♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ GOOD EVENING.

WELCOME TO IVORY TOWER.

I'M DAVID CHANATRY, FROM UTICA UNIVERSITY.

I'M JOINED THIS WEEK BY SARAH PRALLE FROM SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY, NINA MOORE FROM COLGATE UNIVERSITY, LISA DOLAK FROM THE COLLEGE OF LAW AT SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY AND RICK FENNER FROM UTICA UNIVERSITY.

FOR YEARS, AMERICAN PRESIDENTS HAVE SAID IRAN CANNOT GET A NUCLEAR WEAPON.

THIS PAST WEEKEND, DONALD TRUMP TOOK ACTION, AND A BIG GAMBLE.

WHETHER IRAN'S NUCLEAR INFRASTRUCTURE HAS BEEN COMPLETELY DESTROYED REMAINS TO BE SEEN.

AN DRAFT ASSESSMENT FROM THE PENTAGON REPORTEDLY SAYS CORE COMPONENTS HAVE ONLY BEEN DAMAGED.

BUT AT LEAST FOR NOW, FEARS OF A WIDER MIDEAST WAR HAVE RECEDED.

DID THE MAN MEET HIS MOMENT•.DID THE MAN MEET THE MOMENT.

>> MAYBE.

A QUICK AGGRESSIVE DIRECTED ATTACK, VERY LIMITED RESPONSE FROM IRAN, ONE DESIGNED NOT TO HARM AMERICANS AND EVEN TIP TO US.

A QUICK AGREEMENT TO A CEASE FIRE.

YOU KNOW, THINGS LOOK GOOD.

BUT THERE ARE A LOT OF UNANSWERED QUESTIONS.

FIRST, AS YOU SAID, WHAT WAS-- WHAT DID THE BOMBING ACCOMPLISH?

YOU KNOW, TRUMP TOLD US THAT THEY OBLITERATED THE FACILITY AND NOW WE ARE FINDING OUT THAT MAYBE IT'S ONLY TWO MONTH DELAY.

WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO THE ENRICHED URANIUM?

PART OF THE PROBLEM IS THAT WE KNOW THAT WE CAN'T TRUST WHAT TRUMP SAYS.

I ALSO WONDER WHAT TRUMP BELIEVES.

WHAT KIND OF INCENTIVES YOU DOES THIS HAVE?

WHAT IS IRAN GOING TO DO NOW?

WILL THEY TRY TO GET A SMALL BOMB.

ON THE SURFACE, MAYBE BUT A LOT OF UNANSWERED QUESTIONS TO ME.

>> ONE OF THE THINGS TO REMEMBER IS WHAT ALEXANDER HAMILTON LAID OUT IN FEDERALIST NUMBER 70 AND IT LAYS OUT THE INSTITUTIONAL LOGIC OF THE PRESIDENCY, WHICH IS THAT YOU NEED ONE OF THE BRANCHES TO BE ABLE TO MOVE QUICKLY.

HAMILTON USED THE TERM ENERGY.

CONGRESS IS NOT STRUCTURALLY SUITED TO RESPOND TO THE KINDS OF EMERGING ISSUES THAT ARE HAPPENING IN OUR CURRENT GLOBAL SECURITY ENVIRONMENT.

I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU THAT THE MEANS ARE QUESTIONABLE, AND ALSO WHETHER OR NOT IT IS EFFECTIVE.

I MEAN, YOU KNOW, WE'LL FIND OUT IF IT WAS EFFECTIVE.

BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHAT IT DOES DO IS IT SENDS A VERY CLEAR MESSAGE, AND IT SETS A STRATEGY.

AND THAT MESSAGE IS MESS AROUND AND FIND OUT.

>> SO IS THAT THE NEW TRUMP DOCTRINE THEN?

NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION?

YOU TRY TO BUILD THE BOMB, WE WON'T LET YOU?

>> YEAH, I THINK IT'S, AS I SAID, MESS AROUND AND FIND OUT BECAUSE HE HAS-- THE COUNTRY HAS A WHOLE HAS SEEN THAT SANCTIONS DID NOT WORK UNDER BARACK OBAMA.

THERE WAS A GLOBAL COOPERATION THERE.

THEY DIDN'T WORK UNDER BIDEN.

ALL IT DID WAS GIVE TO IRAN $100 BILLION TO CONTINUE THEIR PROGRAM AND SO THIS IS WHERE WE ARE.

WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE REALITIES.

AND IF I COULD JUST SAY THIS.

NOT JUST OF A COUNTRY THAT IS AFTERNOON EXISTENTIAL THREAT TO IRAN BUT FOR FOUR DECADES HAS COMMITTED DEATH TO AMERICA.

