From Sky news.

This is connections.

I'm Evan Dawson.

Our connection is our was made in a social media post from President Trump congratulating Senator Chuck Schumer, leader of the Senate Democrats.

The president was thanking Senator Schumer for voting to pass a bill that would allow the government to keep operating and avoid a shutdown.

Most Democrats stood against the measure, but Schumer joined the Republicans to get it passed.

The president said, quote, congratulations to Chuck Schumer for doing the right thing.

Took guts and courage.

It's a really good and smart move.

End quote.

Schumer was one of only nine Democrats to join Republicans in voting to keep the government open, and his vote has been seen by many in his party as a betrayal, or at least a capitulation to Trump when many Democrats want united opposition.

Politico cataloged the tidal wave of anger, starting with the progressive group indivisible, which put out a statement maligning Schumer for doing a great deal of damage to the Democratic Party.

The group scheduled an emergency call to discuss whether it is time for Democratic leadership in Washington to change.

Politico adds the following quote Schumer's one time partner, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, went so far as to urge senators to vote against Schumer's position, saying that this is a false choice that some are buying instead of fighting, and it's unacceptable.

And dozens of House Democrats sent a sharply worded letter to Schumer on Friday, which expressed strong opposition to his standpoint, arguing that the American people sent Democrats to Congress to fight against Republican dysfunction and chaos and that the party should not be capitulating to their obstruction, end quote.

Democratic operative Charlotte Clymer said this week that she, quote, has not seen such unite in anger across the party in a long, long time.

Senator Schumer has managed to unite us far more than Trump has in recent months.

End quote.

Yesterday.

Yesterday on ABC's The View, Schumer defended his actions, saying that if the government shut down, millions of Americans would be at risk.

The most vulnerable Americans, people who rely on Medicaid and Snap, for example.

He said he knew his position would be difficult to take, but he believes he did the right thing.

Let's offer one more piece of data about how the American people are feeling about that.

A new NBC news poll shows that President Trump's approval rating has fallen from the 50s to the 40s since his inauguration.

It's trending downward, and all of the approval ratings for the president show that.

But the approval rating for the Democratic Party is now 27% lowest mark they've ever recorded.

If you break it down by demographics, men without college degrees, men with college degrees, women without college degrees, women with college degrees.

Turns out that college educated women are by far, by far the most progressive group in the country.

And yet even college educated women now have a negative view of the Democratic Party.

A net negative three points.

This hour, a conversation with Democrats about what the right thing to do really is in this moment and with this new administration.

Our guests in the studio, let me welcome Emily Goldsmith, chair of the Monroe County Democratic Women's Caucus and chair of LD 20 2323.

Welcome to the program, Emily.

Thanks for being.

Thank you for having me.

Also with us next, Emily is Scott Colleges, chair of the Wayne County Democratic Committee.

Welcome back to the program.

Thanks for being here.

Thanks for having me.

Welcome as well to Avi Pressburger, president of the Monroe County Young Democrats.

Welcome back to you.

Thank you.

On the line with us is Jan Regan, who's a former member of Geneva City Council.

Jan, welcome back to the program.

Thanks for being with us.

Well, thanks for having me.

I wish I could join you in person, but I'm glad to be included.

Okay.

What I want to do.

And I don't usually do it this way.

But before we listen to what Senator Schumer said yesterday, which we should hear him out, I want to give our guests the chance to just briefly, this is not your in-depth remark.

Just generally speaking, was Schumer right?

Wrong.

Really wrong.

Sort of.

Right, Abby.

You know, it's a really challenging issue.

Obviously there are people who are going to be hurt in the immediate by a government shutdown, but I really do fear that what Schumer did in the long run is going to lead to project 2025 being much more, enacted much more swiftly and effectively.

we need to be really careful about, legalizing and as AOC put it, codifying the chaos.

Okay, Emily.

definitely wrong.

Sort of wrong.

Probably.

Right.

Absolutely right.

I'm going to fall on the sort of wrong side of things, I think, you know, to your point earlier.

He had some pragmatic reasons for what he did.

But it really, to me just shows a, a failure to understand, where the median Democratic voter is right now and without like, I'm getting on my soapbox, I do think that is emblematic of some greater problems within the party.

We've got room for soapbox in this.

I'll bring my next time.

Scott, where are you on this one?

I'm actually exactly the same.

I'm.

You know, it's sort of wrong.

I understand the reasons.

I understand the sense in what he was saying.

But at the same time, in this moment when we're really looking at everything that was being proposed, either taking a bad CR bill or having the government shutdown.

And while I don't want people harmed by a government shutdown, I think we're having the same effect.

We just gave license to it by going along with us here.

Okay.

Jan Regan yeah, I think I'm kind of getting in line with the others who just spoke.

I, I think that Schumer's, What steered that there really wasn't an off ramp to this, shutdown, and it would only give more power to, President Trump and Elon Musk to continue, you know, rampage and the government.

And as much as there's.

So there were things in the CR that Democrats and probably a lot of other people would not like, especially when you learn more about it.

I think his fear was that you'd be turning more power over to those who are putting those things in play.

So as much as I wish and thought he would vote against it, I follow his reasoning for, not, you know, for for voting for the CR.

All right.

Well, let's listen to how Senator Schumer described his reasoning.

And he preface this by saying that he felt that despite what President Trump, I was gonna say, tweeted, I think he posted on True Social, about congratulating Schumer.

