In this insightful episode, host Jody Heiss fills in for Tony Perkins to discuss some burning issues facing the nation. The conversation kicks off with a detailed examination of the Democrat-led partial government shutdown, featuring Casey Harper, a Washington Stand reporter. They debate the possibility of a resolution and delve into President Trump’s responses. The narrative shifts to a tragic shooting in Pawtucket, Rhode Island, and the subsequent debates over societal patterns and transgender rights.
SPEAKER 18 :
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 07 :
This is a Democrat shutdown. This has nothing to do with Republicans. This is a Democrat shutdown. They’re upset that the crime numbers are so good. They’re very unhappy that the crime numbers are so good. They’re very unhappy that there’s a movement for getting voter ID. They want voter ID. The population, 98%.
SPEAKER 09 :
That was President Trump commenting on the Democrat-led partial government shutdown. Welcome. Welcome to this February 17th edition of Washington Watch. I’m your host, Jody Heiss, filling in today for Tony Perkins, and thank you so much for joining us. All right, coming up today, the partial government shutdown hits day four now after weekend talks failed to fund the Department of Homeland Security. The White House has sent yet another proposal, but as of now, Democrats are refusing to reopen the government. North Carolina Congressman Mark Harris will be joining us shortly to break all of that down for us. Plus, Iowa State Senator Sherrilyn Westrich, who introduced Bill 3115, will join us to discuss her proposal to ban telehealth and mail-in order prescriptions for mifepristone. All right, Democrats have sent a counteroffer to Republicans on immigration enforcement reforms that they want in exchange for a vote to fund the Department of Homeland Security. So today marks day four of this Democrat-led partial government shutdown. And joining me now is Washington Stand reporter Casey Harper. who’s been tracking today’s story. Casey, let’s start with this one. Is any deal going to be reached anytime soon to put an end to this government shutdown?
SPEAKER 16 :
Yeah, sorry to disappoint, Jody, but I can almost guarantee there will be a day five of the shutdown and probably six and even seven as lawmakers are out of town. And it’s unclear whether Democrat and Republican leadership will be able to nail down an agreement this week while that recess is going on. Now, after funding lapsed, which happened began on Saturday morning, most TSA and Border Patrol employees are now working without pay, at least those that are willing to work. Now, even if a deal is struck, congressional leaders will need time to come back into session. That can be about 48 hours. Now, here is President Trump yesterday talking to reporters when he was asked if he’s OK with any of the Democrat demands.
SPEAKER 07 :
I don’t like some of the things they’re asking for. We’re going to protect law enforcement. We’re going to protect ICE. You know, they’re part of the whole system that is working. And Washington, D.C. now is considered a very safe city. When I took over, it was a city that was losing two, three people a week.
SPEAKER 16 :
Now, Republicans and Democrats have agreed on some provisions, like body cameras on ICE agents, which is actually already funded, ironically enough. But on other forms, they’re at a standstill, Jody.
SPEAKER 09 :
Wow. All right, Casey, thank you for that. Let me shift gears with you. We’ve got a couple of people who were killed and three injured yesterday at a shooting at an ice hockey rink in Pawtucket, Rhode Island. And the shooter reportedly identifies as transgender. Is this becoming more and more of a pattern? And what’s the latest in the developments here?
SPEAKER 16 :
Yeah, it’s a really tragic story and a troubling trend we’re seeing unfold. So some of the details. 56-year-old Robert Dorgan is the suspect here who reportedly opened fire during a hockey game. Now, police are calling it a family dispute as he killed his ex-wife and shot three of his children tragically. Now, police say the suspect is also dead after turning the gun on himself, but a closer look at court records for Dorgan reveal a pattern of disputes before this, including other relatives, as well as allegations that his gender transition, as it’s called by some, it fueled much of that discord. Now, according to police, the suspect, whose first name is Robert, also went by Roberta. Legal records reveal that Dorgan’s then-wife also noted that the gender reassignment surgery and narcissism plus personality disorder traits was part of the reason for filing the divorce. So we don’t have any more details on anything more specific on a motive, but you’re absolutely right, Jodi, that this is a really alarming trend we’re seeing.
SPEAKER 09 :
It really is. All right, before I let you go, Casey, it seems to me that tensions are certainly thickening between the U.S. and Iran, and Iranian state media has reported the partial closure now of the Strait of Hormuz amid the talks that are taking place now between the U.S. and Iran. Can you walk us through some of the latest developments that are taking place in those talks?
