>> TONIGHT ON "IVORY TOWER" WHAT TO MAKE OF THE PRESIDENT'S REVENGE TOUR ALSO TONIGHT: WINNERS AND LOSERS IN THE REDISTRICTING BATTLES AND THE SYRACUSE COMMON COUNCIL VOTES FOR A BAN ON THE USE OF FACIAL RECOGNITION.

STAY TUNED WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK.

>> THIS PROGRAM IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY THE MEMBERS OF WCNY.

THANK YOU.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY THANKS FOR JOINING US.

I'M NINA MOORE OF COLGATE UNIVERSITY.

WITH ME AROUND THE TABLE TONIGHT RICK FENNER OF UTICA UNIVERSITY CHAD SPARBER OF COLGATE UNIVERSITY, AND SARAH PRALLE OF SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY PRESIDENT TRUMP RACKED UP A STRING OF VICTORIES THIS WEEK IN HIS SO-CALLED REVENGE TOUR.

HE HELPED TO DEFEAT REPUBLICANS WHO HAD FALLEN OUT OF FAVOR WITH HIM.

AND ALL 37 OF THE CANDIDATES THAT HE BACKED WON THEIR PRIMARY.

WHAT DOES THIS ALL MEAN?

WE KNEW BEFOREHAND THAT TRUMP IS THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS TRUMP.

WE ALREADY KNEW THAT HE COULD CREATE PROBLEMS FOR DISSENTERS.

BUT WHAT ARE THE LONGTERM IMPACTS OF HIS REVENGE TOUR?

RICK, WHY DON'T YOU START US OFF.

>> LET ME FIRST TALK ABOUT A SHORT RUN IMPLICATION OF THIS IN THAT THERE ARE NOW A NUMBER OF LAME DUCK REPUBLICANS IN THE SENATE, WHO I THINK ARE GOING TO BE LESS LIKELY TO FEEL OBLIGATED TO DO WHATEVER TRUMP WANTS.

AND WE ARE ALREADY SEEING THIS IN THE PAST FEW DAYS.

BUT I THINK THE MORE INTERESTING, IMPORTANT IMPLICATIONS ARE THE LONG RUN AND THAT HAS TO DO WITH WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE MID TERM ELECTIONS BECAUSE A NUMBER OF REPUBLICANS THAT I THINK WERE VERY SAFE WINS MASSEY AND CASSIDY, NOW AND CRONIN, PERHAPS IN TEXAS, MAY BE REPLACED BY PEOPLE THAT DEMOCRATS FEEL ARE MORE BEATABLE.

SO THIS COULD LEAD TO AN IMPROVED CHANCES OF, SAY, THE DEMOCRATS TAKING THE SENATE.

>> LET ME FOLLOW UP ON YOUR FIRST POINT ABOUT THE LAME DUCK SENATORS, WHO ARE LEFTOVER.

WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN SENATOR TILLIS BE VERY, VERY OPEN IN HIS CRITICISM OF TRUMP AND ALSO JOHN CRONIN WHO HABIT GONE TO HIS PRIMARY YET BUT IS SORT OF TEETERING ON THE EDGE.

THE SENATE, SARAH, HAS DECIDED TO GO HOME INSTEAD OF PASSING THE IMMIGRATION BILL, PARTLY OUT OF ANGER FOR WHAT TRUMP HAS DONE.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

PARTLY OUT OF ANGER AND PARTLY DUE TO THE FACT THAT HE IS EXTREMELY UNPOPULAR RIGHT NOW, AND HIS PRIORITIES ARE NOT THE VOTERS PRIORITIES.

SO PEOPLE ARE UPSET ABOUT THE HIGH COST OF HIS OBSESSION WITH THESE BALLROOMS, THE $1.8 MILLION SLUSH FUND FOR PEOPLE WHO FEEL THEY WERE UNFAIRLY PROSECUTED UNDER THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION.

FOR ALL KINDS OF THINGS.

THE WAR IN IRAN.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, REPUBLICANS ARE FEELING THE PRESSURE BECAUSE HE IS COMPLETELY OUT OF STEP WITH THE AMERICAN VOTERS.

AND THEY'RE LOOKING TO POTENTIAL LOSSES, ESPECIALLY IN SWING DISTRICTS.

SO YOU ARE ALREADY SEEING THIS WHERE THEY GRILLED ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS ABOUT THIS $1.8 MILLION SLUSH FUND... >> BILLION.

>> OF COURSE, SORRY.

AND REPUBLICANS WERE NOT HAPPY WITH THE ANSWERS THAT THEY GOT ABOUT THAT.

