KLZ 560 AM DENVER'S CONSERVATIVE HOME STATION
Menu
In this episode, we explore the ripple effects of a bold step taken by the Trump administration to overhaul the federal education system. Hear from Family Research Council experts and state attorneys who support transformative educational reforms and discuss paths to bolster national security through decisive immigration policies. Additionally, discover how a coalition of states is standing against unconstitutional gender transition practices for minors, highlighting the pressing need for a federal SAFE Act.
SPEAKER 12 :
from the heart of our nation’s capital in Washington, D.C., bringing compelling interviews, insightful analysis, taking you beyond the headlines and soundbites into conversations with our nation’s leaders and newsmakers, all from a biblical worldview. Sitting in for Tony is today’s host, Jody Heiss.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, good afternoon. Welcome. Welcome to this Thursday edition of Washington Watch. Hope you’re having a great day. I am Jody Heiss, a senior vice president here at the Family Research Council and president of FRC Action. An honor, as always, when given the opportunity to fill in for Tony and a thrill to have you on board with us as well. We’ve got a lot coming your way today. It was an executive action that has long been awaited.
SPEAKER 07 :
Today we take a very historic action that was 45 years in the making. In a few moments, I will sign an executive order to begin eliminating the Federal Department of Education once and for all.
SPEAKER 08 :
That was President Trump less than an hour ago. So what does this executive order mean for the future of education in America? That’s a question that many are asking, and I’ll unpack this when I’m joined a little bit later in the program by FRC’s Meg Kilgannon, who served in the Department of Education during the first Trump administration. And the left, as you can imagine, has been up in arms over this move. But really, you have to ask yourself, are they up in arms because this is going to hurt education? Or are they up in arms because of what it may mean for taxpayer-funded leftist indoctrination? Well, we’ll be joined in just a little while by Congressman Greg Stubbe, and he and I also plan to discuss some of the latest developments in the Ukraine-Russia war and the Israel-Hamas war as well. And while activist judges have been certainly trying to stop or at least slow down President Trump from answering the call of the American people, this administration is making it extremely clear that they’re going to keep doing the job that they’ve been called to do. We’re not going to stop doing what we’re doing.
SPEAKER 18 :
We’re going to arrest aliens today. We’re going to arrest TDA today. We’re going to deport TDA today. We’re going to deport criminals every single day. They’re not going to stop us. A district court judge isn’t going to stop us from making this country safe again. We’re going to keep moving forward.
SPEAKER 08 :
That was President Trump’s border czar, Tom Homan, earlier today. Well, there’s a coalition of some 26 state attorney generals backing the administration’s efforts to deport dangerous illegal immigrants. And I’ll be joined later in the program by one of them, Alabama’s Attorney General Steve Marshall, to discuss this. I’ll also be joined later today by Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost to discuss the battle that he’s engaged in to protect minors in his state from gender denying procedures, or what the left mistakenly refers to, I should say misleadingly, because it is intentional. They refer to this as gender affirming care, which it certainly is not. But we’ll be joined by the Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost to discuss that in his state. And then we’ll close out the program today with FRC’s Dr. Jennifer Bowens to discuss this battle on a national level and why there needs to be federal legislation to address this. So as always, we have a packed, packed program coming your way, and you don’t want to miss any of it. But if by chance you do, our website, you can always catch it at TonyPerkins.com. President Trump has taken a big step, a long, long-awaited step toward fulfilling his campaign promise regarding the Department of Education. He signed an executive order that is going to now start the process of dismantling the department. That executive order, by the way, was signed less than an hour ago. So is this going to make education great again? What are going to be the next steps? Well, here to discuss this and more is Congressman Greg Stubbe. He serves on the House Ways and Means Committee as well as the Intel Committee. He represents the 17th Congressional District of Florida. Congressman Stubbe, great to see you. Welcome back to Washington Watch.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah, it’s good to see you, Jody. Thanks for having me.
SPEAKER 08 :
Always a pleasure. All right, Congressman, first steps first. First things first. What’s your response to the president’s executive order?
SPEAKER 06 :
I think it’s great. I’ve been a co-sponsor of bills for years to try to do away with the Department of Education. That’s a function of our school districts and our counties. It’s a function of our states. It never should be a play at the federal level. You don’t see anywhere listed in the Constitution where the Department of Education is contemplated. It’s a great first step, but Congress needs to come behind the president now and support him in this. So through this reconciliation package, We need to do away with the Department of Education. We need to do the things that the president has done through executive order and back him up through the law so that once it gets through the process and gets through the bill, that the president can sign it and we no longer have to deal with this anymore. You can still do Pell Grants. You can still do that kind of thing. But ultimately, dismantling the department is a good step in the right direction.
SPEAKER 08 :
What is the temperature of Congress in that? Because, yeah, this is going to ultimately require congressional action to make this permanent. So how do you gauge it? Is it a real possibility that Congress will do away with the Department of Education?
