and i see it in the state legislature. so first of all, they are have become very very few competitive congressional seats in the country as a result of this. it's a very small number of seats snow that shift seats now -- when the majority in congress are shifting and that's what we see playing out in the process ahead, is that the majority shifts, not because of the shift of the voter preferences, but because the lines are drawn, indifferent way on the map. those kinds of things undermine confidence in the system being when that is about the voters. it gives the sense that we need to push back again. in the state we see extreme polarization and as i mentioned before, the other thing that gets a lot sometimes as it really empowers the special interest. and of the reasons for that is when the districts are so heavily gerrymandered. -- the reason for that is when these districts are so heavily gerrymandered, i usually get less differences between the candidates when it comes to ideology. it would be a republican or for -- wh

you can have this with legislature to.ng as you have time to let people talk. >> legislature without a commission will have a lot of public hearings and let people submit maps. they are available so people can submit maps. the legislature believes it maps ---it's maps will stand up to court scrutiny. they will do what they ultimately want to do. mike: we have a skulduggery question. even with public commissions, does the persistence of "shadow processes" that run parallel to these commissions make the idea of a nonpartisan objective redistricting effort moved -- moot? >> i would not say it makes it moot but whenever you have any system, people will try to figure out a way to gain it and use the rules in place in the process strategically. you know, when the court required districts to be evenly populated, for a while, there was a lot of gerrymandering. some districts had 500 and others had 15,000 but over time, people used those things strategically and there are constraints that i do think, you know, there is so much at s

>> the governor can veto maps passed by the legislature. i think that's what people anticipate will happen. like the legislateture, he will have proposed maps. there's a briefing on a few different topic. one is a lease changing approach. they put a partisan gerrymander in place a decade ago. we obviously think that's not the right approach. that would entrench a gerrymander and they should use what they normally use. that's being litigated. we're going be part of this redistricting litigation. we want fair maps that empower the people and the state. we'll advocate for that in court. >> do you anticipate private parties to come in and file some of these lawsuits as well? private plaintiffs. >> there's been some that have been filed as well. it's possible there will be additional litigation but there are private entities. there's legislatures involved, the governor is involved and others as well. hopefully the cases that are pending now will sort out the key issues and lead to fair maps. that remains to be seen. >> in new mexico, like a lot

a lot of legislatures, including conservative legislatures, are starting to recognize we are not going to use the courts as a backdoor tax collection system anymore. it is taxation without representation and it is bad public policy. so, that is the good news. a lot of legislatures are understanding this and going about trying to fix the problem. getting to the bottom of it will be difficult. there is a state senator in new york who has a bill called the end predatory fees act in which she is trying to get rid of all of those fees. i hope that bill passes the new york legislature. but then, the next up is where things become difficult. ultimately, all of those government services that are funded by the backdoor tax for poor people, they will be back before the legislature and say hey, where is our money? we want what you took away from us. that is where the fight will have to continue for years in legislature, state by state. host: we have a viewer off of twitter who says my shot came as a new lawyer defending a dui defendant. she got appointed counsel. when she was found guilty, she wa

are the outcomes of the california state legislature better than new hampshire state legislature? it depends on your politics, i suppose, to some extent, but it is also the case that california's state legislature is dealing with a wider range of difficult questions because california's economy is regulated and often winds up being the defective way in which a lot of regulations work in the u.s., because a lot of companies make products, if they're gonna make products for the california market, you might as well use the same manufacturing processes . so the u.s., another problem that the u.s. legislature is something we have been beating the drums on since we first met over coffee many years ago, about the fact that the u.s. congress does not invest enough in its own policymaking capacity, so that is one question, whether, if you increase the number of members, but don't increase the expertise and staff capacity, you may not be solving the problem. the hope is if you have more members, you would also have more staff capacity and expertise, and more focus on committees and subcommi

