Skip to main content

tv   Washington Journal Dean Cheng  CSPAN  August 5, 2022 1:34pm-2:19pm EDT

1:34 pm
3.6% to 3.5%. usa today reporting the labor market now has recovered all 22 million jobs lost in the pandemic. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. including charter communications. >> broadband is a force for empowerment and that's why charter has invested billions building infrastructure and upgrading technology, empowering opportunity in communities big and small. charter is connecting us. >> charter communications support c-span as a public service. giving your front row seat to democracy. hington journal" continues. host: we are joined by dean chang, we discussed this morning
1:35 pm
speaker pelosi's high one visit. first of all, dean chang, how did you view the choice by speaker pelosi to go to taiwan? guest: she was originally scheduled ago last fall. while coming down with covid, sort of ironically. this was a rescheduling of the visit, this is part of ironically why the chinese are reacting as strongly. they had several months to suade her from coming, and they failed. it is probably about as well-managed as it could be. she arrived in the evening, had meetings, but was promptly finished and flute onwards. needless to say, beijing was not happy about it. it sent the message the u.s. wanted. host: outwardly, the white house was not happy about it. what do you think, behind the
1:36 pm
scenes, the guidance they gave to the speaker and the potential flaw -- fall out it may contribute to the biden white house? guest: i was disappointed in the white house's hesitancy and opposition to the visit. in this period, i think it is important for the u.s. to signal beijing that we continue to stand with taiwan, that this is a strong relationship. by signaling to the speaker of the house, who is a part of the legislative branch, it basically created the appearance of a disagreement between two key branches, as well as the top leadership of the u.s. government. host: what has been your reaction to the military response, the military exercises china is going through? guest: one of the things that has been under noted is that the chinese in their closure areas and missile tests, which,
1:37 pm
missiles have been spotted over taiwan, which have never happened before. they are almost replicating and going beyond what they did in 1996, the u.s. responses sent two battle groups and that shocked beijing. china is doing the same thing, going a bit beyond. no one is thinking about sending two carrier battle groups into the taiwan straits area, because the risk would be too high. that is a sign that beijing is underscoring that 25 years later, the balance of power has shifted and it is china that now holds a much more powerful position. i do not think that message is lost across asia, i fear that is something that may be recycling itself within top circles of the straight. host: what do you expect the situation on the ground in the ocean there, after sunday when
1:38 pm
these drills, these exercises are supposed to in? will there be continued chinese presence in that area? guest: absolutely. i think this is the chinese salami approach they have been taking. will they be holding missile drills and firing in taiwan on a database -- day-to-day basis, probably not. if you take a look at where the chinese are doing their exercises, there is one box directly east of the island. i think that is a signal we should expect to see chinese ships, including coast guard ships, regularly patrolling east of the island to signal several things. host: the map we are showing from new york times about that area shows that part of that area is the japanese economic zone. what kind of potential problems does that create with japan? guest: a lot. the japanese have steadily edged closer to supporting taiwan,
1:39 pm
specifically supporting the u.s. in the event of a taiwan contingency. this is china pushing back against japan. taiwan fuzz -- was first torn from -- taiwan has been a focal point of china-japan relations, or pushing 140 years. host: this is part of a chinese military plan that came back a couple of weeks ago when speaker pelosi first decided on this trip. this is a highly organized plan that has been on the shelf for a while. guest: absolutely. this is military exercises season, so to speak. the pillai -- pla normally would be doing these exercises. because speaker pelosi had planned on sitting almost eight months ago, they have had lots of time to think about how to calibrate this. even this visit, there were
1:40 pm
