December 5, 2025 • 40 mins
Todd breaks down the high-stakes redistricting battle in Indiana and why it could decide control of Congress for the rest of the Trump administration. He’s joined by special guest Paul Lagemann, State Advocacy Manager for Heritage Action, to explain how mid-decade redistricting works, why Democrats are crying “unfair,” and what “honest” map-drawing really looks like. They dig into the history of gerrymandering, the impact of counting non-citizens in the census, and the pressure campaign on key Indiana senators ahead of Monday’s vote. Todd also highlights how Hoosiers can engage their legislators without joining the left’s screaming matches. Plus, hear from our partners in biblically aligned investing, natural wellness, and advanced wealth planning.
48 Financial – https://48financial.com/todd
Christopher’s Organic Botanicals – https://christophersorganicbotanicals.com
Full Suite Wealth – https://fullsuitewealth.com
48 Financial – https://48financial.com/todd
Christopher’s Organic Botanicals – https://christophersorganicbotanicals.com
Full Suite Wealth – https://fullsuitewealth.com
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Attention. You're listening to the Todd Huff Show, America's home
for conservative not bitter talk and education. Be advised. The
content of this program has been talking about it two
prevents and even cure liberalism, and listening may cause you
to lean to the right. And now, coming to you
(00:28):
from the full suite Wealth Studios, here is your conservative
but not bitter host Todd Huff.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
Well, my friends, we are down to the nitty gritty,
the final stretcher as Indiana has this fight come to
a conclusion between now and Monday on this redistricting fight,
which is critically important. Listen, I know for those of
you that are not in Indiana, this may seem like
all that matters is Indiana this week, and I know
(00:56):
it matters because it's my state. But listen, this has
nash implications. We've talked about this, we'll get into this today.
In fact, I've got a special guest who's going to
be joining us here in a minute from Heritage Action,
and we'll introduce him here in just a moment. My friends,
But this battle impacts Congress, this battle impacts the fight
(01:17):
that we're in, and we're in a cold civil war.
Make no mistake about it for political control and victory
in this country, and we've got to beat back these
radical leftists. And it starts in Indiana with this fight
over redistricting. So we'll get to that in just a moment, friends,
But you know, one of the biggest challenges that we
as conservatives have is finding ways to ensure our values
(01:38):
align with the way that we live our lives. Where
you know, the job that we have uh whether or
not the places that we do business with are supporting
conservative principles or they're empowering radical leftists. And that also
includes the way that we invest our money. That's why
I love what four eight financial is doing. They specialize
in biblically responsible invest and that means that they go
(02:02):
to find companies the level that those companies align with
your faith and your values. They do all this heavy
lifting for you. All you have to do is complete
a short assessment.
Speaker 3 (02:13):
I did it.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
You can as well visit for eightfinancial dot com slash
todd to take that quick and easy assessment for eight
financial dot com slash todd. Because your money should work for,
not against, your values. All Right, that being said, my friends,
I'd like to welcome to the program today a special
guest from Heritage Action. His name is Paul Logoman. He
(02:36):
is the state advocacy manager for Heritage Action. Paul, Welcome
to the program today.
Speaker 4 (02:42):
How are you, Todd. It is great to be on
the program. It's a beautiful morning in Indiana. As I'm
en rude to the State House, we have a huge
event that we're partnering with, Turning Points on And when
we talk about Arning Point, not only can we talk
about the organization, but hopefully we can talk about the
(03:06):
position that we are all in in Indiana as we
are very very close to seeing a mid mid decade
redistricting happen. So this is pretty exciting times. And and
this isn't just about Indiana, as you mentioned, this is
about keeping Congress read and not seeing that change over
(03:32):
as we as we wrap up the last two years
of the Trump administration.
Speaker 2 (03:37):
That's right, that has unbelievable ramifications. If Democrats get in control,
of course, we know we'll see law fair, we'll see
the weaponization of government and all sorts of crazy radical
ideas that the end of.
