Washington Watch Reporter Mary Stackhouse reports on the NATO Summit, Iran, and the latest scandal surrounding Graham Platner. Dr. David Adesnik, Vice President of Research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, shares what to anticipate from
SPEAKER 09 :
of our nation’s capital in Washington, D.C., bringing compelling interviews, insightful analysis, taking you beyond the headlines and sound bites 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 11 :
It’s a regime that’s infected with the Muslim Brotherhood, which hates the United States. He harbors Hamas, the Hamas terrorists. He supports them. He finances them. He’s thrown his opponents in jail, all of them. He throws more journalists in jail than anyone can understand. So he’s not exactly a model ally of the United States.
SPEAKER 05 :
That was Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on CNN earlier today commenting on the president of Turkey. Welcome to this Tuesday, July 7th edition of Washington Watch. I’m your guest host, Jody Heiss, filling in today for Tony and honored to be sharing the next hour with you. Thanks for tuning in. All right, coming up, President Trump met with Turkish President Erdogan earlier today. This is taking place at the two-day NATO summit that is happening there in Turkey. We’ll be discussing more of the details of this with Dr. David Adesnik from the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Then a little bit later, Tennessee Congressman Chuck Fleischman will be joining me to talk about how Americans are benefiting from that one big, beautiful bill that was signed into law a year ago. And we’ll also be talking together about how congressional Republicans will be working through the third reconciliation package and what that may entail. And then also… We want to cover today a proposed U.S. Postal Service rule that would seek to strengthen mailing standards for the transmission of mail-in ballots. Of course, that’s a big deal for federal elections, and we’ll talk about why 13 state attorney generals have supported that measure. All that and much more is coming your way straight ahead right here on Washington Watch. Let’s begin with some international news. President Trump arrived in Turkey today for the annual NATO summit. And of course, this comes at a time where President Trump has voiced complaints about America’s heavy investment into the defense alliance. And joining me now to discuss this and get us kicked off is Washington Watch reporter Mary Stackhouse. Mary, there’s a lot happening at the NATO summit. Kind of break it down for us. What’s going on there today?
SPEAKER 14 :
Jodi, earlier today, President Trump met in Turkey with Turkish President Erdogan. During the meeting, when speaking to reporters, President Trump signaled that he may be open to giving Turkey F-35 fighter jets. This is something that Turkey wants, but something that Israel and some Republicans have been opposed to. Here’s what President Trump had to say on the matter.
SPEAKER 03 :
The decision we’re going to make… We have a very good relationship. I would think that many people, I can tell you many people, including the people sitting right here, thinks, you know, why wouldn’t we do that? We have a better relationship with Turkey, and Turkey’s been in many ways much more loyal than other countries that we think would be loyal. So, yeah, something certainly we would consider.
SPEAKER 14 :
President Trump also said that he would lift some economic sanctions on Turkey, despite them retaining Russian air defense systems. Now, that had previously triggered sanctions by the U.S. in President Trump’s first term. We’ll continue to track how the NATO summit goes and bring you those updates. Jody?
SPEAKER 05 :
We appreciate that. Speaking of the Middle East, Mary, there’s been some renewed attacks from Iran against ships in the Strait of Hormuz over the past 24 hours. Can you give us the update of that?
SPEAKER 14 :
Jodi, two tankers were struck, including a Qatari liquefied natural gas carrier, at risk of explosion. Qatar blamed Iran for the attack. They reported being hit overnight by a drone that caused a fire in the engine room. The crew was reportedly safe and was evacuated, but maritime security sources briefed on the incident say that the fire on board could put the ship at risk of blowing up. In an incident later today, a tanker was struck by a drone while transiting the Strait of Hormuz. It sustained minor damage. Now, these incidents are the first reported attacks in the straits since mourning for Ayatollah Ali Khamenei began last week. This, of course, shines a light on the ongoing insecurity for Gulf shipping. Jodi.
SPEAKER 05 :
All right, let’s shift to some domestic news. There’s a growing call for withdrawal for Democratic nominee for Senate in Maine, Graham Plattner. This is becoming a big deal within the Democratic Party. What are you hearing?
SPEAKER 14 :
Jodi, prominent leaders in the Democratic Party are urging Graham Plattner to withdraw from the Senate race after a woman who said she previously dated Plattner had accused him of breaking into her home and raping her. She said this happened close to five years ago. Earlier today, New York City Mayor Zoran Mandami and independent Senator Bernie Sanders both withdrew their endorsements of Plattner, and they called on him to end his campaign. Plattner released a video to X yesterday denying the allegations. Other Democrats who have called on Plattner to withdraw include Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Senator Ruben Gallego, and Congressman Ro Khanna. This Senate race, of course, is a key target for Democrats as they seek to win control of the U.S. Senate from Republicans. Jody.
