6.2.25 Legal Docket, Moneybeat, and the Vanport Flood

Summary

The World and Everything In It: Episode 6.2.25 Summary

Release Date: June 2, 2025

Host: Mary Reichert & Nick Eicher

---

Introduction

In this episode of The World and Everything In It, hosts Mary Reichert and Nick Eicher delve into a spectrum of pressing issues ranging from legal controversies and international conflicts to economic policies and historical retrospectives. The episode is structured into several segments, each offering in-depth analysis, expert interviews, and poignant storytelling to inform and engage listeners.

---

Legal Docket: Wrong Address and a SWAT Raid

The episode opens with a gripping discussion on a recent Supreme Court case concerning the Fourth Amendment rights related to SWAT raids.

Mary Reichert introduces the topic:

"The Supreme Court wants to know how much checking is enough before the flashbangs fly." ([00:05])

The case centers around Katrina Martin and her boyfriend, Toy Kleat, who experienced a harrowing SWAT raid on October 17, 2017. The agents mistakenly raided the wrong house due to a GPS error, leading to traumatic consequences for Martin's family.

Kent Covington recounts the personal impact:

"Putting in my face at like one time. So I was just really just nervous." ([08:00])

The legal intricacies are unpacked as Nick Eicher explains the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) and its limitations in holding federal agents accountable for discretionary actions. The crux of the Supreme Court argument questions whether the government's reliance on discretion should shield it from liability in such cases.

Justice Neil Gorsuch's perspective is highlighted, emphasizing the absurdity of allowing governmental agents to violate individual rights under the guise of policy discretion:

"There is no such thing as a discretionary intentional tort." ([11:00])

The segment underscores the delicate balance between ensuring public safety and upholding constitutional protections, leaving listeners to ponder the adequacy of current legal frameworks.

---

International Conflicts and Political Maneuvering

The hosts transition to global affairs, focusing on the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict and the delicate peace negotiations between Ukraine and Russia.

Steven Redfern reports:

"Republican Senator Dave McCormick... said the US should continue to pile pressure on Hamas." ([01:19])

Senators Richard Blumenthal and Lindsey Graham express concerns over Vladimir Putin's intentions, suspecting a façade of peace talks while preparing for further military offensives:

"He's playing the game at the peace table." ([03:27])

Economic tensions between the US and China are also discussed, particularly China's adherence to the U.S.-China trade agreement. The potential for intentional violations versus systemic glitches remains a contentious point:

"Maybe it's intentional." ([04:07])

The segment concludes with a nod to President Trump's cautious stance on imposing new sanctions, balancing the need for peace talks with strategic economic pressures.

---

Domestic Issues: Gender Policies and Environmental Disasters

The episode sheds light on contemporary social issues and environmental challenges within the United States.

Mary Reichert highlights a Title IX investigation in Oregon following a controversial track event where female athletes protested competing against a transgender athlete:

"The U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights has launched a Title IX investigation in Oregon." ([04:46])

Similarly, California faces its own Title IX probe, reflecting a nationwide debate on gender identity in sports.

Wildfires continue to ravage parts of Canada, prompting mass evacuations and affecting air quality across North America. Kent Covington details the widespread impact:

"Air quality concerns stretch as far south as Georgia and the Carolinas." ([05:34])

The resilience of communities and the efforts of agencies like the USDA's Forest Service are showcased as frontline responses to these natural disasters.

---

Money Beat: Economic Policy with David Bonson

In the Monday Money Beat, economist David Bonson offers insightful commentary on the United States' economic landscape, focusing on entitlement reforms and fiscal sustainability.

David Bonson discusses the inevitable changes to Social Security, advocating for proactive adjustments to eligibility ages to ensure long-term viability:

"I think it just has to happen... age 68 if you're between 50 and 55, and then age 70 if you're under the age of 50." ([22:02])

Addressing the political challenges of implementing such reforms, Bonson emphasizes the necessity of bipartisan support and the delicate balance between public safety and fiscal responsibility.

The conversation also touches upon the role of the Federal Reserve, with Bonson advocating for a rules-based approach to monetary policy to mitigate discretionary interventions:

"A rules based fed further constrains but also limits the temptation of intervention." ([28:48])

This segment provides listeners with a comprehensive understanding of the economic policies shaping the nation's future.

---

World History Book: The Vanport Flood of 1948

Emma Eicher narrates a poignant historical account of the Vanport Flood, a devastating natural disaster that reshaped Oregon's social fabric.

