So salitarianism and monopoly go in and don't make the healthcare system any worse, don't jack up premiums on people by seventy five percent, and.

Don't act lawlessly.

History tells us that when the people stand up, something magical happens.

Well, I don't need to remind everybody that the government is shut down, but we are not shut out from getting a deeper understanding of what's going on in Washington, DC, because we have one of the most prominent democratic voices, someone who has been a fierce defender of democracy and free speech, who is one of the leaders in the resistance against Trump and trump Ism, that can unpack and unveil what's going on with healthcare in this country, what's going on in terms of negotiation with the government shut down, but also broad in the aperture to what's going on in American cities with the increasing militarization with our National Guard, and what's happening to the state of our democracy.

This is Gavin Newson.

This is Senator Chris Murphy.

Senator Murphy, it's great that you took the time to be with us today.

I continue to make this point behind your back anytime I'm asked, they said, who do you admire out there in the Democratic Party?

Who from your perspective, particularly in Washington, TC stands out And every single time first name comes out of my mouth is you, sir.

And so I'm grateful for this opportunity to check in and check up on what's going on in this country, including just what happened as we're taping this.

Just an hour or so ago Pam Bondy, the Attorney General of the United States, at an oversight hearing that sounded more like cross examination coming from Pam Bondy doing op research on Democratic senators.

So what was your reflection of that, Well, Governor, awesome to be with you, man, The compliment is turned straight back around.

What you're doing out in California is.

Absolutely a central People need to feel like we are powerful, not powerless right now, and you're delivering people that sensation that there's still things we can do to save our democracy.

Yeah, I mean I watched some clips of that hearing.

You know, she acts like, you know, somebody who works for a guy who believes he's a king, right it, believes that they're accountable to no one.

She clearly showed zero deference for the United States Congress and Senate.

That's probably understandable given her combative boss and how you know what she wants folks out there making news and creating viral clips.

But you know, it just is representative of the way the entire administration operates.

They're not bound by the law, they're not bound by the Constitution.

They don't believe they're accountable to the people.

They certainly don't believe they're accountable to the Senate.

And I think that's wearing thin on folks.

You know, eighty percent of Americans now say that we're in the middle of a political crisis.

More than fifty percent of the country is worried about losing their right to free.

Speech and the show.

So I don't think she does her boss any favors by, you know, acting so childish representing the Department of Justice in front of the United States Senate.

I don't know if you think differently.

It's interesting, and you know, I want to unpack that because I think the point you're making is an important point about how quote unquote unpopular so many of the positions, not just the president's overall popularity itself, but a lot of the positions he has been promoting, including members of his own administration.

But I wonder if just in the administration of oversight, did you reflect on that and reflect on the fact that Democrats may need to change their tactics in terms of how they even begin to, you know, prepare for subsequent oversight hearings.

Yeah, I mean, these hearings are becoming jokes because she's not even attempting to answer these questions.

You know, when we send basic oversight letters to these agencies to ask questions about how they're spending money, they never ever respond.

And so yeah, I do think you need to understand that right now, they perceive these hearings to be reality TV shows, and you're, unfortunately, whether you like it or not, going to have to approach the hearings in that way.

But I also think Governor, you know that we've got to make clear that the oversight here, especially when it comes to the illegality, is permanent, right because someday Democrats are going to be back in charge of the House and the Senate.

Someday we're going to have the power of subpoenas.

Someday there's going to be people in the Department of Justice who actually want to administer the law on its face, and so I just think we're going to need to say to these folks and save your records, because if any of you have committed actual, real illegality, you know you are ultimately going to have to be held accountable for that, either by being hauled before Congress and be forced to swim in and tell the truth and be held accountable for perjury, or before a court of laws.

So the oversight is going to be much more real and much more forceful when Democrats are back in charge.

And we'll get to getting back in charge.

Talk a little bit about redistricting in twenty twenty six, particularly as it relates to not just the Senate but obviously the House.

But first I want to sort of paint the picture of where we are today where now this government shut down.

We haven't broken any records, but were not necessarily break in any new ground in terms of breakthroughs based upon at least what I'm reading and understanding and hearing, as it relates to the prospects of a deal, where you think things stand at this stage, and how do you think we have positioned ourselves the Democratic Party, and how do you think we get out on the other side.

Well, I mean, I think it's first of all important to understand that Trump is rooting for a shutdown, right because he does believe that he has these extraordinary powers.