SPEAKER 05 :
All right, Mary, thank you so much. We appreciate it. I want to go back now to the NATO summit that kicked off today in Turkey. And joining us now to discuss this and more is Dr. David Adesnik. He’s the vice president of research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. He also formerly served as the deputy director for joint data support at the U.S. Department of Defense. Dr. Adesnik, always great to have you joining us on Washington Watch. Welcome back.
SPEAKER 15 :
Thank you. Glad to be back.
SPEAKER 05 :
All right. I absolutely want to dive into the host country, Turkey. I want to get there. But before we do, just kind of a 30,000-foot view, if you will, of the broader picture of this year’s NATO summit, what the main issues are.
SPEAKER 15 :
Well, one of the biggest issues is the extent to which U.S. will be keeping a strong military presence in Europe, principally to deter Russian aggression against members of NATO. The Trump administration has made some moves to pull back those troops. The Europeans are hesitant about that. And in a way, they feel they are being given a poor reward for their improved performance on defense spending, that there was a historic agreement a little while back to have countries spend 5 percent of their GDP, 3.5 on defense, 1.5 on defense-related infrastructure, a major historic increase. And almost all of them are moving in the right direction. And I think many of them expected that, if they did the right thing according to U.S. standards, that would mean a continued American commitment.
SPEAKER 05 :
Very interesting. That is a big deal. And there still seems to be a lot of sparring taking place. But let’s turn our attention specifically to Turkey. There, at least from my perspective, has been a notable shift in the relationship between the United States and Turkey. Do you agree? And so what’s your take on it?
SPEAKER 15 :
Well, I think there’s no question that, if you look at the longer-term 2025-year picture, that’s been the case. Turkey had a non-Islamist government previously. It had a strong military influence, which wasn’t always optimal, but it was clearly on the U.S. side in most cases. And what we have seen is a growing trend toward Islamism. In the brief note you saw from Prime Minister Netanyahu at the top of the hour, that he described what it is. It’s a fairly pernicious ideology that Erdogan embraces. It’s why he openly supports Hamas. He doesn’t make bones about it. He refuses to call it a terrorist organization. The U.S. Treasury Department has had to sanction a raft of terror financiers supporting a range of groups from al-Qaeda to Hamas to others on Turkish territory. And Erdogan is actively supporting America’s enemies while remaining nominally a U.S. ally because Turkey’s in NATO.
SPEAKER 05 :
So why are we befriending him so much? We’re seemingly on the international stage. He may present himself as an ally, talking about Erdogan, but really he’s not, is he? So why are we befriending him like we are?
SPEAKER 15 :
Well, I do think there’s some deep confusion. I think sometimes the personal relationship overrides strategic considerations. President Trump seems to get along with Erdogan very well. There’s a history of doing business before that. There is, in fact, a Trump Tower, Istanbul. Some of those involved on the Turkish side were part of Erdogan’s extended family. And I think we’ve seen, if someone wins the president’s trust, he continues to give them that trust. But I don’t think it’s been well-rewarded, either when Trump was in office the first four years or currently.
SPEAKER 05 :
So there’s talk, for example, and I think this just adds to what you were just talking about, that potentially at least the United States could sell F-35 fighter jets to Turkey. There’s many people who that raises a lot of concern with good reason. But President Trump seems to be suggesting that that kind of sale of F-35s could happen pretty soon. What’s your take on that?
SPEAKER 15 :
Well, it may be an uphill battle with Congress, right? So not just is there sanctions in place, because Turkey bought what’s called the S-400 air defense system that could potentially shoot down American or American-made planes from Russia, which triggered sanctions. Congress then reinforced that, saying that for as long as Turkey has the S-400 system, it cannot have the F-35. That was specifically intended to prevent a president of either party from making this kind of decision. However, the potential way around that is to engineer some situation where Turkey gives the S-400 back to Russia or to a third party of some kind to maybe create a technical exception where it doesn’t literally have the weapon. But I think it speaks to the deeper problem. Turkey also has a deep relationship with Russia. It’s also playing both sides in the Russia-Ukraine war. And most importantly, if it has that air defense system and has the jet, it could basically be sort of training the Russian system on how to shoot down a U.S. jet, could share that information with Russia, with China.
SPEAKER 05 :
Yeah, that’s what makes many of us scratch our heads with all of this. And I agree with you. This could have an uphill battle in Congress. And frankly, I think that’s a good balance of power there. We heard Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu earlier on a clip warn against strengthening Turkey’s military. He claims that that would undermine the balance of power in the Middle East. Do you agree with him?