In 1948, Vanport, Oregon, known for its remarkable racial integration amidst prevalent housing discrimination, was obliterated by catastrophic flooding. Bob Nistler, a 14-year-old at the time, shares his firsthand experience:

"You see, somebody say, oh, the dike broke. The dike broke, and we jump on our bicycles." ([32:00])

The flood not only annihilated the city but also served as a catalyst for social change, leading to increased racial integration in neighboring Portland and prompting Oregon to address discriminatory labor and housing practices.

Bob Nistler's survival story underscores the resilience of the community and the enduring impact of the flood on subsequent generations:

"Bob is 91 now, but he still loves to tell the story of being washed away in a floating building." ([35:57])

This historical reflection serves as a testament to the transformative power of adversity and collective action.

---

Ongoing Probes and Investigations

The episode briefly revisits the FBI's renewed investigation into the leak of the Dobbs decision draft from 2022, which overturned Roe v. Wade. Steven Redfern comments on the reputational damage and the necessity of rebuilding public trust:

"One of the ways to do it is these cases of significant public interest that matter." ([16:07])

The probe, led by Marshall Gail Curley, faces scrutiny due to perceived conflicts of interest and procedural shortcomings, highlighting the complexities of maintaining integrity within high-stakes governmental investigations.

---

Conclusion

The World and Everything In It masterfully intertwines current events, legal debates, economic policies, and historical narratives to provide a holistic view of the world's multifaceted challenges. Through expert analysis and compelling storytelling, the episode equips listeners with the knowledge and insights needed to navigate and understand the intricate tapestry of today's global and domestic issues.

---

Notable Quotes:

• "There is no question that there was no policy here." – Kent Covington ([13:19])
• "NEPA is a procedural cross check, not a substantive roadmap block." – Supreme Court Opinion ([14:12])
• "As many of us have talked about Social Security forever...” – David Bonson ([22:02])

---

This summary captures the essence of Episode 6.2.25 of The World and Everything In It, ensuring listeners receive a comprehensive overview of the key discussions and insights presented.

Transcript

[Mary Reichert]

Good morning. Today on legal docket, a wrong address and a SWAT raid. The Supreme Court wants to know how much checking is enough before the flashbangs fly.

[Nick Eicher]

How about making sure you're on the right street? Checking the street sign. Is that asking too much? The high court taking up the question, what happens when federal agents kick down the wrong door? Also today, the Monday money beat. Economist David Bonson is standing by. And today we imagine he is king for the day. And later, the world history book. Remembering a major flood almost 80 years ago.

[Kent Covington]

The dike broke. The dike broke. So we jump on our bicycle.

[Mary Reichert]

It's Monday, June 2nd. This is the world and everything in it. From listener supported World Radio, I'm Mary Reichert.

[Nick Eicher]

And I'm Nick Eicher. Good morning.

[Mary Reichert]

Time for the news. Here's Kent Covington.

[Steven Redfern]

The FBI is investigating what it referred to as a targeted terror attack in Boulder, Colorado. A man reportedly wielding Molotov cocktails attacked a group of people who had gathered Sunday to draw attention to Israeli hostages still being held by Hamas in Gaza. One witness described the alleged attacker shirtless.

[Kent Covington]

And was yelling with some kind of accent and was threatening to burn people.

[Steven Redfern]

Boulder Police Chief Steven Redfern.

[Nick Eicher]

The initial callers indicated that there was a man with a weapon and that people were being set on fire. The initial response by our officers. We were on scene very quickly when we arrived. We encountered multiple victims that were injured with injuries consistent with burns and other injuries.

[Steven Redfern]

Video footage of the incident shows an officer with his gun drawn advancing on a bare chested suspect with containers in each hand. Redfern says officers took the suspect into custody without incident. And in the Middle East, Israel and Hamas are seemingly no closer to a ceasefire to bring more hostages home. Republican Senator Dave McCormick spoke Sunday after a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He said the US should continue to pile pressure on Hamas.

[Kent Covington]

There cannot be a military body from.

[Mary Reichert]

Hamas standing when this war is done.

[Steven Redfern]

Hamas responded to the latest US Ceasefire proposal with a list of new demands which President Trump's special envoy, Steve Witkoff called totally unacceptable. He said the US proposal is the only way to close a 60 day cease fire deal in the coming days. The proposal calls for a truce leading to the release of 10 living Israeli hostages and the bodies of more than a dozen captives killed in Gaza. Negotiators from Ukraine and Russia are set to meet for peace talks today in Istanbul. But two US Senators are warning that Vladimir Putin is preparing to ramp up Russia's offensive while pretending to have interest in peace. Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal.

[Kent Covington]

He is in effect stalling and stonewalling, prolonging the conversation so that he can mount this offensive and take control of.