SPEAKER 06 :
Well, I sure hope so. With President Trump in the White House, you’ve seen the House move to his position on things because he’s overwhelmingly supported by the American people. I certainly think it’s a majority of Republicans that support dismantling the Department of Education. But we absolutely have to do these type of things. The American people want them done. And this is our opportunity to do it. We have to get fiscally responsible. We have to balance our budget. We have to reduce the deficit. We have to do all those things because we have a Republican House. Senate and the White House, if we don’t do the things that President Trump campaigned on and we said that we were gonna do, we’re gonna probably lose the House in the midterm. So we have to come through for him. Backing him up on all these issues I think is very, very important.
SPEAKER 08 :
And just the dismal shape of the Department of Education and education in general in this country. And there’s just so much involved in this. I just underscore with an exclamation point everything you just said. And the American people as a whole, I’m convinced, are pulling with you. So why, Congressman Stubbe, is the left so against this? I guess one could speculate. But what’s your reasoning that you would suppose they’re so opposed to this?
SPEAKER 06 :
Teachers unions, 100 percent. The teachers unions obviously support it. The teachers union are 99 percent Democrat. You already saw the head of the teachers union saying that they are immediately going to file suit. They’ll probably have that ready to go and they’re going to file that tomorrow. That’s the left’s. response to anything these days is to file a lawsuit, knowing that district judges that are appointed by Biden will likely find in their favor and the will have to appeal and the administration will have to appeal and go through the process. But it’s absolutely 100% the teachers union. They love bureaucracy. They love the waste, fraud and abuse, and they’re all democratically run. So they’re, they’re obviously going to push against this pretty considerably.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, you’ve been one of those ever since I’ve known you, or ever since this became a big issue, I’ll probably put it that way, a strong, strong defender of fairness and safety in female sports. And we certainly have seen how the previous Biden administration tried to use Title IX to push transgenderism. And, you know, when you kind of look at that through the lens of the Department of Education, you kind of ask yourself that. Is this whole executive order and the move now underway to dismantle this apartment really part of perhaps doing away with the Department of Indoctrination slash education?
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah, think about all of the executive orders and the things that the Department of Education did on trans sports and women’s sports and doing away with biological women only being allowed in women’s sports. And it’s a huge problem. This is a state’s rights issue. The state should be determining this. Your local school districts should be determining this, not the federal government. And the federal government shouldn’t do an edict from Washington, D.C. on allowing biological men and women’s sports in your K through 12 type scenarios. And then that has to be fulfilled nationwide. So it absolutely is a great thing that the president has done. I’m looking forward to Congress coming behind him and backing him up. We have to do this on all of these policies, from energy to the border to education. We only got two years to do this because there’s no guarantee we’re going to have the House in two years.
SPEAKER 08 :
the president here here if i can congressman stevie shift gears on you a little bit uh you previously served on the foreign affairs committee and you’re currently on the intel committee extremely important committee uh for what however far you can go at least let me put it that way can you give us your take on the latest developments with russia and ukraine
SPEAKER 06 :
Well, look, the president has said from the beginning when he campaigned that he wants peace in Eastern Europe, that he’s going to bring the parties together and try to reach some type of deal. Neither side’s probably going to like it, but it’s going to prevent millions of people from dying that has happened, hundreds of thousands of Russians and Ukrainians that have died in this war. And he’s been very… strong on where America is. We’re not going to continue to send tax dollars to Ukraine with no oversight whatsoever to fund an endless war in Ukraine. So the president’s been very strong on this. He’s had conversations this week with President Putin. He’s had conversations with Zelensky. And I think we’re going to come to a landing place at some point because both sides realize that they can’t continue to do this. Ukraine certainly is going to realize that without the United States backing it militarily. And either the other countries in Europe are going to have to step up and support Ukraine, but it’s going to continue to move this war for years on end. And that’s not what the president wants. That’s not what’s good for America. It’s not what’s good for the world. We need peace in Eastern Europe. And the only person that can bring that is President Trump.
SPEAKER 08 :
And it’s pretty remarkable to watch all that unfold. As we look from Ukraine and Russia to Israel, the IDF, of course, has expanded now the ground operations into Rafah. How optimistic are you that the increased pressure that Israel is putting on Hamas is going to get them to change course?
SPEAKER 06 :
Well, it’s not only the pressure from Israel, it’s the pressure from the White House and President Trump. I mean, telling Hamas, hey, if you don’t get our hostages back, they’re gonna be hell to pay, sends a very strong message to terrorists. And that’s the type of leadership that you need in the White House. And I fully support what Israel’s doing. I believe that the president could be more active militarily over there and wipe Hamas off the grid. It’s a globally recognized terrorist organization. They had American citizens as hostages for years, and the Biden administration did absolutely nothing about it. So I absolutely support what Israel’s doing. The worldwide Middle Eastern community is trying to advise Hamas to come to some type of agreement here because they know what ultimately is going to happen, and they certainly don’t want the United States involved militarily. But President Trump hasn’t ruled that out, and I think— I think if they’re not willing to negotiate with the White House and President Trump, then absolutely we support Israel. We’re gonna continue to support Israel. And President Trump has full authority to take out a globally recognized terrorist organization.
