 Welcome to the future of democracy, a show about the trends, ideas, and disruptions changing the face of our democracy. I'm your host, Sam Gill. With election 2020 bearing down on us, perennial questions about accessing the right to vote have been intensified by the ongoing pandemic. Earlier this spring, we heard from experts across the political spectrum about the unique challenges of ensuring a free, fair, and open election amidst ongoing restrictions to movement and deep public anxiety about health. We also heard particular concern about how this situation could exacerbate existing inequities in the right to vote. Historically marginalized communities have emerged from some of the forms of disenfranchisement of the first half of the 20th century, but changes to formal rights did not put an end to de facto discrimination. Today, many election commentators and civil rights advocates continue to fight against efforts to exclude some Americans too often on the basis of race from access to this bedrock democratic right. Civil rights lawyer Nicole Austin Hillary has been at the forefront of these debates throughout her career. The head of the U.S. program at Human Rights Watch, she has been a key commentator on a range of critical issues. Today, we're delighted to have her on the program to help orient us in the countdown to what could be among the most contested and challenging elections of our time. So without further ado, my great pleasure to welcome to the show, Nicole Austin Hillary. Hi, Sam. It's so good to be here with you today. Thanks for having me on. Thank you for joining us. Thank you for joining us. And I'd love to just dive into it. There's been a lot of attention, you know, reasonably focused on the mechanics of pulling off an election in a time when many Americans won't want to go to the polls or can't safely go to the polls. But I think it would be a fiction to assume that before, you know, February of 2020, everybody who wanted to vote was able to exercise that right. And so can you just orient us around some of the issues that you've been working on before COVID about access to the right to vote? Sure. So Sam, as you just articulated, you know, we in this country have made many changes over the last several decades to try to ensure access to free and fair elections. And there are a lot of people who know the stories, particularly recently with the passing of my mentor and personal hero Congressman John Lewis, lots of people have been refamiliarizing themselves with that struggle and with that history. And there are some folks who believe that after the Voting Rights Act was passed, after the Civil Rights Act was passed in the early 1960s, that things were copacetic, but they weren't. There has ever since that time still been efforts to make it difficult for certain groups of people to engage in our electoral system. If you talk to individuals in Black and Brown communities, if you talk to individuals in poorer communities, they will tell you their stories. They will tell you how oftentimes they don't get the information they need to know how to engage in the electoral process. They will tell you that polling places sometimes are inconvenient for them to access. They will tell you how the fact that they are in minimum wage jobs means that they can't stand in long lines for hours before they can cast a vote. So that means for some of those people, they have to make a choice between do I go to work and get a paycheck so that I can feed my family and keep a roof over their heads or do I stand in a long line and cast a vote? For those people, it's an either or. So these are issues, Sam, that have been prevalent long before COVID. And what we see as a result of the pandemic is that these issues are exacerbated because now individuals have issues around safety and health that they have to contend with on top of those same issues that they've been trying to deal with and manage all along. And so one thing I kind of want to tease out a bit is, is COVID exacerbating these inequities simply because it's making it harder to pull off an election? Or is it actually providing sort of new means of active exclusion or both? As someone who's on the forefront of this, what are you actually seeing? It's a little bit of both, Sam. And I will tell you, we actually have a new report of Human Rights Watch that's going to be coming out on September 22nd on COVID and how it's impacted the ability of individuals to engage in our electoral process. We looked at voters in four states, Wisconsin, Arizona, South Carolina and Pennsylvania, and we looked at their primaries and what happened during the primary season. And what we saw was that elections officials in those jurisdictions, in some instances, used COVID as a pretext, if you will, to make changes to their electoral system under the guise of saying that due to COVID we've got to make these changes. One of the things that we saw and many people saw this in the news, particularly Wisconsin, it was very big in the news when the Wisconsin primary came along. But elections officials, for instance, made decisions to close some certain polling locations. They made decisions to move certain polling locations. And they said that this was all done under the guise of COVID to make things safer and to keep people healthy. But what we saw as part of our research is that oftentimes those decisions had a disparate impact. For instance, let's stay with the Wisconsin example, polls were closed, polling locations were closed in areas that had high populations of black and brown individuals and high populations of working class communities. If we did a comparison to some areas that were wealthier and whiter, fewer