State of the Union: Interview With Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

We don't know.

But what we do know is, since the Dobbs decision, this court has had an all-out assault on women's reproductive freedom, starting with that decision that takes away the right to privacy. And what we are seeing in these Republican legislatures, as well as these very conservative courts, is a continuation of that assault.

So to take away the right to have medicine is an extension of taking away this right to privacy. To say we can't have medicine sent by doctors by mail to people across the country is further invading into this right to privacy, where the court and government has a right to what's in your mail, and who you're talking to, and what communications you're having. It's an outrage.

And so we will fight in every respect we can. We will file lawsuits. We will continue to appeal this kind of decision. We will also continue to fight state by state to codify Roe in state law. And we have had many ballot initiatives, even in red places like Kansas and Montana, where we have been successful.

The American people believe that we have this right to privacy. And people believe that women have reproductive freedom. And so if they want to guarantee it, they're going to have to fight for it, and we're going to eventually have to codify it.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

It's hard to ignore the rule of law. And we have a court system and an appeals system for a reason.

So I think the Biden administration is correct in actually fighting this in the Supreme Court. Whether we win or not in the Supreme Court doesn't mean that's our last effort. We will go state by state to guarantee reproductive freedom.

But I think the national conversation we have to have is this right to privacy.

When you take away 50 percent of America's right to privacy, to say women don't have it during their reproductive years, it is such an overstretch and an outrageous statement that I think, when people wake up to the reality of what this means for a conservative court where they believe they should impose their views of the world, their religious beliefs, their views on health care, on the FDA's decision of 20 years ago of a drug that has been deemed very safe?

You have more likely of being risk your health from taking Tylenol than mifepristone. That is a fact. And so where we are today is an outrage and such an overreach by courts that we, as people, need to fight back. We also need to flip the House, and we need to codify Roe.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

They may. And this may be a tactic that they will pursue, but these -- access to medicine is lifesaving.

And, as you said in your opening, this medicine is used for many, many indications for women, in menopause, for miscarriages. Courts and judges should not be imposing their religious beliefs on the FDA and our scientific review of what medicines are health -- are healthy for patients.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Well, we're going to do a full investigation.

And the Intelligence Committee is also going to have a thorough investigation. We focused intensely on how we keep our secrets safe. And I have a lot of questions about, why were these documents lying around? Why did this particular person have access to them? Where was the custody of the documents and who were they for?

Those are important questions we can ask in the Intelligence Committee so that we can have stronger oversight.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Those are the type of questions we're going to ask in a hearing. We're going to have an all-senators briefing this week. But we will also be having hearings in the Intelligence Committee and in the Armed Services Committee.

We need to know the facts. We need to know who this airman was, why he felt he had the authority or ability to show off confidential documents, secret documents to his friends. It sounds like he was extremely immature and someone who did not understand the weight and the importance of these documents. And so we need to figure it out and put proper protections in place.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Well, I will be having a hearing on all of the unidentified aerial phenomenon this coming week.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

And one of the things...

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Absolutely.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

I created, along with Senator Warner and Senator Rubio and Senator Heinrich and some others, an office within the DOD and the Intelligence Committee specifically to review every unidentified aerial phenomenon that the military has access to.

And we have the most intense -- intensely specific technology that can video different aerial phenomenon, that can get radar, heat sensing through our aircraft, through other radar detection. And so we set up this office two years ago.

And, during that two years, they have reviewed over 300 different evidence of aerial phenomenon. About half of them were deemed to be weather balloons, this type of balloon technology, perhaps detection devices. About two dozen were deemed to be drones. A handful were debris or birds.

And there was still 171 that they have not assessed what it is. And so this work has to be done. If we're going to have domain awareness, if we're going to have aerial dominance, if we want to make sure that our adversaries aren't spying on us, or using new technologies, or have aircraft that we don't even know how it functions or how fast it is or how effective it is, that is a national security risk.

And so knowing what these aircraft are is essential. And the military, unfortunately, just hasn't been doing that work. They have just assumed they are nonadversarial because of how they fly or how they function. But I think knowing whether you are being spied on through different kinds of technology is essential to our national security.

So this office is up and running. I'm working with colleagues to make sure it's fully funded. We're pushing the Biden administration and the military to ask for full funding this year. And I think it's vital.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

That is not what it will do.

It will cut four million children and five million adults off from the food assistance that they need. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program works. It keeps people from starving or having terrible health outcomes.

Most of the people on SNAP are kids, and many of the adults on SNAP are veterans. A lot of our veterans are food-insecure. Older people are often food-insecure. People with disabilities are food-insecure. We are the richest nation in the world. We should not be cutting a program that keeps our kids from going hungry and being able to focus in school.

It's a priority. And I think the attacks by the Republicans are cynical, and they're just trying to save money, so they can balance the budget off the backs of low-income people who desperately need food for their families.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Dianne Feinstein is an extraordinary senator, and she's been a role model and a mentor to me my entire career.

I sit with her on the Intelligence Committee. She asks some of the most searing, pointed questions of anyone on that committee. Her legacy and her depth of experience is valuable. And we have had so many senators who have had illnesses, whether it's Mitch McConnell's illnesses, or senators who have had strokes.

These are issues that -- we're human. And we believe that a senator should be able to make their own judgments about when they're retiring and when they're not. And they all deserve a chance to get better and come back to work. Dianne will get better. She will come back to work.

And she's already told Senator Schumer that she can replace -- that he can replace her on the Judiciary Committee if it's urgent for these hearings for judges. She's a team player, and she's an extraordinary member of the Senate. It's her right. She's been voted by her state to be senator for six years. She has the right, in my opinion, to decide when she steps down.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Thanks, Jake.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source