He's come to believe that those powers get bigger in a shutdown.

That's not true.

He also roots for chaos, and the fact of the matter is there's more chaos when the government is shut down.

Cruelty is the point to this administration, and things get crueler when head start centers don't open and federal employees don't get their paycheck.

But what Democrats' priorities are here are pretty damn reasonable.

What are we asking for.

We're saying, listen, the healthcare system isn't fair and it's a mess.

We just don't want it to get worse this fall, when premiums are scheduled to increase on people who have Affordable Care Act plans by seventy one hundred percent.

So let's just make sure that those premium increases don't go into effect.

And then second, let's make sure that if we write a budget that says you have to spend money in all fifty states, the president is actually required to spend money in all fifty states instead of not spending money in places like California, in New York and Connecticut that are represented by Democrats and spending money in states represented by Republicans.

So I mean our asks are pretty minimalist.

Just don't make the healthcare system any worse, don't jack up premiums on people by seventy five percent, and don't act lawlessly.

If we get those two things included in this budget, then I think you're going to see democratic votes, and I think increasingly the American publicers are beginning to see that, you know, what we're asking for is pretty damn popular and not terribly piggish.

And it seems to have been reflected in the president's own comments, where it seemed at least politically attuned to the popularity of healthcare and the imperative to actually figure this out, suggesting that he's quote unquote a Republican but likes healthcare and thinks he can quote unquote make a deal, but doesn't seem to me there's any substantive conversations, or are there substantive conversations being held?

There are not, and the clearest evidence of how unseerious Republicans are about negotiating is the fact that they're not here, so the House of Representatives is not in session.

This is the third week that they've been on kind of an unscheduled recess.

Part of that is that they don't really want to negotiate away out of the shutdown.

Part of that we can talk about it is that they're about to vote on the Epstein resolution, and a minute they come back into session, a new Democrat will be sworn in, giving them the magic number of votes on a resolution that would force a debate and vote on the Epstein resolution.

But no, there are no real negotiations happening right now.

But you know, those premium increases are getting closer and closer and closer, And as more Americans get their notices that they're about to see a five thousand, ten thousand dollars increase in premiums, the pressure is going to mount on Republicans to come to the table and reopen the government while also making sure that people don't get hurt from a healthcare perspective.

And I mean, you know the real world consequences yere.

We're not talking about numbers.

This isn't about politics.

This is you know, people who are going to have to make a really hard decision about whether to keep their healthcare or let it lapse and potentially based bankruptcy, or pay the increased premium and just you know, have their kids go without lunch three days a week, or just not have Christmas presents under the tree this winter.

I mean, their real consequences to these premium spiking for middle class families all across the country.

Yeah, I think.

I mean the magnitude of those those premium increases are pretty jaw dropping.

Did we just put out in California, which, of course we provide more coverage than any other state just by the dairy nature and size and scope and scale of our state.

But we have very familiar here on the exchange in California what they call the Bronze Plan, which is the Middle Plan for folks and anthem.

And you got premiums that will go from three hundred and seven dollars to nine hundred and sixty four dollars a month.

I mean, it's just so it's on average, we talk about the agurate, but people will see tripling in some cases up to three hundred and eighty eight percent and an average of ninety seven percent of those increases, and we expect six hundred thousand people to lose insurance because they can't afford it in California, and I know we're talking four plus million across the United States.

So I appreciate the painting of that picture with clarity and sticking to two easy issues to understand.

Congressionally approved appropriations.

Congress the purse, here's where money.

We both approved the legislative and executive branch where it needs to go.

And the President shouldn't utilaterally change that course, that commitment, that direction and healthcare.

But I'm curious if I could just step back center what was without breaking confidence.

But I'm curious the Democratic Caucus the determination last time not to move forward with the government shut down.

Lessons learned the expectation that you needed to prepare for this moment, particularly with someone as you suggest, it was more interesting in golfing before the shutdown, and obviously had no interest in meeting with the leaders because he canceled that first meeting and then in that last meeting just trolled those leaders in the Oval Office with a twenty twenty eight Trump Patty was never serious to your point about negotiating, but knowing that was what was the journey since the last time, we decided to continue to allow government to stay open to the determination this time to get a little bit tougher in terms of the approach.

Yeah, you know, we have so few moments of leverage, moments where we have power as a minority.

