Transcript
>> HINOJOSA: Many know him as
the man who spoiled the 2000
Presidential Elections, but in
the last five decades, he
brought us the seatbelt, the
airbag, the Clean Air Act, and
much more-- four-time
Presidential candidate, consumer
advocate, and author Ralph
Nader.
I'm Maria Hinojosa, this is One
On One.
Ralph Nader, it's great to have
you on the show.
>> NADER: Thank you.
>> HINOJOSA: So here's the first
question I want to throw out to
you, because, you know, you're a
consumer advocate.
As a kid who was growing up in
the 1960s and 1970s, you know,
Ralph Nader... everybody knew
what you were doing.
But paint a picture of what our
country would look like if you
hadn't existed; if you hadn't,
you know, brought in the
regulations, what would our
country look like?
>> NADER: Well, me and a lot of other
people.
>> HINOJOSA: Okay, but...
>> NADER: But well, for example, we
wouldn't have mandatory motor
vehicle safety standards, we
wouldn't have recall
requirements for companies who
sell you a defective car.
We got through meat and poultry
inspection laws; there were
virtually no inspection
standards of diseased meat and
all the illness that comes from
it, never mind the fraud.
Environmental protection-- there
wasn't anything like that in
Washington.
Legal services for the poor--
this came out of the 1960s as
well.
A Consumer Product Safety
Commission, for example, was
created.
The problem is that the
corporations know how to game
these systems, and so they
slowly, day after day with their
lobbyists and their money, bring
these agencies down so that they
don't do very much.
Year after year they decline.
They don't enforce the law; they
don't have the prosecutions.
The Toyota thing is an example
of a complete breakdown...
>> HINOJOSA: In fact, I was
just...
>> NADER: ...of the Auto Safety Agency.
>> HINOJOSA: I was just watching
something on television.
It looks like they have like, a
three minute ad for saying,
"We're going to do great now."
>> NADER: ( laughing ) Yeah.
>> HINOJOSA: "We're going to fix
it all now"...
>> NADER: Yeah.
>> HINOJOSA: And people are
saying, "Well, wait a second."
This is the kind of stuff that
was happening in the 1960s and
1970s...
>> NADER: Yeah.
>> HINOJOSA: ...before there was
protection, and yet it feels
like we haven't made any
progress.
>> NADER: Yeah.
>> HINOJOSA: That must be
incredibly frustrating for you.
>> NADER: Well, it's because we're
outnumbered in Washington.
There are bout 1,000 citizen
advocates in Washington and tens
of thousands of corporate
advocates, and they money...
much more money to give to the
politicians and many more
lawyers to bring lawsuits.
I mean, they starve these health
and safety agencies.
This year, Maria, we're going to
spend... the taxpayers are going
to spend $775 million to guard
the embassy in Baghdad-- $775
million.
The entire budget of OSHA--
supposed to deal with tens of
thousands of American workers
who lose their lives-- is $520
million.
>> HINOJOSA: How many times have
you seen that number printed in
a major newspaper of record?
>> NADER: Almost never, but you see,
the Pentagon budget, which is
half of the federal government's
operating expenditures, isn't
auditable.
The Government Accounting Office
of Congress every year says the
Pentagon budget is not
auditable.
You know what that means?
That means they don't know where
their inventory often is, they
don't know where the money's
being spent, they can be stolen
from and there's no
accountability because there's
no auditing system in place.
And that's why Blackwater and
Halliburton and all these people
are ripping the taxpayer off
like crazy.
>> HINOJOSA: So a lot of people
probably, you know, if they go
back and they look at what it
was like for you-- yes, you were
leading a team of people, but
you... you basically were at the
head of this movement...
>> NADER: Mm-hmm.
>> HINOJOSA: ...and you were
confronting major corporations
and the government, and you have
this belief that says just one
individual can actually take on
any issue and make change.
Here's what I want to know,
though.
>> NADER: Mm-hmm.
>> HINOJOSA: A lot of people
don't know that you're the son
of Lebanese immigrants.
>> NADER: Mm-hmm.
>> HINOJOSA: So talk a little
bit about how that experience of
your mom and dad and what they
taught you helped inform the man
that you became.
>> NADER: Well, we talked a lot about
public issues-- local, state,
and national, international,
around the dinner table.
So there was no television, no,
you know, text messaging.
