Matt (00:00.789)
Hey everybody, welcome to the Latter Day Lens. We are so happy to have you with us today. I'm Matt. With me as always is Sean, and we are excited to have Mark back with us again. Mark, welcome. Mark has Mark came in guns ablazing. Did you know, Mark, that in the state of Idaho we're voting for the official state gun in this election? It's a non-binding vote, but we get to vote.

Marc (00:25.47)
something.

Matt (00:27.455)
Yeah. I I did my I did my early voting yesterday and I I didn't know how to choose. I was just like I just picked some gun. If I had a ch I would have put a different gun on the ballot, it would have been like a squirt gun or a paintball gun or something like that. A drone. What's that mark? Yeah, there you go. All right, well

shawn (00:28.174)
That Yeah, are you

shawn (00:34.638)
you weren't campaigning? You're not out there campaigning for the Smith and Weston Weston?

shawn (00:48.062)
I guess.

Marc (00:48.949)
Ms. I thought.

Matt (00:53.845)
This is listeners who don't know, this is our second to last episode 'cause we said we're going to end after the midterm elections and we're there. It's upon us. So we're happy to have Mark back with us and then Sean and I will do an episode and then probably next week's episode we'll announce how we're gonna transition, what we're gonna do next.

Marc (01:13.442)
I knew you wanted to transition.

Matt (01:15.361)
I've been dying to. so one listener wrote in and said, Matt explaining why selling business coaching eventually made him uncomfortable, added a lot to the priestcraft question. Sad to hear the show is winding down. I'm curious what you have planned next. Yeah, it's it's a beautiful discussion about priestcraft when talk about the bad things that I did.

shawn (01:40.909)
You always did preach to me on the mission that when people do the right things for the wrong reasons, then there's problems, there's troubles. And so I know you've got you've lived by that. And so so I like that pointing out that when you're selling business coaching, it wasn't it wasn't wrong to sell business coaching, but when you were doing it for the wrong reasons,

Matt (01:51.019)
Mm-hmm. Yeah.

Matt (01:59.028)
It's the wrong thing to make money.

shawn (02:07.424)
No, to make money there's nothing wrong with making money. That's not the re wrong reason. You didn't believe you didn't believe in what you're you're teaching someone.

Matt (02:13.545)
Yeah.

that's true. I definitely did not believe in the product I was selling.

shawn (02:20.3)
Yeah. But but that doesn't mean that someone else who had that same product who believed in it and was selling it, that doesn't mean that they were doing something wrong. Even with their if they were doing it for money.

Matt (02:32.501)
Hmm. I was so good at that by the way, just so listeners know, I was awesome at that. Sorry, what's that, Mark?

Marc (02:39.238)
Are we talking like the Catholics? You're the Pope and the rest of the priests or

Matt (02:45.409)
Something like that.

shawn (02:46.722)
Ha ha ha.

Matt (02:49.209)
but yeah, so listeners, next week we'll let you know what we plan what we have planned next. It's gonna be exciting, it's gonna be different, and maybe it'll be a podcast. I don't know if we've decided if it'll be a podcast or not, but it'll be something fun. All right, let's move to the thought provoker. So, first up this week, a recent poll shows that young vote voters are moving strongly toward Democrats. In 2026, 70% of voters ages 18 to 29 supported or leaned Democrat.

That's 15 percentage points higher than 2024. Only 16% of them approved of President Trump's performance. Young voters are especially worried about high prices, housing, gas, healthcare, and the country's future. They also don't like the war in Iran, and they think Democrats handle major issues better than Republicans. But many were still unhappy with Democratic infighting. this shift is especially strong among young men like you, Mark.

Marc (03:45.417)
I

Matt (03:47.81)
in political science, we have this thing called realignment theory. It says that his America historically sees big swings from one party to the other. So we go through the history of the United States and you'll see big chunks of time when it's like the Jeffersonians and then the Jacksonians and then the Republicans dominate for a while. So this is my question. Are we seeing the beginning of a new alignment in America? Are Republicans now on the decline and re Democrats are ascending? Is that is that what's happening right now?

shawn (04:17.73)
This realignment theory, Matt, I'm gonna assume I understand it because it does seem to make sense. I mean, if I mean, if well, I guess two questions I have for you. we're relying on polls to give us this information. And unless polling has somehow become more reliable, I'm not sure that's the way to judge it. But the theory seems to play out every four to eight years, doesn't it? Like what do you have? Like it literally it just goes back and forth and back and forth, right? Who how back.

How far back can we go to prove that consistency? Is it JFK? Who's after JFK? Bush?

Matt (04:55.574)
so is JFK and then Lyndon Johnson and then there there was the Nixon like so there's presidents in between.

shawn (05:00.662)
Okay. Well let's go go go how about Obama or how about Clinton, right? Clinton to Bush, then back to Obama? And then after Obama was Trump, and then after Trump was Biden, and then after Biden was Trump. Right? Look look look how many years we can go back to see that it is a trend. Is that is that the realignment theory?

Matt (05:05.023)
Uh-huh.

Matt (05:08.655)
yeah.