SPEAKER 08 :
Wow. Less than a minute left. While I’ve got you closely related to all of this is the two month deadline that President Trump has given Iran to accept the new nuclear deal. So how do you think Iran’s going to respond to President Trump, especially after years of going nowhere, really, with the Biden administration?
SPEAKER 06 :
When Trump left office the last time, Iran was broke. Then the Biden administration opened up $8 billion worth of revenue to Iran and has allowed them to fund these proxy wars. They fund Hamas, they fund Hezbollah, they fund the Houthis. All of those resources come from Iran. So we can cut them off economically, which I believe that the president’s gonna do if they won’t do a nuclear deal. The world and the United States cannot stand for a nuclearized Iran. And we have to stand against it. There’s no way that we should allow them to get nuclear capabilities. This White House understands that, unlike the previous White House. And if they don’t take the deal, I think economically, we put those sanctions back in place and they’re going to have real challenges.
SPEAKER 08 :
Thank you so much, Congressman Greg Stubbe. Always great to see you. And man, we appreciate your expertise and appreciate you coming on Washington Watch. All right, friends, coming up, we’ve got much more discussion coming your way on the impact of President Trump’s executive order to dismantle the Department of Education. You want to continue hearing what’s ahead. Stay tuned. We’ll be back in just a moment.
SPEAKER 17 :
During these challenging times for our nation, Family Research Council continues to serve as a watchman on the wall for faith, family, and freedom. And together, thanks to your support, we’re making an eternal impact. 2024 was a year of shining the light for biblical truth in Washington, DC. Last fall, over 1,000 spiritually active, governance-engaged conservatives gathered for the Pray, Vote, Stand Summit to pray for our nation and ensure that the issues impacting sage cons were understood and advanced. Washington Watch with Tony Perkins marked a major milestone this year, its 900th episode, and added the Washington Watch News Desk, a new production that presents the top news each day from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand published 2,000 articles of news, commentary, and podcasts in 2024, garnering over 5 million views. FRC’s outlet for news and commentary continues to pursue the truth on the issues that matter most to you and your family. And with the launch of the Stand Firm app, you can listen to, watch, and read our content in one simple place. Pray for current issues, stay rooted in the scriptures, and engage the political sphere with the community of believers on our new platform. In 2024, FRC shaped public policy and culture, organizing the National Gathering for Prayer and Repentance, where members of Congress and Christian leaders came together to seek God’s intervention in America. In May, FRC called upon believers to pray for and stand with Israel by dedicating a portion of their worship services to pray for Israel’s peace, prosperity, and protection. With Pray, Vote, Stand Decision 2024, FRC and Real Life Network led a powerful evening of election night coverage to analyze the election results and pray that our nation would turn back to God. We also filmed a transformative educational course, God and Government. Available now on the Stand Firm app, this series will explore the biblical and historical foundations of our government, empowering you to stand confidently in your role as a citizen of heaven and earth. Family Research Council thanks you for partnering with us in standing for faith, family, and freedom.
SPEAKER 05 :
Looking for a trusted source of news that shares your Christian values? Turn to The Washington Stand, your ultimate destination for informed, faith-centered reporting. Our dedicated team goes beyond the headlines, delivering stories that matter most to believers. From breaking events to cultural insights, we provide clear, compassionate coverage through a biblical lens. Discover news you can trust at The Washington Stand, where faith and facts meet every day.
SPEAKER 08 :
Thank you so much for joining us today on Washington Watch. I’m Jody Heiss. An honor to be sitting in today for Tony. And as we mentioned in the last segment, President Trump earlier today, in fact just barely over an hour ago, he signed a new executive order concerning the U.S. Department of Education. This was something that he had pledged to do, that is to dismantle the department. He made this pledge while he was on the campaign trail last year. And joining me now to dive deeper into this executive order is Meg Kilgannon. She’s a senior fellow for education studies here at the Family Research Council and previously served at the Department of Education during the first Trump administration. Meg, thanks for joining me today. Great to have you.
SPEAKER 11 :
It’s great to be here.
SPEAKER 08 :
All right, so 30,000-foot view. What’s your thoughts about this executive order that President Trump signed today?
SPEAKER 11 :
I think it’s a really wonderful development. I think that it’s something that we really need to have happen for the president to sign this executive order. It will encourage members of Congress, like Congressman Stubbe said before me, it will encourage them to perhaps even in this reconciliation process that’s coming up, finally pass the legislation that we need to completely eliminate the Department of Education. while at the same time maintaining the protections for students that the federal government can provide. So I think it’s a really, really great day.