rumors of it for several weeks, which allowed them to take the plans off the shelf and nature everything is up-to-date. host: dean change -- chang is with the heritage foundation. we welcome your calls, the visit by the speaker and u.s. policy in the aftermath. (202) 748-8000 is the line to call for -- (202) 748-8001 is the line to for republicans. (202) 748-8002 four democrats. all others, caller:. what is the u.s. military response in the area? guest: when speaker pelosi's plane was heading toward taiwan, we sent a number of fighters mostly to keep watch. they were not escorting her. that is about it, there was no evidence we are deploying a second carrier group out there, although i think there is a
1:41 pm
re-amphibious group in the area. host: as this continues by the chinese, what sorts of reactions can the u.s. take, economically or further military actions, etc.? guest: militarily at this point, we are probably at about where we are going to be. it takes time to deploy additional carriers of ships to the region. we could play more aircraft. economically, it is important to signal to taiwan that we maintained economic relations. i think one of the things to keep in mind is that china is pushing diplomatically across the region, there secretary abe lincoln is at the port -- host: the u.s. announcing to cambodia to agricultural products and what about
1:42 pm
militarily for taiwan, what has the u.s. supplied taiwan in the last year or so? guest: that is very disappointing. this administration appears clamping down on arm sales to taiwan, three key areas that apparently have been killed. anti-submarine helicopter, anti-early warning aircraft and artillery. the last two are things that, if you look at the ukraine conflict, would be particularly useful. you need to know where these airplanes are and artillery is a key way of delivering a wide variety of emulations. host: do you think the u.s. republic of china will change the administration's policies in terms of further arming or supplying taiwan? guest: i have to admit i am bewildered by the line of policies that simultaneously says china is the foremost threat, and turns around and
1:43 pm
says we are going to kobach, an early warning aircraft. host: let's get to calls, we go first to eve in grand rapids, michigan. you are on with dean cheng. caller: good morning. the reason i'm calling, i get up every morning and i listened to c-span. i cannot believe for the life of me that these republicans are still denying this insurrection in the capital. every day, just like any other democrat caller has said, we always are bombarded by the border. what does the border have to do with -- host: we are focusing on china this segment. we go to new jersey to hear from joe on the republican line. good morning. caller: hi. there are many things i do not understand about why china is so
1:44 pm
adamant about taking over taiwan. i remember studying the revolutionary war in the u.s., and win people who supported the king lost in the revolutionary war, they went to canada. they were left alone. there was a revolution in the 1940's, and the communists won. the nationalists went to taiwan. it is 90 miles off the coast to china, i have looked it up. it is about the size of maryland and delaware combined. why is it that the chinese communists are so adamant about getting back taiwan? thanks. host: dean cheng. guest: three broad reasons. one, the chinese communist party is founded on the idea that they throw the foreigners out and unify the country. to your american revolution aspect, the tories who fled to
1:45 pm
canada did not claim they were still the rightful government of the colonies. in that regard, that is one element. second is geostrategic. if you look at the map of east asia, taiwan is part of the first island chain in the chinese navy, and limits access to china sports, which is the center of gravity of china's economy. the third part is semiconductors, technology. taiwan is the main manufacturer of microchips and from the prc's perspective, that is the lifeblood of modern power. control taiwan, control microchips. host: next up, we hear from the -- dee on the republican line. caller: good morning. i want to talk about this china and united states thing. my personal opinion, anybody who is the biggest bully in this world is the united states. there was a person talking
1:46 pm
before i was, what does china have to do with china being 90 miles away. the united states will travel thousands and thousands of miles with war machines to annihilate nations, kill presidents, kill the citizens, dams their countries -- damns their countries, we are worse than china, russia, any other country out there. we are bullies. we have bullied our way through this whole world since the very beginning. we have killed, we have murdered, have stolen and we continue to do that today. i do not understand. i wish this moment would explain a little bit. host: do you view the -- do you think the chinese view the u.s. as a bully on the world stage? guest: absolutely. the chinese have never committed aggression, that is an official line of the ccp.
