Podcasts about Public policy

Get ready for an explosive breakdown as Dr. Oz exposes rampant Medicaid fraud across multiple states!

Why is socialism suddenly becoming popular again in America—and what are the real consequences if it succeeds? In this episode of The Tudor Dixon Podcast, Tudor sits down with Dr. Anne Bradley, professor of economics at the Institute of World Politics and Vice President of Academic Affairs at The Fund for American Studies, to examine the resurgence of democratic socialism and why so many young Americans are embracing it. The conversation explores why "free" government programs have become politically appealing, how envy and economic frustration fuel socialist movements, and why history repeatedly shows socialism leading to economic failure and government control. Tudor and Dr. Bradley also discuss the rise of crony capitalism, corporate welfare, regulatory barriers facing small businesses, and how government favoritism undermines entrepreneurship and opportunity. Drawing from history, economics, and Tudor's own experience running for governor of Michigan, they explain the difference between free-market capitalism and government-controlled economies—and why protecting opportunity matters more than ever.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

When discussing youngsters' life outcomes, school is often the first place someone starts investigating. And yet school time is dwarfed by the amount of time kids spend with their parents or other adult caregivers. Recognizing this, developmental psychologist Ariel Kalil, the Daniel Levin Professor at the University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy, focuses her child development research on parenting. "My argument, in a nutshell," she tells interviewer David Edmonds in this Social Science Bites podcast, "is that we spend a lot of time investigating what happens to kids during the school hours and thinking of school as the site for child skill development, when in fact, it's the out-of-school time that dwarfs the amount of time that children will spend in school.' And the academic kicker, she adds, is "we know much less about how to understand that time." Kalil has been looking at questions around economic conditions, parents and child development for a long time. In 2003, for example, she was the first-ever recipient of the Society for Research in Child Development Award for Early Research Contributions, one of several awards or research opportunities centering on her work she has received. Kalil also directs the Center for Human Potential and Public Policy and co-directs the Behavioral Insights and Parenting Lab at Chicago.  

Author Casper ter Kuile on transforming everyday writing into a sacred ritual, drawing on rest and reflection to fuel creativity, and moving past self-doubt to write as a gift for others. You'll learn Why the point of the work week might be the rest, not the other way around. How to turn an ordinary daily habit into a ritual using three simple ingredients. What a weekly tech sabbath can unlock in your most creative thinking. The reframe that turns a dreadful first draft into something you can build on. A piece of advice from a mentor that dissolves the pressure to say something new. How reading writers you love can quietly refill the tank when you're stuck. Why treating your writing as a gift changes the way you handle criticism. The practice for staying humble and kind toward yourself in equal measure. What sacred reading traditions can teach you about going deeper into any text. Why the smallest groups, not the biggest audiences, are where meaning actually forms. Resources & Links Casper ter Kuile's website The Power of Ritual by Casper ter Kuile The Nearness Harry Potter and the Sacred Text (podcast) Sacred Design Lab "How We Gather" report The Sabbath by Abraham Joshua Heschel Seth Godin About Casper ter Kuile Casper ter Kuile is the author of The Power of Ritual and the co-founder of The Nearness: a space to explore life's big questions with like-hearted others. Casper holds Masters in Public Policy and Divinity from Harvard University, is the former cohost of popular podcast Harry Potter and the Sacred Text, and loves harmony singing, the London Review of Books, and arriving at the pub after a long country walk. He lives with his husband in Brooklyn, NY. For show notes, transcripts and to attend our live podcasts visit: podcast.londonwriterssalon.com.For free writing sessions, join free Writers' Hours: writershour.com.*FOLLOW LONDON WRITERS' SALONTwitter: twitter.com/​​WritersSalonInstagram: instagram.com/londonwriterssalonFacebook: facebook.com/LondonWritersSalonIf you're enjoying this show, please rate and review this show!

Read the full transcript here. How large is the housing crisis, and why does it impose trillions of dollars in economic costs? Why has housing become especially unaffordable across English speaking countries and an expanding number of American cities? What does the gap between the cost of building another apartment and the price it can command reveal about housing scarcity? How do local restrictions turn neighborhood opposition into a metropolitan housing shortage? Are NIMBY homeowners rationally defending their interests, or misunderstanding how land values and redevelopment options work? Why might renters and homeowners oppose construction even when their economic incentives diverge? What benefits do density and growth create for businesses, culture, infrastructure, and urban life? How quickly does new supply lower prices when better cities attract more people? Do institutional investors drive housing costs, or mostly arbitrage between ownership and rental markets? How can even luxury construction set off chains of moves that create cheaper housing elsewhere? Alex Armlovich is the Housing Program Officer at Coefficient Giving. Previously, Alex was a Senior Housing Policy Analyst at the Niskanen Center, where he advocated for pro-housing reforms to address scarcity and improve affordability. His writing and research on urban economics and policy has been widely cited. Alex holds a Master in Public Policy from the Harvard Kennedy School and a B.A. from the University of Rochester. Links: Alex's Twitter Staff Spencer Greenberg — Host + Director Ryan Kessler — Producer + Technical Lead WeAmplify — Transcriptionists Igor Scaldini — Marketing Consultant Music Broke for Free Josh Woodward Lee Rosevere Quiet Music for Tiny Robots wowamusic zapsplat.com Affiliates Clearer Thinking GuidedTrack Mind Ease Positly UpLift [Read more]

Social Security Commissioner and IRS Commissioner Frank Bisignano joins Lisa Boothe for an in-depth conversation about modernizing America's largest government agencies, eliminating fraud, and bringing private-sector innovation to Washington. Drawing on decades of leadership at Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, First Data, and Fiserv, Bisignano explains why he left the corporate world to serve in the Trump administration, how technology is transforming Social Security, and what Americans should know about the future of Trump Accounts for children.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

"We have an untapped army of 200,000 PAs that really could step up and drive some change in the healthcare system if we weren't restricted,” says Dr. Jennifer Kolb, capturing her motivation for pushing to update practice regulations for physician associates that date back more than 50 years.  As Chief Medical Officer and Senior Vice President of Clinical Affairs at the American Academy of Physician Associates, Dr. Kolb has been in the middle of the fight at the state and federal level to grant PAs more independence from physicians, full billing rights, and the increased ability to practice across state lines, among other changes.  In this pertinent conversation with Raise the Line host Lindsey Smith, Dr. Kolb explains how these updates could help close huge gaps in access to healthcare, better manage the fight against chronic diseases and improve patient outcomes.   Dr. Kolb also addresses:  Why the name shift from "assistant" to "associate" took her years to fully appreciate; How a 10-year gap in life expectancy across Chicago zip codes shapes her view of health equity; Why PA's shouldn't wait for permission to start making change in their communities. Mentioned in this episode:American Academy of Physician Associates   If you like this podcast, please share it on your social channels. You can also subscribe to the series and check out all of our episodes at www.osmosis.org/podcast

Behind every policy is a patient, caregiver, or family whose story helped make change possible. In this episode, we speak with Andrea Sanchez and Becki Chandler, volunteer advocates with Blood Cancer United, about the power of patient voices in shaping public policy. Drawing from their own family experiences with blood cancer, they discuss issues ranging from medical debt and insurance coverage to clinical trial access and research funding and explain how patients and caregivers can make their voices heard. Learn why sharing your story matters and how personal experiences help lawmakers see that patients are more than numbers on a page. Behind every statistic is a real person, a unique story, and a family impacted by blood cancer. DOWNLOAD TRANSCRIPT CLICK HERE to participate in our episode survey. Mentioned on this episode: Blood Cancer United Advocacy and Office of Public Policy – sign up for volunteer advocacy or sharing your voice here Medical Debt Case Management Program Financial support Accelerating Kids Access to Care Act Dare to Dream Blood Cancer United Scholarship program Blood Cancer Care Close to Home vlog episode National Institutes of Health (NIH) Advocating for Yourself: Insurance, Finances, and Your Rights podcast episode Additional Blood Cancer United Support Resources: Information Specialists Clinical Trial Support Center Young Adult Resources Young Adult Online Chat Free Nutrition Consultations Free telephone/web patient programs SHARE web series Online videos Free booklets Patient Community Caregiver support Caregiver Workbook Support groups Survivorship Workbook Mental Health Resources The post Making Your Voice Count: The Power of Patient Advocacy first appeared on The Bloodline with Blood Cancer United Podcast.

Keva White and John Kepner look back to the tumultuous 1960's in this interview with Dr. Alford A. Young, Jr., University of Michigan Professor of Sociology, Afroamerican and African Studies and Public Policy about his paper entitled Revolt of the Privileged: The Coming Together of the Black Community at Wesleyan University – 1965-1975, written years later while attending Wesleyan.

Text the show! Originally Aired: March 31, 2026What happens when institutions quietly reverse years of policy without ever admitting they were wrong?In this Best Of episode, Chad revisits one of Common Sense's most talked-about investigations into transgender athletics, women's prisons, institutional accountability, and what happens when ideology collides with reality.The conversation isn't simply about transgender policy.It's about something much bigger:When leaders spend years insisting debate is over...then quietly change the rules...without apologizing to the people whose lives were damaged.Topics include:• Women's sports and competitive fairness• Scientific consensus vs political enforcement• California prison housing policy• DOJ investigations• Institutional accountability• Why policy reversals matter• Why "settled science" deserves scrutinyOriginally broadcast March 31, 2026.☎ Call or Text the Show: 252-CHAD-LAW

Data innovation isn't about buying better tools. As Dallas and Cleveland show, it's about how leaders listen, support risk-taking, and work alongside agencies. The result? A culture where innovation thrives, and scales. Host Stephen Goldsmith speaks with Brita Andercheck, Chief Data Officer in Dallas, and Liz Crowe, Chief Innovation and Technology Officer in Cleveland, about how they drive transformative change across city governments. From reporting structures to how you listen to agencies to going out into the field yourself, they share the unglamorous work that actually drives transformation. In this episode, you'll learn: How to strike the balance between centralization and decentralization Why a problem-first approach beats technology-first Why data teams should measure their ROI The importance of collaboration and relationships How to create psychological safety so teams "fail smart" Guest: Dr. Brita Andercheck – Chief Data Officer and Director of the Office of Data Analytics and Business Intelligence, city of Dallas Dr. Liz Crowe – Chief Innovation and Technology Officer, city of Cleveland Listener Survey: bit.ly/datasmartpod Music credit: Summer-Man by Ketsa About Data-Smart City Solutions Data-Smart City Solutions, housed at the Bloomberg Center for Cities at Harvard University, is working to catalyze the adoption of data projects on the local government level by serving as a central resource for cities interested in this emerging field. We highlight best practices, top innovators, and promising case studies while also connecting leading industry, academic, and government officials. Our research focus is the intersection of government and data, ranging from open data and predictive analytics to civic engagement technology. We seek to promote the combination of integrated, cross-agency data with community data to better discover and preemptively address civic problems. To learn more visit us online and follow us on LinkedIn.

Text the show! Originally aired February 17, 2026.This week's Best Of episode begins with a confession that usually surprises people:I drive an electric Hummer.That doesn't make me less conservative.It actually reinforces one of my core beliefs.People don't reject innovation—they reject being told what they're supposed to like.In this episode, we separate technology from politics and examine how mandates, subsidies, and political messaging have transformed a consumer product into a cultural battlefield.The conversation explores: Why coercion creates resistance  How markets drive better innovation than mandates  The history of energy transitions  California's energy contradictions  Why consumer freedom produces better outcomes than political planning This isn't really an episode about electric vehicles.It's an episode about liberty.

