Speaker 1: There's a certain enormous level of ego you have to
Speaker 1: have to be a talk radio host to think that
Speaker 1: literally an entire city should just listen to what you
Speaker 1: have to say for a full hour, and on top
Speaker 1: of that, also having a large ego to try to
Speaker 1: write for opinion journals, to think that the whole audience
Speaker 1: of that journal or the whole country maybe should listen
Speaker 1: to what you have to say. And perhaps the epitome
Speaker 1: of ego is to talk about something you wrote on
Speaker 1: your own radio show, And that is precisely what I'm
Speaker 1: going to do. I had a piece published in National
Speaker 1: Review today about Pope Leo the fourteenth and the topic
Speaker 1: of AI, and I want to dig into this. So
Speaker 1: there's all kinds of news stories out there about Poplar
Speaker 1: on the fourteenth, everyone's trying to get to know him.
Speaker 1: But one of the few things that he's sort of
Speaker 1: directly confirmed is the fact that over the course of
Speaker 1: him being pope, he directly wants to touch on the
Speaker 1: subject of AI. He wants to teach about talk about
Speaker 1: the subject of AI and talk about its implications for
Speaker 1: society and apply Christian teaching to it. So he himself
Speaker 1: confirmed this in an address he gave to the College
Speaker 1: of Cardinals, and then one of the other cardinals, one
Speaker 1: of the cardinals who elected him from Chile. He confirmed
Speaker 1: in an interview. Yeah, Leo's like really interested in this,
Speaker 1: He really wants to work on it and talk about it.
Speaker 1: He thinks it's a really significant thing. And it even
Speaker 1: is reflected in his name. So Leo, this is Leo
Speaker 1: the fourteenth who just got elected last week. Leo the
Speaker 1: thirteenth was pope around the turn of the nineteenth into
Speaker 1: the twentieth century, and Leo the thirteenth kicked off sort
Speaker 1: of the mod An era of Catholic social teaching with
Speaker 1: this piece that he wrote, this long sort of treatment
Speaker 1: he wrote about societal issues called reeroom novarrum. When a
Speaker 1: pope writes something, basically what he does is he writes
Speaker 1: a document and like the first two or three words
Speaker 1: of the document, that's the title of the document. So
Speaker 1: the first two words were reyroom novarrum, which means about
Speaker 1: new matters, concerning new matters. And this was Leo the
Speaker 1: thirteenth writing in eighteen ninety one.
Speaker 2: He writes reyroom navarrum. And what is he writing it about?
Speaker 1: Well, he's writing it about the industrial revolution, the industrial revolution,
Speaker 1: the rise of capitalism, the rise of socialism, and how
Speaker 1: does the Catholic Church think about these things, interact with
Speaker 1: these things, what are some of the principles of justice?
Speaker 2: Really?
Speaker 1: A lot of what Leo was doing was talking about
Speaker 1: what is the nature of human beings and how do
Speaker 1: they fit in with these kinds of societies, how do
Speaker 1: we respect human nature in all these different contexts. Okay,
Speaker 1: so that's what Leo the thirteenth was doing, and it
Speaker 1: was this seismic intervention, this huge intervention in the political
Speaker 1: controversies that were rocking Europe and the whole world at
Speaker 1: the time. Now, Leo the fourteenth seemed to have picked
Speaker 1: his name deliberately as an homage to Leo the thirteenth
Speaker 1: and Leo the thirteenth intervention in these grand political controversies.
Speaker 1: Leo the fourteenth has basically said he wants to talk
Speaker 1: about AI and the way in which it is interact.
Speaker 1: It's going to have an impact on labor, on society.
Speaker 2: So I wrote a little.
Speaker 1: Piece and National Review is very gracious to publish it
Speaker 1: about this, about why I think it's important. So why
Speaker 1: is it important? Well, for one thing, I think it's
Speaker 1: important because it's kind of allowing the Catholic Church to
Speaker 1: face a little bit more outward, in a bit more
Speaker 1: coherent of a fashion, and that hasn't really been the
Speaker 1: case for a lot of the Francis Pontificate. A lot
Speaker 1: of the Francis Pontificate was dealing with internal fights. Now,
Speaker 1: Francis wrote some good stuff about evangelizing the world, but
Speaker 1: a lot of the external facing stuff that the Francis
Speaker 1: Pontificate was sort of known for, frankly.
Speaker 2: Was I don't know there was.