Speaker 3 (03:48):
Trump's agenda and all of that.
Speaker 2 (03:50):
But I want to stop and spend a little time
talking about this as I just listened to what you
say here. I think it's a great thing, Paul, to
hear heritage and turning point partnering one of the things.
I've been doing this for ten years, and I think
a lot of times we kind of get, even well
meaning conservative groups, we get into our own little lanes
(04:11):
and little bubbles, and sometimes we're not working together as
we should. So I want to commend you for that,
maybe talk a little bit about that partnership and why
this matters so much.
Speaker 4 (04:22):
Sure, and we're gonna I hate to diverge too much
from the registrict and conversation, but I got to tell
you the story because I think it really is relevant.
Just a few months ago, we're all in you know,
our staff team is in Washington, and you know we're
working through staff issues, we're doing planning for the legislative
(04:44):
sessions that are coming up in January across the country
and working through all that, and we had the horrible
news about Charlie Kirk. And I can tell you if
the entire building shut down, we stopped everything collect in
our groups, collectively as a building of you know, three
hundred and some PhDs and lawyers and lobbyists and all
(05:10):
the rest of us. We prayed and and I'll tell
you the difference between that kind of workspace and a
corporate workspace you just can't compare it. And and I
you know, since then, I've always I've been a fan
of Charlie's work. I love to listen to him and
hear how he spoke the kids on campuses. Uh, So
(05:32):
it was it was heartbreaking for me, just really from Afar.
We had a lot of folks who were really close
to him, who knew him, you know, personally, very directly,
and to see kind of how the building as a whole,
the whole enterprise was affected and how we responded was
was really special to me. And it really reinforced I'm
(05:55):
in the right place at the right time. So I
had to start there when we talk about Turning Point.
And it certainly makes this relationship, to this level of
engagement with Turning Point all the more important because that legacy,
that Charlie Kirk legacy is absolutely critical to carry on.
(06:17):
We've got to have that honest, engaging dialogue with folks
of all ages and and I'm excited to be at
the State House with the Turning Point folks today because
I know there's going to be hundreds of students there.
I think it's going to be a great rally and
to really begin to talk, you know, and have Heritage
(06:39):
be part of that dialogue with you know, young people
who are in college and or younger or just a
little out of college, I think it's a I think
it's a really cool step in the right direction for Heritage,
and I am so excited that our senior leadership was
really focused on making this happen.
Speaker 2 (07:02):
Well, I've been a fan of your work of the
Heritage Foundation, of course Heritage Action the other I guess
sister organization there as well. It's you guys do very
important work and I commend you for what you're doing.
Let's talk a little bit about what's happening at the
state House today. I'll be speaking their Governor Brawn, I'll
be speaking their Lieutenant Governor Micah Beck, with Todd Rokeda speaking.
(07:25):
I'm forgetting somebody there's a state representative. I don't have
to listen in front of me. But the bottom line
is you mentioned having a conversation, how Charlie Kirk was
doing that with students, Engaging with students who sometimes didn't
know what they thought, sometimes who had really really bad ideas.
Sometimes these kids had it together and had it figured
out and just wanted to exchange some ideas and thoughts
(07:46):
with Charlie and all that. The need for conversation about
this is critical, and it's hard. It's hard to have
that conversation, Paul, because there's so much screaming. In fact,
as we fill that rotunda today at the State House,
as I prepared my remarks, I've thought about all the
yelling and the channing and the anger and the rage
that's been in there this week from the other side.
(08:08):
And they're free to do that. Don't misunderstand me, but man,
it is really hard to communicate the rationale and the
reasons for wanting to support this because they simply they
don't want to hear it. They don't want to engage
in that conversation. So in the event that you do
get someone who is just legitimately they don't know where
they stand on this issue of redistricting, or maybe they're
(08:30):
even against it, but they're they're open to at least
hearing you out. What do you say to them, are
the reasons that you're in favor of Indiana redistricting.