polling locations were closed. And when we talked to voters in locations where there was more wealth versus where there was less wealth, we had voters, for instance, in the white wealthier areas tell us we had no problems at all voting in those primaries. We had polling places to get to. They were easy to get to. Our polling locations weren't changed. We didn't have long lines. When we talked to individuals in the black or brown communities and where they were more working class, they told us we stood in long lines. A polling location that I used to go to was no longer there. So I had to travel farther. So even though those elections officials said we're doing this to really respond to the needs around COVID, what we found was that, in essence, they made it harder for people who were in some of the most disenfranchised and disadvantaged communities to participate in the electoral process. And again, Sam, that relates to the history in this country where we've seen those difficulties in place and we've seen elections officials make decisions that continue to make it harder for these individuals in these disenfranchised and disadvantaged communities to vote. Right. Well, it's the time-moderate public health principle. You're less likely to get infected in a bar than a high school gymnasium or something, right? Yeah, exactly. I'm still trying to figure that out, Sam. It's a really good example, too. I think we're in a moment in our country where I think a lot more Americans are trying to grapple with what it means to call something systemic, and it's these sorts of vulnerabilities. It's that there really is a need to be thinking about elections. And the question is, is that rethinking exacerbating a vulnerability and giving an opportunity for malicious intent or neglect? Or is it an opportunity to actually expand rights for individuals? But let me ask you about that, because is there a reason this isn't going to be an opportunity or how could we make it an opportunity? Because many of the ways that we can make voting safer are also many of the reforms that voting rights advocates have long forwarded as ways to lower the barriers of entry to voting, more early voting, so that people don't have to be a cluster at the polls, but works better for work schedules, more mail-in voting, more automatic registration. Is there any possibility that this election can actually be an opportunity for expanding the franchise? This is a perfect opportunity, Sam, to expand the franchise. The fact that we are now trying to provide and encourage Americans to utilize more mechanisms to vote means that there are more opportunities for people to engage. Just like the example I gave earlier in our conversation when I talked about working class people who don't have the privilege to stand in long lines, that means that if they have mail-in ballots, that gives them another resource and a resource that allows them to engage in the electoral process while also keeping their jobs and taking care of their families. So ostensibly that these additional mechanisms should be helping us to expand the franchise. The problem that we have right now is that there are certain groups, and I'm just going to call it out because Sam, you and I have known each other, I call it out. People in some of the Republican corners in this nation are now saying that there are problems with mail-in ballots, even though these are the same individuals who probably a decade ago when I was also working on voting rights issues were touting the viability and the ease of mail-in voting. But if we as a nation really try to keep these options open and secure, we have an opportunity to bring more people into the system. And Sam, look, one of the things I tell people is this, and that I've said for years. The biggest problem that we have in the United States is really not voter suppression. Even though we do have voter suppression, as we're talking about now, the biggest problem we have is getting people to engage in the process. So the easier we make it, that means we can up those numbers of people who are actually voicing their opinions at the polls. And I tell people, you know, everybody is not like you and me, Sam. Everybody doesn't have an opportunity to get on a podcast or get on a show and talk about these issues and voice their concerns. I remind people that the best way you can get involved in our democracy is by casting that ballot. No matter how big your individual voice is, it is not bigger than what it is collectively on election day. So this is an opportunity for us to deal with that big problem of just getting people to the polls and having as many people involved and engaged as possible. And let me also say this, Sam, we also have an opportunity to try to address some of the what I like to call forgotten groups in this country. People with criminal histories, they're one of those groups. One of the things that we've also seen in some of our research in Florida, where they passed a proposition to ensure that people with criminal backgrounds, once they've paid their dues and have been released, can engage in the electoral process. One of the things that we've seen is that there's so much confusion in every state around this group of individuals. People come out of serving their time and they don't know what the rules and regulations are in their state. And no one is necessarily telling them, we have an opportunity across the board to do a better job of educating all Americans about how you can get engaged. We have an opportunity to provide more mechanisms for getting engaged. And we have an opportunity to level the playing field, if you will, so that we don't have swaths of people feeling left out of