Speaker 1: Stuff in things that Pope Francis wrote about immigration. He
Speaker 1: would have different kinds of little interventions on immigration, including
Speaker 1: a letter to the United States regarding immigration stuff that
Speaker 1: was released shortly after JD. Vance did his whole interview
Speaker 1: talking about the Order of Loves, the Ordo Amorris as
Speaker 1: he referred to it, that basically the United States has
Speaker 1: more obligations to its own citizenry than it has to
Speaker 1: other citizens of other countries, which is obviously true, but
Speaker 1: this letter from Poet Francis came to try to correct that.
Speaker 2: I guess.
Speaker 1: I don't think the core of what JD Vance said
Speaker 1: was wrong. Obviously countries have more of an obligation to
Speaker 1: their own citizens than to other citizens. The problem is,
Speaker 1: I think that the argument everyone's sort of talking past
Speaker 1: each other. Yes, countries have more of an obligation to
Speaker 1: their own citizens than to non citizens. But the question
Speaker 1: that's actually being debated right now is, well, what obligation
Speaker 1: does the United States have to these people, these people
Speaker 1: who are coming to the United States making asylum claims
Speaker 1: or you know, name your group of immigrants. That's the
Speaker 1: other problem is that I don't think every group of
Speaker 1: immigrants trying to get into the United States through legal
Speaker 1: means or otherwise, I don't think we need to treat them,
Speaker 1: or can treat them, or should treat them all the same.
Speaker 1: So the obligations we owe, the order of our love,
Speaker 1: the order of care that we have to lavish on
Speaker 1: people is different for different people. Now, a lot of
Speaker 1: Francis's outward facing teaching was he had one thing that
Speaker 1: was sort of an environmental thing. But again it yes
Speaker 1: it was outward facing, Yes it was engaging with the world.
Speaker 1: I don't know how much of an impact it really
Speaker 1: had because it's sort of echoing what the dominant culture.
Speaker 1: A lot of dominant cultural forces were sort of saying already.
Speaker 1: Although Francis did incorporate into it a greater a better anthropology,
Speaker 1: a better sense of respect for human life as being
Speaker 1: valuable parts of society, I don't know how well any
Speaker 1: of his specific messages on the environment were being heated
Speaker 1: or there was anything too much of a breakthrough, because
Speaker 1: at the end of the day, there's only so much.
Speaker 1: A lot of environmental activism is fact contingent as opposed
Speaker 1: to ethics contingent. If human beings are genuinely destroying the
Speaker 1: environment in this way, this way, this way, then the
Speaker 1: policy solutions need to be this way, this way, this way.
Speaker 1: And it's a lot of scientific judgments where the Pope
Speaker 1: isn't necessarily a world expert. If so, now, if, on
Speaker 1: the other hand, we're talking about ethics as a principal question,
Speaker 1: if we're talking about ethics and justice and law as
Speaker 1: a principal question, that might be something much more in
Speaker 1: the wheelhouse of the pope. And that's why I'm excited
Speaker 1: about the idea of the Pope tackling AI, because I
Speaker 1: feel like he's got more of a ground And I'm
Speaker 1: not saying everything Francis did on talking about the environment
Speaker 1: was bad I think if you actually read it more granularly,
Speaker 1: it's not as bad as sort of the media reporting
Speaker 1: on it was made to be. But I think Pope
Speaker 1: Leo will be in a better posture to teach about AI.
Speaker 1: So let's talk about some of the big issues of
Speaker 1: justice that have to be dealt with with AI. Right,
Speaker 1: the World Bank estimates that there are about three point
Speaker 1: six nine billion workers on planet Earth, three point sixty
Speaker 1: nine billion people working. Goldman Sachs in twenty twenty three
Speaker 1: estimated that AI would replace three hundred million jobs. So
Speaker 1: that's over eight percent of all jobs in the world.
Speaker 1: That's a lot, Okay, So how do you handle it?
Speaker 1: How do you handle a new technology?
Speaker 2: Which is great?
Speaker 1: We love new technology. We love you know, making difficult
Speaker 1: work easier. That's great, that's wonderful. But eliminating eight percent
Speaker 1: of all jobs on planet Earth, that's a bad idea
Speaker 1: Like that that's going to be bad. So how do
Speaker 1: we deal with that? I think obviously there needs to
Speaker 1: be some sort of just sort of introduction of AI
Speaker 1: systems and a just way to help people transition to
Speaker 1: other kinds of productive work. And and that's this seems
Speaker 1: to be precisely where the Catholic Church could come in
Speaker 1: with some wise teaching. This is not the first time
Speaker 1: in the history of a two thousand year old institution
Speaker 1: that a new technology has come along that made people
Speaker 1: lose their jobs. So I think that's one of the
Speaker 1: disruptive areas where an ethical guidance is really really necessary.