Video Version: What does it actually mean when disability advocacy is “level funded”? What are federal appropriations, and why are they such a big deal for disability rights? On this episode of National Disability Radio, Alden Blevins (Communications Manager), Stephanie Flynt McEben (Public Policy Analyst), and Eric Buehlmann (Deputy Director for Public Policy) pull back the curtain on the federal funding process and what it means for the Protection and Advocacy (P&A) network. They discuss the successful FY26 funding fight, why advocacy on Capitol Hill matters, and how everyday people can help. You also get the added bonus of hill-day survival tips, advocacy myths and truths, and a very important debate about coffee and tea. Transcript: Alden Blevins: Hello, and welcome to National Disability Radio. I am here today with two wonderful people who are about to introduce themselves. I am Alden Blevins, Communications Manager here at NDRN. I have my own lived experience with disability and I’m really glad to be here today. What about you guys? Who are you, What do you do? Stephanie Flynt…: Yeah, I’m Stephanie Flynt McEben. I am also one of your hosts of the podcast and NDRN’s Public Policy Analyst. And I have beef with a music streaming app, and I’m not going to talk about which one, but let’s just say that this [00:00:30] music streaming app told me that I was 67 for Christmas this year. And then it had the audacity to… Oh gosh, what was the playlist the other morning that was recommended? It was Old Camping Man Sunday Morning, and it was really weird. Why? I don’t listen to old camping man music unless James Taylor and Chappell Roan and Taylor Swift count as that. But anyway, hope everybody else is having a good day. And hey, if Spotify thinks [00:01:00] you’re old, you’re just… I don’t know. You’re young at heart, anyway. Alden Blevins: I think it clocked my age exactly. And I must say that I listened to a lot of Lady Gaga and Kesha in the last year. Stephanie Flynt…: Yes. Alden Blevins: And to be fair- Stephanie Flynt…: You were in the 2010’s era. Alden Blevins: They were still the two most popular artists when I was graduating from high school, so they clocked me. They clocked me for sure. Stephanie Flynt…: Oh my gosh. Time to introduce Eric, who is our Deputy Executive [00:01:30] Director for Public Policy. How are you doing? It’s great for you to be here. Eric Buehlmann: Great, it’s wonderful to be here. Evidently, your phone must be listening to my music then in that way [inaudible 00:01:44] Stephanie Flynt…: Maybe so. I don’t know what’s going on, but I don’t know how I feel about it. And also, I guess… I don’t know. I guess the Spotify age thing is eclectic because my top artist was Taylor Swift, so I don’t know. Anywho. Eric Buehlmann: So I’m Eric Buehlmann. I’m the Deputy Executive [00:02:00] Director for Public Policy. As Stephanie said, my first choice is not Taylor Swift, but my wife listens to it a lot. So when I’m in the car with her, that’s what I’m listening to. Alden Blevins: This is National Disability Radio. We are the official podcast of the National Disability Rights Network. The National Disability Rights Network works in Washington DC and around the country on behalf of the protection [00:02:30] and advocacy systems, the P&As and the client assistance programs or CAP. We are the nation’s largest provider of legal advocacy services for people with disabilities. The first thing we want to talk about is some big and good news. The P&A network was funded for the rest of FY26. Can we get a hallelujah? Stephanie Flynt…: Yay, woo-hoo! Alden Blevins: The first thing I was just going to ask is, Eric, can you explain to us why it’s a big deal that we were funded and level funded, [00:03:00] and kind of what it took for us to get to this point? Eric Buehlmann: In terms of being able to, why we were able to do this, it’s really our members reaching out to all the representatives, all the senators, making the case, all the good work that the P&As and the CAPs do, and showing all the examples and saying, “Look, if you don’t fund us, this is what’s going to happen, is that person with a disability is not going to be able to get accessible housing or accessible transportation, or the student’s going to be able to go to school or someone’s going to have an assistive [00:03:30] technology device or rampant abuse and neglect are going to be occurring in either the community or institution.” So they made those cases. Congress said, “We agree with you.” And the best we could hope for at this time was at least maintaining our funding and not losing it. Alden Blevins: I think it’s really important to remember that this is not just numbers on a spreadsheet, this has real world impacts on peoples’ lives, the lives of people with disabilities, whether or not they can access enforcement of their civil rights, so [00:04:00] super important. Stephanie Flynt…: Absolutely. Alden Blevins: Just to peel back the curtain and give a little more context for some of our listeners, I just want to go ahead and ask the kind of general question of what are federal appropriations and what does that really mean when we talk about them? Stephanie Flynt…: Yeah, sure. I’m happy to jump in a little bit here. Essentially what federal appropriations are is how Congress allocates funding. And so essentially, there is a long process as Eric kind of talked through a little bit [00:04:30] earlier, in terms of everything that’s been going on with the budget. And so individuals are able to make various appropriations requests to their office. But essentially in a nutshell, it’s essentially just how we get the funds that we need in order to do the work that we do. Alden Blevins: And just kind of practically, what are the steps in an appropriations process or what can people kind of expect out of appropriation season? Oh Stephanie Flynt…: Oh my goodness. Okay, so usually, [00:05:00] of course in the spring, we usually see a big influx of appropriations forms, which, we’re starting to kind of see that now with the House setting their committee deadlines for appropriations, so we’re starting to kind of see an influx of that now. In the Senate, we’ll probably see that a little bit later on as that comes down. But usually the offices will set their personal deadlines, their committee deadlines. And then the appropriations bills, just kind of depending on where they sit, which, all of ours sit on the subcommittee for Labor, [00:05:30] Health and Human Services, Education and related agencies on both the House and the Senate side on the Appropriations Committee. And so there will be a House markup usually around June, as well as a Senate markup in July with the hope that we are able to go ahead and pass the appropriations, the funding that we need for the next fiscal year that starts on October 1st. Alden Blevins: My next one is just why do you guys think advocacy on Capitol Hill matters [00:06:00] during appropriation season? The regular person might not realize how important this is and why. Stephanie Flynt…: Yeah. In my experience, like you said, Alden, a lot of people don’t realize how important and how crucial that kind of advocacy is. But really and truly, that kind of advocacy is what helps us acquire our funding for services, particularly advocacy. So it’s definitely super important to be continuing to follow up with your members. Of course, meeting with your members if you can, [00:06:30] and their staff. Having a steady contact in their offices, things like that. And even just building those relationships in my viewpoint is a good form of advocacy and just making sure that they know who you are, they know what your programs do. They know how it benefits folks in their state/district, et cetera, et cetera, the constituency that they serve. So just making sure that, those points. Eric Buehlmann: And the specific, the biggest requirement is staff [00:07:00] are always seeking information. You’re covering hundreds of programs, multiple issues. They don’t know everything that is going on. They can’t track everything at the same time because they just have information overload. So putting a face with a person, with the story, with the request in front of them makes the biggest difference, because then the staff begins to know who you are. But otherwise, they’re just overloaded with how much material they’re trying to cover and how much stuff they’re trying to do. And if you’re not in front of them, I mean, as [00:07:30] it’s basically said, if you’re not talking to them, you’re on the menu, you’re not the one that’s providing them the information. Stephanie Flynt…: You’re not at the table, you’re on the menu, yeah. Alden Blevins: That makes a lot of sense to me. I was also just going to ask, we’re all so excited and grateful that we were level funded for FY26, but what does level funding really mean? What has that looked like over the last couple years? And having that level or that stagnant funding, what does that mean in terms of the [00:08:00] P&A’s services or the take home impact? Eric Buehlmann: It’s difficult for the P&As because level funding really is in a way, a kind of a cut. Costs are going up continually, healthcare costs are going up. Cost of travel, cost of everything is going up. So level funding ultimately means that they’re able to do less or they may need to shift from doing as much individual case work to more systemic work where you’re helping multiple people by solving one problem. [00:08:30] So level funding is great, especially when you’re facing the potential of cuts. But ultimately if you do that for many, many years, it ultimately means that the P&As and the CAPs will have less staff and able to serve less people. Alden Blevins: Now that we’ve kind of grounded ourselves in a little bit of how this process works, we’re going to talk about the larger policy landscape that we’re all living in right now. What are some of the disability policy concerns we saw come to a head in 2025 and how do we think [00:09:00] that might influence our policy landscape for the rest of 2026? Stephanie Flynt…: Oh my goodness. Do you want to start or do you want me to? Eric Buehlmann: You go first. Stephanie Flynt…: Oh, goodness. I think for me, the biggest thing that comes to mind is the dismantling of the Department of Education. We’ve definitely seen different things that have kind of gone ahead in that regard. And so obviously, there’s a lot of different concerns that are there in those types of things. And so [00:09:30] just continuing to monitor that and what all of that looks like. Of course, I’ll leave a little bit of the healthcare stuff to Eric since that’s more of his specialty, but of course, that is something that I would be remiss not to mention. The various concerns around the Medicaid work requirements that will be taking effect and how that’s going to impact our community. So there are definitely a lot of different policies and a lot of different things that you don’t think about necessarily intersecting with [00:10:00] the disability community, but that are still having impacts on the disability community, particularly those who are members of multiple marginalized communities. Eric Buehlmann: I think building on that for Stephanie is, it’s not just the Medicaid work requirements that are going to hit people. It’s just the massive amounts of cuts to the amount of funding that the states are getting. It’s sort of a partnership between states and the federal government. And if the federal government cuts their share of funding, it means states are going to be cutting their share of funding. And what those cuts [00:10:30] really mean in the long run is that unfortunately, not required services or waiver services are going to be the ones that are going to get hit. If they have to do it, the state will pay for it. If they don’t have to do it and the state’s not willing to put up the money, then those services are going to go away. And in our case, that means home and community-based services for the most part. So not only are a number of people going to get kicked off of Medicaid because they’re having problems following the work requirements or understanding [00:11:00] what the work requirements are and/or having to go through getting re-certified every six months rather than every year, that’s going to mean more people are going to be kicked off. On top of it, you add in all the cuts and the states are going to look around and say, “Well, we’re losing $1 billion,” let’s say, in California, I think is the number they said. “How are we going to make up that gap?” And what they’re going to do is they’re going to say, “Well, these are required and required in the Medicaid program is institutionalized care versus [00:11:30] the ones that we choose to do on our own, which is home and community-based services. Well, if we have to do it, we’ll have to pay for it.” And that means there’s a gap and that gap is going to come out of home and community-based services. Alden Blevins: Yeah. And I think this is kind of a great connection to that home and community-based services piece. I was going to kind of ask, generally speaking, what themes might we be seeing in Congress right now that could affect P&A programs or disability justice as a whole? Eric Buehlmann: I do think one issue [00:12:00] that we’re encountering is more and more members that may not understand disability as well, or what the desires of people with disabilities are, and may listen to not just the person with a disability, they may be listening to their guardians or they may be listening to their parents. Not saying that they don’t know what the person with a disability wants, but if you want to go to the source, the source is the person with a disability. So I think one of the themes, and I think this is why it’s critically important for people with disabilities to be involved in these discussions and [00:12:30] doing this advocacy, is you’ve got to put yourself front and center. And you have to say, “This is what I desire, this is what I want. I want to live in the community, I want to live at home. I want to be able to work in an integrated environment. I don’t want to be paid subminimum wage.” And if they’re not hearing from people with disabilities about that, then that’s a problem. And I think what we’re seeing is sort of a return to sort of the old way of thinking, sort of pre-IDEA, pre-ADA. And people with disabilities should be [00:13:00] off to the side and not at the forefront. And so I think that theme is carrying over in a lot of the ways Congress and the administration are looking at these issues. And I think in terms of other themes, it’s, “We got to save money somewhere.” And their ideas of trying to save money is to cut programs, which actually in the long run, costs more. It costs more to be served in an institution than it costs to live and get served in the community. And [00:13:30] so we’ve really got to be making those cases. I think those are two themes that I’m thinking of. Stephanie Flynt…: Yeah, for sure. And I think that another theme really is just broader justice in the civil rights community, just not completely and fully understanding disability. And so I definitely think that if we’re not careful with everything going on, we definitely could regress back a little bit more into the medical model as opposed to the social model. And I think that some of the demonstration in the legislation [00:14:00] that could potentially be introduced, and of course that we are closely monitoring and making sure that we’re continually keeping an eye out. And of course, we’ll keep folks in the network apprised of those things. But all that to say, I think that’s kind of a demonstrated action when it comes to their understanding of what disability is. Alden Blevins: I love what you guys said, especially about people with disabilities being front and center and telling their own stories and determining, [00:14:30] telling the world what they really want and seek out in their lives. I think that that’s so important for people with disabilities to be in the driver’s seat. For those of you who don’t know, we do have a saying in the disability community that is, “Nothing about us without us.” So kind of speaking about some of the messages that have been happening in the last year, we know that a lot of things have become very polarized throughout the last year, 2025. What opportunities do you guys see for collaboration towards [00:15:00] a better future for people with disabilities? What efforts might be a good target for bipartisan support? Stephanie Flynt…: Yeah. I think for me, definitely always on the hunt for bipartisan opportunity. Because the truth of the matter is that disability, even though it is being portrayed as a partisan issue, it’s not a partisan issue. It’s a nonpartisan issue. And so just kind of keeping that in mind as we continue to do this policy work. I think [00:15:30] what it boils down to really, at least a part of it, is messaging. Because looking at the issues that are in the disability community, because they’re nonpartisan, I think that really, it comes down to it’s not about what you’re saying, it’s how you’re saying, it’s how you’re presenting it. When we’re talking to different offices, we want to emphasize different things that they are most concerned about or that may matter most to their particular constituency or the folks [00:16:00] with disabilities that they may serve. Those would be my things, but I definitely, even though it can be challenging at times, definitely just continuing to keep hope there. Eric Buehlmann: I mean, there’s always a lot of different things. And as Stephanie said, you have to sort of tailor your message around what people are interested in. I mean, things like the Transformation to Competitive Integrated Employment Act, I think there’s a large number of people, and we’ve seen it in the states, they’re phasing out the subminimum wage, even in some [00:16:30] very conservative states. And so that’s something that’s garnered bipartisan support, that people should be paid at least the minimum wage for the work they’re doing. And that they should be integrated into the employment environment and not just in segregated workshops. We were able to get a Republican co-sponsor for the Keeping All Students Safe Act this year, which would place some kind of federal restrictions on the use of restraint and seclusion in schools and provide money for [00:17:00] training, which is critically important so that the teachers know and the school personnel know what they do when they’re encountering tough situations. There’s a number of bills. I mean, ultimately disability is very bipartisan and it impacts everybody. So usually whether you’re a Republican, a Democrat or Independent, you either have a family member or know someone very close to you that has a disability. So you just got to frame the message right. Alden Blevins: I love that you guys both mentioned messaging and disability [00:17:30] being affecting everyone. That’s part of my core messaging that I always try to put out there, is that disability can come for anybody. You can be a person who has no disabilities one morning and your situation could be different by that evening, depending on what happens to you in your life. And even as you age throughout the lifespan, most of us are going to experience some degree of disability in our lives. So advocating for this [00:18:00] community now when you have the chance to is only going to benefit you when you inevitably become a part of it. I think that’s really important to remember. My kind of last question on this topic is just, what do you think you would want policymakers today to know most about our programs at the P&As? Stephanie Flynt…: I’m going to yield to the executive overseer to start. Eric Buehlmann: I mean, I think our members are hidden gems. I think that’s the biggest [00:18:30] thing, is that most people don’t know what a protection advocacy agency is and/or what it does. As I’ve said many times in my stories is I had met the Executive Director of the Vermont P&A for many times when I worked up on the Hill. Had no idea he worked for the Protection & Advocacy Agency. Talked to him about housing, talked to him about employment, talked to him about all these different things, had no idea that there was a Protection and Advocacy Agency. My second day at the job, I go into an NDRN board meeting and there he is, [00:19:00] sitting there. And I’m like, “Oh, that’s what a Protection & Advocacy Agency… Because I didn’t have a clue. So I think we’re sort of a hidden gem. And I think really, the big thing is that the P&As do a lot of work that other agencies can’t. We have these really strong… I hate saying we, but our members have strong authorities to go in and investigate and monitor for abuse and neglect. If that’s going on, they can go in unannounced. They could do these kinds of investigations that other places can’t. There are [00:19:30] story after story of the police being kept out of certain places or Child Protective Services or Adult Protective Services. But the P&A goes in and is able to sort of expose that abuse and neglect. And that’s really the important thing. And I think people just need to know they exist. But there’s more than just the systemic work. Individually, they are helping people around employment or education or accessible transportation and housing. So I just think there are ultimately hidden gems the more [00:20:00] you delve into it. And as you said, Alden, everyone’s going to become, in my opinion, a member of the disability community at one time in their life or not. Could be permanently, could be temporarily if you break your leg or something like that. And now all of a sudden, you begin to realize that yeah, curb cuts do make a heck of a lot of sense. And yes, automatic doors are very helpful and all those kinds of things. And so we just need to do a better job of sort of explaining the beauty of the work the P&As do and that [00:20:30] it’s not just these giant exposes of abuse and neglect, but there’s all the little individual work that they do that’s extremely important to families and people with disabilities. Alden Blevins: We know in this world that policy is never static. There’s always a lot coming at us, coming at you guys, to kind of figure out and think about how it impacts our community. So my next question is just what do we think might be coming in the landscape of 2026? [00:21:00] It’s hard to speculate, but what should we be looking ahead towards as a community? Eric Buehlmann: Election years are always a weird little duck. Stephanie Flynt…: Yes. Eric Buehlmann: Partly because Congress does not stay around that much, they