( laughing ) It was... it was
good conversation, and they
would throw challenging
questions at us.
And... like one thing my father
said: "What's the difference
between capitalism and
socialism?"
Well, we started talking...
>> HINOJOSA: And how old were
you?
>> NADER: Well, I was maybe nine, but I
was the youngest in the family.
And so we tossed around
different things, and he came up
with this definition.
He said... he said, "Socialism
is government ownership of the
means of production, and
capitalism is corporate
ownership of the means of
government."
And you see how pertinent...
>> HINOJOSA: Wow.
>> NADER: ...it is today, with the
corporations controlling our
government, ripping it off,
contracts, grants, very often
tax system as
a grotesque favoritism for the
loophole crowd, and turning the
government against its own
people so it doesn't serve the
people.
>> HINOJOSA: Your dad also said
something really beautiful,
which is one day you came home
from school...
>> NADER: Yeah.
>> HINOJOSA: ...and your dad
said to you, "So what did you
learn in school?
Did you learn to believe, or did
you learn to think?"
>> NADER: Yeah.
That really stung me, and I went
up to my room and I started
thinking about that, and every
time I sat in a class with a
teacher or a professor, I would
say, "Is this teacher trying to
get us to believe, or trying to
get us to think?"
So it's that one question that
was worth a lot of courses, and
that's what, at their best, that
parents and grandparents do.
And that's why I put down
their... my parent's questions
and experiences in the book 17
Traditions.
>> HINOJOSA: Which is a
wonderful book.
Probably a lot of people may not
have read it.
It's called The 17 Traditions,
and this is a book that you say
that you basically wrote for you
mom and dad.
>> NADER: Yes, and for thousands of
other parents and grandparents
who should put this wisdom and
these experiences down to
connect with their children, who
are more disconnected now
because all these electronic
gadgets that they're... you
know, more disconnected from
their family trail than ever
before.
This is a modest bestseller, by
the way.
>> HINOJOSA: All right!
>> NADER: Oh, yeah, yeah.
>> HINOJOSA: Yes, and we'll talk
about your latest book in just a
minute, but let me ask you about
what it was that your mom and
dad understood as immigrants
that almost they took the
American constitution, their
civic responsibility almost more
seriously than people who had
actually been born and raised in
this country.
What's that about?
>> NADER: Well, once... my father ran a
restaurant and he'd always
criticize what's going on in the
country, but he'd always have a
proposal to improve it.
But we'd have these factory
workers come over, and they all
knew each other and dad, and
he'd irritate them deliberately.
You know, try to get them angry
when they were drinking their
coffee.
And they'd say, "Nader, why
don't you go back where you came
from?"
And he would say, "Listen, when
I sailed past the Statue of
Liberty in 1912, I took it
seriously.
Do you?"
So he turned the tables on them,
and he said, "Do you love your
country?"
"Darn right."
He said, "Why don't you spend a
little more time improving it?"
( laughing ) So that's the kind
of dialogue that were exposed to
all the time.
>> HINOJOSA: But there must have
been times, Ralph, when you were
just saying, "God, this..." I
mean, you were under
surveillance...
>> NADER: Mm-hmm, by General Motors.
>> HINOJOSA: ...by corporations,
by General Motors.
They were coming after you.
>> NADER: Yeah.
>> HINOJOSA: In those moments
when you're... you know, you
were basically being targeted
across the board, what kept you
going?
>> NADER: I think it's a striving for
justice.
I lost a lot of friends in
traffic crashes needlessly.
There were no seatbelts, no
airbags, no padded dash panels,
you know, no rollover support.
Now, for example, it's much
safer-- motor vehicles are much
safer-- but I lost high school,
college classmates.
And I used to hitchhike a lot,
and often the truck drivers who
picked me up would be first at
the scene of a crash, and it was
really pretty bloody and grisly
and screams.
And so I wrote a paper at
Harvard Law School on safe
automobile engineering and the
law.
>> HINOJOSA: And back then, did
people kind of think, "Unsafe
automobiles?
What's this guy focusing on
cars?
Cars are like, supposed to be
everything that we want, and..."
>> NADER: Yeah.
>> HINOJOSA: Did they all think
you were just kind of...
>> NADER: Yeah, well, you know, this
was in 1950s.
The cars were advertised as
psychosexual dreamboats with
fins and ornaments and so on.