Senator Schumer says Elon Musk, he believes, really did want this shut down.

He wanted more power and Schumer didn't want to give it to him.

Let's listen.

The bottom line is a government shutdown works like this.

All government spending is stopped.

All.

And then the executive branch Trump, Musk, Doge and this really evil man people don't know about vote who's head of OMB.

His name is vote would have to go.

And baby OMB is the Office of Management budget which determines the spending.

And they could cut off anything they want simply by saying it's not essential.

So day to snap food for poor kids.

Not essential day for mass transit.

New York City subway in subways all over.

Not essential day seven Medicaid not essential.

People don't need Medicaid.

They should get their own health care.

And this would happen over and over and over again.

And there's no check.

The biggest problem is that they it has been determined that the courts have no say.

And the only say is the executive branch.

Now, in the old days when there was a shutdown, they'd work it out.

But this is a different horrible kettle of fish.

They hate the government.

They want to shut down everything.

You heard what Musk said.

$2.2 trillion.

And so this would have been so devastating.

And here's the second part.

That's maybe just as bad.

There's no exit strategy.

How do you get out of a shutdown?

Guess who determines it?

Trump.

Musk, Doge.

They're the only ones.

And one of the Republican senators told one of the Democratic senators, you get us, you get in this.

We're staying in for six months, nine months, a year till we decimate the entire federal government.

Follow the question.

So it was so bad that I felt I had to do this.

Now it's not happening immediately.

But what does a leader do when you're a leader?

If you see a real crisis a little bit down the road, your job is to stand up and say, we cannot do that.

And that's what I do.

All right.

That's Senator Schumer yesterday on ABC's The View Alex writes to the program to say Senator Schumer's office has turned off their voicemail option.

It's a great look to engage with your constituents.

I think that's sarcastic from Alex.

And Senator Schumer is always welcome on this program.

He hasn't.

Come on.

he's generally pretty accessible.

Guy.

but his office is sort of buttoning up since the vote last week.

So here's what I would want to ask him.

And then I want to have our guests respond to some of this.

I understand what he is saying as again, pragmatically, I hear that what I don't understand is a couple of things.

Number one, politically, strategically speaking, if you are massaging the pain that you think this administration is going to cause the voters, doesn't that give them a better chance of continuing to stay in power?

That's one.

Number two, if you're concerned about people being hurt, you spent a long time saying that whatever they do is hurting people.

So I understand you're saying the other way would have hurt more.

I shut down would have hurt more.

But it's not like people are not going to be hurt in your view.

In your view, people still could lose Medicaid.

People still could lose snap.

There are still going to be assaults on all kinds of institutions, despite the fact that now the government won't shut down.

And finally, I don't fully understand why you think if bad things would have happened, that you couldn't have actually galvanized the American people to understand the source of those bad things, and then try to put a stop to it through political means?

It goes back to the old saying of the people, or the people are going to vote, and then they're going to get what they voted for, good and hard.

I'm not advocating that anybody be hurt, but I don't understand those aspects.

I'd love to hear the senator talk about that.

I don't fully his remarks there.

Don't fully answer those questions.

Abby, what do you make of what you heard from the senator?

Yeah.

So I have a couple of issues with with what he said.

I completely agree with all of the points that you made about, you know, people are being hurt.

Anyways, you know, it's a long term hurt versus a short term hurt.

Who's getting hurt when.

But at the end of the day, all of Trump's policies, all of Elon's policies, everything that DOJ's doing is hurting people.

I also really don't understand this idea that only Trump, Elon and Doge can end the shutdown.

He is.

Schumer is sitting in the article two branch of our government that has the power of the purse.

While it is hard, and it would take time to convince Republicans to cross the line to pass a budget that is acceptable to Democrats and the American people, I do believe that that was ultimately the only real path.

In order to prevent project 2025 from being enacted, we have to allow, not allow, but we have to push the Republicans politically.

They're already not doing town halls.

They're already facing mass protests.

There are you know, Tesla's stock is tanking and it's harming them politically.

So why not let that hurt?

Affect them.

Get to the point where their constituents are actually pushing them to say, you know what, Trump I'm sorry, I know you're going to primary me because of this, but I have to reopen the government.

My people are telling me that the government needs to be open in my district, and if you can't allow that to happen, we need to pass a veto proof continuing resolution or budget.

So you're saying that you think a lot of Republicans in Congress were relieved that Schumer rallied support for this?

Absolutely, absolutely.

Telling the telling Schumer that the government was never going to reopen was playing into his fears of what would happen and protecting themselves from the hard decisions that they are supposed to be making.

They handed away their powers on tariffs.

They hand away their power on everything that Trump asked them for, forced them to continue to do that until their constituents say stop, okay?

Or they listen to their constituents saying stop because they already are.

They're already speaking up.

Emily Goldsmith, what do you make of what you heard from the senator?

Yeah.

You know, Evan, I think it really does come back to, you know, the pragmatism that, he was exercising.

Right.

And I think on its face, these are decisions or a decision rather.

That does make sense.

But to me, the the greater issue here is really that it shows sort of us like out of step, reality with, you know, Democratic leadership and the average voter or, you know, younger people coming up in party leadership.

You know, I really think that, when it comes time to make decisions like these, you have to listen to the people who are closest to people, I guess, like on the ground.

Right.

So you have representatives, who are not the majority leader, who are actually in their communities in a much different way, who are saying, we know that a shutdown will galvanize our community in a new way.

