Loading summary
Transcript65 lines
- [00:01]
Martin O'Malley
That dark night alone in America.
- [00:27]
Ralph Nader
Hi, this is Willie Nelson.
- [00:28]
Michael E. Mann
You're listening to Radical Free Speech Radio.
- [00:31]
Martin O'Malley
KPFK in Los Angeles.
- [00:34]
Alan Minsky
This is Ben Cohn, the ice cream guy. And you're listening to my hero, Ralph Nader, the Ralph Nader Radio Hour.
- [00:42]
Michael E. Mann
Stand up.
- [00:43]
Steve Scrovan
Stand up. You've been sitting way too long. Welcome to the Ralph Nader Radio Hour. My name is Steve Scrovan, along with my co host, David Feldman. Hello, David. Hello, Steve. And our producer, Hannah Feldman. Hello, Hannah. Hello, Steve. And of course, the man of the hour, Ralph Nader. Hello, Ralph.
- [01:05]
Ralph Nader
Hey, everybody.
- [01:07]
Martin O'Malley
Hi.
- [01:07]
Steve Scrovan
This is Steve Scrovan from the Ralph Nader Radio Hour. And it has been my distinct privilege to be able to be doing this show on KPFK, the Ralph Nader Radio Hour, for over 11 and a half years. We have done 603 episodes. And it's been my privilege to be able to work with Ralph, this frankly historical figure, and hear him interact with guests and monologue his own thoughts about what is going on in probably the most critical point of history, in our nation's history, at least since the Civil War. And Ralph is not shy about saying that, you know, he lived through Nixon, and this is much worse than Nixon when you have an administration of Donald Trump who is basically trying to undo everything that Ralph spent an entire life working for, which is watchdogging the government, making the government accountable, helping create certain government agencies that protect us, like the epa, things like the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act. These are things Ralph has worked for, and these are things the Trump administration is tearing down and dismantling. So it's been a tremendous education for me, and it's been my privilege to do that. And I'm so grateful to kpfk, our mother station, for putting us on the air those 11 and a half years ago. So it's important, and Ralph would agree with me to support KPFK. And if you want to support KFPFK, go to 818-9855-735. That's 818985, KPFK. To donate online, just go to kpfk.org and support radio. That really makes a difference and is more important than ever as we hear about Sinclair Broadcasting and nexstar and all these very conservative distributors having the stranglehold on dissent. So call now at 818-985-5735. That's 818-985-Kpfk. Call now. Support the Ralph Nader Radio Hour. Now, Ralph, as we record this, we are in the midst of a Government shutdown. What do you make of this, both politically and practically?
- [03:36]
Ralph Nader
It was really strange because what the Democrats are demanding in order to continue funding the government is an end to the ban that the Republicans passed a few months ago on the subsidies for Obamacare. That's 25 million people who, if those subsidies are ended by January, their premiums are going to spike sky high. The other thing they're demanding is, is that the Republicans rescind the depletion of Medicaid, where anywhere from 10 to 15 million people are going to lose their Medicaid. Now, the irony of this is in the 2026 election, those are the two major attacks that the Democrats are readying to defeat the Republicans. And now they're saying to Republicans, we want you to do the right thing and, and we will in effect lose the opportunity to go after you on very popular issues that can make you lose elections. And the GOP taking orders from the deranged Trump are basically demanding that the end of these subsidies and the deprivation of Medicare to millions of Americans, even though it's going to be devastating for them in the 2026 election. How about that? Millions of people losing their Medicaid.
- [05:01]
Steve Scrovan
Yes. So we'll see how that plays out in the days and weeks to come. But as far as today's program goes, first up we're going to talk about how weaponized disinformation poses existential threat to humanity with Dr. Michael E. Mann. Dr. Mann is a climatologist, presidential Distinguished professor in the Department of Earth and Environmental Science at the University of Pennsylvania and the co author with Dr. Peter Hotez of the new book Science Under Siege, how to fight the five Most Powerful Forces that Threaten Our world. We'll speak to Dr. Mann about his book, which he says is a quote, a call to arms and a roadmap for dismantling the forces of anti science. Amidst the ever changing news cycle, it's hard to keep up with all the ways the Trump administration is dismantling the government. One agency that so far seemed untouchable no matter which party holds power, is Social Security. In the second half of the program, we welcome the former Governor of Maryland, Martin o', Malley, who served as the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. In the Biden administration, we all pay into Social Security and 40% of seniors living alone depend entirely on Social Security. Elon Musk's so called government Efficiency Task Force has driven more employees out of the Social Security Agency at a time when its staffing had already been reduced to a 50 year low. Governor O' Malley is going to give us his take on what he believes the future holds for Social Security under Trump. So far. Doesn't sound like efficiency. As always, somewhere in the middle. We'll check in with our tireless corporate crime reporter Russell Mokhyber. But first, Michael Mann is here to inoculate us against the anti science virus of weaponized disinformation.
- [06:41]
David Feldman
David Dr. Michael E. Mann is Presidential Distinguished professor in the Department of Earth and Environmental Science at the University of Pennsylvania. He is a co founder of the award winning science website realclimate.org and he is author of more than 200 peer reviewed and edited publications, numerous op eds and commentaries, and seven books including Science Under Siege, how to Fight the Five Most Powerful Forces that Threaten Our World. He co authored it with Dr. Peter Hotez. Welcome to the Ralph Nader Radio Hour.
- [07:19]
Michael E. Mann
Dr. Michael E. Mann, oh, thanks so much, David. It's great to be with you all.