Never mind fuel efficiency,
crash safety, or ease of
maintenance to repair, pollution
control.
That's what we changed
completely.
The demand by the public for all
these points that I just
mentioned grew in the mid-1960s
congressional hearings, the
signing by Lyndon Johnson of the
various motor vehicle and
pollution control laws.
>> HINOJOSA: So you know that a
lot of people... there are
people who know you as the
tireless consumer advocate...
>> NADER: Mm-hmm.
>> HINOJOSA: ..and then there
are people who didn't know
anything about you...
>> NADER: Mm-hmm.
>> HINOJOSA: ...until you
decided to run for president in
the year 2000.
And then they say, "Oh, yeah;
he's the guy who ran for
president in the year 2000.
Isn't he the one who made Bush
win?"
And you say...
>> NADER: Well, listen.
First of all, it's factually
wrong.
I've talked to Gore about this,
and Gore has talked to other
people.
First of all, we all have an
equal right to run for election,
and why do they put the wrap on
the Green Party candidate for?
I mean, do these two parties own
all the voters?
Don't we want the voters to have
more choice, the way they did,
say, in the 19th Century and the
Antislavery Party, and the
Women's Right to Vote Party,
Labor, Farmer, Progressive
parties?
It's harder and harder now for
small parties and independents
just to get on the ballet.
All kinds of petition
requirements, all kinds of
obstacles.
But Gore, of course, won the
popular vote, so we have this
monstrosity that you can come in
second and become president
because of the Electoral
College, so...
>> HINOJOSA: Which frankly, you
know, when people talk about the
greatest democracy, and America
is the greatest democracy, it
doesn't seem to make any sense.
>> NADER: Not one American has ever
voted for a human being for
president since the history of
the country-- can you imagine
that?
They vote for the electors in
the electoral college whose
names they don't even know.
It's absurd.
But also, it was stolen from him
in Florida-- from Tallahassee in
all kinds of ways with Kathleen
Harris and Jeb Bush.
>> HINOJOSA: But you got 90,000
votes in Florida, right?
>> NADER: Yeah.
>> HINOJOSA: So if those 90,000
votes had gone for Gore, then he
would have won the state of
Florida.
>> NADER: That's not the way to look at
it.
The way to look at it is how did
I affect Gore before the
election?
Did I push him to take more
progressive stands which got him
up in the polls, where he
actually got more votes than
whatever went to the Green
Party?
But you see, even the most
sophisticated political analyst
never looked at the preelection
day dynamics.
There have been some social
scientist studies who have
concluded that I actually, by
pushing him to do what Lieberman
didn't want him to do...
>> HINOJOSA: Mm-hmm.
>> NADER: ...by challenging the drug,
oil, you know, insurance
companies in speeches-- remember
"the people, not the powerful,"
that was his slogan-- that he
got more votes than if I wasn't
even in the arena.
But it's such a ridiculous
discussion, because let's all
put our best foot forward to the
voters and let's have a good,
competitive election and not
say, "Oh, someone siphons
votes."
When somebody said, "Did you
siphon votes from Gore," I said,
"No, no-- Gore siphoned far more
votes from me!"
( laughing )
>> HINOJOSA: So would you do it
again?
I mean now, because this is one
of the things that people
will... and people-- many of
your supporters who were
die-hard Ralph Nader supporters
said, "Okay, that's it; I'll
never forgive him."
Would you do it again?
>> NADER: Well, you see, that's a
terrible subservience to a two
party tyranny.
They're not thinking clearly
about the necessity for equal
access to the ballet, more
choice to the voters, and let
the best prevail.
>> HINOJOSA: Is that going to
happen in our country?
I mean...
>> NADER: Oh, sure, it could.
It's very easy.
I wrote a book including... Only
the Super-Rich Can Save Us,
that talks about the Clean
Elections Party.
>> HINOJOSA: A small book of 700
and how many pages?
>> NADER: 700 pages, but it's big print
and it's fiction, so it has a
real gripping, exciting
narrative.
Lesley Stahl read this on her
vacation and wrote me a nice
letter.
She said she found it
engrossing, creative, and funny.
I said, "I'll take all three."
( laughing )
>> HINOJOSA: But you're all
about grassroots and every
citizen can change, and...
>> NADER: Yeah.
>> HINOJOSA: So isn't this kind
of saying, "Wait a second.