It will inspire people to organize.

It will make the policies we're seeing from Trump and Musk, hit home in a different way.

And Democrats, or in this case, Schumer, sort of made a decision based on an old playbook that we simply can't use anymore.

The playbook that stopped being effective in 2016.

So both it sounds like both Abby and Emily think Schumer kind of got played here.

yeah.

Got pushed with old fears of an old way of doing things.

Scott.

Comedies.

What do you make of that?

You know, it's not just Schumer that got pushed into this.

The entire situation surrounding this of having the option of a bad CR bill or a government shutdown within ten weeks.

This regime basically has has taken a lot of power out of Congress's hands with the help of Republican congressional members.

At this point in time, what Schumer should have been able to say, if he was looking at his own model of leadership that he described, I'm looking at a crisis six months down the line, nine months down the line, and if we have a government shutdown, you have people who are saying we're going to we're going to have a government shutdown for six months or nine months.

As a leader, I'm going to let the people know whose responsibility that was.

You know, because when it comes down to it, it is the Republicans that are going to be hurting the people, their own constituents, you know, veterans, seniors, people with disabilities.

You've got a lot of people who have, you know, Snap benefits.

All these things are still going to be cut.

We know they're going to be cut because they've already told us they're going to be cut.

If we had a government shutdown, all of this now firmly becomes the responsibility of the Republicans in Congress.

And we are the ones who should be saying, we've got a different plan, and we're inviting the Republican members to come join us with this plan and serve the American people that way.

Supposed to let me follow that thread.

Realistically, we go into the spring, in the summer with the shutdown that Schumer says he thought it could have continued six, nine months.

Okay.

so let's say that's happening now.

People are losing benefits, veterans are losing benefits, National parks are closed.

Families are canceling vacations.

You're saying that despite the fact that President Trump would be saying, well, that's the Democrats fault, the American people would understand, you got the white House, you've got the House of Representatives, you've got the Senate, and you've got a DOJ's team.

You've got everybody in place.

You're the ones who won the election.

You're in power.

You don't get to blame other people.

The market is crashing, the parks are closing, and you're in power.

After you promised the golden age of America.

You think the American people, even people who voted for Trump, you believe that would see that and say it's not the Democrats fault.

It's my team's fault.

I don't even have to believe it.

I've seen it in action.

Where?

Well, we had a town hall in Geneva last night.

We had a lot of people there that were not just Democrats.

We had people, and I understand the congresswoman did not know she was invited.

She was invited and she didn't show up.

you know.

Yeah.

Congresswoman Tenney did not show up for that to, to even engage with her own constituents.

I do know that there were Republicans that were there.

I would I would say, you know, probably not a lot, but you had a lot of people who were not affiliated with any party.

We had a lot of Democrats, certainly.

But you have people who are already voicing that what's going on with this particular regime, and I call it a regime.

It's not an administration anymore because this is a this is a takeover by Trump.

well, I mean, he was duly elected and duly elected, but also doing it in such a way to to reorganize the Constitution.

Yeah.

Musk was not elected.

Yeah.

You know, he's appointing people who were not elected to do Congress's job for them.

Right.

because when it comes down to it, those shouldn't exist.

Doge already existed in the form of Congress.

They're the ones who are supposed to be.

But the Department of Government Efficiency.

But no matter what's going on here, you've got people who are already angry, people who voted for Trump saying you were going to make things more affordable for us, you were going to give us this better nation.

And the first thing you did was to dismantle everything.

I don't hear that from Trump supporters.

Yeah.

I mean, I suppose there are some, but I don't see that in any big numbers.

Got it.

Yeah.

I don't see it necessarily in big numbers, but we're starting to see it.

And you know, honestly when one person steps up and says it, that's good.

That's going to empower other people to do it.

And you're saying anecdotally, Wayne County, Ontario County, you're you're hearing you're starting to hear it.

We're starting to hear, okay, Emily.

Yeah.

You know, I agree with Scott, on principle, right?

I think that, when you take it down to the studs, it takes like one person to speak up than two than three.

And, you know, that's how movements happen.

And also I think, and maybe this is to, the majority leader's credit, we have to kind of accept the fact that with some of this, the call is coming from inside the house.

If you look back at November of last year, we saw very clearly that Democrats really have this inability to message to voters on bread and butter issues.

And I don't know from what I have seen, that broad like Democrats up in this broad, sweeping way really taken those lessons to stride, at least not yet.

And I mean, it's been a couple months.

Like there are structures that have to change and new leaders that are coming up.

And so I think in order for in the event there were a shutdown, like playing like, you know, an alternate reality here had the government shut down in order for this message of like, hey, look at whose fault this really is.

We would have had to have, a party with the the tenacious sort of messaging that we need to kind of rabble rousing folks into seeing that, because ultimately Trump does have this X factor, right?

His, his most ardent supporters have this X factor.

And we have shown over the last eight, ten years that Democrats partially because we do play by this, you know, old playbook, aren't necessarily meeting the moment in terms of messaging.

So maybe that was part of his calculus.

I can't speak to that.

But that would have been a concern.

I think a real concern had a shutdown taken place.

The amount of organizing it would have taken to combat the again, the Trump of it all would have been incredibly great.

And I don't know that Democrats maybe we could have I don't want to be pessimistic, but they're certainly would have been a great deal of organizing that I don't know that we would have been able to do.