Right Republicans, whether we like it or not, they run the White House, the House, and the Senate, and so when they do need our votes, I mean, it's really our moral responsibility on behalf of the people we represent to stand up for things we believe, you know, not to you know, be pollyannish about what we're ultimately going to get, but to stand up for a few things that will help people.

You know, I disagreed with the decision backing in the fall to vote for a budget that was essentially written only by Republicans that didn't solve any of the problems that they.

Were in the midst of creating.

But you know, a few things are different that I think, you know, allows Democrats to be right now really united around using our leverage.

You know.

One, you know, people see Trump I think more clearly now than they did back then.

As approval ratings are you know, ten points lower too.

The pain is you know, more real now that that big beautiful bill has passed.

Premiums are about to go up on millions of Americans.

So the pain is acute right now in a way that maybe it wasn't in March.

And then, you know, back in March, I think there were a lot of folks who were worried about his attacks on democracy.

But maybe we're sort of hoping for the best case.

Now they see that we are in the middle of a totalitarian takeover.

If it's not arrested, if it's not stopped, they are trying to rig the rules, and thank goodness for you and what you're doing in California, they are trying to you know, create a state run media.

They are trying to use.

The Department of Justice to suppress dissent and lock up their critics.

So you know, that level of alarm is much higher.

And I just think, you know, it's not just Democrats who want us to fight and draw a line.

You know, it's a big part of the middle of the country too.

So the demand for us to show power, I just think is a lot more amplified today that it was back in the Spring, which is also why so many people all around this country, left, middle, and center are cheering what you're doing to show that we are not powerless against his efforts to try to rig the rules.

So where do you see?

I mean, is this we look at another week, two month?

I mean, you're going to be back at this in seven, six and a half weeks or six weeks.

Isn't there another this sort of date with destiny in terms of just extending this narrative even be I know we're talking about this continuing resolution seven weeks, but that just gets us to another point where we're going to have another potential shut down.

I mean, is this the bond markets that ultimately we're going to determine that we're going to break this chill?

Is it the stock market that ultimately is going to force everybody to come to the table.

What's your gut?

Yeah?

I mean my gut is that Republicans are already starting to sweat a little bit.

Something interesting happened just about ten minutes ago.

So we had our lunches today, the Republicans all huddle for lunch, Democrats all huddle for lunch, and the Republicans came out of their lunch with a brand new message, one that we hadn't heard before.

Their message today was, well, Democrats have this big protest coming up.

This is the No King's Rally on October eighteenth, and so they want to keep the government shut down until the No King's Rally, which I've never heard from them before.

They clearly knew what they were saying yesterday was working, and they're scrambling to come up with some new message.

And I think it's just all a sign Governor that you know, they are feeling the heat because they're getting more and more calls and emails from constituents who are like, hey, what the hell are you going to do about this seventy five percent increase.

So my guess, if I had to put money out of today, is that this isn't another month that Republicans come to the table sometime soon and say, listen, help help us, help ourselves.

Let's get rid of these premium increases and listen.

That would that would help a lot of people, and it would show, you know, for the first time all year that you know, the Democratic Party has fight and has relevance, and so I love the optimism.

I mean, it would be a hell of a victory for millions and millions of Democrats, Republicans, independence.

To your point, the twenty plus million people that are directly impacted, millions more indirectly impacted.

It's not Democrats or Republicans.

These are Americans, and that would be that would be extraordinary outcome.

Let me ask you just you know, in terms of you've used the word totalitarian.

We started as it relates to the oversight conversation about use the word Kings, not just in relationship to the October eighteen NOME King's rally.

I mean, I remember the old Chris Murphy.

You know, it was the bipartisan you're working across the aisle, actually producing real results.

You know, I'm old enough to remember the most significant at least in my lifetime thirty plus years, safer Communities Act, the work you did mental health and gun safety in a bipartisan way.

But I've noticed much more well, I don't.

Want to say strident, but I see a Democrat who's leading the resistance that has more clarity on free speech in terms of more conviction perhaps and expression around it, as well as democracy and using language that I understand that I think is very resident.

I'm curious your own evolution in that respect, and was there a moment that sort of hit you where you said, I'm going to I'm going to dial things up a little bit.

Well, I mean, I appreciate that coming from you, because we have also watched you at a moment where this party has been desperate for leadership, bold leadership.