Speaker 4 (08:39):
Well, it's interesting you ask that, because usually the conversation
begins one of a couple of ways, but most often
it begins with the concerns that people have about redistricting.
And and by the way, I you know, the issue
of civil discourse today, I mean it is it's so critical.
(09:03):
And to be able to do this and to have
you participate in this and to have the kinds of
conversations that you have on your show, I just I
have to commend you for it, because I think it
just it's too infrequent and uh, you know, there's too
much you know, as you've mentioned, yelling and screaming and noise,
and the the marketplace of ideas you know needs, uh
(09:27):
needs more folks like you to really get them out.
So so thanks for what you do. So really it
comes around a couple of ways. And so some of
the questions that I've been asked is, Okay, so Texas
kicks this off, why should Indiana, you know, be part
of this fight? You know, Texas picked the fight. California responded,
(09:49):
why should Indiana get involved? And and so so my
response to that is, well that that's not exactly true.
So when you look at kind of how the Democratic
Party over the decades has handled handled redistricting and handled
drawing these lines. It goes back to Elbridge Jerry. Okay,
(10:12):
so all the way back to UH twelve to eighteen,
eighteen ten, eighteen twelve. Right, well, and he's governor between
eighteen ten and eighteen twelve in Massachusetts, and a governor
as the UH as a member of the Democratic Republicans. Okay.
So by the time you get to the eighteen twenties,
(10:33):
late eighteen twenties, they lost the Republican part of the
Democratic Republicans. But that is the legacy and the direct
lineage of the Democratic Party. So they wrote the book
on this literally, in fact, they got the name. They
were named for writing the book on this. So these
the redistricting in places like Massachusetts, which I think is
(10:55):
a textbook, right, it is textbook for a nine zero
a series of congressional seats, right, all Democrats, no Republicans.
And if you look at Massachusetts, the numbers aren't that
different from Indiana in terms of you know, hey, how
(11:15):
many Democrats do we have in any anniverses? How many
Republicans do they have in Massachusetts? It's about the same.
And right now we're at seven to two and they're
at nine. Oh, so this isn't as if you know
we have we've done something that is all that different
from the you know, from one hundred years of more
than one hundred years of democratic legacy.
Speaker 2 (11:37):
Well let me let me jump in here real fast. So,
so jerry mandering, which is what you're you're referencing here,
going back to the eighteen tens, eighteen twelve. I remember
I studied political science at Butler years ago, and jerry
mandering when I was there meant a deliberate attempt where
you went way out of your way to draw some
(11:59):
odd shap apes. And I believe that district in Massachusetts
was referred to a gerrymander because it resembled a salamander
or some such thing.
Speaker 4 (12:06):
And that's correct.
Speaker 2 (12:09):
But it doesn't mean to make a decision where I
draw the line, like I still have to decide as
a state legislature where the lines are drawn. And just
because I put them in a place that is maybe
politically advantageous for me, that that doesn't That is just
part of the political process, Paul. This is this is
(12:31):
baked into it. If you don't like the maps. You
can hold your state legislature responsible, but it is the
prerogative of the state legislature to put these lines where
they think they should be.
Speaker 3 (12:42):
I mean, tell me talk about that.
Speaker 4 (12:44):
Yes, and that is absolutely right, and that is exactly
how Representative Ben Smaltz spoke about this. He is the
author of HB ten thirty two, which is the redistricting
build that contains all the maps, and he was very
clear about it. He said, these, you know, we made
these decisions strictly on a political basis. And you know,
(13:08):
the only things that we took into consideration were the
geography and the politics. Those are the only two things
we took into consideration. And so, as he laid it out, yes,
that is a political these this is a purely political
process with the with the intent of gaining political seats, right, yes,
(13:30):
and so this isn't this is not And he didn't
sugarcoat it. He didn't say we're trying to be fair.