So we can't depend on the
grassroots.
Now we have to depend on these
ultra, ultra, ultra rich who may
have their own baggage," but
they're the ones who are going
to actually make our country
better, or our world better?
>> NADER: Yeah, I selected them because
they're enlightened, in advanced
stage, had a different
perspective on life, and had a
lot... were willing to put
billions of dollars into
mobilizing the grassroots.
So it's the top down, bottom up.
Justice requires money.
It requires money for lawyers,
for organizers in the
communities.
It requires money for
transportation.
It requires money to constantly
reach people directly.
And people don't understand.
The abolition of slavery
movement?
A lot of it was funded by proper
Bostonians in the 19th Century.
The Civil Right movement?
Try the Curry family and the
Stern family in the 1950s and
1960s.
They poured a lot of money.
I mean, these people didn't go
south, you know, by hitchhiking
and the freedom rides and so
forth.
NAACP was supported by rich
people, so we...
>> HINOJOSA: So this notion that
if you're wealthy or you've made
money, therefore you're aligned
with corporate interests and you
are therefore bad, you're
basically saying, "No, it
doesn't have to look that way."
>> NADER: 99%, you're right, but never
do 100% stereotype, because all
you need is one percent.
These 17... in every page, once
you accept that you have these
influential-- who get their
calls returned-- 17 people,
super-rich, older age,
enlightened Americans, they put
up and raise $15 billion and
they turn the country around
from the grassroots all the way
to Washington.
So every page could happen, once
you accept that predicate.
Warren Beatty thinks it'll make
a good movie.
By the way, I have him in there
running against Schwarzenegger.
All this occurs in 2006.
>> HINOJOSA: So are you hopeful,
Ralph?
I mean, you've been at this for,
what?
You're 75 years old now.
You've been basically... Todd
Purdum from the New York Times
said your public life has been
one long, unyielding argument
with the world.
So...
>> NADER: Look, I'm...
>> HINOJOSA: ...are we making
progress here?
>> NADER: Yeah, sure, we're making
progress, but...
>> HINOJOSA: Or are we three
steps forward, two steps back?
>> NADER: Both.
You know, cars are safer, for
example.
We have a great Freedom of
Information Act to get
information, which is the
currency of democracy.
But on the other hand, the
corporations have become fewer
and bigger.
The bigger ones are fewer, they
merge, they're global, they pit
one country against another,
they control these trade
agreements, and they never stop
concentrating power.
They have to, to get their way,
control government.
They have to.
There isn't a single government
agency and department where the
outside influence is
overwhelmingly corporate.
>> HINOJOSA: So how do we... how
do we... so how do normal
citizens-- small, regular
citizens-- when you're saying
it's so massive, their level of
influence...
>> NADER: Simple.
Corporations have no vote-- the
people have the vote.
The biggest...
>> HINOJOSA: But you're also
saying that the vote in the
United States isn't actually a
just vote because we're voting
for the Electoral College.
>> NADER: Right.
That has to be repealed, of
course.
But let's start with congress.
Congress is the most important
branch in government.
It controls, you know, the war
part, the money part, the
appropriations part, health and
safety, general welfare.
There are only four... 535 men
and women.
They put their shoes on like you
and I do.
1,500 corporations who don't
have a single vote get their way
with the majority of these again
and again.
Where are we back home?
Why don't we organize back home?
If in any every congressional
district 2,000 people out of
630,000 in each congressional--
and there are colleges and
community colleges in every
district-- if they would form a
strong congress watchdog
group and they would fund two
full-time offices and two
full-time people and they would
devote 200 hours per person a
year, volunteer to establish
major redirections, living wage,
health insurance, prison reform,
tax reform, electoral reform,
corporate crime crackdown, on
and on, it would happen.
There's nothing out there except
a few single-interest groups--
NRA, pro-life, pro-choice--
there's nothing out there except
corporation.
Auto dealers are out there
organized, insurance agents are
out there organized, connected
to Washington and their patron
companies.
So the biggest secret of
democracy is not just that it
can work, it's that it doesn't
take that much effort by a small
number of organized people who
reflect broad public sentiments.
Who reflect broad public
sentiments.
It may be passive in a lot of
people, but that's what I did
with the auto safety.
>> HINOJOSA: Okay, but I'm sure
that people are watching this
and they're saying, "Well, Ralph
Nader, we actually saw that in
this country with the election
of President Barack Obama.