We've seen you step out and frankly take risks, which is which is what I think this country is desperate for us to do, to show that we understand the gravity of this moment and show that we are willing to take risks on behalf of saving the democracy.

And probably fifty is a risk, right, not.

Destined to succeed, but but can and will if we put our work behind it.

So I appreciate you saying that.

Yeah, listen, I just see these guys, and I saw these guys early.

They are not Democrats, small d you know, inside the Republican Party, they have come to believe over the last four years that democracy is just not worth it any longer if it elects Democrats.

They have come to believe.

That, you know, our support for multiculturalism and civil rights and human rights and feminism is you know, an assault on the very idea of Americanism, and their version of Americanism is a Christian, white male dominated America.

So they want to get rid of us at any cost, and if that cost is the erasure or the weakening of democracy, then they're willing to live with that.

So to me, this is all a plan.

I mean, a really well thought out plan to capture the media, to use the doj to, which hunts to rig the rules, to change the facts, as an attempt to just try to suffocate the opposition so that.

We don't have enough room to operate.

And last thing I'll say is that, you know, I think some people say, well, as long as there's you know, no cancelation of elections, we're in good shape.

Well I don't think they're canceling the elections.

I think they're just going to, you know, do what they've done in Turkey and Hungary and other countries like that, where the opposition party still exists, but they just you know, don't have enough space to operate, or the rules are are changed, like the shape of districts, so that even if the president is wildly unpopular, we can't win.

I just see these guys, and I know it sounds extreme to suggest that Republicans are actually trying to engineer an erosion or a destruction of our democracy.

And I don't think every Republican believes that there's still a lot of Republicans in the Senate who want to protect democracy, but there are some, there are some real radicals inside the White House who do have plans to convert America to something different than liberal democracy.

And I just think we have to see it and understand it so that we recognize, as you are, you know, how loud our fight has to be.

How do we overstate or do we understate the influence of the omb director rest vote.

I mean, I think he's just you know, one of many in that White House who who's operationalizing this plan to you know, constrict the space that the opposition has to to operate.

I mean, what he's doing recently is another tried and true tactic of would be authoritarians.

He's you know, pausing funding for democratic states, and he's you know, hoping that Democrats will essentially bend or self censor themselves so that they get their money turned back on.

It wasn't lost on any of us in the Democratic Caucus that when they canceled a whole bunch of energy projects.

One of the states that was exempted was Nevada.

One of the two Democratic centers from Nevada voted for Trump's continuing resolution.

So it's a very clear signal.

If you vote with me as a Democrat, your money will continue.

If you don't vote with me, the money's turned off.

So, you know, I just think he's he's playing his role, But I tend to think that it's more, you know, Stephen Miller and that crowd out of the White House that's orchestrating a lot of the day to day operations of trying.

To on your mind our democratic norms, and.

Those democratic norms now include the militarization of American cities.

We saw that obviously firsthand here in California, not just with the federalization of the National Guard thousands and thousands, but seven hundred active duty Marines that were sent to a US city.

We said it at the time, this is a preview of things to come.

Obviously Washington, DC has its own criterion conditions, but clearly takes shape there and now taking shape in cities large and small, Portland attempting to militarize those streets with a federal judge appointed by Trump who correctly has put a pause, but that's not necessarily the case.

And you brought up Stephen Miller with what he's been able to effectuate in the city of Chicago.

Give us your sense of that.

Trend line that's growing headlined now and where you think things may go if we're not successful in pushing back.

Well, it's incredibly dangerous, and I do think you have to put it in this broader context.

You know, at the same time that they are sending our troops into Portland and Chicago, they are also getting ready a campaign to crack down on what they term, you know, far left terrorist groups, but that list may include Indivisible and move On, just basic run of the mill progressive activist groups may all of a sudden be targeted by the Department of Justice or by the IRS.

And so what they are doing is using the military, using the Department of Justice, using the IRS to try to convince people that you're just better off staying on the.

Sidelines, right.

I mean, we'd be naive to think that troops in your city doesn't have an impact on people's willingness to show up and protest.

We'd be naive to think that the threat of IRS action against you're not for profit chills your interest to speak truth to power, say what you think is true about the immorality of this administration.

So again I.

