make my administration faith-based. And, you know, like Kimi, I had a chill down my spine when he said that. But that's what we have. So Chuck, let me ask you as I would ask any lawyer to take the other side. What can be done to fix this? Do we have to wait it out, as Kimi says, to, you know, the next generation of the Supreme Court? God knows when that will happen. What can be done by Planned Parenthood? What can be done by those individuals who value these rights? Because so far, I mean, it's been a fight. And in Ohio, they won on some kind of iconic basis. But if you look at that map around the country, they haven't been winning. What can they do? And when is this going to turn around? Now, I think that's a really good question. We're a little more than a week after the 60th anniversary of the March on Washington. And quite honestly, I don't think anything less than mass mobilization is really going to impact either elections or choices. Because there is an elitist group, which Kimi and Tim have alluded to, they're an identifiable group. Their combination of wealth status and power is sufficient that they can ignore things. I mean, the Alabama legislature has now twice ignored not only the federal courts, but the Supreme Court's eating to stop racially gerrymandering. And they basically said, hey, we know our people better than you do. We're going to do what they want. This is George Wallace 2.0, unless this is brought under control in response to mass mobilization demands by the people. It's not going to happen because they're not responsive to the electorate. That's pretty serious. And what it leads me to think is that it's not just this issue. And it's not just this issue and gun rice or gerrymandering. It's all the issues that we think about and talk about and worry about. And the government, in terms of the protection of the citizens, the response of Congress and the Supreme Court to what people need and want, what the economy needs and wants, what our society needs and wants to be vital and vibrant, it's broken. I mean, it's a serious problem because it goes to all issues. Do you agree? No, I think that's absolutely true. And it goes directly, as Kimi and Tim have indicated, to the essential question of human choice, whether it's reproductive rights choice, whether it's choice about who your family is going to be, who you're going to be, what choices you're going to make in your life, what your life is going to look like. All of those are inimical to the people who have been eroding those choices, the Alitos, the Best of the Group, and there's a whole list of them. Why we put another person named McCarthy in a position of leadership in politics is beyond me. But now we see what we get. How much of this is linked to Donald Trump? He kind of unleashed it. You can say it was always there since Reagan, but certainly he has unleashed more than we expected. And they are following him now today. They see him as their leader, even in the throes of four indictments. Clearly, if he loses, if he is jailed, if he loses his ability to control people and influence them, if they turn their backs on him for some reason, would that change this? Trump has brought at least two things. One, complete detachment from any anchor of truth or morality. Absolutely none. And he's bragged about that. And the second, which is critical to maintain that, the other side of that same coin, is impunity. In his campaigns, he said, I could walk down the street and kill somebody, and I'd be fine. And he's now arguing, yeah, my people tried to do that on January 6th, and it did in fact take five lives, but I'm still absolutely unaccountable. You can't touch me. Well, okay, let me put that question to Kimmy. How much of this comes from Donald Trump? This malaise, this decline of our representative government, our democracy, how much of it? And these cases, and the Dobs case, and the lack of respect for women's rights and rights of people in general, how much of it comes from Trump? I think that Trump was the gate that was removed on kind of the floodwaters. He could not have been elected if this wasn't, if the country wasn't primed for it already, right? So while I think he, he's definitely a factor, he has made things worse to kind of build on what Charles was talking about is that one of the worst things he's done is he's caused people to lose faith in the media. He's caused people to lose faith in politics. I mean, you see these people screaming till they're blue in the face, but no, he's still on the election and there's all these facts. Like they just, they just don't want to believe it. But I think kind of the longer systemic issue that kind of got us to where we are is that there has been a huge breakdown, and J.U. for I think talked about this before in public education in this country, and it's been coming for a long time. And the bill is starting to come due because we have now created, I mean, I think to your point earlier, J, where there's kind of this stratified view, right, where you've got your upper echelon of people that are super educated, and they're looking at this like this is bananas. Even, even the most Republican people I know are kind of like, you're, you're just making rights up out of thin air here. You don't have the right to do that. And then you go down to people that are a little bit less educated, but kind of have a general sense of they probably took civics at some point. And you've got people below that who never took civics class, it just wasn't offered in their school. And you have people underneath of that who were not able to attend school for a variety of reasons, which is tied to our socioeconomic issues too, which then means that they're not going to think for themselves. And they're