He just said we're trying to win. And the reason
I bring up Albert Jerry, you know, back all the
way to eighteen ten to eighteen twelve, is because they've
been doing it since then. Okay, And so the other
the other issue that I hear, or the other question
(13:52):
that I hear is what about the fairness? You know?
And so the other side is saying, hey, you're cheating.
And what I want to say about Indiana specifically is
in Texas for that better. Neither in Indiana, North Texas,
nor Missouri, nor North Carolina had to alter their process
(14:12):
in any substantial way. They didn't have to change their constitution.
They didn't have to, you know, completely alter their process
and system. But both Virginia and California did, right, So
Virginia's in the front end of this. California has already
done it. Both of them have to have a California
(14:34):
had it, Virginia has to have it referendum to alter
their constitution to get rid of their independent Redistricting Commission
and eliminate that and shift to a political process. Right.
And so when people say, hey, you know, you're cheating,
you're breaking the rules, you know, my answer is, look,
(14:56):
this is a fight for Congress. It's a fight for
the for control of the next two years in in
our legislative body, and the fight for the House. So yes,
this is a political process. But when you say, hey,
did you cheat are you cheating to get this done? No,
(15:17):
And in fact, we are working completely within the existing
laws of the state of Indiana, as it did Texas,
as it did in Missouri, as it did in North Carolina.
And on the other side, they have to alter their
constitutions for goodness sakes to make it work. They're breaking
their own rules. And so if there's any cheating going on,
it's not on our side of the aisle. So I
(15:39):
don't think it's cheating. I don't think it's unfair. I
think it is I think it reflects the people of
the of our Hoosier state. Right. And so if you
look across the state, you say, Okay, you know every
elected statewide official is Republican. You've got, you know, massive
supermajorities in the House and even more massive than the Senate. Right,
(16:03):
You've got almost every county organization, almost every county council,
county commission is Republican in the state of Indiana. And
yet we say it's only fair if we have seven
Republican congressmen and two Democrat congressmen. It doesn't make any sense. Well,
(16:24):
let's talk about doesn't reflect the nature of the state.
Speaker 2 (16:26):
Let's talk about fair I tell my kids, by the way,
not to use the four letter F word fair because
it is such. And listen, I'm a guy that appreciates
what I would call justice. We need to seek that.
But what is fair that this drives me absolutely bonkers?
What is it that's fair? I've seen these leftists, I've
seen them on social media come after me wanting to
(16:48):
say Indiana's sixty Republican or sixty percent Trump support, forty
percent Democrat, whatever. So there should be if we had
ten districts, it should be six to four.
Speaker 3 (16:58):
Like, who comes up with this? Thinking?
Speaker 4 (17:00):
This is not the word that works.
Speaker 2 (17:03):
I did some research in the nineteen sixty In nineteen sixty,
the World Series was between the Pittsburgh Pirates and the
I think the New York Yankees and the New York
Yankees lost the series four to three, but they scored
twice as many runs as the Pittsburgh Pirates. To me,
this is exactly the point. We're not looking at the
World Series champion to say who had the most runs
(17:25):
over seven games. You have to win individual games, just
like you have to win individual districts. This stuff, to
me is so cut and dry, black and white. But
talk about fairness. What does that even mean in this
practical sense that the Democrats get two seats? Who says,
so why do they have the right to those? How
do we even know how people are going to vote?
I mean they can run people in all nine districts, Paul,
(17:46):
And if they changed their ideas a little bit and
not embrace this radical left bull craft we've been dealing with,
then maybe they could win some of these races. So
what does that all mean?
Speaker 3 (17:56):
To begin with? What is fair? This stuff is mind
boggling to me.
Speaker 4 (18:01):
Yes, and I really appreciate that. And I think that
the key word here isn't fairness, It is honesty. And
I can tell you when I sat through you know,
literally hours of committee hearing on Tuesday, it was it
was all about honesty and there was no bones about it.