Trump and then Biden.

Yeah.

Matt (05:20.371)
Realignment theory is like it's a longer period of time. So, like, like there's a whole like the Jeffersonian area, there were like five presidents of the United States that were all Jeffersonian Democrats. And then after Jackson, you have this big period of time where so many Americans call themselves Jacksonian Democrats. And then so it's these bigger, longer period of time swings. And so in in the theory, it's hard to say what's happened since the civil rights movement.

Because it sort of messed things up a little bit. The civil rights movement did.

shawn (05:49.187)
So then what what do you political scientists call the the back the literal back and forth of look, it just goes back, it goes Democrat to Republican to Democrat to Republican. There's gotta be something there. And I think it's I think the reason I bring it up is because I think that's what's happening, typically, is you get four to eight years of people going, okay.

Matt (05:59.916)
Beless.

Matt (06:03.541)
Yeah.

shawn (06:08.694)
Maybe my I'm maybe I'm not so like rah rah on my party at the moment because look, I can point out twenty things that are really bad. You know what? Let's give the other guys a chance. And then four to eight years they go, you know, these guys have screwed things up. We're gonna give the other guys a chance. That seems to be the trend.

Matt (06:23.489)
So then that what you're describing is what they call dealignment theory, which is that people aren't really attached to either party. They'll just go back and forth depending on which one is gonna represent them at the moment. Yeah. So that's what like the last 50 years sort of look like that. I would say the last 50 years has been a Republican dominated era, even though you've had Democrat presidents here and there. Republicans dominate kind of in the state legislatures and in the national legislature.

And then and I think we're at a transition where it's gonna be moving forward, it'll be all Democrats all the time. Give them power. Which excites probably more.

Marc (07:02.985)
I I do wish to say I disagree with one thing you said there. You you said that civil rights kinda messed things up.

As for myself, I think it was a great leap forward for society. So

Matt (07:17.021)
Okay. Messed up realignment theory. That's right. But Mark, you're a historian. You look at the history of politics. Do you think that that it kind of swings back and forth and we're about to like swing into a new era?

shawn (07:17.102)
Ha ha ha ha

Marc (07:29.573)
I think it's a newer actual thing 'cause it's the people say, it's been going on for so long, but at the end of the day, most people in the heartland, your typical salt of the earth, tend to be conservative and the liberals tend to be in the city, and there's really not much of a difference. So I'd go more with dealignment theory. It's just I don't care as much right now. So you know, Hillary's got this in the bag, she'll be fine and whoops, the farmers voted.

Matt (07:59.81)
so do you not believe that young people are all becoming democrats?

Marc (08:03.465)
no, I think they are and I think they're stupid for it. Not they don't Democratic Party has nothing.

Matt (08:05.928)
Ha ha.

Marc (08:13.969)
Shack did nothing.

Matt (08:18.197)
All right. Sean, what do you think? I I actually because I teach at BYU Idaho, I think I see the most conservative young people in America. I don't see a lot of evidence that BYU Idaho kids are becoming Democrats en masse. But but I do think that young people are increasingly moving away from rural areas and moving to the cities. And and I think that that also, like because they're surrounded by more liberal people, more liberal ideas and

shawn (08:30.168)
Yeah. That makes sense.

Matt (08:44.767)
More more the needs of the liberal people, then I think that it makes them maybe more liberal. What are you seeing in in your neck of the woods, Sean? Are young people Democrats?

shawn (08:55.022)
I mean, I'm unique because I'm in California, but I'm also in a very conservative area of California. And so I don't s no, I don't. I don't see a ton of Democrat youth. I don't. I see a lot of kids who leave here probably are becoming when they go to college. That's what I'm seeing. They'll go to college and they will come back a a bit more liberalized. Yeah.

Matt (09:07.477)
Yeah.

Matt (09:19.189)
Democrat were poisoning their minds. Mark's like, Yes.

shawn (09:22.39)
I'm not saying that. I'm saying that's what I'm seeing. You ask what I see. I didn't say that. You the one that says civil rights is bad and the Democ Democrats have poisoned minds. Yat's you.

Matt (09:31.809)
I tried to think of a latter day lens on this. I really couldn't think of a latter day lens, but I know there are a lot of people right now that really wanna think about like what's the future of America look like after Trump because it's not long until he's a lame duck, official lame duck president. And so I don't know, trying to look forward.

shawn (09:38.659)
Ha ha.

shawn (09:51.535)
Can I can can I submit that your what's it called? The realignment theory is dead. Because of the internet age that we live in. Mark Scots in the Book of Mormon. Let's can't wait hear that. Because of the age that we live in, the internet is and the the speed to information is so quickly, I don't think you're ever gonna have this mass migration at all. I think it's it's it's today they're into what's in front of their faces. And right now Donald Trump is allowing the world to be easily like

show that the Republicans are stupid. And then tomorrow though, tomorrow it'll be different because Democrat will get into office and gas prices will be just as high and they'll get fed up and whatever's in front of their face. And like the Book of Mormon says, they can't see afar off. That's the scripture Mark's about to bring in. Mark's about to bring go ahead.