like to go home and they like to campaign. Some would say they’re not here to do as much damage. But the administration’s still here, they could do plenty of damage. And so I mean, my expectation is there will not be [00:21:30] a lot that’s going to really occur. They’re going to do what they normally have to do, which is sort of the appropriations and try to get that done as well as they can before the elections. There may be some messaging bills that they try to work on, but I’m not expecting a lot of things to actually get passed and a lot of work to get done. But I think this gets back to the theme issue and that kind of discussion, which is you need to be laying the foundation for the members that are here now and those that are running, especially [00:22:00] in someone in a seat where a member’s retiring or if there’s an open seat. And you need to be making sure the candidates understand the needs and desires and wishes of people with disabilities so that when they do come here, they already have at least some based foundation. So I would really look at ’26 as you got to focus on funding because that’s going to have to happen no matter what. And then making sure that your candidates and then making sure that your members of Congress understand about disabilities so that when [00:22:30] they come back next year, that they’re really almost ready to get going on the issues of importance. Stephanie Flynt…: Yeah. Alden Blevins: So much of what we do is kind of playing a little bit of defense about whatever is going on in the larger policy landscape or the news cycle of that week. But we obviously also have our own policy priorities that we would like to see and that we would like movement on in the next year. So I was just going to ask, what are NDRN’s top three [00:23:00] public policy priorities? Eric Buehlmann: I think if you’re looking in the proactive world, that’s tough in this day and age. I think our policy priorities tend to be much more in the defensive world now, Which is, there’s sort of a 1A and a 1B. You always have the money aspect of it, the appropriations aspect of it, and making sure that our members have hopefully increased funding, but at least level funding. The second, as I talked about before, is our members have amazingly strong authorities [00:23:30] to sort of ferret out abuse, neglect, fraud and waste. And we got to make sure that those aren’t reduced. And so that’s sort of the other big thing. I think structurally, we’re looking at the administration and saying, “We need to make sure that disability is still centered here.” The Department of Education is extremely important for students with disabilities and the amount of work they do. And around employment because the vocational rehabilitation system is there. Health and Human [00:24:00] Services impacts people with disabilities in huge, humongous ways. And so we got to make sure that those structures stay strong, that are providing the training, the technical assistance, the support to all the different programs that support people with disabilities and that they’re strong. Alden Blevins: Yeah, absolutely. I heard education, I heard healthcare. I think these are all bread and butter issues for us and for the community at large. [00:24:30] It can just be tricky to decide when and where to focus your attention. Stephanie Flynt…: Right. And also too, again, going back to that, how do we mesh the priorities in a way that we could potentially try to work with folks and get stuff done? And I think that that’s kind of where that point of collaboration comes in. Figuring out what the priorities of various offices are and see, how can we kind of mesh ours together? Where’s the common ground? What can we work together [00:25:00] on in order to make things better for disabled folks? Eric Buehlmann: And I think as Stephanie said, this is where these relationships come into effect, because you have no idea what’s going to be the big issue of the day. Today it may be X, tomorrow it’s going to be Y. The day after it’s going to be Z, and the staff are just overwhelmed a little bit. But if you have those relationships with them, if something comes up and you need to get in touch with them, you shoot them that email, you send them that note [00:25:30] and they know who you are and they’re willing to look and listen to figure out what you’re saying and where it needs to fit in their priorities. They don’t know who you are, this gets back to the, if you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu, then they’re not going to understand why this is a problem because you’ve not laid that foundation. So that’s where those relationships come to be critically important, because you just never know what’s going to pop up. Alden Blevins: My next question is, what are kind of the strategies or things that [00:26:00] everyday folks can do to kind of help or support? There’s a lot of overwhelming information coming at folks on all sides. And it would just be really nice if we could know what would be most helpful in terms of getting that community support to advance our priorities. Stephanie Flynt…: I think for me, the biggest thing that I can think of there is just making sure that your voice is being heard and that you are able to kind of amplify your voice when it comes to these issues. [00:26:30] Making sure that you are reaching out to your senators and representative, things of that nature. Of course, there’s the number for the Capitol switchboard and we can certainly put that in the show notes if that’s helpful to people. But for everyday folks, it’s so interesting. I’ll be on Facebook and I’ll just see different things and it’ll be videos of people just calling their senators and representative. And it sounds scary, it sounds daunting, but I promise you, getting [00:27:00] constituent calls is definitely something that is super, super helpful in terms of advocacy there. So definitely, definitely recommend that. Eric Buehlmann: And as Stephanie said, take advantage of those action alerts, take advantage of those days. If you’re looking at your state and local legislatures, a lot of them have disability days where a number of groups will come together and they’ll go to the Capitol and they’ll talk up their issues. Take advantage of those. In terms of the federal, try to keep track of if they’re going to do a town hall or if they’re going to be having a [00:27:30] get together. And go and have a discussion with the staff and the members that are there. And then when it comes to the campaigns, get involved with the campaigns. Make sure that the candidates have some kind of disability platform as part of their work and what they’re doing. Because ultimately if you’ve, I’m going to say trained, trained them ahead of time, then when they come to Congress or they go into the state legislature, you don’t have to explain as much. You’re not having to spend your time explaining why this issue is important. [00:28:00] You get to jump to, “This is why we need to do this.” So you need to be working at those candidates. You need to be looking at their platforms and you need to be talking to them so that they know that you’re there. Alden Blevins: Absolutely. I think a lot of times people feel overwhelmed with just knowing how or why to help. And I love that you even mentioned people posting their calls onto social media, because I think that’s another avenue that folks can use. Talk to your friends, talk to your neighbors, talk to people that you talk with online about how these issues impact you [00:28:30] and your life personally. I think that hearing those stories from people with disabilities can be really impactful as well. All right, I’ve got some quicker round of questions just to kind of help folks get to know both you guys and your work. Stephanie Flynt…: Yay. Alden Blevins: The first one is just almost similar to two truths and a lie. If you could give me one myth and one truth about federal advocacy, what would you say? Eric Buehlmann: I think it’s sort of the flip side of the same coin. To me, [00:29:00] the myth that’s out there is, “My voice doesn’t matter.” And that, “Whatever I say isn’t going to be heard by the staff, isn’t going to be heard by the member and I’m not going to really have an impact.” It does. Again, as I said early on, staff are constantly looking for those sources of information. They cannot keep track of all the topics they cover, all the bills they have to do, all the differing appropriations they’re following. They can’t. They rely on the constituents to provide them information. And if you are a trusted resource and providing them good information, [00:29:30] you’ve got your in and they’ll understand and they’ll follow what you’re asking them to do as best they can. So I think that’s the myth, is that their voice doesn’t make any difference. To me, the flip side of that is the truth is it does make a difference. And so if you’re not engaged, then you’re automatically losing. The disability community needs to be and put itself front and center. Because as Alden said, people with disabilities are a majority of this country. You will eventually be a member [00:30:00] of the disability community. And so therefore, you need to make sure your voice is heard. And so I think the truth is your voice does matter, the myth is people think that it doesn’t. Stephanie Flynt…: I think for me, a myth that I would say, not as interesting as Eric’s, but I think a myth that I would say, and these are probably for people who are kind of newer or just more on the outskirts of things, is that a bill is going to pass overnight. That’s not how policy works. Usually it takes lots of reiterations of introduction [00:30:30] and stuff, but that’s how it’s designed. And so I think that’s kind of where my truth comes in or where the truth comes in for the myth versus truth, is that policy is designed to take a while, even though it can be frustrating at times, but that’s in order to ensure the appropriate checks and balances and whatnot. So no, you’re not going to enter in and pass a bill in two days. Hate to break into any hopefuls, but you know. Eric Buehlmann: No, that is a huge one. People think that policy moves at a lightning quick pace. [00:31:00] It is a snail. Stephanie Flynt…: Yep. Eric Buehlmann: It takes years. I worked eight years on election reform before we were finally able to get it through Congress. And reauthorizations, I mean, this is one of our smaller ones. The Assistive Technology Act program was last reauthorized in 2004. We finally got the next reauthorization done in 2021. So it moves slowly and you have got… I guess that’s another thing, sort of following up on what you’re saying. The truth is you have to stick to these people. Stephanie Flynt…: Yes. Eric Buehlmann: You can’t just say, ” [00:31:30] I talked about this once and it’s going to get done this year.” No, you’re probably back next year. Stephanie Flynt…: Not how it works. Eric Buehlmann: And you’re probably back the next Congress and you’re probably back the next Congress. So you will repeatedly have the same conversations. Stephanie Flynt…: Yes. Especially with staff turnover, too. There are going to be different staff members, folks may move back to the representative or the senator’s districts or their own home districts or change roles, what have you. But there can sometimes be a lot of that [00:32:00] turnover. But that can also be a good thing, too. Eric Buehlmann: But Stephanie, I think we’ve got another good truth and myth. Stephanie Flynt…: Oh, okay. Eric Buehlmann: Which is, the myth in my mind is if I feel like the member’s not supportive or following what I’m talking about and caring about disability, then it’s not worth my time. The truth is staff do a lot of work. Stephanie Flynt…: Yes. Eric Buehlmann: And you may encounter a member that is not really [00:32:30] interested in disability, doesn’t really care about disability, but the staff is very interested in disability. And so your message can get conveyed from the staff to the member. You may not always get everything exactly the way you wanted from the member, but you’ve moved him in a direction, or her, in a direction that they weren’t going to go without the staff. Stephanie Flynt…: Exactly, exactly. Staff definitely have a lot of influence when it comes to different member priorities and things like that, that might not usually be on their [00:33:00] radar, such as disability. Alden Blevins: Actually, I caught Eric saying something yesterday that I thought was so impactful. Somebody was expressing disappointment that their meeting was with a baby staffer. And I heard Eric say, “That baby staffer could be in charge in 10 years.” Stephanie Flynt…: I was going to say, like a Chief of Staff in five years- Alden Blevins: Yeah, you never know what inroads you’re making when you get into those rooms. And you should take the chance once you’re in that room, to make the case for people with disabilities. Stephanie Flynt…: Yes. Alden Blevins: This next one, I’m [00:33:30] hearing a lot of themes of perseverance, maybe having to stay on people, having to return year-to-year. This is just a silly question, but what is your Hill day fuel of choice? Is it coffee, is it tea? What keeps you going? Stephanie Flynt…: I think that mine is probably either, probably Celsius. And then I don’t know if y’all have ever had the Mary’s Gone Crackers, but I like to have little hummus things with me. And so I’ll do the Mary’s Gone Crackers with some hummus on the Hill. And so that’s really good to eat between [00:34:00] meetings and stuff, but they’re really good. They’re quinoa seed crackers, gluten-free, garlicky, basil. I don’t know, they’re really good, especially with hummus. So I guess for me, that’s my food and caffeine. Eric Buehlmann: And Stephanie no doubt, could tell any of everybody what mine is. Stephanie Flynt…: Anything gluten-free/unsweetened iced tea from McDonald’s. Eric Buehlmann: Yep, bingo. I’ve never had coffee in my life. Alden Blevins: Wow. Eric Buehlmann: Yeah, I’ve never had coffee in my life. Stephanie Flynt…: I thought you would at least- Eric Buehlmann: Nope, never had coffee in my life. Alden Blevins: Just not even curious? Stephanie Flynt…: Not a sip? Eric Buehlmann: I’m curious, [00:34:30] but I’ve never had it. I’ve now reached the age of, “Why should I now start?” Alden Blevins: This is so fair, because once you start, it’s hard to stop. Stephanie Flynt…: You’re not going to be able stop. Alden Blevins: It’s real hard to stop. Stephanie Flynt…: Especially when you find a roast that you really like. Eric Buehlmann: I’m a caffeine addict, don’t get me wrong. For many years it was Dr. Pepper, Diet Coke. Stephanie Flynt…: Diet Coke. Eric Buehlmann: Doctor said, “No.” Now I’m an unsweetened tea… Well, I’m not going to say always unsweetened tea, but it’s always usually some form of iced tea. Alden Blevins: [00:35:00] Yeah. And sometimes you sneak in the sweet tea as a treat, I assume? Eric Buehlmann: No, not really. I’m not a big fan of sweet tea. I find it too sweet. Alden Blevins: Wow. Stephanie Flynt…: You have to have the right sweet tea, though. Eric Buehlmann: Yeah, I’m not from the South. Stephanie Flynt…: I was going to say- Eric Buehlmann: I’m in Virginia, but I’m not the South. Stephanie Flynt…: They don’t make good sweet tea up in the DMV if you want good sweet. Actually, they just started carrying Milo’s at my local grocery store, so that’s what I recommend. Eric Buehlmann: I’ve seen Milos. Milos is good? Stephanie Flynt…: I love Milos, yes. Eric Buehlmann: Okay, I’ll have to get that one. Stephanie Flynt…: So good, yeah. I mean, it’s sweet, but it’s not too sweet. Anyway. Eric Buehlmann: See, I find it too sweet. I’ll [00:35:30] mix it with unsweetened iced tea at times. I grew my tea at home. And what I’ll do is I’ll pour a little lemon iced tea in and sort of mix it, but I find it too sweet. But yeah, I’ve never had coffee in my life. Coffee ice cream once or twice, but never- Stephanie Flynt…: Okay, but that’s really good. Eric Buehlmann: Nah, no. Stephanie Flynt…: No? Eric Buehlmann: No. Coffee smells great. I love the smell of coffee, but I’m not going to try it now if I can avoid it. Alden Blevins: Good for you. My next one [00:36:00] is just, what is your go-to story when speaking with folks on The Hill? Do you have a P&A story that you feel like you come back to? Do you speak about issues more generally or do you have a go-to story in your back pocket? Eric Buehlmann: Well, I mean, I think the one I always fall back on is the Kaufman House in Kansas. There was a place in Kansas. I think if you just Google Kaufman House in Kansas, you’ll find it. Basically, this is one of those examples where the P&A was the only one that got in. These [00:36:30] were a husband and wife that were running a, I guess I’d call it a group home, that were doing unspeakably horrible abuse and neglect of people with mental illness. And the state had been called in a number of times, the local people had been called in a number of times, and they just shut the door on them. The P&A went in and exposed the whole thing, basically showing what was going on there. They got convicted of a number of crimes, they were sent away to jail. To me, that’s the example that I will go [00:37:00] to a lot, is without the P&A, these people would’ve been just still going through abuse and neglect. I mean, I think the P&As are creating stories every single day, honestly. The number of reports that come out from P&As, we just got one from the Maryland… Maryland, wrong M. Minnesota P&A, about the use of seclusion with some amazing pictures of the various seclusion rooms in Minnesota that they had come upon. I think they’re occurring every single day and all these reports that are coming out. [00:37:30] Our members are in all sorts of facilities, just exposing abuse and neglect. Unfortunately, some of the stuff we really can’t talk about is they’re exposing the waste, fraud and abuse that’s occurring at times in the representative payee program because people aren’t using the benefits to the benefit of people with disabilities, to the beneficiaries. But the one, if you were going to ask me the one, it would be the Kaufman House. And Nancy Jensen testified [00:38:00] in front of Congress on the importance of the P&A program. She’s written some books on the issues that arose, but that would be the one go-to. Stephanie Flynt…: Yeah. I think for me personally, it really just varies from office to office and various priorities. I will say that one thing I do try to do before meeting with particular offices is I try to reach out to the P&A, just to see if there are any particular stories or any particular things that I should highlight going [00:38:30] on in their state for their senators or representative, or even if there’s anything specific in their district. Eric brought up the report that Minnesota did on restraint and seclusion. And one thing that staffers love is data. So if you’re able to kind of bring in a visual, say like the report or even send in a report of what’s been going on along with a story, along with data, that’s really going to get you far. And so those are things that I really [00:39:00] try to bring, just tangible stuff that they can take back to their higher ups in order to try to get different things up the chain, in order for us to get the support that we’re wanting to get from that particular office, whether the goal is co-sponsoring a particular bill or sponsoring something, or whether the goal is just general support or flagging something. Just making sure that you have those materials that folks can take back. Alden Blevins: Yeah, absolutely. And I [00:39:30] think what Eric said about the network generating stories all of the time, every day. Stephanie Flynt…: Yes. Alden Blevins: Where I sit, working in communications, is I try to share a story. At least every week, there’s a new, new story coming out about something that a P&A is doing, whether it be work related to abuse and neglect, whether it be work related to some states, they’re already talking about the Medicaid waiver programs and how they can apply some systemic advocacy to ensure that those are protected through the changes [00:40:00] coming in the Medicaid landscape. There’s just always something to be aware of that’s going on. And I think that really harnessing all of those stories together presents a really strong case for what our network is able to do. Stephanie Flynt…: Absolutely. Alden Blevins: Yeah. I’ve been told that maybe you’ll have a Hill day or appropriations pun and/or joke? Stephanie Flynt…: I always have a joke, you know this. Alden Blevins: Okay, so? Stephanie Flynt…: Oh my goodness. Alden Blevins: Let’s get a drum roll. Stephanie Flynt…: Yes. All right, [00:40:30] so it’s more of a question for Eric. Eric Buehlmann: Oh, no. Stephanie Flynt…: Are you ready? Eric Buehlmann: No, because we did not test this out beforehand. Stephanie Flynt…: Sorry, okay. How would you describe the appropriations process? Eric Buehlmann: How? Stephanie Flynt…: It’s fund. Alden Blevins: So much fun-d. Stephanie Flynt…: So much fun. Alden Blevins: So much fund. Stephanie Flynt…: Oh my goodness. Alden Blevins: Incredible. Stephanie Flynt…: But yes, that is my joke of the month. I’ll be here next month, assuming that I’m not kicked off the podcast [00:41:00] yet. Sorry, Michelle, you weren’t here for the joke, but I’m sure you’re actually laughing even though you pretend you don’t like them. Alden Blevins: Michelle is groaning from afar. Stephanie Flynt…: Yes. Alden Blevins: Yes. Eric Buehlmann: Stephanie’s puns get us through the day. Stephanie Flynt…: Yes, they do. See, I knew there was a… Yep, there we go. Alden Blevins: You got to laugh, you got to laugh. Stephanie Flynt…: Yes, exactly. Laughing is the best form of self-care when it comes to this kind of work, that’s for sure. Alden Blevins: Absolutely. It’s important to remember that congressional budgets and federal decision [00:41:30] making say a lot about whose rights are protected and whose are not, what voices are included, what voices are not. And I’m very grateful that I got the chance today to sit down with two of my amazing coworkers and hear more of their voices, get to share more about the amazing work that they do for our larger community. This has been National Disability Radio, where we highlight issues that impact people with disabilities. If you enjoyed this episode, be sure to subscribe and continue the [00:42:00] conversation at ndrn.org or anywhere you get your favorite podcasts. Thanks for listening. Until next time, let’s keep working together to create a world where people with disabilities can thrive. Stephanie Flynt…: Bye.

