tv Meet the Press NBC May 8, 2022 6:00am-7:00am PDT
this sunday, the fate of roe v. wade. >> how dare they tell a woman what she can do and cannot do with her own body. >> a dividing country react as to that draft supreme court decision. >> i've been praying for this as long as i've understood what a baby was. and it's a big deal. >> this is an attack on women. >> washington's strong reaction from abortion right supporters. >> it's an assault on women. >> i'm going to fight like hell to protect this fight for michigan women. >> it rocks my confidence in the
court. >> while most republicans shy away from the issue and instead focus on the leak. >> just say, breach of protocol, i think will compromise the ability for court consensus. >> the most egregious breach of trust at the supreme court that has ever happened. plus, the fallout. will this galvanize democrats heading into the midterm election? >> this maga crowd is really the most extreme political organization that's existed in american history. >> they want to get off on the things that are so unpopular about this president. could a nationwide ban be the next step? are other rights in jeopardy? can either party find a position that meets americans where they are? i speak to who supports banning most abortions. and dana who poses automatic abortion ban that could go into effect in her state. inside the court's decision-making process with former supreme court clerks, neil and jennifer.
and plus our panel. kimberly atkins stohr, and ali vitale. welcome on this sunday, a special edition of "meet the press". >> nbc news in washington, longest running show in television history, this is a special edition of "meet the press" with chuck todd. >> a good sunday morning and a happy mother's day to all the moms out there including my mother, grandmother. the draft decision overturning roe v. wade only added to growing perception that the supreme court is just one more partisan institution, now a creature of politics, no longer about. the leaked decision for conservatives who worked decades for this moment and it was a shock to millions of americans who have never lived in a world without abortion rights. in this morning's special edition, we're going to cover this story from all angles. the real world fallout, the confusing checkerboard of state laws that would soon be in
effect along with real questions about whatever rights might be in jeopardy. the political fallout. many believe it will help them in the midterms but energizing roe never been tested, it will be now. the court and the broken confirmation process manipulated by mitch mcconnell to manufacture this conservative majority that appears ready to overturn roe in a country that apparently wants it preserved. with 50 states making their own rules, all adds up to further division in a country already split in two. >> women's rights in america are under attack. >> we're going to win in 2022. roe v. wade is not going to change the outcome. >> after the leak of that early draft ruling, reversing roe. >> the supreme court appears poised to overturn roe v. wade. >> governors and state legislators are rushing to define their positions in a
post-roe world. >> the lives of unborn children are, it's very important that we protect the lives of them. >> where is the democratic party? where's the party? why aren't we calling this out? this is a concerted coordinated effort and yes, they're winning. >> should roe be overturned? at least 25 states will likely ban abortion. 13 of them have trigger bans, meaning, it will immediately be outlawed. >> it means lights out in north dakota. >> it's a shot in the face. it's just like, bam, to women of color especially. >> we're going to continue to focus on those women, focusing on the humanity of those women. >> democrats are hoping to turn voter attention away from high inflation ahead of the midterms by drawing a sharp contrast on abortion rights. >> this maga crowd is really the most extreme political organization that's existed in american history. >> and warning that republicans, via the court's conservative majority, could take away
otherwise from access to contraception to same-sex marriage protections. national republicans focused on the leak itself. >> the leak is reprehensible. egregious breach of trust. >> we'll find the leaker. >> largely avoided questions about the future of abortion rights. >> that's not the story for today. >> the nrsc, in charge of getting senate republicans elected, advises republican candidates to, quote, be the compassionate consensus builder on abortion policy. >> there should be an exception for rape and incest, so i think that's where the american public is. >> already, democrats are raising the issue in competitive midterm races. from florida, new hampshire, nevada, to wisconsin. >> the supreme court where it looks like ron johnson is going to get exactly what he wants. overturning roe v. wade. >> reporter: as both parties try to define each other by their most extreme positions. >> would you ever support a ban
that does not make exceptions for incest or rape or life-threatening conditions? >> a total ban. >> not be exceptions. >> the answer is no. >> in a recent pugh poll, they say it should be illegal with all cases and 37% say it should be illegal including those who want exceptions and 61% legal in all or most cases, still, the majority of most americans support roe, senate democrats do not have the votes to codify it in legislation. they expect to take it up later this week. >> not going away. you'll hear a lot from us through the next few months through november. >> one of 13 states with trigger laws to ban abortions once roe is overturned and the draft opinion is about a case in mississippi. the governor of mississippi, an opponent of abortion rights and
joins me now. welcome back to "meet the press." >> thank you for having me on this morning, chuck. as an aside, happy mother's day to all those moms out there, particularly, the first lady of mississippi and my mom and grandma. >> let me double down on them and wish them a happy mother's day as well. >> let me ask about this case itself. one of the odder aspects of your law is that this law appears to have been passed with the intent of hoping it would not be enacted. the reason i say is you passed a 15 week ban after the trigger law was passed in '07, and you were a lieutenant governor when the 15 week ban was, but the whole point of this was to get a case to the supreme court to overturn roe, so will the 15 week ban, if roe is overturned, ever be implemented in the state of mississippi? >> you're right that the trigger law was put into effect in 2007. i should point out, and i think this really points towards sort of the changing approach with