SPEAKER 16 :
Sure. This is an important week for these talks as they are continuing in Geneva over this long-running nuclear dispute. But as you mentioned, just hours after the talks began, we saw some pretty interesting footage come from Iranian state media, which showed the Revolutionary Guard doing drills in and around the Strait of Hormuz, which effectively closes it. And this is a very important waterway that’s crucial for oil shipments. Now, to Iran, they’ve threatened in the past to shut down the Strait to commercial shipping if it’s attacked, which would be pretty impactful for the global economy. It would choke off about a fifth of global oil that flows out into the rest of the world and significantly drive up crude oil prices. Now, an Iranian foreign minister told reporters that Iran and the U.S. do have an understanding on some of the, quote, guiding principles for their indirect talks so far, but that is a far cry from an actual deal, Jody.
SPEAKER 09 :
All right, Casey, as always, thank you so much for giving us a broad view of what’s happening out there. Perhaps we’ll be talking to you a little bit further. All right, now let’s dive deeper into the partial government shutdown and what may come out of negotiations that are seemingly taking place between Democrats and the White House. Joining me now to discuss this and more is Congressman Mark Harris, who serves as a member of the Judiciary Committee, and he represents the 8th Congressional District of the great state of North Carolina. Congressman Harris, welcome back to Washington Watch. Always an honor to have you, my friend.
SPEAKER 05 :
Hey, Jody. It’s great to be with you. Thank you for having me this evening.
SPEAKER 09 :
All right. So let’s start off with this. What can you tell us about the details, at least the latest that you’re hearing in terms of the offer that the Democrats have sent to the administration?
SPEAKER 05 :
Well, I’ve not heard any of the particular details of the offer that the Democrats have supposedly sent back. But I can tell you that it’s perfectly clear to everybody across the country that this is yet another Schumer shutdown. I think the president alluded to that again in his comments when he was on Air Force One. that the Democrats want to shut it down. They just are looking for any reason to create chaos wherever they can. And the reality is that this is a shutdown that, once again, we funded 96% of the government, and they are wanting to somehow shut down Homeland Security, which is doing nothing but taking hostage the American people once again and our homeland security. And the irony of all of it, as you know, and has been discussed ad nauseam over the last several days, is that ICE and Border Patrol are already funded through the One Big Beautiful Bill. So they’re able to continue doing the work that they’re doing, while at the same time, our TSA agents, our FEMA disaster relief opportunities, as well as our Coast Guard are now under threat of not having funding. And that is dangerous, and it’s wrong. And to somehow think that they need to cause pain for the American people is absolutely ludicrous. And so you’re right. These negotiations are going on between the White House and Chuck Schumer. And I’m hopeful that they’re going to come to some agreement. We’re on a 48-hour watch right now, a 48-hour notice, if you will, to be able to return to Washington. This was already a planned week in the district, and we’re continuing to work in the district. But we do have that 48-hour notice to return to Washington to vote on whatever agreement the White House may come to here.
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, we’re hearing that the White House has said that some of the demands from the Democrats are just red lines, specifically as it relates to some face masks. Is there any chance for a compromise being reached?
SPEAKER 05 :
I don’t know what the chance of compromise. You’re correct. There are so many things on the list that basically were just showstoppers. The things that we have agreed to that were in the original bill we sent over were the body cams. That’s something they wanted. That’s something we believe is going to be advantageous ultimately. And so that’s already part of it. But asking these THAT’S JUST LUDICROUS. SOMEHOW ASKING FOR JUDICIAL WARRANTS FOR THOSE THAT THEY’RE SEARCHING OUT THESE CRIMINAL ILLEGAL ALIENS THAT THEY’RE SEEKING TO BRING TO JUSTICE AND TO DEPORT. That’s a non-starter as well. So there are things I’m sure they’re asking for that the White House just says, no, that’s not going to work. But again, the president’s the negotiator in chief, and I assume he’s going to walk that fine line of standing strong and at the same time trying to find a place we can work.
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, it’s going to be very interesting to watch this. If I can, Congressman Harris, shift gears with you here. We’ve had a shooting in Rhode Island where a suspect opened fire during a hockey game at a skating rink, an ice rink. And police are saying that his ex-wife was shot as well as a few of his children. Then he turned the gun on himself. The man reportedly identified as transgender, has actually undergone some sort of transgender reassignment surgery. What do you make of all of this? Is there a connection between these procedures, do you think, and perhaps associated drugs involved along with the violence that we are seeing more and more prevalent?
SPEAKER 05 :
Well, I think it really is pretty simple to connect the dots. This is not the first time we’ve seen a tragedy like this. We saw it in Nashville, lived out. We’ve seen it in other locations that people are well aware of. And the reality is that when you try to put these, some kind of drugs in the system to try to bring about some kind of change, you’re going to get this kind of result. And I think that that is something that we have to take into account. And it’s sad. I mean, the person’s own daughter said very clearly that her dad was sick. He had been sick. He was very sick. He had shot their family now. or her family, and it was very, very tragic. And so that’s his own daughter’s testimony. And I agree that when you start mixing these complicated drugs together to bring about some kind of hormonal change, you’re asking for trouble. And I think we’re seeing it all too often. And I would hope that folks would, on the other side of the aisle, would begin to wake up to this reality and let’s call this what it is, a mental illness that needs to be treated, not just glossed over and somehow looking for affirmation. That’s the problem.