Think it's part of this big, broader plan, And again it just raises the stakes on his budget fight, because yeah, I want to get people's healthcare saved, but I also have no moral obligation to vote for a budget that funds the destruction of our democracy, that funds those operations at the Department of Defense, at the Department of Revenue, at the Internal Revenue Service.

So that's why this budget has to be, you know, not just good for our healthcare system, but good for our democracy too.

What do you make of you know?

And the big beautiful bill, as they describe it, the ability now for ICE to increase its ranks by aparts of ten thousand personnel, which would make it the largest domestic police force anywhere in the world.

And increasingly it seems pretty obvious to anyone paying attention, a political domestic police force that appears not to be as committed to an oath to the Constitution, but to the oath to the President himself.

At least how it's played out in my state.

What do you make of what's happening there, not just with the federalization of the Guard and the militarization of American cities, but with ice, with border patrol, masked men disproportionately out in the streets, sidewalks, parks, playgrounds, in and around churches, schools, courthouses.

You know, I'd say two things.

And again, you know, I think you have, better than anybody else, called out the moral consequences of a private police force loyal to the president and not necessarily the rule of law doing violence to our neighbors without regard on most days as to whether those neighbors.

Have committed a crime or not.

But you know, one, I think it's it's really important to understand that this isn't popular and Democrats, you know, have been really reluctant to talk about anything connected to immigration.

Yeah, I think the Democratic Party should get, you know, stronger on a message of a secure border.

But I also think that, you know, folks really don't like what's happening now, and we don't appear to folks as a legitimate opposition if we're remaining silent.

So folks want a secure border, but they also don't want ICE going after immigrants who are, you know, basically playing by the rules and having committed no violent offenses.

So I think that that's really really important to understand that we've got to talk about what's happening and that the people will be will be with us.

Do you think, I mean one of the things that I appreciate, many things that I appreciate about you, is your willingness to do your own forensics, your own analysis on went right wrong in the last election, but you broad in it.

You wrote a one I think the best maybe the best piece quite literally that I've read, looking back at where our party is, looking at the present and arguing for a different future.

Is your sense that our party is finance footing again now?

I mean, on the basis we could talk a little bit more, maybe unpacked, maybe you can illuminate the viewers and listeners about what you argued is the challenge for our party.

But is your sense now that we are back on firmer footing than when you wrote that piece a number of months ago.

Do you feel like our party is in better shape or worse shape?

Are we finding our voice?

Is this shut down in a perverse sense, helpful in terms of just organizing that voice and a clarity of what's at stake.

All right, well, I'm going to turn that question back around on you too.

But I mean, the polling would not tell you that our party is in good shape today.

We are historically.

Unpopular and part of that is just, you know, people expressing their frustration about Trump's lawlessness through their indictment of the opposition that they would hope could have arrested.

More of it.

But yeah, he's giving us an opportunity, right, he has been exposed as a fake populist.

Right he is simply operationalizing government to steal from poor people, cut their health care to it enrich himself.

And so that really commands us to try to figure out why we've lost so many votes amongst poor people in this country because they're now questioning whether this guy is actually righteous, whether this guy actually is looking out for them.

But they're not ready to vote for Democrats.

And that's for a couple of reasons.

Hey, they think we're just as corrupt as Republicans are.

And so until we get more forceful in the way that we talk about how we would reform government if we were back in charge, like maybe a constitutional amendment to ban private money, corporate money on us money from campaigns.

They're just going to sort of think that we're all the same stripe.

And then two, you know, they perceive us Democrats often to be pretty judgmental about them if they don't line up with us on all of our social and cultural priorities.

And so you know, I've gotten in some hot water amongst our friends because I've said, listen, I think we should be a party who has a tent pole of unrigging our economy and unrigging our democracy, and then we should try to let into that coalition people who might not agree with us on all of the hot button issues, even guns.

That doesn't mean I stopped fighting any harder for those things.

I just think we can win a lot more elections if we were perceived as being, as I said, a little less overtly judgmental of people who don't believe in everything that you know, me or Gavin Newsom or Kamala Harris believes.

And let's just open up the aperture a little bit to who we invite in, and we might find ourselves winning more elections and being able to get a lot of good stuff done for the country.

So is your sense that we're coming to our senses in that respect or is it still so situational as you opened up about Trump and trump Ism and sort of the crisis at hand in this moment, and that we're still sort of in this fight or flight in terms of playing defense right now before we then get back dust off and really talk about that positive alternative to Trump and trump Ism that is more inclusive, that broadens our appeal to more people.