There was a movement that wanted
change, and some people might
say this was, you know, a
hopeful change.
It actually brought in a change.
>> NADER: Yeah.
>> HINOJOSA: You're incredibly
frustrated by President Obama.
>> NADER: Well, first of all, he has no
organized base.
I mean, he got a lot of small
contributions, but he also
raised, more than any
presidential candidate in
history, Wall Street money,
corporate money, corporate law
firm money.
So he sails into office not from
a mass movement-- I mean, he got
a lot of votes, but that's
different from a mass movement
like the Farmer Progressive
Movement at the turn of the 19th
and 20th Century.
I mean, they... the candidates
came out of them.
They became state legislators,
governors, senators, and so
forth.
They knew where they were coming
from.
He sort of had an electronic
victory.
You know, the Internet and all
that.
He didn't campaign much in poor
areas at all, hardly mentioned
the poor.
Said he was going to expand the
war in Afghanistan, said he was
against single-payer full
Medicare for all.
So he warned us that he was very
much a corporate democrat, and
why did all these corporations
put so much money into him?
Because they knew he was their
man.
So I'm not surprised.
What I am disappointed in is his
extraordinary belligerence
overseas.
He's Bush Light-- meaning his
rhetoric is better.
But he's made some... many of
the same claims, the same
national security state, going
anywhere, never mind
international law, et cetera.
And the second... I mean, he's
into Pakistan now.
I mean, when... you know,
congress is supposed to
declare these wars.
And the second is too
concessionary to big business.
He's had personal invitation.
Six times the head of Aetna
Insurance, six times the head of
Pfizer Drug, have met with him
in the White House.
He's never called out to us.
>> HINOJOSA: Has he called out
to you?
>> NADER: Never once.
Doesn't answer the letters.
One of his best friends, Dr.
Quentin Young, 85 years old, in
Chicago, the leader of the
single payer movement, wonderful
doctor who he used to spend
quite a bit of time with, he
never invites him for
consultation.
The head of Aetna, the source of
the problems?
He is conflict averse.
>> HINOJOSA: So what do American
citizens... what do we do, then?
Because, you know, there are a
lot of people who are saying,
"Well, wait a second.
We thought that change was on
the way."
Obviously some people are
saying, "Wait a second.
We don't see the change coming.
Now I feel entirely frustrated,
and I feel so frustrated that
I'm entirely apathetic, and I
don't want to do anything."
>> NADER: Well, that's exactly what the
power structure wants you to do.
In other words, wants you to
quit, to withdraw.
And of course, that is not
acceptable, right, if you care
for your descendants and your
children and your country and
your world?
I mean, where's the courage
here?
Where's the guts?
Is it just on the sports field
or in the battle arena?
How about civic courage?
How about moral courage?
How about your own self respect?
You know that if you're going to
a destination and it's going to
take 500 steps, do you say to
yourself, "Oh, it's going to
take 500 steps-- I'm not going
to take the first step, the
second step"?
There are all kinds of wonderful
citizen groups in this country
who want you to join.
Civil liberty groups,
environment, labor, migrant
reform, all these things.
But people give up on
themselves.
And the moment they give up on
themselves, the country's on the
way into the pits.
Because they're the only ones
who can hold the reins of the
power brokers.
>> HINOJOSA: There's something
that... you once were asked a
question about optimism and
pessimism, and you said
something like, "You know what?
I'm neither optimistic or
pessimistic.
I don't really, you know, work
in the field of emotions."
>> NADER: Yeah.
>> HINOJOSA: Well, but most
people do actually get sad, or
they feel inspired, or they
don't.
But, you know, when they get
into a place of entire
frustration, and you're just
saying, "Look, I'm just not
emotional, I'm not going to..."
well, what do you say to people
who are, in fact?
>> NADER: Well, you have to control
your moods, because otherwise
you become discouraged, you
know, you want to drop out.
That doesn't work.
Corporations work 24 hours a
day.
You keep that in mind, and you
see how they're grinding workers
under.
I mean, look at the ridiculous
wage at most... you know, one
out of every three workers
making Wal-Mart, $7.50, eight,
nine, ten dollars an hour.
They're grinding other
consumers.
They've got you right by the
neck.
Your credit score, your credit
rating, they've got you in debt.
You know, they control so much.
