Latest / The 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson / A CCP Connection the Media won't Cover, AI at the Oval & Can Schools be Taught to Read Again Week In Review

Transcript

A CCP Connection the Media won't Cover, AI at the Oval & Can Schools be Taught to Read Again Week In Review · The 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Welcome. It is Verdict with Ted Cruz week in Review.
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: Here are some of the stories that you may have
• 0:05
  Speaker 1: missed that we talked about this week. First up, a
• 0:08
  Speaker 1: Chinese tycoon that is having major influence in America now
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: being investigated. So what does this mean? We explain it.
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: Up Next, a big meeting at the White House in
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: the Oval Office talking about the future of AI. Senator
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: Cruz was with the President talking about that and he
• 0:27
  Speaker 1: gives us the details. And finally, major legislation to help
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: with children in America with reading. Yes, actual standards before
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: the federal government sends your tax dollars. So is it
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: biparts enough to actually pass? We break that down as well.
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: It's the weekend review and it starts right now. Senator
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: I want to start off this last segment by saying,
• 0:49
  Speaker 1: I don't ever want our government to be weaponized against
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: our political adversaries. Not that they't to use the word enemy.
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: Democrats use the word enemy to describe Republicans, I say adversaries,
• 0:59
  Speaker 1: but I do want to hold those accountable that are
• 1:02
  Speaker 1: actually doing corrupt things. And we now know a lot
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: more about the investigation and the Chinese Communist Party tycoon
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: Nevil Roy Singham, and it should get a lot more
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: attention than it is right now. Certainly the media they
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: are looking the other way.
• 1:18
  Speaker 2: Well, that's exactly right. And you know, we ended the
• 1:20
  Speaker 2: last segment by talking about the need for accountability of
• 1:24
  Speaker 2: the corruption within the Biden administration, that those who broke
• 1:28
  Speaker 2: the law need to be held to account. And on
• 1:31
  Speaker 2: this podcast we have talked at great length about the
• 1:35
  Speaker 2: need to follow the money that these anti American efforts. Look,
• 1:39
  Speaker 2: if you look at all of the stories in today's pod,
• 1:41
  Speaker 2: they're interwoven the DSSA. There is clearly a funding stream
• 1:46
  Speaker 2: funding the antisemitic protests on college campuses, funding the communists
• 1:51
  Speaker 2: tearing this country apart, funding the DSSA, funding the Black
• 1:55
  Speaker 2: Lives Matter and ANTIFA riots across the country, funding the
• 1:58
  Speaker 2: open border riots in LA and elsewhere. The money stream,
• 2:02
  Speaker 2: and what I've urged the Department of Justice, what I've
• 2:05
  Speaker 2: urged the FBI from the beginning of this second Trump administration,
• 2:08
  Speaker 2: follow the money the people who are paying for this.
• 2:11
  Speaker 2: This is not organic when people carry out these acts
• 2:14
  Speaker 2: of violence, it's not organic. When you look at the
• 2:17
  Speaker 2: anti Semitic protests, the tents all match. Follow the money
• 2:21
  Speaker 2: and then we in a previous podcast couple of weeks ago,
• 2:25
  Speaker 2: talked about the bombshell story that we've all seen the
• 2:29
  Speaker 2: rising sentiment against AI that on the left and the right,
• 2:33
  Speaker 2: suddenly people are saying, gosh, I don't like AI. Shut
• 2:35
  Speaker 2: down data centers. Kathy Hokeeld just this past couple of
• 2:39
  Speaker 2: weeks said no data centers in New York, and the
• 2:41
  Speaker 2: bombshell story that much of that is being paid for
• 2:46
  Speaker 2: by a communist named Neville Roy Singham who has deep
• 2:51
  Speaker 2: ties to the Chinese Communist Party. And listen, we're in
• 2:54
  Speaker 2: a race America and China to see who will develop
• 2:58
  Speaker 2: AI first. If China wins, it will put China in
• 3:01
  Speaker 2: a position to dominate the world economically. But also whichever
• 3:06
  Speaker 2: country wins, the values of that country will dominate AI.