- [07:24]
Ralph Nader
Welcome indeed, Mike. I want our listeners to consider two frames of reference while we interview Professor Mann. People have experienced the COVID pandemic, the SARS pandemic. They've experienced hyper hurricanes and unparalleled wildfires and heat waves and sea level rises. So we're not talking about science in the abstract. We're not even talking about basic science. In contrast, applied science, we're talking about a body of knowledge that covers perceived impacts that are killing people in this country and around the world day after day. A recent report just came out that the smoke from the huge fires, such as coming from Canada, take about 40,000 lives in our country alone through respiratory ailments. That's about how many are killed on the highway. That's the first reference. And the second one, when you listen to Professor Mann, ask yourself how many of these threats, how many of these unmerited assaults on people who are standing up for empirical reality would be possible if anonymity was banned on the Internet, Something which Zuckerberg and others have opposed because they want more traffic on the Internet. Okay. With that background, Mike, lay the basis first of all, for the perils that are now more than approaching. They're in our midst in terms of climate and pandemics.
- [08:59]
Michael E. Mann
Yeah. Well, thanks, Ralph. If I may, it's just an honor to be speaking with you, especially about this topic because I know you've done so much work over the years in trying to communicate the existential environmental threats that we face today and we communicate against this stiff headwind of an anti science movement that is promoted by petro states and polluters and plutocrats and all of the bad actors that of course you've spent your career sort of singling out appropriately. And in this case, this misinformation, this disinformation is deadly. As you allude to the wildfire smoke, there's mortality associated with that. These unprecedented wildfires that are a result of human caused warming of the planet from fossil fuel burning. And there is a direct connection, we can now say that many of these extreme events simply wouldn't be occurring, certainly wouldn't be as extreme as they are in the absence of the warming of the planet. So you've got this fundamental threat to human health, this source of mortality in climate change and also in the extraction and burning of fossil fuels themselves, the air and water pollution that by some estimates is responsible for as much as 20% of all premature deaths. And so we're talking about a major source of mortality here. Then of course you've got pandemics and anti science. An anti science and ideologically motivated anti science movement to convince people to not vaccinate, to get them to oppose vaccination, to get them to reject the messaging coming from our leading public health scientists like my co author Peter Hotez. So that's another existential threat. Climate crisis got the threat of ever more deadly pandemics got do in substantial part to climate change and environmental disruption. And then the third in that three legged stool, the third threat which is the greatest threat of all, and you've alluded to it, is the unprecedented massive promotion of disinformation by bad actors who have weaponized our social media platforms to promote anti science messaging on climate or vaccines for purely ideological reasons. And there is this infrastructure that is created that supports that disinformation machine. And it's the five actors that we talk about, the five forces that threaten our world, the plutocrats, the petro states, the polluters, the propagandists, and yes, the press. Not all media outlets, but many of them, including even what we used to think of as sort of legacy objective news outlets like the New York Times and the Washington Post, which too often engage in what we call performative neutrality where anti science positions are put on an equal footing or placed on an equal footing with the overwhelming consensus of the world's scientists. So the, the public is confused. They don't know whom to believe. And of course that plays to the interests of these bad actors who benefit from business as usual, who fossil fuel burning and all of these other activities that are threatening the planet.
- [12:08]
Ralph Nader
Mike, talk about ExxonMobil, scientists in the early 1980s.
- [12:13]
Michael E. Mann
Yeah, thanks for that question. You know, there's a memo from 1982, it was an internal report from ExxonMobil's own scientists which made a prediction of how much the planet would warm a little over 1 degree Celsius, a little less than 2 degrees Fahrenheit, warming of the planet that would occur if we continued to burn fossil fuels at sort of historical business as usual rates. So they predicted where those CO2 concentrations would be today in a scenario of inaction, in a scenario of business as usual. And they accurately predicted how much the planet would warm up. But they didn't stop there. There is a line in that report and I'll remind you, this isn't Al Gore, this isn't the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, this isn't me. This is ExxonMobil's own scientists who warned of potentially catastrophic events that would be occurring now in that scenario. And what are we seeing? We are seeing those catastrophic events, these super typhoons and hurricanes, there are two of them in the Atlantic right now as we speak, are becoming more powerful, are becoming more destructive. The impacts of climate change aren't subtle anymore. They are taking a toll in the damage that they are causing and in the mortality that they're responsible for. And that's, that's where we are. And we're there because of this disinformation machine that we need to find a way, as you say, we need to find a way to reassert the will of the people, listeners.
- [13:36]
Ralph Nader
Professor Mann is not predicting perfection in terms of science. There have been many scientifically established principles in the past that have been discredited by subsequent science.
- [13:47]
Michael E. Mann
Absolutely.
- [13:48]
Ralph Nader
So there's always a skepticism there. We're talking about tens of millions of people back home who suffer the indiscriminate impact of climate and pandemic. Conservative liberals all get affected. Their floods in North Carolina affected a huge area of pro Trump territory and families recently from a hyper hurricane. So if the Congress was controlled by the people in their own self interest. Yeah, and of course their own self interest is in preventing and mitigating pandemics and climate catastrophe, which is rooted in scientific facts as well as their own daily experience when they're hit by these forces, don't you think these five Ps, as you call them, the plutocrats, the petro states, the pros, the propagandists and press, would have far, far less impact? And shouldn't the laser beam effort of all our marches, reports, rallies, strikes, litigation, zero in on those 535 people.