1:47 pm
their perception of the united states is trying to contain china, is trying to prevent china's return to the world stage. absolutely, they view themselves as far more sinned against. would chinese neighbors agree with that assessment is a very different issue. again, china in its attitude feels it is entitled to dominate the region and intimidate or pressure cambodia, vietnam. host: there was a headline a day or two ago. pelosi visits undermining risks with asian efforts. does this strengthen our relationship with them? guest: it seems to be mixed. when speaker pelosi landed in south korea, her leadership -- her meetings with the leadership was by phone call, that has been commented upon and there has been a lot of what is going on
1:48 pm
there. the japanese have noticed the military exercises, and that has definitely further pushed them towards the u.s. southeast asia, secretary blinken at the form is trying to play off of speaker pelosi's visit. host: is it because of china that japan has beefed up its military? guest: yes. for decades, we have been trying to get them to increase spending by 1% gdp. in the recent years, they have now agreed to push to 2% of gdp on defense spending, that is in reaction to china. host: let's hear from joe in cliffside park, new jersey. independent line. caller: good morning. relating to the other comments made dealing with china and
1:49 pm
wanting to be on the world stage, they are on the world stage already. pouring billions into different countries on infrastructure, they are moving to take over their philosophy is to take over the world in a sense of the imperialistic ways that china has was been that way. taiwan represents another step in the form of taking it over based upon the fact that taiwan was part of china, and had separated due to the war going back decades, if not half a century. there is no true answer to pellucid going to china, other than it is political and -- pelosi going to china, other than it is political. china stepping forward and making islands have further military influence in that area of the world. it is a complex topic, and one
1:50 pm
must understand that this could ultimately lead to a limited war with china, and protecting taiwan's interest to remain independent. we must be terribly careful on how we proceed with our efforts to bolster taiwan's position as independents. do we know the war over taiwan? i do not think so. host: thanks, joe. dean cheng. guest: i cannot disagree that the situation is extraordinarily complex. it is three players, not just the u.s. and china. taiwan is a separate player from either of these other superpowers, it has its own interests. as a democracy, the president in
1:51 pm
taipei has to listen as much to domestic political concerns as foreign and military strategic issues. is this worth fighting a war over? that is part of the issue that is the taiwan's relations act and prevention to arms sales. what is preventing the war is, how do we deter china from trying to take the island? how do we signal beijing at the same time that we are not supportive of taiwan independence, which many folks seem to misunderstand. the u.s. does not support taiwan independence, it supports a peaceful resolution to the taiwan straits issue. host: what did? guest: that was huge. the chinese has held up hong kong as an example. here is hong kong being reintegrated into china, it will be left alone and we will sign a treaty with the u.k., the
1:52 pm
foreigner colonial chief. now that china has said your system is subordinate, it has undermined any real interest in one country, two systems in taipei, taiwan. as important, it has antagonized the important population of taiwan to say, whatever it is our relationship is with china, it will not be one country, two systems. we do not trust you, for good reason. host: richard in louisville, kentucky, republican line. caller: for 40 years, we have had american technology going over to china as they continue to build their military, nuclear weapons. now, they have a navy twice the size of ours. you have nancy pelosi go over there and act like a complete
1:53 pm
fool, china turns around, surrounds that little island and starts firing missiles over it. do you honestly believe that if the united states got involved in trying to protect taiwan that it would not turn into a nuclear war? it will never happen. taiwan is gone, just get over it. host: ok. dean cheng. guest: well, first of all. when you are on an island hundreds of miles off the shore, chinese navy can operate all around the island. that was true whether or not nancy pelosi went. if china can win a war against taiwan is an interesting question. they haven't fought a war since 1979. i think it is important to recognize that the chinese are not going to start a war on a whim, or unless they are very sure. party survival would be at stake. with regards to whether or not
1:54 pm
we would go nuclear, that is a tough call. we fought the cold war for well over 40 years. at the end of the day, deterrence worked. i think that is the outcome we are all hoping for with regards to taiwan. host: wise this muscular response from the chinese military important to the political future of president xi jinping? guest: president xi is part of a party that will eliminate retirement requirements or he has secured his position as president, and will not have to resign as head of the party. he does not want a war during this party congress with this enormous political significance hang over his head. going into the congress, went he wants is a peaceful situation
1:55 pm
where he can say, look at how well things are going. that is all because of me. host: let's hear from matt in houston on the republican line. caller: good morning, everybody. i want to make a comment. in 2020, we noticed that there were hundreds of thousands of cisco routers that were in critical infrastructure at the u.s. at&t and nsa --internet, infrastructure, we had to replace a lot of these because on the bottom of these boards were chips that were installed as they moved through china. if we allow taiwan to fall to china, none of us ever will have freedom again. it started with products sold in wind, which nancy pelosi and several others signed off on because when they wanted to start signing on everybody, they only had to blow up two towers. now, we have got to worry about winnie the pooh and east taiwan.