SPEAKER 15 :
Well, if it’s a Turkish military directed toward a potential threat to NATO, I have much less of a problem with it. If it’s a Turkish military that continues to do things like basically deploying a proxy force in northern Syria that’s actually become part of the Syrian army. that’s helping send weapons and arrange proxy forces in a number of wars in North Africa or in East Africa, those are not good things. The way Turkey is actually using its power, sometimes even intimidating Greece, its neighbor and a fellow NATO member, that is not good, right? We do want to have a strong Turkey. It’s a valuable, large country that we should have as part of the alliance. But if it’s off in the wrong direction, it can really become a threat.
SPEAKER 05 :
What a complicated issue. While I have you, before I let you go, I wanted to get your thoughts on the latest developments with Iran. Of course, there have been some renewed attacks against ships there in the Strait of Hormuz over the last 24 hours. I wanted to get your take on that. What can you tell us about it? And what is this ultimately going to mean for the talks that are taking place between the U.S. and Iran?
SPEAKER 15 :
Well, I think the best way to see it is as part of the Iranian negotiating strategy. They always want to draw out negotiations, and now they want to establish that they can even use force during negotiations without triggering an American response, I think correctly sensing that our side is hesitant to restart hostilities. They would like to normalize it so that them using force against third countries or against American shipping in the Gulf is something that will basically tolerate and not treat as a cause for using force. In other words, they want to basically change the status quo to consolidate the control they didn’t have previously over the strait.
SPEAKER 05 :
Very, very interesting. We’re going to see how all this unfolds, I’m sure, in the next few days to come. In fact, President Trump has indicated, sounds to me like, that there will be consequences for that move from Iran, but we shall see. Dr. David Adesnik, Vice President of Research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, always an honor to have you joining us. We appreciate it a great deal. All right. Coming up, don’t go away. We’ve got a lot more to cover. Congressman Fleischman is going to be joining me. He’s from Tennessee. And we’re going to be talking about the one big, beautiful bill, what it meant for Americans when it was passed a year ago, what it means today. Stay with us. We’ll be right back.
SPEAKER 18 :
America, what formed the fabric of our freedom? What stitched together the hearts of those that fasten the stars and stripes? 250 years ago, our founding fathers penned the invisible words woven within every heart, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Unite with others who will pledge to defend these eternal truths today at Family Research Council’s Pray, Vote, Stand Summit, September 24th to the 26th at Cornerstone Chapel in Northern Virginia. In 1776, our country declared independence in reliance upon divine providence. In 2026, in the same spirit, we’ll declare dependence upon God by gathering for a time of prayer, inspiration, and action. Use promo code America at checkout for a $25 discount. Register now at prayboatstand.org.
SPEAKER 06 :
The family is the oldest, most tested, and most reliable unit of society. It is divinely created and sustained.
SPEAKER 07 :
And yet there are those who are always tampering with its values and structure.
SPEAKER 06 :
That’s why we need organizations like the Family Research Council that can effectively defend and strengthen the family.
SPEAKER 10 :
Family Research Council began over 40 years ago, like all great movements of God, with prayer. Today, Rooted in the heart of the nation’s capital, FRC continues to champion faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. FRC is one of those bright lights that helps us focus on true north.
SPEAKER 12 :
And I shudder to think, had they not been here, that it could have been worse, worse, worse. The Family Research Council has literally millions of people that follow what they do. And that small army makes a difference. Every time I meet with Tony, he prays for me. that matters. This is a grassroots organization. Tony and his team in Washington do a great job, but the power of the FRC is the people.
SPEAKER 16 :
It’s just a wonderful parachurch organization that doesn’t seek to take the place of the church, but it seeks to assist the family and the church as we try to move forward successfully, not in a defensive mode, but in an offensive mode as we seek to live our lives according to the Holy Scriptures.
SPEAKER 01 :
FRC is not going to be whooped. You know, we’re going to fight. We’re going to take a stand. And again, we don’t retreat.
SPEAKER 04 :
To thousands of Americans who love this country and happen to believe the Bible as a definitive way to live, we will not be silent. We will not shrink back. We will not apologize for biblical truth. We will continue to stand for it.
SPEAKER 05 :
Welcome back to Washington to Watch. I’m Jody Heiss, your host today, filling in for Tony. Thank you so much for tuning in. All right, over the weekend, of course, the big celebration was America’s 250th birthday. But there was another anniversary that was also being celebrated, at least in the background. And that was the one-year anniversary of the working families tax cuts. It was signed into law a year ago. It’s… probably more commonly referred to as the one big beautiful bill. But it’s really the working families tax cuts. It was the first budget reconciliation package that Republicans in Congress were able to get to the president’s desk. And in fact, now they are considering the third, something that to my knowledge has never been done before. But there’s only 24 legislative days before midterm elections in November. So can congressional Republicans… Get the third reconciliation bill across the finish line. That would be a huge, huge accomplishment. Joining us now to discuss this and more is Congressman Chuck Fleischman. He serves on the House Appropriations Committee. He represents the third congressional district of the great state of Tennessee. He and I used to fly on the plane together to Washington, D.C., I don’t know, a hundred times. Congressman, my friend, welcome back to Washington Watch. Always great to see you.