- [14:54]
Michael E. Mann
Yeah, no question about it. And I should say that petro states was really a stand in for some of these other things. We're talking about polluters and politicians who essentially are collaborators with the petro state. And the United States now given its policies, its policies that are essentially dictated by the fossil fuel industry must be classified, as we argue in the book, as a petro state and its enablers. The enablers of that petro state are the politicians who are rubber stamping Trump's agenda and the polluters who obviously are essentially writing the agenda. Project 2025 was written by the Heritage foundation, funded by the Koch brothers, polluters. And so you're absolutely right in what's so ironic, what's so tragic, I should say, is that they have been so effective, these five bad actors, in convincing the public to vote against its own interests. That has been the defining source of our problem today. The fact that with the massive propaganda machine they have, Murdoch media empire, Fox News, Wall Street Journal editorial pages, Elon Musk's weaponization now of Twitter to promote right wing talking points and ideology, they have essentially been able to convince people that up is down, black is white, and climate change is a hoax, as our president literally said a week ago to the UN General Assembly. And the vaccines, you know, are dangerous. Ralph, you may have known the great Carl Sagan.
- [16:30]
Ralph Nader
Yes.
- [16:31]
Michael E. Mann
Yeah. Well, you know, he pre staged this in his great book, came out in 1997. The demon haunted science as a candle in the dark. And there's an amazing passage from that book which I often quote, where he presages, you know, a world where people fall into superstition, become unable to understand the technology that determines their lives, resort to pseudoscience and superstition. I would argue he didn't focus as much as he might have on anti science. Not just pseudoscience, but ideologically motivated anti science. But he did warn us that we were headed down a path of destruction, a threat to human civilization. And we're at that moment, we're in the moment that he predicted and we're at a pivot point. And the only way that we will be able to preserve, as far as I can see, anything that resembles modern human civilization is if the people take back the power that they have under the Constitution. It remains to be seen if that happens here because we are at the precipice now where our democracy is literally crumbling before us. In the time that we've been talking, I'm sure there is another headline in the news that underscores literally the disintegration of all of our democratic institutions. All of the guardrails that have kept us in check for so long seem to be coming down and doing so very rapidly. And so we are at a moment of crisis. And only by taking back our politics, by the people taking back their politics, as you say, can we avert catastrophe.
- [18:07]
Ralph Nader
And I always say to our listeners, a lot easier than we think. I've written a book called Breaking Through Power. It's a lot easier than we think. 1% of the people organized in congressional districts reflecting public opinion and public anxiety, fears and necessities for a safe and healthful life. I find a couple useful distinctions here. Maybe you can help us elaborate it it is not just an anti science movement, it's a corporate science, anti academic science movement. Corporate science, like Monsanto reflects, is not peer reviewed. It is secretive and is driven by profit and it's made to obey political goals in Washington and state capitals. Academic science in principle is peer reviewed. It's open. It is designed to perform in the public service and interests and it always is open to revision. And in recent decades, corporate science over universities has undermined academic science, co opted it, tempted it, and in many universities like MIT and Harvard and Berkeley has become a dominant in campus presence. Could you elaborate on that? I find that much more useful pro and con way to analyze it than simply using the words anti science.
- [19:30]
Michael E. Mann
No, you're absolutely right. And that's why we really try to underscore we're talking about ideologically motivated anti science. It isn't the sort of pseudoscience that Sagan was so concerned about people falling victim to faith healers and crystal healing and horoscopes. He was focused on that. But you've put your finger on it, the real threat. And Carl saw it, but I don't think he saw it quite as clearly as he would now if he were still with us. The problem is ideologically motivated anti science where there is an ideological political, financial agenda behind the effort to discredit science. And we've seen, you know, the origins. The playbook was written by the tobacco industry. One of the lines in a internal document that was released. And you'll note the similarity with the internal fossil fuel documents from ExxonMobil that we talked about that secretly. They knew there was a problem. Their own scientists knew there was a problem and they hid it. And instead they spent hundreds of millions of dollars promoting misinformation, attacking independent scientists, doing everything they could to cloud the public Public understanding and preventing policy action. But that playbook goes back to the tobacco industry. And there's a line from one of the documents they had to release in response to a settlement with a number of states attorneys generals back in the 1990s, doubt is our product. That's from a tobacco industry internal memo, Doubt is our product. And what they meant was the most important thing for them, for their business model, was to cloud the public understanding of the threat, threat that is posed by their product. And it's the same playbook that all of these other players have been using, as you note. And it's interesting to ask, well, what about the sort of anti vax, you know, the public health anti science that we see now as so pervasive among conservatives, among the Republican Party? Why are they opposed to vaccines? Why are they opposed to, you know, the. What our public health experts say about these pandemics and how we can protect ourselves from them? And it goes back to the fact that early on, the Koch brothers, two of the plutocrats who funded much of that infrastructure that has been attacking climate action for decades, they were concerned about the effect that lockdowns would have on fossil fuel usage. They didn't want lockdowns, stay at home orders. They wanted to keep the oil flowing, they wanted to keep the fossil fuels burning. They're the world's largest project, privately held fossil fuel interests, but they also fund a larger libertarian ideological sort of agenda. And so they created organizations, front groups, they even bought off leading, you know, quote unquote medical experts to convince the public that these actions weren't necessary. And they created this rabble, this sector now of our population that has been weaponized to oppose all messaging from the public health scientists, which of course means opposing vaccinations. And these vaccines are part of big government just telling you what you can and can't do. It fit in neatly to their narrative, the same narrative they use on climate change. Oh, these politicians, they just want to tell you they want to prevent you from eating your hamburger or flying to see Grandma, you know, for the holidays. They're going to take away your liberty. They're going to take away your freedom. Freedom. And that's the larger framing into which this folded in. And so it became this behemoth, this anti science behemoth that couples opposition to climate action and opposition to vaccines, all as part of sowing distrust in the scientists whose message is often inconvenient to these powerful interests. So you put your finger on it. It isn't anti science in a vacuum. It's anti science with a clear ideological agenda, a plutocrat, petro state driven ideological.