the legislature, the republican controlled legislature would decide to ignore the vote and just send trump electors to the electoral college even if biden won the state. mark gellman again wrote that in september of last year in advance of the election that that was the plan the trump side was working on, and it seemed crazy at the time. i mean, even as trump was openly laying the groundwork for it before the voting was even started, calling the election a hoax before there was even voting. even then, gellman's report ing seemed like it was visiting from another planet one that wouldn't necessarily sustain democratic life. but then sure enough that is exactly what happened. that is exactly what trump and company did. it is in fact what they're still trying to effectuate, right, in the state legislatures with these election reviews from republican state legislatures in arizona, wisconsin, other states. they are saying the election results should be decertified, which means there shouldn't have been biden electors from there. there should have been trump electors. trump secretly won th

and then the state legislatures. and then in those cases.nd with all kinds of legislation and the turnover rate is close to 60 percent so every year. >> so that ability to change with legislation with that multiplicity and ultimately the injustice. >> and with the creditors at this is too complicated to explain you have to read the book that the people are frightened by inflation the depreciation of money. but they don't have any but thelv individuals and then it comes back to them. and that says i promise to pay. that is what madison is concerned about. as a consequence. and then for the central government to be approved. but then those that prevailed and said that's just crazy. and those that have transformed in the constitution and that is from what the states can do. they can't pass they can't print paper money. but madison is still disillusioned. and then that was so central. so listen to the significance of the distillation that was a fear of democracy and the page for paper money. >> . >> and social media is the democratic instrument

the state legislatures which were large in size quadruple in some cases but the colonial legislatures were very small sometimes 30 and 40 people now they have two or 300 and they're passing all kinds of legislation there annually elected and you have a multiplication in the legislatures and the turnover rate is close to 60%, new people coming in every year and they have their interest to promote the result is an ability of the legislation and am so confused and judges don't know what is the law and to get it straight the next year there's a whole set of laws you ultimately have the injustice of the law mainly his regular paper money and other beneficial walls of predators. if this is complicated yet to read the book and explain why the dominant people are frightened by inflation and the depreciation of money because they are essentially bankers there's almost no banks the bank of north america created in pennsylvania but most of the states have no banks there lending money to their neighbors that's political call comes back as paper which says i promise to pay in gold and silver but i

if i can enter the legislature, _ changed. if i can enter the legislature, at _ changed.- changed. if i can enter the legislature, at least i - changed. if i can enter the legislature, at least i can. changed. if i can enter the i legislature, at least i can ask for a political change, political improvements. if we just ignore it then that gives the government full house in the government full house in the legislature and what will be the result? they will be sorry till the end of days. there is no improvement on our democracy. there is no improvement on our democracy-— democracy. hong kong is preparing _ democracy. hong kong is preparing for _ democracy. hong kong is preparing for its - democracy. hong kong is preparing for its first - preparing for its first legislative council election since the introduction of national security law. this year, only three of the 153 candidates running consider themselves pro— democratic. pollsters are predicting a 30 year low voter turnout. beige and has imposed a sweeping reform of hong kong's electoral system. it means that only cand

our legislature, the congress does less and less work. agencies do more and more work and interpret the laws as they see fit and the people who are left out our we the people. we do not get a vote on all kinds of things that the founders intended for us to decide for ourselves. host: you argue in the book that we are more united than divided. for viewers who see poll after poll about political polarization, how can that be the case? guest: the first part of the book, i was really troubled by a narrative i hear from pundits on the left and the right, which is that we are bitterly divided nation. half of us democrats, half republicans. we hate each other. when you get into the polling data, which is widely available, anyone can look at it, reputable polling data, most americans are not that invested in politics. there are certainly not that invested in a political party. they are not that ideology goal. they tend to be center-right. people who are bitterly valid -- bitterly divided our people i call -- are people i called the political flac

this exercise performed by our legislature was not an audit. the ballot review can best be described as a sham. the review was plagued by errors. errors that are simply unacceptable to actually election professionals. the arizona senate hired a firm with no meaningful election experience or knowledge. they made up the rules as they went on. millions in tax dollars were wasted funding the audit and replacing voting machines rendered unusable by them. it was billed as the most transparent audit in american history, now potentially facing contempt of court for failing to produce audit documents. the entire exercise was in effort to sow doubt in the 2020 election results and being used to justify voting restrictions. from the outset of the ballot reveal, i said arizona would become the blueprint for those looking to undermine elections. and as other states now considered similar politically motivated reviews, i am familiar with the problems such reviews create. audits must be establishing rules and procedures. they must protect voter data and must