Speaker 2: Another area.
Speaker 1: We've seen with the proliferation of AI, with the proliferation
Speaker 1: of all these other kinds of technologies, we've seen how
Speaker 1: human relationships, human interactions have gotten worse, they've gotten more impersonal.
Speaker 1: There was this story that came out about a week
Speaker 1: or so ago that Mark Zuckerberg was talking about how,
Speaker 1: you know, most human beings have about three friends, but
Speaker 1: human beings have a capacity for wanting to have a
Speaker 1: fifteen good friends, and his proposal to combat There're more
Speaker 1: and more statistics about human loneliness, and in fact, in
Speaker 1: the United States, there's a lot of statistics about the
Speaker 1: sharp increase in diagnoses of teenagers experiencing depression, anxiety, suicide,
Speaker 1: suicidal ideation. This enormous jump that started in twenty twelve.
Speaker 1: Twenty twelve, which was pretty much the time, you know,
Speaker 1: the iPhone had been released, just a few years earlier.
Speaker 1: Twenty twelve was the point at which smartphone usage and
Speaker 1: social media became universal. So we're more and more and
Speaker 1: more engaged with people at an impersonal level. There's a
Speaker 1: greater oddly enough social media. Forms of social media which
Speaker 1: are designed to help you connect with other people actually
Speaker 1: actually have an isolating of impact, to the point that
Speaker 1: it's led Mark Zuckerberg to say, oh, why don't we
Speaker 1: just create AI friends for people? Instead of having, you know,
Speaker 1: your group of three friends and say you could have
Speaker 1: fifteen friends, use AI to help you create friends. This
Speaker 1: is an alienating, isolating and terrible thing. And maybe Pope Leo,
Speaker 1: I would hope Pope Leo could shed some I think
Speaker 1: really interesting and important.
Speaker 2: Light on this whole thing.
Speaker 1: Now, the last area I'm gonna sort of talk about
Speaker 1: where AI can have a real impact on ethics, and
Speaker 1: I hope Pop Leo talks about it.
Speaker 2: I'm not sure if he's going to.
Speaker 1: Is the area of bioethics. So you've got more and
Speaker 1: more and more this proliferation of i've yf to create babies,
Speaker 1: and more and more you're seeing developed this stuff called
Speaker 1: crisper gene editing, So gene editing is a way to
Speaker 1: help provide certain kinds of medical treatments to people by
Speaker 1: altering the genome. And it's it's got a lot of
Speaker 1: potential for good, but boy can have a lot of
Speaker 1: potential for bad.
Speaker 2: It can have a potential.
Speaker 1: For editing human beings to make them idealized and perfect.
Speaker 1: And especially in a world where you've got, you know,
Speaker 1: massive increases in the number of people utilizing IVF to
Speaker 1: create babies, where you already have sort of this eugenic
Speaker 1: approach to things, there are some people who are utilizing
Speaker 1: IVF in these kind of crassly eugenic ways.
Speaker 2: They're recruiting. You know, you're buying eggs for IVF babies.
Speaker 2: I mean my wife.
Speaker 1: I remember my wife saw these ads all the time
Speaker 1: when she was in college. You pay more for eggs
Speaker 1: from women who are Harvard graduates and supermodels than you
Speaker 1: do for anyone else's eggs. Paris Hilton talks very openly
Speaker 1: about the sex selection process she had where she destroyed
Speaker 1: gazillions of boy embryos so that she could finally get
Speaker 1: a girl embryo, or I forget if it was that,
Speaker 1: or vice versa. Anyway, there are all kinds of accounts
Speaker 1: about wanting to utilize AI in conjunction with crisper gene
Speaker 1: editing to try to create idealized human beings, and I
Speaker 1: wonder if this is just going to lead to a
Speaker 1: insane commodification of human life, especially if it's done in
Speaker 1: the context of in virtual fertilization. So I am leery
Speaker 1: of all these kinds of developments, and I would hope
Speaker 1: that the Pope could maybe ably speak to those things.