the two political parties on this issue, but the 2007 trigger law was actually enacted with a democrat speaker of the house and enacted with a democrat chairman of the public health committee, but when we enacted the 15 week ban, our initial intent and our goal was really to save baby's lives. we believed if roe was not ever overturned, certainly the viewpoint of mississippians if we could enact laws that would save baby's lives, that it would be an endeavor to do so. if, in fact, the leaked opinion, chuck, is accurate, and if in fact this court votes to overturn roe, you are correct, our trigger law will go into effect and we will ban abortions with the exceptions of rape and the life of the mother because of that trigger law that passed in 2007. >> yeah, i notice that doesn't include an exception for incest.
why? >> well, i wasn't in the legislature or executive branch at that time. that was the decision that was made by the mississippi legislature, and i think it's certainly a conversation. there are exceptions for rape. there are exceptions for the life of the mother, and we'll see what happens based upon the ultimate outcome of this dobbs case that's before the supreme court. >> what about contraception and birth control, particularly, iuds? is this total ban that gets put in an abortion, with certain types of birth controls like iuds? >> i don't think it is going to apply to those that choose to use birth control. i believe that clearly, life begins at conception, and i am trying very hard to make sure
that everyone in america, puts it back in the elected representatives in each of the 50 states. that's, by the way, where the decision-making was in america for the first 200 years of our country until 1972, in my opinion, roe was wrongly decided. >> you know, it's interesting you say that, the supreme court is going to take something, take away a right that was in the hands of individual women, and i want to play something from kristen gillibrand who believes this decision essentially takes away some of her citizenship. take a listen. >> i hope every human being in this country understands that when you take away a woman's right to make her decisions about her health and well being, she is no longer a full citizen. she no longer has freedom. she no longer has bodily autonomy. she no longer has basic civil
rights or civil liberties. >> respond to her. how does this not take away a woman's right to control her own body? >> well, that right that she is talking about, there is no right to an abortion in the united states constitution. in fact, there's also nothing in the u.s. constitution which precludes individual states from regulating abortion policy, and what i would say to you, chuck, and look, i'm empathetic to all of these ladies who find themselves in very difficult times and very difficult decisions but what makes this different, what makes abortion different is if you believe, as i believe, that's an unborn child in that mother's womb. that is, what we're trying to do is stand up for the rights of those unborn children.
stand up for those who absolutely cannot stand up for themselves. that's why this decision is so important. it's also why that's very high emotions on both sides of this particular topic and i understand that. >> look, you've just said you believe that life begins at conception. if there is legislation brought to you to ban contraception, would you sign it? >> well, i don't think that's going to happen in mississippi. i'm sure they'll have those conversations in other states. >> that's not the question. >> there's so many things we can talk about. what the next movement in the pro-life movement, in my view, chuck, is simple. and that is, we must prove that being pro-life is not just about a anti-abortion. what we want to do next is focus on the two things that are very and that is ensuring that those expectant mothers have the resources they need. that's why in mississippi this
year, we invested significant additional resources in pregnancy resource centers and that we are working to build a system. we have 37 of those in mississippi and we're working to build a system throughout our state to ensure that every expectant mother has access to the information and the education that they need. the second piece of the equation and second piece of the next phase of the pro-life movement is we've got to make sure that we make it easier on those babies that are born, either through the potential for adoption services. adoptions, resources for adoptions. make sure that we improve our foster care system. in mississippi, for instance, we invested in over $100 million combined, with other state funds to improve technology at our department of human services at child protection services so the babies that are not adopted end up in the foster care system,
that we care for them and do so in a way that recognizes the importance -- >> governor though, you're in a state that doesn't do a good job of helping children. one of three mississippi children live in poverty. if you order women to stay pregnant, that's what it will do, order women to stay pregnant, you're talking about providing resources while they're pregnant. what are you going to do for the child after they're born, what are you going to do for the mother? are you, again, i look back at mississippi's numbers here. child poverty is already at a level that to me should be unsustainable, why should we believe we'll provide for these resources if they have these babies? >> look, chuck, it's a fair question and one that what i want you to know, when i was sworn into office in the middle of january of 2020 in the inaugural address, i made it very clear that my job as
governor is not to try to hide our challenges, not to try to hide our problems but to find solutions to those problems and that's what we're going to continue to do. it's the reason i just mentioned that we are investing $100 million in technology for our department of child protection services. there's no doubt that our long history of health outcomes that are not acceptable. we have a long history of poverty and the way in which you address poverty, government has a real challenge in doing that but the way in which you address poverty is improving educational attainment, educational outcomes and by improving the opportunities and job skills for those individuals so that they can go to work and provide for themselves and provide for their families and those are the, it's a multifaceted approach but in mississippi, we work hard every day to address each and every one of those issues.