nothing fun, nothing fancy, whatever kansas legislatures do, doesn't reverse what the public needs to stay home so we can beat this scourge, despite what leaders of the legislature say, we are so close, and they are doing politics, don't fall for it. i'm so angry. shame. that was the kind of guy kansas had in charge of their covid response, unafraid, blunt talking, no politics, let's just talk about the pandemic and public health and what needs to be done. here's the evidence. that's what he's been doing. until now. dr. lee norman has now been pushed out, told to resign from his job as secretary of health in kansas. according to emails obtained by "the kansas reflector" newspaper, the governor's office told dr. lee norman that his blunt talk about covid that he had been so admired for, was apparently exacerbating tensions with republican lawmakers in the state. his public remarks were making it harder for the state governor to persuade republican legislatures to okay policies to try and keep the pandemic under control. too much straight talk. dr. norman told kcur radio in kansas city

president, we and the legislature need to get results. you should help us get this resolved, is going to change our country forever. he said, i'm not getting involved in it. within three days he has cheney weighing in. so he didn't tell the truth. i found this administration, i've been very clear, there were 50 presidential scholars gather to list the top presidents in the history of the country. sale wavered back and forth between both roosevelt, lincoln and washington. who are the worst? and bush was listed on every one of them so it's just not me, that's why i am confirmed -- concerned about this election coming up. and i have my own abide is --ideas about john mccain, tina. -- too. >> just so our viewers can better understand, what likelihood is there that we are going to have to face the nuclear option again? >> what the republicans came up with was a way to change our country forever. they made a decision, if they didn't get every judge they wanted, then they were going to send it to the house of representatives. we were going to in

if that became a prevalent practice, the legislature could step in. while we don't think it would be constitutional for maine to distinguish on that basis, we don't think that the absengs of an express provision in the statute to that effect is a basis -- >> don't we have to judge the constitutionality of the statute as it now stands? >> i think we should be asking is the statute a constitutional as owe plied to these particular petitioners. if these petitioners could point to an example in which a school was approved for funding even though it provided atheist i can or anti-religious instruction, that might be a valid for an as applied claim. the theoretical possibility that could happen is not a ground for indating the statute. the court has dealt with a lot of funding programs and issues under the establishment clause and the free exercise clause deciding certain practices are constitutional or not. i don't know any case the court has said the absence of this statute of some express exclusion for atheist schools is itself a basis for striking the l

a lot of legislatures, including conservative legislatures, are starting to recognize we are not going to use the courts as a backdoor tax collection system anymore. it is taxation without representation and it is bad public policy. so, that is the good news. a lot of legislatures are understanding this and going about trying to fix the problem. getting to the bottom of it will be difficult. there is a state senator in new york who has a bill called the end predatory fees act in which she is trying to get rid of all of those fees. i hope that bill passes the new york legislature. but then, the next up is where things become difficult. ultimately, all of those government services that are funded by the backdoor tax for poor people, they will be back before the legislature and say hey, where is our money? we want what you took away from us. that is where the fight will have to continue for years in legislature, state by state. host: we have a viewer off of twitter who says my shot came as a new lawyer defending a dui defendant. she got appointed counsel. when she was found guilty, she wa

to reduce that down to 20, they increase the actual size of the legislature with this both with going from 70 up to 90. what a good chunk of those. now we're going to just be appointed by the prob, aging body here. so they're, they're definitely the, representing the jamie and all of this. so the whole point of it is that the government should be able work through this legislature anything it walks. the complaint before was that when it was back with these new young former protesters who got elected and the old patent democrats, the old democratic party types, that they were stone walls. there were filibustering that were not allowing the government to push through its measures. and they said that everything was kind of sale needed. now they say this will be created to a patient legislature which will just got through government bills and then pass them and they expect a very high rate of government bills to be passed. i suspect that anything the government puts in will be passed by the legislature because that's what it's therefore keith. good to talk to you about the thanks. keith r