• 3:11
  Speaker 2: So if China wins, AI will be dominated by Communist
• 3:16
  Speaker 2: Party control and surveillance and propaganda and espionage. And I
• 3:22
  Speaker 2: think all of us want AI to instead reflect American values,
• 3:26
  Speaker 2: to reflect free speech and individual liberty and free enterprise. Well,
• 3:32
  Speaker 2: a bit of good news, which is the Trump Department
• 3:35
  Speaker 2: of Justice is doing exactly that. It's following the money
• 3:38
  Speaker 2: and it's holding people to account. Let me read from
• 3:40
  Speaker 2: a story in CBS News. Husband of Code Pink founder
• 3:44
  Speaker 2: being investigated under federal forhid agent and tax laws. Devilroy Singham,
• 3:49
  Speaker 2: the wealthy husband of the founder of the progressive nonprofit
• 3:52
  Speaker 2: Code Pink and the benefactor of far left political causes,
• 3:56
  Speaker 2: is under criminal investigation by a grand jury in the
• 3:59
  Speaker 2: Southern District of New York. According to multiple sources with
• 4:02
  Speaker 2: knowledge of the matter, the investigation began by looking into
• 4:06
  Speaker 2: possible violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act and has
• 4:09
  Speaker 2: since expanded into a criminal tax probe over whether the
• 4:13
  Speaker 2: money was unlawfully funneled through nonprofits he controls, and whether
• 4:18
  Speaker 2: he lied on the tax forms for those nonprofits known
• 4:21
  Speaker 2: as nine nineties. Singham is a major financial backer of
• 4:27
  Speaker 2: a New York City based nonprofit called The People's Forum,
• 4:31
  Speaker 2: a left leaning nonprofit that advocates for causes impacting the
• 4:35
  Speaker 2: working class and other marginalized groups. He's also the founder
• 4:39
  Speaker 2: of thought Works, an IT consulting company, and is married
• 4:42
  Speaker 2: to Jody Evans, co founder of the anti war group
• 4:45
  Speaker 2: Code Pink. Singham sold thought Works to a private equity
• 4:50
  Speaker 2: firm in twenty seventeen for seven hundred and eighty five
• 4:55
  Speaker 2: million dollars. At around the same time, Singham moved his
• 4:59
  Speaker 2: business off operations to Shanghai, China, and began funding a
• 5:03
  Speaker 2: vast global network of nonprofits and think tanks to the
• 5:08
  Speaker 2: tune of hundreds of millions of dollars, according to reports
• 5:13
  Speaker 2: of The Free Press in The New York Times, Singham
• 5:16
  Speaker 2: moved the funds through shell companies and other opaque entities,
• 5:20
  Speaker 2: advancing his brand of leftist politics while pushing pro Beijing messaging.
• 5:28
  Speaker 2: He injected much of his own money into Code Pink,
• 5:31
  Speaker 2: funding up to a quarter of its operation, according to reports.
• 5:35
  Speaker 2: Soon Code Pink softened its stance on China, which had
• 5:39
  Speaker 2: previously been highly critical of Beijing's human rights policies. Among
• 5:44
  Speaker 2: other things, the group defended China against widespread reports its
• 5:48
  Speaker 2: government was committing genocide against a Muslim minority group in
• 5:52
  Speaker 2: the country's far northwest. So I and numerous other senators
• 5:57
  Speaker 2: of the Judiciary Committee have urged the Department of Justice
• 5:59
  Speaker 2: to look at into this. Chuck Grassley wrote a letter
• 6:03
  Speaker 2: urging DOJ to do that. Here's what Grass's letter said. Quote.
• 6:07
  Speaker 2: Evidence suggests that the People's Forum and Code Pink have
• 6:09
  Speaker 2: been funded and influenced by mister Nevill Roy Singham and
• 6:13
  Speaker 2: the Communist Chinese government, both of which are foreign principles.
• 6:17
  Speaker 2: The evidence also suggests that the People's Forum and Code
• 6:20
  Speaker 2: Pink have engaged in covered political activities that directly advance
• 6:24
  Speaker 2: the Communist Chinese government's political and policy interest and by
• 6:29
  Speaker 2: the way Nevilroy Singham's response to that is quote, I
• 6:35
  Speaker 2: categorically deny and repudiate any suggestion that I am a
• 6:38
  Speaker 2: member of work for, take orders from, or follow instructions
• 6:41
  Speaker 2: of any political party or government or their representatives. I
• 6:45
  Speaker 2: am solely guided by my beliefs, which are long held
• 6:48
  Speaker 2: personal views. So well, there's going to be an investigation
• 6:51
  Speaker 2: into it. I don't know if this guy is just
• 6:54
  Speaker 2: a communist who hates American and wants to destroy our nation,
• 6:57
  Speaker 2: or if he's a communist who hates American wants to
• 6:59
  Speaker 2: destroy our nation, who is working directly for and may
• 7:02
  Speaker 2: even be funded by the Chinese Communist government. That's one
• 7:05
  Speaker 2: of the things that I would imagine the investigation will
• 7:07
  Speaker 2: examine either way. I am very glad the Department of
• 7:11
  Speaker 2: Justice is examining the hundreds of millions of dollars he
• 7:15
  Speaker 2: is using to fund the people that are tearing our
• 7:19
  Speaker 2: country apart.
• 7:21
  Speaker 1: Yeah, and that's the key thing there. And if you're
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: doing something that is illegal and it's coming in with
• 7:27
  Speaker 1: the Chinese Communist Party, why would anyone not want that
• 7:30
  Speaker 1: to be investigated if that's what the evidence is showing.
• 7:33
  Speaker 1: That's the core part here that I think matters for
• 7:35
  Speaker 1: all Americans.