Speaker 1: Now when we return, I want to talk about why
Speaker 1: this would be sort of a shift from the controversies
Speaker 1: of the Francis papacy.
Speaker 2: That is next on the John Girardi Show.
Speaker 1: Pope Leo has announced he wants to discuss the topic
Speaker 1: of AI in his teaching over the course of his pontificate,
Speaker 1: and I think this could represent a real shift from Francis.
Speaker 1: All signs are kind of pointing to this. Francis sort
Speaker 1: of wanted to sort of be reaching out to the
Speaker 1: outside world, but a ton of the energy of his
Speaker 1: papacy was focused on internal questions.
Speaker 3: And.
Speaker 1: That I do sort of wonder if his sort of
Speaker 1: outward witness to the world was sort of undercut by
Speaker 1: the internal questions that royaled Catholicism. Now Pope Francis gets
Speaker 1: hit with this perception label of being liberal. Some of
Speaker 1: that is overstated. I do this to people I know,
Speaker 1: to people that Pope Francis is more conservative than Donald
Speaker 1: Trump on abortion, gay marriage, in virtual fertilization, enormous the
Speaker 1: role of women in society, like this enormous range of
Speaker 1: issues where Pope France is actually more conservative than Donald Trump. Now,
Speaker 1: maybe it's a little bit apples to oranges, but it's
Speaker 1: a little overblown. Nonetheless, the thing about Francis is that
Speaker 1: he did permit a ton of debates to happen over
Speaker 1: a bunch of stuff that everybody had sort of thought
Speaker 1: by the end of Benedict's papacy in twenty thirteen, he
Speaker 1: just sort of allowed debate to just royal over things
Speaker 1: that everyone sort of thought by the end of Benedict's
Speaker 1: papacy were pretty well settled. Questions of Catholic teaching. Can
Speaker 1: people who've been divorced and then gotten remarried without having
Speaker 1: their first marriage declared null within the Catholic Church, can
Speaker 1: they receive communion? Everyone thought the answer to that was
Speaker 1: very clearly no. That was fairly well decided by John
Speaker 1: Paul the second consistent with prior teaching, and Francis opens
Speaker 1: that can of worms, and we have years long debate
Speaker 1: over the topic, ending with well maybe kind of sort
Speaker 1: of seems to maybe be permitted in one footnote, and
Speaker 1: people are still angry and arguing about it. Should priests
Speaker 1: be allowed to celebrate the Mass in its older Latin form? Well,
Speaker 1: it seemed like for years it was yes, that's fine
Speaker 1: if your bishop allows it, and then Bennetett comes along
Speaker 1: and says, yeah, it's fine, just do it, and then
Speaker 1: Francis allows a big debate about it, and no, it's
Speaker 1: not okay, but it's kind of permitted. Catholics argued about
Speaker 1: that for about two and a half years, still arguing
Speaker 1: about it, still not feeling great about it. A lot
Speaker 1: of bishops still uncomfortable, very uncomfortable with the rules that
Speaker 1: Francis put in place. Unclear why he decided to open
Speaker 1: that can of worms. Should we have female deacons? It
Speaker 1: seems like we've had commission after commission after commission studying
Speaker 1: this thing.
Speaker 2: In Francis order is.
Speaker 1: Another commission and another commission, another commission to study the
Speaker 1: question whether Catholic should have female deacons and The answer
Speaker 1: still seems to be, no, why are we still opening
Speaker 1: up this can of worms? What is the Catholic Church's
Speaker 1: teaching on the death penalty? Francis gives a new sort
Speaker 1: of version of it, orders the old version of it,
Speaker 1: written by John Paul the Second to be thrown out
Speaker 1: of the Catechism, and it's like, well, the morality of
Speaker 1: the death penalty didn't change, Like, why are we reformulating it?
Speaker 1: Why are we reopening this can of worms? There were
Speaker 1: should priests be allowed to get married? Or rather, should
Speaker 1: married men be allowed to enter the priesthood again, something
Speaker 1: that seemed fairly well settled again and again and again, and.
Speaker 3: Oh of a sudden, we're having a big debate about
Speaker 3: it in twenty nineteen. If you look at the timeline
Speaker 3: of Francis's papacy, there was just constant controversy, controversy, controversy, controversy, controversy, controversy.