SPEAKER 07 :
Jody, it’s great to be with you. It’s great to be with the Family Research Council. Let me begin by saying thank you to you. Thank you to Tony. Thank you to the Family Research Council. And most importantly, our watchers and listeners who put God and country first. God bless you all. It’s good to be with you. And yes, you’re my classmate. We’ve served together. And what a wonderful role you have now. It’s a pleasure.
SPEAKER 05 :
Well, thank you so much. All right. I do want to get to the third reconciliation package. That is a big, big deal. But let’s begin with the first one, the one big, beautiful bill, tax cuts. And what has that actually done for Americans over the past year? Give us a breakdown.
SPEAKER 07 :
It’s done something fundamentally that I’ve always said we did. Keep more money in the hands of the American people, the hardworking American people at all levels. Let’s not divide Americans like Democrats and those radical socialists do on a person’s ability to work hard and earn money let’s unite people around that and that’s what the big beautiful bill that tax cut bill did whether you were in a lower bracket or a higher bracket everybody got to keep more money if they worked hard uh it’s just incredible i go out and i talk to waitresses and waiters and people who work for tips and people are out there working hard They’re getting more money in their paychecks because of Donald Trump and because of Republicans in the House and the Senate. Yes, because of the big, beautiful bill. It was a huge success. The biggest tax cut, really, when you think about it, in American history. And it stuck. And no Democrats voted for it. This was a Republican initiative. Jody, I remember a time when Republicans and Democrats could work together for the American people. Right now, it’s the Republicans who are working for the American people.
SPEAKER 05 :
Yeah, and what amazes me in all of this is how much Republicans have been able to get accomplished with such a razor-thin majority. And like you just said, zero help from the Democrats. And of course, the legacy media in all of this is always trying to bury Republicans as being divided and divisive and all this sort of stuff. But you continually prove them wrong. So how much more do you think Republicans are going to be able to deliver for the American people, particularly when compared with the Democrats when they were in power?
SPEAKER 07 :
Another great question. The reality is, and you see this with the Save Act. I’ve passed the Save Act three times, maybe four. I chair the Energy and Water Subcommittee, as you’ve talked about it. I’m an appropriator. But in the House, it’s easier, even with razor-thin margins. Our rules allow the majority rule. In the United States Senate, because of the 60 vote threshold, which is in place, it’s much harder to do. And that’s where reconciliation comes into play. Whether it’s reconciliation one, two, or hopefully three, we’re in a situation that the constraints of the filibuster rule don’t apply. The key will be, and this is what I really hope, is if we can get this done, particularly if there’s some way to get the SAVE Act into Reconciliation III. There’s some question as to whether or not the parliamentarian in the Senate might overrule that. But remember this, in the event that that happens, it only takes a majority vote, 51 votes, to overrule the parliamentarian. We need the SAVE Act. President Trump is right. House Republicans are right. We have done it three times in a row. 90%, almost 90% of Americans favor the Save Act, as President Trump calls it, the Save America Act. We need integrity in our elections. We can’t let anyone cheat. And the Democrats like to cheat. They would cheat. It’s the only reason that they’re opposing this. We need integrity. One legal person, one legal vote. I’m going to be an optimist. We’ve got two more weeks in July coming up. Then we’ve got some time in September. But I’m bullish on the Republican Party. I think we’re going to win in November in the House and the Senate because our message is better. But we’ve got to stay in there, work hard. And you’re right. Our great growing Republican Party, and I’m proud of our House members, we have moderates, conservatives, center-right people, libertarians. The reality is we’re not a monolith, but gosh, we are Republicans, and we are a far better alternative to that radical left-wing mob that has taken over the Democratic Party.
SPEAKER 05 :
I think that’s a breath of fresh air for many of our viewers and listeners to hear. And I think hats off as well. I just want to say, for the first time in years, I can’t remember that all 12 approach bills have been passed. That’s a great accomplishment. But let’s talk some about this third reconciliation bill. What do you hope is going to be in there? Do you think it’s going to get across the finish line?
SPEAKER 07 :
I’m the eternal optimist. We got one and two done, as you alluded to, the big, beautiful bill. They said we couldn’t do it. We did it. Obviously, a lot of this credit goes to Donald Trump and his wonderful team at the White House. He wanted this. He knew it was good for the American people. Still, many people in America don’t really realize the full impact of reconciliation one and two because of what we actually have in the bill that benefits them. But when they get their paychecks every week and they see more money in their pocketbook and less in the hands of the bureaucratically bloated, overspending federal government, they understand that that’s what the Republicans are fighting for every day. On Reconciliation 3, I don’t know if we can get the SAVE Act in there. We can certainly try and see what the parliamentarian does. And if that doesn’t work, we can try to overrule the parliamentarian. But we can go back and get some of the things in Reconciliation 3 that perhaps we had hoped to get in Reconciliation 1 or 2. The reality is reconciliation will not be subject to the constraints of the filibuster.