• 7:36
  Speaker 2: You know, it's one of the things that is dangerous
• 7:39
  Speaker 2: in this world where we're on social media, where you
• 7:42
  Speaker 2: see things or on x or Facebook or wherever you are,
• 7:45
  Speaker 2: and suddenly a lot of people seem concerned about something
• 7:47
  Speaker 2: and that can seem organic, and we are seeing more
• 7:50
  Speaker 2: and more paid foreign influence operations. And China puts a
• 7:55
  Speaker 2: lot of money into undermining America. Cutter puts a lot
• 7:59
  Speaker 2: of money into mining America. Iran puts a lot of
• 8:02
  Speaker 2: money into undermining America. You know, there was a report
• 8:04
  Speaker 2: from the Bitcoin Policy Institute that says for the past
• 8:08
  Speaker 2: five years, nonprofits funded by Nevil Roy Singham have been
• 8:12
  Speaker 2: putting out papers opposing export controls on advanced semiconductors to China,
• 8:18
  Speaker 2: putting out newsletters quoting Chinese communist officials blasting America's approach
• 8:24
  Speaker 2: to technology, and articles characterizing US data centers as fronts
• 8:29
  Speaker 2: in the quote new Cold War on China. And this
• 8:34
  Speaker 2: is a deliberate foreign influence effort that is targeting the
• 8:41
  Speaker 2: American economy, it's targeting AI, it's trying to get America
• 8:44
  Speaker 2: to stop leading an AI, and it's trying ultimately to
• 8:48
  Speaker 2: defeat capitalism and destroy our country. These it has the
• 8:53
  Speaker 2: exact same objectives as the DSA radicals that are taking
• 8:57
  Speaker 2: over the Democrat Party.
• 8:59
  Speaker 1: Now want to hear the rest of this conversation, you
• 9:02
  Speaker 1: can go back and listen to the full podcast from
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: earlier this week. Now onto story number two. That's incredible
• 9:09
  Speaker 1: you went. So you went from that back to d
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: C straight to the Oval Monday morning, yeap for a
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: very interesting meeting on AI at the White House. Talk
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: about that a little bit.
• 9:20
  Speaker 2: Yeah, So I took Amtrak and came from Manhattan down
• 9:23
  Speaker 2: to DC on Monday, and then I had a meeting
• 9:26
  Speaker 2: at the Oval Monday.
• 9:27
  Speaker 1: And by the way, that is what we call welcome
• 9:28
  Speaker 1: back to your real life when you go from the
• 9:30
  Speaker 1: World Cup Drew Barrymore to Amtrak to d C. I
• 9:33
  Speaker 1: just that's an interesting step down really quick, and that's
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: probably got on purpose doing that. But keep going oh yeah.
• 9:39
  Speaker 2: Yeah, look, look it was. And so the meeting in
• 9:42
  Speaker 2: the Oval, I was with the President, I was with
• 9:46
  Speaker 2: Marsha Blackburn, Senator from Tennessee, and I was with Scott
• 9:49
  Speaker 2: bess at the Treasury Secretary, and Kevin Hasset at the
• 9:52
  Speaker 2: head of the National Economic Council, and several other members
• 9:54
  Speaker 2: of the White House staff, and we were talking about AI,
• 9:58
  Speaker 2: artificial intelligence, and it was a discussion about what to
• 10:02
  Speaker 2: do about it. And listen, Marcia has a package of
• 10:06
  Speaker 2: bills that she's pitching, and it's a package of bills.
• 10:10
  Speaker 2: It's kids safety bills, it's requiring app stores to verify ages.
• 10:16
  Speaker 2: It's a bill called no Fakes, which which deals with
• 10:20
  Speaker 2: preventing people from from pirting and competing copying people's voices
• 10:25
  Speaker 2: and images. And so she was pitching to the President,
• 10:31
  Speaker 2: you should support my package of bills. And I'm chairman
• 10:35
  Speaker 2: of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, Transportation, which has
• 10:38
  Speaker 2: jurisdiction over a ton of stuff, including AI. And so
• 10:42
  Speaker 2: we're going to have a mark up in the next
• 10:43
  Speaker 2: couple of weeks on a bunch of AI bills, and
• 10:47
  Speaker 2: Marsha wants her a bill to be one of them,
• 10:48
  Speaker 2: and so she laid it out, and I got to
• 10:51
  Speaker 2: say a lot of discussions, she's pushing the president back
• 10:53
  Speaker 2: my bill, back my bill, back my bill, and I
• 10:56
  Speaker 2: stayed quiet for much of the meeting. The meeting was
• 10:58
  Speaker 2: like hour hour and a half long, and then I
• 11:01
  Speaker 2: said at the end, I said, listen, if Marcia introduces
• 11:05
  Speaker 2: the bill, I'll mark it up. I'll put it up
• 11:07
  Speaker 2: on the committee for a vote. And I said, I
• 11:10
  Speaker 2: expect all support it. All. To be honest, I'd never
• 11:13
  Speaker 2: read the bill until she handed it to me, so
• 11:14
  Speaker 2: I like, she handed me a hundred page bill and
• 11:17
  Speaker 2: I didn't know what was in it. But I said,
• 11:18
  Speaker 2: look from what she's described in it, I anticipate I'll
• 11:21
  Speaker 2: support it. But I also said it was kind of
• 11:25
  Speaker 2: near the end of the meeting, but I said, because
• 11:28
  Speaker 2: they had handed the president a truth social post supporting
• 11:32
  Speaker 2: the bill, and I said, look, someone needs to tell
• 11:36
  Speaker 2: you this bill has very little, if any chance of passing.
