US Government Shutdown Over?

Summary

Amanpour – "US Government Shutdown Over?" (November 10, 2025)

Host: Paula Newton (sitting in for Christiane Amanpour)
Podcast: CNN Amanpour

---

Episode Overview

This episode zeroes in on the potential end of the longest US government shutdown in history, the Congressional infighting over health care subsidies, and the real-world repercussions for Americans relying on federal services. The show then pivots to analyze a history-making White House meeting between President Trump and Syria’s President Amal Al Shada, delves into misogyny and gender-based violence in Mexico following an assault on President Claudia Sheinbaum, and finishes with a deep dive into food politics and SNAP benefits with Marion Nestle.

---

Key Segments & Discussion Points

1. The Fight to End the US Government Shutdown

(Main Segment: 00:33–14:55)

• Context:

  • The US is on the verge of concluding a six-week government shutdown, the longest ever recorded.
  • Eight Senate Democrats broke ranks to join Republicans in advancing a funding measure, covering agencies through January but dropping key Democratic demands like extended health insurance subsidies.
  • This move sharply divided Democrats; party leaders like Chuck Schumer opposed the compromise.

• Key Interview:

  • Guest: Senator Angus King (I-ME), one of the eight senators who crossed party lines.
  • Host: Paula Newton

Main Discussion Points

• Why Did Some Democrats ‘Cave’ and End the Shutdown?

  • King: The shutdown failed to pressure Republicans into extending ACA health care subsidies.
  • Prolonging the shutdown would only harm vulnerable Americans without changing the GOP’s stance.
  • Realized that “the shutdown was an impediment, not a stimulant, for health care talks.”
    Quote:

    “There’s no point in continuing the shutdown if it wasn’t accomplishing anything.” — Sen. Angus King (05:47)

• On Voting for the Compromise:

  • The needle moved because Democrats realized the shutdown was harming their constituents for no gain.
  • Securing SNAP benefits for millions was a tangible win.

• What Did Democrats Get—If Anything?

  • The deal secured three appropriations bills, including the Department of Agriculture, ensuring food assistance security until next fall.
  • Promised a December vote on ACA subsidies—Sen. King says there’s “maybe a 25–50% chance” of real reform, but that’s better than zero with the shutdown.

• On Government Dysfunction:

  • Reflection on how partisan gridlock and failure to pass budgets is harming real people and undermining democratic norms.
  • King supports measures to hold Congress accountable for passing budgets.
  • Memorable Moment:

    “Our most basic job of all is to pass a budget and we haven’t done it. And there’s no excuse for it.” — Sen. Angus King (13:36)

Notable Quotes

• Charles Lister (citing Schumer-era talking points):

  “We must fight because...children who are dying of cancer will not get health care coverage.” (02:42)

• Sen. King’s Counterpoint:

  “You don’t stand up to a bully by giving him another weapon to hit you over the head.” (07:25)

• Paula Newton:

  “Is it though, Senator, that ending the shutdown increases our chances of success? Some say the shutdown could have won something more.” (09:09)

• King (Summary of why he and others flipped):

  “The shutdown wasn’t helping us get the solution to the tax credits on the ACA. And it was hurting a lot of people. And therefore it made no sense.” (11:40)

Key Timestamps

• [03:45] — Interview with Sen. Angus King starts
• [06:37] — On political strategy vs. standing up to Trump
• [08:07] — December vote on health care; realistic outcomes
• [13:36] — Reflection on US democracy and Congressional failure

---

2. Syria’s President Al Shada’s Landmark White House Visit

(Main Segment: 15:58–28:53)

• Context:

  • President Trump holds a historic Oval Office meeting with Syria’s Amal Al Shada, a former jihadist once targeted by the US.
  • Marks Syria’s diplomatic re-entry after 14 years of war and the Assad regime’s fall.

• Guests:

  • Reem Turkmani (LSE Syria Conflict Research Program; firsthand return from Syria)
  • Charles Lister (Middle East Institute, Syria Program Director)

Main Discussion Points

• Syria’s Dramatic Political Shift:

  • Al Shada’s government gains global recognition; the US just dropped him from the terrorist list.
  • Yet, he faces enormous rebuilding, security, and legitimacy challenges at home.

• What Does Al Shada Need from the US?

  • Removal of US sanctions (specifically the Caesar Act) to unlock international investment and rebuild the economy.
  • US diplomatic pressure on Israel to ease ongoing attacks on Syria.
  • Full re-integration into the international financial system.

• Internal and External Balancing Act:

  • Al Shada must balance international demands with internal polarization—a major legitimacy test.
  • On the ground, most Syrians remain skeptical; real benefits of lifted sanctions have yet to materialize in daily life.
  • Security remains fragile, and persecution of minorities persists.

• Realities of Sanctions and Security:

  • Six-month sanction waivers are not enough for real economic change; full repeal needed.
  • Deep-rooted fears and insecurity persist in Syria; locals don’t yet trust the new government.
  • Decentralizing security is vital but challenged by deep distrust and a legacy of violence.
  • Quote:

    “The level of fear we have in Syria—geographically or even within the cities...they’re terrified of leaving the house.” — Reem Turkmani (25:17)

• President Al Shada’s Statement on Minorities:

  “No one has the right to erase another group...there must be a legal framework that protects and ensures the rights of all, not a system that serves only one sect.” (26:39–26:54)

Notable Quotes

• Charles Lister:

  “Having just got back from Syria...the challenges this government faces are extraordinary...a relationship with the US will be crucial.” (17:31)

• Reem Turkmani:

  “He needs to include the local communities to protect themselves. There’s a huge gap of trust and it won’t be built overnight.” (25:20)

• Paula Newton on need for tangible progress:

  “It kind of needs to be consequential, right?” (18:37)

Key Timestamps

• [15:58] — Segment introduction; background on Al Shada
• [17:31] — Lister on why this is a historic moment for Syria
• [18:55] — Turkmani’s first-hand impressions of post-Assad Syria
• [21:37] — Economics, sanctions, and expectations gap
• [24:26] — On minorities, security, and decentralization

---

3. Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum Takes on Misogyny

(Main Segment: 28:53–37:18)

• Context:

  • President Claudia Sheinbaum was groped while walking between buildings, an incident caught on video.
  • Sheinbaum pressed charges, vowing to address sexual violence.

• Guest:

  • Gabriela Jauregui, poet, author, and women's rights activist (Mexico City)

Main Discussion Points

• A Culture of Normalized Violence:

  • The assault’s brazenness signals how normalized harassment is—even the president isn’t immune.
  • Only 3% of such assaults are formally reported.