Matt (10:23.371)
Yeah.

Matt (10:35.839)
Is that the verse, Mark?

Marc (10:37.269)
Not easy but I now it is not common that the voice of the people desireth anything contrary to that which is right, but it is common for the lesser part of the people to desire that which is not right, so whoever wins that'll be right, and if it's the wrong it will be destroyed. And it seems just by choosing the wrong choice

Marc (11:05.981)
And we're paying the price.

Matt (11:08.257)
Okay. I've never thought of the verse that way, but that's a very interesting application of that verse. Thank you, Mark. You get you get all the points for that.

shawn (11:16.75)
You brought the Book of Mormon.

Matt (11:19.051)
All right, next up. Defeated Brazilian presidential candidate Flavio Bolsonaro arrived in Miami with his family. After refusing to accept his election loss to President Luis Ignacio Lula de Silva, he traveled through Argentina and Ecuador before coming to the United States, where the Trump administration approved visas for him and his family. Bolsonaro is also being investigated in Brazil for corruption, money laundering, and tax evasion. His father is under house arrest after an attempted coup.

President Trump welcomed Bolsonaro and questioned the Brazilian election results. While Lula criticized Bolsonaro for leaving the country, the pr the current president. So this is my question. Is this an example of Trump's hypocrisy? Does Trump have one set of rules for poor immigrants, break the law and we deport you, and another set of rules for rich ones? See, Levi always likes to say that Trump is racist, but it's not about racism because Bolsonaro is not a white guy, so it can't be racism. So is it about rich versus poor?

shawn (12:18.284)
I wan I wanna hear I wanna hear Levi answer to that as well.

Matt (12:21.472)
Ha ha.

Marc (12:23.083)
Does Donald Trump know he's not white?

Matt (12:26.273)
Flavio Bolsonaro sounds like a very European name. So what do you think, Mark? Is this hypocrisy?

shawn (12:26.323)
Ha ha ha.

Marc (12:31.403)
Well no, I'm just saying there's down there.

Marc (12:37.286)
not about rich and poor or about agree with me or not. But even then I I don't know, it's it's a difficult subject altogether.

Matt (12:47.819)
So don't you think that there are immigrants in in Texas that voted for Trump that are getting deported?

shawn (12:48.001)
Matt does

Marc (12:53.537)
How did they vote for Trump if they're legal citizens?

Matt (12:58.525)
I see. well we know that we know that ICE is putting people in detention centers who are lawful US citizens.

shawn (12:59.17)
Ha ha ha.

Marc (13:07.573)
You know this? How many?

Matt (13:09.417)
I mean I don't know, but we know that there's more than one.

I don't Okay. Well Okay. So you're saying that he's putting people in detention centers because they didn't support him in the election?

Marc (13:18.664)
there we are.

Marc (13:26.801)
No, I'm saying that asylum seekers who are probably gonna come vote Democrat, he's not so worried, but someone who would have supported him, it's like, sure, come on then, I got you.

Matt (13:38.07)
I see. So it's about it's about maybe the electoral makeup of the United States in the future, like which immigrants come in and which ones don't?

Marc (13:45.131)
The electoral makeup of now is you know, Matt, you would have voted for Kamala, you can stay in Ecuador. Sean, you would have voted for me. On in, I guess you're in trouble.

Matt (13:54.987)
Got it. Got it. Okay. What do you say, Sean? Do you say it's

shawn (13:58.255)
I'm gonna go with that, man. That was interesting to watch, that whole exchange right there. That was really fascinating and fun to listen to. yeah, that makes sense. That seems like what Trump does. Well, you're gonna support me, then I'm gonna be completely on your side and give you benefits. What you said something mean about me? You're dead, I'm gonna throw you in jail. I mean, that seems to be his childlike behavior, so

Matt (14:20.577)
But we would agree that that's hypocrisy, right? No, that's not hypocrisy.

shawn (14:24.246)
I mean do you do you r do you really you really want anyone to attempt to not paint Trump as a a hypocrite? Like of course he's a hypocrite. No?

Marc (14:36.117)
the use as hypocrite, I would just use being a politician.

shawn (14:41.854)
Nice. Nice. Okay. I can go with that, Mark. Dang, Mark's getting the points that right now for sure.

Matt (14:42.374)
okay. All right. Well, I I don't think I I don't even get to say my side yet. How does he get points before it?

shawn (14:51.17)
Go ahead, try.

Matt (14:53.225)
I don't think it's about rich and poor either. I think it's about President Trump does not like if you look around at all the people he pardons and all the people he supports that are leaders in other countries, he pardons people for money laundering, he pardons people for election fraud, he pardons people who are who have been convicted of white collar political oriented crimes. And I think And I think that

Marc (15:16.161)
They're white collar. Mm.

Matt (15:20.961)
Trump does not want to be held accountable for the things he did in office. So we'll go into Venezuela and we'll take your president and we'll bring him and put him in our jails because he did, I don't know, whatever he did, something with drugs or something like that. Trump's never been accused of that, right? So we're gonna put those people in jail. But people who are accused of the same things that Trump has been accused of, he pardons those people and he gives them amnesty and he protects them because he says in the future sometime.

