Deconstructed

Ilya Somin, Professor of Law at George Mason University, and the author of Free to Move: Foot Voting, Migration, and Political Freedom, joins host T.J. O’Hara on Deconstructed to explore migration between cities, states, countries, and even within the private sector to escape government barriers, overreach, and oppression. Professor Somin is a broadly published author and political commentator whose work has been featured by virtually every major media outlet both in print and on the air. His new book dissects migration at every level and the value it can bring.

Mr. Somin provides a succinct definition of what he means by “foot voting,” which is essentially as it sounds: improving one’s ability to favorably impact his or her life by moving to a more promising location or investing in an outside service. In his opinion, the less restrictive the regulation of movement, the better.

It is an interesting discussion about a serious issue in today’s world, particularly as the refugee issue is about to explode because of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. As a side note: Professor Somin has “put his money where his mouth is” in a very positive way. He is donating fifty percent of the proceeds of his book sales to support a refugee fund. Pick up a copy if you would like to help the cause.

Andy Moore, Executive Director of the National Association of Nonpartisan Reformers (NANR), joins host T. J. O’Hara on Deconstructed to discuss that organization’s progress toward attaining nonpartisan reform. Mr. Moore serves as an entrepreneur-in-residence with Price College of Business at the University of Oklahoma, and he is also the founder of Let’s Fix This, which is focused upon building civic engagement and power for political reform.

Given Mr. Moore’s diverse educational background (BS in Psychology, Master of Arts in Marriage and Family Therapy, and an MBA in Entrepreneurship and Entrepreneurial Studies), T. J. asks what attracted him to the world of political reform. Mr. Moore references his natural interest in helping people and the shocking regulatory obstacles he observed his clients encounter when trying to access the public programs they needed. While trying to resolve the systemic issues, he witnessed a budgetary crisis in his state and questioning what caused it. When it became clear that the root cause was government dysfunction, he formed Let’s Fix This to get citizens more involved. It was through that organization that he began to work with NANR and ultimately became its Executive Director.

Mr. Moore describes NANR’s role as that of a trade association: a group that connects other reform organizations, leverages resources, and shares best practices. NANR does not try to promote itself or endorse any specific reform. Instead, it supports reform in the abstract and provides tools for the organizations (big and small) that are trying to achieve it.

T. J. asks for examples of the types of issues that NANR’s members are pursuing. Mr. Moore discusses the members’ interest in open elections that result in majority outcomes. He describes the challenges that close primaries present and how plurality voting often results in a choice between the lesser of two evils. NANR’s members are working to assure that independents have a say in primary elections and that alternative voting processes like Top 5 and Ranked Choice Voting be used to drive more representative results.

Mr. Moore also discuss election reforms that expand access to voting.  He cites the need to assure that every eligible voter has an opportunity to cast their vote. While citing that some states are headed in a positive direction and others are not, he talks about specific elements that can contribute to a more accessible ballot box.

T. J. asks about gerrymandering, which has been prominently in the news. Mr. Moore describes what is transpiring and draws a distinction between what the politicians and Parties want versus what the people want.

The two then examine one of the more challenging issues that NANR members are pursuing: a potential constitutional amendment to drive campaign finance reform. For example, Mr. Moore speaks about an initiative that would override the United States Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United and thereby prevent corporate money from flowing into the political arena in a manner that can potentially disrupt election integrity. T. J. asks if there is a parallel concern over union donations since neither a corporation nor a union can ever accurately reflect every single employee’s or member’s position to which Mr. Moore gives an inspiring response.

If you have concerns over the current state of our Nation’s elections and how the process needs to be changed to expand access and protect its integrity, you need to listen to this show. Then, get involved

Shawn Griffiths, National Editor of the IVN Network and the host of Toppling the Duopoly, joins T. J. O’Hara on Deconstructed to discuss voting rights, presidential debates, and electoral reform from a practical perspective. Beyond his responsibilities as IVN’s National Editor, he also is an election reform expert who collaborates with the leaders of related movements from across the nation.

After a brief discussion of some of the subjects and guest that have been featured on Toppling the Duopoly, Mr. Griffiths dives into the world of voter rights. He speaks about the recent attempts to pass the Voting Rights Act at the federal level and some of the inherent challenges of trying to affect comprehensive reform. Beyond the constitutional challenges, he explores why these issues are better left to the states to resolve.