SO WE HAVE SKIN IN THE GAME.

>> RIGHT, IRAN HAS NOT BEEN A GOOD INTERNATIONAL PLAYER.

THERE IS NO QUESTION ABOUT THAT.

BUT I DO WONDER, RICK MENTIONED WELL MAYBE IT'S ONLY DELAYED A COUPLE OF MONTHS.

IF THAT'S THE CASE, SARAH, I MEAN THE OBAMA DEAL, WHICH WAS NOT JUST OBAMA, OF COURSE.

THERE WERE MANY NATIONS INVOLVED WITH THAT.

PERHAPS WAS THE BETTER APPROACH.

>> YEAH, I MEAN I THINK ABOUT THAT A LOT.

SO ONE MEASURE OF EFFECTIVENESS OR SUCCESS, WHICH, OF COURSE, TRUMP HAS DECLARED FULL SUCCESS, WHICH IS HIS M.O.

IS HOW MUCH DID IT SET THEM BACK FROM ACTUALLY BEING ABLE TO CONSTRUCT A NUCLEAR WEAPON.

THAT'S EVEN A NARROWED, YOU KNOW, DEFINITION OF SUCCESS.

BECAUSE THE OTHER WAY YOU CAN THINK ABOUT IT IS WHAT RICK WAS SAYING IN TERMS OF INCENTIVE.

WHAT IS THE LESSON THAT IRAN IS GETTING FROM THIS?

DOES IT SHIFT THEIR INCENTIVE AND SAY THAT HEY, WE REALLY KNOW WE NEED SOME KIND OF NUCLEAR WEAPON BECAUSE WOULD ISRAEL HAVE DONE THAT TO THEM IF THEY HAD HAD A NUCLEAR WEAPON.

THAT'S NOT JUST FOR IRAN BUT FOR THE OTHER COUNTRIES WHO ARE LOOKING AT THIS SITUATION.

IT'S LIKE, OKAY.

I THINK WE NEED A NUCLEAR WEAPON AS DETERRENTS AGAINST THIS.

>> BUT DOESN'T THAT ALSO GET BACK TO THE OTHER POINT THAT IF THEY TRY AND GET IT, YOU KNOW, WE WON'T LET YOU.

>> THAT HISTORICALLY HAS NOT PROVEN SUCCESSFUL.

BOMBING COUNTRIES OR USING MILITARY ACTION AS DIPLOMA.

THE JCPOA WAS ACTUALLY WORKING.

THEY WERE ABIDING BY IT.

THE IAEA HAD INCREDIBLE ACCESS TO IRAN'S NUCLEAR FACILITIES SO THERE WAS A LOT MORE TRANSPARENCY.

AND IT WAS WORKING UNTIL TRUMP TORPEDOED IT AND TOOK THE UNITED STATES OUT OF IT.

WITHIN A YEAR, IRAN WAS BACK TO ITS BUSINESS OF TRYING TO ENRICH URANIUM.

SO WE WOULD BE IN A MUCH BETTER INFORMATION RIGHT NOW IF THAT HAD STAYED IN PLACE.

>> THERE IS AN ARGUMENT TO BE MADE, IS THERE NOT, LISA, THAT HE ALMOST HAD TO DO THIS?

>> WELL, THERE IS AN ARGUMENT TO BE MADE BASED ON THE OPPORTUNITY THAT THE ISRAELIS HAD CREATED BY , YOU KNOW, REALLY WEAKENING IRAN'S AIR DEFENSES, BY CLEARLY INFILTRATING THEIR SECURITY FORCES AND WEAKENING THEM.

AND THEIR INTELLIGENCE SEEMS TO BE INCREDIBLE INSIDE IRAN, WHICH IS ONE REASON WHY I'M EAGER TO HEAR ISRAEL'S SORT OF OFFICIAL DEFENSE ASSESSMENT IS.

AND SO THERE WAS THIS OPPORTUNITY THAT MADE IT APPROPRIATE FOR THE UNITED STATES TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT WITHOUT PUTTING AMERICAN SERVICE MEN'S LIVES AND OTHER SORT OF AMERICAN INTERESTS AT RISK.

SO THERE WAS THAT.

AND WHETHER IT SET BACK-- I MEAN IT'S ALWAYS A MATTER OF TIMING.

IT'S NOT-- UNTIL THIS REGIME IS GONE, AND IS NOT REPLACED BY ONE THAT IS AS BAD OR WORSE, IT'S ALWAYS, ALWAYS GOING TO BE A MATTER OF HOW LONG.

YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT POSSIBLE TO UTTERLY DESTROY A COUNTRY'S NUCLEAR PROGRAM FOREVER.