He might need that same kind of return favor for himself.

shawn (15:53.103)
I don't think that's the right theory. The mark gets all the points.

Marc (15:56.065)
I too much. It's like I tell my mom often when we talk about the Donald. He's not evil and he's not scheming. He's just a politician, almost nothing new. Ecclesiastes, nothing is new under the sun. Everyone their own way.

Matt (15:56.491)
Ha ha.

Matt (16:14.963)
Okay. Well then well then why pardon Rod Blogojevich, right? Rod Blogoevich, governor of Illinois, who went to jail, sentenced for ten years for taking a bribe in order to give somebody the Senate seat in Chicago. He why does and he's a Democrat and would not have voted for Trump. So why does Trump pardon that guy?

Marc (16:36.554)
Because whoops.

Marc (16:40.769)
Come on.

Matt (16:44.811)
All right. Well I thought I'd throw that that theory.

shawn (16:45.826)
Wait, wait, you lost you lost a couple of points there, or a couple of Mark, that last answer.

Marc (16:52.587)
My defense really cared at all.

Matt (16:55.073)
Fine. I'm giv if you don't want the points, I'll give them all to Sean. Sean gets all the points.

Marc (17:00.767)
Okay.

shawn (17:04.655)
I mean Matt Matt Matt to just defend Mark's points just a little bit, like like can't you go through the list of pardons th that Biden issued and aren't there a number of politically motivated you know what I mean? Like just because Trump is like the ire I have for Trump's pardons, I had the same ire for Biden's pardons. Like w you can't really point out that that's not a political move. So Mark's point that these

Marc (17:04.929)
I'll give you

shawn (17:32.91)
They're just acting like politicians, isn't that valid?

Marc (17:35.808)
Do wonder three.

Matt (17:35.99)
I'm not gonna I'm not gonna defend Biden's pardons. Biden, I think also pardoned people that should not have been pardoned. But I'm just using Trump's pardons as an example of my idea that it's not just about who supports him and who doesn't support him, because he pardons people that don't support him. I think that he, by the way, this is my prediction. He's gonna pardon Ghlaine Maxwell before he's done. He is a hundred percent. Yeah.

shawn (17:59.331)
No. That would be so crazy. Hey. I mean that would continue to be wrong and I don't know why politically that would be smart. That doesn't make sense.

Marc (18:04.224)
As

Marc (18:12.435)
As Abraham Lincoln in the movie Lincoln says, I find that prophesying is I forget what he said actually. It's not a very lucrative position. That's something like that. It's been a minute. I just edited this out. I didn't say

shawn (18:27.324)
Ha ha.

shawn (18:31.299)
Matt (18:32.698)
I like that part, Mark. And I actually think that Lincoln to finish the sentence said prophesying is not lucrative but the right thing to do.

shawn (18:40.674)
Yeah.

Marc (18:42.401)
The I'm young. That's right.

Matt (18:45.281)
All right. All right, here's the next topic. Dolora Huerta died this week. She began her career as a school teacher in the 1950s, but she soon turned to civil rights activism after seeing the extreme poverty and hunger faced by farm worker children in her classroom. In 1962, she co founded the United Farm Workers alongside Cesar Chavez, leading a major great

Marc (18:47.201)
I don't know about it.

Matt (19:12.629)
Boycott and strikes that secured fair labor laws in California by 1975. Throughout her life, she dedicated herself entirely to protecting workers and expanding voting rights, remaining an active leader for decades and earning major honors like the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Later in life, she destro demonstrated further courage by speaking openly about the personal hardships and abuse she endured at the hands of Cesar Chavez during those early years.

While continuing to stand as an enduring symbol of leadership and service. So this is the question What lessons does her life teach us about how to stand up for our beliefs and make a difference in our communities?

shawn (19:54.797)
What lessons. I mean, many lessons. Like she th no one can argue that she didn't live like all human beings, an incredibly not all, she lived an a very impressive life. She had some incr incredibly impressive accomplishments and she did a lot of good for a lot of people. She, like all others, also had some pretty questionable, you know, living standards. Like all people, right? That's the human experience. And I don't

Judge her for that. The lessons we can learn are that she's a human being. She's a daughter of God, doing the best she can. And she d she I think she sincerely cared about her brothers and sisters. So I I think that's the lesson. Like anxiously the scripture is to be anxiously engaged in a good cause. Right. I think as Latter-day Saints, we sometimes get caught up in, I need permission to go serve, right? I I go to church and unless I have a specific calling, it's not my job to go out and do X, Y, or Z. And

That is counter scripture. Scripture says, use your agency to bless the lives of your brothers and sisters and to preach the gospel to lead people to Christ. And do it of your own free will and choice and be anxiously engaged in it in any good cause. I think that's what she did. And I'm I'm I'm I'm grateful for her. I think she was an awesome, awesome person. So I think that's the lesson.