After years of failing both students and educators, is it time to change the way we are teaching the teachers?In this episode, Ariana Guajardo sits down with Kate Bierly, Director of the Next Generation Texas Campaign at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, to discuss her latest research on schools of education and how they've failed both teachers and students.From grade inflation, declining academic standards, and ideological indoctrination, Kate explains how schools of education have changed over the past century and what Texas can do to prepare better teachers.Kate Bierly's research on Education Schools: https://www.texaspolicy.com/education-schools-low-standards-high-indoctrination-zero-results/

In this episode of CharityVillage Connects, we examine what Canada's 2026 Spring Economic Update means for the nonprofit and charitable sector. Where do the federal government's priorities lie? Where does the care economy fit within Canada's future? Sector experts explore the opportunities and challenges ahead, including potential impacts on funding, regulation, service delivery, and community wellbeing. Tune in to The Spring Economic Update: Where Does the Nonprofit Sector Fit in Canada's Future? Meet Our Guests in Order of Appearance Nicole D'Aoust, Charity and Non-Profit Lawyer, Partner, McCarthy TétraultTyler Meredith, Founding Partner, Meredith Boessenkool & Phillips Policy AdvisorsArmine Yalnizyan, Economist and Atkinson Fellow on the Future of Workers, Atkinson FoundationDr. Susan Phillips, Professor Emerita, Philanthropy and Nonprofit Leadership, School of Public Policy and Administration, Carleton UniversityAbout your HostMary Barroll, president of CharityVillage, is an online business executive and lawyer with a background in media, technology and IP law. A former CBC journalist and independent TV producer, in 2013 she was appointed General Counsel & VP Media Affairs at CharityVillage.com, Canada's largest job portal for charities and not for profits in Canada, and then President in 2021. Mary is also President of sister company, TalentEgg.ca, Canada's No.1, award-winning job board and online career resource that connects top employers with top students and grads.Additional Resources from this EpisodeWe've gathered the resources from this episode into one helpful list:Spring Economic Update 2026: Canada Strong For All (Government of Canada, 2026)Registered Charity Information Return T3010 (Canada Revenue Agency)Charity Insights Canada Project (Carleton University)Million-Dollar Murray (The New Yorker, 2006)Dunn House Social Medicine Housing Model (University Health Network, 2026)Charities and Giving: Guidance CG-032 – Registered charities making grants to non-qualified donees (Canada Revenue Agency, 2023)Disbursement Quota Calculation (Canada Revenue Agency)Canada Strong Fund (Government of Canada, 2026)Build Canada Homes (Government of Canada, 2026)Learn more and listen to the full interviews with the guests here.#podcast #charity