[David Bonson]

More territory on the ground.

[Steven Redfern]

Blumenthal and Republican Senator Lindsey Graham spoke after traveling to Ukraine and then meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron in Paris. Senator Graham said Sunday we saw credible.

[Nick Eicher]

Evidence of a summer, early fall invasion.

[Kent Covington]

A new offensive by Putin.

[Nick Eicher]

He's playing the game at the peace table.

[Kent Covington]

He's preparing for more war.

[Nick Eicher]

And I think the Senate is fed up with Putin.

[Steven Redfern]

The senators are urging quick support for a sweeping sanctions bill to cut the economic lifeline fueling Russia's war. They say the US Congress and Europe may have just two weeks to act. President Trump last week said he was holding off on new sanctions against Moscow a little longer to allow more breathing room for peace talks. Meantime, Treasury Secretary Scott Besant said China is violating the terms of what was effectively a ceasefire in the U. S China trade war.

[Nick Eicher]

They are withholding some of the products.

[Kent Covington]

That they agreed to release during our agreement. Maybe it's a glitch in the Chinese system.

[Nick Eicher]

Maybe it's intentional.

[Steven Redfern]

The two sides last month agreed to ratchet down tariffs as trade talks continue. In Oregon, two female high school athletes over the weekend staged a quiet protest over being forced to compete against a male so called trans athlete. As their names were called during a girls high jump award ceremony, they stepped off the podium and turned away. In a statement, Reece Eckerd and Alexa Anderson said they acted not out of hate but out of necessity. They said someone has to say this isn't right. The U.S. department of Education's Office for Civil Rights has launched a Title IX investigation in Oregon for forcing girls to compete against male athletes. A Title IX probe is also underway in California after officials there allowed a biological male to compete in a girls track and field event. In Canada, authorities have evacuated more than 25,000 residents in three provinces as dozens of wildfires continue to burn. Most of the evacuations were in Manitoba, which declared a state of emergency last week. The fires have caused major air quality concerns not just in Canada, but across much of the US as well. Brian Jackson with the National Weather Service over the Dakotas into Minnesota, so the.

[Nick Eicher]

Eastern North Dakota, South Dakota into western Minnesota.

[Steven Redfern]

There's a good concentration of smoke there. Air quality concerns stretch as far south as Georgia and the Carolinas. The USDA's Forest Service deployed an air tanker to Alberta and said it would send 150 firefighters and equipment there as well. I'm Kent Cuffington and straight ahead, mistaken Identity, constitutional rights and legal remedy. Plus the Monday Money beat with economist David Bonson. This is the world and everything in it.

[Mary Reichert]

It's the world and everything in it for the second day of June 2025. We're so glad you've joined us today. Good morning. I'm Mary Reichert.

[Nick Eicher]

And I'm Nick Eichert. Time now for legal talking. First, a little Primer on the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. constitution. It says, the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated. And no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to.

[Mary Reichert]

Be seized to be secure in your house, safe in your home. That's the relevant part of the Fourth Amendment. We'll be talking about today, specifically what happens when government agents disrupt that security. I was asleep Oct. 17, 2017, about 4:30 in the morning. This audio is from the Institute for Justice.

[Kent Covington]

And all of a sudden, I hear a lot of banging.

[Mary Reichert]

IJ's client, Katrina Martin.

[Kent Covington]

Bang, bang, bang.

[Nick Eicher]

Martin and her boyfriend, Toy Kleat, were sleeping when a SWAT team showed up to raid the house. Six FBI agents in tactical gear, guns drawn, shouting commands. A flashbang exploded in the dark. Martin's son Gabe was just seven. Back then, it was like two guns.

[Kent Covington]

Putting in my face at like one time. So I was just really just nervous.

[David Bonson]

That was my main focus.

[Kent Covington]

Like, I didn't want to get killed.

[Nick Eicher]

Cleat remembers trying to make sense of what was going on.

[Kent Covington]

The bang was so loud and so abrupt. I just remember landing on my feet out of the bed. It startled me.

[Mary Reichert]

So immediately that's what came to my brain.

[Kent Covington]

Someone had broken into the house and.

[Steven Redfern]

I need to protect everyone.

[Mary Reichert]

Problem was, the agents had raided the wrong house. They entered the correct address into GPS, but the system led them astray by about 400ft to a house that looked similar. Quarter lot, big tree out front.

[Kent Covington]

The one and the most important thing that sticks out to me is my.

[Mary Reichert]

Child being alone by himself in a.

[Nick Eicher]

Room underneath the carpet, shaking, shivering from.