SO YOU ARE ALREADY SEEING THE FALLOUT FROM THIS AND ANY SHORT-TERM VICTORY TRUMP HAD IN SHOWING HIS POWER AROUND PRIMARIES, I THINK, IS NOT PLAYING OUT IN THE LEGISLATIVE ARENA AT ALL.

>> YOU REFER TO HIM AS UNPOPULAR BECAUSE I THINK THE MEDIAN VOTER HAS ALWAYS HATED DONALD TRUMP UNTIL THEY SEE WHO THE DEMOCRATS PUT ON THE BALLOT TO FACE HIM.

HE IS ALWAYS OUTPERFORMING POLLS SO ANY OF THE DATA THAT I SEE ON LIKE NUMBERS, I ALWAYS TAKE WITH A GRAIN OF SALT.

BUT I THINK THERE ARE TWO NUMBERS THAT ARE WORTH PAYING ATTENTION TO.

THE FIRST IS THAT THE RECENT "NEW YORK TIMES" SIENNA POLL THAT PUT HIS POPULARITY RATING AT 26% AMONG INDEPENDENTS, WHICH IS EVEN LOWER THAN WHAT BIDEN HAD AFTER HIS TERRIBLE SUMMER DEBATE.

AND THEN THE OTHER IS JUST DOLLAR FIGURES.

AND THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS SPENDING ON PRIMARIES IS GOING TO EAT AT THE COFFERS, YOU KNOW, ALL THE MONEY THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR A GENERAL ELECTION.

THAT COULD COME BACK TO HURT THEM AS WELL.

>> ONE PROBLEM WITH... >> THE MOST EXPENSIVE EVER IN THE HISTORY OF CONGRESS, BECAUSE TRUMP GOT INVOLVED.

>> RIGHT.

THE ISSUE IS THAT 26% INDEPENDENTS APPROVAL RATING IS REALLY IMPORTANT, BUT THE PROBLEM IS THAT'S A NATIONAL NUMBER, AND WE DON'T HAVE NATIONAL RACES SO IT REALLY COMES DOWN TO WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN IN A HANDFUL OF STATES.

AND I THINK THAT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE INTERESTING TO SEE HOW THAT'S GOING TO PLAY OUT.

THE OTHER THING THAT YOU MENTIONED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, CONGRESS LEAVING, THE REAL REASON THEY LEFT IS BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE VOTES TO PASS THINGS THAT TRUMP WANTED SO MIKE JOHNSON HAD TO BACK OFF THE WAR POWERS ACT BECAUSE HE DIDN'T HAVE THE VOTES TO DEFEAT IT.

AND I THINK IT GOES TO THE SHORT RUN IMPLICATIONS, YOU KNOW, OF RUMP'S REVENGE TOUR.

HE GOT WHAT HE WANTED AND IN TERMS OF PEOPLE RUNNING FOR THESE ELECTIONS BUT IT MAY COST HIM GETTING THE POLICIES THAT MANY REPUBLICANS WANT AND SUPPORTED.

>> UNLESS MELALO MANIAC PRESIDENT GIVE THESE PEOPLE PERMISS, THE PEOPLE'S WHOSE SEATS ARE AT RISK, TO GIVE THEM PERMISSION TO PUT DAYLIGHT BETWEEN THEM AND THE PRESIDENT LIKE BIDEN DID WHEN HE WAS UNPOPULAR.

DEMOCRATS WERE NOT TALKING ABOUT BIDEN, THEY WERE DISTANCING THEMSELVES FROM HIM.

BUT TRUMP IS INCAPABLE OF THAT.

HE IS INCAPABLE OF LETTING THEM BE MORE INDEPENDENT ON SOME OF THESE POLICY ISSUES WHERE HIS POSITIONS ARE EXTREMELY UNPOPULAR.

>> GOING BACK TO RICK'S POINT ABOUT THE INDIVIDUAL STATES, THE ONE THAT INTERESTS ME THE MOST IS TEXAS WHERE TRUMP HAS ENDORSED PAXTON OVER CRONIN.

THE DEMOCRATIC CHALLENGER, JAMES TALARICO, HE IS REALLY INTERESTING BECAUSE HE IS TRYING A NEW APPROACH FOR THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

FIRST BY DOING THINGS LIKE APPEARING ON JOE ROGUE AN.

JOE ROGUE AN HAS SAID YOU SHOULD RUN FOR PRESIDENT.

SO HE HAS GOT THAT KIND OF ENDORSEMENT.

BUT HE ISY APRESBYTERIAN MINISTER RUNNING ON A PROGRESSIVE CHRISTIANITY CAMPAIGN AND I HAD A WONDERFUL STUDENT LAST YEAR WHO WROTE THIS EXCELLENT PAPER, EFFECTIVELY ARGUING THAT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, IF IT WANTS TO WIN, NEEDS TO START COURTING THE CHRISTIAN VOTE BETTER.