- [23:19]
Ralph Nader
Agenda, and commercial profit. Of course, it's very important to distinguish between quackery, pure quackery on the fringes that gets a foothold among sometimes millions of people, and corporate science, which is the dominant form of anti science in the pursuit of profit. And not only that, they shut up people, they file suits against academics like you, they file frivolous lawsuits against farmers who speak out. So it's good to do that. Go into your criticism of Zuckerberg, the social media and AI. Where does all this fit?
- [23:59]
Michael E. Mann
Yeah, we call it anti social media in the book because that's what it really is now. And it has been, whether it's Zuckerberg and Facebook, which has been weaponized by bad actors, and the rules have been set in a way that allows the bad actors to exploit that medium. Let's make no mistake about it. There's a reason that Mark Zuckerberg funds a front group called the American Edge Project. So there's literally lobbying for legislation that would prevent any common sense regulation of these social media platforms. Elon Musk, of course, having bought Twitter and he bought it so that it could be weaponized for the bad actors that helped leverage that purchase. Saudi Arabia and Russia, two leading petro states. You think it's a coincidence that they helped fund Elon Musk's acquisition of Twitter, which has now been completely weaponized. He's changed the algorithm to promote right wing propaganda and anti science on climate, on vaccines and everything else.
- [24:56]
Ralph Nader
Talk about anonymity. What if anonymity was prohibited on the Internet as proposed by Professor Robert Falmouth University, San Diego Law School, who has been on this program talking about it?
- [25:07]
Michael E. Mann
Yeah, it's an interesting point, isn't it? Because too many bad actors are able to hide behind anonymity. And so much of the disinformation that we're talking about is actually promoted by what are sometimes called inauthentic accounts. What does that mean? They're professional troll farms and some of them are connected to petro states like Russia. They are bot armies, literally. They're AI bots that have been programmed to spew misinformation, disinformation, propaganda. And that can only happen, that has taken hold because the rules allow that. And one of the ways to rein that in, as you say, would be to sort of lift this veil of anonymity that protects too many of these inauthentic actors on social media. There are all these common sense things that we could do to try to rein in social media, to regulate them the same way that we would regulate traditional media outlets. And yet they have used their great wealth and power to lobby against any and all legislation. Right now, the reins of our entire communication infrastructure are in the hands of these bad actors, which own all three branches of the federal government. Federal government right now. And have weaponized all three branches to promote their agenda.
- [26:24]
Ralph Nader
There are a lot of bright spots around the world. The drawdown program that Paul Hawken launched, the fiercely competitive renewable energy industry, which is spreading in red states at a fast pace. Texas is the biggest producer of wind power. Talk about the bright spots, the civic action, as well as the economic superiority of these alternative systems that would undermine the fossil fuel industry.
- [26:53]
Michael E. Mann
Thanks for asking about that, Ralph. Because it's easy to get very depressed when we talk about all the threats and challenges that we face here. It feels monumental. We feel powerless. And one of the points that I've made over and over again is that doomism and despair plays right into the agenda of the bad actors. They want you to give up. They want you to feel overwhelmed, like there's nothing you can do about it. And so it's so critical for us to recognize that while there is great urgency, you know, with respect to the crises that we face, this is so important, and it's what you're saying. There's also agency. We have the ability to change this. We still have the ability to avert truly catastrophic climate change if we act, and we act with dispatch. And the obstacles, they're not physical. They are not technological. And as the polluters would like you to think, as the bad actors would like you to think, we have the technology to decarbonize our global energy infrastructure. The only obstacle are political. And political obstacles can be overcome. And people need to be thinking about that in the lead up to this midterm election, which may be our last available effort to steer this ship, to right the path of this ship that we're on. And so there is still an ability to make a difference. And there are some reasons for cautious optimism. When you step back and you sort of. You direct your gaze away from the United States, you look at what's happening writ large in the world. You look at what's happening in China. I just returned from a trip to Hong Kong and I was made more optimistic about the experiences I had there, the people that I spoke with, the students that I lectured to. And some of it is the underlying Buddhist philosophy that I think still sort of infused diffuses the way China looks at these global problems, they care about climate change. They are the leading actor now in the world. They're the largest carbon polluter, but they're taking action to reduce their carbon emissions to move dramatically away from fossil fuels. The US has contributed far more cumulative carbon pollution to the atmosphere than any other country. That's really important because that's all the climate cares about. People like to finger point at China, which, which currently is the largest emitter because they industrialized much later than the United States. Right. More than a century later. But their trajectory is actually a downward trajectory. They've contributed far less carbon pollution to the atmosphere than we have and they're taking greater action. And you know, to the extent that they become the world leader, they are sort of positioning themselves, you know, to the extent they're becoming the leader in decarbonization and, and the move towards renewable energy and flooding the global marketplace with lower cost solar panels and wind turbines because of their manufacturing of the renewable energy infrastructure. The United States doesn't get to determine the future course of human civilization at this point. It's going to be the rest of the world. All the United States gets to determine is whether it's going to be on the front line of the clean energy transition, the great sort of economic development of this century, whether they're going to be on board or left behind. And right now, with the policies of the Trump administration and congressional Republicans and a Supreme Court that is enabling them, we are quickly seeding that ground. We are quickly seeding our economic competitiveness in the world to China and other countries. And so I'm optimistic that the world will tackle the great problems we face. I'm less optimistic that the United States is going to be part of the solution unless we turn things around very quickly. And that's why we have to change the whole political environment so that there is room even for energy companies saying, you know what? We see the future, we are going to fall behind. The US Is going to fall behind the rest of the world because, you know, the Stone Age didn't end for want of stones and the fossil fuel age for want of fossil fuels, it'll end because we found something better. And those that recognize that those countries like China that recognize that are going to prosper, those that don't, like the US Right now are going to fall behind.