• Significance of Sheinbaum’s Response:

  • Filing charges is both symbolically and practically important—a signal to all Mexican women.
  • Sheinbaum also calls for a national plan to homogenize laws on harassment and improve how authorities handle complaints.

• Systemic Challenges:

  • Critics point to cuts in women’s services and to dismissals of serious allegations within Sheinbaum’s own party.
  • Jauregui: This is a “rampant problem” spanning multiple administrations.
  • Underlines global trend: fewer female heads of state worldwide today than two decades ago.

• Media, Gender, and Public Criticism:

  • Jauregui notes re-victimization in media coverage.
  • The attack exposes the scale and depth of misogyny in Mexican society: “Gender violence against a woman in office makes the problem...really clear, especially in a country where 10 women and girls are murdered every day.” (35:02)

• Will Sheinbaum Deliver?

  • Jauregui remains cautiously hopeful Sheinbaum’s national plan will focus not just on supporting victims, but on educating and targeting male behavior, as the root of the problem.

Notable Quotes

• Gabriela Jauregui:

  “The normalization of sexual violence means a pedestrian can just attack the president...these actions seem legitimate.” (30:29)

  “Only about 3% of these crimes end up in a formal complaint.” (31:25)

• Sheinbaum’s rationale for reporting:

  “If I don’t file a complaint...what position does that leave all Mexican women in? If they do this to the president, then what will happen to all the young women in our country?” (29:33)

Key Timestamps

• [28:53] — Incident background and stats on violence
• [30:29] — Jauregui analysis of cultural drivers
• [31:37] — Significance of Sheinbaum’s action
• [33:18] — Criticisms of government response
• [36:19] — Will Sheinbaum keep her promises?

---

4. Food Politics, SNAP Benefits, and What to Eat Now—Marion Nestle

(Main Segment: 37:30–53:14)

• Context:
  • The government shutdown jeopardized SNAP benefits for millions.
  • USDA tried to block discounts for SNAP recipients; courts forced full benefit payments.
  • Interview with Marion Nestle, public health advocate and author of “What to Eat Now.”

Main Discussion Points

• How Supermarkets Shape Our Choices:

  • Supermarkets and food companies are businesses, not social services; everything from store layout to checkout display is designed to maximize purchases, not nutrition.
  • Quote:

    “Supermarkets are not social service agencies...their purpose is to get you to buy as much food as you possibly can.” — Marion Nestle (40:05)

• Food Waste and Caloric Abundance:

  • 40% of US food production is wasted, mostly at the farm and household level.
  • American food supply provides about 4,000 calories per person per day, far above what’s needed.

• Political Choices Drive Health Outcomes:

  • Food insecurity and poor diets are political choices—not inevitable.
  • SNAP is a lifeline for 42 million Americans—mostly working, but underpaid.
  • The government shutdown’s impact, with agencies withholding or cutting aid, is “shocking.”
    Quote:

    “It’s quite shocking to use the poor as a pawn in this ridiculous political situation that we’re in now.” (47:38)

• Ultra-Processed Foods, Lobbying, and Public Health:

  • Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s impact: some positive moves on processed food ingredients, but largely superficial changes, and marred by broader attacks on public health infrastructure.

• Dollar Stores, Food Deserts, and Nutrition:

  • People relying on dollar stores for groceries face dire nutritional consequences.
  • Despite technical requirements for fresh food, “Oh my goodness, you don’t want to buy your produce there. It really doesn’t look very good.” (49:13)

• Call to Action:

  • True change comes through collective advocacy and changing the political structures that guide the food system—both personal and societal choices matter.
  • Quote:

    “These are political issues, they’re political choices. We could feed everybody in America...we could have universal school meals for kids...These are things we could do politically. But we haven’t chosen to.” (50:00, 50:43)

• On Policy Resistance:

  • Pushback against healthy food subsidies or taxes as “nanny state” policies chafes against the reality that choices are already limited and shaped by industry.

Notable Quotes

• Marion Nestle:

  “If you are trying to eat healthfully in today's food environment, you are fighting a multi trillion dollar industrial industry all by yourself.” (52:01) “Please run for office. If you want political power, that's what you have to do.” (52:43)

Key Timestamps

• [39:05] — Why write “What to Eat Now”?
• [40:05] — Supermarket and industry psychology
• [42:52] — Food waste and the abundance problem
• [47:38] — SNAP, shutdown, and food insecurity
• [49:13] — Dollar stores, food deserts
• [52:01] — Call to individual and collective action

---

Notable Quotes (With Timestamps)

• Sen. Angus King (on ending the stalemate):

  “There’s no point in continuing the shutdown if it wasn’t accomplishing anything.” (05:47)

• Sen. King (on giving in to Trump):

  “You don’t stand up to a bully by giving him another weapon to hit you over the head.” (07:25)

• Reem Turkmani (on security and trust in Syria):

  “They need to include the local communities to protect themselves. There's a huge gap of trust and it won't be built overnight.” (25:20)

• Gabriela Jauregui (on normalized violence):

  “The normalization of sexual violence means a pedestrian can just attack the president...these actions seem legitimate.” (30:29)

• Marion Nestle (on the SNAP situation):

  “It’s quite shocking to use the poor as a pawn in this ridiculous political situation that we’re in now.” (47:38)
  “If you are trying to eat healthfully in today’s food environment, you are fighting a multi trillion dollar industrial industry all by yourself.” (52:01)

---

Episode Flow & Takeaways

• The episode weaves together high-level legislative drama, global diplomatic breakthroughs, the impact of gender violence in society, and the granular realities of food politics.
• Central themes: how politics—domestic and international—shape the everyday lives of ordinary people, often pitting vulnerable communities against intransigent power structures.
• Despite political logjams and status-quo inertia, the guests underscore the need for action—whether collective or individual—to drive real change, be it in ending hunger, empowering women, or building peace.

---

For Further Listening/Reading

• Senate negotiations: Keep an eye on upcoming December votes regarding ACA subsidies.
• Syria’s future: Watch for developments on US-Syria relations, Caesar Act repeal, and internal security reform.
• Gender violence in Mexico: Monitor the implementation of a national harassment plan and Sheinbaum’s follow-through.
• Food politics: Marion Nestle’s “What to Eat Now,” and advocacy around SNAP, school meals, and food deserts.

---

This summary omits advertisements, introductions, outros, and other non-content sections to focus solely on key interviews and discussions.

Transcript

[Paula Newton]

When did making plans get this complicated?

[Marion Nestle]

It's time to streamline with WhatsApp, the.

[Paula Newton]

Secure messaging app that brings the whole group together. Use polls to settle dinner plans, send.

[Marion Nestle]

Event invites and pin messages so no.

[Paula Newton]

One forgets mom 60th and never miss a meme or milestone. All protected with end to end encryption.