Speaker 3: Much of it settled in a totally orthodox way. Some
Speaker 3: of it settled in a fairly ambiguous way that made
Speaker 3: a lot of conservatives pretty angry and upset, and conservatives
Speaker 3: and more moderate leaning bishops throughout the world, many of
Speaker 3: them were quite tired of this constant sort of and
Speaker 3: I don't know if it's just Francis's personality that he
Speaker 3: just liked people debating things and liked people talking about things,
Speaker 3: or if he permitted this debate or encouraged this debate,
Speaker 3: whatever it was. Certainly in some instances he encouraged debate
Speaker 3: on it and then seemed to get mad when people
Speaker 3: criticized him too harshly on one side and fired people
Speaker 3: and made people lose their jobs. Certain cardinals who kind
Speaker 3: of got unceremoniously fired because they were critical, well.
Speaker 1: Either because they were so critical or immediately after being
Speaker 1: so critical. So cause and effect. Clearly it was not
Speaker 1: something that was There was controversy after controversy after controversy,
Speaker 1: and it was all over internal stuff, and it sucked
Speaker 1: up a lot of the oxygen of the Francis papacy.
Speaker 1: And it seemed as though none of it was stuff
Speaker 1: that needed to happen. It was all stuff that had
Speaker 1: felt pretty well that no one was really disputing by
Speaker 1: the time of Pope Benedict, and to reopen all these
Speaker 1: old wounds, it was happening again and again and again.
Speaker 1: My hope, my prayer, and I think a lot of
Speaker 1: internal signs are pointing to this is that pop Leio
Speaker 1: doesn't want to open those old controversies, that maybe he
Speaker 1: wants to resolve the controversies that are left dangling open
Speaker 1: under answers and let sleeping dogs lie. A lot of
Speaker 1: initial indications are that he is not his hostile to
Speaker 1: the old Latin mess, that he was never too into
Speaker 1: any of anything about homosexuality or any sort of deviations
Speaker 1: from normal, boring, orthodox standard Christian morality. So I'm really
Speaker 1: encouraged by Pope Leo and I'm hoping we can kind
Speaker 1: of close the door on these internal controversies heal and
Speaker 1: resolve those and turn outward. And his desire to want
Speaker 1: to tackle AI I think is a good sign of that.
Speaker 1: I'm really hopeful for him. And frankly, you know, he's
Speaker 1: elected at age sixty nine.
Speaker 2: He could have a.
Speaker 1: Good you know, God knows how long he'll live, but
Speaker 1: I mean, he could have a good twenty years as pope.
Speaker 1: So I'm praying for him. I hope he can tackle
Speaker 1: those things when we return. Gavin Newsom, unexpected hero of
Speaker 1: the pro life cause. Wow, he has really ticked off
Speaker 1: planned parenthood. You're gonna want to hear about this. This
Speaker 1: is the John Girardi Show. Gavin Newsom has bizarrely enraged
Speaker 1: the pro abortion crowd in California. You would never think it.
Speaker 1: I mean, who has given them more dutiful, faithful service
Speaker 1: than Gavin Newsom.
Speaker 2: Now I'm gonna talk about this.
Speaker 1: We're gonna talk about it a little bit tomorrow on
Speaker 1: Right to Life Radio, but I want to give you
Speaker 1: a taste of it today just because I'm sure Newsom
Speaker 1: is about to poop his pants because of how this
Speaker 1: could impact his presidential ambition. So what is happening this week?
Speaker 1: Gavin Newsom gave what's called his May revise. Basically, he
Speaker 1: gives an initial proposal for the budget in January, and
Speaker 1: then in May he revises it based on new data
Speaker 1: about tax revenue coming in after April of after you know,
Speaker 1: the April tax day. So here's Newsom facing at least
Speaker 1: a twelve billion dollar budget deficit. Not good governors can't
Speaker 1: just spend into the red. State governments can't just bend
Speaker 1: into the red the way that the federal government can.
Speaker 2: He's got to do something about it. So Newsom.
Speaker 1: The biggest thing that Newsom, the headline thing that Newsom
Speaker 1: is cutting back on is medical coverage for illegal aliens,
Speaker 1: and I think that's the start of this. So Planned
Speaker 1: Parenthood of California, they're five to one C four. It's
Speaker 1: led by this gal named Jody Hicks. So five on
Speaker 1: one C four is basically a five to one C
Speaker 1: three is UH doesn't pay taxes and donations to it
Speaker 1: are tax deductible. Five A one C four doesn't pay taxes,
Speaker 1: but donations to it are not tax deductible to the donor.