- [30:57]
Ralph Nader
We've been speaking with Professor Michael Mann, University of Pennsylvania, co author of Peter Hoditz of the new book Science Under Siege how to Fight the Five Most Powerful Forces that Threaten our world. Thank you very much, Mike.
- [31:12]
Michael E. Mann
Thank you, Ralph. It was truly a pleasure.
- [31:14]
Steve Scrovan
We've been speaking with Dr. Michael E. Mann. We will link to his work@ralph naderradiowoward.com up next, the Trump administration is sticking its grubby little fingers into the Social Security administration. But first, let's check in with our corporate crime reporter, Russell Mokheimer.
- [31:31]
Russell Mulkheimer
Former National Press building in Washington, D.C. this is your corporate crime reporter. Morning many percentage Friday, October 3rd, 2025. I'm Russell Mulkheimer. Becky McLean is a molecular biologist who worked at Pfizer for 10 years. McLean raised urgent alarms about biosafety lapses at her biotech lab at Pfizer. McLean's warnings about dangerous genetically engineered viruses that were handled without following standard safety protocols were met with hostility, intimidation and ultimately devastation. Devastating illness after a workplace exposure changed her life forever. Now she's documented her fight for justice in a new book Exposed. A Pfizer scientist battles corruption, lies and betrayal and becomes a biohazard whistleblower. For the corporate crime Reporter, I'm Russell Mulcaiba.
- [32:22]
Steve Scrovan
Thank you, Russell. Welcome back to the Ralph Nader Radio Hour. I'm Steve Scrovan along with David Feldman, Hannah and Ralph. How much damage can Donald Trump do to our most durable and dependable government program? Social Security?
- [32:34]
David Feldman
David Governor Martin o' Malley served as commissioner of the Social Security Administration from December 20, 2023 to November 29, 2024. He previously served as Governor of Maryland from 2007 to 2015, following two terms as mayor of the city of Baltimore. Welcome to the Ralph Nader Radio Hour. Governor MARTIN o', Malley, hey, thank you.
- [33:01]
Martin O'Malley
It's a great honor to be with you and Mr. Nader. Ralph it's good to talk with you again, my friend. And thank you for all that you do to give us courage and hope that we're going to come through these dark times if we keep putting one foot in front of the other. So thanks for having me. Glad to be here and talk about Social Security for a little bit.
- [33:19]
Ralph Nader
Well, you're the leading spokesperson on preserving Social Security, expanding benefits frozen after 40 years and focusing on the devastating staff cuts that have reduced the service capabilities. When people call Social Security on the phone or try to go to a Social Security office which has been depleted of the necessary workers, though, tell us the current predicament of the Social Security Agency in terms of its ability to recover from the Trump slashing and cutting.
- [33:56]
Martin O'Malley
Yeah, this can almost be likened to a Jenga tower. You know, the game where you Try to pull out as many logs as you can without toppling it over the Doge boys. And from the articles I've read, most of the people that were sent to Social Security with their chainsaws to reduce the staff there to critical subcritical levels were mentioned. And so here's the fundamental problem. When I was asked to go there, it was after 10 years of house Republicans, in essence driving their staffing to a 50 year low, even as baby boomers of my generation swelled their ranks every single day to a new all time high. And now with those going in cutting at least 12%, I think actually the numbers are greater than that. The place has become a bit like the hermit kingdom. We find out what's actually happening inside only when people quit and disgust. So these guys have put benefits at risk in a way that hasn't happened in the 90 year history of this agency. And in fact, this very month is going to be the first time that Social Security stops sending out paper checks to beneficiaries who have earned those benefits. Now, we may say, oh, it's just a small percentage of the 70 million who receive benefits every month, but if you're One of the 700,000, mind, many of them homeless or living in areas of our cities or our countryside that don't have, you know, ready availability to some of the banking services we take for granted, that can be a rock your world event. So what we're going to see this month, if they go through with it, will be the biggest interruption of benefits in the history of the program. But my deeper concern is that even broader benefit reduction interruptions are coming. And that's not just me who says that. I mean, I've been in touch with a lot of the systems people there, and they're all amazed that the dedicated women and men who have refused to quit keep it going. So the agency, as President Biden said in one of his very first talks as a full fledged citizen again, he said, they're trying to wreck it, wreck its reputation, wreck its customer service, so then they can rob it. And the one thing they've already succeeded in robbing, two things now, is the peace of mind that people had that every month that direct deposit or that check would be there. And the second thing they've robbed, in the greatest theft of personal data in United States history, is all of our personal data and records. When the Doge team made a copy and took into their own personal cloud all of our data on the paper.
- [36:47]
Ralph Nader
Check elimination of the monthly Social Security benefit. Don't they exempt people at a higher age level. Can there be a waiver?
- [36:56]
Martin O'Malley
It used to be. They're saying now you have to go apply for that waiver. And if you're in an 89 or 92 year old individual, good luck navigating what is now an even tougher website to navigate with its double encrypted stand on your head, gargle peanut butter, spit nickels to prove you are who you are in order to get the waiver to keep getting your paper check. So they're saying you have to apply for a waiver, Ralph. But look, walk into any field office in America, you, you will see that 10 windows and only three people behind the windows that are open. And that's because of the meat cleaver they've taken to the staffing there.
- [37:35]
Ralph Nader
You can't do a waiver online.