[Kent Covington]

Fear because someone was standing over him with a gun.

[Mary Reichert]

Only after agents noticed a piece of mail with a different address and people who didn't match the suspect's photo did they realize the mistake. They apologized, left, and told Martin she could call for compensation. She did that, but the compensation didn't come. Martin lost wages. Her son was traumatized. The therapist needed to be paid.

[Kent Covington]

At the time, I was a Track coach. And I had to give that up.

[Mary Reichert]

Just because the trauma from the grenade.

[Kent Covington]

At the starting line when they shot the gun off for the runners to.

[Mary Reichert]

Start, it would send me through a frenzy.

[Nick Eicher]

So Martin and Kliat sued under Georgia law, making claims like negligence and false arrest. She also sued under a federal law, the Federal Tort Claims Act. Congress passed the FTCA back in 1946. The point of it was to allow citizens to sue the federal government when it does them harm. Now, before we go on, it's important to understand some background law. Normally, you can't sue federal agents. Before 1946, the only way was to ask Congress to pass a private bill just for your case. Of course, you can imagine how time consuming and expensive this might be. And that's why Congress approved the FTCA.

[Mary Reichert]

And then about 30 years later, Congress amended FTCA after a string of drug raids at the wrong houses in Illinois. That 1974amendment was called the Law Enforcement Proviso. It lets victims sue for certain intentional acts by federal officers, things like assault, battery, wrongful arrest, and false imprisonment. But over the years, courts carved out a big exception. Government would not be held liable if the officer's conduct was discretionary, meaning the officer used his own judgment. And that judgment, that use of discretion is grounded in considerations of public policy. So if a court finds those two things, that's when sovereign immunity kicks right back in. Then you cannot sue.

[Nick Eicher]

In oral argument at the Supreme Court, Patrick Giacomo of Institute for justice represented Martin.

[Kent Covington]

There's no such thing as a discretionary intentional tort. If even proviso claims Congress amended the statute to affirmatively guarantee are barred by sovereign immunity, what is left of the Federal Tort Claims Act?

[Nick Eicher]

In other words, what happened to Martin is what the 1974amendment was created to fix. The government's lawyer, Frederick Lew, didn't deny the government made a mistake, but argued it just doesn't rise to a constitutional or legal violation.

[Kent Covington]

The officers here were weighing public safety considerations, efficiency considerations, operational security. The idea that they didn't want to delay the start of the execution of.

[Nick Eicher]

The warrants because they wanted to execute.

[Kent Covington]

All the warrants simultaneously. Those are precisely the sorts of policy trade offs that an officer makes in determining, well, should I take one more extra precaution to make sure I'm at the right house?

[Mary Reichert]

Justice Neil Gorsuch cut to the absurdity of letting government agents violate rights under the guise of discretion. Listen to this exchange with Lou. For the government, no policy says, don't.

[Kent Covington]

Break down the wrong door of a house. No. Excuse me. Of course, of course.

[Nick Eicher]

Don't traumatize its occupants.

[Kent Covington]

Really? Of course. It's the United States policy to execute the warrants at the right house.

[Nick Eicher]

I should hope so.

[Mary Reichert]

But Lou reiterated those policy considerations of the officers. Public safety, efficiency, operational security. The exchange with Justice Gorsuch got more prickly.

[Kent Covington]

Those are precisely the sorts of policy trade offs that an officer makes in determining. Well, should I take one more extra precaution to make sure I'm at the right house? And here, petitioners suggest, for example, that the officer should have checked the house number. Yeah.

[Nick Eicher]

You might look at the address of the house before you knock down the door.

[Mary Reichert]

And it continued on like that.

[Kent Covington]

That sort of decision is filled with policy trade offs because checking the house number at the end of the driveway means exposing the agents to potential lines of fire.

[Nick Eicher]

How about making sure you're on the right street? Is that. And how does that just the right street?

[Kent Covington]

No, I mean, I was just gonna.

[Nick Eicher]

Checking the street sign. Is that asking too much? Lawyer Giacomo for the family had the last word during rebuttal.

[Kent Covington]

There's no question that there was no policy here. If you really, really meant to drop the pizza off at the right address, it doesn't matter. You still need to give a refund if you drop it off at the wrong address.

[Nick Eicher]

Now, winning here at the Supreme Court doesn't mean an automatic payout. It means just a day in lower court to try to win one.

[Mary Reichert]

All right. The justices handed down one opinion last week. It was a case about trains, oil, and how far environmental reviews should go. The court ruled that they went too far. We covered this case back in December and have a link in today's transcript. It's seven County Infrastructure Coalition versus Eagle County. The justices were unanimous in the decision, but not for all the same reasons. The case will end up narrowing the scope of a federal environmental law known by the acronym nepa, the National Environmental Policy Act.