SPEAKER 09 :
Yeah, it’s no doubt a mental problem, but we are seeing also a spiritual problem in this country. And I know you fully understand that from a spiritual perspective as a pastor and so forth. So we’ve got to bring into this conversation the spiritual aspect of all of it as well, because this is seemingly spreading all across the place. But even just common sense, We’ve had a couple of medical organizations, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, for example, backtrack on their previous positions on transgender procedures for minors. Do you think we’re moving in the right direction? We’ve got about a minute left.
SPEAKER 05 :
Well, I do believe that. I believe that group came out that you just referenced and said that nobody should be able to undergo a surgery like this until they were at least 19 years of age. So I think that there is a wake-up call. But to your very point, At the end of the day, this is a spiritual underpinning that our country is failing to recognize and really just call it out. And I think that that’s gonna be an important aspect for us to recognize that we are created in the image of God. God is our creator. You weren’t created in the wrong body. God loves you and he wants to be able to meet your needs right where you are. And we’ve gotta begin to proclaim the hope that comes in Christ alone. And at the same time, recognize those that are sick need to be treated, not just affirmed.
SPEAKER 09 :
Thank you so much, Congressman Mark Harris, for your insights. We love you here at FRC, and you’re doing a great job for the people of the 8th District in North Carolina. Thanks for joining us today. All right, friends, don’t go anywhere. On the other side of the break, we will be taking a look at some of the developments coming out of Iran. So stay with us. We’ll be back in just a moment.
SPEAKER 15 :
You see, America has freedom for a purpose. The question is, are we living by that purpose today? See, the founders understood we as a nation would be accountable to God for what he had granted to us. They sought freedom for a purpose, and that freedom was given to us as a nation for that same purpose, to serve God, to honor him, and to live as a people under his authority.
SPEAKER 20 :
At the 2026 National Gathering for Prayer and Repentance in Washington, D.C., members of Congress, state leaders, evangelical leaders, and intercessors from across the nation united as one voice in prayer.
SPEAKER 26 :
Heavenly Father, thank you so much for this gathering. We do repent. And we ask for your continued favor and blessing over our nation, even when we don’t deserve it.
SPEAKER 24 :
I thank you that because of the shed blood and the glorious righteousness of your son, Jesus Christ, a sinner such as myself can boldly approach your throne. You said that you helped to humble, and we’re asking just now that you would help us, Lord.
SPEAKER 23 :
We pray that you humble us, help us to follow after you with all our hearts so that we can see righteousness exalted in this nation and this nation restored to you. We know that it’s not by our power, it’s not by our might, it’s by your spirit.
SPEAKER 15 :
Freedom has a name. His name is Jesus. And freedom has a purpose. It is to honor and glorify you. We pray that we would return to that purpose. Amen.
SPEAKER 11 :
The book of Hebrews says that the Word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. Stand on the Word is Family Research Council’s journey through the living and active Word of God. Follow the plan with us. Spend 10 to 15 minutes a day reading God’s Word, and over the course of two years, discover that the Bible is one big story, a story of many words, pointing to the Word, the One who is the same yesterday, today, and forever, because the Word is alive, and His name is Jesus. Find our Bible reading plan and daily devotionals from Tony Perkins at frc.org slash Bible. Join us as we stand on the Word.
SPEAKER 09 :
Welcome back to Washington Watch. I am your host today, Jody Heiss. Thank you so much for tuning in with us. All right. The U.S. and Iran say that they are agreeing on basic guiding principles, at least following second round talks of some indirect nuclear weapons. conversations that are taking place and Iran’s foreign minister Abbas Iraqi says that progress has begun although a final deal is not close and President Trump says he is likewise indirectly at least participating in some of these negotiations and he believes that Iran wants an agreement. as the U.S. military pressures increase in that region. So Iran has also conducted drills near the Strait of Hormuz, while Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei is warning against any talk of regime change. So as each day goes by, the stakes seem to get astronomically higher. And now to discuss all of this is Jonathan Hessen. He’s a senior fellow at the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security. And he joins us now live from Jerusalem. Jonathan, welcome back to Washington Watch. Thank you so much for staying up late and for joining us.
SPEAKER 25 :
Thank you for having me, Jody.
SPEAKER 09 :
All righty, so do we have real progress, do you think, that’s starting here, or is just this Iran stalling?