1:56 pm
no thanks. taiwan needs to stand free, free hong kong. host: dean cheng, any comments? guest: china is one of the world's leaders in cyber espionage, it's cyber technology is pushing ahead in certain areas, artificial intelligence. they are our peer in some elements of those technologies, and they will be ahead. when we think of u.s.-china competitions, it is absolutely about chips. the interesting thing there, china is intent on building lodging chips, they are not there yet. lodging chips are dominated by taiwanese, south korea and some american firms, but not chinese. host: i wanted to ask you about the efforts by the chinese on the economic side, particularly the fishing in the east china sea, the area between at 100 miles between china and taiwan. are they -- is china expected to
1:57 pm
further pressure taiwanese fishing vessels into not being able to fish in that area? guest: i think it would certainly love to do that, i think that is to the east of the -- east of taiwan the prc will have difficulty limiting fishing activities. any taiwan straits area, closer to the chinese side, you wind up with that problem. we have seen chinese fishing fleets across indonesian and other waters, central pacific waters. for those listeners who are interested in the environment, china is one of the worst fishing states out there. the various technologies they use are often some of the worst in terms of vacuuming a swath of ocean, regardless of what sea life gets caught in their nets. host: let's hear from dawn calling from missouri on the independent line. caller: good morning.
1:58 pm
even though taiwan is 120 miles off china's coast, if you look at it in-depth on a map, it is clearly a part of the starch of tellico to the north of the philippines, to the south. it would be, that is the logical reason it is in our free zone of nations. that is all i have to say. host: ok, do countries like the philippines have countries over china's presence? guest: absolutely. the court of arbitration found in favor of the philippines where china has been building artificial islands and extensive fishing, etc. china openly said the port of arbitration is unqualified to issue judgments, sort of like
1:59 pm
saying the supreme court is not allowed to make constitutional calls and judgments. the japanese, the philippines, taiwan are part of the so-called first island chain, and that is an area china is showing great concern about. all of these islands are in pro american hands, they limit china's ability to flush their navy out to the central pacific. if they were in chinese hands, they would keep the u.s. navy in their -- and their forces away from china. host: speaker pelosi's trip made strange bedfellows in terms of who supported and who didn't, some democrats opponents of this trip. i wanted to point you to the comets of michael waltz, congressman from florida on the armed services committee. critical of the speakers trip here here is what he had to say on fox news. [video clip] >> here's the big difference
2:00 pm
from priors, we have had these -- with these chinese over visits from taiwan. the difference then from now, acton, a new and we knew that they couldn't do anything about it military. now, they believe that they can do something about it let harrell he, they can match us. they -- he has told his military to be ready around 127 to defeat us. that is the game changer and why we have to wake up as a country, versus the speaker of the house, then it is trade routes, it is critical minerals, then it is our pharmaceuticals that they are manufacturing. then, they dominate the world. host: how might this change u.s. policy toward military policy toward the area? guest: well, i think there is the hope and expectation that there will be increased, renewed arms sales that the administration will move away from that decision.
2:01 pm
that there will be greater opportunity for exercises. one of the problems for the taiwan military, they have been isolated from pretty much interacting with any other militaries. there has been enormous amount of the military doctrine and technology. the hope is, it is not just weapons and equipment, it is training and doctrine that they need modernization. host: do you think hungers been watts's comments reflect a waters split in the republican party over how we view -- congressman watts comments reflect a larger split in the republican party? guest: among some to walk away because of things like climate change in things where we need chinese cooperation. we are seeing splits in both the republicans and democrats, but i do not think it is a specific, ideological one. host: tim in hannibal, new york on the democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning.
2:02 pm
i was led to believe that, when the patriots of america, big business decided to started manufacturing in china that one of the conditions in order for them to do any business there was that they had to give up intellectual properties to do business there. is this true, or is it not? if it is not, it is espionage, correct? guest: well, it depended on what it was you are making in china. if you are packaging dog food, no. there was not much intellectual property. if you were microsoft, manufacturing chips or things like computer chips, yes. the chinese definitely pushed for intellectual property, that is part of why the previous administration posted tariffs on the chinese administration. is that espionage, no.
2:03 pm
it is contractually based. you want to make x here, apple iphones, you will have to do that. apple walked in knowingly. espionage would be if somebody stole your data, that has happened with folks like cisco routers. that was often in the united states, or worldwide. host: have we seen reaction from american business leaders protesting this military action by china? any action, any threats of moving their business out of china? guest: out of china, because of the pelosi visit or the missile tests, no. there has been a broader trend of companies starting to redirect out year investments. it is not, i am upping my factory or closing it. that, my next factory will not be in china. it may be in indonesia or peru. host: that has been an ongoing thing the last couple of things, correct? guest: correct.