[Nick Eicher]

At the center of this case is an 88 mile stretch of railroad in the Uintah Basin in Utah. The track connects oil producers in that remote area to the national freight network so that they can ship crude oil all the way to refineries on the Gulf Coast. Environmentalists had sued. They argued the federal board that approved the project looked only at the 88 miles of new track and not at the broader effects. Not the potential for spills or emissions in Colorado, not the increased refinery activity thousands of miles away in Texas and Louisiana. That argument did carry the day in lower court, and the judge blocked the project.

[Mary Reichert]

And that's what the Supreme Court reversed. It said the law NEPA allows for a check, not a chokehold. In other words, quoting from the opinion, NEPA is a procedural cross check, not a substantive roadmap block. The goal of the law is to inform agency decision making, not to paralyze it. That means federal agencies must review the direct environmental effects of the projects they approve and not every distant or downstream consequence that might happen later. Bottom line, it's a win for infrastructure and energy development and a signal that courts will not stretch NEPA beyond its original design.

[Nick Eicher]

And finally, a news item from last week, the FBI's deputy director, Dan Bongino announced on social media a new probe into the leak of the draft of the Dobbs decision back in 2022. That's the decision that overturned Roe versus Wade and sent abortion policy back to the states. Here is Bongino on Fox News explaining the probe.

[Kent Covington]

The place has taken a reputational hit. There is zero question about it.

[Steven Redfern]

There were a lot of bad actors, one of them still out there causing.

[Kent Covington]

Us all kinds of trouble. So we had to fix it and rebuild public trust.

[Steven Redfern]

One of the ways to do it is these cases of significant public interest that matter.

[Mary Reichert]

Marshall Gail Curley's eight month investigation turned up no culprits. Her probe received criticism in part because the justices were not asked to sign sworn affidavits, as were others with access to the draft opinion. She was investigating her superiors, which also created a conflict of interest that undermined the credibility of the investigation. And that's this week's legal docket.

[Nick Eicher]

Additional support comes from Evangelism Explosion International.

[Steven Redfern]

Helping believers share the Good News of Jesus with the world. Evangelismexplosion.org from the mission Focused Men for Christ Podcast this month, Fathers Helping Sons embrace Biblical Manhood. Mission Focused Men for Christ on all.

[Kent Covington]

Podcast apps.

[Nick Eicher]

And from Rich Haven Camp.

[Steven Redfern]

And Retreat centers in Brevard, North Carolina and Cono, Iowa. Camp and year round retreat [e-mail].

[Kent Covington]

The.

[Steven Redfern]

Trump shall resound and the Lord shall descend.

[Nick Eicher]

Even so, just last Friday, these golden voices wrapped up this year's World Journalism Institute Collegiate program. It was a remarkable two weeks of Dort University hospitality and thanks to the generosity of world donors, 32 aspiring journalists were able to train this year in Northwest Iowa. And now here they are, the WJI Class of 2024, united by one mission and made possible by you, my Soul.

[Kent Covington]

Hi, I'm Anna Keizer and I am from Maine and I go to Grace College in Winona Lake, Indiana.

[Mary Reichert]

Hi my name is Aubrey Winstead.

[Kent Covington]

Hello, I'm Kathryn Munson. I am from Montevallo, Alabama, Just graduated from the University of Montevallo. Hi, I'm Lauren Dursheid. I'm from Ottumwa, Iowa.

[Mary Reichert]

My name is Caleb Cleaning.

[Nick Eicher]

I'm from Gilbert, Arizona.

[Kent Covington]

My name is Johnny Knight. I'm from St. Paul, Minnesota. My name is Daniel Kyle. I'm from Chattanooga, Tennessee. I'm Claire Perkins. I'm from Asheville, North Carolina and I.

[Steven Redfern]

Go to East Tennessee State University.

[Mary Reichert]

My name is Rilla Haverdink.

[Kent Covington]

I'm from Bright outside Atlanta, Alpharetta, Georgia. I'm Kerrigan Hoyle and I'm from D.C. fairfax area.

[Mary Reichert]

Hi, my name's Elena Doctorian. I'm from Macon, Missouri, but I go to school at College of the Ozarks.

[Kent Covington]

I'm Claire Wilkerson. I'm from Texas, Dallas, Texas.

[Mary Reichert]

Hi, I'm Jacob Vanderweid, a graduate of Montreute College from Orlando, Florida.