SPEAKER 25 :
Well, if we really look down to the wording utilized by each side, we do hear from the Iranians, of course, a lot of optimism and that, yes, there are still wide-ranging gaps that exist, but we have a certain framework to work on. You know, this has pretty much a foundation to establish a framework without any substance to it. So we… do hear more from American officials discussing their angles to what actually took place in the room between the U.S. president’s special envoys to include Jared Kushner, of course, and Steve Witkoff, there wasn’t a lot of optimism from what I understand to start with. So even the smallest type of progress could be regarded as significant. But nonetheless, I am very skeptical about the extent of success of the negotiations that took place in Geneva, Switzerland. We do hear also the remarks coming out of Tehran by the supreme leader of the tyrannical Ayatollah regime saying that they’re not going to negotiate about deterrent weapons. They’re not going to negotiate about many other aspects related to American demands. So what type of substance is there in the first place? There are many questions lingering, all the while we also are seeing a lot of U.S. forces entering into the theater, coming into the region, which does send a very clear signal to the Islamic Republic.
SPEAKER 09 :
Yeah, you know, I think a lot of people are rather shocked that even any degree of talks are taking place. So as you just referenced, you do think that the U.S. military pressure in the region is adding to the pressure to even have talks?
SPEAKER 25 :
Well, quite frankly, the number of assets in the region are enough to complete the task as is. If President Trump would have wanted to send that signal of, we want you to be serious in talks with us, he has already done that. The additional assets coming into the theater are more of a credible threat that the United States is deliberate in its actions, and they better take President Trump serious in this context. Unfortunately, I do not necessarily see the Ayatollah regime really believing that something significant can take place, but we do see things happening currently on the ground, including the exercise by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps in the Strategic Strait of Hormuz that you refer to taking place, where for the first time in a very long time, the Ayatollah regime was deliberate enough to block part of the straits for the sake of conducting live-fire exercises.
SPEAKER 09 :
Right. So that’s a… poses the question, with what they’re doing in the Strait of Hormuz, do you think Tehran is negotiating in good faith, or are they using what they deem as military escalation on their part as potential leverage?
SPEAKER 25 :
Well, I do not believe that the Islamic Republic has ever negotiated in good faith. They do aspire to achieve a negotiated solution that benefits them rather than the United States. They have not really shown a true desire. to come to terms with the defeat that they’ve sustained during the last two years since the atrocious, horrendous attack by Hamas on October 7th of 2023, all the way to The 12-Day War, which was launched last June 13, and then the cherry on top, so to speak, on the 22nd of June, when—or, rather, the 19th of June, when President Trump related operation, Midnight Hammer, they don’t seem to comprehend their current situation that they’re currently in. And they keep saying, you know, if we’re attacked, we’re going to respond in force. It’s not going to stay within the boundaries of Iranian territory. We’re going to wreak havoc across the region, something obviously Israel, the United States or any other country would that is deliberate in its protection of national security interests of their respective countries, but also all freedom of navigation cannot accept.
SPEAKER 09 :
And all the while, Benjamin Netanyahu, prime minister, is saying that the nuclear infrastructure must be totally dismantled, not just stopping enrichment, but dismantled. And of course, that’s a hard one for Tehran to swallow. We’ve only got less than a minute. What are you hearing in that regard?
SPEAKER 25 :
Well, the Iranian president has already come out and said that they’re not going to dismantle their nuclear program. So that is a done deal from Tehran’s perspective. Whether or not President Trump, with all the tools at his disposal, can convince the other side that he is being serious and they better follow suit, that’s a question to be seen. But the last time they have threatened to block the Straits of Hormuz the way they did today by blocking a part of it, we had at the time President Reagan launching Operation Frame Massive. We’re going to have to leave it there. All right.
SPEAKER 09 :
Jonathan Hessen, senior fellow at the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security, thank you for joining us. All right, friends, coming up, much coming out of Iowa as it relates to Mifflip Bridgestone. Stay with us.
SPEAKER 10 :
The family is the oldest, most tested, and most reliable unit of society. It is divinely created and sustained. And yet, there are those who are always tampering with its values and structure. That’s why we need organizations like the Family Research Council that can effectively defend and strengthen the family.
SPEAKER 18 :
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.
SPEAKER 05 :
FRC is one of those bright lights that helps us focus on true north. And I shudder to think, had they not been here, that it could have been worse, worse, worse.
SPEAKER 01 :
The Family Research Council is key. It’s one of a handful of groups that I think will determine whether our children live in a country that enjoyed all of the freedom and all the opportunity that we enjoyed in this great land.
SPEAKER 08 :
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 25 :
FRC is not going to be whooped.
SPEAKER 14 :
You know, we’re going to fight. We’re going to take a stand. And again, we don’t retreat. You will never see in front of this building here in Washington, D.C., a white flag flying. We will never step back. We will never surrender. And we will never be silent.