Speaker 1: But a five A one C four can do more
Speaker 1: political stuff. So they can do an unlimited amount of
Speaker 1: issue advocacy, and they can do some direct candidate and
Speaker 1: party advocacy.
Speaker 2: Okay, Now.
Speaker 1: Jody Hicks comes out and says she is outraged, we
Speaker 1: are outraged, uses the word outraged at Gavin Newsom for
Speaker 1: his decision to cut a third, one third, five hundred
Speaker 1: million dollars worth of Planned Parenthood funding. Hmm, I say
Speaker 1: five hundred million. That's a lot for Planned Parenthood, certainly. Now,
Speaker 1: she doesn't sort of say how and doesn't talk about
Speaker 1: the specifics. She says cutting fully one third of Planned
Speaker 1: Parenthood's funding in California, she is outraged at it, and
Speaker 1: the wording of it is like, who I mean. I've
Speaker 1: seen liberal groups get frustrated with Gavin Newsom before for
Speaker 1: stuff he has had to cut from prior state budgets
Speaker 1: when we've had deficits, and they say, you know, we
Speaker 1: are disappointed, but we are looking forward to working with
Speaker 1: Governor Newsom to maybe see if we can come to it.
Speaker 2: Blah blah blah blah blah.
Speaker 1: There are all kinds of ways that they will couch
Speaker 1: their language to try to you know, we can't totally
Speaker 1: burn this bridge.
Speaker 2: We have to work with the governor, you know. Blah
Speaker 2: blah blah blah blah.
Speaker 1: And No Planned Parented is saying we are outraged he
Speaker 1: has effectively defunded Planned Parenthood when Congressional Republicans are trying
Speaker 1: to do the same thing, and we are looking forward
Speaker 1: to working with members of the legislature to reinstate this
Speaker 1: funding with members of the legislator like, we're not even
Speaker 1: gonna bother working with Gavin Newsom on it, which I
Speaker 1: find to be wild. So they are so angry and
Speaker 1: what are they angry about? Well, I think what they're
Speaker 1: angry about is Gavin Newsom's cutting medical funding for illegal
Speaker 1: aliens and let me let me just explain this whole thing. Okay,
Speaker 1: even before he added illegal aliens, medical was in trouble.
Speaker 1: Because here's here's the basic dynamic. Newsom comes in on
Speaker 1: his white horse in twenty eighteen running for governor and
Speaker 1: he says, I'm not gonna be like those other liberal politicians.
Speaker 1: I'm going to promote single payer healthcare. Single payer health care.
Speaker 1: That's what I'm gonna do. Single payer healthcare. Every liberal
Speaker 1: politician says they're going to do it. And then when
Speaker 1: the going gets tough, if they just say, oh, it's
Speaker 1: not the right time, they kick the can down the road.
Speaker 2: And that's not me. I'm blah blah blah blah bah.
Speaker 2: I'm Gavin Newso, big, tough.
Speaker 1: Strong Goven news And then what happens, Well, he gets
Speaker 1: elected governor and he realizes it's not the right time.
Speaker 1: It would be too expensive, and he kicks the can
Speaker 1: down the road. Because to actually do single payer health care,
Speaker 1: where basically you eliminate all other insurance options for anyone
Speaker 1: wanting health insurance in the state, and everyone is covered
Speaker 1: in one state run health insurance plan that is funded
Speaker 1: by the taxpayers, you would have to increase taxes massively,
Speaker 1: and Newsom finally got in office and realized he didn't
Speaker 1: really want to do that, So no single pair. What
Speaker 1: Newsom did after talking this big game while running for
Speaker 1: governor is he sort of slide and.
Speaker 3: Said, oh no, no, no, I wasn't I didn't really
Speaker 3: want single pair.
Speaker 1: What I wanted was universal coverage. That's what I wanted.
Speaker 1: So how does he arriving in twenty eighteen, several years
Speaker 1: after the expansion of medical under Obamacare, how does he
Speaker 1: accomplish this? Well, just expanding medical eligibility. He just expands
Speaker 1: it and expands it and expands who is eligible for
Speaker 1: medical and the coup de gras is in twenty twenty four,
Speaker 1: where he expands medical eligibility to everybody. Everyone in California
Speaker 1: is covered, including people who are not supposed to be
Speaker 1: in the country. So in twenty twenty four he extends
Speaker 1: medical eligibility to illegal aliens. And let's even go before that.