• 11:43
  Speaker 2: And like Trump was surprised, and I just said, look,
• 11:47
  Speaker 2: there are different elements of it. Right now. There are
• 11:49
  Speaker 2: no Democrats backing this bill. It's not clear that every
• 11:53
  Speaker 2: Republican on the committee will back the bill. Maybe they will,
• 11:56
  Speaker 2: they might and I said, let are you clear, I'll
• 11:58
  Speaker 2: mark it up and I expect to vote. So I'm
• 12:01
  Speaker 2: not the opposition here, but I just want you to
• 12:03
  Speaker 2: know that at this point there's opposition from Democrats in
• 12:08
  Speaker 2: the Senate, there's opposition potentially from some Republicans in the Senate,
• 12:12
  Speaker 2: and there's strong opposition on aspects of the bill from
• 12:16
  Speaker 2: Republican leadership in the House. And so I just said,
• 12:19
  Speaker 2: I don't want you to be surprised you lean in
• 12:21
  Speaker 2: and say let's go pass this bill and then it
• 12:24
  Speaker 2: doesn't pass. And so Trump said, all right, well, then
• 12:26
  Speaker 2: I'm not going to support it. I don't want to
• 12:27
  Speaker 2: support something that doesn't have a path to passage. And
• 12:31
  Speaker 2: so We're going to mark up a series of bills.
• 12:33
  Speaker 2: I've told Marsha if she wants me to mark up
• 12:35
  Speaker 2: her bill, we will. I don't know she will ask
• 12:38
  Speaker 2: for it or not.
• 12:39
  Speaker 1: Can you ask a politics question on this? Yeah? How
• 12:42
  Speaker 1: much of her bill is her pushing because she's running
• 12:46
  Speaker 1: for governor and really trying to get Tennessee's hands on
• 12:49
  Speaker 1: a lot of AI and AI infrastructure and AI and
• 12:52
  Speaker 1: the state. Not blame her for that, but like, is
• 12:55
  Speaker 1: that part of this hardcore push where you're in the Senate,
• 12:58
  Speaker 1: You're going I understand both sides of this. My reading
• 13:00
  Speaker 1: the room wrong.
• 13:01
  Speaker 2: So listen, they're different components of it. So let's take
• 13:04
  Speaker 2: the different elements of the bill. The first bill is COSA,
• 13:07
  Speaker 2: and COSA is a kid's safety bill. It's a good bill.
• 13:10
  Speaker 2: I've supported it. I've voted for it in the last Congress.
• 13:13
  Speaker 2: It passed the Senate ninety three to three. So I'm
• 13:16
  Speaker 2: all for COSA. I'm a yes, I want it to pass.
• 13:19
  Speaker 2: Here's the problem. After it passed the Senate ninety three
• 13:22
  Speaker 2: to three, it went to the House and the House
• 13:27
  Speaker 2: refused to take it up. Why because because the Speaker
• 13:30
  Speaker 2: of the House and Steve Scalise, the majority leader, opposed
• 13:34
  Speaker 2: the bill. And the bill puts what's called a duty
• 13:37
  Speaker 2: of care on the tech companies that if there's content
• 13:42
  Speaker 2: that harms kids, they can be sued. And the House
• 13:46
  Speaker 2: leadership doesn't support that. And so look, frankly, what I
• 13:49
  Speaker 2: told Marsha a year and a half ago is I said, listen, Mop,
• 13:51
  Speaker 2: I'll back COSA again. We can pass it again. I'm
• 13:53
  Speaker 2: fine with that, but it will never become law until
• 13:57
  Speaker 2: you sit down with Johnson and Scale and work out
• 14:00
  Speaker 2: an agreement, because if they refuse to take up the bill,
• 14:03
  Speaker 2: you want to pass it again, we can do it.
• 14:05
  Speaker 1: You'll get if they're not going to take it up.
• 14:09
  Speaker 2: If the House won't take it up, it's not going
• 14:11
  Speaker 2: to become in the US Code. And so I said,
• 14:14
  Speaker 2: what you need to do is sit down and negotiate
• 14:17
  Speaker 2: a compromise and it won't be everything you want, but
• 14:19
  Speaker 2: you need to find something the House is willing to
• 14:21
  Speaker 2: pass that hasn't happened. So that's a real impediment. I'm
• 14:26
  Speaker 2: going to vote for COSA. I want COSA to pass,
• 14:29
  Speaker 2: but right now the House is not going to take
• 14:32
  Speaker 2: it up. There's a second component, which is called the
• 14:35
  Speaker 2: App Store Accountability App, which is putting liability on an
• 14:41
  Speaker 2: app store for age verification. Now there are a couple
• 14:45
  Speaker 2: of problems with that Number One, there are tech companies
• 14:49
  Speaker 2: like Meta, like Facebook that support it, but Apple and
• 14:53
  Speaker 2: Google hate it because they're the app stores and they're like, wait,
• 14:56
  Speaker 2: you're making me liable. So Apple and Google don't like it,
• 15:00
  Speaker 2: so they're both the tech companies are divided their lobbying
• 15:02
  Speaker 2: on both sides. And there's a competing bill that is
• 15:08
  Speaker 2: called the Parents over Platforms bill, which is frankly the
• 15:12
  Speaker 2: Apple and Google bill, And there are several Republicans on
• 15:15
  Speaker 2: the committee that support that bill, and so I said, look,
• 15:19
  Speaker 2: this is just a pissing match between giant tech companies.