Jan Regan, what did you make of what you heard from the Senator?

Well, I think he was obviously, facing two bad options.

but I have been swayed by his arguments.

and I'm not so sure with respect that that, you know, people would come to the conclusion that it's basically on the Republicans and that this took place.

But one of the important things that's coming out of this discussion, I think, is, is the, real need for showing people exactly what the impact of these cuts that are being proposed and the the new budget, things going on and dodges of fact and, and programs and so forth.

I think people need to see the real impact and real people, that is out there.

And that is slowly happening.

The event last night in Geneva that Scott mentioned, he was also the, and key to that and did a fantastic job.

I think, that's a start.

And more of that has to happen.

It's very telling that, our own representative, Claudia Tenney, failed to show up and from my understanding, didn't even respond to the invitation at all.

And just like Democrats, she has to hear these, you know, these true stories as well.

And, I think the more of these they get out either by people attending or by the coverage and in media, and I have to throw out one more thing.

And when I get the media, that's another dangerous aspect in that we have so much control, where people are getting their news in the hands of, well, basically in the hands of Elon Musk and, and President Trump.

And so we've got a lot of things to combat.

So the more we can do to communicate the actual effects of these cuts, on real people that we all know and than ourselves.

Do.

You know, I mean, I think we've got to get those stories out there.

So last night's event was a good step in that direction.

So in our second half hour we're going to spend more time on that.

So Jan and Scott talking about this event last night, more town halls, more public events, more community engagement.

I want all of our panelists to tell us what they do want their party to do more of, or to start doing.

but briefly, let me just ask kind of a up down.

I'm giving you the thumbs up or thumbs down of Senator Schumer, and maybe other Democratic leadership stays in power.

Or you want to change.

Let's in my line on that, as always been that the Democratic Party needs to always be looking for new leadership.

We need to be building our bench.

We need to be building our ranks.

And that involves changing leadership periodically.

And I think that it's time for new folks to be running for Senate.

I think it's time for, you know, the Senate caucus to be sitting down and having conversations about who is the most effective messenger, to the American people who can win, Senate elections coming up.

And I think it's very telling that two New York senators voted one way when the rest of the caucus voted another.

And these are the two Senate senators who are supposed to be in charge of helping us hold and the Senate seats that we have and win new ones.

I think it's very telling that, they voted one way and the rest of the caucus voted another.

Emily, changed leadership.

Keep it.

You know, I really have to echo what Avi said.

I think that, you know, we always need to be having this forward mindset, that to say that this needs to be the straw that breaks the camel's back, I don't know.

And also, I think, again, in order to meet the moment that we're in, we have to be building our bench and having these strategic conversations.

and, I mean, I could keep going, but I'll let you get.

Okay.

Scott.

Scott.

Comma, just change it or keep it.

I'm with, both with Avi and Emily.

You know, we have to be forward more, have a forward momentum when it comes to leadership.

We've got people who have got things to say that that have got good messages to bring up.

And, you know, if the current leadership won't take that mantle and go with the moment, then we do need to change it.

Jan Regan, keep it or change it.

Yeah, I'm kind of right in line here.

I, I, I think you have to look at electability, and, and getting people involved and new leadership is always a good thing if they can get elected and do the right thing.

So, I mean, I think keep building the bench and, you know, move forward.

it is 844295 talk listeners.

I see the phone starting to ring, and we're going to take your feedback in the second half.

Hour 84429582552639.

If you're call from Rochester 2639994, email the program connections at six.

I talk or join the chat in the chat section on YouTube.

We're streaming at six I news YouTube page.

We're going to take this only break in the hour.

We'll come back and we'll take some of your feedback.

We've got Abby Press Burg, president of Monroe County, young Democrats, Emily Goldsmith, chair of the Monroe County Democratic Women's Caucus, Scott Colleges, chair of the Wayne County Democratic Committee.

Jan Regan on the line, former member of Geneva City Council.

And your feedback next.

Coming up in our second hour, it's not an easy time for conferences and programs that support Mwb minority and women owned business enterprises.

And there are a couple of events in Rochester that are aimed at empowering mwb women in business.

We're going to talk about how they feel about some of the federal attacks on Dei and related programs, and how they talk about their work with the public.

That's next hour.

Support for your public radio station comes from our members and from Green Spark Solar, serving the greater Rochester and Finger Lakes regions for over 20 years.

Green Spark Solar is dedicated to helping people power their homes and businesses, with local solar power and battery storage back up more at Green Spark solar.com.

Did you know that Sky news has a reporter covering the news and Albany Capital Bureau correspondent Jiang Yun Han reports on what's happening there and how the decisions made by lawmakers affect you.

Lawmakers are looking for ways they can reform prison safety.

Minimum wages would increase incrementally over the next few years.

A growing number of organizers have called for the facility to shut down.

Jiang Yun reports for Sky and the New York Public News Network.

Listen for her reports on Sky news.

This is connections.

I'm Evan Dawson, and we're going to start listening on Finger Lakes Public Radio, EOS Pat in Geneva first.

Hey, Pat, go ahead.

Pat, are you there?

the line Pat's there.

This is there you are.

My hearing something.

Pat, you're.

Oh, I was at the meeting last night.

Okay.

And, I may have missed a minute where they, may have said this already, but our meeting last night was specifically about what?

These federal actions, what the effects would be upon health care at all different levels.