Yeah, I think it's.

Probably the former.

I think we are right now seized with this fight.

And of course it doesn't really matter if we correct from a policy or messaging standpoint if we don't have an election in twenty twenty six or we don't have a free and fair election.

So it is kind of essential at least in twenty twenty five for us to make sure that we lose our democracy within this twelve month period of time.

But I think we could probably do a better job of walking and chewing gum at the same time.

I don't know, Gavin, it's just to me, you know, we became a party that kind of became addicted to incrementalism.

You know, we thought that these little adjustments on the margins of the market could you know, make people's lives better.

I just want us to be for big ideas again, ideas that are as big as the solutions that people face.

And again, in the way that you're attacking this threat to democracy, you've kind of modeled a belief in big ideas.

And Trump has big ideas.

They're racist, they're responsible, divisive ideas.

The Democratic Party is going to have to have some bigger ideas if we want to convince people that we know how hard their lives are.

I can't agree with you more.

I mean those talk about trend lines that have become headlines.

You've got an economy for decades that hasn't been working for folks.

And one of the areas that I admire you're so focused on as young people, and this notion of loneliness and isolation and underscorings for the economic trend lines that are now finally being recognized.

As a thirty year old today living is doing worse than his parents, which is the first time in US history that's ever been the case.

And the more time I spend online, more time I spent offline, more time I spend with my own kids.

You know, I can appreciate this, this sort of that's.

Almost a desperation that I will never ever afford the home I'm growing up in, or even imagine even being able to pay rent, even if I have two or three roommates, or be able to continue to afford the quality of life that you or my parents are enjoying.

And so I think this notion of moving away from incrementalism is important, But I also want to unpack this notion of isolationism and this notion that increasingly people are sort of understanding and unpacking again.

You've written a lot about it.

Maybe you can illuminate us to your thoughts in that respect.

I appreciate it because you know, there's a there's a radical change happening in America today, and it does explain a lot of our incivility and a lot of our political anchor.

We've gone through really a period of great social withdrawal.

And it's not just the pandemic.

It really dates to, you know, the moment those smartphones got dumped in our pockets.

Today, the average adult spends half as much time every week with friends and family in person than they did just thirty years ago.

The fall up and socialization has been even more severe for our kids.

They're in some instances spending sixty seventy percent less time in in person communion than they were just generations ago.

You know, you have to work longer hours now to be able to make ends meet, so there's less leisure time available for you.

We have a a isolation and loneliness epidemic in this country, and you know, the Surgeon General under Biden talked about you know how that has health consequences.

You're more likely to have heart disease, dementia if you're spending more time alone.

But it has practical considerations for our politics.

I mean, I bet you a lot of those people who were riding at the Capitol on January sixth were pretty lonely people that came to believe these conspiracy theories about Democrats because they were first sad about their loneliness, and then they were angry about it and they wanted to.

Take it out on somebody.

So, you know, I just think that you know, the in that founding document, it says that government is supposed to guarantee the right to pursue happiness and happiness is rooted, yeah, in your career, but mostly in your relationships, mostly in you know, how connected you feel to your community.

So I would love a conversation about how we kind of unwind this cycle of social withdrawal.

And I think we should start with our kids.

You and I am raising kids in this age of smartphones.

You and I talked about it last time we saw each other in person.

I remember you having done a better job than I have and my kid's mom has in keeping our kids away from that technology.

But you know, you could just start by restricting the access kids after social media, giving them a chance at meeting each other more often, and then maybe that would spin them into healthier adults.

I just think it's a real important and unifying conversation because like right and left, don't feel differently about the poison that's being handed to our kids.

They want us to step up and do something.

I completely concurrent in terms of just the universality of the concerns and the consideration of how we can I mean, this is about communitarianism.

It's not about political party.

It's about our shared experience, shared humanity.

And I think this explains more things and more ways on more days in terms of our politics and unpacking that is critical and the interest of trying to sort of unpack more issues and distill in a very short period of time.

I want to unpack a little bit about your reference a moment that very much is in line with what we were just talking and you mentioned media and passing.

You obviously have tried to meet the moment with the Nope Act, which I want to talk about in a second, in relationship to what happened with Jimmy Kimmel.

But there's a lot happening with social media.