[Marion Nestle]

It's time for WhatsApp message privately with everyone. Learn [e-mail].

[Paula Newton]

Hello everyone and welcome to AMA Poor. That is what's coming up. It's our responsibility to work not only here amongst ourselves, but across the aisle.

[Gabriela Jauregui]

To solve these problems for the Americans.

[Paula Newton]

Is the government about to reopen after 40 days? Eight Democratic senators voted with Republicans moving towards ending the longest US Government shutdown in history. Then a Syrian president visits the White House for the first time in history. Former jihadist Al Shada meets with President Trump to discuss sanctions, security and regional peace. We dissect the significance of this moment and misogyny in Mexico. President Claudia Sheinbaum takes a stand after being publicly assaulted in the street. I ask women's rights activist Gabrielle Jauregui about this pervasive issue.

[Marion Nestle]

Also ahead, I think food is political because these are political issues. They're political choices.

[Paula Newton]

Public health advocate Marion Nestle speaks to Hari Srinivasan about her new book what to Eat Now. And a warm welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Paula Newton in New York sitting in for Christina Manpur. A nearly six week long stalemate has been broken, possibly and the longest US Government shutdown ever recorded could soon be coming to an end. Eight senators in the Democratic caucus voted with Republicans to advance a measure to reopen the government and see most federal agencies funded through January. The move has split Senate Democrats and is strongly opposed by their leader, Chuck Schumer as it dropped a key demand to extend health insurance subsidies.

[Charles Lister]

Democrats must fight because millions of millions.

[Paula Newton]

Of families will lose health care coverage.

[Charles Lister]

We must fight because children who are dying of cancer will not get health care coverage. We must fight because a senior citizen cannot afford to pay $25,000 a year just for health insurance.

[Paula Newton]

We must fight to keep millions from financial ruin. But for those senators who defected, the pain of the shutdown proved too much. Now, I understand that not all of.

[Gabriela Jauregui]

My Democratic colleagues are satisfied with this.

[Paula Newton]

Agreement, but waiting another week or another.

[Gabriela Jauregui]

Month wouldn't deliver a better outcome.

[Paula Newton]

It would only mean more harm for families in New Hampshire and all across the country. The funding plan would secure food benefits for millions of Americans and reinstate thousands of laid off federal workers. Angus King is a U.S. senate Independent who caucuses with the Democrats and one of the eight senators who broke ranks and voted to end the shutdown. He joins me now to discuss his decision and what happens next. Welcome to the program, Senator. We really appreciate it.

[Senator Angus King]

Well, great to be with you. And it's an important topic, and I hope I can sort of explain a little bit of what's going on on the inside.

[Paula Newton]

Right, right. So walk us through it. You were one of the key negotiators here. Recent polls, though, and this is key, we're showing that more people saw the Republicans responsible for the shutdown. You know, we've been looking at Trump's approval ratings. They're falling to top things off. And this is the real criticism here, Senator King, that you didn't really get much in this deal. So walk us through this decision.

[Senator Angus King]

Well, first, let's back up and talk about why we had the shutdown in the first place. The goal was to pressure the Republicans to negotiate an extension of those ACA health care credits, which Chuck Schumer was talking about. By the way, one of the first bills I introduced this year was to extend those ACA credits. The problem was the shutdown wasn't achieving that goal. We've been at it, as you mentioned, the longest shutdown in American history, and there was no progress whatsoever on the Republicans saying, oh, okay, we're going to give you the ACA tax credits. And there was no likelihood of them doing so. So the question was, was there any point in continuing with the shutdown that wasn't accomplishing anything and at the same time is harming a lot of people. SNAP benefits, I think you mentioned. And so it wasn't getting us anywhere. So wherever we've gotten, and I believe we've got a lot in this deal, which I'll be glad to outline for.

[Paula Newton]

You, and we'll get to that. But we're kind of having a circular argument here because many will say, what was the point? If it wasn't working, what was the point of it in the first place, lead to the conclusion with some that you caved.

[Senator Angus King]

Well, no, I think the point in the first place was the Democrats thought that the pressure of the shutdown, plus the impending increases in the or decreases in the credits, which would have increases in ACA premiums, that those two things would stimulate the Republicans to do something about these tax credits, which die automatically at the end of the year. That was, I thought it was not likely to happen back in early October, but we now know that it didn't happen. We've been through six weeks, six and a half weeks. It didn't happen. And the Republicans position all along was very clear. We'll talk about health care, we'll talk about the aca, but not until the shutdown is over. So the question is, was the shutdown a stimulant for talks about the ACA or an impediment? And it turned out to be an impediment. There's no point in continuing the shutdown if it wasn't accomplishing anything.

[Paula Newton]

At this point, it may not be either. Right. We have to see what actually happens with this kind of a vote, or if anything happens on these health care subsidies. And I will get to that in a moment. But I do want to make another point of it that, you know, in the last few hours, you seem to be saying that, you know, standing up to Trump just didn't work. Is that true?

[Senator Angus King]

Well, there were two I talked about. The whole purpose of the shutdown was to bring forward these health care issues. And by the way, the shutdown was a success in the sense that I think it has focused national attention on the issue of health care and the importance of these premium tax credits. So I think in that sense, it's really talked to people about what's coming if these tax credits aren't extended and how important health care is and how expensive it is. So that was a shutdown. But the other point was to stand up to Trump. Okay, I get that. Believe me. I've been to no Kings rallies in Maine. I understand. I myself am very concerned, angry, you name it, with what this administration is doing. The question is, does the shutdown? Is the shutdown really standing up to Trump? Because what the shutdown did, and we now know this, with what they've done about snap, gave him more power than he had before. And I don't understand the principle of standing up to a bully by giving him another weapon to hit you over the head.

[Paula Newton]

Well, just to note that both Chuck Schumer, Minority Leader in the Senate and minority leader in the House, Hakeem Jeffries, disagree with you. Now, I do want to make one other point here, though, that we're talking about a vote, right? The compromise includes a promise from Republicans on that December vote on the Affordable Care Act. Realistically, do you believe that vote will happen? And even if it does, people are saying it has no hope of surviving in the House anyway.

[Senator Angus King]

Well, before I get to the vote, there's plenty in this bill that's also important. There are three appropriations bills, one of which is Department of Agriculture, which means SNAP benefits will be protected until next year, until next fall, end of September. So that was a big victory that wasn't on the table before these discussions began. And so I got to talk about that. Now. Let's talk about the vote. I don't, I'm not so idealistic to say, oh yeah, we're going to win this vote, the Republicans are going to suddenly do what we want. I don't think that's true, but I do think, and I know this from discussions with colleagues on the Republican side, that there are members who do want to do something about the ACA tax credits and other parts of the health care issue. So that I believe there is a chance that we can pass this. And what I let's say it's 25, 50%. That's better than zero, which is what the chance is of getting these tax credits extended through the shutdown.