THERE ARE NEW NUCLEAR SCIENTISTS AND NEW NUCLEAR MATERIALS.

SO WHETHER IT'S A FEW MONTHS OR A FEW YEARS, I AGREE WITH THOSE WHO HAVE SAID, YOU KNOW, EVEN IF IT DIDN'T DESTROY OR SIGNIFICANTLY SET BACK THE PROGRAM, IT SEEMS THAT IT DID SEND A MESSAGE.

AND EVEN DEMOCRATS TODAY ARE SAYING IRAN CANNOT BE ALLOWED-- THIS REGIME CAN NEVER BE ALLOWED TO HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON.

>> AND THAT HAS BEEN THE U.S. POLICY FOR DECADES NOW.

>> AND IT HAS HAD BIPARTISAN BACKING RIGHT UP UNTIL IT WAS TRUMP, WHO TURNED AROUND AND DID, WHAT I CONSIDERED TO BE THE RIGHT THING HERE.

IF I COULD RESPOND TO SOMETHING SARAH SAID.

THE IAEA WAS NOT ABLE TO GO IN AND TO INSPECT THE MORE SERIOUS SITES OR THE MORE PROBLEMATIC SITES.

SO, YEAH, IN THEORY, THEY HAD THE AUTHORITY TO GO IN AND INSPECT, BUT INSPECTIONS WERE ALWAYS A PROBLEM.

AND THE QUESTION OF WHETHER IRAN WAS A YEAR OUT VERSUS THREE TO FOUR MONTHS OUT IS A DIFFERENCE WITHOUT A DISTINCTION.

IRAN SHOULD NOT HAVE A WEAPON NOW OR EVER.

>> AND I WANT TO GET TO THE POINT YOU WERE TAKING EARLIER ANYONA, ABOUT CONGRESS.

-- NINA, WHAT IS CONGRESS' ROLE IN THIS MODERN AGE?

>> WELL THERE REALLY IS NO-- I MEAN DIFFERENT CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLARS WILL ANSWER THAT QUESTION DIFFERENTLY.

THE BASIC GIST OF THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE CONSTITUTION INVESTS IN POWER THE POWER TO DECLARE A WAR AND RAISE ARMIES BUT INVESTS IN THE PRESIDENT THE POWER TO BE THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF OF THE ARMY AND NAVY AND CONGRESS HAS CONTINUED TO AUTHORIZE MORE AND MORE SPENDING FOR STANDING ARMY, THE STANDING ARMY IS BIGGER, MORE POWERFUL, MORE WEAPONIZED AND CONGRESS HASN'T ASSERTED, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE WAR POWERS RESOLUTION, YOU KNOW, 50 YEARS AGO OR SO, AND ALL THAT SAYS IS THAT WHEN POSSIBLE, THE PRESIDENT NEEDS TO NOTIFY CONGRESS.

SO ALL THIS HAS TO DO WITH WHAT YOUR DEFINITION OF DECLARING WAR IS IS, WHAT YOUR DEFINITION OF RAISING AND SUPPLYING ARMIES AND STUFF.

BUT THE WAR POWERS RESOLUTION SAYS WHEN POSSIBLE.

WELL, YOU KNOW, IF YOU ARE GOING TO LAUNCH A SURPRISE ATTACK, DO WE REALLY WANT TO BE INFORMING CONGRESS?

>> HE WAS INFORMING THE ENTIRE WORLD BUT NOT CONGRESS.

>> IT WAS NO SURPRISE.

>> HE WAS DOING IT ON SOCIAL MEDIA BUT WOULDN'T ALERT CONGRESS?

IT'S JUST ANOTHER CONSOLIDATION-- >> HE ALERTED THE LEADERS OF CONGRESS, RIGHT?

>> BUT NOT THE DEMOCRATS.

>> GAVE CHUCK SCHUMER ABOUT A MINUTE'S NOTICE I THINK.

>> >> THE SUPREME COURT HAS UPHELD A TENNESSEE LAW BANNING PUBERTY BLOCKERS AND HORMONE THERAPY FOR TRANSGENDER TEENAGERS.

THE COURT SAID THE LAW DOES NOT VIOLATE THE 14TH AMENDMENT RIGHT OF EQUAL PROTECTION.

THE TENNESSEE LAW DOES ALLOW CHILDREN ACCESS TO THESE MEDICAL TREATMENTS FOR OTHER PURPOSES, BUT NOT FOR GENDER DYSPHORIA.

MORE THAN 20 OTHER STATES HAVE SIMILAR LAWS.

WITH THIS COURT'S DECISION, NINA, THIS IS NOW A TIPPING POINT AWAY FROM THE MOVE TOWARD MORE TRANSGENDER RIGHTS?