- [37:37]
Martin O'Malley
You could, but as I say, let's say you're homeless and you go through and try to prove who you are. My own 22 year old son, a digital native, tried to get something as simple as a new Social Security card for a new job he had where they told him he had to have one of those. He got tossed out when he was trying to get in there three different times because they said we don't have your name living at the address you say that where you live. So there was an article recently about this. A lot of people who are homeless continue to get those paper checks delivered at, you know, a homeless services place that helps them with that process. So yeah, technically, conceptually, they're supposedly able to apply for a waiver and good luck if they can get it. And they, you know, maybe they will get a waiver or maybe they'll get somebody that they love to go set up a bank account for them and do all the direct deposit stuff and execute the legal authority. So a person can do that as their guardian. But we're talking about 700,000 people. And the more they chirp away, the more they see they learn what they can get away with without public blowback. And that's what you've seen these guys doing. When there's public blowback, they take a step back, but they haven't taken a step back from this suspension of 700,000 checks.
- [38:53]
Ralph Nader
Let me quote something for our listeners in a report that's just coming out this month by academic researchers. Quote, Respondents overwhelmingly reported the compounding administrative breakdowns, loss of staff with specialized knowledge, rapidly changing policies, significantly worse processing delays, more frequent errors with emails and faxes routinely lost have made even Basic tasks impossible, end quote, said Katie Savin, the lead author, assistant professor at California State University, Sacramento. She continues, quote, the results are devastating consequences to claimants who've experienced hunger, eviction and loss of health care as a result, end quote. Because they rely so much on the Social Security tech for the basic necessities of life. Now, why isn't AARP more vigorous here? They have chapters all over the country, millions of people. Why aren't they more vigorous in Congress and on the executive branch?
- [39:56]
Martin O'Malley
Yeah, that's a very good question. They put out some things, but I think none of us can be too vigorous when it comes to pushing back against these guys. The question you just asked was a question I heard Elizabeth Warren ask in another setting. It is the most popular program in America, second highest level of trust among the American people in terms of federal agencies, behind only the National Park Service and Smokey the Bear. So the numbers are out there. I've found myself, Ralph, kind of in this role, being the most recently serving confirmed commissioner, the first Democrat, by the way, confirmed since 1997, bringing the alarm and waking up the democracy. The good news is they're awake. But we really could use AARP to ring that bell louder.
- [40:39]
Ralph Nader
Let's talk about John Larson's determination. As chairman of the Social Security subcommittee of the House Ways and means Committee in 2022, he introduced a bill that would increase frozen Social Security benefits have been frozen for over 40 years and pay for it by increasing the cap of income that can be subjected to Social Security tax. He had 200 Democrats supporting him and he wanted the bill to go out of House Ways and Means to the floor for a vote.
- [41:10]
Martin O'Malley
John Larson has been a great champion of Social Security. I've done a ton of town halls out there, more than I can count. And people often ask, why is it that a family making 170,000 pays as the same, roughly 10,000 into Social Security on their income as a single guy making 170 million pays into Social Security? That's not fair. That doesn't make any sense. And the only percentage of the public that benefits from that cap to which Social Security is applied is about 6% of us who make more than $170,000. So the long term, whether we're talking customer service, Ralph, or we're talking the long term ability of Social Security to keep pace with the cost of living and to pay 100% benefits, what is called the misnomer, sometimes I think of solvency, but the long term fiscal health and its current customer service woes are absolutely solvable problems. And in terms of the long term health, we need to ask wealthier people to continue to pay in.
- [42:16]
Ralph Nader
Well, some listeners may be asking when is Social Security going to start paying out more than it's getting in and having to reduce benefits in the monthly check? Right now, I think it's 2033. Give us your view on this.
- [42:30]
Martin O'Malley
Sure. Yeah. Let me unpack that a little bit. We have all seen and your listeners have all seen because nothing draws more eyeballs to click on a story and read the advertising than a scary headline that says Social Security to run totally dry by 2033. But that's not true. What they're talking about is a surplus in the Social Security trust fund intentionally built up since the last congressional adjustment in 1983 that was designed to be drawn down during this time when that big demographic of the baby boomer bubble is going through their retirement years. And so that's what has been happening. In other words, the year I was there, Social Security had paid into it by Americans working In the economy 1.3 trillion. Social Security paid out 1.4 trillion. Where did the difference come from? That hundred billion that was drawn down from that surplus intentionally built up, which has now been drawn down to 2.6 trillion. And it is true that that that is scheduled that surplus to be depleted in 2033, at which time Social Security by current projections would only be able to pay 83% of benefits. Now, we can't make light of that 17% haircut for people as you mentioned, that live entirely and depend entirely on Social Security to keep themselves out of poverty or from living under a bridge. That that would be a life rocking moment. So that's the reality of what's happening here. And the way to fix that is, is actually pretty straightforward. And it's what the actuaries have been underscoring for years, which is you need to require that wealthier people give up their current windfall of not paying another diamond to Social Security after their first 170,000. Not right, not fair. The general public supports that adjustment and Congress needs to do it.
- [44:40]
Ralph Nader
Well, Trump is always lying about Social Security. Here are two of them. He said, quote, I signed one big beautiful bill and allowed no tax on Social Security for our great seniors, end quote. It's a complete lie that Social Security benefits are tax. The second lie is that he said, quote, I made a sacred pledge to our seniors that I would always protect Social Security. And under this administration we're keeping that promise and strengthening Social Security for generations to come. End quote. That is false. Another lie is that undocumented immigrants are getting Social Security benefits. They are paying in if they have a job into the Social Security fund, but they are not getting benefits under the law. That's prohibited. Your comment?