SPEAKER 09 :
All right, welcome back to Washington Watch. I am your guest host today, Jody Heiss, filling in for Tony, and thank you so much for joining us today. All right, the abortion drug Mifepristone and any other drug prescribed for the purpose of inducing abortions would be harder to get in the state of Iowa under a bill that moved forward by a state senate subcommittee there. The proposed legislation would mandate that these drugs only be prescribed following an in-person appointment with a physician and that in itself would restore one of the key FDA safeguards that the Biden administration removed at the federal level. Now proponents have argued that that in-person medical supervision is essential for the safety of women taking these dangerous drugs. So what will passage of this bill mean for protecting women and their unborn babies? Joining me now to discuss this is Senator Sherrilyn Westridge, who is a member of the Senate Ethics Committee in Iowa. Senator Westridge, welcome to Washington Watch. Great to have you with us.
SPEAKER 03 :
Thank you. I appreciate you having me on.
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, we’re excited to talk to you about this. Let’s start with some of the key components of this bill. What does it cover?
SPEAKER 03 :
Well, basically, the purpose of the bill is to stop the mail order pharmaceuticals being shipped into Iowa without a prescription, without a physical consultation. So without basically seeing a doctor. And that’s the main goal of this bill, and the thing that I think is most important. There are other provisions in the bill, and those had some importance to us, but we had concerns with those, concerned about the informed consent portion, the off-label drug counseling had some pushback, and I too had concerns about that. And one of the main, goal here is that this is not aiming at the Iowa medical community. We don’t want them to be affected in a negative way. This is what we want to be a positive bill to help patients.
SPEAKER 09 :
And of course, these drugs are very dangerous. So can you hit on some of that, some of the dangers of telehealth and mail-in orders, dispensing drugs like mifepristone and misoprostol, some of these other abortion-inducing drugs that in and of themselves are very dangerous?
SPEAKER 03 :
Of course, and depending on whose hands they fall into, this could be given to an unsuspecting young woman by someone who wants her to not have that child. And if the woman doesn’t know she’s been given these drugs, that can cause side effects that are really terrible. There can be terrible bleeding. You could have all kinds of things happen that you don’t know about because these drugs have fallen into the wrong hands and been given to you unsuspectingly. And even if you’re choosing to take those drugs, you may not know the side effects or how to handle them or when to see a doctor if something happens. So you need that informed consent. You need that doctor prescribing these drugs so that young ladies who may want to use these drugs and who choose to use them are safe. And so that’s what we’re looking for. We want Iowans to be safe. We want these young ladies to be safe. And we don’t want illegal or illicit or just out-of-state prescriptions without that in-person visit to get that information.
SPEAKER 09 :
And another major component of this legislation, as I understand it, is mandating the reporting of medical complications after abortions that were caused by these drugs and reporting that to the state. How valuable would this type of information be for revealing some of the hidden dangers of mail-in drugs that the abortion industry is using?
SPEAKER 03 :
I think it’s invaluable. I mean, any reporting we can do on medical procedures, how pharmaceuticals are affecting women. I think more information is always better. And to have that report back and to see what is actually happening. These drugs are being taken off from from they’re not being prescribed. And yet women are able to acquire these drugs. And we don’t want that. We want this to be an upfront consultation with a doctor, and then we want a report back because we can see those side effects. If these drugs are in any way harmful, we need that data. That’s all. It just provides extra data.
SPEAKER 09 :
I know Iowa already protects life once a heartbeat is detected. So how would this bill, if it becomes law, how would it close loopholes that currently allow abortion… drugs and the abortion industry, for that matter, to bypass your state standards through telehealth and out-of-state mailing of abortion drugs. How would the loopholes be impacted by this?
SPEAKER 03 :
Well, in my view, I think the reporting, and that is another reason that the reporting would be important and keeping that data is to make sure that that doesn’t become a loophole, that people aren’t kind of skirting around the law by illegally obtaining those drugs after the heartbeat is detected. So with that, at least we would know what’s going on. Here we’re having unreported drugs coming in from out of state, and it just becomes a problem where we don’t know what’s going on. We don’t know if people are superseding the law. So with that, if you have to see a doctor, if you have to get that consultation, they’re going to know how far along you are in your pregnancy and know if that human life is, you know, detected by a heartbeat. So I think it’s going to be kind of a… Thank you. Yeah.
SPEAKER 09 :
Thank you so much, Iowa State Senator Sherrilyn Westrich. Great work.
SPEAKER 03 :
Thank you, Jodi.
SPEAKER 09 :
We appreciate you coming on Washington Watch. All right, coming up next, a fascinating study on college students pretending to be woke. Stay tuned.