2:04 pm
as xi jingping has lamp down, as we have seen steady uptake in espionage issues and political repression, a lot of companies are looking at this as being risky. there is a whole code issue. host: has the u.s. policy toward china changed between the trump administration and biden administration? guest: no. the biden administration has not rescinded most of the terrace put in place. it has talked about taking some chinese companies off the entities list, but that has not happened yet. there is still freedom of navigation operations in the south china sea, maybe transistors to the taiwan straight. in that regard, there has not been much. it is the arms sales of taiwan, the header of discussions, not the substance. host: let's hear from bill in waynesboro, pennsylvania. democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning.
2:05 pm
my concern is, i listen to a lot of news. more and more for months and months at least, i hear so much talk by politicians and political leaders about china being a threat, and even dozens of possible war with china. this goes on all the time, it goes on with president biden, who i generally support. it is democrats, it is republicans. my point is, if we talk about war with china enough, we can make it happen. there is a difference between a military threat and economic threat. in many ways, china has exceeded our economy. we have a lot of people in this country that just cannot stand the thought we are supposed to be exceptional in the world, and the economy's rise and fall.
2:06 pm
we might not be the strongest economy in the world -- always be the strong as the economy in the world. we have given away much of our economy, the businesses have, by moving to china because they can pay workers there many dollars less then workers are paid here. my main point is, i think it is a mistake to constantly talk about china as a threat and a military threat. if they truly become a military threat, this country, with its thousands of nuclear weapons and 800 military bases around the world, part of the u.s. empire, this country could successfully fight china or blow us all to kingdom come. host: bill in pennsylvania.
2:07 pm
dean, your thoughts. guest: even during the cold war, many argued it was the u.s. that was the problem. china's military is still the largest in the world, it's military has modernized. it is not your father or grandfather's pla, this is a military that deals sophisticated weapons, has counterspace capabilities. no u.s. adversary has fielded cyber capabilities. now, we are finding out they are expanding their nuclear forces massively, 300 silos detected in western china. new, ballistic missile submarines. they are building and manning a strategic bomber, the chinese themselves are talking about that. host: a little more than 10 minutes left with our guest, dean cheng talking about nancy pelosi's trip, the military response. we welcome your calls. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. democrats, (202) 748-8000.
2:08 pm
for independents and others, it is (202) 748-8002. dean cheng's work can be fine owned -- can be found at you draw a straight line from the u.s. withdraw from afghanistan to the russian invasion of ukraine to an increasingly aggressive china. explain that. guest: afghanistan was a catastrophe. one of the worst aspects was that, from a military perspective, it made it look like we were not very competent. that, after 20 years of fighting there, is not the message you want to send. russia's invasion of ukraine occurs in the wake of that. what's the u.s. going to intervene, certainly not. was putin and bolden, it was
2:09 pm
quite likely. it didn't help the u.s. said specifically there was no chance of u.s. intervention. what we are seeing with the chinese's lessons learned from both of their superpower competitors. while russia is aligned with china, they are a potential threat from beijing's perspective. what have they learned from the russian invasion of the ukraine, the american withdraw from couple -- ? host: the u.s. response, it was part of a broader nato response, united nato. is there a organization that is in the southeast asia region that the united states is part of, a similar bulwark against chinese military aggression? guest: i think you are referring to the southeast asia treaty organization, which was set up in the 1950's. that organization died at the
2:10 pm
end of the vietnam war. it is still in the books, but no one thinks of it as an existing organization. asia has no militant, multinational military alliances. that is one of the challenges, u.s. has a wagon wheel of bilateral alliances, but there is no multilateral alliances. some countries like south korea and japan dislike each other as much or more as either fear china. host: was it a mistake for the u.s. not to enter that u.s. trade deal at the end of the obama administration? guest: the trans-pacific partnership, the free-trade deal. it was a self -- black eye. had we had joint, it would send a signal to the beijing that the u.s. was a robust, economic presence in the pacific region, tying together these countries. the reality was, both hillary clinton and donald trump opposed it.