the process. We need to create a system wherein everyone feels as though they have an opportunity to be engaged and have a hand in it and a stake in the outcomes of our elections. And that's what this moment is giving us. I think at this point that you bring up, I think, is sometimes lost in this discussion, which is, look, denying someone the opportunity to vote who is actively trying is obviously a grievous injustice. But it's such a grievous injustice that I think it sometimes blinds us to the real disenfranchisement, which is everybody who doesn't bother. They don't bother because they don't know. They don't bother because they're worried they don't have an ID. They don't bother because they're worried it will be safe. And for those people, doubt is really the instrument of suppression, doubt and anxiety. I think the other point that's lost is that we tend to focus on the race for president, but there's so many other elections where those dynamics take hold that matter so much more to our to our daily lives. And I think I think many people don't realize that if we're worried about, if we're worried about people not being able to vote for president, then we should be really worried about people not being able to vote for school board or a utility district or all of these other pieces. But it just it gets lost in the politicization, I think of this conversation sometimes. It does. But you know, again, Sam, looking at this moment that we're in regarding COVID, this is the perfect example and underscores perfectly why being focused on the down ballot races is so vitally important. I'm sure like me, you have been involved in so many conversations with friends, colleagues, neighbors who have children in school, and all of the decisions that go into into deterrence. Do the kids go back to school? Do they go back to school virtually? Do they go in person? How do we provide meals for the kids who need food and who aren't getting it if they're at home? The people who make those decisions are the school board members or the county executives or the mayors. We see that come to life more vividly now than maybe we've ever seen before. So this moment of COVID is a great example for everyone to have a better understanding of why it is vitally important to be focused on your leadership at all levels of government because they are the ones who really are impacting day to day how you live your life, how your children live their lives, and how safe we all are or aren't during this moment of a global pandemic. We had night foundations based in Miami and we had a municipal primary in August with record turned out and I sort of thought, well you know, it does matter who's in charge. Sometimes it's really clear that it matters who's in charge. So tell us on those along those lines you pointed to some of the states where we're not where we're seeing people race to the bottom. Are there examples that we're seeing of state election administrators or local election administrators who are putting these pieces together that you're articulating? They're not only working to expand the franchise but they recognize the informational imperative, the educational imperative, what any bright spots? Yes, you know Sam, I'm going to stick to those same states that I mentioned that we're focused on in our report, Wisconsin, Arizona, South Carolina, and Pennsylvania. Because even though we saw some problems in those states, we also had examples where there were elections officials who we interviewed and whose voices will be represented in our report who were working very diligently to ensure that they were protecting the right to vote for all of the citizens in their jurisdictions. We for instance see that in Wisconsin, even though they had some of the issues that we all saw and saw in the news and read about and heard about during the primary, our report also documents some of the changes that Wisconsin has made. For instance, some of those polling places that they removed in some of those more disadvantaged communities, they put those back and they've tried to put them in places that are more convenient for people in the struggling communities to access. So I do think that that's the good news. That's the good story, Sam. And part of it is that people like you and me, organizations like Human Rights Watch, the fact that we do this research and try to expose the problems, often it helps to serve as a catalyst for those elections officials and those other leaders to make the changes they need to make. Sometimes it's a matter of simply documenting what's happening and putting it in front of them and saying, do you realize that there's a disparate impact coming from the decisions you've made? And not only do we point out the problems, but we as researchers and as policy advocates make recommendations. We don't have to expect and wait for those leaders across the country to make these decisions alone. Those of us who have expertise in this work, we can make recommendations to them to help them implement the kinds of changes that are going to make it easier for more people to vote. So that's the good news. We've identified some problems, but there are elections officials in each of those jurisdictions who are heeding to some of these issues and who are making changes. I think it does that for what you're describing though, which is really exciting. I think it should give us hope that when exclusion is unintentional and people are provided with information, they have an affirmative desire to take action, more than merely an obligation, but an affirmative desire to do their job well, which means enabling people to vote. It does raise for me some sort of philosophical questions about the