Matt (21:11.371)
Yeah, I like that, Sean. I also think so the the stuff with Cesar Chavez, right? It came out years later that he raped a lot of people. And she's one of the people that he raped. He raped her twice and she got pregnant both times. And she gave up those children for adoption to other families to raise. So I think one lesson you learn from her is that it's not easy. Like sometimes in order to make a difference in society,

shawn (21:23.126)
That's crazy.

Matt (21:41.302)
You have to affiliate with bad characters who inflict horrible harm and pain on you. And you have to make difficult s decisions about family life and all of that sort of stuff, right? But for her, the cause was so important that she was willing to keep quiet about that for a very long time and give up her children.

shawn (22:02.858)
I'm confused. I'm confused about your point. The lesson is that go engage with evil people that do bad things to you for a greater cause? That's the lesson.

Matt (22:07.19)
Yeah.

Matt (22:14.881)
No, I'm not saying that we should do that. I'm saying that her life teaches us that that's often a price you have to pay. So

shawn (22:23.756)
Yeah, but doesn't that suggest be willing to pay that price? Go seek that out.

Matt (22:28.505)
well I think the lesson that I take from that is if you're an active member of the church and you see things wrong in your community and you say, I should organize and I should do something about this and you decide not to, it's okay. Because it's a tremendous price that people pay to go get organized and go like create a movement. Like it comes at terrible personal cost. And it's okay if you say, I'm not gonna do that, because it just doesn't matter that much to me. That's okay. Yeah. Yeah.

shawn (22:54.39)
It's there's risk to it. There's risk to it. Yeah.

Matt (22:59.425)
In order to have that kind of so another lesson is anyone can do it. Anyone can do it. She was not special. The the difference between her and almost everybody else was she was willing to pay a tremendous personal price in order to organize this movement and bring about change in her community. That's admirable. But that's not everybody. And so I just think it's okay to say, look, I care a lot about, I don't know, abortion or transgender rights, whatever it is you care about, and say, but I don't care that much.

shawn (23:24.844)
What what's the w what's the price she paid?

Matt (23:30.241)
She never had a family. She never got married. Did she did?

shawn (23:31.906)
What do you mean? She did two. She she was married three times and had fifteen kids.

Matt (23:38.059)
Are you serious?

shawn (23:39.22)
She mar one of her so she was married twice and then her and then those both ended in divorce and then she got together with Caesar Chavez's brother for the next like fifteen or twenty years and had four kids with him, even though they never got married.

Matt (23:54.676)
Okay, well, that's a tremendous price. Three marriages. Three marriages of Well, I'm talking about the rape part, right? Where she had to like a f she was a she had to affiliate with some very seedy characters in society who were extra right, Caesar Chavez was extraordinarily talented. And she had to and I would say like in terms of equal treatment as a woman and stuff like that, I don't think that she was treated particularly well by the people she interacted with, like

shawn (23:55.725)
Sorry, it's pr

shawn (24:20.122)
okay. Because of the era that it was in, i see, I see, I see. Yeah. She was facing cultures, yeah, society wasn't exactly friendly against minority women at the time. I see, I see. Okay, I get your point.

Matt (24:23.015)
Mm-hmm. Yeah.

Matt (24:32.073)
Right. Yeah. You also lose privacy, right? Her life becomes public. She becomes an object of scrutiny for everybody around her. again, it it's fine. Like so I think there's just the two sides of the coin, right? On the one hand, I believe she's an inspiring person. I think she did a great, great work, but on the other hand, it came at great personal cost. And I think it's okay for people to look at things and say, I'm not willing to pay that price just to make sure that all of my fellow workers have equal rights.

shawn (25:01.836)
I w I wish I knew more. I don't I don't I mean from my studies I didn't I don't know that I would my conclusion was she paid a great price. I I I she actually she made good money. She had l lots of kids and had relationships with whom she wanted to have relationships with and she was successful and she got awards from presidents and I don't know. I but I need to study her life more. I don't know if she paid a great price. What'd you say, Mark?

Marc (25:15.295)
Other than

Matt (25:23.745)
What do you say, Mark?

Marc (25:24.773)
I I I in my defense I don't think I've ever heard of her until this moment and I think that the lesson I would take is speak up because you think about Harvey Weinstein and how many people he molested and such and if the first person would have spoken up, or at least the second or third, we could have stopped it. So if she would have said, Hey Caesar Chavez is this kind of guy, okay, maybe he wouldn't get to do as many

bad things and maybe he didn't speak so well, but are you telling me that we can't find a group of good people who can morally fight for the right things? We have to have evil people so we can accomplish good? I I don't know that I buy that as much.

Matt (26:09.993)
You were the one who just told me that politicians do bad things, and I shouldn't hold them to such a high standard.

Marc (26:14.977)
Well she Chavez isn't a politician. He's a farm enthusiast and and rapist.

Matt (26:22.893)
I wish you were right about that, Mark. I wish I believed that speaking up made a difference. But I saw I've seen many women speak up at congressional hearings for people who have been nominated to be on the Supreme Court and say, so and so sexually assaulted me and have their names just drug through the mud as a result.

Marc (26:41.929)
Can we not I I would re this is a gentle topic and trying not to get myself canceled, but speak up a little sooner than thirty years later when they're being nominated for the Supreme Court.

shawn (26:54.85)
Ha ha ha.