There is wisdom in taking well considered steps in your life and business. The trouble is that sometimes, when the best move is a big one, we can write it off as unwise or reckless. How can we overcome what holds us back from making the right big moves?  Well I am pleased to welcome back to the show someone who has lived out and navigated this problem. My friend and world renowned expert in communication and negotiation, Kwame Christian!  Kwame Christian, Director of the American Negotiation Institute. He is the author of two bestselling books: Finding Confidence in Conflict and How to Have Difficult Conversations About Race He is a highly sought after keynote speaker and was a recent featured guest on the Mel Robbins Podcast. Kwame is dedicated to empowering others and has helped countless individuals overcome the fear, anxiety, and emotion often associated with difficult conversations through a branded framework called Compassionate Curiosity. As an attorney and mediator with a Bachelors of Arts in Psychology, a Master of Public Policy, and a Juris Doctorate (Law Degree), Kwame brings a unique multidisciplinary approach to making difficult conversations easier.   We discuss: Big swings mentality and its impact on success The role of identity in behavior change Overcoming fear and limiting beliefs Practical strategies for habit formation The concept of strategic luck and positioning The importance of honesty and self-awareness Playing small is often rooted in limiting beliefs and fear. Adopting an identity-based approach can accelerate behavior change. Small, consistent actions lead to big ripple effects over time. Practicing identity shifts through experiments and reminders is effective. Embracing uncertainty and adaptability is crucial in a changing world. Links: www.kwamechristian.com   REGISTER NOW FOR THE SUMMER WEBINAR SERIES!  Build a Stronger Coffee Shop: One Step at a Time Great coffee shops don't happen by accident. They are built by hiring the right people, training them well, and leading them with clarity and consistency. In this live three-part Summer Webinar Series, Chris Deferio shares the practical systems and coaching insights that have helped coffee businesses build stronger teams, healthier cultures, and more resilient operations. Each webinar includes: Live instruction and Q&A PDF workbook One hour of virtual consulting for each live attendee Lifetime access to the recording Register for the individual sessions that fit your current needs, or scroll down to save 20% on the complete Summer Webinar Series. REGISTER NOW FOR THE SUMMER WEBINAR SERIES!    chris@keystothshop.com of book a free call now:  https://calendly.com/chrisdeferio/30min    Related episodes:  

In this episode of Crossing Faiths, John Pinna interviews Devan Patel, a lawyer and strategist who collaborates with multi-faith communities on technology, policy, and ethics. The discussion centers on the intersection of artificial intelligence, human dignity, and religious communities, particularly focusing on the Vatican's forward-looking involvement in the AI discourse. Patel shares details about the newly released papal encyclical Magnifica Humanitas issued by Pope Leo XIV, which addresses the safeguarding of human dignity in the age of AI. Drawing historical parallels to Pope Leo XIII's Rerum Novarum, which responded to the Industrial Revolution, the conversation explores how various global faith leaders are universally responding to the risks of AI—such as companion chatbots affecting youth—and how the Vatican's receptive, human-centric framework provides a welcome platform for collaborative, cross-disciplinary dialogue on technology's future. Devan Patel is a Washington, D.C.-based lawyer, political strategist, and educator who operates at the intersection of law, faith, and technology. He is the founder and president of Crux Advisory Group, a fellow in AI ethics at the Rainey Center for Public Policy, and an adjunct professor of law at Notre Dame Law School. Throughout his career, Patel has focused heavily on legal strategy, public policy, and international AI ethics, which includes co-drafting the Electoral Count Reform Act, working on amendments for the Respect for Marriage Act, and convening industry leaders and faith figures at the Vatican to establish global ethical principles for artificial intelligence. https://www.devanpatel.com/

For more than four decades, Fred Nile was one of the most recognisable and controversial figures in Australian politics. As the founder of the Call to Australia Party, later the Christian Democratic Party, he built a career campaigning on conservative Christian values, influencing legislation in New South Wales despite rarely holding the balance of power outright.Join Holly and Matthew as they trace Fred Nile's political career, from his early activism and election to the Legislative Council through to the campaigns, controversies, and social debates that made him a fixture of Australian public life. Whether opposing censorship, gambling, abortion, same-sex relationships, or changing social attitudes, Nile remained one of the country's most persistent political campaigners.Love him or loathe him, Fred Nile left an undeniable mark on New South Wales politics. This episode explores the man, the movement, and the legacy of one of Australia's longest-serving parliamentarians.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/weird-crap-in-australia--2968350/support.

Text the show! What happens when Americans expect FBI-level investigations from departments operating on county budgets?In this Best of Common Sense episode, Chad Law explores the widening gap between federal investigative agencies and the local law enforcement officers responsible for solving the vast majority of crimes in America.Using one nationally watched investigation as a starting point, Chad explains why modern policing increasingly depends on resources many local agencies simply don't possess—and why the answer isn't necessarily more federal power, but stronger local institutions.Along the way, the conversation covers:• The difference between federal and local investigative capabilities• Why constitutional policing matters• How staffing and training affect justice• Why Americans ignore the elections that matter most• Whether technology can ever replace community policing• Why rebuilding local government may be the key to rebuilding trustIf you've ever wondered why some investigations look dramatically different than others, this episode explains the structural reasons behind it.

Join our champion program: mark@themomentumcompany.comAttend a Thriving Leader event: https://thriving-leader-2026.lovable.app/Instagram: @the.momentum.companyLinkedIn: /momentum-companyIn this episode of The Intentional Agribusiness Leader, Mark sits down with Karla Thieman, Senior Vice President of Public Policy at JBS USA, for a conversation about leadership, public policy, career development, culture, and what it takes to create lasting impact in agriculture.Karla defines intentional leadership through one simple idea:Have a North Star.Know where you're trying to go.The path won't always be straight. There will be setbacks, unexpected opportunities, and plenty of detours. But intentional leaders don't lose sight of the destination—they adjust their route while staying committed to the mission.For Karla, that North Star started early.As a high school senior, she knew she wanted to become an agricultural lobbyist—someone who could connect farmers to public policy and serve as a voice for agriculture in Washington, D.C. That vision guided every opportunity that followed, from Capitol Hill to USDA and ultimately to leading public policy efforts at JBS USA.One of the biggest themes throughout the conversation is this:Leadership isn't about having a perfect plan. It's about having a clear direction.The conversation traces Karla's journey through writing the 2014 Farm Bill, serving as Chief of Staff to Secretary Tom Vilsack at the USDA, and eventually building JBS USA's Washington, D.C., public policy office from the ground up.Along the way, she shares an important reminder:Sometimes the opportunities that shape your career aren't the ones you planned for.They're the ones you were prepared for.Another major theme is culture.When Karla joined JBS, she didn't just build a team—she intentionally built a culture.She believes great teams start with great people, long before a position is ever available. Throughout her career, she's kept a "Rolodex" of talented individuals, investing in relationships and identifying future leaders long before she needed to hire them.The conversation also explores how JBS reinforces its culture across more than 80,000 employees through seven core values:DeterminationSimplicityAvailabilityHumilitySincerityDisciplineOwnershipThose values aren't simply written on the wall.They're embedded into hiring, performance evaluations, leadership development, and daily decision-making.Because culture isn't built by intention alone.It's built through consistent reinforcement.Another powerful leadership lesson comes from Karla's experience leading teams at a young age.Like many emerging leaders, she wrestled with imposter syndrome after stepping into high-level leadership roles early in her career.Her biggest lesson?Information isn't power unless you share it.She observed that the best leaders weren't the ones who protected information to maintain influence.They were the ones who equipped their teams by creating transparency, trust, and ownership.That philosophy has shaped the way she leads today.The conversation closes with one of Karla's proudest accomplishments—helping launch the International Year of the Woman Farmer.What began as an idea in 2015 took more than a decade, multiple administrations, countless partnerships, and unwavering persistence before becoming a reality in 2026.It's a powerful reminder that meaningful change rarely happens overnight.Sometimes the most important work requires years of steady, intentional progress.Because leadership isn't measured by how quickly something happens.It's measured by whether you're willing to keep moving toward your North Star.Listen if you are:Navigating leadership or career transitionsInterested in agricultural policy and the Farm BillBuilding culture within your organizationDeveloping and leading high-performing teamsLooking to grow as an intentional leaderPassionate about the future of agriculture and public serviceA clear North Star won't eliminate the twists and turns—but it will keep you moving in the right direction.