going to let somebody else think for them. And they're going to let someone else tell them what they can and cannot do and what they shouldn't believe. So do I think Donald Trump is the reason for this, or do I think that it'll get better if he weren't around? I mean, it might get better just not have him constantly talking on screens, whether that be a, you know, be an ex or whatever else he, truth, social or whatever he uses. But no, I think our country was primed for it. And I think it was kind of a meeting of all the worst possible case scenarios. And I think to Charles's earlier point, how do we go forward from here? I mean, you really have to look at mass social change. You have to mobilize somehow. Because right now, we can't keep doing the same thing over and over. It's very obviously not working. And I do think that there's kind of a new generation coming up. And I wanted to correct a point earlier. I don't think the solution is to wait for the new Supreme Court. I just don't. I think that it has to come from grassroots movements, because I think that there is a new generation, my generation and younger, that's been looking at this like, so we've now lived through what is it, four or five unprecedented lifetime events or something. They're already calling Gen Alpha, I think the disaster generation because of all the climate change disasters they've had to live through. And at some point, I'm really hoping that we kind of get sick of this. And we're like, this is not the golden land we were all promised. What happened? How is the system broken? And how do we fix this? So that's what I think needs to be done. I would agree with Charles. This reminds me of my fatigue theory. My fatigue theory goes to the stock market. I'm sure I've told Tim about five times about my fatigue theory. The stock market goes up until it gets tired of going up. And then it goes down. And it keeps going down until it gets tired of going down. Then it goes up. Well, maybe the same thing is going to happen here. What struck me so interesting after the Dobs decision, I figured, well, the evangelicals have had their day. They won that case. They struggled for it for decades. And finally, they have their moment. Now, maybe they'll stop. Maybe they'll just let it go for a while. And what I was really surprised to find is now they didn't let it go for one second. They kept on pushing all the harder. They were encouraged by the Dobs decision to work at the state level. And they've been working diligently at the state level ever since. Aren't we going to get tired of that? Is that generation that Kimi's talking about going to get tired of that? Are people going to see the troubles that the disadvantage and the poor will have as a result? Our educational system, the people who can afford to study civics, aren't they going to get tired of seeing the country on a decline? Kim, could this happen? Will this happen? And will this happen before 2024? They're tired of it. But I guess we'll find out on election day 2024. I recently saw another article addressing what Kimi said. And that is, it's going to take a younger generation. And why is that? Because 33% of our mega-GOP, they're no longer rooting for a politician in the name of Donald Trump. They're rooting for their cult figure. And there is no breaking out of a cult. They've had studies about deprogramming people of cults. Most of the time, they don't work. The bottom line is no one likes to admit they've been duped, and they won't admit it. And so these 33% of our fellow Americans, and I call them the mega-GOP, they're in a cult, and they'll stay in that cult. And there's nothing to break them out of it. So what's going to be the difference? Millennials and Gen Z, I think that will save the day. Hope so. Not clear, because to the extent that they have studied civics, they may recognize the crisis. To the extent that they have not, they may never see it. And they may be very concerned about the chaos, but have no solution for it. Chuck, let me go to you on this question of whether this has affected the power of the evangelicals. And I guess I go back to the phenomenon in California where people in the GOP are thinking about changing their platform on it. Has this made the evangelicals more powerful? Has it made the MAGA Trumpers more powerful? Or finding the ghastly results of the Dobbs decisions, is it making them less powerful? And how will that work between now and election day? Well, I think Kimmy's insight is a really important one. That Trump, as a gait or as a spotter, he has fed something that was already there. This is something that's now been cultivated for many, many years. Remember, we live in a country that took us almost 200 years to get to the point where we recognize that discriminatory education was not equal education. And we are still, 70 years later, a long way from anything approaching equitable rights and access to education. Kimmy's exactly right. Until we start to recognize that the strength is not in zero sum fear of having rights taken, because the ones who are afraid of that are that elite group. They are the 1% or the 10% or whatever you want to call them. But they have spread that gospel with the help of religions to a wide group of people who identify with it. But these are among the people who are themselves, the victims of those very parasitic tendencies at the top. So until we get to a point where people are saying enough already, we are taking back our choice. We're taking back our ability to be able to be families, to be communities, to make choices that serve collective units, not just individuals at the expense of other groups. We're not going to see change. I think Kimmy and Tim are right. Well, Kimmy, let me go to a point that