[Kent Covington]

My name is Erin Luoma. I'm from High Point, North Carolina, and I just graduated from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. My name is Isaac Davenport.

[Mary Reichert]

My name is Josiah Scott.

[Kent Covington]

Grace Mackey. Alyssa Griffith. My name is Kate Stimson and I'm from California. I just graduated from Patrick Henry College. Hey, my name is Sam Boger. Jane Aubrey Page.

[Nick Eicher]

Sarah Atkins.

[Kent Covington]

My name is Bonnie Pittman. Faith Montalvo.

[Mary Reichert]

My name is Lauren Smith. I'm from Hillsdale, Michigan. I just graduated from Hillsdale College.

[Kent Covington]

Hi, my name is Sam Sofio. I'm from Cincinnati, Ohio. I attend Cedarville University.

[Mary Reichert]

And the reason why I'm here is.

[Kent Covington]

To cultivate the gifts God has given to me.

[David Bonson]

My name is Abby Young, and I'm here because I believe that journalism can glorify God and I want to learn how to do that better.

[Kent Covington]

And I'm here at WJI to gain a community of like minded learners and journalists. And I'm at WJI to hone my journalism skills and learn from some of the best in the industry, to grow in my journalism skills, to try something.

[Mary Reichert]

New, to learn how to glorify God through effective writing and storytelling.

[Kent Covington]

My name is Israel Goel.

[Nick Eicher]

I'm a student at Baldwin Wallace University. And I'm at WJI because I wanted.

[Kent Covington]

Top notch training from Christian professionals, but also to be around so many other believers. So thank you so much for making this possible. Thank you for giving the world.

[Mary Reichert]

Coming up next on the World and everything in it, the Monday Money Beat.

[Nick Eicher]

Time now to talk business, markets and the economy with financial analyst and Advisor David Bonson. David heads up the wealth management firm, the Bonson Group, and he is here now. Good morning to you, David.

[Kent Covington]

Well, good morning, Nick. Good to be with you.

[Nick Eicher]

Well, hey, nice piece of writing in your latest dividend cafe, David, or should I say maybe your royal highness, David King for a day. You obviously were responding to readers who were saying, hey, what would you do if you had the power to set policy? And you set forth a lot of great ideas. But in brief and really the whole thing is worth the read. But you noted that debt to GDP has exploded and what's driving that is spending, not taxes. You say that entitlements are the elephant in the room, that pro growth policies matter, but they must be lasting. And your hypothetical Dave Land reforms illustrate the hard choices that we face economically. So let's begin with entitlements and for this let's return from Dave Land to present day usa. Is there a single entitlement change you believe has a chance of gaining bipartisan support?

[Kent Covington]

David well, I'll do you one better. I think one of the biggest things isn't just that it has a chance, it's inevitable. It's just a question of whether or not it happens proactively and preemptively or it happens for some people, you know, against their will, and that is changing the age of eligibility for Social Security. I think that if they right now announced anybody receiving benefits, nothing changes. And anyone in their 60s who's been getting closer to that date, nothing changes, but announced some sort of modest adjustment for eligibility, age for benefits higher for people in their, let's say mid-50s and then higher still for people in their 40s and below. What I suggested was age 68 if you're between 50 and 55, and then age 70 if you're under the age of 50. I not only think it has a chance, Nick, I think it's just so absolutely fundamentally obvious that they're going to have to do it. And you know, you look at a few years of eligibility change, a couple of years, you know, times that population, times that benefit, we're not talking about one of these typical small fixes. This is massive. And so ironically, as much as we have all talked about Social Security forever and so many people gone through life saying, oh, I'm never going to get it, because we always talk about how hard the thing is going to be, and there's so many criticisms of the program, how inferior it would be to people just being able to have invested on their own and whatnot. And yet the Societal acceptance of a need for some social safety net. Ironically, Nick, Social Security is by far the easiest of the three between Medicare and Medicaid. Medicaid, because of the political toxicity and the severity around the people who it impacts, and then Medicare, because of the complexity and also the size. You're talking about a basically universal medical program for seniors. Those two are going to be much harder than Social Security. Social is one that would be easier. And this change I just laid out was one of the ones I suggested. There's a couple others that I included. The COLA adjustment means testing the COLA adjustment. I really do think that has a very good chance because a person by the name of Barack Obama once suggested it and a person running against him for president twice suggested it, both John McCain and Mitt Romney. So you had bipartisan support for it back then, and they couldn't get it done with a popular president. But the other idea I had, I'll throw it out there, was one that I think is just a really, really good idea, and yet I don't know that it has the ability to happen, which is just offering a significant amount of people at the right means a buyout, but at a big discount. And I mean a discount from the discount. In other words, it would be something people would be sacrificing to take, but they would be taking an upfront amount of money versus an ongoing stream, and then it cuts out that liability for the government, for the taxpayers, forever. And so many companies have done this with their pension fund without a severe discount and had a very, very high participation rate that I've seen enough data to convince me that you'd have a lot of people that don't really rely on their Social Security at all that would be happy just to take an upfront check and be done. I think it would save two or three trillion dollars.