(18:24):
Representative Small says, these are political decisions. We've based it
purely on that. We you know, the idea is to
get more to you know, to get more runs than
our opponent, right, I mean, we're in a head to
head fight here to get more districts than our opponent.
And that's how we've designed it. We're in power, we
have the opportunity to do it, and you know the
(18:48):
nation is in balance, right, that's just about Hoosiers. It's
about a bigger picture. And you know, so I think
the way Indiana's handled this this, you know this pretty
direct honesty. Even the the the ranking member on the
Democrats side on the Elections and Reapportionment Committee on Tuesday,
(19:09):
you know, said to Representative Smalls, I appreciate you being
purely honest about what's trying to do. And I think
that's that's the right thing. I think that's exactly how
we should We shouldn't veil it in anything other than
what it is exactly, which is this is a fight
for our nation and we intend to win. But yeah,
and here's how we're going to do it.
Speaker 3 (19:30):
We came to the current maps in the same way.
Speaker 2 (19:33):
I mean, you know, there might have been a difference
give and take EBB and flow there, but it's the
same stinking thing that said, well, we think Democrats should
have should be I guess competitive in these two districts.
I mean, I don't even It's just mind boggling to me,
especially when you factor Paul things like how illegal immigration
affects the census. I mean, you know that Biden's administration.
Speaker 3 (19:56):
They counted.
Speaker 2 (19:58):
Illegal aliens in the census, and they allocate federal funds
and they allocate representation to states based upon those tallies. Like,
I mean, we know that that's impacted it. And I've
seen some that said that it's multiple districts that have
been assigned and those are also those translate into electoral votes.
I mean, this is a massive problem and it's diluting
(20:19):
the voice of Hoosiers.
Speaker 3 (20:20):
Talk about that.
Speaker 4 (20:22):
Absolutely. And I have got to make a shameless plug
for a piece of model legislation that we're introducing in
Indiana and probably about fifteen other states and I'm so
excited about. And it is state redistricting. And in the
state Redistricting model bill, you don't count folks who aren't eligible.
You don't count non citizens. If you're not eligible to
(20:45):
vote as a citizen, you're not counted. Okay. That will
change lines, and it even could potentially have an impact
of reducing the number of elect of congressional districts in state,
So there could be some negative impact to it. It's
an honest response, you know, to a dishonest problem. And
(21:05):
the right now as we say, okay, it's got to
be you know, one hundred or seven hundred and ninety thousand,
you know per congressional district, which is the right number.
You know, as we look at each congressional district, then
you know how we count that number of people just
includes all the people that are there. It doesn't matter
(21:27):
if they're citizens, if they're eligible, it was a citizen
devote or not. And so that is problematic and that's
why we at Heritage have come up with an alternative. Now,
it can be kind of expensive for states.
Speaker 2 (21:40):
Yes, sorry, let's pick up there. I'm getting to the
end of my segment. I'm sorry, let's pick up there.
Let's talk about this on the other side of the
break before I take that break out. My friends, Let's
face it, living with discomfort can be tough, and prescription
medications can help you. Sometimes those often come with a
long list of side effects, not to mention the risk
of dependency.
Speaker 3 (22:01):
That's why a lot.
Speaker 2 (22:02):
Of people are exploring natural options like Creative. Now, I
know Creative has a bad reputation out there, but that's
because of the synthetic jump junk that has chemicals that's
not managed the right way.
Speaker 3 (22:15):
You can work with.
Speaker 2 (22:16):
Christopher's organic botanicals you can get a work with a
family run company that does things the right way. They
work directly with Indonesian farmers. They lab test every batch
to make sure that you're getting a product that is
good and properly handled.
Speaker 3 (22:32):
My friends.
Speaker 2 (22:32):
So Christopher's Organic Botanicals keeps it real, they keep it clean,
they keep you informed. You can research it, and I
encourage you to research it. You can go to their
website or do it on your own. But Christopher's Organic
Botanicals dot com. If you decide that this is something
you want to give a try, start with the Kratim
starter pack.