SO I'M REALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING IF HER STRATEGY AND TALARICO'S IS A WINNING ONE.

AND SO, YEAH, I'M GOING TO BE REALLY INTERESTED TO SEE HOW TEXAS PLAYS OUT.

>> IT'S INTERESTING BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WHILE WE ARE SEEING REPUBLICANS ACTUALLY MOVING RIGHT WITH SOME OF THE PEOPLE THAT THEY HAVE ELECTED, DEMOCRATS, ON THE OTHER HAND, ARE MOVING LEFT IN SOME, AND THAT IS AN ISSUE BECAUSE YOU MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, THE MEDIAN VOTER HERE AND WHERE TALARICO IS NOTES FALLING INTO THAT TRAP.

HE IS REALLY MOVING AND TRYING TO COURT THOSE MEDIAN VOTERS, THOSE INDEPENDENTS IN TEXAS.

AND I THINK IF THE DEMOCRATS ARE GOING TO MAKE INROADS IN NOVEMBER, ESPECIALLY IN STATES LIKE LOUISIANA, THEY HAVE TO BE CAREFUL AND KNOW THEIR AUDIENCE BECAUSE THE DEMOCRATS HAVE SNATCHED DEFEAT FROM THE JAWS OF VICTORY MANY, MANY TIMES BEFORE.

>> PLANENOR IN MAINE IS PROGRESSIVE ON ECONOMIC ISSUES BUT HIS FOCUS IS A POPULOUS MESSAGE.

I THINK THERE ARE OTHER DEMOCRATS DOING THAT'S AS WELL.

>> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS HAPPENING WITH THIS IS THAT DEMOCRATS ARE MOVING FARTHER TO THE LEFT, REPUBLICANS FARTHER TO THE RIGHT.

SO YOU HAVE THESE TWO EXTREMES, WHO WILL END UP GOING AGAINST ONE ANOTHER IN MANY OF THE ELECTIONS.

SO AS OUR COLLEAGUE LUKE PERRY SAID LAST WEEK, OR THE WEEK BEFORE, IT REALLY COMES DOWN TO 30 OR 40 SEATS THAT MIGHT CALL FOR SOMETHING LIKE A TALARICO WHO CAN REACH OVER, AND BRING IN NEW KINDS OF VOTERS.

YOUR THOUGHTS, SARAH?

>> I FEEL LIKE DEMOCRATS ARE GETTING THAT MESSAGE.

I CERTAINLY HOPE SO.

THAT IT SEEMS LIKE THEY'RE GIVING SOME PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, FREE REIN, DO WHAT YOU NEED TO DO SAY WHAT YOU NEED TO SAY TO GET THE VOTES IN THE DISTRICT AND THINK ABOUT EXPANDING THE MAPS BECAUSE THEY WILL HAVE TO AS WE TALK ABOUT WITH GERRYMANDERING, THERE IS STRUCTURAL BAYIAS AGAINST DEMOCRATS RIGHT NOW.

THERE ALWAYS HAS BEEN IN THE SENATE AND IT IS GOING TO BE INCREASINGLY IN THE HOUSE.

THEY HAVE TO EXPAND THEIR MAPS.

>> IT SEEMS LIKE IT IS AIDED BY THE FACT THAT THE REVENGE TOUR, THE PRESIDENT'S FOCUS ON HIS ENEMIES IS SORT OF BACKWARD LOOKING.

HE SHOULD BE WINNING ON IMMIGRATION.

>> I THINK THAT YOUR QUESTION TO SARAH GOES ALSO TO WHAT RICK HAD SAID ABOUT THE LONG-TERM.

I ACTUALLY THINK THE LONG-TERM IS MUCH LONGER THAN THE MID TERMS.

WHAT DO YOU DO WITH THE POLITICAL BATTLEFIELD IS LITTERED WITH THE CORPSES OF REPUBLICANS WHO HAVE STOOD UP TO TRUMP.

ROME ANY, RYAN, SASS, FLAKE, TILLIS, CHENEY, ON AND ON AND ON.

THESE ARE FUNDAMENTALLY CONSERVATIVE PEOPLE.

I DON'T THINK THERE IS A DEMAGOGUE IN WAITING AFTER TRUMP , BUT I ALSO DON'T THINK THAT THE YOUNG PEOPLE IN EITHER PARTY ARE REALLY TRYING TO COURT THOSE KIND OF CONSERVATIVE OLD SCHOOL CONSERVATIVE THINKERS.