T. J. asks about some of the more common and controversial issues that arise in any discussion of voting rights, including Voter ID and Early Voting initiatives. Mr. Griffiths explains how the former is often misunderstood and misrepresented. He cites the bipartisan Carter-Baker Commission on Federal Election Reform that reached a consensus on the need for Voter ID and how to address it back in 2005. Of course, those bipartisan recommendations have fallen by the wayside in favor of the hyper-partisan positions to which the parties cling today.

Mr. Griffiths also addresses T. J.’s question pertaining to Early Voting: “When is “early” too early?” The two discuss the pros and cons of Early Voting and the direction it has been heading.

Then, they explore the Republican Party’s recent consideration of requiring its presidential candidates to pledge not to participate in any debate hosted by the Commission on Presidential Debates. Mr. Griffiths provides background on the history of the CPD, how it came to be, and why the Republican Party’s action just might help correct what has become a dysfunctional system… or destroy it.

In the final segment of the show, Mr. Griffiths responds to a question about the Electoral College. Some people think it is fine just the way it is while others think it should be replaced by a direct democracy. Mr. Griffiths explains the pros and cons of both schools of thought and then offers a better approach.

Sit back and enjoy a balanced discussion based on Mr. Griffiths’ deep understanding of the issues surrounding election reform. It’s an experience you won’t find anywhere else.

Renowned democratic strategist Joe Trippi joins host T. J. O’Hara on Deconstructed to explore a variety of critical political issues. Mr. Trippi brings a wealth of knowledge and experience to the show. He has worked on many Presidential, Gubernatorial, and United States House and Senate campaigns and has been a regular commentator on a wide variety of network news and opinion shows. He is currently the host of That Trippi Show and recently joined The Lincoln Project, which is usually cast as a conservative organization.

T.J. leads with a question about the upcoming midterm elections. Mr. Trippi warns against viewing 2022 “as a fight between Right versus Left or Republicans versus Democrats.” He believes that “democracy itself is on the ballot.” He cites his belief that former President Trump is leading an anti-democracy movement and that the traditional Republican Party no longer exists.

Mr. Trippi raises January 6th as an example of the authoritarian approach the former President and his followers will impose on our Nation. He argues that the Republicans in office have been obstructionist to the current Administration. T.J. asks what the distinction is between “obstructionist” tactics and “the Resistance,” and Mr. Trippi responds.

Mr. Trippi also comments that some Republicans hold that “violence may be needed,” which he says is indicative of the threat that Party’s victory would present not only in 2022 but in 2024 as well. T.J. suggests that part of the challenge for independents is that they heard the mantra that “violence may be needed” from the other side of the aisle to justify actions that occurred during the 574 riots in 2021. Mr. Trippi suggests that the threat to democracy is the distinction.

The two then move into a discussion on voter rights. Mr. Trippi shares his view of what might be a reasonable approach to the issue. Some of his suggestions align with his Party’s narrative, but others are reflective of a less partisan approach. He offers interesting positions on same-day registration and Voter ID laws that are worth consideration.

Mr. Trippi provides an interesting example of what may have transpired if then-President Obama had taken action to block the 2016 presidential results. T.J. teases that everyone already knows that Russian interference stole the 2016 election.

The two then discuss the recent challenge to the filibuster. Mr. Trippi argues that all bets are off because, while it worked when there were two ideological Parties, that time has passed. The Republican Party has ceased to exist and given way to a Trump-led group of followers. Mr. Trippi’s position is that Voting Rights cannot be held hostage, so the filibuster must be suspended. T.J. references 2005, when the roles were reversed in a 50/50 Senate with Vice President Dick Cheney commanding the tie-breaking vote and then-Senator Biden excoriating Republicans for suggesting that the filibuster be suspended. He suggests that political flip-flopping disturbs many well-informed independents.

It is fascinating to hear two knowledgeable individuals have a civil discussion about some of today’s most emotionally charged political issues.  Sometimes they agree and sometimes they don’t, but they remain completely respectful throughout… just when you thought that was a lost art.  Listen to the show to renew your belief that it still is possible.

John Gable, co-founder and CEO of AllSides.com and AllSidesForSchools.org, joins host T. J. O’Hara on Deconstructed to discuss the importance of learning how to reach a factual conclusion rather than a partisan one. In a world in which biased representations often carry the day, these two organizations strive to expose their audiences to a range of opinions.

Mr. Gable begins the discussion with a reflection upon his upbringing as a Republican in the blue state of Kentucky (as it is now and was at the time). Transitioning from his early work with political candidates and organizations, he describes what he experienced migrating to the world of technology in the liberal epicenter of the West Coast. He describes the very few differences he had with his co-workers as compared to what he noticed they had in common. Within that context, he offers another interesting insight into the contrast he saw between San Francisco and a city in Mississippi where he once worked.  It may not be what you might guess.