SPEAKER 15 :
We have state leaders that want to keep the deadly drugs out of their states. Maybe if these abortion pills were coming by boat, the administration would change its tactics. It’s time to respect the rights of the states, and it’s time to end death by mail.
SPEAKER 13 :
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, alongside Senator Lindsey Graham, led a press conference on Capitol Hill urging the Trump administration to end the Biden era policies that have allowed dangerous abortion drugs to be shipped across state lines. They were joined by state attorneys general, pro-life advocates and multiple Republican congressmen.
SPEAKER 17 :
There are more abortions today in the United States than when Roe versus Wade was the law of the land. And why is that? It’s because of the chemical abortion drug, Mifeprestone. Nearly 70% of the abortions that are committed in the United States today are committed because of Mifeprestone.
SPEAKER 06 :
The federal government is allowing a chemical abortion pill to be sent through the mail that wipes out every state unborn protection law in the land. It’s harder to ship alcohol in this country than it is to ship the abortion pill.
SPEAKER 12 :
And that should never be the case. This is a drug that takes the life of every child. So there is always a death that’s involved in this drug, but is also incredibly dangerous for the mom as well. We think that we should require a doctor to be able to get access to this drug.
SPEAKER 02 :
As a doctor, I think it’s essential that there be human contact before the pill is prescribed.
SPEAKER 04 :
It’s not about a national abortion ban. It’s about validating Dobbs and preventing other states from nullifying the legislative policy choices that have been made by our states and facilitating the illegal, unethical, and dangerous drug trafficking of abortion pills into our states without any medical oversight whatsoever.
SPEAKER 06 :
We can simply fix this if we have the courage to do it. So what are all of us telling the administration? You’ve been a great pro-life president, Mr. President. It’s now time to deal with this issue.
SPEAKER 17 :
We want to protect life, and we want to give voice to the American people and their right to protect life state by state, city by city, and yes, here in the United States Congress. That’s what this fight is about.
SPEAKER 13 :
Let your voice be heard. Text LIFE to 67742. Sign the petition. Tell the Trump administration to act.
SPEAKER 16 :
Download the new StandFirm app for Apple and Android phones today. You can join a wonderful community of fellow believers. We’ve created a special place for you to access news from a biblical perspective. Read and listen to daily devotionals, pray for current events, and more. Share the Stand Firm app with your friends, family, and church members. And of course, stand firm wherever you go.
SPEAKER 09 :
Thank you so much for tuning in today to Washington Watch and welcome back. I am Jody Heiss, your guest host for today. All right. There is a fascinating new study that’s come out, which found that a large majority of students on college campuses pretend to hold views more left-leaning than their own in an attempt to succeed socially or academically. The same study found that 82% of these studies actually submitted assignments representing their actual views or misrepresenting their actual views, and they did so in order to better align with a professor’s expected woke ideology. Folks, this is sobering information findings. I mean, you look at parents and high school students who are considering which college to send their kids or which ones to attend. This is incredibly important information. And now joining me to discuss this fascinating study is PsychForum’s founder and CEO, Kevin Waldman. Kevin, welcome to Washington Watch. Thank you for joining us.
SPEAKER 22 :
Hi, thanks for having me.
SPEAKER 09 :
All right, let’s start with what led you to undertake this study.
SPEAKER 22 :
Yeah, so I actually attended the University of Michigan in adulthood, in my 30s, and I walked in there, a very liberal person, and I started to realize that a lot of the talking points in the campus setting are very, very narrow-minded in a ideological sense, very leftist, and no real room for open dialogue or really inquiry into anything outside of what the professors are teaching, which is political. And so I decided to investigate further.
SPEAKER 09 :
Amazing. Well, I mentioned a couple of the things that stuck out to me, but give us an overview of the results of this study and were there any parts of it that surprised you, that kind of stood out?
SPEAKER 22 :
Sure. I’ll start by saying I like the term sobering that you used in the intro. It is sobering. A lot of people that I’ve come in contact with believe that they have the same theories that I do, which is that the students are kind of pretending. But when you see the actual data, it is shocking. So 88% of the students at both universities together believe uh confess to uh you know performing progressive values on campus in order to succeed it’s not even just a um academic thing they’re afraid socially uh to be a part of anything that isn’t extremely liberal on campus or liberal in appearance i should say very leftist uh beyond liberal and so We have actually at PsychForum done three different studies that are all kind of ideologically driven in the sense where we’re trying to underscore that the students are being told what to believe during a very important developmental period of their life where trial and error is extremely important, where failing is very important, where trying new things is important. And they’re not really getting the opportunity to do these things because they’re being scripted right from the get-go. And if you do not believe this, maybe this isn’t the right university for you. And you could be a danger in a social setting and certainly in an academic setting if you question some of these ideologies.