SPEAKER 08 :
Okay, so there’s a lot of parents, probably grandparents, listening, watching us right now, and they are asking, what is the benefit of doing away with the Department of Education, and how is this going to serve our children in schools better?
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, you know, in a way the Department of Education takes the little amount of money that comes from the federal government and they take a slice right off the top of whatever small amounts of money are going to the states. So at least this way the states would get money directly and they would get more money. So – I understand people are concerned when something is being taken away. That’s, of course, a natural reaction. But I think that when we reflect on what really has been the value add of this department and what is the state of American education right now? Are students achieving? Do parents feel included in the process at their schools? I think that we have to agree that the answer, unfortunately, is that students are not Are not being well educated right now and that the Department of Education isn’t doing anything to correct that problem and that it is actually making that problem worse. So let’s eliminate that and then we’ll get down to business. Is the problem in your state? Is the problem in your school? I think that this is what we need to do to really figure out what’s going on.
SPEAKER 08 :
Yeah, that’s a great point, Meg. I would love to see, and I’m sure probably somebody out there has it, you may even know as informed as you are on all this, but I’d be curious to know the test scores before the Department of Education came into existence versus test scores across the country since we had a federal Department of Education. That’d be good information, wouldn’t it?
SPEAKER 11 :
It would be. And some of these kind of test scores didn’t exist and weren’t required, right? It was the department that created this, that drove the need for that kind of testing. But, you know, before the Department of Education was started in 1979, Kids were in school. And I will say this, that the family is in crisis. And as long as the family is in crisis, children are going to suffer, right? So at the end, if you’re worried about this department closing, Look to your own family and your own community around you immediately and make sure that everything in your life is going the way it should go. That’s really in the end the only thing you can control anyway, right? And so that’s, you know, be engaged in your local school. President Trump made a point of saying at this event today that he loves our teachers and he wants to take care of our teachers. And I know that parents feel the same way. Americans spend generously on education. We want teachers to be well paid. We want schools to be well funded. We want our children to be in good environments with happy teachers, right? And so this is a way of trying to address some of the problems that we know are happening in education. And we’re going to do it at the local state and local level. And I think that he’s, I think President Trump is right. I think that the governors and state education agencies are really excited to do this, to have this money directly and to be able to spend it the way they feel like it needs to be done effectively in their state. There was a statistic cited by that in Iowa, for example, about $50 billion of expenses occur because of federal Department of Education mandates. So that’s $50 billion that’s not going to the children of Iowa that the state taxpayers are paying. So what is the offset here? Something’s got to give. And our federal budget is in trouble anyway. So I think this is a really good idea. We should definitely give this a try.
SPEAKER 08 :
Will this executive order in any way affect students with, say, disabilities and Title I funding for low-income schools?
SPEAKER 11 :
The promise is being made that those programs will remain intact and will be continued. And those kinds of funds can come from other places within the federal government. Before we had a Department of Education, we had an Office of Education at Health, Education, and Welfare, that old department. And so we may be returning to a situation like that where there are some functions of education with an education title that are a part of another agency perhaps. And definitely the special needs funding could come out of HHS and that might be a really much better use of that money coming out of that department.
SPEAKER 08 :
So to clarify, as we wrap up this segment, Meg, the portions of the department will still be there for grants and that type of thing. But primarily, the money would shift from the Federal Department of Education and go directly to the states and enable education to be handled on the state and local levels. Is that what is happening here?
SPEAKER 11 :
Absolutely. Absolutely. And it will mean even more money going to states, not less money, because we won’t have that cut off the top from here in Washington.
SPEAKER 08 :
And ultimately, that’s the best place for education. The closer the funds get to the actual student, the more effective and impactful it is. Thank you, Meg Kilgannon, Senior Fellow for Education Studies here at the Family Research Council. Always appreciate your fantastic insights. Thank you for joining us.
SPEAKER 11 :
Thank you, Jody.
SPEAKER 08 :
All right, friends, don’t go anywhere. We’ve got a lot more yet to come your way. Next, Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall is going to share about why a coalition of state attorney generals have come together to defend the Trump administration’s recent actions against the violent Venezuelan gang. So you don’t want to miss this. We’ll be back right after this break.
SPEAKER 01 :
At the 2025 National Gathering for Prayer and Repentance, hundreds gathered with Christian and government leaders at the Museum of the Bible in Washington, D.C. to pray for the nation and ask God to forgive us of our sins.
SPEAKER 04 :
We gather here not to appeal to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. We are appealing to heaven. Today we make our appeal not in the authority of a political party or in the name of a denomination. We come in the name and the authority of Jesus Christ. who has been given all authority in heaven and on earth, and we have been commissioned to operate in that authority.