Matt (26:56.609)
But if they're a judge, if they're a powerful person and nothing's gonna happen anyways, what's the point of speaking up? It's just gonna make your life harder.

Marc (27:04.641)
Clinton got impeached, Donald Trump got impeached, things happened.

Matt (27:08.775)
None of got removed from office. Like Donald Trump got impeached and then he went after everybody that testified against him.

Marc (27:14.65)
Nixon was right the whole time and history will vindicate him.

shawn (27:19.795)
huh.

Matt (27:21.375)
I I so again, I I'm not gonna say people shouldn't speak up, but I'm just gonna say like I understand why people don't speak up and I understand why they stay quiet because it doesn't necessarily make things better when you when you speak up about that stuff. But

shawn (27:36.616)
You got some you got some interesting takes today. You got some really, really interesting takes today.

Marc (27:43.051)
Well they're they're

Matt (27:46.571)
And I'm

Marc (27:46.635)
So little handsy, he's gonna lead the great uprising.

Matt (27:52.67)
I I wish yeah, I'm just trying to get points, you guys. I'm just trying to get your points and

shawn (27:57.84)
you'd you'd you're doing it the wrong way. Mark is earning more points. I think I earned points on that one better.

Matt (28:03.231)
You definitely earn points. Sean Sean wins points for this reason because he doesn't like anything backhanded. Sean did his research. Sean knew the facts of the story. And Sean had spiritually uplifting, faith inspiring reasons to look up to Dolores Huerta. And that's all you need for the points in this show.

shawn (28:11.639)
Matt (28:24.457)
Okay, I I can't tell you guys how much I've been waiting to discuss this big question with you. This is gonna be so much fun. I pitched it to my wife and it didn't work out so well. Okay, here's so life in the United States is more expensive. costs are rising faster than inflation, especially for things like housing, childcare, college tuition, and health care. just looking at health insurance premiums for next year, it's insane. Like

shawn (28:36.183)
Ha ha.

Matt (28:54.143)
My wife went to the doctor for just an annual physical and I think the bill was six hundred and eighty dollars, but you know, our insurance covered it. But it's crazy. Yeah. My son went to the he went to the emergency room once and now he's going to urgent care and it's gonna he could buy an automobile for the price of the amount of money that those two appointments are gonna cost him. So health care and housing are the two big things that are making it harder for young people to achieve the same kind of middle class lifestyle.

That older generations were able to experience in their early 20s, maybe mid 30s. So here's the question How can we reduce the cost of healthcare in the United States? I've never been able to persuade you guys that we should have government healthcare. So this is my next approach. What if we do this? What if we have a constitutional amendment? Now I wrote this based on the Second Amendment and the 14th Amendment, my two most favorite amendments. I don't even like the First Amendment.

So here's what it says. A healthy population being necessary to the security and prosperity of a free state, the right of the people to access health care shall not be infringed. No state shall make or enforce any law that denies any person within its jurisdiction access to health care. That's so good. You say it's dumb?

shawn (30:12.31)
You're so that's so dumb. So dumb. So Matt, I I'll bring in a scripture. How about this? There's in Revelation 315, it talks God talks about how I know thy works that they are neither hot nor cold, but lukewarm. And I would that they're hot or cold. If you're lukewarm, I spew thee out of my mouth. I think the approach to healthcare in the United States has been very lukewarm. It's been one foot over here in the free market and another foot over here in the government is gonna meddle and regulate.

And look, there's wisdom to both sides. I understand that. And but but it's stuck in a lukewarm state and therefore it's problems and it's not effective for for everybody. And so, so, hang on. So, I think I'm with you on the idea that it we ought to go all in on one side, either either free market capitalism, or we go all in on the other side, which is let's get a a government standard.

Matt (30:49.281)
Okay, so this amendment fixes that.

shawn (31:05.544)
your government standard solution and a constitutional amendment isn't I don't think it's the answer. I don't think that's gonna work.

Matt (31:10.261)
This this constitutional amendment doesn't do the this says the government stays out of healthcare. It says if it's a constitutional amendment, it says that this the government cannot regulate health care. It can't make a law.

shawn (31:15.862)
If it's a country

shawn (31:23.192)
But how does it but if it's a right no, what are you talking about? The government if it if it if it interprets the constitution as saying you, Matt, have a right to health care, it's clearly gonna legislate protection of your right to have health care. What do you mean? Of course they'll legislate you.

Matt (31:36.681)
Okay, but but that's why I modeled it after the Second Amendment. You have a right to a gun, but that doesn't mean the government's gonna give you a gun. You can have a right to health care. That just means that the government can't stop you from accessing health care. It doesn't mean they have to give you health care.

shawn (31:55.267)
Wait a minute. So okay, so I have a right to the gun to a gun and are there not a million gun laws that that that the government is regulating? There of course the government regulates gun laws or guns. By law.