Then, Mr. Gable explains how the idea for AllSides originated. Its premise is that the way society gets its news and information affects the world around us. He suggests that news, social media, and even search results have dramatically changed in the last several years, becoming so narrowly filtered, biased, and personalized that we are becoming less informed and less tolerant of different people and ideas. AllSides was created to present a broader range of views to help us learn to resist any attempts to manipulate our beliefs.

When T.J. asks how AllSides works, Mr. Gable provides an overview of how AllSides literally presents “all sides” of an issue. He describes how his team continually evaluates media sources to determine where they lie on the political spectrum and ultimately assigns a “Media Bias Rating” to each source (i.e., Left / Lean Left / Center / Lean Right / Right). He then explains how they select sources on the Left, Right, and Center for every critical issue. There is no attempt to sway AllSides’ audience one way or the other – simply an effort to expose readers to different points of view to broaden their perspectives.

AllSides even assigns ratings to “fact checking” organizations because, yes, they also exhibit biases. It becomes painfully apparent that “facts” often have little to do with the “checking” these entities provide.

Mr. Gable also discusses the wide range of tools that AllSides offers including “Talks” and a fascinating approach called “Mismatch.” The latter tool leads to a discussion of the unique tools that are available with the affiliate organization AllSides for Schools. That program reaches out to institutes from Middle Schools to Colleges. Mr. Gable shares some of the curricula and practice skill instructions that are available to help bridge the gaps that exist in our education system with respect to understanding fundamental civics, the ability to engage in civil discussions, and the capacity to exercise critical thinking.

T.J. says AllSides is a “go to” website that should be on everyone’s short-list of political resources. If you are serious about arriving at your own informed decision rather than just accepting what the Party or media outlet of your choice decides for you, AllSides is an excellent source with which to begin.

John Daniel Hull, IV, founder and partner of the D.C. law firm of Hull McQuire PC, joins T.J. O’Hara, host of Deconstructed, to share his political experiences and observations from inside the Beltway. Mr. Hull is a distinguished attorney who, as a Democrat, served as a Legislative Assistant to a congressional Republican before beginning his career as a litigating attorney.

In recent years, his political affiliation has shifted to a more conservative point of view, and he explains what drove his change of heart. He cites the tenor of the media in Washington, D.C. and how it has impacted the way with which events and individuals are often portrayed.

Mr. Hull describes the similarities and differences he personally observed in the Black Lives Matter protests he attended as well as the January 6th rally that served as a precursor to the insurrection at the Capitol later that day. His observations of the attendees and some of the groups that drove the behavior of the crowds are quite interesting in each case. As a former journalist, his “takeaways” are quite compelling.

Then, Mr. Hull does a “deep dive” into “free speech” differentiating the actual element of that phrase and its misplaced use. T.J. quizzes him on “freedom of the press” as well, and he dissects that issue as well.

From Antifa to the Proud Boys, Mr. Hull has had an opportunity to directly observe the behaviors of both and the aftermaths of their actions. He describes what the media reported relative to the facts versus the impact of any partisan spin on national perspectives. Learn how an actual observer evaluates the actions he saw, the people he met, and the way each was presented to the public. Some may be in complete alignment with what you might suspect. Others may stun you with what the genuine details reveal… particularly with respect to the law.

Leave your political biases at the door and enter the world of someone who lives in D.C. and regularly experiences history as it occurs. Then, ask why this isn’t what you may have read or seen from either side of the aisle.

Pearce Godwin, founder and CEO of the Listen First Project and the #ListenFirst Coalition, joins T.J. O’Hara, host of Deconstructed, to discuss what is driving the political divide and how to fix it. After working for the United States Senate and serving as a national political consultant for presidential and statewide campaigns, Mr. Godwin traveled to Africa with a relief organization to gain a fresh perspective. On a late-night bus trip between Uganda and Kenya, he reflected upon the political vitriol that was transpiring in the United States in contrast to the “incredible relational wealth” he experienced in the incredibly impoverished countries he had been visiting. It was then that he jotted down a few notes on what ultimately evolved into the Listen First movement.

Mr. Godwin’s intuitive sense is that political opponents have far more in common than they might admit. He describes how he settled on the concept of seeking out those who are different from him and to “listen first” before he formed his opinion. He shares how that simple phrase spawned a coalition that now features nearly 400 organizations that are trying to improve our political environment.