You’re listening to American Ground Radio with Stephen Parr and Louis R. Avallone. This is the full show for July 23, 2026. We open with Texas Democratic Senate candidate James Tallarico's reparations proposal — made at a July 20 campaign event in DeSoto — calling for tuition relief, homeownership grants, and government-funded baby bonds for Black Texans, all in the name of repairing past harms. We walk through everything he left undefined: who qualifies, what the eligibility standard is, where the funding comes from, and what the total cost would be. We also walk through the genealogical reality of a multiracial nation — including the head of the NAACP who discovered she had an ancestor on the Mayflower, and the uncomfortable question of what happens when the same family tree contains both slaveholders and slaves. We make the theological point that a grievance machine with no limiting principle is not a policy. It is a dependency engine. The debt of slavery was paid — Lincoln said so, and the Civil War proved it at a cost of more American lives than any conflict before or since. The answer is not racial accounting. It is equal citizenship, strong families, honest education, safe communities, and a culture that celebrates achievement instead of grievance. In our Top 3, first-time unemployment claims dropped to 187,000 — the lowest level since 1969 under Richard Nixon, coming in 22,000 below the prior week and well under what economists had projected. Fewer layoffs means steadier families. Then a member of Vice President J.D. Vance's Secret Service protective detail was suspended and placed under criminal investigation for allegedly leaking operational security information to the media — specifically complaining about unpredictable travel schedules. A Secret Service agent who can't keep a secret should not be in the Secret Service. And New York City landlords filed a lawsuit against the Mamdani administration's rent freeze — arguing that the Rent Guidelines Board was packed with political allies who then manipulated their own data to justify a two-year freeze on rents for more than a million tenants. We explain what rent freezes actually produce: slumlords, abandoned buildings, and a housing stock that deteriorates because owners cannot raise revenue to maintain it. We also cover two men stabbed in an unprovoked attack on New York City's Upper West Side — the attacker reportedly shouting Allahu Akbar — one victim Asian, one wearing a yarmulke. We note that Mamdani's response to antisemitic violence in his city is to promise to arrest Benjamin Netanyahu. We connect the violence to a broader point: when leadership sets a tone of weakness, confusion, and ideological hate, this is the inevitable result. Our American Mamas Terry Netterville and Kimberly Burleson tackle the question of whether wives say things to their husbands that would devastate them if said in return — and the answer is an unambiguous yes. Terry admits she tells Kevin his hair is dirty, that he can't wear that outfit, and that mowing the lawn is his job — while acknowledging that if Kevin said any of those things to her it would ruin her day. The conversation becomes a warm, funny, and surprisingly insightful look at how different couples absorb criticism differently, why the way you're raised shapes what you can and cannot say to your spouse, and what happens when a wife goes on strike to make everyone appreciate what she does. We discuss Sophie Cunningham of the Indiana Fever — who has gone public in defense of women's sports, saying truth matters, biological sex has consequences in competition, and that protecting the integrity of women's athletics is not hatred of anyone. We make the point she is actually making: you can treat transgender people with dignity and still say that female sports should be reserved for biological women. Those two things are not in conflict. They are the only coherent position. In our Digging Deep segment, Secretary of State Marco Rubio gave what may be the clearest explanation of the Trump Doctrine we have ever heard — summarizing it in one line: Iran says eye for an eye. Trump says a head for an eye. We unpack the game theory behind it — tit for tat with disproportionate response. If you are nice to Trump, he is nice back in equal measure. If you are mean to Trump, he will be worse to you than you could ever possibly imagine. Iran fires on one tanker, the U.S. takes out a port, a tower, and every radar site in reach. Iran fires on two tankers, the U.S. goes on a 12-day bombing campaign eliminating bridges in and out of the country. The mullahs keep acting confused. The reason is they have never seen anything like this from an American president. Rubio also shared that Iran is sending messages through third countries every day begging to make a deal — but every deal they make, they either break or try to renegotiate. They are not ready yet. They will be. We also cover Ted Cruz's prediction that Zoran Mamdani will become the next U.S. senator from New York — replacing Chuck Schumer, who Cruz believes can no longer win a Democratic primary in the state — and that Mamdani is the single most powerful Democrat in America right now. We connect it to AOC leading New Hampshire polling for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination, and to DSA-backed candidates winning primaries across the country. For our Bright Spot, a new Empire Center for Public Policy survey — conducted in New York, one of the most left-leaning states in the country — found that only 24% of respondents prioritize reducing greenhouse gas emissions over lower energy prices, 63% oppose mandatory home heating electrification, and 60% oppose letting individuals sue oil companies for climate change. The noisy minority demanding zero fossil fuels, electric heat mandates, and climate lawsuits does not represent most Americans — even in New York. That is common sense, and common sense is always a bright spot. We also cover the Houthis attacking two Saudi oil tankers — Iran's last meaningful proxy after Hamas was decimated by Israel and Hezbollah was severely weakened — and make the strategic case that doing the hard thing now makes tomorrow easier. Letting Iran build nuclear weapons capable of reaching Europe would have made tomorrow catastrophically harder. And we close with two-year-old Lucy Moline, who heard that her five-year-old sister Emma needed a bone marrow transplant after a rare disease stopped her bone marrow from producing red blood cells — and volunteered to be the donor because she wanted to be brave and help her sister. The transplant worked. Emma is cured. Is there anything better than sisters? May your pursuit of happiness bring you joy. Listen now wherever you get your podcasts, visit AmericanGroundRadio.com, and join the conversation at 866-AGR-1776!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Bongani Bingwa speaks with Dr Busani Ngcaweni, Director of the Centre for Public Policy at the University of Johannesburg on Investigating Director of the Investigating Directorate Against Corruption (IDAC) head, Andrea Johnson’s resignation. 702 Breakfast with Bongani Bingwa is broadcast on 702, a Johannesburg based talk radio station. Bongani makes sense of the news, interviews the key newsmakers of the day, and holds those in power to account on your behalf. The team bring you all you need to know to start your day Thank you for listening to a podcast from 702 Breakfast with Bongani Bingwa Listen live on Primedia+ weekdays from 06:00 and 09:00 (SA Time) to Breakfast with Bongani Bingwa broadcast on 702: https://buff.ly/gk3y0Kj For more from the show go to https://buff.ly/36edSLV or find all the catch-up podcasts here https://buff.ly/zEcM35T Subscribe to the 702 Daily and Weekly Newsletters https://buff.ly/v5mfetc Follow us on social media: 702 on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TalkRadio702 702 on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@talkradio702 702 on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/talkradio702/ 702 on X: https://x.com/Radio702 702 on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@radio7See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Text the show! Last week on Common Sense, Chad asked whether government can ever actually get smaller.This week, a single receipt from California turns that question upside down.When electric vehicles reduce smog inspections, what happens to the fees that funded them? When lottery revenue is promised to schools, what happens when the institution becomes more important than the promise? What do tobacco settlements, prison contracts, and legalized sports betting all have in common?This episode follows the money—not the headlines.Instead of asking whether government solves problems, Chad investigates what happens when those solutions begin threatening government revenue.You'll never look at public policy the same way again.In This Episode California's smog fees and EV incentives  Why gas taxes are disappearing  The lottery promise that quietly changed  Tobacco settlement bonds and shrinking smoking rates  Prison occupancy guarantees  Ferguson's dependence on fines and fees  Sports betting, Kalshi, and the next generation of government revenue  Ronald Reagan's warning about permanent government 

AI, Cybersecurity, and Public Policy: Export Controls, Arms Races, and the "New Radium" On Cyber Security Today (Weekend), the host interviews Pratim Datta, a Kent State University professor and former global consultant, about the past six months of AI and public policy as it intersects with cybersecurity. They discuss Anthropic's "Mythos" and "Fable," the marketing-versus-risk debate around autonomous hacking tools, and how the sheer volume of vulnerable code creates a "digitally polluted" environment. The conversation covers whether AI is a consumer product or a weapon, the implications of U.S. export controls (including restrictions affecting foreign nationals), and how model pullbacks may have shaken allies' trust in American tech. They also examine comparisons to radium and nuclear-era unknowns, the OpenAI–Hugging Face incident, the "cathedral vs. bazaar" tension of closed vs. open models, and the broader U.S.–China economic and national security struggle. 00:00 Weekend Show Kickoff 01:15 Meet Prat Dadam 01:59 Policy Whiplash in AI 02:55 Mythos Hype and Fear 06:27 Digital Pollution Problem 07:53 AI Arms Race Begins 09:18 Export Controls Shockwave 14:31 Weapon or Consumer Tech 16:57 New Radium Analogy 21:57 Economics and Trade Wars 23:49 Cathedral Versus Bazaar 25:44 Censorship and Control 27:16 Jurassic Park Chaos 30:27 Hotel California Reality 32:36 Closing Thoughts and Thanks

Text the show!

As Canada stares down the barrel of fresh U.S. tariffs (50 per cent), there is a realization that the counter-strategies that succeeded in President Donald Trump's first term won't cut it today. For our expert panel, the power to change Trump's mind won't come down to the federal government or Prime Minister Mark Carney. Instead, the pressure will come from America's voters, businesses and political funders.What game is the U.S. playing in targeting products such as Christmas decorations, dog leashes, toilet paper and hockey sticks, while exempting crude oil, potash and critical minerals? Host Kathleen Petty has assembled a couple of the big guns to help make sense of the strategy:Gitane De Silva, executive director of the University of Alberta's Peter Lougheed School of Politics and Democracy; founder and president of GDStrategic; and Alberta's senior representative to the United States from 2016 to 2019. Martha Hall Findlay, a member of Carleton University's expert group on Canada-U.S. Relations; director of the University of Calgary's School of Public Policy; and a former Liberal MP.As Canada contemplates how it may respond, the experts caution there's a big difference between standing strong and hitting back. They say our country needs to stop wishing the U.S. would play fair, and focus on what can actually be done about the trade relationship. They say Alberta is getting greater recognition thanks to the dispute, and that Albertans and Canadians are seeing how each province contributes to the country as a whole.Host: Kathleen PettyGuests: Gitane De Silva, Martha Hall FindlayProducer: Diane Yanko

Most adults who smoke want to quit, and about half try to do so in any given year, yet fewer than one in ten succeed. That persistent gap between intention and outcome is one of the central challenges in public health, and it's exactly the kind of problem that calls for new thinking about how to communicate with people to support behavior change.  Dr. Amanda Graham has been a leading force in doing just that in her role as chief health officer at Truth Initiative, the nation's largest non-profit public health organization dedicated to preventing addiction among young people and helping people of all ages to quit tobacco. On this episode of Raise the Line from Elsevier, Dr. Graham, who holds a PhD in clinical health psychology and has done 25 years of NIH-funded research focused on technology-based cessation interventions, helps us understand the interplay between behavioral science and digital communications in the field. "A well-timed message can really be powerful in interrupting what for many people is kind of an automatic behavior, especially via text, which data tell us is an extraordinarily powerful modality,” she explains to host Lindsey Smith.  Tune-in to understand where the field is heading, and to learn about: Why "push" technology may work better than apps and websites when it comes to breaking automatic behaviors; How the rise of e-cigarettes, nicotine pouches, and heated tobacco has scrambled decades of public health messaging; How highschool smoking rates plunged from over 30% to less than 2%. Mentioned in this episode: Truth Initiative Program with Mayo Clinic If you like this podcast, please share it on your social channels. You can also subscribe to the series and check out all of our episodes at www.osmosis.org/podcast