WHERE DO THEY GO?

>> WELL, WE WILL SEE WHERE THEY GO.

THE FALLOUT FROM THE SUPREME COURT RULING ON THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT CONTINUES.

A NUMBER OF SOUTHERN STATES HAVE CHANGED OR THEY PLAN TO CHANGE THEIR VOTING MAPS.

THE NEW MAPS AIM TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF REPUBLICAN SEATS IN THE HOUSE.

AND MANY DO SO BY ELIMINATING THEY WILL HAVE TO SPLIT THE MAJORITY BLACK DISTRICTS IN THE STATE.

WILL THESE NEW MAPS IMPROVE REPUBLICANS' CHANCES OF MAINTAINING A MAJORITY IN THE HOUSE COME NOVEMBER?

>> WELL, YES, I THINK SOA.

THERE IS A GERRYMANDER WAR RIGHT NOW, RIGHT, THE DEMOCRATS MIGHT JUST PICK UP SIX.

SO IT DOES LOOK LIKE A SLIGHT REPUBLICAN ADVANTAGE; HOWEVER, CHANCES ARE THAT IF, YOU KNOW, TRUMP CONTINUES TO BE VERY UNPOPULAR, THE DEMOCRATS WILL HAVE A LARGE ENOUGH MARGIN SO THAT THEY WILL PROBABLY STILL TAKE THE HOUSE, BUT BY A SMALLER MARGIN.

>> RICK, YOU ARE NODDING YOUR HEAD IN AGREEMENT?

>> YES, I THINK WHAT HAS HAPPENED HERE IS THAT, AGAIN, THE DEMOCRATIC STATES HAVE NOTED BEEN QUITE AS SUCCESSFUL IN BEING ABLE TO REDRAW MAPS.

ALTHOUGH FLORIDA IS NOT A DONE DEAL.

FLORIDA'S STATE CONSTITUTION SAYS NO PLAN OR INDIVIDUAL DISTRICT SHALL BE DRAWN WITH THE INTENT TO FAVOR OR DISFAVOR A POLITICAL PARTY WHILE DeSANTIS IS SAYING THE REDRAWING OF THE DISTRICTS IN FLORIDA ARE NOT DOING THAT.

BY TAKING TAMPA, DIVIDING IT INTO THREE SEPARATE DISTRICTS THAT NOW REPUBLICANS CAN WIN, YOU KNOW, THAT SORT OF VIOLATES, YOU KNOW, COMPACTNESS AND SOME OF THE OTHER DRIETIA THAT ARE USUALLY USED FOR REDISTRICTING.

I THINK THERE IS A DECENT CHANCE THAT HE MAY LOSE THAT AND THAT WOULD MEAN THAT THOSE FIVE EXTRA SEATS IN FLORIDA WOULDN'T BE-- WOULDN'T BE REPUBLICAN EITHER.

>> ALTHOUGH LOUISIANA SORT OF STARTED THIS WITH THE CASE THAT WENT TO THE SUPREME COURT, EVEN THERE, THE GOVERNOR'S DECISION TO POSTPONE THE ELECTIONS IS BEING CHALLENGED ON THE ARGUMENT THAT HE DIDN'T HAVE THE POWER TO DO SO.

WHERE DO YOU COME DOWN ON ALL OF THIS, DHAD?

>> I'M GOING SAY SOMETHING CRAZY.

WEIRD, RIGHT?

NOT BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT BUT IT'S A THOUGHT EXPERIMENT AND I'M WONDERING IF THESE REDISTRICTING EFFORTS COULD BE BETTER FOR DEMOCRACY.

AND HERE IS WHERE I'M COMING FROM.

LIKE IF YOU WERE TO DRAW THE MAPS, SO THAT YOU GET PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION OR WHATEVER, YOU CAN PRETTY EASILY CREATE SOLID RED AND SOLID BLUE DISTRICTS.

BUT IF YOU TRY TO CARVE OUT THE MINORITY PARTY'S SEATS, IN ORDER TO TRY TO GET MORE SEATS FOR THE MAJORITY PARTY, YOU RUN THE RISK OF TURNING SOME OF THESE DISTRICTS PURPLE.

AND WHEN YOU TURN THEM PURPLE, ALL OF A SUDDEN THERE IS AN INCREASED INCENTIVE TO COURT THE MEDIAN VOTER.

SO IF YOU WANT A FANCIFUL EXAMPLE THAT IS ILLEGAL, IMAGINE TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, TAKE TENNEY'S 124th DISTRICT AND AOC'S THE 14th DISTRICT, I THINK, COMBINE THEM AND THEN DIVIDE THEM IN SUCH A WAY THAT YOU GET TWO BLUE SEATS OUT OF IT, YEAH, I THINK YOU GET MORE DEMOCRAT VOTERS IN NEW YORK.