SPEAKER 09 :
All right, so let’s bring this a little bit closer to home. Were there any takeaways that you would present to parents and high school students who are considering where they might consider attending college?
SPEAKER 22 :
It’s a tough question to answer without being biased. I certainly wouldn’t send my kid to a school without being very involved in their lives. This is not the 90s where you let the kids come home in the streetlights. Come on, you should be involved in your college student’s academic life. Have a really good relationship with your kids at this point. there’s a lot going on that the universities are dependent upon the parents not being involved. And in my research, the closest thing I’ve seen to success with students, which there are many, they’re usually conservative families that are involved in the student’s life. So I guess what I would tell parents is to be involved, to look at the curriculum. And if you have concerns to contact the university. And I would definitely do research on the curriculum at this point before sending my kid to any university.
SPEAKER 09 :
Thank you so much, Kevin Waldman of Psych4 for your insights on this incredible study. We appreciate you joining us today on Washington Watch.
SPEAKER 22 :
Thank you so much.
SPEAKER 09 :
All right, continuing this conversation on the psych form study, how do parents raise teenagers, future college students? How do they raise them to be confident in their biblical worldview and unafraid to share that worldview with peers and professors alike? Well, here now to share more about this is Dr. Jeff Myers, who is the president of Summit Ministries. Dr. Myers, welcome back to Washington Watch. Always an honor to have you, my friend.
SPEAKER 21 :
It’s an honor to be on your show. I love this show, love the work of Family Research Council. And Jody, you’re a great stand-in host.
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, thank you very much. I earned you extra brownie points. But listen, this is an incredible study here. I hope you were able to see the conversation I just had with Kevin Waldman. Are you surprised that so many college kids are mindlessly spouting ideas that they don’t even themselves actually believe?
SPEAKER 21 :
No, I am not surprised at all. I thought your interview with Kevin Waldman was fantastic. I’m glad that in the psychological sciences, he’s developed a sort of language for describing what’s actually happening. But parents have known this for a long time. Conservative-oriented students have known this for a long time. But he talks about students performing based on what they think the professor’s expectations are rather than learning to think. And the way he described it, that they’re being scripted from a young age, is powerful and terrifying. You know, what we found over time, and you probably have heard this saying before, a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. So these universities think they are indoctrinating the entire next generation to be just like them, when in fact they may not be doing any such thing.
SPEAKER 09 :
Yeah, great point. And I likewise was struck deeply emotionally when he talked about how they’re being scripted in all of this. What do you think is causing these college students to at least spout these woke beliefs that they themselves don’t believe in? I mean, could this be a symptom of these college kids themselves not having a solid biblical worldview? before they go to college? What’s behind all of this, do you think?
SPEAKER 21 :
Yeah, so there’s several things happening here, Jody. I think the last point is one we should probably mention first. It is really significant. This is why we do the work we do at Summit Ministries, to help young adults develop a biblical worldview and to understand the counterfeit worldviews they’ll be facing and learn how to talk about them before they head off to a college or university. If they don’t have that happen, when they start hearing all of these crazy views that their family members don’t believe, they start to become, well, they develop what the apostle James called a divided mind. Because on the one hand, they’re thinking, this is not what I learned growing up. On the other hand, they’re thinking, well, my professor has a PhD. Maybe my parents are wrong. And so it sort of puts a divide in between them and their families. If you’ve talked about all of this ahead of time and you know these attacks are coming, then you’re not as compelled by them. In fact, you’re in a way inoculated against them. And that is extremely important for parents to be able to do this. But the second part of your question is just a normal thing for kids to ask, what do I need to do to succeed in this situation? And if the impression they’re getting is, what I need to do in this situation in my class is to stop thinking and just learn to repeat whatever my professor says, they are not getting an education. They’re not getting an education. The definition of education is to lead out of, which means to lead out of ignorance. They are being schooled, but they are not being educated if they are not having the opportunity to examine different viewpoints and actually dialogue honestly about them.
SPEAKER 09 :
Very well said. And that just makes me think more and more. Let me ask you this. Are there spiritual, potential spiritual consequences for repeating, for verbalizing, for articulating ideas that you don’t believe in?
SPEAKER 21 :
Oh, of course, yes, because what you’re learning is to become an unethical person. You’re learning to respond to what is happening around you rather than taking a stand for what is true. If you ask young adults today, do you think if you were living in the 1850s that you would have been opposed to slavery? And 100% of them say yes. But then if you ask them, well, give me an example of an ethical issue where you’ve actually personally sacrificed for a viewpoint, they can’t give you one. So they sort of assume that they can think by looking in the rearview mirror, and that isn’t what they really need to do. They need to be prepared by their parents to know that even though your professor is not going to reward you for this, you need to figure out how to articulate the truth and do it with evidence. Then you use the classroom to sharpen yourself, not just to go along. The second one has serious negative consequences for your soul. The first one has serious positive consequences for your soul. Learn to stand, learn to think, become resilient. And if you get nothing else out of college than that, then it could be worth your while, even if you’re in an environment that promotes stupidity.