SPEAKER 03 :
Father, we pray in Jesus’ name for our complacency, our greed, our pride, our gluttony, our sloth, and tolerance of sin.
SPEAKER 02 :
Lord, your word is the food that can make America healthy again. May your word be exalted and believed in our nation again.
SPEAKER 19 :
Lord, we ask that you allow us to become that shining city on the hill once more for your love, your grace, and your mercy.
SPEAKER 14 :
I thank you for your love and your grace and your mercy, for the opportunity that you have provided us to heal our land. We ask you to do it, Lord. We ask you for the wisdom, discernment, and stamina to do the thing that you have called each one of us, all of us here, to do. May we be found faithful. We trust it, pray it, believe it all. In Jesus’ name, amen.
SPEAKER 08 :
Good afternoon. Welcome back to Washington Watch. I’m your host, Jody Heiss, filling in for Tony today. Thank you for joining us. All right, President Trump’s efforts to remove the transnational Venezuela gang, Trendi Aragua, it’s now being backed up by a coalition of 26 state attorney generals. In a brief filed before the DC District Court of Appeals, this group of attorney generals is requesting that the district court’s temporary restraining order on Trump’s deportation effort be stayed during the appeals process. So how might this brief influence the courts? And what might be the next legal steps in an effort to rid the U.S. of this horrible group of gang members? Well, here to review the facts of this case is Alabama’s Attorney General, Steve Marshall. He is one of the 26 AGs who co-signed the brief. And in addition to his responsibilities as a state attorney general, Marshall serves as a member of the executive committee of the Republican Attorney General’s Association. Attorney General Marshall, welcome back to Washington Watch. Great to have you.
SPEAKER 13 :
Good to see you, Jody. Thank you for having me.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, it’s great to see you as well. So what are the arguments that are provided in this brief against the temporary restraining order?
SPEAKER 13 :
Yeah, Jody, in some ways, the question is, what are the arguments against, right? For the Democrats to somehow say that a terrorist organization that is committing crimes against the people of this country, engaging in drug trafficking, human trafficking and authorizing violence on law enforcement. that somehow or another we want to stop the Trump administration from removing these individuals from our country. And so it is astonishing to me that the arguments are being made that this president has enacted very consistent with his mandate, and that is to reverse the horrific trend in the Biden administration and allowing individuals to come into this country who want to do harm. Very surprised by the decision of the D.C. Circuit initially in being able to stop or attempting to stop the administration from taking this action because this is a national security issue. I mean, this is a violent extremist gang. It has been identified as a foreign terrorist organization. in which there is a direct proclamation from the president identifying the harm that they can cause on the American people. There is no dispute that they came into this country unlawfully for a bad purpose with a direct connection to the leadership of the Venezuelan government. But yet somehow that isn’t enough. Clearly, this president, under the Constitution as well as under the Alien Enemies Act, has the ability to remove individuals that have invaded this country to conduct bad operations, and that’s exactly what this gang is doing.
SPEAKER 08 :
Yeah, extremely well said. And in fact, your office mentioned that the president has the constitutional right to protect our national security. He has the right to protect American lives that have been put at risk. by this and other terrorist members. So in what ways, I mean, I think we all see some of the things, but just how widespread is this problem in the U.S. among citizens?
SPEAKER 13 :
Yeah, I think we’re still learning. You know, there’s no doubt that these gangs become embedded in communities. And particularly when we have no idea who’s crossed the border, we have no ability to contact these individuals or know, in fact, where they’re going. We’re still learning it. And sadly, we learn it as a result of, for example, the murder of Lakin Riley. from one of TDA gang members taking the life of this innocent college student, where Congress has to respond by passing a law. I mean, that shows you the impact already this gang has had in our country. You know, we’ve all seen the video of Colorado and what’s going on there with the takeover and apartment complex. We’ve heard the stories from law enforcement across the country where they have a presence in multiple states. And, you know, Jody, is the expectation of Democrats that we just simply sit back and wait for them to commit more harm on the citizens of this country? Or do we expect a president to show leadership like we’ve seen from President Trump to be able to attack affirmative action to be able to remove these individuals from our shores? We think it’s not only an appropriate act by President Trump, but one that’s needed in our country to ensure public safety. I have no doubt that will ultimately prevail. But this is just one of the steps in getting the courts convinced that he’s right.
SPEAKER 08 :
So what’s the next step after filing this brief? And do you think this ends up in the Supreme Court?