- [45:30]
Martin O'Malley
Yeah, all of those things. I mean, once they got rid of the heads of all of the offices of inspectors general, they started launching these big lies. And you recited a few of them. There's others as well, like the lie that there are 12 million dead people that continue to receive checks. And as Trump said himself to Congress, some of them are as much as 300 years old, which would have had them here for the founding of Jamestown. That's not true either. So let me unpack them quickly on the zombie apocalypse. 12 million people receiving benefits. Not true. Social Security is electronically notified by every vital statistics office in every state in the union as soon as the death certificate is recorded. It is an infinitesimally small number. In the latest OIG report, in March of 2023, I believe it was 7,000 people who continue to receive checks after they died. And most of that was unavoidable because the people pass away in the same week that they're in the pay cycle, you know, but we still recover that in probate. The second big lie about the illegal immigrants, and this was a big one, Ralph. All over the swing states, people were being pounded by jumbo postcards in the campaign saying that Donald Trump is going to protect Social Security because Kamala Harris is letting illegal immigrants make milk it dry. The truth is illegal immigrants, so called undocumented people working here, can't receive any Social Security benefits, but they contribute $26 billion a year for the rest of us.
- [47:06]
Steve Scrovan
Hi again, everybody. This is Steve Scravling. We're taking a short break from our regular programming to do a little fundraising here for kpfk. And I'm joined by our executive producer of the Ralph Nader Radio Hour and who's the program director at KPFK when the Ralph Nader radio was born, Mr. Alan Minsky. Hello, Alan.
- [47:25]
Alan Minsky
Hey, it's great to join you, Steve. And you know, I always tell people there is nothing I am more proud of doing in my entire life than the role I played along with you in launching the Ralph Nader Radio Hour. I think this is a gift to the country and all of humanity. In fact, so very proud to work with you on this. And of course, I'm joining you now because it is the KPFK Fund Drive. KPFK is the home radio station of the Ralph Nader Radio Hour. So we want people to call right now, 8189-8557-3581-8985. KPFK. For just $25, you get an annual membership. But, you know, that was a membership level that was set a long time ago. $25 doesn't go very far. I'd encourage right now people to consider $10 a month, just do a $10 a month donation, $120 a year to keep this radio program and this radio station alive as the home station of the, of the Ralph Nader Radio Hour. You know, who knows? Is there a Ralph Nader Radio Hour with, without kpfk? So keeping this institution alive right now is so important, and as Steve said earlier in the hour, more important than ever. And I don't think there's any way that can be overstated. We see a direct attack on free speech writ large and American media in general. And the left. We can maybe even leave the left out of it because, you know, they're going to label that left, whatever is critical of the Trump administration, however that fits in, really, on the left, right spectrum. But with this radio show, it is exactly speaking to so much of what Trump opposes and what people need to hear, including the maintenance of democracy, the maintenance of free speech, and the maintenance of honest journalism. Nobody, nobody has better analyzed the roots of the crises of American media over these past few decades, going all the way back to Nader's just fierce and profound opposition to the Telecommunications Act, I believe, of 1996, where the whole Internet was given away to private hands and all the dangers we've had with that since that with the algorithms controlling our lives, as it were. But also that has allowed for the consolidation of media and the situation that we just see right now with these very few people own major broadcast media outlets. And they are, they are so vulnerable to threats from the Trump administration in terms of their business model. No matter how problematic that business model is, the truth is that has given the Trump administration a wedge to demand things from them. They are capitulating. And we need real media. We need not only to keep the Ralph Nader Radio Hour going, we need everybody listening right now to donate to support us. KPFK really might very well need to pay for lawyers in the coming days and weeks. Right, to defend the right of free speech, to defend the maintenance of kpfk. So give what you can, but not only do that, give what you can, and then let every single person you know tell them about the Ralph Nader Radio Hour get them listening in. Share this There is no better one hour a week radio show in the country or the world right now. No one more important than the Ralph Made a radio hour. So Steve, very important moment.
- [50:31]
Steve Scrovan
Yes, very important moment, Alan. And I also want to recognize my co host, David Feldman. In the history of the Ralph Nader radio, it was actually David and you who came to me because you had a slot to fill during a drive time slot and it was in January 2014 and you wanted to do an alternate State of the Union. Obama was president then. And you thought about what about Ralph? And you knew I had done a documentary about Ralph. And David reached out and talked to me and I set up the contact and set up the interview. And then David said to me, okay, be here at 4:30. And I said, well, what do you need me for? And he said, you don't understand. Ralph Nader is my hero. He's been my hero ever since my dad pointed at the television, said that is the greatest American and I can't do this alone. And so you and I showed up to help him. That's my dog yipping in the background. That's Catherine the Great. So you and I showed up to help him and just be in the room with him. He did a great job. And then afterwards we all turned to each other and said, boy, this guy knows a lot. I should do this every week. And it took us a few weeks to get Ralph on board with the idea because Ralph is very busy. He's still doing everything he's doing to this day. At age 91, you would not know that to hear him and to listen to him, and he's still as sharp as ever. And he's a piece of living history because he lived through Nixon, he lived through Vietnam War, he lived through all these other rollbacks of the 80s during the Reagan era. You mentioned the Telecommunications Act. Even before that was the Fairness Doctrine. In the late 80s that had been repealed, which led to way to for people like Rush Limbaugh to just monologize for hours and hours without any balanced coverage. So yes, that, that's a little bit of history of how this program started. And what we continue to do is Ralph, he's the iron man. He's Lou Gehrig, he's Cal Ripken. 603 shows so far and still going strong.