Speaker 3 (22:50):
Use code tot huff. You'll save ten percent.
Speaker 2 (22:52):
Christopher's Organic Botanicals dot com. My friends, Truth, Transparency, tradition.
Time out for me. Be back in just a minute.
Welcome back, my friends. Been talking with Paul Logoman. He
is the state advocacy manager for Heritage Action.
Speaker 3 (23:12):
We're talking about redistricting.
Speaker 2 (23:14):
I ever so rudely interrupted Paul because I had to
cut it off there before so we could take that
time out. So Paul, I do apologize. Before the break,
you were talking a little bit about some things some
work you're doing in Indiana regarding just the way that
districts are drawn and encountered and so forth. Maybe pick
that up and set that up and explain what you're
(23:35):
working on there.
Speaker 4 (23:37):
Absolutely, and sorry for the long winded part of it,
but we get excited and these beautiful, semi sweet morsels
of conservatism are hard to let go even with breaks.
That's right. So the bill that Heritage is pushing around
the country and we're working on in a number of
about fifteen or sixteen state legislatures this year in the
(23:59):
coming year in the twenties cycle is is state sponsored census.
So it puts the state centers, puts the census in
the hands of the states so they can control that,
they can eliminate non citizens, uh and get an actual
honest count. And the one thing you do find is
particularly in urban areas, it will affect those spaces because
(24:23):
that's normally where you end up with, you know, more
folks that are here that don't have the ability to vote.
So you know, whether they're here legally as a non
citizen that can't vote, or illegally as a non citizen
that can't vote, they shouldn't be counted. You know, in
terms of what the design and what the size and
(24:44):
what the parameters are of a congressional district, a state
legislative district, a county council district, or any such thing.
So better census county is the goal.
Speaker 2 (24:54):
Yeah, and that sounds great, and that's there's some that
makes a lot of sense in certain ways.
Speaker 3 (25:00):
So would would the bill.
Speaker 2 (25:03):
Does the US is the federal government still? Would they
be conducting the US census overall? Would in this legislation?
Would states try to take that over completely?
Speaker 3 (25:14):
What what happened? How does that work?
Speaker 4 (25:16):
It wouldn't eliminate the federal census. The federal government has
the ability to do whatever they want, is what I thought.
I would do what they want to do. Right. However,
for the purpose of creating uh political subdivisions and districts. Uh,
it would it would use the state numbers as opposed.
Speaker 2 (25:34):
In federal Okay, So, so if a state had its
own number that differed from the federal government census numbers,
would that impact the number of congressional seats that would
be allocated?
Speaker 3 (25:49):
Or how does that come from the federal census?
Speaker 4 (25:53):
The number of seats probably can't change unless there is
a federal change, right, but it would certainly alter the
you know, the potential dimensions and the look and feel
of many of these congressional districts. And at that point,
(26:14):
really if we say, okay, well the Feds say we
have to have nine in Indiana, we just divide them up,
you know, based on legal citizens and you know, instead
of you know, seven hundred and ninety thousand, it might
be seven hundred and sixty thousand, you know, for each district.
But then that alters the way that this looks. Yatcha.
Speaker 2 (26:35):
Well, I've seen some testimony, ironically in Congress recently about
the census, and you know, sometimes you get in the
weeds on some of this stuff. But I got to
tell you, listening to the testimony of people that are
experts on.
Speaker 3 (26:49):
The census, and I'm it is mind boggling.
Speaker 2 (26:51):
I mean, they're basically admitting we're just guessing on numbers
in a lot of ways. I mean I saw a
panel of four or five people and they all basically said,
we don't know. At some point, there's algorithms and you know,
mathematical estimates, and you know, you factor in the illegal
alien count being in there, and it's a recipe for
(27:12):
this disaster.
Speaker 3 (27:13):
How did we get here, Paul? How do we get to.