racial dimension of the right to vote that I want to get into with you, which is the discussion that we've been at, the perennial discussion about fraud, which has been particularly pronounced recently, but comes back with regularity, reminds me of when you and I got to know each other, which was around the time that the Supreme Court invalidated Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which for people listening is the section that for a certain set of districts that had historic rates of disparate access to voting had to get approval if they were going to change election procedures, but at the time I felt and I still feel now this sort of unease that is this really a question of evidence? There is no evidence of fraud at any level. Look, if a vaccine performs as well, is our mail-in voting system performs, we're all going to take it. And those rates. And I felt the same way about the coverage formulas. The part, as you know well, but for our audience, a big part of the argument to invalidate Section 5 was that the coverage formulas were out of date, but the question always to me was why don't we update the coverage formulas? Why, if that doesn't strike me as a genuine gesture that evidence ought to matter? And just as someone who is on the front line, I mean this is a racial justice issue for so many, for Human Rights Watch, it's not one that's on everyone's radar. What is going to change people's minds? It's not clear to me that it's evidence about disparity. You know, one of the things that we really depend on at Human Rights Watch is telling stories, Sam. And I think at this critical moment in the country, we see that telling stories has had a huge impact. And it's not just telling stories about voting, it's telling stories about race and about the experience of racial groups who've been marginalized in this country for 401 years. When people got to see the tape of George Floyd's killing, it told a story. When people learned about Breonna Taylor and her life, and the life she was living, and the way that she was trying to be a credit to her community by working in law enforcement herself, that was a story. I think that's how we're going to be able to better secure voting rights, Sam, to be frank. People right now are open, not just in this country, but globally. People are open to hearing the stories and the experiences of people. And it's really difficult to turn away from hearing stories and understanding what an individual's own personal experience has been. So when you hear someone, for instance, say, you know, I tried to vote. And this is one of the stories that we are telling of a woman who said I tried to vote. I went to a polling place. It was the polling place I used to go to. I asked them where I should go next. I went to the place where they told me I should go next. And when I went there, they said, no, that's not the right place. Here's where you need to be. And by the time I got there, it was too late. I couldn't vote. People were all human beings. That's what's at the heart of human and civil rights and social justice, that we are all human beings. And when you hear the struggle that people have, I think it helps people to empathize and to have a better understanding. And I think this whole moment that we are in globally, around systemic racism, around injustice, around trying to understand the plights of different groups is about knowing those stories and understanding and empathizing and putting yourself in those positions. I think that's part of what's going to make the difference. The evidence that the courts have said we need, that's the evidence. People telling you what they've not been able to do. People telling you how they were, you know, stopped from being able to engage in our electoral process. And, you know, that's our stock and trade of human rights watch. We believe that the data is important. The research is important. But you've got to have the voice, not our voices, not the voices of the so-called experts and the academics, but the voices of people who are actually on the ground who are living and breathing these experiences every day. That's what's going to make a difference. Sam, that's what's going to make a difference as we talk about injustice, whether it's about voting, whether it's about housing, education, health disparities, that's what's going to make a difference. And that's what we see at Human Rights Watch is what's happening globally. You know, I do a race and justice discussion every week at Human Rights Watch. And I have people from around the world, you know, because we're a global organization, I have people from around the world who are part of these discussions, Sam, and they're all saying the same thing. I don't care if you're in Geneva, Switzerland, if you're in Egypt, if you're in Nairobi, if you're in, you know, Arkansas. Everyone's experiences around understanding, around personal strife, around safety and around health are the same. And that's the starting point, Sam. And that's what's going to make a difference, whether we're talking about voting rights, whether we're talking about health disparities, whether we're talking about economic inequality, that's the starting point. I want to agree, but I want to push on this a little bit more too as concerns voting. Because I think, so the story you told, I think there is a lot of power to it. It's evocative for me of the other kind of urtext, which would be the scene at the opening of Selma, which I think it's Oprah Winfrey, which combines both the earnest effort to undertake the right and the deep humiliation of being denied. And that certainly comes through in the story you told. But as we were discussing earlier, so