After taking some time away to help my family through my dad's open-heart surgery, I'm back with a new episode of Uncommon Sense with Ginny Robinson. Thank you to everyone who reached out and supported my family during this time.Today, I share my opinions on several current events. I discuss why I believe America must remain a sovereign nation and why I have concerns about the growing military relationship between the United States and Israel, including why I believe these actions raise real constitutional and legal questions.I also share my thoughts on the continued loss of American service members in the Iran War and explain why the United States should NOT be involved in another foreign war.Finally, I discuss the assassination of Charlie Kirk and how it is connected to the Epstein files, and why I think Americans deserve greater transparency and accountability from those in power.--https://www.youversion.com/bible-app

When President Trump took office in January of 2025, he signed 26 executive orders on the first day. In that pile of executive orders was one entitled: Protecting the Meaning and Value of American American Citizenship.  In it, the president directed that federal officials were not to issue documents recognizing United States citizenship to anyone who is born in the country to illegal immigrants or legal migrants here in a temporary capacity. This practice, known as birthright citizenship, has gathered a lot of attention over the last few years for the immigration chaos it has created. Last month, the Supreme Court, in Trump v. Barbara, decided that the executive order was unconstitutional. Now, conservatives are looking for ways to preserve American sovereignty. Here to discuss some ideas for how to make that happen is Roger Severino, Vice President of Economics and Public Policy, here at the Heritage Foundation. --- Roger Severino on X: https://x.com/RogerSeverino_--- Email us at heritageexplains@heritage.org 

TYPICAL SKEPTIC PODCAST #2734

More than three years into the generative A.I. boom, higher education leaders are still asking the same question: how do we use this responsibly? Today's guest says it's time to shift from experimentation to practical implementation, and he revisits his own 2026 A.I. predictions to see how they're holding up.Cengage EVP & Chief Digital Officer, Darren Person, tells host Jason Altmire that A.I. for its own sake won't improve learning, measurable outcomes will. Person explains how human-in-the-loop tutoring tools are reshaping teaching, why he's skeptical of "AI can do everything" claims, and what schools should look for when vetting A.I. vendors.To learn more about Career Education Colleges & Universities, visit our website.

Fresh out of the studio, Dr. Rafael Frankel, Head of Public Policy for Asia Pacific at Meta, joins us to unpack how Meta is stepping up on the fight against scam syndicates in Southeast Asia along with a coalition of partners. He explains why today's syndicates operate with state-like capabilities and forced labor at scale and how AI has become both the scammers' sword and Meta's shield, powering the removal of hundred million scam accounts in 2025. Frankel walks through the disruption-sprint model that took down the million accounts in a single week alongside the FBI, Microsoft and Starlink, and argues that beating scams demands a coalition matched to the criminal supply chain. Closing out, he reminds us that crime is never zero — but through sustained, collective pressure, it can be cut by orders of magnitude."I think that people underestimate the criminals that are the drivers of the scams. Mostly what we're talking about at this point is extremely well-financed, highly sophisticated transnational criminal networks that have turnover in the billions, tens of billions, and have the finances, the technological know-how, the sophistication to really be trying to scam people 24/7, 365 days a year. That's a tough adversary to be up against." - Dr Rafael FrankelProfile: Profile: Dr Rafael Frankel, Head of Asia-Pacific Public Policy at Meta LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rafael-frankel/Episode Highlights:[00:00] Quote of the Day by Rafael Frankel from Meta[02:38] From foreign correspondent to tech policy[03:39] Career lessons: gut instinct and taking risks[04:33] Why the Meta APAC policy role, and why now[07:26] The one thing people misunderstand about scams[09:13] What changed: industrial scale scam centers[11:35] AI as Meta's shield, deployed at scale[13:07] Genesis: the Bangkok 2024 convening[14:14] First disruption: 59,000 accounts, six warrants[15:45] June haul: 1.5M accounts, Microsoft, Starlink, 63 arrests[16:52] Matching the coalition to the criminal supply chain[18:52] Building trust: results create the feedback loop[20:05] The Global Signal Exchange and the FIRE program[22:50] Counter-intuitive lesson: Meta doesn't see everything[24:13] Asia Pacific as front line of the solution[26:20] Pulling on the same rope across governments[27:30] POGO centers and pinpointed police action[29:02] Is sanctioning a kingpin just theatre?[30:52] Crime is never zero, but reducible by orders of magnitude[31:02] The question Rafael wishes people asked: how can I help?[32:52] What success looks like three years out[35:08] ClosingPodcast Information: Bernard Leong hosts and produces the show. The proper credits for the intro and end music are "Energetic Sports Drive." G. Thomas Craig mixed and edited the episode in both video and audio format.

Host Paul Pacelli opened Tuesday's edition of "Connecticut Today" wondering if the state of Connecticut made a mistake a few years ago by legalizing adult-use, recreational marijuana (00:30). Some folks in Massachusetts want to rollback a portion of the Bay State's legal pot laws. Paul also welcomed blogger Meghan Portfolio from the Yankee Institute for Public Policy (08:56), and ABC News reporter Jordana Miller from the Middle East (16:49)

"It is getting pesticides out of the vineyard. It's making sure that when we send a worker home, they're not going home and hugging their child with any other pesticide or herbicide. It is a mission, but it does start with the dirt, and it has to flow all the way through the winery into the bottle." —Jeff O'Neill "A lot of times, people think about the environmental side of sustainability, but it's also about the social pieces— how you treat your employees, worker health and safety, and also how you exist within the community." —Allison Jordan Regenerative organic wine sounds like a buzzword — until you stand in a vineyard that's actually living it. This week, Justine Reichman sits down at Ram's Gate Winery with Allison Jordan (VP of Environmental Affairs, Wine Institute) and Jeff O'Neill (founder, Ram's Gate and O'Neill Vintners & Distillers) to unpack what real stewardship looks like when an entire industry commits to it. Key takeaways: How the California Code of Sustainable Wine Growing turned 200+ best practices into a statewide movement, covering everything from soil health to worker safety What it actually takes to earn CCOF Organic and Regenerative Organic Certification — including the 3-to-5-year soil conversion most people never hear about Why Ramsgate planted fruit trees inside its vineyard rows, and what that agroforestry bet could mean for the next 20 years The honest answer to the question every skeptic asks: Does regenerative wine actually taste as good? This conversation is proof that sustainability isn't a marketing layer — it's a rebuild from the soil up, and it's changing what "good wine" means.

In the United States, regulators inspect nursing homes to ensure compliance with quality, safety, and other standards. While these inspections are not technically announced, they are easy for nursing home staff to predict because they usually occur annually. In this episode of The Pie, Maggie Shi, an assistant professor at the University of Chicago's Harris School of Public Policy, discusses how this predictability affects nursing homes' effort levels, and, in turn, resident health.

Michael Centrella is the Head of Public Policy at SecurityScorecard. In this episode, he joins host Charlie Osborne and Stephen Ward, co-founder at Brightmind Partners, former CISO, and former Special Agent with the US Secret Service, to discuss government cyber defense and what organizations can do to stay protected. SecurityScorecard's mission is to make the world a safer place by transforming the way organizations understand, mitigate, and communicate cybersecurity risk to their boards, employees, and vendors. Learn more about our sponsor at https://securityscorecard.com

How did Brooke go from numerous procedures and thyroid cancer to fighting for transparency and accountability for Texans on the policy side of healthcare?In this episode of The Sweet Tea Series, Ariana Guajardo sits down with TPPF's Brooke Garner, Policy Scholar of the Healthy Texas Initiative, to discuss her personal journey through America's healthcare system and why she's now working to reform it.Diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) at just 14 years old and later thyroid cancer at age 20, Brooke shares how insurance barriers delayed treatment, increased medical costs, and ultimately shaped her passion for healthcare policy. Together, they discuss the difference between healthcare and health coverage, why healthcare transparency and accountability matter, and the reforms Texas is pursuing to put patients back at the forefront of their health coverage.

Today's guest is Dr. John Sullivan. He is a retired Los Angeles Sheriff's Department lieutenant. He is currently an Instructor in the Safe Communities Institute (SCI) at the Sol Price School of Public Policy, University of Southern California. Dr. Sullivan is a researcher, author, and one of the country's leading scholars on transnational organized crime. Borderland: Narcosis is an IRONCLAD Original Sponsors: 1st Phorm: Go to⁠ ⁠https://www.1stphorm.com/borderland⁠⁠ and get free shipping on any orders over $75, free 30 days in the app for new customers, and 110% money back guarantee on all of our products. Subscribe on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/borderland-narcosis-with-vincent-rocco-vargas/id1730589324 Subscribe on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/6w9YAIljxWKXsetl10w9Qp?si=8a5eb53e12b74e3a Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For more than four decades, Fred Nile was one of the most recognisable and controversial figures in Australian politics. As the founder of the Call to Australia Party, later the Christian Democratic Party, he built a career campaigning on conservative Christian values, influencing legislation in New South Wales despite rarely holding the balance of power outright.Join Holly and Matthew as they trace Fred Nile's political career, from his early activism and election to the Legislative Council through to the campaigns, controversies, and social debates that made him a fixture of Australian public life. Whether opposing censorship, gambling, abortion, same-sex relationships, or changing social attitudes, Nile remained one of the country's most persistent political campaigners.Love him or loathe him, Fred Nile left an undeniable mark on New South Wales politics. This episode explores the man, the movement, and the legacy of one of Australia's longest-serving parliamentarians.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/weird-crap-in-australia--2968350/support.

Send us Fan MailSpencer Perry, PhD, is an assistant professor of Economics and Public Policy at the Institute for Social and Economic Research (ISER) at the University of Alaska Anchorage. Before earning his PhD in Economics at Arizona State University in Tempe, he worked for three years at the Federal Reserve. He moved to Anchorage a year ago when he began his job at ISER where he focuses on topics in health and public economics.This episode was recorded on January 30, 2026.  

Text the show! Did America ever agree to becoming one of the most surveilled societies in history?Today there are more than 76,000 automated license plate readers operating across the United States, collecting roughly 20 billion vehicle scans every month.Most of them arrived without public hearings, ballot measures, or meaningful public debate.In this Sequel Sunday investigation, Chad Law follows the paper trail behind America's rapidly expanding surveillance infrastructure—not to argue whether the technology works, but to ask a much more important constitutional question:When did government stop asking?From Dayton's now-famous trash bag solution to Cleveland, Denver, El Paso, and beyond, this episode examines how surveillance systems spread, why transparency often arrives only after installation, and why consent—not efficiency—is the real foundation of American government.Rather than choosing sides in the privacy debate, this episode asks whether citizens still possess the ability to see what government is doing—and to stop it when necessary.Because if you can't see it...and you can't stop it...did you ever really consent?