AND TRANSITIONS?

>> I THINK THAT IT IS A MOVE AWAY FROM RIGHTS FOR TRANSGENDER ISSUES.

AND HERE IS WHY I SAY THAT F. WE SET ASIDE THE PARTICULARS OF THIS CASE ITSELF, THERE IS SORT OF A CONSTITUTIONAL FOUNDATION THAT THE COURT HAS LAID FOR A ROLL BACK TO COME LATER ON.

FIRST AND FOREMOST IS JUST THE REALLY UNUSUAL REASONING THAT THE TENNESSEE LAW, WHICH TARGETED TRANSGENDER YOUTH, IS NOT DISCRIMINATORY AND THE COURT SAID IT'S NOT DISCRIMINATORY BECAUSE IT APPLIES TO ALL YOUTH.

, TO BOTH BIOLOGICALLY BORN MALES AS WELL AS FEMALES AND SO THAT, TO ME, IS SORT OF ODD BECAUSE SECONDLY, IT IGNORES WHAT MOST CAN PRESUME, WHICH IS THE INTENT BEHIND THE LAW, THE LAW WAS SPECIFICALLY INTENDED TO FOCUS SPECIFICALLY ON TRANSGENDERS BUT MORE THAN BOTH OF THESE THINGS IS THIS.

THE COURT HAS SAID THAT TRANSGENDERS ARE NOT A PROTECTED CLASS.

THAT IS ENTITLED TO HEIGHTENED JUDICIAL SCRUTINY AS ARE OTHER MARGINALIZED GROUPS.

AND SO FOR THE COURT TO SAY THAT, REALLY SETS UP ROLLING BACK THE RIGHTS IN OTHER AREAS.

>> SARAH.

>> YEAH, AND I GUESS I WOULD SAY THAT THE COURT IS KIND OF IN LINE, UNFORTUNATELY WITH PUBLIC OPINION ON THIS ISSUE.

THERE IS ACTUALLY QUITE A LOT OF PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR CERTAIN TRANSGENDER RIGHTS, INCLUDING BANNING JOB DISCRIMINATION.

IT'S LIKE PLUS 33.

SERVING IN THE MILITARY, VERY POPULAR.

EVEN GENDER NEUTRAL BATHROOMS REQUIRING THOSE IN PUBLIC BUILDINGS IS A POSITIVE IN TERMS OF PUBLIC OPINION.

THE PUBLIC IS REALLY NOT THERE YET ON TRANSITIONING PUBERTY BLOCKERS AND HORMONE TREATMENTS FOR YOUNG PEOPLE.

AND OFTEN TIMES IT'S DUE TO PARTLY, I THINK CHILDREN, YOU KNOW, THIS IDEA OF CHILDREN AND THAT THEY-- THAT WE ARE WORRIED ABOUT CHILDREN AND THE KINDS OF DECISIONS THAT THEY NEED PARENTS AND OTHER PEOPLE TO HELP MAKE THESE DECISIONS.

AND I HAVE A LOT OF SYMPATHY FAIRWAY THESE FAMILIES AND FOR THESE CHILDREN WHO REALLY FEEL LIKE THEY'RE IN THE WRONG BODY.

AND YOU WANT TO BE ABLE TO GIVE THEM THAT OPPORTUNITY.

AND THAT DECISION SHOULD NOT BE MADE BY STATE LEGISLATORS BASED ON, FRANKLY, BIGOTRY.

>> BUT IT SHOULD BE MADE BY THE MEDICAL COMMUNITY.

AND WHAT BOTHERS ME ABOUT THIS IS WHAT I THINK AT THE CORE SHOULD BE A MEDICAL ISSUE HAS BECOME A POLITICAL ONE.

ON THE FAR RIGHT, CLEARLY THE FAR RIGHT DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO CHOOSE THEIR OWN PRONOUNS THEY USE.

THE LEFT ON THE OTHER HAND, YOU KNOW, IN SUPPORT OF TRANSGENDER RIGHTS IN GENERAL, HAS NOW CHOSEN THIS AS SORT OF A LITMUS TEST.

AND SO WHAT HAPPENS IS WE'VE GOT BOTH SIDES PULLING AND THIS ISSUE ON WHAT I THINK IS SOMEWHAT CONTROVERSIAL.

IT DOESN'T APPEAR THAT THE MEDICAL EVIDENCE IS AS STRONG AS IT APPEARS TO BE.