SPEAKER 09 :
Yeah. And, you know, it just seems to me that even if you don’t believe something, if you are verbalizing it, if you are writing it, that there’s something that takes place there that whether you realize it or not, there’s a degree, a sense in which you are taking ownership of that because you are arguing in behalf of it. And that just puts an individual on dangerous soil spiritually, it seems to me.
SPEAKER 21 :
I think that’s a really interesting point. You know, in addition to that, it develops kind of a cynicism. Say, well, you know, the only thing you have to do at this university is just to say whatever they want you to say to get ahead. But parents, listen to me. You’re paying $80,000 a year for this. You can have your child indoctrinated for a whole lot less money by just watching videos on YouTube or TikTok. Save your $240,000, $300,000. I’m just being tongue-in-cheek, obviously, there. But the point is, if we can help you at Summit Ministries, we want to do it. But we want to help young adults learn to think, and they have to learn the truth of a biblical worldview. We give them the facts, we’re not trying to cram anything down their throats. We expose them to the counterfeit worldviews because you actually learn more about the truth when you’re looking at the ways it has been manipulated and people use propaganda to try to move you away from it. And then finally, you learn to talk to people who have different viewpoints. If you can learn those things, then even a very liberal college environment can sometimes turn to your benefit. I certainly experienced that when I was in my doctoral program. I was all alone in believing the beliefs that I had, I thought, until I began to eventually just ask questions and articulate them in class. And all of a sudden I realized, oh, out of the 25 of us in our doctoral program, there are seven believing Christians. But none of them would have ever said anything had I not been the first to ask the professor a question that showed I was skeptical of the dogma we were being presented. Right.
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, that’s awesome. So what are some questions that you would recommend for parents and teens to discuss about when it comes to deciding what college, whether it be Christian or secular college, to attend? What are some questions they need to think about and talk about?
SPEAKER 21 :
Well, one question is, I want to ask, what does a good education look like? I’m going to be asking that of the admissions reps. They probably won’t know. But you’ve got to visit the campus. You’ve got to talk to professors who are in your field of potential interest. What does an educated person look like in this situation? I think you can just come right out and say, Hey, look, I know there was a study recently about people assuming progressive views. Is that what you expect of students or do you expect them to learn to examine two opposing viewpoints and honestly articulate the difference? What protections do you have of students against psychological manipulation? Because a lot of times it’s not just in the classroom, Jodi, it’s in the residence hall. You go to your residence hall and all of a sudden they’ve got you doing these psychological studies where you’re supposed to confess that you’re a racist or whatever, and it’s psychological manipulation. The students need to be prepared. Okay, I’m engaging in a psychological study here plainly. I need to have a permission form so that you can psychologically analyze me. If there’s no permission form, then what you’re doing is against the law. At each university, there’s an institutional review board. Anybody who’s doing anything that’s psychologically manipulative has to have it passed by the institutional review board, which is an official committee at the university. And you can just ask. hey, look, you’re having us do this anti-racism exercise. Can you show me the permission slip that you have from the Institutional Review Board to conduct this? So there are those sorts of questions. Jodi, in class, there are a whole other series of questions you ask, just starting with how do you know that? What do you mean by that? How do you know that’s true? Where did you get your information? Those kinds of basic things in class break the spell and sometimes allow other students to come to your side in creating a fair and balanced discussion.
SPEAKER 09 :
That’s awesome. All right, final question. We’ve only got about a minute. Does Summit Ministry have some resources for parents and teens on the issue of developing a biblical worldview?
SPEAKER 21 :
We absolutely do. This summer, we’re having two-week-long intensives in Colorado and in South Carolina where students 16 to 22 years of age can join us, study with us with the top Christian thought leaders of our day, ask all of your hard questions. We don’t ignore any question. We’re not afraid of any question the students bring. So that’s one thing. Summit.org, you can check that out. Also, while you’re at Summit.org, you can see that we have a whole series of websites web articles, videos, things like that that can help young adults answer some of the big questions they have coming up. There’s always an imbalance between truth and a relationship. Your goal is not to humiliate your professor or your classmates. Your goal is to be a learner who helps lead other people to the truth.
SPEAKER 09 :
Thank you, Dr. Jeff Myers, Summit Ministries, summit.org. Thanks for joining us on Washington Watch. All right, friends, have a great evening. We’ll be back tomorrow.
SPEAKER 18 :
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.