• 15:23
  Speaker 2: I'd like to see age verification. I support age verification,
• 15:26
  Speaker 2: I'm pushing for it. But every Democrat opposes age verification.
• 15:30
  Speaker 2: So I said, listen, it's a simple math. If you
• 15:32
  Speaker 2: lose all the Democrats and if you're losing some Republicans,
• 15:37
  Speaker 2: I don't see how this passes. Like it's just a math.
• 15:40
  Speaker 2: Like I'm not opposed to it. I will vote yes,
• 15:44
  Speaker 2: but how do you get to the votes to pass it.
• 15:48
  Speaker 2: There is additionally her bill No Fakes now no Fakes.
• 15:52
  Speaker 2: I'm on the Judiciary Committee. Judiciary Committee has already pased
• 15:55
  Speaker 2: no Fakes. It was a voice vote. I was fine
• 15:57
  Speaker 2: with it. No Fakes has a lot of good element
• 16:00
  Speaker 2: to it. So no fakes is protecting. Say you have
• 16:03
  Speaker 2: a musician and someone uses AI to create a fake
• 16:06
  Speaker 2: song for a musician, it makes you liable for that
• 16:10
  Speaker 2: in politics. By the way, this is coming. It hasn't
• 16:14
  Speaker 2: really happened yet, but it's coming soon. You're going to
• 16:16
  Speaker 2: see someone create AI and take a video of a
• 16:19
  Speaker 2: politician a fake video and be like we should eat
• 16:25
  Speaker 2: live kittens, and it's going to be you're not going
• 16:29
  Speaker 2: to be able to tell that it's fake, like it's
• 16:30
  Speaker 2: going to appear to be. The real problem.
• 16:32
  Speaker 1: Can have to respond to a ridiculous, absurd video, right.
• 16:36
  Speaker 2: And by the way, Amy Klovichar last year had a
• 16:39
  Speaker 2: video of a hearing where she said a bunch of
• 16:41
  Speaker 2: things that were derogatory that she would never have said,
• 16:45
  Speaker 2: but it looked entirely real and she had to respond
• 16:48
  Speaker 2: to that. That's going to explode a lot. So finding
• 16:53
  Speaker 2: some protections to say, look, someone can't use your name,
• 16:56
  Speaker 2: image and likeness and create a counterfeit that no but
• 17:00
  Speaker 2: he knows is fake. I'm quite supportive of that. When
• 17:05
  Speaker 2: the judiciary passed this bill, there were several Republicans Mike Lee,
• 17:10
  Speaker 2: Eric Schmidt, and myself who raised free speech concerns because
• 17:14
  Speaker 2: the way the language is written it's quite broad. So
• 17:16
  Speaker 2: for example, Trump send out the meme of a Keem
• 17:21
  Speaker 2: Jeffries and Chuck Schumer wearing sombrero singing yes, now that
• 17:26
  Speaker 2: was parody, it wasn't real, and I've retweeted it and
• 17:31
  Speaker 2: then amplified it, but there is an argument that under
• 17:36
  Speaker 2: the language to know fakes, that could be banned. Now
• 17:40
  Speaker 2: there is some language saying bonafide satire is okay, but
• 17:46
  Speaker 2: there's a lot of gray area. You think of Spencer
• 17:48
  Speaker 2: Pratt and the hysterical ads he put out with Gavin
• 17:53
  Speaker 2: Newsom and Karen Bass just like doing horrible things to
• 17:57
  Speaker 2: people of California. I have a concern that under the
• 18:02
  Speaker 2: language and no fakes, the tech platforms would take down
• 18:06
  Speaker 2: those ads because they'd say, you're using Gavin Newsom's image
• 18:11
  Speaker 2: in a way that he has not approved. And so
• 18:15
  Speaker 2: my point was, look, I'd love to see this get done,
• 18:18
  Speaker 2: but I also want to protect free speech. So my
• 18:22
  Speaker 2: point to the President was, Hey, if you want to
• 18:24
  Speaker 2: endorse this, great, I've got no problem with it, but
• 18:26
  Speaker 2: you need to know that I don't see a path
• 18:31
  Speaker 2: that this actually gets to pass in the Senate take
• 18:34
  Speaker 2: sixty votes, given that I don't know of a single
• 18:37
  Speaker 2: Democrat supporting this bill, and there may be Republicans opposing
• 18:42
  Speaker 2: this bill. The math doesn't work, and so the President
• 18:47
  Speaker 2: decided not to support it. Listen, I still expect that
• 18:51
  Speaker 2: we will take up in the next couple of weeks
• 18:54
  Speaker 2: a series of AI bills. And by the way, we
• 18:56
  Speaker 2: will do a podcast when we do that markup where
• 18:58
  Speaker 2: we talk about the AI bills pass. But what I'm
• 19:01
  Speaker 2: trying to do right now is find all right, let
• 19:03
  Speaker 2: me use a Kamala Harris phrase the ven diagram, that
• 19:09
  Speaker 2: is the intersection of what bills could make a positive
• 19:13
  Speaker 2: impact protecting people from some of the harms of AI yep,
• 19:17
  Speaker 2: but at the same time that have a real pass
• 19:20
  Speaker 2: to passage. And so we'll move several bills on that.