AND YOU KNOW, READING THINGS ON BOTH ABOUT THE ALABAMA AND THE TENNESSEE CASE, SHOW THAT THERE HAS BEEN SOME OVERREACHING, YOU KNOW, WHEN PARENTS ARE BEING TOLDER, OH YOUR BOY IS SHOWING THESE ISSUES, WOULD YOU RATHER HAVE A DAUGHTER THAT IS ALIVE OR A SON THAT'S DEAD?

YOU KNOW, PRESSURING THEM USING THE THREAT OF SUICIDE WHEN IT TURNS OUT THERE WAS NO INCREASE RISK OF SUICIDE.

JUST REALLY.

>> THE COURT WAS VERY STRONG ON THAT, ABOUT THE MEDICAL EVIDENCE APPARENTLY IS NOT WHAT PEOPLE HAD BEEN LED TO BELIEVE.

>> AND SO WHAT THIS CASE WAS ACTUALLY ABOUT WAS WHO GETS TO DECIDE.

IS IT THE COURTS OR IS IT THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS?

AND I'M FIRMLY OF THE BELIEF THAT WHEN IT IS, BETWEEN THE TWO OF THOSE, WHEN YOU HAVE A SITUATION WHERE THE MEDICAL EVIDENCE OR MEDICAL EXPERTS ARE IN DISAGREEMENT, THE COURT GOT THE RIGHT.

IT IS NOT, DOES NOT BELONG NOT COURTS.

THE COURTS SHOULD NOT BE MAKING THIS CALL.

>> HERE IS THE OTHER THING.

ONE WOULD ASSUME THAT IT SHOULD BE PARENTS.

I MEAN GIVEN THE FACT THAT THE MEDICAL COMMUNITY IS VERY MUCH DIVIDED, THE COURT SAID ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ACTUALLY, NOT VERY LITTLE, BUT NOTHING ABOUT PARENTAL RIGHTS.

PARENTS RIGHTS TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT THEIR CHILD SHOULD RECEIVE THIS SORT OF MEDICAL TREATMENT AND THE DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS ON THAT BASIS.

AND I GUESS THE OTHER THING I WOULD ADD IS THAT THAT SEEMS TO CONTRADICT WHERE THE COURT AND CONSERVATIVES ARE IN OTHER AREAS WHEREBY THEY ARGUE THAT PARENTS SHOULD BE TOLD BY SCHOOLS THAT THEIR CHIDE IS IDENTIFYING WITH A GENDER OTHER THAN HOW THEY WERE BORN.

AND SO JUST-- THE COURT'S REASONING HERE WAS ALL OVER THE PLACE, BUT I FIND A LOT OF INFORMATION IN THE CONCURRENCES.

AND THERE JUSTICE ALITO WAS VERY MATTER OF FACT IN SAYING THIS IS NOT GROUNDS FOR THE COURT TO INTERVENE AS LISA SAID BECAUSE THERE IS NO DISCRIMINATION HERE AND TRANSGENDERS ARE NOT A SPECIAL CLASS.

>> SO THIS LAW WAS ABOUT CHILDREN.

DOWN AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, THE COURT LED WITH THE ARGUMENT THAT THIS LAW DISTINGUISHED BASED ON AGE.

AGE.

AND MEDICAL PURPOSE OR MEDICAL USE.

AND THAT'S HOW THE COURT COUNTERED THAT ARGUMENT SO IT WAS VERY CLEAR THAT AGE, YOU KNOW, IS THE SORT OF CENTER PIECE OF THIS.

>> BUT I THINK THE CONCERN IS GOING BACK TO WHAT NINA SAID IS THAT THEY DID SAY TRANSGENDER PEOPLE ARE NOT A PROTECTED CLASS.

I THINK THAT'S WHERE SOME OF THE CONCERN COMES FROM.

IF THEY'RE NOT CONSIDERED A PROTECTED CLASS, COULD THAT AFFECT OTHER CASES?

>> IT GETS TO THE QUESTION WHETHER EVEN BRINGING THIS CASE, THE ACLU BROUGHT THIS CASE, SET BACK... >> I THINK IT WAS VERY RISKY LEGAL STRATEGY.

I MEAN THE LGBTQ MOVEMENT HAS USED THE LAW IN COURTS PRETTY EFFECTIVELY.

BUT THE DIFFERENCE IS THEY, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS SOME BACKLASH, TOO, AGAINST THE MARRIAGE EQUALITY CASES AND THEY WENT BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND TRIED TO SHAPE AND PERSUADE PUBLIC OPINION TO GET PUBLIC OPINION TO SUPPORT TO NORMALIZE IT, TO TELL STORIES AND NARRATIVES SO THAT PEOPLE CAN RELATE TO LGBTQ PEOPLE AND THEIR WISHES AND DREAMS.

I THINK THEY DID NOT DO THIS.