BUT WOULD AOC STILL WIN IF SHE HAS FEWER SOCIALISTS IN HER OWN DISTRICT?

AND SO... >> THAT WORKS IF YOU GET DISTRICTS THAT ARE NOW 52-48.

BUT IN SOME STATES, YOU ARE STILL LIKE LOUISIANA, YOU ARE STILL GOING TO BE ABLE TO HAVE FAIRLY LARGE MAJORITIES BY ONE PARTY.

>> MAYBE.

>> BUT I DO LIKE... >> POTENTIALLY INTERESTING.

>> ESPECIALLY IN THE SOUTH.

I MEAN IT'S-- THEY CAN REDISTRICT AGAIN.

IF THEY LOSE ONE OF THOSE DISTRICTS THAT WAS LIKE THEY REDREW, THEY'LL JUST REDO IT AGAIN AND ENSURE THAT THEY HAVE A MAJORITY.

I THINK THIS IS TERRIBLE FOR DEMOCRACY.

>> IF YOU COULD TRADE TENNEY AND AOC AND GET TWO MODERATE DEMS OUT OF IT, WOULD YOU TAKE THAT DEAL.

>> THAT IS A WHOLE OTHER DEAL.

PART OF THE CRAZINESS IN WHAT YOU POSTULATED, CHAD IS THAT NORMALLY FOLKS LIVE CLOSE TO ONE ANOTHER, WHO LIVE CLOSE TO ONE ANOTHER HAVE GENERALLY THE SAME IDEAS, ROUGHLY THE SAME EXPERIENCES AND SO THE CONTIGUITY REQUIREMENT THAT IS INVOLVED IN A LOT OF WHAT GOVERNS THIS, HELPS TO ENSURE THAT YOU DON'T HAVE THOSE SORT OF DRASTIC DIFFERENCES, RIGHT?

SYRACUSE IS DIFFERENT.

BUT NOT TERRIBLY DIFFERENT FROM MANLIUS.

AND SO ONE OF THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THIS AND CONNECTED TO WHAT I JUST SAID, RICK, IS THAT THESE ARE SPLITTING MAJORITY BLACK DISTRICTS.

AND SO FIRST YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT THAT.

AND THEN I HAVE ANOTHER.

, ANOTHER QUESTION.

>> WELL, YOU KNOW, THE POINT IS THAT THESE ARE ALSO MAJORITY DEMOCRATIC DISTRICTS AND NOW I THINK THE DISTINCTION REALLY TURNS OUT TO BE, IN SOME CASES, MORE OF A LEGAL ONE, WHEREAS DEMOCRATS NOW HAVE HAD A TOUGHER TIME DEFENDING THESE DISTRICTS BECAUSE THEY WERE BASED ON RACIAL GROUNDS.

>> DELIBERATELY.

>> YES.

>> BUT THEY WERE ALSO DEMOCRATIC STRONG HOLDS.

SO THEY WERE SUPPORTING THEM NOT ONLY BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO PROVIDE REPRESENTATION FOR BLACKS BUT ALSO BECAUSE THEY WERE SOLIDLY DEMOCRATIC.

NOW, REPUBLICANS CAN BREAK THIS UP EASIER BECAUSE OF THE SUPREME COURT RULING.

>> RIGHT, BUT THE CONGRESSIONAL BLACK CAUCUS, SARAH, SAYS THAT WHAT IS HAPPENING IS RACIST BECAUSE IT'S DELIBERATELY UNDERMINING BLACK VOTERS RIGHT TO CHOOSE A REPRESENTATIVE OF THEIR OWN CHOOSING.

WHOEVER AND WHATEVER THAT IS.

>> WE ARE IN A NEW EAR A. WE ARE NOT IN THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT ERA ANYMORE WHICH WAS A HIGH POINT IN AMERICAN DEMOCRACY IN MY OPINION.

IN 1965, THE SOUTH HAD NO REPRESENTATIVES IN CONGRESS.

NO BLACK REPRESENTATIVES IN CONGRESS.

NOW IT HAS 3 IS.

THIS DECISION MIGHT BRING THAT BACK TO ZERO HONESTLY.

AND THERE IS SOMETHING SERIOUSLY WRONG WITH THAT, WITH, YOU KNOW, BLACK PEOPLE ARE HALF THE POPULATION IN THE SOUTH AND HAVING ZERO REPRESENTATIVES IN CONGRESS IS SHAMEFUL HONESTLY.

AND REPRESENTATION MATTERS.