has occurred to me. We had Black Lives Matter and people were out in the street and plenty of media about that. And there was some suggestion of violence. Trump himself wanted to use the Insurrection Act and put them all down. But I have noticed that since Dobbs, the initial reaction of women and liberal people has declined. Sure, there are articles and there are the thought leaders who come and tell us bad decision, bad result, everything bad. But in fact, there's less protest, group protest in the street. The same thing happened with Black Lives Matter. It's the news cycle, the media cycle, and it's this thing about how protests declines over time. Will there be a resumption of this protest that we saw right after Dobbs? Will there be violence about this issue? And could that change things? So first of all, I'd like to address the statement about it's women or what did you say? It's not as imperative or whatever. I don't think that's true. It's forefront of our minds. Just because we're not marching in the streets, just because we're not yelling about it, it's the reality for most women I know, especially if you're childbearing age. I just had a conversation with a friend who very nearly divorced her husband because he wants to move to Florida. And she's like, that's fantastic, but we also want to have a kid. And he says, yeah, and she was like, I can't do both because what if something happens? So I think the average woman and the average person who's able to get pregnant, it's very much still on the forefront. However, and at least I can't speak to all reproductive rights organizations, but at least with respect to Planned Parenthood, our efforts have gone away from protests just because protests, they carry a certain, you know, that je ne sais quoi right after the event, right? Like you want your anger, you want to take action, you want to go and march in the street. But what does that actually do? Because I think to Charles's point, elective leaders aren't listening. They don't care if you're screaming on their doorstep. You need to mobilize and you need to get out there and start banging doors. It's not violence, it's not marching the streets, it's getting out there and actually driving social change and reimagining the path to abortion access. It's building inclusive cultural shifts in neighborhoods and it's taking it all the way down so that you're not doing the flashy showy and there's the record, there's nothing wrong with protests, I think they're necessary. But if you want to make real change, you have to start changing minds and hearts on an individual level. And the only way you're going to do that is if you're going out, you're doing education programs, you're trying to forge inclusive mass movements, you're doing cultural shifts on race and gender, all of those things. Who does all of this? I mean, it's not going to be your elected leaders, so it's going to be grassroot leaders. It's going to be reproductive rights organizations. To some extent, it's going to be men when they can stand up and say something like, hey, that's not okay. It's going to be the community. It's not a top-down movement anymore. That with social media, that's possible. Although we haven't seen it really happen on other divisive issues. Kim, I want to ask you a question about technology. Mipha Pristone, powerful drug had been around for a while and it surfaced after Dobbs as a solution for a lot of women. And now it's in play. Now it's headed to, I guess, the Court of Appeals and ultimately Supreme Court as to what can happen with that drug. Before it seemed to be the solution. Is it still the solution or will it be crushed by the Supreme Court? There's federal law that says the FDA has its authority to issue drugs in 50 states or authorize the use of those drugs in 50 states. I'm not an expert on federal law, but it just seems to me that the Supreme Court will come down on the side of allowing this drug to be prescribed in 50 states, regardless of its ultimate purpose. It's a safe drug. It's been proven safe for decades. And that's my best guess, Jay, is that the Supreme Court will preserve that option. Well, there are limitations. I think there was a case in one of the courts of appeals. Kimi, do you know about this? Just said you could not buy it off the web. You could not buy it online and you could not. There was another limitation on it. Oh yeah, get it in the mail. Now that really pulls the rug out from under most people who would order it online and who would get it by mail. So we already have limitations on Mipha Pristone, which we didn't have before. And I think when the Supreme Court gets its hand on that, it's going to affirm that. Don't you think? Okay. Honestly, I don't know what the Supreme Court's going to do because I think they're going to be stuck between they would love to stamp out right till abortion. And if they do outlaw the distribution of Mipha Pristone, there are, I understand from my OBGYN friends, there are other kind of cocktails of medication abortions that are available, but they're not as effective and more painful. The biggest effect it's going to have on our state, obviously, is that Hawaii gets all of its supply by mail. So that's really, really, really going to hurt us, not with sounding we have the most progressive reproductive rights law in the country right now. But the original question, Jay, I think the court is going to be torn between wanting to stamp out reproductive rights and recognizing that decision will have catastrophic consequences for the FDA's regulatory scheme. So it'll be interesting to see what happens there. Yeah, something we have to follow. I've saved the question for you. If you look to the comments made by the leaders of Europe, you find that