SPEAKER 05 :
All right, Tennessee Congressman Chuck Fleischman, thank you so much. Great to see you again. Appreciate it so much. All right, stay tuned. Coming up next, a big push to protect mail-in ballots with the Postal Service. Stay with us. We’ll cover that big news item right after this break.
SPEAKER 02 :
The Stand Firm app brings trusted Family Research Council resources together in one place. Stay informed with news articles from The Washington Stand. Watch interviews from Washington Watch. Explore courses produced by FRC and find many other resources to equip you to engage culture and government from a biblical perspective. Download the Stand Firm app today by texting APP to 67742 or by searching for Stand Firm in your app store.
SPEAKER 18 :
Have you noticed the upsurge in gambling ads? How could you not? The ads are big, bold, shiny. They virtually glitter with gold. Well, fool’s gold. Because as they say, the house always wins. But some lessons are easily forgotten. And nowhere is this more evident than the rise of the sports betting industry. Since 1992, 39 states and Washington, D.C. have legalized sports betting. And as a result, more than $600 billion has been wagered on sports since 2018. Now, Christians should be instinctively concerned about the latest growth in gambling. For one, gambling profits are often losses for those least able to afford them, causing unnecessary friction within families. Secondly, it’s inherently exploitative. The gambling industry necessarily harms one person to benefit another. Gambling offers me the chance to gain at your expense. For me to win, you must lose. But even if I win, I lose the dignity and satisfaction of earning what I have. By greenlighting gambling, cities and states across our nation take the short-term gain of a little extra revenue for the long-term loss of strong communities. States think they’re winning when in the long run, really, they are losing. Remember, the house always wins. Follow Family Research Council’s news outlet, The Washington Stand, for more stories that speak out against policies undercutting strong families and strong communities. Because the only house that truly wins is a house built on a solid rock, God himself.
SPEAKER 1 :
Music
SPEAKER 05 :
Welcome back to Washington Watch. So glad to have you joining us today. I’m Jody Heiss, an honor to be sitting in for Tony. There’s been a lot of media attention on the efforts to pass the Save America Act, which Congressman Chuck Fleischman was just talking about. That’s a much-needed measure. It would ensure integrity in our elections, and that’s why it’s so important, and that’s why it’s called the Save America Act. But that’s not the only effort that’s taking place to shore up our elections and to restore voter confidence in our voting system. There’s another proposed rule within the U.S. Postal Service that seeks to strengthen mailing standards for the transmission of mail-in ballots for federal elections. And last week, 13 state attorneys general expressed their support for that proposed rule. And joining us now to discuss this is Catherine Robertson. She’s Chief Counsel to Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, who led that multi-state comment letter. Catherine, welcome to Washington Watch. Thank you for joining us. And before I get into this proposed rule… I’d like to just kind of get your general assessment, if you could, of where you see our nation right now when it comes to this whole issue of absentee and mail-in voting.
SPEAKER 17 :
Yeah, well, I think it’s very clear by the litigation against this rule so far that it has really become a red state, blue state issue. And you hate to think that election integrity is so polarizing and so partisan, but that is clearly the case. You saw a bevy of blue states immediately come in and sue. And you have to ask yourself, why is that? Why is it that the red states want election integrity and the blue states don’t? And I think, you know, unfortunately, I think we all know the answer to that.
SPEAKER 05 :
So let’s zero in on this proposal with the U.S. Postal Service, this rule. I just had Congressman Chuck Fleischman from Tennessee on. He mentioned the Save America Act. We’ve talked a lot about that. There’s been a lot of coverage about the Save America Act as well. There should be. It’s a very important piece of legislation. But that’s not the only thing taking place. I think probably most of our viewers and listeners are not aware of this Postal Service rule. So break that down for us. What’s this all about? What will it accomplish?