And we had on our panel, we had two doctors, a midwife and a retired, health care, she was a health care expert, a, and I say, she's worked in health care for 40 years.

as an administrator, I would say.

And and the one thing I did want to say is as soon as soon as they mentioned the the vote and where Schumer went, we got boos.

The whole crowd.

There were over 500 people there and it was all boos.

So that's what I just wanted to make sure everybody understands it.

It was not a mixed bag.

It was all boobs.

Pat, thank you very much.

Scott was moderating.

That's a fair description of last night.

Yeah, yeah.

When that came up, you know, and Senator Schumer did have a representative there as well.

and I've warned him, you know, once he once he stood up and we, we had said what that vote was, he was going to get a lot of boos.

And he certainly did the entire theater.

Okay.

Jen, Regan, you were there anything you want to add?

Yeah.

No, that's that's that's exactly right.

I have to say the rest of the meeting went very calmly and people really listened.

But, when that, came up, yeah, there was definitely a reaction.

Okay.

Pat, thank you for that.

Robert in Fairport.

Next.

Hey, Robert.

Go ahead.

yeah, I'm kind of curious.

I mean, we're spending as a government $6.75 trillion a year.

We're only raising 4.92 million or trillion in taxes for every dollar we're raising in taxes.

We're spending, I don't know, 20, $0.30 extra.

I don't hear any ideas from your panel on how to address that.

I mean, if you really run a government based on how much we're raising in taxes, we should be laying the government off for about four months.

and we should be running things with tax dollars for eight months.

Well, hold on for a second.

I mean, because obviously that's a silly suggestion.

So let's try to get back to the the world of reality here.

There isn't anything that's coming from dozer, Elon Musk that would balance the budget.

Is there?

This is the first time in my lifetime that I've actually heard of politicians that are trying to cut the growth of government, but they're not.

I mean, there's nothing that Elon Musk is doing or what, 60 days into IT administration, 30 days.

I mean, this is I mean, we're we're just a few we're we're less than 100 days into an administration.

And you're saying what they haven't done so far.

No no no no no no no, that's not fair.

I know contrary.

It is fair.

Okay.

No.

Hold on.

Let me let me give you this first administration I have seen in my entire lifetime that it's actually made a priority to cut the size of government and cut the growth of government.

What I am saying, Robert, is if if that actually happened, whether the the people of this country like the result or not, I'll give it to you that that they cut $2 trillion or whatever the number is going to be.

Nothing that they have done indicates that they are actually serious about that.

They are putting headlines out about nickels and pennies, trying to take credit and usually over inflating what is actually being saved.

It is not a serious effort so far.

This is coming from a media outlet that is funded by the government.

Well, first of all, we're not funded by the government.

We receive government.

Robert.

I'm not I'm listening.

I'm not cutting the call.

Robert, Robert is making a point about where the cuts are going to be, and I appreciate that.

Now, I'm just saying, man, all I'm saying, Robert, is like, let's stay in reality.

That's all I want you to do.

If they cut $2 trillion, okay, absolutely.

Whether people like it or not, we can say they did something that nobody has done.

We'll see if they do.

The money has to come from the military.

Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security.

That's where it is.

What they are doing is chipping away at the edges.

They will try to cut NPR and probably the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and they will have a news conference and they will brag about it.

That's probably what's going to happen.

And they have a right to do what they want to do.

and then the public will react.

If that happens, it's going to hurt.

It's going to hurt us.

It's going to hurt.

I think a lot of communities, yes, I'm biased, of course I'm biased.

But it is not accurate for you, Robert, to say that we are we're funded by the government.

The implication is that's where all the money comes from.

That is not even the majority of what we do.

It is enough that it will hurt.

And I don't want to see communities hurt by that.

I'm I'm in favor of keeping Fred Rogers and NPR and journalism going just as strong as ever.

But it is not.

That's part of the problem is he's going well.

You're funded by the government.

You know, it's 18%, 18%.

That's a lot that hurts us.

If we lose it.

But let's like, let's stay in reality here.

Nothing that they have done is indicative of a serious effort to cut $2 trillion.

We'll see.

Maybe they will.

That's what I don't get though.

Why are we talking about it?

Like they're going after all these little bits and pieces on the edges, claiming that they're going to get to $2 trillion, and so far they haven't touched the big ones.

Now they may go after Medicaid.

I mean, it's certainly I think the indication is that, well, they'll start they are they are spreading all kinds of weird misinformation, you might call it lies about Social Security.

I mean, all of the things you're in the state of the Union and all this stuff like that was baloney.

I mean, that stuff on Social Security, there's there's a little bit of waste, fraud and abuse every year and Social Security that should be addressed.

But there's not millions of people age 200 getting paid.

That's not happening.

That was literally a press release from people who didn't even understand what's going on.

So that's all I want to do is stay in reality.

That's it.

What's staying reality.

And if you don't think Corporation for Public Broadcasting should get funded, or if you don't think this program are USAID, that's fine.

Let's talk about it.

But let's not let's not make up numbers that don't actually equal anything substantial.

That's all I'm saying.

That's it.

Okay, Avi, you've talked about Medicaid.

are you concerned now that those big cuts that Robert is talking about, serious cuts are coming, that that is going to target the big entitlement programs, which is where most of the money is the military, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security.

Do you think cuts are going there?

I would guess that they are going to try to make some cuts.

I think ultimately they're going to face enough backlash where, they they rescind most of those efforts after hurting a lot of people.