Mr. Godwin talks about the mission of the Listen First Project and the principles that drive the initiative. He says the organization is predicated on the belief that “every person has dignity” and should be welcomed with appreciation, curiosity, empathy, and grace. Mr. Godwin also thinks that diversity can be America’s greatest strength if it isn’t used as a political weapon to separate us.

Then, T.J. explores some of the compelling polling data that is listed on the Listen First website. The two discuss what Mr. Godwin calls the “toxic polarization” of America.

Poll results indicate that 87% of Americans believe political polarization is a threat to the country, 66% see the opposing party as a serious threat to the U.S., 42% see the opposing party as “downright evil,” 20% say many members of the other side “lack the traits to be considered fully human,” and 15% of Republicans and 20% of Democrats say the country would be better off if large numbers of opposing partisans “just died.” Think about that.

The polls also give insight into why we have become so politically jaded. They reveal that 77% have few, and 41% have no friends from the other side. Correspondingly, 62% say the political climate prevents them from saying what they believe. So much for free speech.

The good news, according to Mr. Godwin, is that an overwhelming percentage of Americans recognize the need to reduce divisiveness and that there is more common ground among the American people than the news media and political leaders portray.

T.J. asks what people can do to begin to make a difference. Mr. Godwin responds by describing various programs that Listen First offers to bring people of dissimilar backgrounds and beliefs together to learn from one another. Many of the programs have already reached thousands of concerned citizens. Mr. Godwin shares the organization’s vision for soon reaching millions.

“Listen” to learn more about what this movement is doing and how you can become involved. The first step is to go to the website and sign the pledge: “I will listen first to understand.” If you have the courage to commit to that simple step, you will be well on your way to making a difference.

Jeanne Sheehan Zaino, Ph.D., joins T.J. O’Hara, host of Deconstructed, to discuss the structural challenges of the Constitution that have contributed to the growing political stalemate in our Nation’s capital.  Dr. Sheehan Zaino is a Professor of Political Science and International Studies at Iona College and a regular contributor to Bloomberg Television and Radio.  She is also the author of several books, including her latest, American Democracy in Crisis: The Case for Rethinking Madisonian Government, which is the basis of the interview.

In Dr. Sheehan Zaino’s assessment, the Framers of the Constitution tipped the scales dramatically toward protecting Liberty as opposed to creating a responsive, effective, and accountable form of government.  She discusses the reason for that emphasis and the success it has enjoyed throughout our Nation’s history. However, she also suggests that the effort to avoid tyranny has led to an impasse among our elected officials. No one has enough power to make things happen, and as a result, minority interests are overrepresented, and the will of the majority is suppressed.

Dr. Sheehan Zaino shares her view of how government structure under the Constitution contributes to the quagmire that exists in Washington, D.C.  She says, “It’s hard to be responsive to the majority when you can’t form a majority,” and emphasizes that the Constitution was designed to prevent a concentration of power. In fact, its balance of power inhibits the ability to move quickly on critical issues, including those on which the majority of Americans agree (e.g., immigration reform, gun reform, etc.).

T.J. asks whether the issue is only structural or if elected officials also bear responsibility. Dr. Sheehan Zaino responds by acknowledging the personal element but underscores the fact that barriers erected by the structure of our system are critical components. In fact, she opines that the structure itself impedes voters’ ability to hold elected officials accountable. She also emphasizes how often “things only get done” in periods of crisis.

In terms of effectiveness and efficiency, T.J. cites Singapore as an example of a highly efficient and effective government but one that is devoid of a Twenty-Second Amendment. As such, it was ruled for 31 straight years by an authoritarian Prime Minister who curbed a wide number of freedoms and imposed harsh punishments for serious non-conformance. T.J. poses the question, “To what degree should we be willing to give up Liberty in return for a more responsive, effective and accountable government.” Dr. Sheehan Zaino, who is also a pollster, says she would love to conduct that poll as her next project is focused on comparing autocracy to democracy.

The two also discuss the role the Parties play. From a political science perspective, Dr. Sheehan Zaino submits that responsible Parties should be part of the solution. Of course, “responsible” is the operative word.  Whether the major Parties qualify in that regard is up for question.

Dr. Sheehan Zaino also reviews the two alternatives within Article V (Amendment) that could be used to address some of the structural issues and the challenges to executing either of them. She also discusses some of the extra-constitutional means that exist (e.g., the filibuster) as well as some specific solutions that should be considered.

This is an extremely interesting and important interview. It provides a point of reference and a point of view that will challenge your thinking. Listen and learn.