• 19:24
  Speaker 2: But I'm trying to find exactly the right intersection right there.
• 19:28
  Speaker 2: And so we had that conversation and the President agreed
• 19:31
  Speaker 2: with me as before.
• 19:33
  Speaker 1: If you want to hear the rest of this conversation
• 19:35
  Speaker 1: on this topic, you can go back and dow the
• 19:37
  Speaker 1: podcast from earlier this week to hear the entire thing.
• 19:41
  Speaker 1: I want to get back to the big story number
• 19:44
  Speaker 1: three of the week you may have missed, Senata, I
• 19:46
  Speaker 1: want to move to this education bill that is so
• 19:48
  Speaker 1: important that you have been working on. Explain what this
• 19:53
  Speaker 1: bill is, why it's important right now, and why American
• 19:57
  Speaker 1: should be paying attention to it.
• 19:59
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Look, you talked a minute ago about how one
• 20:02
  Speaker 2: of the reasons why we're having young people, particularly young
• 20:06
  Speaker 2: people who stay in the education system for a long time,
• 20:09
  Speaker 2: gets so radicalized, so left wing, so America, hating so capitalism,
• 20:14
  Speaker 2: hating so communism, embracing is because our education system is broken.
• 20:19
  Speaker 2: And that's certainly true at the university level, particularly the
• 20:23
  Speaker 2: so called elite universities, but it is also true in
• 20:26
  Speaker 2: K through twelve. And one consequence of K through twelve
• 20:30
  Speaker 2: getting radicalized is that it drives the politics crazy left.
• 20:34
  Speaker 2: But another consequence is they failed in their basic job
• 20:38
  Speaker 2: of teaching. And you know, you used to go and
• 20:41
  Speaker 2: learn the three r's, reading, writing, and arithmetic, And I
• 20:44
  Speaker 2: mean that used to be like the core of what
• 20:46
  Speaker 2: you were learning. Yeah, if you look.
• 20:48
  Speaker 1: At a novel idea. By the way, what a novel idea?
• 20:51
  Speaker 1: You go to school to learn to read, writing to arithmetic, Like,
• 20:54
  Speaker 1: isn't that amazing that someone came up with that curriculum
• 20:56
  Speaker 1: one day and then we just decided to abandon it right.
• 21:00
  Speaker 2: Well, and there is a literacy crisis. The numbers of
• 21:04
  Speaker 2: students coming out of school who can't read, who don't
• 21:07
  Speaker 2: have the ability to read, is staggering. I'm gonna give
• 21:09
  Speaker 2: you some of the stats. So in twenty twenty four,
• 21:13
  Speaker 2: the National Assessment of Educational Progress what's called the NAPE,
• 21:17
  Speaker 2: the reading assessment, showed that thirty three percent of eighth
• 21:22
  Speaker 2: graders are reading at a level that is quote below basic.
• 21:28
  Speaker 2: Thirty three percent. A third of eighth graders can't read
• 21:31
  Speaker 2: at even the barest minimum of levels. For twelfth graders,
• 21:36
  Speaker 2: the average reading scores were three points lower than in
• 21:41
  Speaker 2: twenty nineteen and ten point points lower than in nineteen
• 21:45
  Speaker 2: ninety two. So it is a staggering crisis. And one
• 21:51
  Speaker 2: of the big reasons for that it is that you've
• 21:54
  Speaker 2: had left wing radicals takeover teachers, colleges, education programs that
• 22:00
  Speaker 2: teachers unions, and they've moved away from what actually works.
• 22:06
  Speaker 2: They've adopted an approach to reading that is called three quing.
• 22:11
  Speaker 2: So three quing it is something that uses context and
• 22:17
  Speaker 2: pictures and sentence structures rather than phonics. Look, when I
• 22:21
  Speaker 2: learned to read, we learned phonics. We would diagram sentences.
• 22:25
  Speaker 2: Phonics works, and you know what we now know three
• 22:28
  Speaker 2: quing does not. It's a disaster and it's produced terrible results.
• 22:35
  Speaker 2: So a number of states Florida, Indiana, North Carolina, Ohio,
• 22:38
  Speaker 2: South Carolina, Texas, West Virginia, and Wisconsin have all banned
• 22:42
  Speaker 2: teaching three qing because the data are terrible. It fails
• 22:46
  Speaker 2: to teach kids to read. What is amazing, though, is
• 22:51
  Speaker 2: a number of schools instead have focused on what's called
• 22:55
  Speaker 2: the science of reading, which is going back to phonics,
• 22:59
  Speaker 2: going back to the basics of teaching reading. And the
• 23:02
  Speaker 2: results have been staggering. And there's something called all right,
• 23:06
  Speaker 2: you're an all miss grad You're gonna like this. There's
• 23:09
  Speaker 2: something called the Mississippi Miracle.
• 23:13
  Speaker 1: So love this already, keep singing this song. I'm ready.