IT'S NOT JUST LIKE OH DEMOCRATIC REPRESENTATION, WHICH THEY ALSO DON'T GET REPRESENTED, BUT HAVING SOMEONE IN CONGRESS THAT REPRESENTS YOU IS REALLY DIFFERENT.

IT ACTUALLY MATTERS TO VOTERS.

THEY'RE MUCH MORE ENGAGED.

THEY'RE MUCH MORE POLITICALLY, THEY TRUST THE GOVERNMENT MORE WHEN THEY SEE PEOPLE LIKE THEMSELVES IN CONGRESS.

>> THE SUPREME COURT SAID THAT'S ILLEGAL TO BASE THE DISTRICTS ON THOSE KINDS OF... >> AND YET... YOU ARE EXACTLY RIGHT ABOUT THAT.

WE SAW THAT COMING FROM THE AFFIRMATIVE ACTION DECISION BUT YET REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS ARE PUSHING BACK AGAINST THE PLAN TO GET RID OF CONGRESSMAN JIM CRY BURN'S DISTRICT.

CAN YOU MAN THAT, IN SOUTH CAROLINA.

>> I THINK ON THE QUESTION OF IS IT RACIST, IT DEPENDS ON HOW YOU DEFINE WHAT RACISM IS.

I THINK WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE DATA, I DON'T THINK THERE IS ANY QUESTION THAT BLACK REPRESENTATION IS GOING TO DECLINE AS A RESULT OF THE REDISTRICTING AND THE RECENT SUPREME COURT DECISION.

BUT IS THAT DECLINE AND EFFECT OF A MORE PARTISAN KIND OF DECISION OR IS IT INTENTIONAL?

AND IF INTENTIONALITY MATTERS THEN... >> THEN THE COURT IS NOT... >> IT MATTERS LEGALLY, BUT YOU KNOW... >> WE HAVE TO WRAP THIS UP.

WE SHOULD DEFINITELY COME BACK TO THIS ONCE WE SEE HOW THINGS SHAKE OUT.

NOW TO OUR THIRD SEGMENT.

AND THIS IS WITHOUT THE TELEPROMPTER WORKING.

EARLIER THIS WEEK THE SYRACUSE CITY COUNCIL VOTED TO BAN THE USE OF FACIAL RECOGNITION IN COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS.

THE MEASURE WILL NOW GO TO THE MAYOR FOR HER SIGNATURE.

ACCORDING TO THE POST-STANDARD CITY LAWMAKERS ACTUALLY DON'T KNOW WHETHER ANY BUSINESSES CURRENTLY USE FACIAL RECOGNITION.

STILL, THEY'RE CONCERNED THAT THE TECHNOLOGY IS PRONE TO MISTAKEN IDENTITY ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO OLDER PEOPLE PERSONS OF COLOR AND MEMBERS OF THE LGBTQ+ COMMUNITY.

BUSINESSES, ON THE OTHER HAND SAY FACIAL RECOGNITION SOFTWARE IMPROVES SAFETY.

CHAD, WHAT DO YOU THINK?

>> IF YOU GO TO THE STATE LEVEL, SENATOR RACHAEL MAY IS ON 9 BAN OF FACIAL RECOGNITION AND PRICING.

WE COVERED THAT PRICING TWO WEEKS AGO.

I CRITICIZED HER FOR USING A BROADBAND ON-- A BROND BAN ON THE BEHAVIOR OF PRICE DISCRIMINATION WHEN VOTERS ARE WORRIED ABOUT A NARROW KIND OF USE OF ELECTRONIC DATA FOR PROFIT WITHOUT CONSENT.

THIS TOPIC, I THINK, FALLS INTO THE SAME VEIN WHERE PEOPLE DON'T WANT WEGMAN'S TO USE FACIAL RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY FOR PROFIT, MARKETING AND PRICING PURPOSES.

BUT IF GOD FORBID SOMEBODY WERE TO ABDUCT A CHILD FROM A GROCERY STORE, PEOPLE WILL ABSOLUTELY WISH THAT WE HAD NOT COMPLETELY BANNED THE RETAILERS FROM USING THIS TECHNOLOGY.

AND THAT'S WHERE I COME DOWN ON.

I WISH THAT THE LAWMAKERS WERE A LITTLE BIT MORE CAREFUL ABOUT THINKING ABOUT HOW THE TECHNOLOGY IS USED AS OPPOSED TO JUST A BROAD-BASED BAN ON THIS TECHNOLOGY ALL TOGETHER.

>> BUT THIS IS SO OFTEN THE CASE WHERE TECHNOLOGY LEADS TO, YOU KNOW, INFRINGEMENTS ON OUR PRIVACY, BUT I THINK IT COMES DOWN TO LESS THE PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED THE WITH THE TECHNOLOGY RATHER THAN THE PEOPLE WHO USE OR MISUSE THE TECHNOLOGY.