SPEAKER 17 :
Well, this is President Trump’s initiative to do what he can with the tools that he has. You know, he’s waiting on Congress to act on the SAVE Act, but he’s got tools at his disposal as the leader of our executive branch of government. And so this particular rule is designed to utilize the authority of the United States Postal Service to strengthen the integrity of that part of voting. Obviously, lots of ballots are cast by mail, absentee ballots and otherwise. And so what he’s proposed to do is to keep a national list, a national voter registry that has to be checked before a ballot can be mailed out. And then he has proposed a barcode system that would help track ballots to ensure that they’re getting from point A to point B in a way that maintains ballot security. the state’s reaction to that or at least the 13 states that joined our letter is to say thank you for being willing to do the part of this that we cannot secure on our own uh you know this is just one of those common sense kind of things and you said the several blue states have already sued to prevent this yes there are i think three lawsuits currently pending um in states where you can imagine the judges might not be as friendly to the president’s agenda. I think one judge up in the Northeast has already purported to put an injunction nationwide in place so that these measures cannot be implemented in the states that sued. So there’s a long road ahead, as is the case, unfortunately, for most election integrity measures. What’s interesting about this rule is that it is still in the comment period. This rule has not even been finalized yet, and yet they’ve rushed in to prejudge, you know, what they think the outcome ought to be here. And so we joined with 12 other states, as you mentioned, to send a letter in support of this and to really outline why states need this assistance from the federal government. You know, Alabama is a state that fights very hard to maintain control of our own elections, and we certainly are maintaining that position. But there’s part of this that the state can’t control. And that’s what happens when a ballot hits the mailbox. And so that’s where we do need the president’s assistance. And we’re very glad that he’s put these measures forward. And, you know, we’re going to continue to help litigate this as well.
SPEAKER 05 :
So you mentioned the lawsuit, what was taking place there. I’m sure this is going to end up in federal court. What are you anticipating there?
SPEAKER 17 :
Well, like I said, there are several challenges going on now, and it’s going to take time for these cases to reach finality. I think the goal would be to get this rule implemented quickly. But this is a fight not just for the next election. It’s a fight for future elections. And so you’ve seen the states led by Missouri. We’ve come in and intervened in at least one of these lawsuits. So we’re here for the long run, but we’d like to see this get in a posture where the injunction is lifted and it can go in place while we litigate it, you know, for the future.
SPEAKER 05 :
All right, less than a minute to go before our hard break, but what’s the next step for this issue? Where does it go from here?
SPEAKER 17 :
Well, I think we continue on with the APA process to get a rule finalized. And then, like I said, the group of states that’s on our side will continue to come in and defend the administration’s position. What you’ll see is probably this will get up to a circuit split at some point and then make its way to the United States Supreme Court. But we’re hoping that we get the rule implemented in the meantime. That’s the goal.
SPEAKER 05 :
That is a great goal, and again, thank you. And Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, of course, he’s been on the program with us many times, and your leadership there in the state of Alabama. Hats off to you and everyone involved in this. Thank you so much, Katherine Robertson, Chief Counsel to Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall. We are grateful for you joining us today on Washington Watch. All right, coming up, we’re going to continue our week-long celebration. of America’s 250th anniversary. So after the break, we’re going to share another excerpt from FRC’s God and Government series. So don’t go anywhere. Stay with us. We’ll be right back.
SPEAKER 10 :
One nation under God. America’s undeniable foundation of faith.
SPEAKER 08 :
Before America was exceptional, America was prayerful. Just as Paul urged Timothy, first of all, that prayer, intercession, and thanksgiving be made for all people, our founding fathers understood deeply the command to be devoted to prayer. This great American experiment began as a mighty appeal to heaven, petitioning the Lord of heaven’s armies to intervene for the righteous cause of liberty. As war began to sweep across the colonies, the Continental Congress called days of fasting and prayer in their fight against the British. The Lord answered, and the colonies prevailed. Yet in spite of victory, our founding fathers knew that dependence on God in prayer was not to be forgotten. With countless challenges facing our young nation, John Adams declared national days of solemn humiliation, fasting, and prayer to directly address the many trials and call on Americans to seek mercy and restoration. Years later, in one of America’s darkest hours, Abraham Lincoln stood upon this unshakable foundation by calling the nation to repentance, declaring, It is the duty of nations as well as of men to confess their sins in humble sorrow and to recognize that those nations only are blessed whose God is the Lord. We have seen the hand of God answer prayers again and again as our nation has turned to Him. However, the wise warning of Ronald Reagan still stands. If we ever forget that we are one nation under God, we will be a nation gone under. Through war, uncertainty, and turning points in history, many of our leaders have known where to turn. And now, it’s our turn. We echo the call of George Washington 250 years ago, humbly to supplicate the mercy of Almighty God, that it would please him to pardon all our manifold sins and transgressions, and finally establish the peace and freedom of America upon a solid and lasting foundation, the undeniable foundation of faith.