[Nick Eicher]

So, David, on a different note, Elon Musk's stint at DOGE has come to an end. The Department of Government Efficiency, it ended after the statutory limit on special government employees. But on his way out, Musk poked fun at the big beautiful bill. But you know, in real world terms, and we've talked about this before, politicians respond to voters. So how do you convince the public that it's time to accept painful cuts? What do you think is the most effective way to. To build that consensus?

[Kent Covington]

Nick One of the most influential books in my life was a book by a man named Thomas Sowell called Conflict of Visions, where he laid out what he called the constrained vision and basically identified it as the fundamental difference between conservatives and not conservatives, which is that we accept the imperfectibility of things and want to make the best of situations. And he has a very famous line that is important in economics, that there are no solutions, only trade offs. And when it comes to Doge, you're not going to get things perfect and there's going to be pain and messiness around any attempt to make things more efficient or to purge out fraud, waste and corruption. With that said, your question is how do we persuade the public? While we can't do it perfectly because of the constrained vision, we certainly don't need to agitate it. We don't need to make the task of persuasion even harder than it already is. We're not going to make all the people happy all the time, as another wise man once said. But I think to go about doing something that's already going to be unpopular, it's already going to be messy, that's already subject to constraints, that there needs to be a really conscious effort to do it diligently, to do it with precision, to be putting wrong information on a website and taking it back every single day to go announce that you saved 8 billion and then say I meant 8 million to bring the chainsaw out. I guess I basically think that we had really talented people that are used to, in Silicon Valley, blowing things up. And you can't blow things up when you're trying to persuade the people. You have to go about things with a bit more, I guess, technique. That's what I would say. I don't think the stuff that they want to do in Doge is undoable. None of it can be done perfectly, none of it can be done without collateral damage, constrained vision, but it can be done without purposeful agitation. And unfortunately, I think they got off on the wrong foot with this and the public turned against it.

[Nick Eicher]

Hey, before we go, let's talk about one more thing that you said you'd like to see and that's a rules based Federal Reserve. I would point out the Fed now has some very specific targets. Using specific data points, the government publishes seeking 2% inflation full employment. So what exactly would a rules based Fed look like compared to what we have now?

[Kent Covington]

Yeah, no, what I mean by rules is rules in terms of how they administer monetary policy. They can say we have a target to get to 2% inflation or we can say we have a target to get to full employment. But that's not a rule as to how to get there, that's a goal for where you want to go. So yes, wanting stable prices and wanting full employment are both goals. But the rules are not in place for how to get there. The way monetary policy is administered consciously, legally, purposely, explicitly is at the discretion of the Federal Open Market Committee. They are to go use their own open market transactions at their discretion to decide what they think the interest rate should be. And then they have other policy tools as well. But the setting of the federal funds rate has become the primary policy tool available that isn't subject to a rule, it's subject to discretion. And so my view is that a rules based fed further constrains but also limits the temptation of intervention, of using discretion to intervene. And this is by the way, why so many people are against it, because they view the discretion and the intervention as a feature, not a bug.

[Nick Eicher]

All right. David Bonson is founder, managing partner and chief investment officer at the Bonson Group. He writes regularly for World opinions [e-mail] David, thank you so much. We'll see you next week.

[Kent Covington]

Thanks so much, Nick. Good to be with you.

[Nick Eicher]

Today is Monday, June 2nd. Good morning. This is the World and everything in it from listener supported World Radio. I'm Nick Eicher.

[Mary Reichert]

And I'm Mary Reichard. Up next, the world history book. In 1948, Vanport was a bustling shipyard city in Oregon. Thousands of African Americans worked side by side with whites and they managed to avoid major strains on racial relations, at least for the most part.

[Nick Eicher]

Of course, there were some issues. Vanport and the neighboring city of Portland still enforced strict housing discrimination at the time. Then a sudden tragic disaster on Memorial Day upended life as everyone knew it, and it changed the city and its citizens forever. World's Emma Eicher brings us the.

[Kent Covington]

1948 May 30, the real memorial Day. And so then we had what they called the Vanport Flood.

[David Bonson]

Bob Nistler was only 14 years old when floods demolished the city of Vanport, Oregon. It'd been an odd spring. First it was freezing until mid May. Then it suddenly got really hot and it'd been raining for days.