[Paula Newton]

Is it though, Senator, some, maybe even in your own state might say that continuing with the shutdown might have led to a more tangible vote in either the Senate or the House. I do point out that there's no.

[Senator Angus King]

Evidence, there's no evidence that that's the case. I mean, Senator, if it hasn't worked in six weeks, why is it going to work in seven or eight or nine weeks?

[Paula Newton]

Okay. But I am wondering if we really get down to it here in terms of these subsidies that in own state I looked at some of the numbers, especially seniors, people in rural areas, middle income seniors, you know, some of them are looking at an increase of $12,000 a year. If these subsidies don't go through, what are you going to go back?

[Senator Angus King]

Did you hear me say that I introduced a bill a year ago to extend those subsidies? I don't know.

[Paula Newton]

But the point is they might say to you, Senator, why didn't you keep the shutdown going?

[Senator Angus King]

Because it wasn't getting us anywhere. The chances of solving this problem through the shutdown were zero. The chances of solving it through some kind of negotiation is more than zero. And I don't know what it is. I don't know whether it's 50% or 25%, but that's better than zero. That's the big misunderstanding here that somehow the shutdown, if it continued, was going to get us to the finally the Republicans were going to say, oh yeah, we're going to fix this. They've said continuously they're not going to even discuss it as long as we're in the shutdown. And that's what they've done, we've done the shutdown for six and a half weeks. And the question is, okay, we go another two weeks, we go through Thanksgiving, we go into Christmas, and where are we then? What's the end game? And the thing we haven't discussed here is that the shutdown is hurting people. It's hurting people. 175,000 people in Maine get SNAP benefits. They're not going out. That's, that's a catastrophe. And also, air traffic controllers are working tired.

[Paula Newton]

Indeed.

[Senator Angus King]

I don't know about you. I don't want to land at an airport with a tired air traffic controller.

[Paula Newton]

Indeed. And we have heard from those associations that they don't want the situation either. It was clearly getting to the point. It was dire. And that's why I am curious to ask you, as you know, you've hosted so many of these bipartisan meetings. You do sit as an independent, even though you do caucus with the Democrats. Can you take us through these discussions? Discussions. Because how did you end up convincing skeptical Democrats and the Republicans to say yes to even a possibility of a vote? Like really kind of take us inside the sausage, as it were, and how it was made?

[Senator Angus King]

Well, you, you, you flatter me by saying I convinced. I think my colleagues that ended up voting with us last night were convinced because of what they reached the same conclusion I did. They reached a conclusion that the, the shutdown wasn't helping us get the solution to the tax credits on the aca. And it was hurting a lot of people. And therefore it made no sense. And that's why they voted last night to move this bill forward. That will also move the three appropriations bills forward and get us at least a shot at this vote. Let me talk about the vote for a minute. This is very much sort of inside, you know, the way the Senate works. The majority leader of the Senate, who is now John Thune, the Republican leader, used to be Chuck Schumer when the Democrats had the majority. The majority leader of the U.S. senate has 100% control over what comes to the floor of the Senate. I can introduce a bill, and it's a great bill. It will never get a hearing unless the majority leader decides. I don't mean a hearing. It will never get to the floor unless the majority leader decides that. So for the majority leader to agree with us, and he said this in his speech yesterday, that he is committed to bringing a bill to the floor on the ACA and the health care issue, generally drafted by the Democrats on a date that we chose in the first or Second week of December. That's a big deal. Will it succeed? I don't know. But it has a lot better chance of success than where we are now, which is no chance of success, given.

[Paula Newton]

The fact that Americans are suffering here. And the majority of Americans want to see bipartisan legislation pass wherever it can, however it can. I mean, if we just take a step back here, this was record breaking, the shutdown. It's not technically over yet. What does this tell you about the health of the American democracy? This was a record and real Americans were suffering.

[Senator Angus King]

It shouldn't ever, it shouldn't happen. I mean, our most basic job of all is to pass a budget and we haven't done it. And there's no excuse for it. I mean, the Appropriations Committee meets, they work all these things out. It's usually they come out with bills that are, you know, 26 to 3. They're very much bipartisan for some reason. They never get to the floor. And that's one of the things that is important about this agreement. Not only does this bill pass three appropriations bills, they're 12 altogether. But the majority leader is committed, and I believe this, to bringing four more major appropriations bills to the floor in the next month. And that's if we can, if we can reestablish the process of passing budgets, we certainly should. James Langford and I have a bill that only. That got 57 votes. We didn't quite make 60 votes that basically says members of Congress can't travel if they don't pass a budget.

[Paula Newton]

Yeah. And I think that that is notable. Right. You guys were supposed to leave on the weekend. You did not. The House is hopefully now returning. I do have to leave it there.

[Senator Angus King]

The House, what's that? Did you mention what is that? Is that a part of the US Congress? I've forgotten all about those guys.

[Paula Newton]

And we will leave it there. We'll check in with you again, though, after you check in with the people of Maine to see what their reaction is. Senator Angus King for us. Thanks so much.

[Senator Angus King]

Thank you.

[Paula Newton]

And stay with cnn. We'll be right back after a quick break.

[Senator Angus King]

Tev, I got news for your ears.

[Paula Newton]

The podcast.

[Senator Angus King]

I am your host, Michael Ian Black. He's trying to do all the vertical video stuff now. He's like seeing that it works, seeing.

[Paula Newton]

The people get excited.

[Senator Angus King]

I hear the kids like it.

[Charles Lister]

Schumer, every time he opens his mouth, he is not built for this moment.

[Paula Newton]

He came of age 30, 40, 80 years ago when there was still some decorum in politics.

[Senator Angus King]

I read an interview once where someone was saying that. He always tries to find out who you're dating and like, when are you getting married? And who is like, why?

[Reem Turkmani]

Why do you. Right.

[Senator Angus King]

I don't think Chuck Schumer's good at.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Getting out there and saying, like, what.

[Paula Newton]

Is the thing Chuck Schumer is good at?

[Marion Nestle]

Great question.

[Senator Angus King]

Matchmaking. Yeah, exactly. Have I got news for your ears. Releases new episodes every Wednesday. Don't miss an episode.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Follow us wherever you get your podcasts.