SPEAKER 13 :
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 05 :
Welcome back to Washington Watch. I’m Jody Heiss, an honor today to be sitting in for Tony, and thank you so much for joining us. In honor of America’s 250th anniversary, we’re closing out each program this week with an excerpt from FRC’s God and Government series. This is an important video series based on a course that Tony has been teaching literally for over 30 years now. It equips Christians, Christ followers, with practical knowledge of biblical guidance for government combined with the Christian history of our nation. And then, of course, there’s a great powerful application of both of those to civil government. Now, today we want to share an excerpt from session two on civil government, its origins and function. In this part, Tony will be discussing how laws are developed from principles. And among the underlying principles is that the government has the responsibility to uphold the authority of parents and the government of family. Of course, unfortunately, this is being undermined by some within civil government. So on this very important topic, here’s what Tony had to say.
SPEAKER 04 :
The integrity of family government is so important that it must be backed up by civil government. That’s the principle. Okay. And… We see the opposite of that today. What we see is government undermining. I mentioned this a little bit earlier, but week before last, I think it was recently, Governor Gavin Newsom in California signed into law AB 1955. which will stop school districts from notifying parents if their child starts using different pronouns or identifies as a different gender than what’s on the school record. Now, that’s in response to some school districts that were actually applying biblical principles, godly men and women who got elected to school boards, and were applying policies to ensure that parents’ rights were respected. So they were actually doing what government should do, and then you’ve got a higher level of government. The governor and the legislature quickly passing within like two months legislation that would… knock down these ordinances, override the ordinances that these local schools have put in place. So this is what we’re dealing with. It’s not going to be easy. There’s going to be confrontation, but we need to know why we’re doing this. And this is why it’s so important to have the underlying understanding so we know we have the authority. The Chino Hills Valley School District has the authority to do what they did. Their authority is not only in history and in this scene in this country, but it’s in the Word of God. It flows from the natural law. Parents’ rights should be respected. Now, if citizens do not become aware of the intended biblical functions of civil government, two things happen. First, individuals, families, churches, and schools will lay aside their God-ordained responsibilities. I mean, think about that for a moment. If we’re not aware of what our responsibility is in the family, in self-government, we’ll lay it aside, and guess what? Something will fill that vacuum. And what happens in civil government that it becomes ever-growing and the bureaucracies will increase, taking on the responsibilities that are reserved for the other institutions of government at the expense of our freedoms and our liberties and at great expense. So it’s to our advantage, to everyone’s advantage, not just Christians, but for everybody to make sure that each of the institutions of government are functioning as God designed them to be. Because it’ll cost us less, we’ll have more freedom, and there’ll be more peace and prosperity for all. Ben Franklin said this, he had this motto, rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God. Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God. Now let’s look at some outside, I say that because I want to look now at some areas that are outside the responsibility of civil government. Number one, outside the areas of responsibility for civil government is education. Let me unpack this. Deuteronomy chapter 6. Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength. And these words which I command you today shall be in your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children and shall talk of them when you sit in your house and when you walk by the way, when you lie down and when you rise up. You shall bind them as a sign on your hand and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. You shall write them on the doorpost of your house and your gates. That was not to the government. That was to the parents to teach their children the ways of God. Now, let me say this. You can delegate the authority to educate your children, but you cannot delegate the responsibility. So you can, you know, it’s not a sin to send your kids to a public school. Now, I would highly… Recommend you not, given what we see happening in our public schools, but some people live in, you know, I grew up in rural Oklahoma, went to a public school, and they had, you know, good schools. Of course, that was a long time ago. Schools were good in a lot of places. And so you can delegate the authority. You can say, I’m going to let this public school, I’m going to let a private school, I’m going to let someone else teach my kid. And you can do that, but you cannot delegate the responsibility. God’s not going to hold the school system accountable for what your children were taught. This instruction to teach your children is to you. Okay? So you can outsource a part of it, but you better make sure that those things that God wants your child taught are actually being taught. Now, given what I see today happening across this country and the resources and the technology that’s now available, I think homeschooling, homeschool co-ops, they’re growing in popularity. And frankly, churches. churches can become learning centers. Not schools because I know there’s a lot of red tape and we’re going to talk a little bit more why that red tape is there. Red tape is designed to keep you from being able to do what you need to do. But learning pods and learning centers are outside of a school. And we’ve got some resources at the Family Research Council. We believe every church could become a school and take back the hearts and minds of But that is not a responsibility of government, teaching our children. Next, an area that is outside the authority of government is welfare. All right, 1 Timothy chapter 5. Verse 3, honor widows who are really widows. But if any widow has children or grandchildren, let them first learn to show piety at home and repay their parents, for this is good and acceptable for God. Now she who is really a widow and left alone trusts in God continues in supplications and prayers day and night. For even when they