Matt (32:07.211)
They might I mean, but this is the best you c imagine if there was no amendment, what there would be for gun laws in the United States. So the amendment that says I have a right to a gun says the government has to stay out of it. And it

shawn (32:15.866)
yeah, I see. So now you go to federal so now you go to federalism. Okay, under your amendment, federalism kicks in and so state by state will have their own rules about healthcare. But it's to

Matt (32:28.789)
That's that's the second part of my amendment. No state can make a law that denies any person access to health care. So states can't regulate it either. So I have a right to health care and a and a state cannot regulate health care.

shawn (32:39.079)
okay.

shawn (32:45.174)
So who what so how do you implement this law? Tell me, tell me a tri give me a good implementation of this law. So let's say in Colorado there's a family who doesn't pay for insurance, doesn't have any any health care, and they go to a doctor and say, Hey, my kid's arm is broken. That doctor must by law fix the kid's arm by for free, right? Because the government's not gonna pay for it because it doesn't have to.

There's no law that requires that. So that then this doctor, if he does not fix this kid's arm for free, he will go to jail? What is it? Okay.

Matt (33:13.929)
Right. Right.

Matt (33:20.531)
No No No it's the exact same as the guns, Sean. I don't get to go into a gun store and say I have a right to a gun, give me that gun.

Marc (33:30.827)
You do if you already have a gun.

shawn (33:33.893)
Ha ha ha.

Matt (33:34.311)
No, that's still breaking the law, Mark. So everybody has a right to a gun. And just because I have the right to a gun doesn't mean somebody has to give me a gun for free. A right to a gun means the government can't take my gun away from me. That's what it means. A right to health care means the government can't take my health care away from me.

shawn (33:39.512)
Yeah, but

shawn (33:50.233)
But that's not how but but that is not your intent in saying everyone has right to health No, it's not. Your intent in saying everyone has the right to healthcare is saying healthcare must be provided to people. It's not really? You don't think that's how how the movement would interpret it? Go ahead, Mark.

Matt (33:54.859)
Yes it is.

Matt (34:02.621)
No, no. my

Read the amendment. The amendment go ahead, Mark.

Marc (34:10.121)
I so I agree that we need to pick one or the other, and I think at this point the genie cannot go back in the bottle, so we probably should go for a national health service.

shawn (34:21.246)
Whoa, Mark

Matt (34:22.707)
Now you now that I go all the way capitalism, now you guys are like, let's go single payer healthcare. That's what it takes. I have to go all the way to your side, and then you're like, well, well, maybe that's a bad idea.

shawn (34:35.682)
Yeah, wait a minute, Mark.

Marc (34:37.217)
Well, actually, you know.

Matt (34:39.851)
Well then I will make the case for one hundred percent capitalism, get the government out of healthcare. Because the reason that health healthcare is so expensive, yeah.

shawn (34:48.11)
Hang on. Why do you need an a okay, why do you you don't need a a a constitutional amendment to do that? Why? Why though?

Matt (34:55.231)
Yes, you do. A hundred percent you do. Because they're because the American Hospital Association, the American Medical Association, the American Pharmaceutical Association, those powerful groups, not to mention all the rich people who work in medicine right now, have a vested interest in making sure that healthcare follows the same stupid rules that's followed for the last hundred years. But a constitutional amendment makes all of that policy illegal and makes it so that everyone

Can access healthcare without going through the medical system. And that's all you need to make to fix medicine in America. Why is it that if I have a cough or a cold, I have to go to a doctor and get a prescription? That's a law. That I would say, now that's an unconstitutional law. You can't make that law anymore. I can go to why is it as a citizen, I can't just go to AI and say, what should I take for this medicine? And then it tells me what medicine I want, and then I buy that medicine. Plus all the laws that say you can't import.

shawn (35:32.12)
Hm.

Matt (35:54.134)
drugs from other countries. You can't we have so much regulation of healthcare in the United States that makes it incredibly expensive. So all you do is you just say, no more laws about medicine. People can make their own choices.

shawn (36:05.428)
I see. You're saying that the you're saying that the right to health care isn't to force those who provide health care to give you health care. You're saying the right to health care gets government out from impeding my access to any health care that I want.

Matt (36:21.121)
Correct. That's right. And this this amendment is 100% the free market solution to healthcare. It says the government can't make laws about healthcare. And you have a right. If if it's healthcare, right? If you say, you know what, I'm feeling sick. I think that taking this will help me feel better. You have a right to make that choice yourself, and the government doesn't get to tell you what you can and cannot do. I don't know why.

shawn (36:23.202)
So you're saying yeah, free market.

shawn (36:45.922)
I just you're you're I I don't know why you leap to if there's a constitutional right to something, no laws will be made to to regulate that. There there are la there are free s there are free speech laws. There are gun laws.

Matt (36:54.015)
Well, they'll try, just like they do with guns.

Matt (37:00.417)
So they will try, right? But the best way, the best defense you have to protect against all of that is to have a constitutional amendment that says that law violates my rights.

shawn (37:06.016)
I think this is a Matt. I think this is your Trojan horse. I think this is your Trojan horse. I think you're setting this up and it sounds actually kind of interesting, but I think you know full well that if in a in a legal battle where someone says, Look, this doctor, I came with my kid, he broke his arm, and this doctor denied my free right to health care, my right to health care, then I think you know that there will be judges who will side on their side.