SPEAKER 13 :
I could definitely see it in the Supreme Court. The next step is for the D.C. Circuit to determine whether or not they want to set aside the injunction that this Democratic judge has done. But judge is also a bigger issue here that I think you hear around multiple of the lawsuits against President Trump is whether or not a singularly sitting district judge has the ability to stop policy at a nationwide level. We’ve already seen the court very much opposed, at least some of the conservative members, opposed to this power being vested in a singular district judge. It’s the mechanism in which Democrats were able to hamper the Trump administration during their prior tenure, and one that I hope the court will weigh in on. If you look, for example, you and I have talked about the successful efforts of Republican AGs around Title IX and the improper regulation that came from the Biden administration trying to open up our locker rooms and our bathrooms. We did that in individual cases with individual states suing, not with one judge stopping the entire nation with one stroke of a pen.
SPEAKER 08 :
Yeah, it’s amazing. I think that is an excellent point that drives to the heart of this whole legal battle. It’s a whole balance of powers argument that’s at stake here. And that is a battle that must be resolved. We have three branches of government equally involved. responsible, but for separate tasks in different jurisdictions. So I think that’s an excellent point that you bring up. Thank you so much, Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall. Always great to have you. Appreciate your leadership and the other 25 attorney generals with you. Thanks for joining us on Washington Watch.
SPEAKER 13 :
Thank you.
SPEAKER 08 :
All right, coming up, we’ve still got more to cover. We’re going to be talking about allowing kids to undergo so-called transgender procedures. That battle continues to plague states all around the nation, and the most recent one is Ohio. I’ll be joined right after the break with Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost about what’s happening in his state, and then FRC’s Dr. Jennifer Bowens will go deeper into this topic. So stay tuned. We’ll be back on the other side of the break.
SPEAKER 15 :
What is God’s role in government? What does the separation of church and state really mean? And how does morality shape a nation? President John Adams said our Constitution was made only for moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. Join Family Research Council for God and Government, a powerful 13-part series that equips you with biblical truth to engage in today’s most pressing debates. From the Ten Commandments in Classrooms to the Immigration Crisis of America, we’ll uncover The foundations of our nation’s history and why it’s relevant for today. Defend God’s plan for government because faith and freedom were never meant to be separate. New episodes available each Monday. To view the series on the Stand Firm app, text COURSE to 67742.
SPEAKER 16 :
The world is hurting. Streets are filled with crime. Families are broken. Sin is celebrated and God is mocked. Everywhere we look, the wages of our sin are on full display. As Christians, we know that surrender to God’s will is the solution to our biggest problems, but not everyone agrees. Even in church, we hear people say the most important thing is to be tolerant, that we shouldn’t impose a morality on other people, and that loving our neighbor means celebrating what they do. But you can’t do that. It’s not that you don’t love your neighbor. You do. But you care about God’s opinion more than your neighbor’s opinion, and this makes you different. In fact, sometimes it makes you feel alone, like you’re the only one. But there is good news. You are not alone, not even close. Research has found that there are 59 million American adults who are a lot like you. There are millions of people around the country who are born again, deeply committed to practicing their faith, and believe the Bible is the reliable Word of God. But that’s not all. They’re also engaged in our government. They’re voters. They’re more likely to be involved in their community, and they’re making a difference in elections. The problem is that a lot of them feel alone, too. We want to change that. FRC wants to connect these 59 million Americans to speak the truth together, no matter the cost. If you want to learn more about this group and what it means to be a spiritually active, governance-engaged conservative, or if you want to find out if you are one of these sage cons yourself, go to frc.org slash sagecon and take the quiz to find out. The world is hurting and we have the solution. We can’t do it alone, but we can do it if we work together. That’s what we’re working toward every day. Join us. Go to FRC.org slash S-A-G-E-C-O-N SageCon to learn more. That’s S-A-G-E-C-O-N SageCon to learn more.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, good afternoon. Welcome back to Washington Watch. I am Jody Heist sitting in today for Tony and an honor to have you with us as well. All right. The leftist media avoids noting this, but the reality is that most American adults are opposed to transgendering minors. And in fact, that number is up from 46 percent to 56 percent over the last three years. That at least according to the Pew Research Center. But still, as we highlighted on the program yesterday, there is a fierce, fierce battle underway over this issue. And of course, related to this issue is also the issue of fairness and safety in female sports. But earlier this week, a three-judge panel on the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily blocked the enforcement of an Ohio state law that protected minors from gender-denying procedures. And that, of course, on the other hand, the left mistakenly, misleadingly, so refers to all this as gender affirming care, which it absolutely is not. But nonetheless, what was their rationale behind that decision and what’s next for this battle? Well, joining me now to discuss this is the Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost. Attorney General Yost, welcome back to Washington Watch. Great to see you again.
SPEAKER 09 :
Good to see you, Congressman. Thanks for having me.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, it’s our pleasure. And we’re all kind of shaking our head over all of this. But if you would, the SAFE Act, the Saving Adolescents from Experimentation, remind us the details about that in this House Bill 68.