FIRST OF ALL, BACK IN THE DAYS, I REMEMBER WHEN RADAR GUNS WERE INITIATED BY THE POLICE.

THE SAME ARGUMENTS THAT ARE BEING MADE TODAY ABOUT THIS WERE MADE.

THEY'RE NOT ACCURATE.

THAT THEY'RE INTRUSIVE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

AND WE HAVE COME TO ACCEPT THE USE OF RADAR GUNS.

AND THEY'VE GOTTEN BETTER.

AND SO I THINK THERE IS THAT ISSUE.

THE OTHER ONE HAS TO DO WITH THE ALTERNATIVES.

YOU KNOW, WHILE FACIAL RECOGNITION SOFTWARE HAS PROBLEMS AND THERE HAVE BEEN CASES THAT HAVE BEEN DOCUMENTED WHERE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN INCARCERATED BECAUSE OF THEM.

COMPARED TO THE USE OF EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS, THE FACIAL RECOGNITION DOES MUCH BETTER AND THERE HAVE BEEN RESEARCH PAPERS THAT SUGGEST THAT.

SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THE PROBLEM ISN'T THE TECHNOLOGY, BUT THE OVERRELIANCE ON THE TECHNOLOGY.

WE'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION WITH OTHER A.I.

PRODUCTS AS WELL.

>> SURE, WELL PART OF WHAT YOU MENTIONED IS THE MISUSE.

AND SO SARAH, THAT IS A CONCERN, RIGHT?

NOT JUST THAT THE INFORMATION IS BEING COLLECTED, BUT THAT IT'S POTENTIALLY USEABLE BY OTHER FOLKS THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE ACCESS.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

I MEAN A GOOD EXAMPLE IS GOVERNMENT, RIGHT?

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A PRIVATE BUSINESS, RIGHT, USING FACIAL RECOGNITION.

WEGMANS HAS A TON OF PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT US ALL.

WHETHER THEY DO THIS OR NOT.

JUST AS AN ASIDE.

SO DO MOST CORPORATIONS AND BUSINESSES.

MY CONCERN IS PARTLY ABOUT HOW GOVERNMENT CAN THEN ACCESS THAT DATA.

THEY CAN ACTUALLY BUY IT FROM PRIVATE BROKERS WHO CONSOLIDATE AND PACKAGE THIS INFORMATION SO THAT THEY HAVE EXTREMELY DETAILED INFORMATION ABOUT INDIVIDUALS.

SO IT'S NOT JUST A RANDOM PIECE OF INFORMATION, ONE THING, WHAT YOU BOUGHT AT WEGMAN'S.

IT'S A WHOLE PROFILE OF WHO YOU ARE THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT WITHOUT WARRANTS CAN BUY FROM PRIVATE VENDORS.

THAT HAS ME VERY WORRIED AS SOMEONE WHO HAS PROTESTED AND STUDIES PROTESTS WE KNOW THAT THE GOVERNMENT SURVEILS PROTESTORS AND THAT CAN HAVE A CHILLING EFFECT ON PEOPLE'S RIGHTS TO SPEECH AND EXPRESSION.

>> IT'S NOT JUST FACIAL RECOGNITION BUT DNA, FINGERPRINTS, HOW YOU WALK, HOW YOU TALK.

CHAD, QUICKLY.

>> I DON'T HAVE ANY QUICK THOUGHTS ON THIS.

I MEAN, LOOK, I LEAN LIB TEAR LIBERTARIAN-- AND I'M A BID BIT OF A LUDDITE.

I PREFER A WORLD WITHOUT THESE DEVIOLATIONS BUT PEOPLE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THE COSTS AND BENEFITS.

BALANCING PUBLIC SAFETY WITH THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY.

>> AS I SAID AT THE OPENING THIS GOES TO THE MAYOR FOR HER SIGNATURE AND THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC COMMENT.

SO IF YOU CARE, SHOW UP AND HAVE YOUR OPINION HEARD.

NOW IT'S TIME FOR US TO GO OUR GRADE BOOKS AND WE ARE GOING TO START WITH OUR FS AND SPECIFICALLY YOURS, RICK.

>> MY F GOES TO THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION TRYING TO FORM A $IS .8 BILLION GOVERNMENT ANTI-WEAPON WEAPONIZATION COMPENSATION FUND AS WE ADDRESSED EARLIER.