2:11 pm
basically, it would take a lot of fancy footwork for either candidate after winning two join tpp. host: matthew, go ahead. caller: good morning. i am wondering about the asymmetry of the situation, where the speaker of the house visits taipei -- taiwan, excuse me. then, the chinese authorities, there was a visit perspiring rockets into the sea. i do not understand the asymmetry of the whole thing. why are they so threatened? thank you. guest: speaker pelosi is a human being. speaker pelosi is number three in the line of succession. from the chinese perspective, this was not simply somewhat --
2:12 pm
some representative, this was the number three person in our government visiting. that, from the chinese perspective, was tandem to an implicit statement that the u.s. is supporting taiwan. from beijing's perspective, there is no legitimate reason for any politician of any stripe, mayor or president, to go to taiwan. for the number three person -- and a key figure in our legislative branch, which, -- that is a political statement on our part. they are sending a political response, using weapons saying, fine. understand you are doing something serious, we are doing something serious, too. host: there was a phone call between president biden and president xi before pelosi's trip. what do we know of that conversation? guest: sadly, very little. it is surprising.
2:13 pm
the u.s. readout of that was a paragraph long from a two hour conversation. they mentioned they talked about climate change and human rights. the chinese issued a three page, much more detailed version of what they said happened, including that xi jinping made it clear about taiwan. i fear that, as a result, the world is getting a bigger impression, much more influence from the chinese side, which is providing details from the american side. i hope that state department issues a full transcript of the -- of exactly what was discussed. host: let's hear from kami, calling from indiana on the democrats line. we lost kami, we will go to stone on the independent line, calling from oregon. go ahead, stone. caller: how are you doing? i support pelosi in taiwan, i am
2:14 pm
democrat strong. i think it is smart to make an alliance with the taiwanian people. i support the whole movement, i wish she would come to check out eugene, oregon, look at the eugene, oregon, kyle williams, crooked police officer. badge number, 191, look into him. host: the speaker has come into other criticisms, in advance of potentially losing her speakership in foreign policy hurrah. what are your thoughts? guest: from a timing perspective, if she was going to go, she had to go now. we are about to go full war into the reelections -- into the election season for the midterms. if as protected, the democrats lose the house, she will lose that. going now, she goes as speaker of the house. if she went a year from now, she would simply be going as a representative. host: do other leaders of other
2:15 pm
major countries, the u.k., india, australia, other major democracies in particular, face the same sort of blowback and reaction that the speaker did in visiting? so, the prime minister of the u.k. visited taiwan, would there have been a response like this? guest: probably not in the sense of missile firings over taiwan. remember, the u.s. has security ties to taiwan that the u.k. in india do not. i would expect that if boris johnson or his successor would -- were to go to taiwan, we would see massive chinese disinvestment in the u.k., sanctions against british companies. we have already seen that the chinese have issued warrants and things against british members of parliament for their criticism of the chinese treatment of hong kong. this has become a major sore point between london and aging.
2:16 pm
host: den cheng is the senior research fellow at the heritage foundation. "washington journal" continues. host: next is emily cain, executive director director of emily's list, the pro-choice organization aimed at getting women elected to office. emily, welcome to "washington journal.' guest: it is so good to be here. host: emily's list founding, it's underlying mission and how you go about getting candidates to run for office. guest: emily's list is the nation's largest resource for women in politics. we have been around since 1985 with a single mission, to elect democratic, pro-choice women to office. our name, emily's list, is an acronym. it stands for early money is like yeast, it makes the do
2:17 pm
arise. we help women raise money and run successful campaigns. we have elected 159 women to the u.s., 16 governors and more than 1400 state and local officials peered we are not slowing down anytime soon, especially this november. host: are you looking for members mainly in the democratic races, or have you run republicans as well? host: emily's list has only elected and supported democratic, pro-choice women. guest: we are competitive and primaries, and have been from the beginning since we have helped elect barbara mikulski as the first democratic woman elected in her own right to the united states senate. in our history, we have only exclusively elected and supported democratic, pro-choice women. host: we are having you want to talk about some of the cabinets in this years race, and talk about the kansas constitutional
2:18 pm
amendment, the measure which failed in the kansas boat on tuesday by -- kansas vote on tuesday, the measure that would allow a change to the kansas constitution. what was your reaction to that vote? guest: it was excitement, hope and a little bit of joy in what has been a tough year for women's were productive rights. the reproductive rights in our country. we are in a position right now where republicans are talking about a national abortion ban, and if -- and the supreme court has overturned roe v. wade. the vote this week in kansas was an indicator and what we believe we have been seeing across the country. which is, a majority of americans are on the side of people being able to make their own health care decisions. that coalition of people in kansas, democrats, independents and even some republicans th announcer: right now we will take on the white house press


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on