Speaker 1: Let's go before extending medical eligibility to illegal aliens. Medical
Speaker 1: was in an unsustainable financial mess. Basically, you add too
Speaker 1: many people not enough money. So again, how it works.
Speaker 1: I'm a patient covered by medical I go to a doctor.
Speaker 1: The doctor provides a service. The doctor bills medical. Medical
Speaker 1: pays the doctor. The problem is that medical pays way
Speaker 1: less than normal private insurances do so at n Anthem,
Speaker 1: Blue Cross, Kaiser whatever. If I'm a Kaiser patient, or
Speaker 1: if I'm an Anthem Blue Cross patient, I go to
Speaker 1: a doctor, the doctor does a service, the doctor bills
Speaker 1: blue Cross, they Anthem whatever, They send the bill to
Speaker 1: the doctor. The doctor gets a lot of money. I'm
Speaker 1: a medical patient. I go to the doctor, the doctor
Speaker 1: does a service for me. The doctor bills medical. The
Speaker 1: doctor gets a much smaller amount of money. Medical reimburses
Speaker 1: really poorly, and for certain kinds of services, certain kinds
Speaker 1: of areas of medicine. It's so much worse than private
Speaker 1: insurance that it leads more and more doctors to not
Speaker 1: want to care for those patients, especially obgyn care.
Speaker 2: This is a huge problem.
Speaker 1: So that was a big problem before we added illegal
Speaker 1: aliens to the roles of who is medical eligible. Where basically,
Speaker 1: again you have a ton of people on medical and
Speaker 1: the pool of money to pay for reimbursements for services
Speaker 1: for all those medical patients is not very big, or
Speaker 1: it's not big enough to give a good reimbursement to doctors.
Speaker 1: This leads to more and more doctors not wanting to
Speaker 1: take medical patients. This leads to medical reimbursements not really
Speaker 1: covering the cost of care, and doctors losing money when
Speaker 1: they do take care.
Speaker 2: Of medical patients.
Speaker 1: Why did Maderia Community Hospital go under? There were a
Speaker 1: lot of reasons, but one of them was sixty percent
Speaker 1: of their patients were medical and they weren't making money
Speaker 1: off of them. It's hard to keep a hospital afloat
Speaker 1: when you're losing money or barely breaking even on sixty
Speaker 1: percent of your patients.
Speaker 2: Now, they had other problems and other things, other big expenses,
Speaker 2: but that was one of the issues.
Speaker 1: Now Gavin Newsom comes in and adds illegal aliens on
Speaker 1: top of all of this, and holy cow, it's way
Speaker 1: more expensive than he thought. In fact, the budget deficits
Speaker 1: about twelve billion dollars. There are ways to cut and
Speaker 1: slice it to realize.
Speaker 3: The illegal alien medical care.
Speaker 1: Basically constitutes the whole budget deficit that over two years,
Speaker 1: illegal aliens are costing the state about twenty three billion dollars,
Speaker 1: so it pretty much the whole budget deficit is explained
Speaker 1: by giving medical coverage to illegal aliens. So Newsom has
Speaker 1: to come up and go up there and shamefacedly, you know,
Speaker 1: hat in hand, because you know he is going to
Speaker 1: be the great Democrat leader. Giving healthcare coverage to everybody,
Speaker 1: has to roll it back, has to roll it back
Speaker 1: for certain classes of illegal aliens. I think that is
Speaker 1: where the cuts to Planned Parenthood are happening. Let me explain,
Speaker 1: So how does Planned Parenthood where do they get their
Speaker 1: California state funding. There are various kinds of grants they get,
Speaker 1: I'm sure, and grants and this and that, but the
Speaker 1: vast bulk of state funding and of federal funding, by
Speaker 1: the way, that Planned Parenthood gets is from the Medicaid program,
Speaker 1: the California iteration of which is called medical. So medical
Speaker 1: is funded partially with state dollars, partially with federal dollars,
Speaker 1: and that's the chief source of Planned Parenthood's got government revenue.
Speaker 1: They take patients who have medical coverage, and you know,
Speaker 1: planned parentoeds doing abortions, giving abortions to mostly lower income women.
Speaker 1: So in California, the huge majority I'm sure of Planned
Speaker 1: Parenthood's patients are on medical. So a medical patient goes
Speaker 1: to Planned Parenthood, they have an abortion. Planned Parenthood bills
Speaker 1: medical for the abortion. Medical pays Planned Parenthood money. Now,
Speaker 1: the thing is they're not getting any federal money for
Speaker 1: that abortion because the federal government doesn't pay for abortions.