were with you, even when we were with you, we commanded you this, if anyone will not work… neither shall he eat. That’s 2 Thessalonians 3, verse 10. So when we’re talking about the widows, this was instruction to the church because the church, there was no government safety net back then. This was to the church. And remember the disciples said, look, we got to get some deacons in here because we need to focus on the word. We need somebody that can distribute to the widows and to those who are in need. So this begins to give definition as to who is in need and who is widows. And so first it starts with the family. You know, families should be the ones taking care. And what we’re actually finding is when government has this crowding out effect, when government does something, people step back. When government begins with its welfare, the churches step back. And we’re going to look. I’m not going to go any further on this because tomorrow we’re going to actually look at what the Bible has to say about poverty and how we deal with it. Next, we see that government really has nothing to do with business except… ensuring economic transactions are just. So let me give you a couple examples of what government does. And this is one that always was so obvious to me when I was in the legislature, because everybody wanted some kind of licensing. And it didn’t matter what it was. I mean, you know, licensing to cut grass, licensing to do this, licensing to do that. It was all designed to restrict competition. And so there’s market control through arbitrary licensing. For instance, in New York City, in 2014, I don’t know if we have that graphic, but to have a taxicab, you had to buy a medallion just for one taxicab. So you know how much that medallion cost? That was $1.3 million for that medallion. for one taxi cab. Well, you’re going to have to work most of your life. That’s just one cab, not a cab company, a cab. So then what happened, Uber came in and Lyft and these others that they tried to control, but they couldn’t because of technology. And so that medallion went from $1.3 million to the value of it down to about $130,000. But they had already, for those who had already paid $1.3 million, so they filed suit against the city. That was arbitrary control, was not driven by market forces, but by government control and restriction. And of course, Uber and Lyft is all based, you know, I mean, I kind of like it because it’s based on market. It’s supply and demand, you know? And so that drove down the price. They also have housing control. All of that’s designed to limit expansion, limit demand. business now there is an area that is within business our government to restrict business and it’s the blue laws now that’s not something we see anymore I remember here back when I was, it was in the 1980s when I worked at the sheriff’s office here, we still had the blue laws. And there were, I think we ended up, East Baton Rouge ended up in some kind of, I think a case with O.C. Brown, former district attorney was involved in a case with the blue laws many, many years ago. The blue laws go all the way back to the colonial periods. And the reason they’re called blue laws is they were actually written on blue paper. And it was designed to honor God on the Sabbath, on the Christian Sabbath. And so businesses would be closed down on Sunday. Or you remember, I mean, it hadn’t been that long ago, you couldn’t buy alcohol until noon, until you stumbled out of church and then you could get alcohol. So those blue laws were done because they recognized the authority of God. So that was a proper use of government control on business. Now, the next area that’s outside of the control is the control of the church. There was a time when license were required. And even now, you know, to do a wedding, as a pastor, you’re required to have a license because you become an agent for the state. But there was a time when license were required to preach. back in the colonial periods i also believe that the the irs the taxation is a form of control of the church and we’ve been a part of working with pastors to challenge that irs restriction on pastors being able to preach on what they deem political issues in fact there’s something in the works even now on that the church is not to be controlled by the government. All right? Then the family. That is outside the realm of government. And there is a tendency for government to usurp the authority of parents. And so we have to make sure that we understand that any law that would usurp the responsibility or the authority of pastors is an unjust law and should be opposed. All right? Now, here’s what I saw this because I fought against those. Those are one of those areas. And I guess having, you know, the benefit of knowing this when I was in the legislature, I was aggressive in fighting for these to try to keep government within its proper boundaries. And so anytime that the rights of a parent were taken from them, that had to be a very serious situation. But now we approach that very lightly. And the justification is… And there are irresponsible parents out there that do bad things. But we cannot set the standard for all based upon those that do wrong. We need to deal with the wrongdoers and not treat everyone else in a way that is inconsistent with biblical truth. Samuel Adams said this. He said, just in true liberty… Equal and impartial liberty in matters spiritual and temporal is a thing that all men are clearly entitled to by the eternal and immutable laws of God and nature, as well as by the laws of nations and well-grounded and municipal laws. We must have their foundations in the former. So there was a recognition by our founders that in order for laws to be just, they had to be rooted, as we looked at earlier, in that natural law coming from the divine law. If not, they were not just laws. And that is God’s design for government.
SPEAKER 05 :
That was an excerpt from session two of FRC’s God and Government course, a very important and insightful series that we’re offering to you. We’d love for you to get a part of it. You can view this six session video series through FRC’s Stand Firm app. And of course, if you do not yet have that app, We want to strongly encourage you to get it. You can do so by going to the App Store or you can go, of course, to Google Play, wherever it is where you get your apps and get the Stand Firm app. You can also get it by simply texting APP to 67742.
SPEAKER 09 :
Washington Watch with Tony Perkins is brought to you by Family Research Council. To support our efforts to advance faith, family, and freedom, please text GIVE to 67742. That’s GIVE to 67742. Portions of the show discussing candidates are brought to you by Family Research Council Action. For more information, please visit TonyPerkins.com.