THEY GOT TOO FAR AHEAD OF PUBLIC OPINION.

YOU HAVE TO BE A LITTLE AHEAD OF PUBLIC OPINION BUT AS SARAH McBRIDE SAID AS THE FIRST TRANSGENDER PERSON, YOU HAVE TO KEEP IT AT ARM'S LENGTH.

>> OKAY.

WE DISCUSSED THE NATIONAL DEBT A FEW WEEKS AGO, BUT NEVER REALLY GOT AROUND TO WHAT WE SHOULD DO ABOUT IT.

WE HAVE SEVERAL OF THE SAME PANELISTS ON THIS WEEK, SO WE'LL TAKE ANOTHER CRACK AT IT.

THE GOP WANTS TO PASS THE BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL BY NEXT WEEK.

AS OF NOW, IT WOULD ADD TRILLIONS TO OUR DEBT.

IF YOU WERE ADVISING CONGRESS, WHAT WOULD YOU CUT OR TAX TO GET OUR FISCAL HOUSE IN ORDER?

>> WELL, I LOVE THE IDEA OF BEING QUEEN FOR THE DAY AND JUST DECIDING-- >> WE DON'T HAVE A KING IN THIS COUNTRY.

>> WHAT WE SHOULD DO.

[LAUGHTER] I MEAN THERE IS SO MUCH YOU COULD DO, RIGHT?

ONE THING IS TO TACKLE TAX EXPENDITURES.

THESE ARE GIVEAWAYS, CARVEOUTS FOR IN THE TAX CODE THAT COST THE COUNTRY $IS .9 TRILLION IN 2024.

$1.9 TRILLION IN 2024 WHICH IS MORE THAN WE SPEND ON SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICAID, MEDICAID AND AND MRKTD.

SOME OF THOSE ARE PROGRESSIVE.

I WOULD KEEP THOSE AND GET RID OF THE REGROSSIVE ONES.

SOME OF THOSE ARE THINGS THAT PEOPLE LIKE LIKE THE HOME MORTGAGE INTEREST DEDUCTION THAT HELPS WEALTHY PEOPLE A LOT MORE THAN POOR AND MIDDLE-CLASS PEOPLE.

WE COULD GET RID OF CAPITAL GAINS EXCLUSIONS, RIGHT?

SO WE COULD TAX CAPITAL GAINS, A STATE TAX INCREASE THAT.

WE COULD GET RID OF LARGE SUBSIDIES FOR AGRICULTURE AND AGRI-BUSINESS, WHICH WOULD BE A TRILLION DOLLARS IN SAVINGS OVER A DECADE.

GET RID OF SUBSIDIES FOR OIL AND GAS, YOU KNOW.

WE DON'T NEED TO FUEL THAT.

THERE IS LOTS WE COULD DO.

>> A LOT OF CUTTING THERE.

RICK?

>> WELL, YOU KNOW, FIRST OF ALL, I DON'T THINK, GIVEN THE PROBLEM THAT WE ARE SEEING THAT IT CAN BE DEALT WITH EITHER SIMPLY BY LOOKING AT CUTS OR BY INCREASED TAXES.

WE HAVE TO LOOK AT BOTH.

IN ADDITION, IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT IS DRIVING THIS DEFICIT, IT'S NOT MILITARY SPENDING.

WE ARE SPENDING LESS AS A PERCENTAGE OF G.D.P.

IT'S NOT-- THAN WE HAVE IN THE PAST.

IT'S NOT BECAUSE OF DISCRETIONARY PROGRAMS.

HAVE YOU TO LOOK AT THE BIG THINGS.

LET'S LOOK AT SOCIAL SECURITY.

WHAT CAN WE DO THERE ON THE BENEFIT SIDE?

WE CAN TALK ABOUT EXTENDING THE RETIREMENT AGE TO 70 AS LIFE EXPECTANCY GOES UP.

WE CAN ALSO GO AT ADJUSTING THE INFLATION CPI OVERESTIMATES INFLATION.

ON THE TAX SIDE, ON THE REVENUE SIDE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THE SOCIAL SECURITY TAXES ONLY ON THE FIRST ABOUT $IS 75,000-- $175 OF INCOME WHERE THE MEDICARE TAX IS ON ALL INCOME.

THERE HAS BEEN SOME TALK OF EXPANDING THE SOCIAL SECURITY TAX TO COVER MORE INCOME.

>> SO THAT'S MOSTLY GOING AFTER SOCIAL SECURITY IS WHAT YOU ARE SAYING BUT-- >> THAT LITTLE WHAT-- THAT'S WHAT IS DRIVING-- YOU COULD ELIMINATE MILITARY IN TOTAL $800 BILLION THAT WAS ONLY HALF OF THE BUDGET DEFICIT.