TikTok now peers to be transferring hands to American investors disproportionate number that have strong ties to the Temper administration.

We've seen what's happened with Paramount deal and obviously new announcement to the new Barry Weise who's going to be running CBS, and just a shift now consolidation into hands of fewer and fewer people.

Seems like more oversight, or at least more settlements that imply more oversight, including with YouTube that's sending twenty two million dollars of a twenty four and a half million dollars settlement to build a new ballroom that is not, by the way, be packed it by the government shut down the construction there.

What's your what's your sense of what's happening the media landscape in this.

Well that doesn't sound too good when you, you know, lay it out that way.

Leading question here.

Well, I mean, like you know this, you know, totalitarianism and monopoly go hand in hand.

You know, it's really important to you know, somebody that's seeking to contract the space for descents to you know, be able to pull the levers of media control.

And it's really really worrying that increasingly there's a really small number of people in this country who control the platforms upon which we communicate.

The algorithms really matter there.

And control the sources of news that we all consume.

You mentioned this, You know this one company that's essentially controlled by the Ellison family.

They're very very close to Donald Trump.

They just bought up Paramount, which on CBS and immediately installed Arry Wise, right leaning commentator in charge of the news.

They now are.

Looking to buy an even bigger media company that includes CNN.

They may have control of TikTok.

I mean, this is one family now that could have CBS, CNN, TikTok, and you saw what happened to Kimmel when the state starts to use its regulatory power to act on small and medium sized actors and say, if you want to keep your license or you want to ever get a merger approved, you've got to listen to us in terms of who can speak and who can't speak.

Again, this is you know, what's been happening in Hungary over the past twenty years, is that the government just starts to cut deals with very rich people.

Will let you take ownership over this media company and will make you We'll let you make a lot of money off of it, but you have to tilt the coverage towards us.

And it's pretty clear and in fact, pretty brazen and transparent that that's what Trump is time to do.

So you know, we've got to, you know, speak up about that.

But we also have to tell people that if you put Democrats in charge, we're going to do something about these media monopolies.

I think that's actually pretty popular because I think folks out there don't like the fact that, you know, the news is being controlled by a small handful of individuals and companies in this country.

So after what occurred with Jimmy Kimmel and the SCC and concerns.

You introduced an actual strategy to respond to that, not just rhetoric, but actual legislative plan referred to and you're of an act.

There's the NOPE Act.

Unpack that.

What's the N and O and P and E stand for?

Well, you know, it is important also to just remember that, you know, Kimmel's back on the air, right, and it's another demonstration of you know, our power.

In that case, it was commercial power that we you know, used our powers consumers to say that Disney listens are going to be consequences to you if you essentially engaged in Trump's censorship regime.

And we can do that again through our commercial power.

But we also have that same power politically.

So you know, the notepack is, you know, is a is a bill about banning political prosecutions.

So we just set up a whole new set of common sense defenses that individuals would have in court if they ever got prosecuted for free speech.

Now it's illegal to arrest somebody just because they're protesting the government, but that hasn't stopped Trump from doing it.

I don't remember if it.

Was Stalin or some other famous totalitarian and once you know said show me the person and I'll.

Find you the crime.

Right like you know, you can dig up something somebody has done and alleged it is a crime, even though your underlying motivation is really to punish their speech.

What this bill does is just set up a number of defenses you raise in court if you believe you're being persecuted for speech, and allows you to ultimately collect attorneys fees and have repercussions against the charging agent if it turns out that you were unconstitutionally pursued for your political activity.

So listen, I don't I don't have any.

Illusions that that bill is going to pass in a Republican Congress.

But it's just another way for us to raise for folks the specter of what they're doing.

So let's in finishing up here, I want to sort of go back to the beginning and just you know, you made the point on multiple occasions, including the reference to how people really use their voice and express their disdain for what occurred and put a lot of pressure on Disney and Kimmel getting back on air in no large part was because of people exercising their free speech and pushing back.

You mentioned the No King's rally on October eighteenth.

You mentioned as well Indivisible and other organizations you've been supporting, and we're grateful and you've been champion for so many of these, uh, these these sort of democratic, small de organizations all across this country.

What you know, where where do you see things going as we map out twenty twenty six?

I mean, uh, there, it's pretty clear Trump would have made those phone calls, first one being to Greg Abbott said he's entitled to five seats in Texas, and those subsequent phone calls.