Speaker 1: The federal Medicaid program doesn't pay for abortions accept in
Speaker 1: cases of rape and incest.
Speaker 2: So that's all.
Speaker 1: California dollars going to fund abortion, going to pay the
Speaker 1: medical reimbursement to Planned Parenthood for performing an abortion. So
Speaker 1: I think what's happened is Newsome's gonna cut medical eligibility
Speaker 1: for illegal aliens, and that's going to result in Planned
Speaker 1: Parenthood losing out on five hundred million dollars. They're making
Speaker 1: five hundred million dollars providing quote services to illegal aliens. Now,
Speaker 1: many of those services are giving birth control. Some of
Speaker 1: those services might be actual legitimate healthcare services like maybe
Speaker 1: papsmeters or something. But what does plan What is the
Speaker 1: dominant service Planned Parenthood does as far as generating revenue abortion?
Speaker 1: Abortion is the chief revenue generator for Planned Parenthoo, don't
Speaker 1: believe they're stupid stats where this are, oh.
Speaker 2: Only three percent of all the services we do or abortions.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but it's the lion's share of revenue they generate.
Speaker 2: What are we talking about. That's ridiculous to.
Speaker 1: Act like, oh, just barely any thing of what we do. No,
Speaker 1: it's the Lion's share of the revenue they generate. It's
Speaker 1: it's far and away their most revenue generative service. So
Speaker 1: I think just by cutting so they must have been doing.
Speaker 2: So many abortions on so many illegal alien moms. I mean,
Speaker 2: it's insane that that much.
Speaker 1: I think that must be what this is, because it's
Speaker 1: not like it's not like Newsom is going to directly
Speaker 1: cut out Planned Parenthood programs. He wouldn't do that for
Speaker 1: political reasons, and I'm going to talk about that in
Speaker 1: the next segment. But I think by cutting medical for
Speaker 1: eligibility for illegal aliens, he is cutting off a revenue
Speaker 1: stream to Planned Parenthood. When we return, I'm going to
Speaker 1: talk about what this could mean for Newsom politically. That's
Speaker 1: next on John Girardi Show. Planned Parenthood is furious at
Speaker 1: Gavin Newsom because he is quote cutting five hundred million
Speaker 1: dollars of funding to Planned Parenthood in California through his
Speaker 1: May revision to the budget. I think actually what's happening
Speaker 1: is that Newsom's just cutting medical eligibility for illegal aliens.
Speaker 1: And because of that, Planned Parenthood is going to miss
Speaker 1: out in about five hundred million dollars of revenue because
Speaker 1: they were providing so many abortions to so many illegal aliens.
Speaker 1: Now Newsom's Newsom is going to be standing at attention
Speaker 1: after this. Why well, Newsom needs Planned Parenthood. He wants
Speaker 1: them on that wall. You need me on that wall.
Speaker 1: He needs Planned Parenthood. Why well, some of you may
Speaker 1: have heard that Gavin Newsom is quite interested in running
Speaker 1: for governor of this fine state. And how does he
Speaker 1: run for governor? Well, he needs money and the kinds
Speaker 1: of billionaire, gazillionaire donors that Gavin Newsom needs to court.
Speaker 1: What do they love? They love planned parenthood, they love abortion.
Speaker 1: And this is the dynamic in a lot of California politics.
Speaker 1: California politicians aren't so much afraid of Planned Parenthood itself.
Speaker 1: They are afraid of the donors who give to Planned Parenthood.
Speaker 1: That's what they're afraid of. Like when Mackenzie Scott, Jeff
Speaker 1: Bezos's ex she gives a nine figure gift just all
Speaker 1: on her own, to Planned Parenthood. That's the kind of
Speaker 1: money that Democrats fear and respect and want to court,
Speaker 1: and Newsom wants to court those kinds of dollars for
Speaker 1: when he eventually runs for president.
Speaker 2: That's what's going on. That's the situation.
Speaker 1: So I'm very curious to see how Gavin Newsom is
Speaker 1: going to mend fences over what's going on here with
Speaker 1: Planned Parenthood being so mad at him for cutting off
Speaker 1: quote their funding when I think all he's doing is
Speaker 1: cutting off illegal alien eligibility for medical That'll do it,
Speaker 1: John Girlready show see you next time on Power Talk