ELIMINATE ALL DISCRETIONARY PENDING.

>> I WONDER IF WE ARE REARRANGING THE DECK CHAIRS ON THE "TITANIC" LEER?

>>-- HERE.

>> RICK IS RIGHT.

I'M WITH HIM 100% BUT IT'S ALSO MEDICARE AND MEDICAID AND WITH OUR AGING POPULATION, THIS IS ONLY GOING TO BEGIN TO ACCELERATE NOW AND THERE ARE THINGS WE CAN DO THERE, TOO.

I MEAN WE ARE, AS YOU SAID, WE ARE ALREADY TAXING, YOU KNOW,-- THERE IS NO CUT ON TAXES FOR PAYROLL TAXES FOR MEDICARE.

BUT WE COULD MEANS TEST MEDICARE.

AND WE COULD DO A MUCH BETTER JOB OF CURBING PRESCRIPTION DRUGS COSTS MEDICARE.

GIVING MORE-- GIVING MEDICARE MORE POWER TO NEGOTIATE ON DRUG PRICES AS MEDICAL SCIENCE ADVANCES AND DRUGS GET MORE SOPHISTICATED AND MORE EXPENSIVE, YOU KNOW, USUALLY THAT MEANS A GREATER PROFIT MARGIN FOR THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY AND THAT'S SOMETHING WE COULD DO BUT THE OTHER THING NOW , UNFORTUNATELY, IS NOW THIS IS A VICIOUS CYCLE BECAUSE NOW INTERESTS COSTS, INTEREST ON THE DEBT IS IN HERE, TOO.

AND SO WHEN TIMES ARE GOOD, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THINGS LIKE PAYING DOWN SOME OF THE DEBT IN ADVANCE.

>> SO WE ONLY HAVE A FEW SECONDS LEFT.

SO NINA, SOME HIVE SOLVE THE PROBLEM IN 20 SIXTH.

>> I'LL JUST SHARE WITH YOU MY GRIPE THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT ALL OF THESE CUTS AND ADJUSTMENTS AND WHAT WE SHOULD DO WHICH IS APPROPRIATE BUT PARTLY IN SITUATION BECAUSE OF THE 2017 TAX CUTS, WHY ARE WE SAYING THAT WE'VE GOT TO FIND, YOU KNOW, WAYS TO MAKE THE POOR PAY FOR TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH INSTEAD OF DEALING WITH THAT AND THEN MEANS TESTING SOCIAL SECURITY SPECIFICALLY SO THAT BENEFITS ARE REDUCED FOR WEALTHY INDIVIDUALS.

THAT THAT FRAMEWORK HAS ALREADY BEEN SET.

THAT'S ALL I GOT TO SAY.

>> SO NOW WE WILL GO TO AS AND FS.

SARAH YOUR F. >> IN 200 IS, THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION SIGNED A RULE THAT PROTECTED 58 MILLION ACRES OF U.S. NATIONAL FORESTS FROM ROAD CONSTRUCTION AND TIMBER HARVESTING.

A MAJOR CONSERVATION WIN.

THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION THIS WEEK ANNOUNCED IT IS GOING TO OPEN UP ALL OF THE 58 MILLION ACHERS TO DEVELOPMENT AND THAT'S GOING TO REVERSE THIS POLICY THAT WAS BROADLY POPULAR, PROTECTED A THIRD OF U.S. NATIONAL FOREST LANDS.

SO MY F GOES TO ONCE AGAIN TO THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION.

>> SHOCKING.

A STUDY PUBLISHED IN THE JOURNAL SHOWS THAT PLARN DOUBLES THE RISK OF DIEING FROM HEART DISEASE.

THE STUDY EXAMINES POOLED MEDICAL DATA ON 200 MILLION PLUS PEOPLE AND FOUND THAT THOSE WHO WERE MOST AFFECTED ARE YOUNG AND HAVE NO HISTORY OF CARDIOVASCULAR DISORDER.

GIVEN THAT CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE IS THE TOP CAUSE OF DEATH IN THE U.S., LIKE THE CO-AUTHOR, I BELIEVE IT IS TIME THAT WE EDUCATE PEOPLE ABOUT THE DANGERS OF MARIJUANA, JUST AS MUCH AS WE DO TOBACCO.

>> LISA.

>> MY F GOES TO PRESIDENT TRUMP'S DECISION TO PAVE OVER THE ROSE GARDEN.

A DECISION THAT IS BEING IMPLEMENTED THIS WEEK.