>> the last thing, at the end of the day, they have less rights under this law than men do. how do you justify it? >> what i would say, chuck, is at the end of the day, there is no right to an abortion in the united states constitution. that the issue with abortions that makes it very different is that there is a life, there is an american child in that womb and it's incumbent upon those elected to stand up for rights of those individuals that can't stand up for themselves. >> governor tate reeves, thank you for coming on and sharing your perspective. >> thanks, chuck. the story in michigan is a bit different from michigan, typically a blue state, abortion ban that's passed in 1931 and would go into effect if roe v. wade was overturned. gretchen whitmer said she'll keep fighting like hell to preserve abortion rights. michigan's attorney general joining me now. good to see you. >> thanks for having me, chuck,
and happy mother's day to my mom and to all the moms out there. >> and a happy mother's day to you, and also your mom. let me start with the decision you've already made. you said if roe is overturned, you are not going to enforce this 1931 law but you can't prevent others in the state from enforcing the law. explain. >> well, there's 83 duly elected prosecutors for every county in our state. as attorney general, i have statewide jurisdiction and i ran on a platform of understanding that likely during the course of my term, roe v. wade would be overturned, and as incredibly draconian and 1931 law would criminalize abortion in this state with virtually no exceptions, no exception for rape, for incest, no exception for medical emergencies. and understanding that the lives
of our 2.2 million women who are of childbearing age in this state, their lives at risk, i refuse to enforce this draconian law that will endanger their lives and put in jeopardy the health, safety and welfare of lives of each and every woman in the state of michigan. >> look, i want to bring up, it's part of the michigan penal code and i want to note other one aspect of this law that actually makes mention of the use of drugs. any person who shall in any manner sell drugs or a combination of drugs designed for females to produce an abortion, guilty of a misdemeanor, the druggist shall register the name of the purchaser, date of the sale and residents of the prescription prescribing the same. madam attorney general, this seems like a draconian law and puts the doctor and the woman in
criminal jeopardy. am i reading that correctly? >> yeah, i think you absolutely are and if you look again at the phrasing of the law that prohibits abortion in the first place, it talks about administering medication for an abortion. and so, you know, even if the woman were to procure abortion medication and then take it on her own, she herself would be guilty of that crime. so we're talking about not just throwing providers and anybody who works with the provider under aiding and abetting theories in prison but also women themselves who procured abortion through abortion medication. so it's a really scary set of circumstances for women here in michigan. >> look, i mean, another instance, the tragedy of a miscarriage. does this mean a doctor cannot perform the procedure necessary when you've identified a
miscarriage, it seems to me that some ob/gyns would think it's a crime if they essentially do what most doctors do right there. >> doctors will be so afraid that there'll be investigations into these procedures, even though they're performed when there is no viability any longer. because it's the same procedure that you might perform for an abortion, they'll be so concerned that these cases will be investigated, it will have a chilling effect and you won't have basic medical health care required for women not to have extreme health problems or even die. doctors simply are not going to perform those procedures anymore because they don't want to go to prison for it. >> let's talk about the various forms of relief you and other abortion rights supporters are
seeking. you've got the governor's, i guess call it a lawsuit or try to get clarification from the state supreme court to, i guess to wipe out the law. planned parenthood, filed a suit against you, which you have said is misguided, but obviously, they're trying to attain a similar outcome from the state supreme court and then there's a petition campaign circulating to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot. those deadlines are in july. what is the safest way to protect abortion rights in michigan right now of the three paths? >> firstly, i think each and every eligible voter in the state should be signing on to reproductive rights for all petition and then coming to the polls and voting on it in november and for voting for every pro-choice democrat up and down the ticket whether it's for federal office or for state office. but in addition, you know, i have great hope and i put my full support and attorneys are