[Paula Newton]

Now. History was made at the White House today as President Trump hosted Syrian President Amal Al Shada, the first ever visit by a Syrian head of state. And Al Shada is not just any head of state. He is a former jihadist who once had a $10 million US bounty on his head. The 43 year old we know came to power after the ousting of Bashar Al Assad. Since then, he's been making the rounds trying to end Syria's international isolation. Just last week, the US Dropped him from a list of designated terrorists. And it is of course, a stunning transition that almost no one could have predicted. I want you to look at this video now posted Saturday, of the Syrian leader playing basketball with America's top military leaders in Syria. Think about that. Apparently he's got some game. Reem Tukmani is director of the Syria Conflict Research Program at the London School of Economics. And Charles Lister is the Syria Program Director at the Middle East Institute. And I want to thank both of you for joining the program. It was something, as I said, that no one a year ago could have ever predicted that we'd be here. It is stunning still to recount the last 11 months or so. I do want to go to each of you to see, see how it feels. Charles, I will start with you and just note, right. He has had more audiences, I'll call them, with people around the world than the Syrian regime had in more than half a century.

[Charles Lister]

Yeah, exactly as you describe. It's been an extraordinary 11 months for Syria for any number of reasons, some of which you've included and many others, of course, coming out of 14 years of debilitating civil conflict and more than 50 years of Assad family tyrannical rule. I think, you know, there is grounds for a good deal of optimism. Hence the rush to Damascus, all of the government engagements that this new transitional government, despite its controversial history, has received. But then having just got back from Syria a couple days ago myself, you know, the challenges that this government, and no matter what kind of government it was, the challenges this government face are Extraordinary. And here, the beginning of a relationship with the United States will almost certainly be crucial in determining whether or not the biggest challenges of those, particularly those focused on the economy, are surmountable or not. And so that's why President Alshara's visit here to Washington is just so significant and potentially consequential.

[Paula Newton]

Yeah, potentially consequential. It kind of needs to be consequential.

[Senator Angus King]

Right?

[Paula Newton]

Reema, I do want to ask you the same question, but also note that you were just in Syria for a niece's graduation. It must have been great to be there as a family member. You hadn't been there in 14 years. What are your impressions in terms of where we've arrived today?

[Reem Turkmani]

It is incredible to see that this visit is happening, the first ever for a Syrian president to the White House. And as you said, I just came back from Syria. It's my third visit since the fall of the Assad regime. I haven't been able to go there for 14 years. And every time it is an emotional roller coaster. I mean, it's always like good news, bad news in a row. You see things, you feel so optimistic and happy, and then a minute later you hear extremely bad story, you see destruction. And it's a reflection of the reality on the ground. People are still very polarized. The conflict is not over. So President Al Shara has a very, very complex and sticky reality to handle back in Syria. He does need external support, external packing. I think there's a fine balance he has to balance here between the external demands and this very complex reality with people with very different expectations, including expectations.

[Paula Newton]

Out of this visit itself and at this visit. Reem, I want to ask you, what does he need to get out of this visit and what do you believe his strateg is right now on that?

[Reem Turkmani]

I think he's hoping to see an end to the US Sanctions against Syria. And we just heard good news about in that direction. We're waiting to hear the details. I think he would also like the US to pressure Israel to stop its daily attacks on Syria and to help, of course, Syria to integrate again in the international financial system. But all these shifts he's making, I mean, to go and meet the US President, being somebody who actually fought the Americans not a long time ago on the ground, on the other side, speaking openly against the US Until a very long time ago. So if we think about his base, his loyalist base, this is a very challenging foreign policy realignment. And I wonder whether he has strong enough internal legitimacy to support such foreign policy shift.

[Paula Newton]

Understood Charles, as you said, you were just back from Syria as well. And when you look at what is in front of him today, what does he need to secure? What kind of a strategy will you employ? And to Reem's point, what is the political situation on the ground in Syria in terms of the way Syrians are looking at this? Because it has been almost a year and in some cases their situation gets more precarious.

[Charles Lister]

Yeah. Well, let me start with the last part of your question to say that I think there continues to be a really quite significant gap in terms of the messaging coming out of the Syrian government about its foreign policy successes, about the many ranges of sanctions that have been removed over the past six months or so. And there is an expectation on the ground that the kind of rapid pace of all of those achievements should be being felt by those on the street, whether it be in more electricity coming into their homes, you know, more affordable food around the table, higher salaries and less inflation. And none of those things have really kicked in yet. And that's not necessarily the failure of the government. That is just frank reality that those things take an exceedingly long time to build up. But there is a big gap in expectations. And for me, I think that's one of the biggest, more kind of long term concerns. But it's also the core reason why the Caesar act sanctions again here in Washington do need to be fully repealed. And as Reem said, we had to what at least sounds like encouraging news announced just a few minutes ago, which is that there'll be a six month waiver or removal of those sanctions. But frankly speaking, having spoken to major multinational banks, huge businesses keen to invest in Syria, individual entities interested in investing in Syria, a six month waiver is just no way near enough. There needs to be a full repeal of that legislation. No one can transact money in large sums into the country. I had a meeting with the central bank governor just a few days ago and he made it very, very clear that without the full repeal of the Caesar act, there is not going to be a significant financial investment into Syria. It's just logistically impossible. And so it sounds like good news, but on a practical level, it changes very little from where we were an hour ago before this announcement was made. And there the battle still is in the House of Representatives where there's a small number of holdouts who are refusing that.

[Paula Newton]

And Reem, you can understand some of the reluctance though, in some corners of the United States, including some in Congress, who look at some of the revenge attacks that have gone on in the last few months and are wondering, you know, can this president really handle the weight of everything before him? And I note that the UN has said that, you know, that there were 1,400 civilians killed in March. They continue to investigate these crimes. There are communities, minority communities, that continue to live in fear in the country. Reem, you know that the president has said that, look, he believes that all faiths should live peacefully in Syria, but practically, what more can he do on the ground? Because I'm sure that is what's stopping what Charles says, right? The six month stay while they need longer than that.

[Reem Turkmani]

Sure. But first let me just comment on what Charles said about the Caesar Act. I fully agree it needs to be fully repealed. Whether you're with or against this government. I think we all have to be in favor of full removal of the sanctions. I'm more on the political side of the authorities, but I'm with full support behind repealing these sanctions because they are harming the Syrian people, all the Syrian peoples. Now, on the issue of minorities, I think all the security challenges, not just towards the minority in Syria, I think the solution is decentralizing the security sector. And I think Al Sharam, his forces are still reluctant to do that. They still have a huge trust issue with the local communities. They need to include the local communities to protect themselves. There's a huge gap of interest as well from many of the local communities, whether in the coast and Suida.

[Marion Nestle]

Sure.