They're even now planning your
genetic future, your political
future, your military budget
future.
And so that ought to get you
angry.
That shouldn't say, "Oh, I'm
going to give up."
It's amazing.
For every million people who
don't give up on their sports
team, even though their sports
team's got a losing record, why
do they give up on themselves,
if only for their children?
We have to have this kind of
agitational dialogue with one
another, instead of these
insipid, you know, text
messages.
I had a teenager tell me the
other day she did 300 text
messages in one day.
I said, "Well, tell me, Phyllis,
what's the urgency of the
communication here?"
>> HINOJOSA: Yeah, what are you
talking about that's so
important?
>> NADER: The trivialization in these
electronic gadgets... that's
why, you know, when you go to
citizen meetings around the
country, there's hardly anybody
under 40.
I mean, they're all elderly
people.
Because they grow up with these
electronic gadgets, virtual
reality, looking at screens.
You know a ten-year-old now, the
average ten-year-old is watching
screens seven and a half hours a
day.
That's the latest report.
>> HINOJOSA: It feels a little
bit like 1984, you know?
Kind of like, "Okay, now you're
all controlled, you're
programmed."
>> NADER: Yeah.
>> HINOJOSA: And then people are
going to say, "No, that just
sounds really, really strange.
We're just regular folks trying
to figure this out."
I mean, big conspiracy here,
or... on the part of
corporations to...
>> NADER: Corporations, they just want
to sell you stuff-- junk food,
junk this, junk that, violent
programming to the kids,
undermining parental authority.
Parents are going up the wall.
I mean, their kids are being
marketed right out of their
control.
>> HINOJOSA: And so a parent
should do what at that moment?
>> NADER: Just take control.
I mean, put that TV aside, you
know, put that iPod aside, don't
even buy them that stuff.
Get them to read, to think, to
converse, to connect with their
own peer group on a wholesome
level, to exercise their bodies.
Look at the obesity, child
obesity.
It's because of A, junk food,
and B, they're sitting hour
after hour looking at screens.
>> HINOJOSA: But the way you
paint it it's almost as if, you
know, this country is going down
the tubes, Ralph Nader.
>> NADER: It is going down the tubes.
I mean, the highest average wage
in the country's history is
1973.
See, right there, poverty's
increasing, child poverty is
increasing.
>> HINOJOSA: So what's the
motivation on the part of
corporations to take this
country down the tubes?
Then they don't have anybody to
actually buy their products.
>> NADER: Well, that may occur
increasingly.
But as long as they can ship
jobs and industries to communist
and fascist regimes like China
at 50 cents an hour, where they
know how to keep workers in
their place, and then ship the
products back here, that's what
they like.
Someday there's going to be less
and less purchasers here.
On the other hand, there'll be
more purchasers in China.
These corporations are extremely
expedient.
They have no allegiance to our
country, even though they were
born in the USA, they profit on
the backs of USA workers,
they're bailed out by Washington
when they're in trouble,
defended by the Marines abroad
when they get in trouble with
dictatorships and so on.
And they still don't have any
allegiance to this country.
They just go where the serf
labor is, where they can pollute
the easiest, get away from not
paying taxes, bribe officials.
This country starts with the
Constitution, "We the people."
We the people have to get
together.
We've got to stop making excuses
for ourselves, copping out, you
know, rationalizing our own
futility.
Look at our forbearers at their
best.
Did they cop out?
I mean, look what they did--
slavery, women's rights, civil
rights, workers, farmers.
We've got to... and it's
exciting, too.
People live such dreary lives
because they're so desperately
trying to pay, you know three
months ago's bill, and the rent.
And this excites people.
And you can see that
particularly among women civic
leaders, who come up from very
poor areas-- black American
women, Hispanic American women.
You don't think their lives are
enriched when they go against
injustice?
I mean, it's a whole new
lifestyle.
And there's nothing more
gratifying than advancing
justice for your fellow human
being.
>> HINOJOSA: And on that note,
get out there an act, everyone.
Thank you so much for your
words, Ralph Nader.
A real pleasure.
>> NADER: Thank you.
Essential.org is our Web site.
>> HINOJOSA: We'll go.
Thank you.
>> NADER: Okay.
>> HINOJOSA: Continue the
conversation at:
Captioned by
Media Access Group at WGBH
access.wgbh.org
Share
Embed
Transcript
Podcasts