much disenfranchisement is the person who sort of doesn't take the step to try, because again, they're unsure, they're scared, they've effectively been softly talked out of it. And there I fear that, and I would think, for example, reenfranchisement of formerly incarcerated populations fits that sort of mold. It's someone who doesn't even realize maybe that they have the right. My fear there is that that plays into so many tropes we have about how hard you were supposed to try to exercise your rights. And so how do we use stories to push that next frontier of really expanding access to the right to vote of our affirmative obligation to enable formerly incarcerated populations? Some of the viewers are sending questions about people who have barriers because of literacy or because of intellectual ability of these places where it's really our work that we've got to do to respond to that individual. Sure. Well, Sam, look, it has to be it has to be multifold in terms of what the responses and what the solutions are. We have to put these individuals in the forefront so that they can tell their stories because it's their experiences that matter. But we also have to use and leverage the power of advocacy, of community organizing, of grassroots organizing, and of the law. All of those variables have to come together to help create a system in which everyone feels like they can engage and is not fearful of engaging. So, for instance, if you talk about individuals who perhaps have literacy issues or learning disabilities, well, then it's up to those of us who are in the advocacy community to be working with groups on the ground who can provide services and support to those individuals. We have to be knocking on doors. We have to be reaching out to these individuals and saying, here's how we can provide support to you if you need it. And we have to engage with these communities and find out what are your needs. We can't make assumptions. We need to find out what those needs are and then meet them. And that's why it's so important, Sam, for there to be intersectionality between national advocacy groups and voting groups, community groups, grassroots organizations, community service organizations. It's going to take that kind of collective action to try to dispel the fear, to try to assuage people's concerns and help every person in this country feel as though they can actually get out there and engage in our electoral system. But that means being on the ground, knocking on doors, and working directly with these groups. Again, with respect to the research that we did, we talked to some national groups, but we were on the ground in Wisconsin and South Carolina and Arizona and Pennsylvania talking to the elections officials. We were on the ground talking to the community groups, talking to the advocates who work on behalf of voters. That's where we have to do so much of our work. That's what's going to help dispel the fears and the concerns. Because imagine, Sam, if you have a concern about something, what's going to matter to you more? Is it going to matter to you more that Nicole Austin Hillary, with whatever her title is, is on a national program telling you about the importance of voting and telling you why you should feel confident in doing it? Is that going to matter to you more or is it going to matter to you more that the president of your local Boys and Girls Club, where your kids go every day, where you see them doing work, where you see them engaging in the community, if that's someone who's involved in get out the vote efforts, if that person knocks on your door and says, Sam, here's why you can vote and here's why you can overcome any of the barriers that might be in place. What's going to matter to you more? I think hearing from that person who is your neighbor, who's your trusted community leader, the person who you trust your children with, I think that's going to make the most difference. That's what we have to get behind and engage in more. Having those people really serve as the leaders for connecting with the community and helping to dispel those fears and myths. Well, I know you, so that would actually be really compelling if you were the one too, but I'll vote. I'm going to vote and I'm going to help other people vote. So let me ask you some forward-looking questions. One is the sprint to the election. Through the prism of racial justice and the imperative to make this election as much a force as it can be to advance racial justice, what's one of the top priorities around voting over the next 90 days effectively? That's a great question, Sam. And I think it's important for people to keep in mind the nuts and bolts of what it's going to take to actually have your vote counted. One, everyone needs to make sure that they are aware of what the rules and regulations are in their particular jurisdiction. And everyone knows this, but I have to underscore it's different all across the country. You know, I live in the suburbs of Washington DC. What my rules and regulations are for me, I'm in Maryland. What the rules and regulations are for me in Maryland are different than they are right across the, you know, the bridge going into DC and are different than what they are across the Potomac River from my friends who live in Northern Virginia. Everyone must make sure that they are aware of what the rules and regulations are in their jurisdiction governing their elections. That's number one. Number two, please, please, please, everyone, make sure you're registered. If you're not registered, get registered. And if you believe you're registered, double check it, double check it, triple check it. We all have to be citizen advocates right now, Sam. And