[Reem Turkmani]

Also in the northeast, towards this government. They're not going to build the trust overnight. So coordinate with them. Let them protect themselves. Let them have their own forces, but coordinate it, make it accountable to a legal system in Damascus and then gradually build towards some, you know, a different model. But right now, the level of fear we have in Syria, whether geographic, I'll say it, like in the south or the coast or even within the cities. I mean, I was just last month in Aleppo talking to my cousins and relatives. They're terrified of leaving the house. Yesterday our neighbor was driving her son to the nursery. She was kidnapped. And there's so many of these stories on daily basis wherever you live. So he is struggling to, you know, to get hold of the security.

[Paula Newton]

And to that point, Raymond Charles, I do want you to listen to what he told CNN in December 2024 in terms of his promises to Syrians and the international community listening. Many Syrians are happy and will be happy to see the end of the Assad regime, but they're also worried about what HTS rule would mean, including minorities.

[Marion Nestle]

No One has the right to erase another group. These sects have coexisted in this region.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

For hundreds of years, and no one.

[Paula Newton]

Has the right to eliminate them. There must be a legal framework that protects and ensures the rights of all, not a system that serves only one.

[Marion Nestle]

Sect as Assad's regime has done.

[Paula Newton]

Charles, you know, the criticisms within Syria is that Syria isn't doing as much that he, that he should be doing at this point in time.

[Charles Lister]

Well, as with all of these things, it's complicated. I think he at the top has said the right things, has issued the right directives. The challenge, especially again coming after 14 years of conflict, is, is channeling that down the chains of command. And I think unquestionably, you know, back in March, in the coastal violence that you described, that was clearly an issue of a complete lack of chain of command and control. And thus what ensued was, was chaos. Violence we saw in July in the southern province of, of Sueda was different somewhat. A lot of international misunderstandings, most of which have gone unreported. Also a significant tribal component that lies outside of the government. But it's complicated. It's going to take time for those kinds of structures to take root in a country where basically the state had been completely hollowed out through conflict, but also corruption, mismanagement, and everything else. I do also just want to mention something around, you know, the steps that should be taken. It's interesting that we had this horrific chapter of five or six days of violence on the coastal region in March. The coast of Syria now is statistically the most stable region in all of Syria. And that is because security has been decentralized on that local level. I mean, even just earlier today, there was a huge graduation ceremony for several hundred locally recruited forces. So this is happening, but again, the consequences of that, from March to today, in November, it takes time.

[Paula Newton]

Charles Lister, Reem Turkmani, we really appreciate your insights, especially as you were both in Syria. We look forward to what else this meeting between the United States and Syria will bring. Appreciate it.

[Charles Lister]

Thank you.

[Paula Newton]

We go next to Mexico, where misogyny, harassment and violence against women is in sharp focus. Now, while walking between government buildings, President Claudia Sheinbaum was approached and groped by a man on the street. Sheinbaum decided to press charges against the assaulter and has spoken out against gender based violence. And my reflection is, if I don't file a complaint, even though this is a crime, then what position does that leave all Mexican women in? If they do this to the president, then what will happen to all the.

[Marion Nestle]

Young women in our country.

[Paula Newton]

Now, sadly, these types of incidents are all too common in Mexico, with 70% of women over the age of 15 reporting some form of violence in their lifetimes. That's according to a national survey. So will President Choinbaum action actually help end this endemic issue? And what more can be done? Gabriela Arrieguy is a Mexican poet, author and women's rights activist. And she joins us now from Mexico City to discuss and I welcome you to the program on what is a very disturbing scene in the last week in terms of what Mexican women and others have had to hear. What does the speed and the brazenness of this assault on the president say about cultural attitudes towards women and especially the issue of sexual, sexual violence because we have to say so much of it goes under reported in Mexico as well.

[Gabriela Jauregui]

Hi, Paula. Thank you for having me. Yes, indeed, extremely disturbing images that we that you just shared and that happened last week. And I think that what this speaks to is a normalization of sexual violence and harassment. And when this is so normalized, so much so that that a pedestrian can just attack the president while walking from one building to another makes these actions seem legitimate. So, you know, I really appreciate that the president has decided to take, you know, take it seriously and file a complaint because as you mentioned, statistically it's horribly common and only about 3% of these crimes end up in a formal complaint. So I think that this sends out a strong message.

[Paula Newton]

And you say it sends a strong message and President Shane bomb her decision to file charges against the man. It is significant. How is that being seen in Mexico?

[Gabriela Jauregui]

I think that most people agree that this was an important step to sort of, you know, against the normalizing of harassment and in favor of the normalizing of speaking out against it and, you know, filing complaints because of the small amounts of reporting, we don't even, you know, we don't even know how much of this is going on in all in the whole country. And also another thing that she called for is now a national plan against sexual abuse and harassment so that federal laws are homogenized and that sexual harassment becomes a serious offense in all 32 states in Mexico. Not only that, it also calls for greater efficiency when women file complaints to authorities because this one of the reasons women don't file complaints is not only that violence is normalized, but it's also that women are usually re victimized when they file a complaint. So the president has called for greater efficiency from the authorities as well.

[Paula Newton]

Yeah.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Yeah.

[Paula Newton]

Chilling to think that if you report it, then you are at risk of retribution. I do want to point out that on the campaign trail, Sheinbaum championed feminist ideals. Right. She declared that it's time for women. But you can hear the critics, right, say that how can that promise ring true? And people point to the deep cuts to women's services and also her defense of a male member of the Morena Party that was accused of assaulting his half sister. Her half sister, pardon me.

[Gabriela Jauregui]

And I think that. Yeah, yeah, yeah, no. And this, I think, is a rampant problem that has been going on for not just in this administration, but in previous administrations. And as you know, as an activist, as women had hoped, many women had hoped that this would change under this administration. And I don't think we've seen the swift and sort of serious action we had hoped for, but hope. You know, one possible silver lining to this horrible incident is that, you know, maybe it's time for this to be taken much more seriously. And I think that this isn't only the case in Mexico. It's interesting to see that the disciplining of women's bodies through violence, politically, especially women in public office, has been a serious problem here. But not just here. You know, in 2003, there were 36 female chiefs of states or leaders around the world. And in January of this year, that number has been reduced to only 25. And it's no wonder, I think, that, you know, the violence against women permeates all strata of society. And this has been, you know, made very patent with this attack on the president.

[Paula Newton]

And President Shane Baum obviously knows this is a problem, has known. And now, unfortunately, she knows this all too well. Do you think, though, that her gender has amplified the criticism? I mean, you know, you're in a catch 22 as a woman and as a leader anywhere around the world, but likely, especially in Mexico.