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, it’s a common sense law that basically says you can’t undertake permanent, irreversible medical procedures to change somebody’s sex before they are 18. It also says that boys aren’t allowed to play girls sports, which is kind of a would have been a no brainer just a few years ago. But obviously, we’ve had in Ohio to pass a law making common sense the law of the land. Notwithstanding that, the ACLU sued. They lost in the trial court below after a five-day trial where we had a bunch of great testimony, including from… Chloe Cole, one of the great advocates out there talking about against the idea of gender transitions for minors and went up to the Court of Appeals. So that was the decision a couple of days ago.
SPEAKER 08 :
Okay, and Chloe is amazing, by the way. She’s been on with us, and yes, she is such a powerful voice. But can you tell us now about this decision from the Court of Appeals? What did this three-judge panel say regarding the bill? And maybe perhaps more specifically, what did they get wrong with it all?
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, they’re trying to latch on to an Ohio-only amendment. Ohio passed a constitutional amendment back in the teens in reaction to Obamacare that said everybody’s got a right to choose their own health care. The federal government’s not allowed to impose a plan on us. The ACLU is trying to argue, and the court ultimately agreed, that that law extends to the idea that the state can’t tell parents that they’re not allowed to have their children mutilated or chemically castrated. And we’re going to take that to the Supreme Court. You know, Jody, the truth of the matter is we have all kinds of laws that forbid conduct for minors that is perfectly fine or at least legal for adults. You can’t get a tattoo as a minor without adult permission. And even if you have adult permission, You can’t enter into a contract and have it enforced against you. Parent cosigns that the parent’s on the hook, but they can’t sue you under that contract if you’re a minor. You can’t vote as a minor, even if your parents say it’s okay. Well, why is that? Because teenagers’ brains are not formed. They’re not grown up yet. They can’t see and foresee the consequences of their actions. So we have all sorts of laws that restrict behaviors for teenagers, for minors, that don’t apply to adults because it’s our job as a civilized society to protect the kids.
SPEAKER 08 :
Great, great points. And I think it’s also, it’s just worth noting by way of just bringing it all into context. Here’s something we already know, but we’re talking about cutting off healthy body parts We’re talking about using hormone and puberty blockers in a way that they were not designed to be used. And this is not denying someone health care. It really is like experimentation and experimentation with lifelong, irreversible consequences. Isn’t that the reality of it?
SPEAKER 09 :
Yeah, and I think the appeals court knows that they’re on kind of thin ice here because they let stand the surgical procedures, the ban on surgical procedures, and didn’t go quite that far. But these puberty blockers, which Chloe Cole can tell you all about, and she had parental permission, by the way, when she was a kid, The bottom line is they have just as long-term effects as a surgical procedure does. And in fact, the rest of the world, we have medical professionals that are backing away from this and saying, this isn’t a good idea for people before they’re fully grown. We shouldn’t be doing this to kids. I think this is a case of judges inserting themselves into lawmaking and into the practice of medicine. And I’m very hopeful that the Supreme Court of Ohio is going to see through it. I will tell you this. I will promise you this. We’re going to keep fighting to protect the kids of this state. I am never, ever going to give up on this battle.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, thank you a thousand times over for that. So in terms of what’s next for all of this, you firmly believe this is eventually going to find its way to the Supreme Court?
SPEAKER 09 :
Yeah, we’re taking it there right now.
SPEAKER 08 :
Wow. That is awesome. Well, I just want to thank you again so much, Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost. What a tremendous job you’re doing protecting children and leading the way for our entire country to stand up for this issue. Many, many thanks to you. Job well done. Thank you for taking time to join us today on Washington Watch.
SPEAKER 09 :
It’s good to be with you again.
SPEAKER 08 :
Thank you. God bless. All right. I want to broaden this discussion even further right now, seeing how this has become unquestionably a nationwide issue. So here now to discuss why we need a federal SAFE Act. to protect all kids from these kinds of dangerous so-called gender transition surgeries is Jennifer Bowens. Dr. Bowens is the director of the Center for Family Studies here at Family Research Council. She has worked extensively as a clinician providing trauma-focused treatment to children in foster care and behavioral health settings. And she’s also helped a lot of adults who’ve experienced interpersonal traumas such as sexual abuse and assault. Dr. Bowens, welcome back to Washington Watch. Always an honor to have you. Thanks for having me, Jody. It’s good to be with you. Well, it’s our pleasure. Thank you. All right. So let’s start with that first question that I just mentioned that you believe. Why do we need a federal SAFE Act?
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah, well, this issue isn’t for kids just in red states, but also for kids in blue states. And it’s not a good practice for any child. I don’t care what color of state that you’re in. This is a bad medical practice. And we need to use every available mechanism that we have, whether it’s taking these cases to the Supreme Court, suing. Doctors who perform malpractice, I mean, it is malpractice, or inviting our professional organizations to do some soul searching by presenting case studies. We have so many different ways that we can educate, correct policies, et cetera, and we need to do everything we can to keep our kids safe.