The Gordie Howe International Bridge will open on Monday, July 27....for now. It comes as its previous opening date of June 12 was cancelled due to US President Trump demanding a new deal in exchange for the American side opening up. More than six weeks later, a new deal has been reached between Trump and Prime Minister Carney, yet no one seems to know the exact details of the deals - including the two leaders themselves. Host Maria Kestane speaks to 680 News Radio Business Editor and co-host of In This Economy, Kris McCusker, and Drew Fagan, a professor at the Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy. They discuss what we know about the deal and the new reality of White House deals. We love feedback at The Big Story, as well as suggestions for future episodes. You can find us:Through email at hello@thebigstorypodcast.ca Or @thebigstory.bsky.social on Bluesky

What is a decision, and why does decision-making matter in politics, history, war, and public life? This panel examines how decisions differ from choices, when decisions become political, and how theories of rational choice, game theory, cognitive bias, neuroscience, and emotion shape our understanding of judgment. They explore how constitutional, legal, cultural, and social frameworks influence government decision-making, with special attention to decisions for or against war. And they trace how history uses moments of decision to explain sovereignty, leadership, democracy, authoritarianism, and crises such as climate change. Series: "UC Berkeley Graduate Lectures" [Public Affairs] [Show ID: 41450]

Timothy Snyder holds the inaugural Temerty Chair in Modern European History at the Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy at the University of Toronto. Snyder's work has appeared in forty languages and has received a number of prizes, including the Emerson Prize in the Humanities. Snyder was a Marshall Scholar at Oxford, has received the Carnegie and Guggenheim fellowships, and holds state orders from Estonia, Lithuania, and Poland. He is researching a family history of nationalism and finishing a philosophical book about freedom. In this episode, Robinson and Timothy discuss the future of the United States. More particularly, they delve into AI, rebellion, conspiracy theory, our relationship with Russia and Ukraine, Donald Trump, and more. Timothy's most recent book is On Freedom (Crown, 2024).Timothy's Website: https://timothysnyder.orgOn Freedom: https://timothysnyder.org/books/OUTLINE00:00 Will the United States Cease to Exist?13:47 Is Trump Breaking the United States Apart?21:09 Will AI Prevent Armed Rebellion Against the Government?30:20 Trump, Conspiracy Theories, and the Politics of Small Numbers39:46 Putin Does Not Think Ukraine Is Real45:57 What Are Trump's Soft Spots?50:26 How Tim Organizes His Thought57:59 Donald Trump and the SuperloserRobinson Erhardt researches symbolic logic and the foundations of mathematics at Stanford University, where he is also a JD candidate in the Law School.

Stijn Schmitz welcomes Rory Johnston to the show. Rory Johnston is a Commodity Market Research Specializing in Oil and Gas. Johnston describes an unprecedented period of volatility in oil markets, where the supply-demand balance swung radically within a single month. Following a ceasefire in the Strait of Hormuz, a surge of previously stranded tankers created a temporary mini-glut, flipping market structures from severe backwardation into contango. However, this glut proved fleeting as inbound empty tankers, initially driven by the most risk-tolerant owners, have dried up, leaving Gulf loadings constrained by available shipping capacity. Consequently, supply is tightening aggressively again. The most significant factor absorbing the supply shock is China, which swung its crude imports down by five million barrels per day without clear economic damage domestically. Johnston explores speculative explanations, including massive refined product stock releases, a coal-to-petrochemical feedstock switch, or a geopolitical understanding with the US. He also suggests China may be using the crisis as a successful dry run for weathering a potential blockade in a Taiwan conflict scenario. This swing, totaling roughly half a billion barrels, dwarfs the collective releases from IEA member states. Beyond crude, the refined products market, particularly diesel, is critically tight. Diesel crack spreads have soared to staggering levels, driven by drone attacks damaging Russian refineries, prior damage in the Middle East, and China slashing product exports. Johnston clarifies that strategic petroleum reserves function as a supply boost, not passive inventory, and that operational tank minimums at hubs like Cushing primarily affect regional price differentials to discourage exports, not trigger infinite crude spikes. He concludes that the overriding vulnerability is refining capacity, which is easy to target and hard to defend, making North American facilities a potentially valuable geopolitical safe haven in the current drone warfare era. Timestamps: 00:00:00 – Introduction 00:00:29 – Guest Rory Johnson Introduction 00:01:06 – Energy Supply Demand Dynamics 00:04:30 – Mini-Glut and Market Flip 00:07:45 – Hormuz Traffic and Tankers 00:10:44 – China Import Swing Explained 00:15:00 – China Inventory Releases Analyzed 00:20:45 – Western SPR and Inventories 00:25:30 – Commercial vs Strategic Stocks 00:29:00 – Global Oil Deficit Calculation 00:34:00 – Refining Capacity Tightness 00:42:00 – Product Shortages and Prices 00:48:00 – Refinery Investment Outlook 00:52:50 – Concluding Thoughts Guest Links: Substack: https://www.commoditycontext.com/ X: https://x.com/Rory_Johnston Rory Johnston is a Toronto-based oil market researcher, the founder of Commodity Context, a lecturer at the University of Toronto's Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, host of the Oil Ground Up podcast, as well as a Fellow with both the Canadian Global Affairs Institute and the Payne Institute for Public Policy at the Colorado School of Mines. He is a leading voice on oil market analysis, advising institutional investors, global policy makers, and corporate decision makers. His views are regularly quoted in major international media including the Financial Times, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg News, Reuters, BNN Bloomberg, CBC, and Financial Post, and he frequently appears on numerous market and industry podcasts (e.g., Bloomberg's Odd Lots, Hidden Forces, etc.). Prior to founding Commodity Context, Rory led commodity economics research at Scotiabank where he set the bank's energy and metals price forecasts, advised the bank's executives and clients, and sat on the bank's senior credit committee for commodity-exposed sectors.

Christopher Nolan's adaptation of “The Odyssey” has been drawing a lot of attention but not necessarily for good reasons.Actress Lupita Nyong'o, set to play Helen of Troy in the film, complained in an interview that Homer didn't include enough women in his play. In actuality, “The Odyssey” was one of the most pro-women works for its time period. Nolan's film has also received criticism for its controversial casting choices, including giving the role of a famed Greek warrior to transgender actor Elliot Page. Nolan's adaptation releases Friday, July 17. Only time will tell whether the film stayed true to Homer's vision.

"I always remember feeling like I was part of the clean plate club," says Dr. Christle Guevarra, recalling a childhood spent quietly convinced that her weight was a matter of willpower. That belief followed her through a competitive powerlifting career and medical practice until she finally tried a GLP-1 medication herself and, as she describes it, the constant mental noise around food quieted down. Now a board-certified family and sports medicine physician, traveling team doctor for U.S. Figure Skating, and author of The Beginner's Guide to GLP-1s, Dr. Guevarra brings a rare combination of clinical authority and lived experience to the conversation around obesity medicine.  In this episode of Raise the Line from Elsevier, host Lindsey Smith talks with her about what's actually changed in how physicians understand the issue and what it means for patients. "The biggest thing is reframing how we approach weight loss. It's not just a willpower problem, it is a neurobiological problem." Tune in to learn about: Why she said no to a GLP-1 prescription for two years and what finally changed her mind; The real story behind concerns about muscle loss on these medications; What happens when the “food noise" goes silent and a new set of challenges takes its place.   Mentioned in this episode:  Dr. Christle's website If you like this podcast, please share it on your social channels. You can also subscribe to the series and check out all of our episodes at www.osmosis.org/podcast

If you've seen ads for Trump Accounts for kids, but also know anything about Donald Trump, you might be wondering “Free $1,000 per baby? Okay, what's the catch?” It's a classic. Guest: Justin Wolfers, Professor of Economics and Public Policy, University of Michigan, and founder of Platypus Economics.Want more What Next? Subscribe to Slate Plus to access ad-free listening to the whole What Next family and across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen.Podcast production by Rob Gunther, Evan Campbell, Madeline Thames-Ducharme and Patrick Fort.Paige Osburn is the senior supervising producer of What Next and What Next TBD. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

If you've seen ads for Trump Accounts for kids, but also know anything about Donald Trump, you might be wondering “Free $1,000 per baby? Okay, what's the catch?” It's a classic. Guest: Justin Wolfers, Professor of Economics and Public Policy, University of Michigan, and founder of Platypus Economics.Want more What Next? Subscribe to Slate Plus to access ad-free listening to the whole What Next family and across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen.Podcast production by Rob Gunther, Evan Campbell, Madeline Thames-Ducharme and Patrick Fort.Paige Osburn is the senior supervising producer of What Next and What Next TBD. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The USMCA review is underway, with implications beyond tariffs. Our Head of U.S. Public Policy Research Ariana Salvatore breaks down the key issues shaping the road ahead.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Ariana Salvatore: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Ariana Salvatore, Head of U.S. Public Policy at Morgan Stanley Research.Today, I'll be talking about the USMCA review – what happened on July 1st, what it means for North American trade, and how investors should be thinking about the road ahead. It's Friday, July 10th at 10am in New York. Last week, the six-year review deadline for the USMCA came and went. And as we'd anticipated, the U.S. declined to extend the agreement for another sixteen-year term. U.S. Trade Representative Greer stated that the U.S. did not agree to renew the USMCA in its current form, pointing to shortcomings and trade deficits with both Canada and Mexico, much of which echoed his testimony in front of Congress in December of last year. So, what happens next? This decision triggers an annual review process that could continue until the agreement's scheduled expiration in 2036. So, that means effectively the new deadline for negotiations is now July of 2027. And if we get to that point and see a similar outcome, this procedure repeats until the deal is terminated in 2036. Now, importantly, the agreement itself remains fully in force during this period. The current tariff regime, rules of origin, investment protections, and dispute settlement mechanisms are all unaffected for now. That's actually in line with the expectation that we laid out earlier this year. In short, we anticipated an outcome in which negotiations stall and the deal moves to annual reviews. We thought that was becoming more likely than an ambitious expansion of the agreement in its current form. That being said, there are some important implications of this outcome. First, we think North American trade is being reshaped by a transition from a rules-based framework – where tariff schedules and preferential access anchored trade decisions – toward a more discretionary, sector-specific approach tied to industrial policy objectives. That, of course, increases uncertainty around exemptions, sector treatment, and consequently investment decisions for corporates. Second, we think two bilateral deals may not be off the table. While it's still our base case that the trilateral framework remains intact, reporting seems to suggest that negotiations are progressing much more substantively with Mexico than with Canada. A third round of U.S.-Mexico negotiations is scheduled for the week of July 20th, while substantive text-based negotiations between Canada and the U.S. have not yet begun. That asymmetry could mean that bilateral issues between the U.S. and Mexico are resolved more easily, while outstanding frictions like Canada's dairy market quota system could prove to be an overhang in those bilateral talks. Third, the structural divergence between Mexico and Canada is accelerating, which is something my colleagues have highlighted in their recent work. If we think about Canada's manufacturing export base – autos, metals, machinery, energy, and transportation equipment – that actually overlaps with the areas that the U.S. government is increasingly defining as strategic. And therefore, necessitating more government involvement through, in things like Section 232 tariffs. Canada accounts for only a negligible share of U.S. imports across computers, semiconductors, communications equipment, and advanced electronics. Those are actually the sectors where Mexico has become deeply integrated, particularly through assembly and re-export activity linked to AI servers, electronics, and industrial hardware. Mexico now supplies roughly 35 percent of U.S. IT hardware imports and nearly 50 percent of U.S. server imports. And the North in particular has emerged as a vital interconnection hub between Latin America and the U.S. That's been driven by nearshoring trends, AI adoption, and multi-cloud strategies, as my colleagues Nik Lippmann and Fernando Sedano highlight. That means the scope and the objectives of the bilateral talks between the U.S. and Mexico and the U.S. and Canada may diverge even more from here. So where does that leave us? The USMCA is still intact, but the annual review process means North American trade policy is now a recurring negotiation, not yet a settled framework. And that will likely remain the case if policymakers agree next July to punt the issue yet another year. The primary risk, in our view, stems less from the possibility of a full USMCA collapse and more from the prolonged uncertainty around implementation details, sector-specific trade measures, and Section 232 tariffs. Thanks for listening. If you enjoy the show, please leave us a review wherever you listen and share Thoughts on the Market with a friend or colleague today.