a lot of legislatures, including conservative legislatures, are starting to recognize we are not going to use the courts as a backdoor tax collection system anymore. it is taxation without representation and it is bad public policy. so, that is the good news. a lot of legislatures are understanding this and going about trying to fix the problem. getting to the bottom of it will be difficult. there is a state senator in new york who has a bill called the end predatory fees act in which she is trying to get rid of all of those fees. i hope that bill passes the new york legislature. but then, the next up is where things become difficult. ultimately, all of those government services that are funded by the backdoor tax for poor people, they will be back before the legislature and say hey, where is our money? we want what you took away from us. that is where the fight will have to continue for years in legislature, state by state. host: we have a viewer off of twitter who says my shot came as a new lawyer defending a dui defendant. she got appointed counsel. when she was found guilty, she wa

the legislature immediately tabled the resolutions which in effect killed them. legislature adopted another set of resolutions, they still censured the two senators but they adopted someone else's resolutions. tyler realized that at time that his colleagues didn't really care too much who his daddy was, they didn't care that he was full of himself, that he had a lot of self-confidence, and really for the first time in his life tyler had been told that something he had done did not pass muster. he wasn't crushed by it, but it did take him aback. it did make him think that maybe this political life is going to be a little bit more difficult than i thought at the outset. in 1813 tyler took another step in the phase of his political life, his political rise, he married well. this is letitia christian, from new kent county who tyler had married on his 23rd birthday, march 29th, 1813. judge tyler had died a few months before, which really made it easier for tyler to get player yid since he inherited some property from his father. he also inherited debts but he inherite

and are being considered by the republican state legislature in pennsylvania. so secretary hobbs and commissioner schmidt, can you describe how these republican driven sham audits differ technically from the professional, standard-driven audits that are required in many jurisdictions? and how they might also be impacting voter confidence? >> senator, i don't know that there is enough time left in the day left to do that. i would say that in arizona the results were certified, litigated and legitimately audited according to the law. and what we saw was absolutely not a real audit. it detracted from transparency -- there were lapses in security. every other professional auditing, senator, that you would see in place was not there. and overseen by people with an entirely partisan agenda. >> thank you. mr. schmidt? >> as a former senior auditor, i believe strongly in the importance of audits when they are legitimate and real and when carried out by qualified people who know something about auditing and something about elections. that is not what we have seen today.

they can't run for state legislature again.you are seeing people like jim frazier leave to go take a job in the transportation industry, where he has been connected, he has been head of the sla transportation committee. he is not anymore but he has been. you see people running for congress and for the l.a. board of supervisors. there is a member appointed to a judgeship in california. so, you are eing a lot of people thinking about the next step in their career. i feel like this will continue to have, continue to happen as more members, on the 2014 turn out date. >> 2010, and i have to add on to this, redistricting. new line during the run and in a lot of cases, legislators might not want to call and pack up and move for two more years in the legislature. i do think this dynamic really interesting to watch and a potential second term of governor gavin newsom. he might be in office with a vastly different legislature. there is already been a lot of debate over the balance of power between the executive and the legislature. that

if she is going to be a professional legislature. who's actually going to try to get the bill passed. she can safer her memoirs, all of her private feelings about that. but to go public with that, is never productive. she was very stern about joe manchin on your show last night, saying that she believed that what he was saying was at odds with what he's been saying before. but she didn't use the word, law she was very careful about the language she chooses. and it's an ongoing gaining of yards one, day losing yards another day. and the way, the way to present it publicly, is without all of that rancor. no matter how much you're feeling. because the message that people, get out there in the world. is oh, they're just fighting. they just fight that's all they do. and they literally, they literally use the word fight. which i by the way believe it's a mistake in politics. it's the words that creates all sort of problems. but, chuck schumer uses the word fight in his official written communications. about what he's doing on the senate fl

so i wonder what the legislature is can do more to prevent that. people with disabilities or disadvantage in the possible 3 are situation and you know, a sensitive question, but i think irrelevant one, how much does this decision have to do with germany is past where disabled people were systematically murdered by the nazi regime? oh, well i actually don't think that this plays an important role at this point of time . it would have been important. i think germany is parliament would have set up rules for regulating 3 our situations right at the beginning of the damage in 2020 . they rather left that to the medical societies for, for the doctor's test with having to navigate. there's this huge moral conundrum. how do they weigh the difference between a disability and a condition brought on by personal choices such as smoking or drinking excessively? or is that even part of the account to let's yeah, well, i don't think that this is such a major issue in the practical situation at hand. because a disability, or a preexisting condition, is not a crit