• 23:17
  Speaker 2: In twenty thirteen, Mississippi's reading numbers were not good. Mississippi
• 23:23
  Speaker 2: was forty ninth in the nation on the national assessments
• 23:27
  Speaker 2: and reading. They began then going in on the science
• 23:31
  Speaker 2: of reading and vigorously teaching phonics, and Mississippi has risen
• 23:35
  Speaker 2: from forty nine in the country to a top ten
• 23:40
  Speaker 2: state in the country in fourth grade reading achievement. By
• 23:44
  Speaker 2: the way, it wasn't money that did it, it was
• 23:47
  Speaker 2: actually teaching what works. Alabama, by the way, did the
• 23:52
  Speaker 2: same thing. They moved from forty ninth to thirty fourth. Louisiana,
• 23:57
  Speaker 2: Louisiana moved from forty ninth to thirty seconds. And here's
• 24:02
  Speaker 2: what the New York Times said, you're gonna like this.
• 24:05
  Speaker 2: The New York Times said, in twenty nineteen, blue states
• 24:07
  Speaker 2: had better average test scores than red states after adjusting
• 24:10
  Speaker 2: for democraphics. Now red states are mostly ahead. That's the
• 24:15
  Speaker 2: New York Times. And so what happened on this legislation
• 24:19
  Speaker 2: is I introduce legislation this week that takes the existing
• 24:23
  Speaker 2: federal grants that go to education. There's a pretty big
• 24:26
  Speaker 2: funding stream from the federal government to states for education
• 24:29
  Speaker 2: and the reading funds. The legislation I introduced said, if
• 24:34
  Speaker 2: you want to get those reading funds, you have to
• 24:38
  Speaker 2: use the reading methods that are demonstrated empirically to work.
• 24:43
  Speaker 2: You have to have what actually works and what the
• 24:46
  Speaker 2: data shows work. You can't teach this garbage that results
• 24:50
  Speaker 2: in kids not learning. You've got to use the empirically
• 24:54
  Speaker 2: successful methods. And what's interesting, by the way, who's against
• 24:58
  Speaker 2: this bill?
• 24:58
  Speaker 1: Because if you have the data you just mentioned there
• 25:01
  Speaker 1: showing where this is working, you would think this would
• 25:04
  Speaker 1: be by partisan.
• 25:06
  Speaker 2: So it actually is. So I introduced this bill with
• 25:09
  Speaker 2: Brian Shotts. Brian Shotts is a Democrat. He's from Hawaii.
• 25:13
  Speaker 2: Interestingly enough, Brian is widely considered the next Democrat leader
• 25:18
  Speaker 2: in the Senate. He's widely considered the most likely successor
• 25:21
  Speaker 2: to Chuck Schumer. And Brian I know, well, he's a
• 25:25
  Speaker 2: friend of mine. He's on the Commerce Committee with me.
• 25:28
  Speaker 2: I'm the chairman of the Commerce Committee. He and I
• 25:29
  Speaker 2: have done a number of bills together. And look, would
• 25:32
  Speaker 2: you talk with Brian. He's a Democrat, so he can
• 25:35
  Speaker 2: be left wing on a lot of issues, but one
• 25:38
  Speaker 2: on one he can be quite reasonable. As you know,
• 25:40
  Speaker 2: I play hoops every week. Brian's come out several times
• 25:43
  Speaker 2: and played hoops with me. I mean, he's and I'm
• 25:46
  Speaker 2: going to say something that's going to surprise you. This
• 25:49
  Speaker 2: bill was his idea.
• 25:51
  Speaker 1: Really.
• 25:52
  Speaker 2: He came to me. He came to me on the
• 25:54
  Speaker 2: Senate floor and he said, Ted, have you've seen the
• 25:57
  Speaker 2: data from Mississippi and the Mississippi Miracle and the incredible
• 26:01
  Speaker 2: reading scores that are coming out of Mississippi. And by
• 26:04
  Speaker 2: the way, this doesn't happen often. Democrats don't praise red
• 26:07
  Speaker 2: states that often. And I said, yeah, I have. It's fantastic.
• 26:12
  Speaker 2: And he said, what do you think about us joining
• 26:15
  Speaker 2: together to draft legislation that would require if you're going
• 26:17
  Speaker 2: to get the federal funds that are going for literacy,
• 26:20
  Speaker 2: you've got to teach using the reading methods that the
• 26:24
  Speaker 2: data show actually produced results. And I said, I think
• 26:27
  Speaker 2: that'd be fantastic. I'm a huge fan of phonics. I
• 26:30
  Speaker 2: don't like these woke teaching methods that are just a
• 26:34
  Speaker 2: failure and a disaster. And it's interesting my team. I
• 26:38
  Speaker 2: went to them and so I said, hey, you know,
• 26:39
  Speaker 2: shots pitch doing this, and my team was skeptical. They said,
• 26:43
  Speaker 2: we don't really believe a Democrat's going to go along
• 26:45
  Speaker 2: with something that is praising what's working in red states
• 26:49
  Speaker 2: and by the way, implicitly criticizing the woke education policies
• 26:54
  Speaker 2: in many Blue states. To Brian's credit, Look, I mean
• 26:57
  Speaker 2: he we introduced it to getather. You asked who opposes it.