that means advocating on behalf of yourself, your loved ones, your neighbors, making sure that everyone knows that their registration is up to date and valid and that they can actually vote. And then the last thing is determine how you're going to vote. If you have access to early voting in your jurisdiction, determine now are you going to be someone who engages in early voting? Are you going to be someone who engages in mail-in voting because there's a ballot available to you? And if that's what you want to do, then find out what are the steps I need to take to make sure I get a ballot from my jurisdiction because it's different everywhere. So again, sticking to my example of the DMV, as we call it, the District of Maryland, Virginia region. In the District of Columbia, everyone is being mailed a ballot, whether you request one or not. In Maryland, where I live, you have to first request a mail-in ballot and then it gets sent to you. I'm not getting it sent to me automatically. So I implore people find out what it is you need to do to engage in the election in the way that you are most comfortable engaging in the way that you feel is going to be safest and healthiest for you and your family. And finally, find out what the options are for Election Day. There are lots of communities for various reasons, Sam, as you and I know, who want to engage in voting on the ground, on Election Day, by going to the polls. Research has shown that the African-American community particularly likes to be engaged in voting at the polls. And a lot of that we know has to do with history because we are from a group of people who have been historically disenfranchised where people had to bleed and die in order for us to get that right to vote. So for many people, it is symbolic and it is purposeful to go to a poll on Election Day. If you're one of those people and that's your choice, find out what's available to you. Don't be like the individual that I talked about in my earlier example who went to one polling place and found out on Election Day that she needed to be somewhere else. You find out ahead of time so that you are going to the right place, find out how you get there. And if there are issues around getting there or questions about it, now is the time to suss those issues out and suss those questions out with your elections officials. Those are the main things, Sam, that people can do. And those are the main things you can do to empower yourself. Don't wait for other people to give you the power. You have the opportunity to have the power yourself to ensure that you can cast your ballot and that it will be counted. How confident are you that every American will have at least one safe option to vote in November? I'm very confident, Sam. I am. I know that there are issues, but I think as we've seen in the work that we've been doing, jurisdictions are really working hard to try to deal with the problems now so that they have less of those problems on Election Day. I believe in the systems that elections officials and community members and leaders across the country have been putting in place. I think we all collectively, despite the fact that there are some people who do want to make it more difficult for certain groups to vote, I do believe that the majority of people in this country and the majority of leaders want us to be true to our democracy and have voting that is safe, free, and fair for everyone. So I'm confident that the system's going to work. We all just have to make sure we do our part. And we also have to make sure that we're holding elections officials collective feet to the fire, Sam. We can't just sit back and wait for everything to be done swimmingly well. We have to make sure as advocates that the people who are in charge are doing their job the way they're supposed to, and we have to make sure that the checks and balances that are in place to ensure that are actually working. So we all have a job to do, but I think if we all do the jobs that we're supposed to do, I'm pretty confident that Americans will have their voices heard and will have their votes counted. We may not know on Election Day who president is, but I think we will get to that. And this whole myth of voter fraud is just that. I've said, and you've heard me say time and time again, there's been so much research on voter fraud is almost non-existent in this country. Instances that some people claim are voter fraud have often been deemed to be administrative errors, or the fact that an individual didn't understand or had a misunderstanding about where they should vote or whether they were registered. You know, I just heard on CNN last night, Ginsburg, who was the attorney for George W. Bush in 2000, during the vote recount say that this idea of voter fraud is really non-existent in this country. So when you have people like that say that, that should tell us something. I think across the board, we're coming to a greater understanding that, you know, this is hyperbole, and we shouldn't buy into it and we shouldn't allow it to keep us from the polls. So I want to get you out of here on a similar question, but longer time horizon, which is as what, what is the, what is the longer term agenda around the right to vote as a question of racial justice in this country? What are the, what are the, let's say we get through this election? You know, what are the, what are the, what are the, what are the big picture issues that you're going to be tackling? Well, we're going to be tackling a couple things, Sam. And you know, and I want to remind people the right to vote is a human rights issue. It is not just a right in the United States. It is a global right. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights lays that out very clearly that every individual in every country has the right to engage in the political process and choose their leaders. We're going to be continuing to work to ensure that that right that is laid out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is indeed adhered to in the United States and across the globe. You know, I oversee the U.S. Division of Human Rights Watch, but my colleagues who oversee the European division and who oversee the African divisions and the Asia divisions, they're all doing the same thing. We are all collectively trying to make sure that this right is guaranteed and is respected. The other thing that we're doing, Sam, is that for our U.S. program, we have a main goal of working to end systemic racism in the United States. And that means looking at all of the different mechanisms that add to systemic racism. That means not just looking at voting and our democratic processes. That means looking at policing and how our system of justice works. That means looking at economic inequality and how money and class determines how people get to engage in our American society. It means looking at education and disparities in education. It means looking at housing and it means looking at health disparities. We are taking a look at all of those systems because when you talk about voters and the power of voters, it's about what the vote can get you. It's not just about going to the election, going to the polling election day and electing a leader. It's about trying to ensure that you have the support mechanisms in place, that you have the economic mechanisms in place so that you can live freely and in a way that your family can thrive and that your community can thrive. So that means taking a close examination at how all of these systems work together towards that goal or how these systems work together to make it harder to reach that goal. That's what we are focused on. And so when we talk about voting and elections, that's what that's all about. That's about ensuring that people have the opportunity to determine how their communities are run, what support mechanisms they have, and what's being put in place to keep their families and their jobs and their homes all safe and secure. We also, Sam, are going to be looking at, and I'd love to come back on and talk to you about this, we're also going to be looking at the issue of Reparatory Justice because if you really want to deal with the history of the United States and the aftermath of the 401 years of systemic abuse, you also have to talk about how do you make people and communities whole again. And so Reparatory Justice has to be a part of that conversation. That's a big part of what we're going to be looking at. And I want people to know that Reparatory Justice is not about, I know some people, they freak out when they hear that term. They think it's about writing a check to every Black person in America. That's not what it's about. That's a simplistic way of looking at it. Reparatory Justice is about making communities whole again. We've done research in and actually did a report that came out in June of this year on reparations looking at Tulsa, Oklahoma, where the 1921 race massacre happened. As a result of that race massacre, Sam, that Black community has been decimated. Used to be a Black community before that race massacre that was considered the Black Wall Street of America. They had banks. They had housing developments. They had lawyers, doctors. They had thriving communities. And as a result of that race massacre, all of that was decimated. And the results of that decimation have carried through all of these 99 years later. So Reparatory Justice is looking at how do we make communities whole again, despite the fact that systemic racism and systemic abuse perhaps took away opportunities for advancement, opportunities for those communities to thrive, opportunities for those children, those descendants to have the education that they need, to have the housing that they need. So the conversations that we're having right now around our democracy have to be inclusive of all of these things, Sam, because democracy is not just about voting. Voting is a tool that we use to get us to a point where we can make as many people whole as possible. Well, a discussion about Reparatory Justice would be fascinating. So we're going to take you up on that offer, no question. But in the meantime, folks can follow you on Twitter at Nicole Austin Hill. We'll send that out via email. So you've got that. Nicole, thank you so much for joining us. Sam, thank you so much. It's been my pleasure. All right, folks, we've got some great episodes coming up that I hope you'll tune in for on September 17th. We'll welcome Professor Kathy Cohen from the University of Chicago, an expert on race in America. On September 14th, we'll have Alondra Nelson, president of the Social Science Research Council. And October 1st, we'll have Nick Pickles from Twitter, who leads the platforms work around misinformation. You won't want to miss any of those episodes. As a reminder, this episode will be up on the website later. You can see this episode in any episode on demand at kf.org slash fdshow. You can also subscribe to the Future of Democracy podcast on Apple, Google Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. Email us at fdshow at kf.org. Or if you have questions for me, just send it on Twitter at the Sam Gill. Please take the survey that's on your screen now. It's extremely helpful feedback for us. And as always, we will end the show to the sounds of Miami songwriter Nick County. You can follow him on Spotify. Thanks everyone. And until next week, stay safe.