THE PHOTOS YOU ARE SEEING ARE FROM THE OBAMA ERA AND THEN FIRST LADY MELANIA'S TRUMP'S RENOVATION AND THIS WEEK'S PAVING WORK IN PROGRESS AND THEY SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES.

>> AND RICK, YOUR F. >> A FEW WEEKS AGO I GAVE AN F TO THE WEATHER BECAUSE IT RAINED ON THE WEEKEND FOR EACH OF THE SIX MONTHS LAST SIX MONTHS OF THE WEEKENDS BUT THAT WAS A TRIVIAL COMPLAINT TO WHAT THE WEATHER HAD IN STORE FOR THUS PAST WEEKEND.

ON SUNDAY, TORRENTIAL RAIN STORMS AND TORNADO BROUGHT MAJOR DESTRUCTION AND DEATH TO THE COMMUNITIES VERY CLOSE TO MY HOME IN CLARK MILLS AND CLINTON.

THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS TO THOSE STRUGGLING WITH THE AFTERMATH OF THE STORM.

>> AND TO OUR AS.

SARAH.

>> MY A GOES TO THE VERA RUBEN OBSERVATORY IN CHILE WHICH CONTAINS A POWERFUL NEW TELESCOPE WHICH WILL TRANSFORM OUR VIEW OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM ALLOWING THEM TO INVESTIGATE DARK ENERGY AND DARK MATTER.

A JOINT VENTURE WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AND SCIENCE FOUNDATION NAMED AFTER VERA RUBEN, AN AMERICAN ASTRONOMER WHO REVOLUTIONIZED OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE UNIVERSE.

DIDN'T GET A NOBEL PRIZE BECAUSE SHE WAS A WOMAN BUT NOW SHE HAS AN OBSERVATORY NAMED AFTER HER.

>> WHICH IS EVEN NICER, ISN'T IT.

NINA.

>> THAT IS NICE.

MY A GOES TO SYRACUSE.COM AND MICHELLE FOR HER DEEP REPORTING THE IMPACT OF IMMIGRATION RAIDS ON AMERICAN FARMS.

THE STORY FEATURES AN UPSTATE FARM WHERE 75% OF THE WORKERS ARE IMMIGRANTS WHO GET MILK FROM SOME 65,000 COWS ALL TO GO TO STORES IN AMERICA.

AS THE PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS LOOK TO REFORM OUR BROKEN IMMIGRATION SYSTEM, I HOPE THAT THEY KEEP AN EYE ON THE AMERICAN FARM, ESPECIALLY HERE IN NEW YORK STATE.

>> LISA.

>> MY A GOES TO THE U.S. SENATE'S NOW 40-YEAR-OLD BIRD RULE THAT PROHIBITS THE BUDGET RECONCILIATION PROCESS TO EXTRACT EXTRANEOUS DECISIONS THAT DON'T HAVE A DIRECT BUDGETARY EFFECT REQUIRING 60 VOTES RATHER THAN SIMPLE MARKET.

THE SENATE PARLIAMENTARIAN HAS RULED NOW THAT NUMEROUS PROVISIONS FROM THE ONE BIG BEAUTIFUL BILL VIOLATE THE BIRD RULE AND MOST ARE BAD IDEAS.

>> MY A GOES TO ELIZABETH McDONOUGH FOR EXACTLY WHAT LISA SAID SHEILAS DONE.

IT IS ENCOURAGING THAT STATE REPUBLICANS HAVE ACCEPTED THE RULING AND TRYING TO ADJUST THE BILL TO BE IN COMPLIANCE.

THE BRIRD RULE GETS A BIG SHOUTOUT.

AS WE CLOSE, I'M SURE YOU KNOW THAT FEDERAL FUNDING FOR PUBLIC MEDIA IS FACING SIGNIFICANT CUTS --- AND THAT PUTS PROGRAMS YOU LOVE -LIKE IVORY TOWER - AT RISK.

WE'VE BEEN HERE FOR 23 YEARS - WE'RE THE STATION'S LONGEST RUNNING SHOW.

SO TONIGHT, WE'RE ASKING FOR YOUR HELP IN PROTECTING WCNY'S PROGRAMMING.

PLEASE CONTRIBUTE AT WCNY.ORG/PROTECT.

THANK YOU FROM ALL OF US AT IVORY TOWER AND THANK YOU FOR JOINING US THIS EVENING.

FOR COMMENTS YOU CAN WRITE TO THE ADDRESS ON YOUR SCREEN.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO VIEW THE SHOW AGAIN YOU CAN VIEW IT ONLINE AT WCNY.ORG.

I'M DAVID CHANATRY, FOR ALL OF US AT IVORY TOWER, HAVE A GOOD NIGHT.