THIS WOULD GO TO PEOPLE CLAIMING TO HAVE BEEN VICTIMIZED BY THE GOVERNMENT AND COULD INCLUDE PAYMENTS TO PEOPLE CONVICTED OF ASSAULTING POLICE OFFICERS IN THE JANUARY 6 STORMING OF THE CAPITOL.

THE PROPOSAL WOULD ALSO GIVE A BLANKET IMMUNITY TO TRUMP AND HIS FAMILY AND PRECLUDE THE I.R.S.

FROM EVER AUDITING HIM.

FORTUNATELY EVEN REPUBLICANS ARE HAVING TROUBLE SWALLOWING THIS ONE.

>> CHAD.

>> MY F GOES TO GRADE INFLATION.

OVER THE PAST 13 YEARS AT HARVARD, THE PROPORTION OF AS AWARDED ROSE FROM ONE THIRD TO TWO-THIRDS OF ALL GRADES.

ALMOST 85% OF GRADES ARE EITHER AN A OR A MINUS SO I APPLAUD THE FACULTY WHO RECENTLY VOTED TO CAP THE NUMBER OF AS TO AT MUST 20% OF EACH CLASS AND IF THAT SOUNDS LIKE I'M GIVING AN A TO HARVARD, NO, "IVORY TOWER" LICHTS US TO ONE A PER PANELIST PER SHOW AND THAT IS COMING UP.

>> SARAH.

>> I ALSO, MY F GOES TO THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, ALSO FOR CORRUPTION BUT A DIFFERENT TYPE OF CORRUPTION NOT GETTING AS MUCH ATTENTION WHICH IS THE PAY TO PLAY SCHEME COMING OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE.

RECENTLY TOBACCO COMPANIES DONATED MONEY TO A TRUMP PAC.

SHORTLY THEREAFTER THE FDA ANNOUNCED THAT THEY WERE EASING REGULATIONS ON FLAVORED VAPES.

SOMETHING THE INDUSTRY HAD BEEN WANTING FOR A LONG TIME.

ACCORDING TO "THE NEW YORK TIMES," THE PRESIDENT PERSONALLY CALLED AGENCIES TO PRESSURE THEM TO CHANGE THEIR DESIST.

THE COMMISSIONER OF THE FDA TO HIS CREDIT RESIGNED AS A RESULT.

THIS WOULD BE HEADLINE NEWS IN ANY OTHER ADMINISTRATION BUT FOR THIS ONE, IT'S JUST ANOTHER TUESDAY.

>> AND NOW TO OUR AS.

STARTING WITH YOU, RICK.

>> MY A GOES TO STEVEN COLBERT AND THE LATE SHOW WHICH HAD ITS LAST EPISODE THURSDAY NIGHT WHILE CBS HAS CLAIMED IT WAS IT CANCEL FOR FINANCIAL REASONS, MANY IT BELIEVE IT WAS BECAUSE CBS IS TRYING TO PLACATE TRUMP AFTER COLBERT SAID A $16 MILLION SETTLEMENT TO TRUMP WAS NOTHING BUT A BIG FAT BRIBE UNQUOTE.

VERY FUNNY SHOW, VERY FUNNY MAN.

>> CHAD.

>> YOU MIGHT HAVE CAUGHT AN NPR STORY THIS WEEK ABOUT THE WASTE THAT OCCURS WHEN STUDENTS MOVE OUT OF THEIR DORMS.

NOEL COLGATE.

OUR CENTER FOR OUTREACH VOLUNTEER ITCH AND EDUCATION COLLECTS NEARLY $100,000 IN DONATIONS FROM DEPARTING STUDENTS AND THEN DISTRIBUTES THE GOODS TO 68 LOCAL NON-PROFITS.

WE ARE TALKING CLOTHES, SCHOOL SUPPLIES, APPLIANCES FURNITURE, RUGS, CLEANING SUPPLIES, HYGIENE PRODUCTS ALL GOING TO PEOPLE IN NEED.

FULL DISCLOSURE, MY WIFE ORGANIZES THIS EVENT.

SHE IS THE BETTER HALF.

I'M JUST VERY PROUD OF HER WORK.

>> SARAH, MY A GOES TO BRITISH BEAVERS.

TURNS OUT THAT BEAVERS ARE REALLY GOOD FOR FLOOD CONTROL.

IN WEST LONDON THEY INTRODUCED A FAMILY OF FIVE BEAVERS THAT DAMMED UP A CREEK, CREATED A HOLDING IF WAUGH WANT TO WATCH THE SHOW AGAIN OR SHARE IT ON YOUR SOCIAL MEDIA, GO TO WCNY.ORG.

I'M NINA MOORE.

FOR ALL OF US HERE AT "IVORY TOWER," HAVE A GOOD NIGHT.