[Gabriela Jauregui]

Absolutely. I mean, on the one hand, more right wing media, for instance, shared re. Victimizing images of the moment of harassment, really images that shouldn't be shared of any woman being attacked by a man, but specifically of a woman in office. They were really horrific. And then, you know, of course, the response on social media was a mixed bag where critics replicated misogynistic words and sentences against the president because she's a woman president. So I think that, yeah, gender violence against a woman in office makes it sort of cuts both ways. Right. And it's very. Makes it really clear, makes the problem that goes on with women at all levels of society makes it really clear, especially in a country where 10 women and girls are murdered every day.

[Paula Newton]

Yeah. It's astounding. Gabriela, unfortunately, I don't have a lot of time left, but I do want to ask you, do you believe that President Sheinbaum, that she will take this on now, that she will champion this? And to what end? How effective can she be?

[Gabriela Jauregui]

I mean, I really hope that she does champion this cause. And I also hope that in this national plan that she's asked the Secretary for Women's affairs for it to make it so that the brunt of responsibility doesn't fall on women, on women reporting, etc. But also on campaigns aimed at men. At the end of the day, the harassment happens at the hands of men. So hopefully this will mean more educational and other kinds of policies aimed at men as well. And I hope that, yeah, this will be a cause that transforms and really makes this presidency sort of keep up its campaign promises that have to do with women's rights.

[Paula Newton]

Understood. Okay. Gabriela, thank you so much. Really appreciate it.

[Gabriela Jauregui]

Thank you, Paula.

[Paula Newton]

And we'll be right back after a quick break.

[Reem Turkmani]

Hey, fans, it's the King of Christmas.

[Marion Nestle]

If you're suffering from ornament overload, it's a little messy.

[Paula Newton]

And if you have blow molds on.

[Gabriela Jauregui]

The brain, what I need in my.

[Paula Newton]

Life right there, you might just be a holiday hoarder. I'm a collector.

[Charles Lister]

We'll use the C word instead.

[Senator Angus King]

If it's kind of ugly, why don't we get rid of it? Would you get rid of an ugly child?

[Paula Newton]

I knew you were crazy about Christmas. Not this crazy. Courting for the Holidays special series Tuesday, November 11 at 9 on HGTV. Now, the government shutdown has put millions of Americans at risk of losing their SNAP benefits crucial for putting food on the table. Now so far, the Trump administration has shown little sympathy with its request to block a lower court's ruling for funds to be paid in full for November, rejected again by a federal court this weekend. Now meanwhile, the Agriculture Department directed states to, quote, immediately undo food stamps for those in need. Author Marion Nestle says she's shocked by how low income families are being used as poor pawns in this political chaos. And she joins Hari Srinivasan to discuss the impact. And her new book is what to Eat Now.

[Senator Angus King]

Paolo, thanks.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Mary Nestle, thanks so much for joining us. Your most recent book, what to Eat now, it is kind of an update on a book that you wrote back in 2006 on what to eat. So why did you feel you needed to write this? Why did you Feel you had to do it. Now what's changed?

[Marion Nestle]

Well, I thought it was going to be a really quick project that I could just whip off. And here we are four years later. It turned out to be an enormous job looking at everything that has changed in the last 20 years. The big ones are online ordering, plant based, ultra processed, the introduction of international foods into every section of the supermarket, the substitution of water for full sugar sodas. I mean, I could just go on and on and on in every section of the supermarket. There have been profound changes that occurred. I just wasn't paying close enough attention.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

What's interesting is that you kind of look at this supermarket through the lens of decisions that most consumers don't know might have shaped the food that they're seeing on the aisles. What aisles they're seeing, what height they're seeing it at.

[Marion Nestle]

Right, right. I mean, this is a book that sort of exposes the obvious fact that supermarkets are not social service agencies and neither are food companies. They're businesses with stockholders to please. Their purpose is to get you to buy as much food as you possibly can, as often as you possibly can, at as high a price as they can get with you.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Kind of really look at the design of a supermarket as something that companies have figured out how to maximize profit, not necessarily health. So it gives an example of something that a supermarket shopper should become a little bit more conscious of, and then maybe they can change their behavior accordingly.

[Marion Nestle]

Well, first of all, the supermarket is designed to get you to do as much exploring of the real estate as you possibly can. Because the rule is the more products you see, the more products you buy. So one objective is to get you to look at as many products as possible. And companies pay supermarkets to put their products in places where you can't miss them. So this would be at eye level and it would be at the end of aisles that has a special name, end caps, and at the checkout counter. When you see products at a checkout counter, let me tell you, those are not there in any random order. Companies have paid many, many thousands of dollars to get those products placed in the checkout counter so that while you're checking out, you just kind of mindlessly grab whatever that's there. And this is all done based on the most astonishing amount of research. I can't believe the amount of research that goes into trying to figure out what makes people bribe products, you know, and this has to do with the color of the packaging, the size of the packaging, the placement of the packaging, the lighting in the store, the way the aisles are designed, every nothing in there is random.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

You're making it sound like a casino where there are no clocks, there are no windows. By design. Right.

[Marion Nestle]

Well. And the company always wins.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

That's right. So you also write that as much as 40% of the food produced in America is thrown away. So it's like we actually have the ability to provide calories for people who need it. But it's kind of how we're designing these calories, what kinds of food, we're putting them in that. Really, you're saying that waste is built into our system.

[Marion Nestle]

Today you see waste as a food system problem because in the United States, our food supply supplies 4,000 calories a day for every man, woman and little tiny baby be in the country. That's food produced in the United States plus imports, less exports. It's not what people are eating, it's what's available for consumption. Food companies have to sell that food. So they are trying to sell twice as much food as the population actually needs. So waste is built into the system, but that waste is not equitably distributed throughout the food system. 70% of the waste occurs at the farm level, at the production level. You know, it's due to bad climate, it's due to bad crops, it's due to all kinds of problems that occur. Only 10% of it occurs at the supermarket level. Supermarkets are really good at inventory control and they manage, they manage their waste pretty well. 20% of it occurs in the home problem. It's the extra vegetables that got rotten in the refrigerator. It's the cheese that got moldy, it's the milk that was there too long and that you as an individual could do something about. But that's only going to be 20% of that 40% still worth working on.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

During Robert F. Kennedy Jr. S confirmation hearings to become the head of the Department of Health and Human Services, he called ultra processed foods poison. But some of this concern seems to have decreased. When it comes to now, I guess what the government is going to be trying to do, whether it's even trying to decrease them or just define them, what the health guidelines and dietary guidelines are going to be. That date has been pushed back now till December.