representing the governor in her lawsuit and i'm very hopeful that the michigan supreme court will find that under our equal protection clause, under our due process clause with the michigan constitution that, you know, the right to an abortion is fundamental under our michigan constitution, even if the united states supreme court decides otherwise but let's make it very clear. the radical and extremist position of the republicans in our state and all around the country completely contradicts what the public wants and it really does place the lives of women in jeopardy. let's be clear. women in my state and in states all over america, are going to die because of this position. and i heard the mississippi governor, when you interview him, refused to answer the question of whether or not he would sign a bill completely outlawing the use of birth control. that is not in line at all with how americans see their rights
and politicians do not belong in our doctor's offices, they don't belong in our bedrooms and should not be making these kinds of decisions on behalf of the american public and behalf of women across america. >> i just want to clarify, is the constitutional amendment the better guarantee here, maybe you get a ruling from this version of your state's supreme court but i assume you don't want to be relying on that in the future. >> yeah, that's correct. i think we need to see both. i would like to see a ruling from the michigan supreme court, so that there's not even any period of time under which women are denied reproductive health care in michigan, but then in addition to that, absolutely, this needs to be codified into our state constitution and if we have enough people that care about this issue, and who come out to vote in november, i see that happening and i think that is, both of these courses of action need to occur to better protect women in the state.
>> dana nessel, thank you for coming on and sharing your perspective. >> thanks for having me. what are the chances that the draft decision will change substantially? and if it doesn't, what are the and if it doesn't, what are the rights that might be in what if you were a gigantic snack food maker? and you had to wrestle a massively complex supply chain to satisfy cravings from tokyo to toledo? so you partner with ibm consulting to bring together data and workflows can serve up jalapeño, sesame, and chocolate-covered goodness with real-time, data-driven precision. let's create supply chains that have an appetite for performance. ibm. let's create. (fisher investments) in this market, you'll find fisher investments is different than other money managers. (other money manager) different how? aren't we all just looking for the hottest stocks? (fisher investments) nope. we use diversified strategies to position our client's portfolios for their long-term goals.
(other money manager) but you still sell investments that generate high commissions for you, right? (fisher investments) no, we don't sell commission products. we're a fiduciary, obligated to act in our client's best interest. (other money manager) so when do you make more money, only when your clients make more money? (fisher investments) yep. we do better when our clients do better. at fisher investments, we're clearly different. (johnny cash) ♪ i've traveled every road in this here land! ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere, man. ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere, man. ♪ ♪ crossed the desert's bare, man. ♪ ♪ i've breathed the mountain air, man. ♪ ♪ of travel i've had my share, man. ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere. ♪ ♪ i've been to: pittsburgh, parkersburg, ♪ ♪ gravelbourg, colorado, ♪ ♪ ellensburg, cedar city, dodge city, what a pity. ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere, man. ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere, man. ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere. ♪ can a company make the planet a better place? at walmart, we're pursuing 100% renewable energy in our operations. and aiming to protect millions of acres of land.