And now you have precedents where if everyone has a right to health care, then you can't deny someone health care.

Matt (37:42.677)
I just it doesn't happen with guns. It doesn't happen with like that's the only thing I can go ahead, Mark.

Marc (37:48.713)
I think it should. The government should give everyone a gun.

Matt (37:53.346)
Well, we can we could litigate that, right? I could say somebody broke into my house and they hurt me and the government I have a right to a gun and they didn't give it to me. And so I'm gonna sue the government and they have so like somebody could try to make that case.

shawn (37:53.879)
Ha ha ha.

Marc (38:07.626)
I'm good with that.

Matt (38:09.343)
Okay, well then you like this amendment, right?

Marc (38:11.399)
I like single payer at better at this.

Matt (38:14.577)
I'll tell you what happened, Sean, is I looked at my meta go ahead.

Marc (38:18.303)
Well, just because again, it the toothpaste's out of the tube, the cat is out of the bag, the flag is up to pole, the cement has been poured. Can we just real quick the the Queen's pawn has moved and the hand is removed. We can't go back to free capitalism and health care, though we should we can't for two

Matt (38:39.977)
I believe that we can. I believe that artificial intelligence makes it totally possible to do that. Because whatever I have wrong with me, I can ask an AI tool what's wrong with me and it'll give me decent advice. And if it gives me bad advice, then I can sue Google or I can sue Meta and it'll give me better advice.

Marc (38:56.939)
That is true. Google diagnosed my UTI a couple months ago.

Matt (39:00.265)
Yeah. I'm looking at I'm looking at the the amount of money. So each month for my health insurance, I spend I think next year I'm gonna spend four hundred a month on my side and my employer is gonna spend three thousand three hundred a month on their side, just for my health insurance. And then when I go to the doctor, I have to pay a copay plus like eighty percent or twenty percent of whatever it is. And so when I started looking at these bills, I'm like, I'm not getting.

The amount of service that these bills suggest I should be getting. And then the, you know what the medical industry will say? Well, laws mandate that we have insurance and we have protection and all of that sort of stuff. So if you just get rid of all of the laws, and then and then Sean's buddy breaks their arm and they go to the doctor, and the doctor says, It's going to be $5,000 to set that. And then they go to their next door neighbor and they say, I'll do it for $50.

shawn (39:39.0)
Yeah.

Matt (39:52.876)
Then they'll go to their neighbor and get it done for 50. And guess what will happen? The doctor will go out of business charging $5,000 for that. And then the prices will come down to something reasonable because anyone can do it.

shawn (40:01.794)
And you're and you're okay, and you're right. If the neighbor who does it for fifty doesn't do it right, then there's a civil litigation and then that guy will be in trouble and he won't do it anymore. And then you have a a marketplace of people going, Well, see, you should have paid five grand because I know how to do it. I'm qualified. But then you get another guy coming in and going, Yeah, I'll do for fifteen hundred though, and I am also qualified. You get a free market trying to compete for it. And there's going to be, for those of you who are listeners who don't like free markets, yeah.

There's there's always going to be a downside. There's always gonna be problems. But that's that's freedom. And the the okay, Matt, you're being persuasive. But before I agree with you and give you give you points, what was your wife's disagreement? Where where did she disagree?

Matt (40:46.482)
'cause I said to her, by the way, this gets rid of all abortion law in the United States. And then she's like,

shawn (40:51.734)
Ha ha ha ha ha!

shawn (40:56.182)
Mm.

shawn (41:00.814)
W was that your Trojan horse? Is this just okay.

Matt (41:01.043)
Yeah. No, it's not my chosen horse, but I ha I was trying to be honest with her. I'm like like if you do have that in the constitution, all abortion law goes away. Yeah.

shawn (41:09.078)
Yeah, that's true. That's right. Good point. That's a great point, right?

Matt (41:13.491)
And the ultimate lesson for her was this is why you don't let political scientists in the room when we're writing constitutional amendments.

shawn (41:19.896)
Ha ha ha

Matt (41:22.497)
'Cause everything that looks good on paper has some kind of a negative thing. But I I will still

shawn (41:26.198)
I mean I mean a libert I mean a libertarian I don't know that your method of making it f free market, healthcare free free you know, f capitalistic. I don't know that the constitutional amendment does that, but if it did, yeah, I think you're you're persuading a libertarian.

Marc (41:40.895)
Then

Matt (41:40.895)
Well, if not, I got you if not, I got you both on board for single payer healthcare in the United States. So that's even better. Hey listeners, next week's our last episode. Let us know what you think about this amendment. If you'd like to start a movement to get this amendment in the constitution, beware of the personal costs. we'll talk to you talk to you all again next week.

Marc (42:04.939)
Caesar Shav yes, and and listeners watch out for Caesar Shaves. He gets a little handsy after a couple of rallies.

Matt (42:11.925)
He's been dead for ten years.

Marc (42:13.985)
Didn't even know.