I think that it's really interesting to talk about the two, you know, a $2 trillion deficit in the budget, but not to be talking about corporate tax rates or marginal tax rates on top earners having fallen more than 60% since the Reagan administration.

so if you want to talk about ways to make the government more efficient and funding it more properly, like we can do that.

But that's on the funding end for most things, unless you want to start talking about the hundreds of per dollar, $100 per bolt that the military spends building, you know, random things that don't work.

So.

Okay.

But but before you got me a little annoyed, okay, but we're not talking about ways that we can, make the government more efficient or spend properly, because those are top of our priorities.

And that's part of why we're so upset with Schumer for making this decision, is that he implemented a funding plan that is horrible.

Okay.

But for to that point, before I get to your co-panelists, this president obviously was president for four years.

They cut taxes.

Then he ran on cutting taxes.

He was elected with the with voters knowing what he intended to do.

And it's the Democratic Party that's got a 27% approval rating.

So doesn't he have a claim that maybe people do want this, that what you're describing is actually as much as you find it detestable?

More people than not may want it less than.

I think it would be great to take off the tax on tips or other low income earners, but at the end of the day, one, they're not likely going to do those things.

why not?

I mean, we're not seeing any serious proposals to make those happen.

To Robert's point, it's only for 60 days.

Maybe we will.

Sure.

But he had four years prior to that to write all these plans up in four years prior to that, to write all these plans up.

So, you know, give me a break on the he's 60 days in, he's ten years into this political career.

he had time to put these plans together.

Project 2025 was written in enormous depth by people who are current, currently working in the administration.

I find it kind of hard to to swallow that we're 60 days.

And how could he have gotten anything done?

he's tanked a whole lot of stuff in 60 days.

and broken more laws than anybody could ever imagine.

So, you know, it's it's certainly I take the note that Democrats need to do a better job messaging.

Certainly.

I take the note that Democrats do need to do a better job being with the working class people and talking about economic issues that impact them, and how we are going to make sure that they are protected, and how we are going to make sure that they are lifted up and prosper.

But at the end of the day, we're doing more than lip service.

We're not just going to talk about helping middle class people.

Every single time we have a we have a Democratic administration, the middle class actually gets lifted up.

GDP in this country grows at double the rate, double the rate when Democrats are in charge from Republicans.

We are the ones who actually have fiscal responsibility and who actually make a plan in order to make this government affordable and efficient and every single time Republicans come in, they chop and chop and chop, and they prove that government doesn't work and then build that distrust within the American people.

But in states like California, higher rates of homelessness than in most red states.

I mean, it's not like where Democrats are in charge.

It's always better, especially for people in poverty.

Sure.

But I'm not talking about in the state by state level.

I'm talking nationally.

And the biggest programs that are going to help uplift homeless populations and people who are struggling are going to come from the federal government, where we can do a massive entitlement.

Programs like Medicare, like Medicaid, like Social Security.

Some states try to do those things, but it's much harder to do it on a state based economy than it is when you go federally wide.

It's also worth acknowledging that, the vast majority of states that take in federal funding more than they send out red states.

So if if California was on its own and had to fund everything on its own and keep all of its money internally, I'm not so sure that you would see the same problems.

Emily Goldsmith okay, lot, they're here.

So based on everything that you're hearing here, what do you want this party to do?

What do you want your party to do more of or start doing that is not doing it all?

I feel like we need to book a separate segment.

so, you know, I really, you know, I have to honestly give Robert some props here.

I think he brings up a really great point when you talk to voters.

you know, it's it's the again, I said it earlier, it's these bread and butter issues.

You know, there are deficits.

And you know, I'll be brings up a good point.

Like, you know, in terms of like couching it in, like the actual history of what Democrats have done when they are in power.

and I'm not going to list all the things that I've just said because I won't do it nearly as well.

But when we talk about things that are lightning rods and flash points and, you know, we have the Trump X factor, we have to really think about how we are messaging.

And, you know, certainly there are notes to learn.

But when we think about the average person who's worried about the cost of eggs making their rent or their mortgage payment, their car payment, insurance, you have whatever you whatever, you know, we have to think about what's actually going to land.

And folks who are having those really real concerns aren't going to care about our GDP.

They're not going to care about, you know, these more heady, concepts, ultra as they may be.

And we have to come back to things that, again, are really going to hit home.

So, when I think about what I would love our party to do different, to do differently, I think about, things like taxing the rich and like raising revenue by, having a more progressive tax structure.

But when you look at folks who are in Democratic leadership, nothing makes some room go more quiet.

I'm saying tax the rich, right.

you can talk about, you know, housing proposals and whether you're for or against things like good cause eviction, you often see, leaders shy away from topics like this rather than talk about it at all.

And so to me, and again, regardless of whether you're a pro or against some of these policies when it comes to like internal Democratic messaging, I think we're really missing the mark by taking this more corporate dumb approach, rather than actually talk about the bread and butter issues that would resonate with, an average, do you want to zero in narrow, narrow?

The focus on what the party's doing and talking about to people, to workers who need, need it the most?

Absolutely.

You know, you talk about people in the labor movement, for instance.

Right.

And you can look at their, you know, their policy priorities and the things that they're fighting for.

And it's often very, very tangible.

It's things like raising the minimum wage from x amount to X amount.

It's, you know, increasing, payments to, I call it, a cost of living adjustment to direct service workers.