so we can all live better. see him? he's not checkin' the stats. he's finding some investment ideas with merrill. eyes on the ball baby. digital tools so impressive, you just can't stop. what would you like the power to do? >> welcome back. one reason abortion rights supporters are so upset with the draft decision, something called stare decisis, the idea they're bound. amy coney barrett and brett kavanaugh suggested that precedent would be important in considering roe. here's kavanaugh at the confirmation. >> it's settled as a precedent of the supreme court entitled the respect under principles of
stare decisis. one of the things about roe, it's been confirmed over the last 45 years. >> a lot of people heard a lot in that sentence. all we can say now is he stated fact. the legal decision and where we go from here, former actor and argued 45 cases in the court and jennifer is an assistant law professor at george mason university. clarence thomas. the circuit level if i have that right. welcome to both of you. hopefully you can take us inside the court a little bit. the leak, this decision was not the first leak. there was a first leak and it was a few days before, "the wall street journal" editorial report, the oral argument suggested that five justices lean toward doing so but a ferocious lobbying campaign is trying to change their minds. the particular targets are justice barrett and brett kavanaugh within five days. going to speculate that alito
writing the majority opinion. it appears there is a debate happening. take us inside the court. when you read this, and put it together, what's going on? >> so i think with the leak that came this week from politico is the more extreme one, because we actually see the draft opinion, something that, to my knowledge, has never happened. so the process is, there was an oral argument in december. the justices all voted in the conference. nobody else was allowed into the conference. take a tentative vote. the senior most, and assigns to alito and then that draft was circulated in february for comment by the other justices. it's, of course, possible that votes change, that sometimes happens but it's extremely rare. so what this decision says, and you started with stare decisis, it's so important because this draft decision says they're going to overrule roe v. wade, planned parenthood versus kc,
it's extreme an opinion and looked like it was written by the failed supreme court nominee. >> jennifer, you've clerked for brett kavanaugh on the circuit. is he, do you sense that he's waiting to see what the chief justice who may be writing another opinion to preserve roe and allow another definition of viability, do you sense it that is something he's up? >> let me just say in joining you both, i think the leak this week was unprecedented in outrage and the justices across the nine chambers, try to mutually apply the rule of law and i think it's actually quite breathtaking how detailed and well reasoned an thorough this opinion was as of february, so i think what justice kavanaugh and the rest of the justices will be doing is applying the constitution as they understand it and are not going to allow themselves to be bullied or intimidated by this outrageous leak this week. >> going back to whether kavanaugh is weighing the
precedent issue here, did susan collins only hear what she wanted to in that statement from brett cavkavanaugh? >> the court has never decided on what should uphold roe. that's been decisive since it came down. i think justices look at the text of the constitution and recognizing that perhaps the court had a hard time settling on justification because there's no right in the constitution on this complicated moral issue that properly belongs with the american people. >> when you read alito's opinion, did you say to yourself, would it change how you might defend roe or argued it in the first place? >> i totally disagree with my friend jennifer. there's nothing persuasive with the draft whatsoever. a contentious decision but it was decided by a 7-2 and five of the seven were supreme court justices and well past
jennifer's point, even if roe might have different theoretical bases, the court's credibility is staked on it. social expectations, crystallized around it. for them to overrule this, chuck, which is the superprecedence calls every other precedent a question from gay marriage to contraception, as you were talking about before with the mississippi governor. >> i want to ask about, in the draft opinion, alito tries to say, hey, i don't want this to be used for anything else. privacy used to justify same-sex marriage. just because you say it doesn't mean it's true. we learned this with bush v. gore so why shouldn't folks who are in same-sex marriages be? >> i think they have to be nervous right now. it's the rationale that the court, that the justice alito used in the draft opinion. if that draft opinion rationale
stays the law of the land, it says, the right has to be historically rooted in the deep traditions of the people. not a test that gay marriage would meet if you have that kind of really harsh reading and it does reflect underlying conception that some justices on this court, you know, pretend to be talking about the original intent of the constitution and they are anything but when it comes to striking down the voting rights act, make up the doctrine when they call corporations people and make up the doctrine, not in the text of the constitution. >> jennifer, why should folks who were in same-sex marriages be comforted by what alito wrote in the draft pick? >> with respect to neil, i think is flat wrong and president biden's marks acknowledged we've got complicated questions here involving a child that makes this case fundamentally different from any other issue. we have another human life at issue. these are complicated questions. the american people feel strongly about and the language that neil is quoting deeply
rooted from a 1997 opinion quoting opinions back to the 1930s. this is nothing new. this is an unprecedented issue, unique of its kind and the instance it was leaked, people talked about other questions, not this one, as if this opinion itself is not all that objectionable. >> you don't believe this is getting rid of a right to privacy, no right to privacy in the constitution? >> i don't believe this says that more generally because it's focused on the interest of the child and essentially doing an admirable thing in the draft opinion to take its out of the seat of power and leaving decisions up to the american people. >> neil, where will this go? will the supreme court hear more abortion cases assuming they overturn roe for now and perpetuity? >> i think it's just ludicrous. i feel better if the republican party wasn't built on basically keeping the voters away from the polls and the like, you can't preach the language of democracy on monday and then on the other six days of the week, try to take it away from the american
people, and so yes, chuck, i think whatever the court does here, there's going to be abortion case after abortion case. your guests just a moment ago discuss things like contraception, louisiana banning iuds and the like, so absolutely, they're in the thick of it. >> i literally have to go. do you expect this to change much from the draft opinion? >> not at all. i respect the justices. ly not be intimidated. >> this is unprecedented. >> you think it's possible they rehear the case, don't you? >> i think they could rehear the case and never count the chief justice out. the vote didn't matter in december. >> the hearing would be a disaster. >> thank you both for being here. appreciate it. when we come back, democrats are hoping that overturning roe will generate anger in their base. we see it looking to get back in your type 2 diabetes zone? once-weekly ozempic® can help. ♪ oh, oh, oh, ozempic®! ♪ ♪ oh, oh, oh ♪ ozempic® is proven to lower a1c. most people who took ozempic® reached an a1c under 7 and maintained it.