[Kent Covington]

Anyhow, we got a letter from Army Corps and said, oh, don't worry about the flood. We'll let you know a few days ahead of time if there's any danger.

[David Bonson]

There's a lot of water in Vanport, then, a city of more than 18,000. It's built on wetlands and sandwiched between the Columbia river and another waterway called the Columbia Slough. About five miles of levees had protected the city from flooding since it was founded in 1943. Those levees kept water out while locking in a unique culture. At the time, Vanport was known for its unprecedented level of racial integration, since the shipbuilding industry there had hired thousands of African Americans. But some white residents grumbled, and most neighborhoods were segregated, as Vanport still had major housing discrimination. And it was much worse in the larger city of Portland. Then came 1948. The winter ice was melting fast, too fast. And the rain didn't help either. Something had to give, and it did.

[Kent Covington]

So we heard somebody say, oh, the dike broke. The dike broke, and it was probably four miles, couple, two, three miles up that way. So we jump on our bicycles and ride up there.

[David Bonson]

Missler's bike was just an orange crate with handlebars and a couple of wheels, but it did the job. He and a neighbor kid streaked up to the levee to see the damage for themselves.

[Kent Covington]

See the opening, the opening. And the big thing was probably 15, 20, 30ft wide. And by the time we seen it, that water just roared through there. It was getting bigger. So we took off, rode our bicycles back, and told mom and dad.

[David Bonson]

His mom was recovering from gallbladder surgery, so they loaded her into a neighbor's car. But there was no room for anyone else. And Nistler's brother Joe was up in the hills with the family car. So Nistler and his dad decided to wait for Joe to come back to make their getaway. They waited and waited, but Joe didn't show up. The flood kept rising and would ultimately plunge the entire city underwater.

[Kent Covington]

So then we decided, well, maybe we'll run up here to get to the bus. Well, we got up to the bus, and all at once, you could see the water coming down and. And coming up to the bus. And so we turned around and run back home.

[David Bonson]

Nistler's family lived on the bottom floor of an apartment complex. They ran up the stairs and started breaking into people's apartments on the top floors, Trying to get as high above the flooding as possible. At one point, Nistler glanced out the window and saw a very strange sight. About a half mile away, they could see another house floating.

[Kent Covington]

There was a couple standing in the front looking at us, looking around there.

[David Bonson]

Then Nistler's buildings started floating, and the waters carried them away.

[Kent Covington]

The water come and picked us up, and we run into that slough. And all at once, it just kind of stopped there and just kept raising the water. And all at once, it started moving, come to a bridge.

[David Bonson]

When the flood finally set them down, the Nistlers tumbled out onto dry land. They started back as the waters around them roared into the Columbia Slough. But as they walked, the flood rose around them again. So they took shelter in another apartment building. Twilight fell as they waited for rescue.

[Kent Covington]

See a boat way over there? So we waved at the boat. No. So they come and pick us up and took us out.

[David Bonson]

Nistler's family was safe, and so were most of the Vanport citizens. But the flood took the homes of almost everyone. City officials teamed up with the Red Cross to help feed and shelter as many people as they could. And there was a silver lining to the disaster. The racial integration that was so unique to Vanport spread to Portland. Whites opened up their homes to welcome black families and hire displaced black workers. The state of Oregon finally had to reckon with discriminatory labor laws and housing practices. As for Nistler and his family, they moved a couple hours away to start their lives all over again.

[Kent Covington]

We moved out to McMinnville and bought a small farm at that time. That was 1949.

[David Bonson]

Bob is 91 now, but he still loves to tell the story of being washed away in a floating building. With thanks to World's Bonnie Pritchett, who interviewed Nistler for this week's World History Book. I'm Emma Eicher.

[Nick Eicher]

Tomorrow, regulating artificial intelligence. Also, the ongoing funding debate over NPR and PBS and bad psychiatry. Tomorrow we'll hear from the former med school administrator who was demoted and ultimately who lost his job after speaking out against gender ideology. That and more tomorrow. I'm Nick Icker.

[Mary Reichert]

And I'm Mary Reichard. The world and everything in it comes to you from World Radio. World's mission is biblically objective journalism that informs, educates and inspires. The apostle Paul wrote the saying is trustworthy. If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore, an overseer must be above reproach. The husband of one wife, sober minded, self controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach. Not a drunkard, not violent, but gentlemen, not quarrelsome, and not a lover of money. Verses 1 through 3 of Timothy, chapter 3. Go now in grace and peace.