SPEAKER 08 :
Absolutely. You know, it’s probably a lot of folks, viewers and regular listeners of this program so far, probably are not even aware of the role that FRC had literally in pioneering the first SAFE Act back in Arkansas. Can you kind of fill us in on that process?
SPEAKER 10 :
Sure. The Save Adolescents from Experimentation Act, SAVE Act as we call them, we helped pioneer that model legislation and were instrumental with Robin Lundstrom, who introduced that bill into Arkansas. And Arkansas was one of the first states to really take up this charge. And you can imagine the bravery of Robin Lundstrom in, you know, in a landscape that, you know, she was all alone at the time. And so we were a big part of that to giving research to back up the model legislation, as well as providing the outline for that. And now look at what has happened. All kinds of bills have proliferated, different versions of these safe acts. And now we have 27 states, roughly 27 states that are implementing a version of the SAFE Act in their state to protect kids. These are all measures to protect children, and it’s been wonderful to see various states take up the cause in a very short amount of time, relatively speaking.
SPEAKER 08 :
It really has… It really has been amazing. As you mentioned, now 27 states, and that’s as of this month. I mean, that’s current information right now that have taken up this trying to protect children. And again, thank you for your tip of the spear role in all of this. Jennifer, if you can, remind us again about the harms of these so-called gender transition procedures.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah, and we heard a little bit from AG Yost, but, you know, we often hear about the physical harms, which they’re pretty, you know, if you want to pay attention, they’re pretty obvious. You know, we’re talking about, first of all, potentially losing parts of healthy parts of life. one’s body in an effort to appear like the opposite sex. But we’re talking about structurally the integrity of a person’s body being altered through chemicals that we know have an effect, such as bone density loss. cardiovascular issues, cancer. I mean, the list goes on and on. One thing that’s not mentioned very, very much, and I think that’s because there just isn’t a lot of research on it, is the fact that children are missing psychological milestones, developmental milestones by altering or halting puberty and by appearing as the opposite sex. And these are important developmental milestones of going through puberty. We all had those experiences where we had to grapple with uncomfortable feelings and uncomfortable feelings about who we are in a social world. And that’s going to be lost for kids who have undergone these gender procedures or really altering procedures to appear like the opposite sex. That’s all they are. They’re cosmetic and very mutilating at the same time. It’s amazing.
SPEAKER 08 :
Yeah, we don’t even know the beginning of it. As you start unraveling some of that for us, I’m just thinking, man, the depth of harm here from a psychological perspective, spiritually, and obviously physical harm, it’s deeper and broader and wider than we can even imagine. Attorney General Dave Yost from Ohio just a few moments ago talked about how he is seeing people all over who are changing their perspectives on this. What are you seeing from a medical perspective? Are we seeing a shift in our country and in the medical community back to sanity and common sense on all of this?
SPEAKER 10 :
Well, I think the polls reflect that. But I’d say just at another level, I think you’re seeing professionals willing to come out more than they have before. And of course, that’s not in the numbers that we’d love to see. But the fact that we have so many people working on this issue. Compared to several years ago, I mean, several years ago, you could barely get somebody to testify on this issue. Now you have a whole large cohort of people that are willing to come forward and tell their story, whether it’s as a professional or someone who’s been affected and is looking to return to their community. I don’t even say detransition, I say coming back to God’s identity for them. They’re returning to who God created them to be, and they’re willing to speak out, which is absolutely wonderful. And that to me is a sign that the people are rising up and they’re rejecting this as an ideology and slash religion.
SPEAKER 08 :
Wow. Well, I couldn’t agree with you more. And I love the way you described this, not detransitioning, but just coming back to God’s identity as to who he created these individuals to be. So for those who may be watching or listening right now who question why we might need a SAFE Act on the state and or national level, what would you say to them?
SPEAKER 10 :
I think we are at a place where this has been such a pervasive issue in every institution of our society. We certainly hear about it in schools and in the psychological community, but it’s been in business and every area has been infected, especially with the push from the last administration to do so. And we need sweeping legislation at every level, rules, rulemaking. I mean, we could, local policies, every single area also needs to be addressed because our society has been infected and we need a good vaccine. A good vaccine, not promoted by some folks like Dr. Fauci.
SPEAKER 08 :
Dr. Jennifer Bowens, Director of the Center for Family Studies here at the Family Research Council. Thank you so much for your leadership on this issue. We appreciate it. All right, friends, that wraps up this edition of Washington Watch. Hope you have a fantastic evening. We’ll see you tomorrow. Right back, same time.
SPEAKER 12 :
Washington Watch with Tony Perkins is brought to you by Family Research Council and is entirely listener supported. Portions of the show discussing candidates are brought to you by Family Research Council Action. For more information on anything you heard today or to find out how you can partner with us in our ongoing efforts to promote faith, family and freedom, visit TonyPerkins.com.