and you may lose weight. adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. in adults also with known heart disease, ozempic® lowers the risk of major cardiovascular events such as heart attack, stroke, or death. ozempic® helped me get back in my type 2 diabetes zone. ozempic® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't share needles or pens, or reuse needles. don't take ozempic® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. looking to get back in your type 2 diabetes zone? ask your health care provider today about once-weekly ozempic®. ♪ oh, oh, oh, ozempic®! ♪ you may pay as little as $25 for a 3-month prescription.
♪♪ this... is the planning effect. this is how it feels to know you have a wealth plan that covers everything that's important to you. this is what it's like to have a dedicated fidelity advisor looking at your full financial picture. making sure you have the right balance of risk and reward. and helping you plan for future generations. this is "the planning effect" from fidelity.
(dad allen) you know when you see a great deal on a phone, and then realize it's not for you? not at verizon.ure generations. (mom allen) yep, they just gave us all a brand new iphone 13. (vo) now everyone can get a new iphone 13 on us on america's most reliable 5g network. for every customer. current, new, everyone. to show the love. welcome back. panel is here. nbc news ali vitale. josh gerstein who broke the story of all time for politico. former george w. bush, kimberly atkins stohr, and also.
josh, let me start with you. has it sunk in with this, what your report has done for the supreme court of the generation? >> it's starting to. when that large black imposing fence went up around the court earlier in the week, certainly indicated that the court realizes whatever issues on this is going to have pretty dramatic momentous implications and probably is likely to anger a number of people on one side or the other. >> do you think it's going to change the way you cover the court? >> well, it probably makes it even harder to press some of the issues for access to the court. we've had a lot of concerns about the court and transparency, even through this period of covid over the last couple of years but even before that. so probably going to be more skittish about that than before, but it was not a terribly
transparent institution to start with. >> that's for sure. we talk, a lot of times, we say, this is going to change everything politically. >> ali, did you sense that on capitol hill? a moment to say, everything is changing and it's really changing? >> i think that democrats and republicans both have been talking about this in theory for a really long time. i know it's not popular to say we don't know but this is untested. for the last 49 years, women in america haven't had to grapple with wondering if there are protections in place for abortion, so i think from an electorate perspective, all of this remains untested and so we'll have to see going forward. i will say, on the hill, democrats and republicans took, of course, completely divergent views here. republicans, of course, focusing on the leak, not the substance. almost be forgiven to say, didn't they push for this for several decades and the women's health protection act on wednesday. it's going to fail. there seems to be some divide if it's better if it fails in bipartisan fashion or fully
democratic fashion but nevertheless, leaves them where they started in terms of having no way to federally codify this. >> sara and kimberly, this appears to favor the democrats. battleground state polling on the issue majorities, battleground state in 2020, legal only texas is out there. plurality, 48-45 and in colorado, very libertarian, not a surprise there. so i understand, kimberly, why democrats think this is a game changer for the midterms. >> we'll have to see because this is so unprecedented in the way it's coming out and it is a midterm election year to boot. we'll have to see. i think we talked before about a lot of other issues that democrats thought would be big motivators and it turns out, whether it's gun control, whether it's police reform and it turned out not to be. i think we'll have to see. i think one thing democrats
should be thinking about is their long game at this point. because this is the result of a republican long game that was very dedicated, for decades, in order to put conservatives in office so that they could put conservatives on courts and democrats need to develop something like that. >> i think it's a bit of a tale of two stories. i think it will motivate democrats. i don't know how it couldn't and they're incredibly depressed. you look at polling. the question, what is the debate? the debate may cut against democrats, where you have a very aggressive progressive movement that believes that abortion on demand at any point in a pregnancy, which is not where the public is. so exit polling shows people who want abortion legal. the question is, what is the definition of legal? so if we have a debate in this country in a number of these states where the democratic candidates are calling for abortion at any point in the pregnancy and a republican candidate is calling for a more moderate stance, that is going to the republican party.