[Marion Nestle]

Well, he got hit by lobbyists just like everybody in government did. Kennedy is a complicated. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Is a complicated figure because when it comes to food. Because on the one hand, he has been calling for reduction in ultra processed foods. Make America healthy again. Let's get rid of some of the harmful additives that are in food. Let's get rid of mercury and fish. A lot of the things that he called for seem to me to be really good ideas. And he scored two wins. Wins. Two big, maybe three wins so far. One of them is he's gotten food companies to agree to take artificial colored dyes out of food products. But if you take the color dyes out of a sugar sweetened cereal, it's still a sugar sweetened cereal. If you take the color dyes out of candy, it's still candy. I don't think that's going to make a bigger difference. Difference to health on the chemicals. He's gotten the FDA to say that it's going to do a better job of deciding which chemicals are generally recognized as safe. So those are wins. I'll grant that. Another MAHA win is that Coca Cola has agreed to substitute cane sugar for high fructose corn syrup. That is nutritionally hilarious areas. It's not going to make any difference at all. The calories will be the same, the sugars will be the same. So this is all very complicated and must be taken in the context of Kennedy's destruction of the public health system, destruction of the cdc, making the FDA a dysfunctional agency and destroying the research apparatus. Not to mention mention what he's done about vaccinations, which I consider to be one of the great public health achievements of the 20th century. So complicated.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

Right now we are, as we record this conversation, still in the middle of a government shutdown. And that has disrupted supplemental nutrition, SNAP payments. And then there's new rules really even blocking grocery stores from offering any other discounts to SNAP recipients. So there's right now millions of Americans who might only receive possibly up to half their SNAP benefits. Judge has said that the administration has to fully fund these. I mean, what kind of. What are the consequences, especially to this population who might not have access to healthy foods in the first place? And the SNAP benefits are part of a real crucial part of how they get nutrition.

[Marion Nestle]

Well, yes. And we're talking about 42 million people here who are beneficiaries of SNAP. Most of them are people who have jobs, but their jobs don't pay enough for them to support their families and feed their families adequately. And the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, SNAP is a lifeline for them, for food. And the idea that the government shutdown has cut off those funds is quite shocking. And even more shocking, shocking is the Department of Agriculture's decision to punish retailers who are trying to help the poor with maybe giving them discounts. Or doing something that will make it a little bit easier for their dollars to go further. It's quite shocking to use the poor as a pawn in this ridiculous political situation that we're in now.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

I think we've known about this for a while, but I think it's becoming in more sharp relief that there's a direct correlation between the cost of a calorie and how nutritious it is. The cheaper it is, the worse off it is for you. I mean, you can kind of find out when you go to, you know, a dollar store, for example, which are real huge and huge parts of rural America and even in general food deserts, where technically, if that's the only kind of grocery store you have versus a store that might have fresh produce, it is very likely to have a very different effect on your body if the bulk of your calories are coming from the dollar store versus from just a grocer.

[Marion Nestle]

Well, it's not just likely. We have an enormous amount of research that shows that people whose diets are based on ultra processed foods are not as healthy as people who eat more healthfully. The dollar stores have to have some fruits, vegetables, grains, fresh foods, because in order for them to accept SNAP benefits, they're required by the Department of Agriculture to have a certain number of fresh foods. But I've been to dollar stores and oh my goodness, you don't want to buy your produce there. It really doesn't look very good. So we need to have a food system that serves people better in the United States.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

And.

[Marion Nestle]

That'S why I think food is political, because these are political issues, they're political choices. We could feed everybody in America. We could give everybody in America a universal basic income. We could have universal school meals for kids. We could have restrictions on marketing of ultra processed foods to kids and warning labels on some of these foods like they do in other countries. There are a lot of things that we could do politically that would help people eat more healthfully. I think one of the most important ones would be to subsidize healthier foods instead of the foods that we are subsidizing. These are political choices.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

The pushback against this relatively simple idea of saying, hey, tax the things that are unhealthy and encourage the things that are healthy is that we hear this sort of political backlash saying, look, I don't want to live in a nanny state. I don't want to be told what cookies I can eat and what I can't. This is against the core values of America and independence. What's the flaw in that thinking?

[Marion Nestle]

Well, I think we already live in an environment in which choices are made for us. We just don't realize it. So it's not a question of imposing some kind of new order on the population. It's a question of tweaking the existing order to promote health rather than the current system. I don't see anything that's wrong with that. That seems just fine to me. You still have a choice. It's just that the easier choice will be healthier. What's wrong with that? Seems like a really good idea to me.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

One of the things that you ask for and end the book with is kind of a call to action and reminding people that this isn't just sort of a health choice, that there are personal choices, political choices that all get rolled up into this. What does taking action look like on a consumer level, on a societal level?

[Marion Nestle]

If you are trying to eat healthfully in today's food environment, you are fighting a multi trillion dollar industrial industry all by yourself. I mean, you can't do that. You can't. It's. You're not going to. You can make healthy food choices for yourself and your family. That's terrific. But to do more than that, you must join with other people. Advocacy requires as many people as possible to be working towards the same goal. And that means joining organizations that are working on these issues. It means writing your congressional representatives. It means running for office. Please run for office. If you want political power, that's what you have to do. We have learned recently in the United States that some people can win elections even if they have ideas that don't seem mainstream. So it can be done. And the recent election should be an incentive and an incentive inspiration and for lots of other young people to run for office. Please, we need you.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

The book is called what to Eat Now. Marian Nestle, thanks so much for joining us.

[Marion Nestle]

My pleasure.

[Paula Newton]

And finally for us, the cop 30 flotilla has docked in Belem. The boat carrying dozens of indigenous leaders arrived at the Brazilian coast a day ahead of the climate summit that started Monday. Coming all the way from a couple glacier in the Andes, the group has been journeying for weeks, celebrating with caipirinhas and a banquet as they reached their final destination. As for why they've come, their main goal, to make sure that this year's conference achieves more for indigenous territories so that they're protected as they deserve. And that's it for us for now. If you ever miss our show, you can find the latest episode shortly after it airs on our podcast. And remember, you can always catch us online, on our website and all over social media. I want to thank you for watching and goodbye for New York.

[Marion Nestle]

I'm Dr. Sanjay Gupta, host of the Chasing Life podcast.

[Paula Newton]

We feel almost a responsibility because we're with you all the time.

[Marion Nestle]

That's Dr. Sumbul Desai.

[Podcast Host / Narrator]

She is Apple's VP of Health.

[Paula Newton]

I want to make sure we're scientifically grounded in the work we do so that consumers have confidence in the message that they're getting.

[Marion Nestle]

For years, she's been thinking about how.

[Paula Newton]

To bring medicine and wearable technology closer together. We have to hit a level of accuracy that we feel really strongly about.

[Gabriela Jauregui]

Listen to Chasing Life streaming now.

[Paula Newton]

Wherever you get your podcasts.