So you saw that poor Indiana governor who said I had no choice and he publicly said it out loud because he would take my money.

Just think about that, I mean, President saying he's entitled to five seats.

And I don't think enough people paid attention to what the governor of Indiana said of why he's moving with redistricting just under just the auspices of being threatened with government money.

What do you make of where we are and where we'll be this time next year in terms of our prospects not only for the House representatives but the United States Senate and how important are these organizing groups, the No King's rally and the momentum that we need to build in terms of sharing our voice between now and then in terms of getting back into control and power.

Well, you know, you mentioned you know before, maybe my my over optimism about our ability to get Republicans to do the right thing on the shutdown.

I don't know.

My feeling is that, you know, people like you and me kind of have to be absurd optimists, you know, sticking this business for as long as we have.

But I'm optimistic about a our ability to defend democracy and our ability to win next November.

Yeah, I think a lot of it has to.

Do with the success of your effort and the success of other states' efforts to try to balance out the harm that they're doing in places like Texas and Indiana.

But you know, there's this really interesting study that was done some years ago that looked at democracies that were crumbling, right that we're being challenged by an elected leader who you know, essentially wanted to stay in power forever.

And what they found.

But the study found is that there's kind of a magic number, a magic number of citizens that once they hit the street, end up just putting the sand in the gears of that to sent away from the democracy.

The number is sort of two to three percent of the people.

I think on October eighteenth, we're going to maybe see record numbers of people all around this country standing up and speaking out.

And that will, you know, cause just a little bit of concern amongst Republicans who think, well, maybe this isn't as strong a bet as I thought.

You know, maybe I am going to lose my seat if I continue to endorse this corruption.

Maybe that'll give a little bit more confidence to some corporate CEO or some leader of a school or a law firm out there to say no to the attempts at bullying.

So I just think it's still in our hands.

History tells us that when the people stand up, something magical happens, whether it's fear on the other side, courage to allies who have been sitting on the sideline, We still have the ability to save this thing.

And again, you know, all, you know, all credit to what you are doing in California, which in many ways is the center of our you know, national effort to resist.

Whether it was what you did to raise issue with the deployment of federal troops, what you've done to stand up to his uses of spending power to bully states into submission or Prop fifty.

I think we'll have a big turnout on the eighteenth.

I think we'll.

Continue to grow indivisible and move on in local groups, and in the end, I think we'll be in a strong position.

A Senate's hard next November, no doubt about it.

Like if you had an outcome where we won the House and we didn't win the Senate, that that wouldn't you know, spell doom for democracy.

That would still be a good day.

But you know, if it's appropleer ratings stayed out in the low thirties, mid thirties, we got a chance to, you know, win places like Texas, flip a couple of seats that people maybe weren't expecting in the Senate and maybe surprise folks.

Love to hear that optimism, and it's a reminder, you know, Justice brand I said it better than any of us.

In a democracy, the most important office is office of citizen.

This notion of act of not inert citizenship.

And we saw that the last big protests a few months back, and I hope on October eighteenth, everybody is hearing Senator Murphy loud and clear, the opportunity to really, you know, not just show up for ourselves, but show up for each other, show up for our founding fathers.

They didn't live and die to watch two hundred and forty nine years of these enduring principles of you know, co equal branches of government, popular sovereignty, the rule of law be replaced by, as we've said, the rule of don And so I'm grateful Center for all your leadership, and I encourage everybody listening watching.

I don't remember under what was it a blog that you wrote yourself?

Was it published in some fancy magazine?

But I wrote I wrote something longer.

I think it was for I don't remember what it was American Prospect.

I think that's where it was.

I talked about it.

Yeah, google it sort of.

There was a realignment of America, and how you know, there's there's a lot of folks out there who want to break out of Trump's camp, but need the Democratic Party to feel a little bit more sincere and a little bit more robust in the way that we attack concentrated power.

So hopefully I'm right.

It was.

It was a long piece and it deserved to be long, and it was every word was important.

And I can't impress upon people more the importance of taking a look at it because you brought in the aperture and you really looked at our party more broadly and connected to cultural issues, more larger societal issues, not just tactical or situational issues.

And again I I I'll end as I began.

One of the brightest lights in the Democratic Party.

Guy shows up every single day online, offline.

Senator Chris Murphy, thanks for being with us.

You're my hero man.

Thanks a lot, Thank you, brother,