And we could go on and they are very, targeted, laser focused, and it's things that resonate.

But when we talk broadly about, oh, we're making things more affordable for working class folks.

If my grocery bill is still going up by 15%, like, I don't, I don't care, you know what I mean?

We have to really bring it down to the, issues that are going to resonate with folks like, you know, people we made we make jokes about about the rent's too damn high, right?

Like, we have to be having, you know, meeting our meeting our voters, meeting our communities where they're at when we talk about these issues.

Scott.

So we don't talk about the local issues enough.

I agree, you know, those bread and butter issues, you know, if Democrats were going to point something out, I wouldn't go pointing about GDP or any of the high level stuff.

I would say we are the ones who are enabling you to have a grocery store in your town.

We're trying to we're trying to address food insecurity that way.

We are the ones who are trying to make sure that your roads are in good shape, so that you can get to work or get to where you need to go.

We're the ones who are trying to get broadband to all areas in, you know, I speak to rural issues quite a lot, and one of the things that's being proposed being cut is rural broadband.

Well, the Biden administration in 2021 spent, what, $33 billion on broadband and most of it never got done in four years.

Right.

And we have to look at, you know, and one of the one of the main things that Democratic leadership, because we've been taking this top down approach, right?

We've been saying, okay, everything from the federal on down, why aren't we listening to the local Democrats and saying, okay, how can we get these things actually done and work in better partnership?

I think that's when I'm looking for Democratic leadership.

I'm looking for somebody who's going to work with me on a local level to make sure that we are getting the support from the federal and state government.

Right.

But also making sure that we are creating these tangible things for so.

So you're saying if you're going to talk about broadband, you better do it right.

You better show people that you know how to not just propose ideas they want, but do it.

And the same thing kind of goes for for almost everything.

We talked about it for education.

We found like, you know, it took us how many years to get a foundation aid formula actually fully funded in New York state.

Right.

if we're going to talk about health care again, last night, like last night, forum was all about health care.

And people were like, we're talking about how do we get to that universal health care?

We've been campaigning on this for a decade.

We've even passed in New York State a couple times.

People are behind it.

Why haven't we just done it?

Instead of having this as a campaign issue?

I'm not looking for campaign issues.

I want.

I'm looking for actual work done.

John writes to say, Evan, everything that your guests are talking about is, everything your guests are talking about is well-intended and important.

Have everyone read the new book abundance?

Well, we're going to talk to you.

I'm going to try to get Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson on this program.

Their new book that came out yesterday is called Abundance and is all about these concepts.

So we are going to be talking about that soon.

let me let me actually take a call before I have Jan weigh in on this because I want to make I think it relates to what I wanted to ask Jan this is Gail in Wayland.

Oh.

Hey, Gail.

go ahead.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Evan.

I am, recently retired pediatrician, lifetime Democrat with, lump in my throat recently about that and was on the front lines in the election polls in a little rural area.

So I've seen it.

you know, my concerns about Medicaid is at least 50% of my pediatric population were on Medicaid, got child health, plus.

Now, obviously kiddos don't vote.

They don't have political action committees.

They're going to be hurt.

35% of children in the US have Medicaid.

So it's really evil to think of cutting that in any meaningful way.

I laughed when you said broadband because we live in a rural road that was promised broadband 3 or 4 years ago, and we're still seeing oh, oh, but yeah, because there's a lot of regulations.

So we could say that.

speaking of Ezra Klein, I just wanted to mention, I heard yesterday an amazing, show with Daniel Shaw.

Who is this?

Yeah.

Wonky mathematician.

Yeah.

And it was amazing saying that only 27% of people have a positive view of the Democrats.

And over 50% are positive of the Republicans.

So they have a lot of problems.

We're wonky.

We're intellectuals.

We may have a million stats that are true, but Trump's lies spread around the world faster than we can put our spreadsheets out.

So we need to fight.

and what I also say is that, you know, the Senate, we're chickens.

They're not willing to take a risk.

And, you know, you got you you got moss with his chainsaws and you got Trump with his world wrestling and transactional brain.

But, they're not willing to put their polling numbers or their primary at risk.

And yet we're all going to go out as a populist and, well, what's going on?

What's going on in Geneseo tonight?

Gail?

Tomorrow night.

Tomorrow night?

Tonight.

we're having an inaugural meeting of an indivisible group.

This is a progressive group.

that really is just spearheading what we can do to save our democracy.

So it's tomorrow night at 6 p.m. at the Wadsworth Library in Geneseo.

All right, let me just jump in, Gail, I appreciate that.

And, Jan, you were at, you know, this town hall this week?

I hear mixed reviews on this.

Some people say we don't need more meetings.

And some people say we actually absolutely do.

We need to be together in public spaces.

We need to be talking to leaders.

so what do you make of this idea that Gail is talking about here?

Jan, more public meetings, more of these groups getting together, chapters of indivisible, etc., etc.. Yeah, I'm all in on that.

I think what the Democrats need to do is channel these frustrations and manage the expectations of voters who just don't like the wild run we've gone through with the Trump administration, that eventually they'll be Republicans.

I think joining in on that cry because when they when you start to see the actual results.

So I mean, little things like the Democrats have to show, so that we're not all actually radical left lunatics.

I mean, we're neighbors and friends who care about other people.

And, I think people the people is the way to go.

And local, gatherings like this are really important because they, they get people together thinking together.

And you see a little bit more the reality of what's what's out there and how other people are thinking.