The Honorable David M. Walker joins T.J. O’Hara, host of Deconstructed, to discuss a myriad of issues that are impacting the United States’ economy. Mr. Walker is the former Comptroller General of the United States and CEO of the United States Government Accountability Office under Presidents Clinton and Bush (43). Most recently, he served as a Distinguished Visiting Professor of Economics at the United States Naval Academy.  Having worked for presidents of both major parties, Mr. Walker is positioned to provide a nonpartisan assessment of what our nation is doing right and what it is doing wrong with respect to the economy.

The discussion begins with the debt ceiling. What is the potential impact of the debt ceiling, which has become a recurring crisis? Should there even be a debt ceiling, or is there a more intelligent way to address the challenge? Mr. Walker clarifies the issue and offers insight into what could be done to address it in a rational way if our federally elected officials were willing to surrender using it as a political pawn. He also highlights the significant difference between our nation’s funded and unfunded liabilities and provides an example at just how much “debt” each of us technically carries in that regard.

Mr. Walker also examines our interest rate vulnerability and the potential inflationary spiral of the multi-trillion-dollar bills that are pending in the Legislative Branch. He shares his perspective of the pros and cons of the Infrastructure Bill and the Spending Bill that are coming up for votes.

Then, the conversation turns to the COVID-19 pandemic. Mr. Walker talks about the way the vaccination issue has been managed and offers insights into the actual statistics. He also offers suggestions for what might be a more equitable approach that would benefit everyone.

Finally, T.J. asks about Afghanistan within the context of the SIGAR Reports that have been generated by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. While the Special Inspector General was not a direct report to the Government Accountability Office during Mr. Walker’s tenure as CEO, he did have visibility to the reports from 2003 to 2008. He reveals the disconnect between the initial mission in Afghanistan versus the untenable mission into which it evolved. He also evaluates the orchestration of the recent evacuation, including underreported elements such as the “pallets of cash” that were left behind. He also suggests the United States’ international failures predate Afghanistan (beginning with Iraq).

Listen to Mr. Walker’s candid, inside assessment of our nation’s economic challenges: those that occur naturally… and those that the Government manufacturers on our behalf.

(Note:  This interview was prerecorded.  Prior to publication, Congress may have acted on some of the issues that were discussed.)

David Nevins, co-founder and chair of the Bridge Alliance, joins T.J. O’Hara, host of Deconstructed, to discuss the Bridge Alliance and two of its most ambitious new initiatives: Citizen Connect and The Fulcrum. Mr. Nevins is a very successful businessperson who has always been interested in leadership. That latter passion attracted him to the world of politics, which often fell short in that area.

He recognized the need to bring people together and became a strong advocate for closing the political divide. This led to his co-founding of the Bridge Alliance (along with Debilyn Molineaux) that now represents a coalition of nearly 100 organizations.

Mr. Nevins shares his view of the Five Principles of the Bridge Alliance and the critical role they play in shaping a more diverse and participatory form of political exploration. He describes why the Bridge Alliance was formed and how it has helped fuel the growth of its members.

Then, Mr. Nevins describes one of the Bridge Alliance’s more recent initiatives: Citizen Connect, a non-partisan platform that helps Americans find the civic organizations and events that matter most to them. This unique organization welcomes people from across the political spectrum and helps them find organizations and events that offer a path forward that is consistent with their priorities. Mr. Nevins explains how this portal is designed to make civic engagement as easy, painless, and rewarding as possible for those who participate.

Finally, T.J. asks about the Bridge Alliance’s latest project: The Fulcrum. Mr. Nevins portrays its original role as a platform where insiders and outsiders to politics can become more informed and also meet, talk, and act to improve democracy in a real-world way. From an editorial standpoint, The Fulcrum tries to remove personal bias from its reporting and provide a range of perspectives. It is committed to the challenging job of verifying the accuracy and credibility of all of the information it receives and shares.  However, The Fulcrum is in the process of even expanding its role.

Mr. Nevins reveals the emergence of The New Fulcrum that will incorporate elements of pop culture, including all of the arts (e.g., music, theatre, poetry, dance, etc.). While politics can be divisive, the arts will add an element that brings people together naturally. Mr. Nevins suggests that the arts can also bring people together in ways that words cannot.

Joy and hope are often cast aside in the world of political reform. That will no longer be the case if The New Fulcrum has anything to say about it. Listen to the advice and guidance that Mr. Nevins and his initiatives are offering to see if there is an opportunity for you to participate in moving our Nation forward in a way that aligns with your values and interests. Enjoy the conversation.