they're pretty much unanimous in their disgust, if you will, to use Tim's term. And that they are saying, wait, what are you guys doing? You're moving backward. Why would you do this? We're talking about rights, the rights of women, and we believe it's fundamental. It's baked into the European system of laws. What effect does this have, should this have, and what happens in the United States? Yeah, I think Kim and Tim points are good ones that the political leadership of the right wing, which is dominant in the MAGA Republican Party, doesn't listen to the electorate. They're not going to listen to leadership in Europe. As long as they have donors continuing to perpetuate their power, which Trump is key to, I mean, if there's one thing that has perpetuated his hold on power, it's his access to and his control of donors. As long as that continues, that force is going to continue to be there. So I don't see that having an impact, but it's representative of the backtracking that we're doing in all of the areas that Kim and Tim and you have mentioned in education, in healthcare, in the basic values and relationships of our society, of the units in our society, the families, the neighborhoods, the communities, those are what's under attack. And until those come together and start coalescing and protecting and asserting themselves, the individual elite power group will continue to manifest exactly the same anti-popular, anti-international positions that it feels maintain its donor links and serve their own power banks. Wow. Okay, it's time for summaries now. Kimi, can you begin? And can you include in your summary something that Chuck alluded to, and that is money? One way to change the tilt here is to vote with your credit card. That goes for voting for progressive candidates around the country, and it means voting for organizations that will lobby for reversal of dobs. What are those organizations and also give us your closing comments? Well, Kim, I mean, obviously there's Planned Parenthood. There are the individual state actors for Texas. That's a little fun. I'm blanking on some of the other ones, but there are a number of them that will do that. I think it's contributing to your voting rights advocacy areas. It's contributing to, like, I know certain of the Planned Parenthood affiliates, they do education things, where they put on a little main education sessions at local schools and things like that. But I'd also like to say, because you mentioned voting with your credit card, I think it goes beyond donating to grassroots organizations. I think people also need to be conscious about where they're spending their money on an everyday basis, because so much of money for donors now is coming out of corporations, right? So, if you have the time, sit down and figure out what those policies are that those corporations you're spending money in. I mean, for example, I buy Chobani yogurt because they said that they'll drive any of their or they'll pay for any of their employees who need to get an abortion, they'll pay for their travel, they'll pay for their stay. That matters to me. Conversely, this was years ago, Ivanka Trump's shoes used to be my favorite shoes to wear to work, and I stopped buying those immediately. People can make everyday decisions that have big impacts because it gives those corporations more revenue. So, make sure you know where you're spending your money. And to kind of our closing remarks is that as dark as things seem, and boy, do they seem dark, I do think that there is some light at the end of the tunnel, because I think people, to your point, are tired of being told what they can and can't do. And I think they're seeing that there's more of us, hopefully, than there are of them, because it really is that 1% of the 1%. And so I think if we can continue to push forward and foster institutional change on kind of the community level, I'm hopeful that we can turn things around. Not good to that. Kim, I want to thank you so much for joining us from Portugal. It really goes beyond the call, and I think we all appreciate you taking the time and effort with a 12-hour difference. It must be midnight almost. So, thank you very much. Anyway, Tim, what are your closing remarks this summer you want to leave with people on the issues? Well, I'd just like to say that I think it's a long shot, but during the Pennsylvania GOP debate, Nikki Haley mentioned what's it going to take to get the Senate to 60 votes on reproductive rights. And maybe there's a compromise there. I don't know. Maybe the compromise is the elimination of rape and incest for abortions. And maybe there's a 15-week, 16-week, 17-week, 18-week consensus there somewhere between the Republican Party and the Democrats that can hammer out a federal law. I don't know. But we've got to get past where we're at right now because we're going nowhere. And people's lives are being shattered, literally shattered. Yeah. And the reference, of course, is that Congress is going nowhere on this issue. Why we have chaos among the states and chaos for the people. The Congress isn't doing anything. Chuck, can you give us your man now? I think Kimmy and Tim has summed it up well, that it is going to take grassroots, bottom-up mass mobilization. We're going to have to build and focus on the strength of our most grassroots-level units, families, neighborhoods, communities. It's the only thing that may change the direction of things because nothing coming from the top down is likely to do it within our lifetimes. Chuck, live a long life so you can have more and more of an effect on this. Thank you so much, my co-host, Tim Apachella. I thank you, our esteemed guest, Kimmy E. de Foster. And thank you, Chuck, with your wisdom. Aloha, all of you guys.