>> where is evidence of republicans with a moderate stance here? there isn't. that's the thing. what you outline on the left is correct but i don't hear exceptions anymore for rape all the time in many republicans anymore. >> we just heard tate reeves talk about exceptions for life of the mother. >> not incest. >> i imagine that will go through pretty quickly, but we'll see. >> see, that's where, i think making the point. >> after that point though, there was a law passed in mississippi on viability at 16 weeks. so i mean, as the debate moves to viability, republicans are in a much stronger position than where the progressive movement is. >> is the debate? >> i think the real issue is that while there may be a debate as sara was saying, what happens right away if roe was struck down at the end of june, all these trigger laws and laws already on the books from 100 years ago are going to kick in in many, many states. talking maybe 26 states that will almost immediately end up
with very severe restrictions or bans on abortion. so the debate may continue, but in those states, women are going to find great deal of difficulty. some states may have to travel a thousand miles in order to get an abortion. >> i was just in south dakota, it's one of the states with the trigger law. they already had one of the most restrictive set of rules governing what they can do for you, so restrictive, doctors from out of state and local doctors too worried about the local repercussions or don't want to do it and at the same time, talking about women traveling over a thousand miles because of just the vastness in some of these rural states so when you talk about the trigger law states, effectively, you could end up on the coast, the two patches of blue where it's accessible and mostly in the middle of the country where it's not. so you sort of just have haves and have nots here. >> there's a lot of manufactured outrage happening around this issue. you know, illinois is completely controlled by democrats. and these legislatures, i think,
will move very quickly around these, this legislation. so yes. there's going to be a period of significant tumult around this and people who feel very passionately about the protection of life, you know, are going to be loud but the people who feel passionate about abortion are also going to be loud and we're going to spend probably most of this fall talking about abortion. >> it's interesting, kimberly, that my experience with abortion is the party that. and what does overreach look like? to your point. >> i think we're going to get a good idea of what that overreach looks like as the laws come into play and what voters were talking about and especially in the state, there's always a big focus on women voters, suburban women voters but keep in mind, those women have access to abortion regardless of what state they live in. it's the others, the people who are in a different position who won't. >> i'm going to pause it there. we want to make note, sadly, a grim milestone this past week as a country. according to our count at nbc news, 1 million americans now
died of covid. in addition, the world health organization announced this past week that 15 million more people counted appeared to have died during the pandemic than would have under normal circumstances, start to see countries underreport its deaths, and we see the reality check now. previously, 6 million more were estimated to have died than what we first thought. it's a reminder that even as we learn to live welcome to allstate. where everyone saves when they bundle their home and auto insurance. isn't that right, frank?
i saved 25%. booyah. you protected your casa? sure did. and the frank tank? you know it. and now you're relaxing. i'm working from home. sure you are. alright i see a lot of head nods. let's circle back tomorrow. you weren't kidding. save up to 25% when you bundle home and auto with allstate. click or call for a quote today.
we are back. download time. hoping the news about roe will energize their base and eye on younger votes. here's why. among younger voters, three quarters say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, 20 percentage points more than the share of voters over 65 who share that view. that large gap matters because those groups of voters do not usually turn out in the same numbers, especially when it comes in midterms. let me show you. here's younger voters in a presidential year. they become almost one in five voters. but in midterm years, you can see here, young voters, down to the 12, 13% or even in the good
democratic year of 18, younger voters didn't quite get out. meanwhile, the 65 plus voters are far more likely to go to the polls, no matter the election. the question now is the election of the supreme court opinion, overturned to nearly 50 year precedent, roe enough to alter the picture and motivate a younger electorate. just about to be finding out come november. donald trump's endorsement pushed jd (fisher investments) in this market, you'll find fisher investments is different than other money managers. (other money manager) different how? aren't we all just looking for the hottest stocks? (fisher investments) nope. we use diversified strategies to position our client's portfolios for their long-term goals. (other money manager) but you still sell investments that generate high commissions for you, right? (fisher investments) no, we don't sell commission products. we're a fiduciary, obligated to act in our client's best interest. (other money manager) so when do you make more money, only when your clients make more money? (fisher investments) yep. we do better when our clients do better. at fisher investments, we're clearly different. can a company make the planet a better place?