todd said if that became a prevalent practice the legislature could step in. i don't ago be constitutional to distinguish on the basis we don't think the absence in the statute to that effect. >> do we have to judge a constitutionality as it now stands? >> i think we should be asking is the statute unconstitutional as it is applied to these petitioners, if they can point to an example in which a school was approved for funding even though it provided instruction that that might be a valid basis, the court has dealt with a lot of funding programs and a lot of issues under the establishment clause in the free exercise clause deciding practices are constitutional or not. i don't know of any case the court has said the absence from the statute express exclusion for atheist schools is a basis for striking the law. i would like to say. >> i have one question i want to confirm understanding i didn't see the government's brief of suggestion that the court should rely on his status of use distinction. i saw this analogy to government speech. is that right? >> i think w

in the state legislatures. although trump won broad rhetorical support from state legislators for his fictitious claims of voter fraud, legislators were reluctant to take the radical concrete step of nullifying the votes of their own citizens. despite enormous pressure, none of the six contested states put forward an alternative slate of electors for trump. only later as congress prepared to count the electoral votes did legislators and some of those states begin talking unofficially about the certifying the biden electors. still though, the trump team achieve something crucial and enduring. by convincing tens of millions of angry supporters, including a catastrophic 68% of all republicans in november p are our poll. that the election had been stolen from trump. nothing close to this loss of faith and democracy has happened here before. even confederates recognized abraham lincoln's election. they tried to succeed because they knew that they had lost. the illegitimate-ing biden's victory was a strategic win for

todd said, if it became a prevalent practice, the legislature could step in so while we don't think it would be constitutional remains a distinguish on that basis, we don't think absence of a expressed position to that effect is basis -- >> judging the constitutionality of a statute as it now stands? >> i think we should be asking is the statute of constitutional is applied to these particular petitioners? if these petitioners could show one example in which a school was approved for funding even though it provided atheistic or antireligious instruction in it might be a valid basis for as applied claim but the b theoretical possibility that court happen grounds for that. they've dealt with a lot of issues under both establishment clause and free exercise clause distant practices or not. i don't know any case the court said the absence of the statute of expressed exclusion for atheist schools is a basis for striking the lockdown. i'd like to say -- >> i just want to confirm my understanding from i didn't seee analogy to government speech because i don't think it's necessary to treat it

he was elected to the virginia legislature for the third time. again we see a pattern of looking at a way to try to continue his political career by using the legislature as a springboard. he got himself nominated as vice president at the whigs at their convention their national convention they nominated william henry harrison. then of course we defeated martin van buren in november 1840. harrison, as you know died 32 days into his term. tyler became president the image on the right is a romanticized picture of this passing an elevation to presidency. harrison had declared his intention to serve only one term as president. tyler almost desperately wanted a second term. he did not make a claim he would only serve one term. after being banished spent much of his time trying to put himself in the position to secure election of his own right in 1844. most notably by pursuing and getting the annexation of texas. tyler became the first president to marry while in office on june 26, 1844 he married a new yorker 30 years younger julia gardner in a ceremo

i would point to therefore essential components of sb-8 the legislature created. first it allows anyone to enforce, regardless of any injury. second it allows those suits to be brought anywhere in texas, even for one abortion. so an abortion provider could face suits all across the state for a single abortion multiplied by the additional abortions provided. then there is no preclusive effect even if an abortion provider wins a case about that abortion. they still have to continue to face suit, after suit, after suit there's no preclusive effect. the provider of the abortion supporter into a permanent defendant. >> i do not want to interrupt your answer to justice but to pick up on a point you made, maybe you could clarify this before you finish answering her question, if you have not finished already. isn't it the case that they texas constitution requires a plaintiff to show injury in fact in accordance with the same standard that applies in federal court? when it first points he made may be the first point was sb-8 allows anybody to see whether or not that perso