- [52:42]
Alan Minsky
No, it's amazing. And of course it's popular across the country. It's popular across the Pacifica Radio Network where it's syndicated, but it doesn't exist without kpfk. So once again, folks, we're asking you and we've come to you very, very infrequently with the Ralph Nader Radio hour. Please support KPFK, the home station of the Ralph Nader Radio Hour. $10 a month is our suggested donation. Maybe do it in one block at $120 or just you can spread it out over $10 a month. A month, every month. Make it a recurring payment. Basic memberships 25. They're thank you gifts. You can get you get a KPFK bag or a T shirt or a cap. Ask them when you call about those kind of thank you gifts. Those are in the 50 to 75 range. Or give more if you can to support the Ralph Nader Radio Hour and kpfk at 8189-8557-3581-8985. Kpfk. Or you can go online at kpfk.org and donate there. 818-985-5735. The Ralph Nader Radio Hour. And I have to tell you, I do engage the show every single week. And I think the interviews and so many times when the show comes in and I post it the way that I post it so the Pacific Radio folks can get around the country. I was like right away I listened to the whole darn thing, Steve, because I'm looking, I'm looking in what my current work is as a political organizer and activist. I'm looking for as much insight as I can possibly get. And I can tell you there is nothing, there's nothing that outshines the Ralph Nader Radio Hour week in, week out on every subject under the sun that they addressed. I mean, you know, look so much of even, again, if you're going to call it like the American left or progressives, there's a real kind of like almost type of blindness as to looking where power really resides in the society. And I think Ralph has always understood that really almost better than anyone. And he, he, he explains how the institutions that are empowered, they're basically getting a free pass, including by so much else in terms of progressive media and media in general. So this is a really, really exemplary radio show and project. So call to Support us at 8189-8557-3581-8985. KPFK speak to when you call, you can speak to the person who picks up the phone and talk to them about getting a thank you gift in return. You can get KPFK T shirts, kpfk, you know, a whole bunch of stuff, coffee mugs, et cetera. There are books that you can pick up. Ask the person who picks up about those as thank you gifts. But most importantly, support the Ralph Nader Radio Hour and its home station, KPFK Radio, with your donation at 8189-8557-3581-8985. KPFK. And let me ask you this. You now work on this show, and you're on the show every week. Can you imagine anything more important to remain going in the next year in this crisis that we're in, Steve, and how much insight people will get from the Ralph Nader Radio Hour in this next year?
- [55:43]
Steve Scrovan
Yeah, because no, I cannot, for the reasons I mentioned before, is that Ralph has seen it all. And so there's nobody on the scene who has that kind of perspective, who's been doing this for over, you know, close to 70 years now and is still, still sharp and still has his handle on and still, you know, able to predict things and let us know what is going to happen just based on what he knows has happened. So that's the, that's the insight I get from him. And, and what's, what's great about Ralph, too, is he's just relentlessly positive. He is a fighter. He does not accept the status quo. And he's looking for people. We have all kinds of people on the show. We have journalists, we have book authors, political scientists. We have activists. We've done a series of shows with activists. A woman in New York and her district who's doing town halls. We had Marcus Sims who is taking old fallen trees and turning into desks for schools. We had John Merriman who is just taking refuse and mainly old tires and all sorts of garbage out of the ditches where he lived. And that started going nationwide. So we just don't highlight the intellectuals, we highlight the real doers. And that's what Ralph really appreciates. I can't tell you how many times we've had a journalist on the air and Ralph said, okay, this is all great. Now what are you doing about it? And the journalists say, well, I just kind of tell you what the problem is. I'm not, that's not really my bailiwick. And Ralph in his history was different. He was the journalist who did that research, but then did something about it. And that's the spirit we need right now in these dark, dark times.
- [57:39]
Alan Minsky
Yeah. No, and of course, the constitutional experts you have explaining that the transgressions of the Trump administration and I have to say, too incredible foreign policy analysis and by the way, geopolitical analysis, the global economy, the trade, the tariffs, everything under the sun Ralph Nader has addressed so brilliantly all the way through to, of course, the horribleness that goes on in our local communities here in Southern California, per ice and everything, and the absolute destruction of people's rights here in the United States of America. And of course, an understanding of the Supreme Court, too. Just a whole series of brilliant interviews on all of these subjects. And again, the intelligence about the operation of power corporations, the macro economy and how it ties together with the political system and the rising oligarchy. The Silicon Valley interviews have been amazing. Again, unrivaled in my opinion. Certainly nobody the subset of those that you've done with the understanding it provides for the 21st century. Ralph, Ralph, Ralph Nader is nobody's dinosaur, man. He is up to speed with the moment, just like as anyone could be. And by the way, he also has incredible just off the cuff wisdom that he provides every week, too. So look, we got to keep this show going so quickly. One final thought. In 30 seconds, why should people donate to the Ralph Nader radio hour at 818-985-5735? D stroven people should donate to the.
- [58:58]
Steve Scrovan
Ralph Nader Radio Hour to keep the lights on, to keep us going and to keep the truth coming straight at you.
- [59:05]
Alan Minsky
8189-8557-3581-8985. KPFK donate now with Ralph Nader Radio Hour and KPFK Radio. Thank you so much.
- [59:15]
Tom Arvin
Hey, Tom Arvin Here on no Kings Day, Saturday, October 18th, I'll be in Long beach for a crucial conversation. I hope you'll join me. Together, we'll unpack the forces driving the authoritarian threat to our democracy. And I'll take your questions live. Join us at Teamsters Local 848 Hall 3888 Cherry Avenue in Long Beach. More information and tickets available@kpfk.org where you can click on the no Kings banner.
- [59:42]
Steve Scrovan
Hello, this is Martin Sheen and you're.
- [59:43]
Tom Arvin
Listening to KPFK 90.7 FM Los Angeles.
- [59:47]
Steve Scrovan
98.7 FM Santa Barbara, SA.