♪♪ what if it's a company of people working beside friends and neighbors? pursuing 100% renewable energy in our operations. aiming to protect, manage or restore millions of acres of land. and offering you more sustainably sourced products so you can become part of the change. so, can a company make the planet a better place? at walmart, we're working on it, every day. and it's easier than ever to get your projects done right.
with angi, you can connect with and see ratings and reviews. and when you book and pay throug you're covered by our happiness check out angi.com today. angi... and done. you're probably thinking that these two are in some sort of lover's quarrel. no, no, no. they're both invested... in green energy. and also each other. digital tools so impressive, you just can't stop. what would you like the power to do?
welcome back. literally the day of the leak or on the eve of the ohio primary, we got the supreme court leak. too early to really have an impact on what voters may have done, but we did find out that donald trump's endorsement of jd vance did help him win. so sara fagen, is donald trump literally or figuratively in charge of the republican party these days? >> well, i think that somewhere in between. in a case like ohio where it was a pretty crowded primary where none of the candidates were particularly defined, he's going to have a huge impact and his endorsement is going to be a big deal. in georgia, the incumbent governor with a long track
record, not having as much of an impact. i think on a case by case basis, net accrues to the president's favor but not going to get them all. >> sara put it pretty well, mr. trump already won whether the candidates win or not, the republican candidates to emerge will be overwhelmingly trumpian. i think that's a fair take. >> i think that's right. i think one thing we see that is powerful is trumpism, regardless of whether trump himself pronounces the candidate's name correctly. you have in someone like jd vance, just a mini trump. someone trying to espouse this populist message even though he himself, as the messenger, doesn't represent that. that's donald trump to a tee. the candidates that are able to capture that and replicate it the best in this particular republican party are going to do well. >> some senate republicans hope that trump's endorsements were not going to do so well, all right, not going to do well in georgia and dr. oz looks like a
coin flip at best. but i don't think the grip is weakening. >> let's say he goes 50/50 over the course of the next month. whether or not you consider that a win is through the eye of the beholder. i think for senate republicans and republicans in washington, the goal has always just been, make sure ultimate. so i think that's going to ultimately, but i think the larger question is in a place like georgia, where his endorsement probably is not going to have the swing that, have never been party loyal. they have always been just whatever his vedetta personally is and that's where the concern stems from, you're not there for the party and frankly, these republicans he's endorsing, they don't have deep party ties either. they come to washington who are much more indebted to trump than the people in control here. >> you know what he doesn't have, josh, doesn't really comment on the leaked document. you would think he would say, my
judges did. i told you they'd overturn roe and making sure it actually happens, but the lack of taking credit, his political antenna is telling him, he's a little nervous. >> you do wonder if he's seeing some of the polling that clearly other republicans are seeing, saying that this issue may be a loser for them in the fall and i also wonder in some of these races where trump's nomination or endorsement has made the difference whether when you get to the general election, you're going to see candidates try to do a straddle sort of like what glen youngkin did, the energy but didn't want to appear with him. can they maintain the straddle to november? >> makes david mccormick the most interesting candidate in pennsylvania. democrats now, you don't want mccormick to get out of here because he's been running as a trumpy candidate but gets to say, trump didn't like him. >> david mccormick is a compelling candidate for a lot of reasons.
he's an exceptional person but the, you know, you're right. many of these republicans are going to have to walk that line, and they're going to have to do what glenn youngkin did, i like what trump did, his policies and his energy. but i'm my own person and i have my own ideas and that's why these incumbents fare so well in these endorsement battles because they have their own identity. >> kimberly, another thing we saw this week, very quietly, president biden debuted his, a new message of sorts, trying to not say the word trump but this maga crowd, and he tried to lump abortion rights and some of these other things in there. it tells me, the white house is looking for a new message here. >> i think that's absolutely right. they're saying, six months out of the midterms, saying how big the consequences here and trying to edge with this messaging a little bit, trying to broaden it out. we'll see how effective it is, but the fact that the message is
still being developed this late in the game. >> of course, they want a new message. 8.5% inflation, a disastrous withdrawal of afghanistan. >> ali, is there anything that's going to get passed? >> in the senate? >> yeah. >> it doesn't really look very likely. they might be able to do this competition bill to help the supply chain issues. see what it was called, a million namings since then, but at the same time. >> the senate passed a version of the bill. >> of course. that's the only one i think has an ultimate path but in terms of these energizing issues we're talking about, specifically on abortion, no. these are going nowhere fast and i think that's actually why you're making this turn away from trump and trumpism and maga because it's better to do the broad messaging than just on him. >> that's all we have for today. thank you for watching. i hope you do enjoy mother's day. don't forget to call her if you haven't yet. be back next week, because if it's sunday, it's "meet the press."
good morning. thank you so much for joining us on this sunday, may 8th, 7:00 on the dot, as we take a look at the golden gate bridge, and beautiful way to start our mother's day. thank you so much for starting it with us. i'm kira klapper, and meteorologist vianey is joining us. >> thank you, and we have some interesting mother's day weather for us, and live at sfo, we have some changes. it is going to be cooler for us,