• 27:02
  Speaker 2: I will confess it's early enough now that I don't
• 27:05
  Speaker 2: want to give you an answer to that. My assumption,
• 27:07
  Speaker 2: My assumption is the teachers' unions will oppose it. My
• 27:10
  Speaker 2: assumption is some of the Blue states will oppose it,
• 27:13
  Speaker 2: and the sort of woke educrats, the people who are
• 27:17
  Speaker 2: teaching at the education schools who are teaching teachers who
• 27:21
  Speaker 2: are teaching this nonsense that doesn't work. I assume all
• 27:24
  Speaker 2: those guys will oppose it. But I'll say this, we
• 27:28
  Speaker 2: just introduced it. I'm going to try to see if
• 27:30
  Speaker 2: we could move it forward and maybe we get support
• 27:33
  Speaker 2: for it. I hope we do.
• 27:34
  Speaker 1: By the way, what do you need when you say
• 27:36
  Speaker 1: moving forward to people understand? And this is one of
• 27:39
  Speaker 1: the reasons why I love doing the show. When you
• 27:41
  Speaker 1: say you're hoping you get the support, what is moving
• 27:44
  Speaker 1: it forward actually look like in the legislature.
• 27:47
  Speaker 2: So look, you drop the bill initially. The next step
• 27:50
  Speaker 2: that we'll work on doing is trying to get other supporters,
• 27:53
  Speaker 2: trying to get other co sponsors. So I'll reach out
• 27:55
  Speaker 2: to other Republicans and other Democrats. Brian will reach out
• 27:58
  Speaker 2: to other Democrats and also Republicans. I'd like to get
• 28:02
  Speaker 2: a pretty good group of bipartisan co sponsors, and there
• 28:05
  Speaker 2: are number of Democrats that I've worked with on different
• 28:07
  Speaker 2: bills who and particularly given that it's Brian and me,
• 28:10
  Speaker 2: we I think we can get other senators to co
• 28:12
  Speaker 2: sponsor it. So let's say we get a half dozen
• 28:15
  Speaker 2: rs and a half dozen d's that starts to be
• 28:17
  Speaker 2: a bill that's got some real heft to it, because
• 28:19
  Speaker 2: you look, particularly if you've got some ideological diversity. The
• 28:23
  Speaker 2: bill would go, uh, go to to committee at first.
• 28:30
  Speaker 2: I assume this would go to what's called the Help Committee,
• 28:33
  Speaker 2: which is the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. So
• 28:36
  Speaker 2: the first step is to get the committee to mark
• 28:39
  Speaker 2: it up, will work to get more by more sponsors,
• 28:43
  Speaker 2: to get a bigger coalition behind it, and then I'll
• 28:45
  Speaker 2: go to the chairman of that committee, that's Bill Cassidy,
• 28:48
  Speaker 2: and ask him to mark it up, which is for
• 28:50
  Speaker 2: the committee to take it up and pass it. And
• 28:52
  Speaker 2: we've got if we've got a good enough coalition behind it,
• 28:54
  Speaker 2: we've got a real chance at that. Once it gets
• 28:57
  Speaker 2: out of committee. There are a couple of paths you
• 28:59
  Speaker 2: can take to pass. One path is to try to
• 29:02
  Speaker 2: pass it by unanimous consent. Now I've passed a lot
• 29:06
  Speaker 2: by unanimous consent. If you do the work and build
• 29:09
  Speaker 2: the coalition, you can get things done that way. But
• 29:12
  Speaker 2: a single senator can object, So I don't know right
• 29:16
  Speaker 2: now if this is possible. You may have an Elizabeth
• 29:18
  Speaker 2: Warren or someone on the far left who objects to this. Uh.
• 29:22
  Speaker 2: The other way to pass it is to attach it
• 29:26
  Speaker 2: to another vehicle that is moving another bill that is
• 29:29
  Speaker 2: being passed, to put it on that And and so
• 29:33
  Speaker 2: we've got some time to get there. We've got to
• 29:34
  Speaker 2: build the coalition, we've got to get it out of committee,
• 29:36
  Speaker 2: we've got to get it teed up where it's at
• 29:39
  Speaker 2: a position to then try to pass it. And then
• 29:40
  Speaker 2: when you get out of the Senate, then you try
• 29:42
  Speaker 2: to pass it in the House. And I'm confident the
• 29:45
  Speaker 2: President would sign it. So we are early in that process,
• 29:49
  Speaker 2: but I'm encouraged to see that that that we're able
• 29:52
  Speaker 2: to get a Democrat and Republican working together saying, look,
• 29:55
  Speaker 2: we really got to teach our kids to read that.
• 29:58
  Speaker 1: It should it should be one hundred to one in
• 30:00
  Speaker 1: my opinion, teaching kids to read that shit. It might
• 30:02
  Speaker 1: be a problem and it might be as always, thank
• 30:05
  Speaker 1: you for listening to Verdict with Center Ted Cruz Ben
• 30:08
  Speaker 1: Ferguson with you don't forget to deal with my podcast,
• 30:11
  Speaker 1: and you can listen to my podcast every other day
• 30:13
  Speaker 1: you're not listening to Verdict or each day when you
• 30:15
  Speaker 1: listen to Verdict. Afterwards, I'd love to have you as
• 30:17
  Speaker 1: a listener to again the Ben Ferguson Podcasts, and we
• 30:20
  Speaker 1: will see you back here on Monday morning.