I it's hard today to communicate.

I think, you know, there's just there used to be everyone watched the 6:00 news and now it's fragmented news.

Yeah.

So many different sources.

Yeah.

At you know, seeing people live and in person is a real benefit.

And I applaud everyone who pulling those kinds of meetings together.

I'm going to try to go as fast I can.

So if I come to you on the phone now, just try to keep it 30s or less, because we're going to fly in a second here.

Debbie in Pittsford.

Keep it tight.

Go ahead.

Hi, Ivan.

How are you?

Good.

I just wanted to weigh in on, you know, the tough decision that Senator Schumer had to make.

And I think it was the, you know, it was a Hobson's choice.

And I think, you know, his his judgment has always been solid, in my view.

And I think that, you know, we we just have we should trust that and let them, let him and others do what they need to do to counteract, you know, the other things that are going to happen with this administration.

So I think rushing to to judgment that he made the wrong call, I don't think is is the right way to go.

I think that, you know, he's always made good judgments on behalf of, of our state and our community.

And I think we need to trust them and good judgment for the country, too.

Debbie.

Thank you.

Debbie's taking the long view on Senator Schumer.

So Debbie sort of seems to be in the minority in the party, but there's certainly some who, who are in that in that viewpoint.

Robert.

Different.

Robert.

Honeoye falls.

Hey, Robert honey, I falls go ahead.

Gotta keep it tight.

Hi.

I'm, political center person.

so I see both sides of these equations.

And one thing I wanted to point out is I thought you shut down the earlier Robert a little too hard.

A little too fast.

By not acknowledging that there's a trajectory and lowering the number of government, people involved.

And even though he is just, working around the fringes, as you say, a trajectory is what people were looking for, who voted for Trump.

So from that perspective, I think he is accomplishing something from everything else, from method and from breaking the law.

I think he's going in a terrible direction.

I think he will ruin our democracy.

So I want him out.

But, I just wanted to acknowledge that.

Okay.

Hey, Robert.

Thank you.

And I want to say to both Roberts, I appreciate every phone call.

I am not an unbiased observer on NPR and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

That should be obvious.

you know, you don't have to listen to what I say on that.

I will tell you that I don't want to see journalism cut anymore.

I don't want to see it hurt.

I think we've already cut enough.

And the fragmentation of media means it's hard to have a public square.

And I want this program to be the public square.

And Robert in Fairport knows you can call he, by the way, smart person who has a lot of really good sort of, digs a lot of data up.

It's a it's always helpful for me to hear from people from all across the community.

So Robert in Fairport, if I cut the call too early, call back tomorrow and tell me I was wrong because I'm often wrong.

That's one of my specialties.

but I feel very passionately about funding for things like Z.

And even though it's not nearly the majority of what we do, it's important.

And I don't want to see people get hurt so that there's that.

I'm not an unbiased observer on that.

The rest I'm just trying to listen and understand where we are.

And I'm going to give Emily a chance.

About 30s final thoughts.

What do you leave her with listeners here as we go forward here?

This kind of fraught time, where even Democrats are kind of struggling to come up with a cohesive idea.

What do you want to leave with people.

Yeah.

You know, 30s.

Wow.

So I think for, my fellow Democrats who are listening, I think my guidance or, you know, my my advice in this time would be to have the hard conversations, right?

Whether it's within our party, whether it's within our community.

We learn from conflict with each other.

we also learn from people in our community that may or may not be of our same party.

Right.

we heard it from the earlier Robert.

You know, he brings good data.

if we and as Democrats continue to other folks who maybe have an R or a C or other letters affiliating their political party, that's just not a good strategy for long term success.

We you know, our roots are being in the big tent party, and we have to come back to welcoming folks, with all different backgrounds and viewpoints and also be focused on real solutions.

Oh, you got 20s go.

Sorry.

I'll be.

I took time from you.

It's all good.

So, I mean, I will acknowledge I'm.

You know, I'm very passionate about the Democratic Party.

I do think that fundamentally, it's the party that is going to be able to bring the best, to the American people.

My pitch to my fellow Democrats is B be involved, be engaged.

You know, Monroe County Young Democrats is currently doing a membership drive because we're trying to expand our influence at the state level, you know, but our county Democratic committee is always looking for more people to be involved and be engaged.

We're always looking for folks to step up, show us where we can be doing more and be doing better, and building the Democratic Party that we all want.

And 15 seconds.

Are you an optimist guy?

I'm an optimist, absolutely.

The only thing I want to tell our Democrats in is particularly our Democratic leadership, is to do that exactly.

Leave lead with our values, make sure that we are preserving our democracy, creating opportunities for people, building a community.

If we are actual leaders and we're not, you know, we're not playing the game that Trump gives us, but actually playing our own game.

I think we'll do much better.

Challenging people to lead Scott comedies Emily Goldsmith, Abby Press Berg, Jen Regan, thank you all for being with us.

You're right.

We needed to make we needed more time.

We'll come back sooner.

Thanks, everybody.

More connections coming up.

Thank you.

Oh, wait a second, George.

You got to take your picture.

Views expressed do not necessarily represent those of this station.

It's staff, management or underwriters.

The broadcast is meant for the private use of our audience.

Any rebroadcast or use in another medium without express written consent of WXXI is strictly prohibited.

Connections with Evan Dawson is available as a podcast.

Just click on the connections link at WXXI news.org.