Speaker 2 (27:15):
The point where we're defying all sorts of common sense
to avoid what's the obvious thing, which is you count citizens,
and if you don't count them, if they don't exist,
you don't just guess and make up a number. I mean,
how did we get to this point?
Speaker 4 (27:29):
Right? Well? And I have to admit I'm a states
government guy as opposed to a federal government guy. So
I have a I have a bias that I'm going
to disclose. You know, I think the states can do
this sort of thing better. I think the problem is
that we've handed this off to the federal government. We
have said to the states, you know so much for
(27:50):
you know, federalism and the being the patri dish of democracy.
You know, we're going to do it our way, says
the federal government. Right, and we end up with systems
that could be a lot better. The beauty of having
fifty states, you know, really kind of govern this process
and govern it and create it and improve it the
(28:14):
way that states do when when they're really free to
make policy decisions. I think you get a much better
product overall. And I think shifting and believing in federalism
and letting it work is definitely the way. And you know,
we argue, we have conversations about internally in the building
(28:34):
about sort of the state versus federal you know, the
pace of how work goes and that sort of thing.
When we talk to our analysts and the folks and
the foundation side who are really doing the deep thinking
about policy, you know, and we're saying, hey, we need this,
you know, literally tomorrow. You know, they don't even understand
it because they're so used to working with a facial
(28:56):
federal government. They don't understand the speed of states and
the engagement level in states. And you know, I really
firmly believe that this is where the action is and
this is where things are headed. And I think a
bill like this, you know, sort of begins to put
that pressure on the Feds and say, you know, and says, hey,
(29:16):
let lose that iron grip that you have on all
of these issues. Let the states do it better.
Speaker 2 (29:22):
So let's let's get returned specifically to where we are
in Indiana today with redistricting. Do you have a gauge
on where some of these senators stand. I know that
I spoke with Brett from Turning Point earlier this week.
He had a list of senators that we've think there
were eight or nine of them that he said, we're
(29:44):
on the fence that people should reach out.
Speaker 4 (29:45):
To and call.
Speaker 2 (29:47):
Do you have any gauge of where these senators are
as to where they're going to come down? Are there
people that can still be persuaded? What's your understanding of
what's going to happen next in the Senate?
Speaker 4 (29:57):
Well, I mean, I think the fact that the Senate
is having a you know, a special session at all
after voting on Organization Day not to do it, says
that they're moving in the right direction. Okay, so you know,
the the vote on organization Day was a surprise to everyone,
including the speaker it uh. I think it sort of
(30:19):
shocked the House that they that they did it. No
one really anticipated it, and and then all of a sudden,
you have this vote on whether or not to do
a special session, whether or not to dooper restricting. So
it was a surprise to everyone. So I think you
can somewhat discount that vote overall and look at where
the yes is and no's are. I think we're about five.
(30:39):
I think if we shift five votes, we went and
so that's that's about where we are. And I can
tell you, like in the conversations I've had with state
senators and state House members who are getting tons of
calls on this, you know, if it's coming from Peoria, Illinois,
or you know, or Kansas City or someplace like that,
(31:01):
they're pretty much disregarding it. If it's coming from within
their districts, they're not only taking the call, they're having
a real conversation. And you know, so we've said to
our team, you know, our sentinel base, the grassroots network
that we have across the state of Indiana and really
across the country, but specifically for our Indiana sentinels, you know,
we have said, hey, this is a polite conversation. You know,
(31:25):
they need to know that if they make the decision
for redistricting, that they're going to support them not only
in the primary, but in future races. That you know,
you're that this is a pivotal decision, and that you're
encouraging them, you know, and standing with them and making
the right call here as opposed to And I can
tell you a lot of the members have just gotten
you know, they've been sworn at, they've been yelled at,
(31:46):
they've been you know that stuff just isn't helpful, and
you know, civil discourse, right, and so I think you know,
we're about five offs in the Senate, as you know, Uh, yesterday,
you know, we moved off a second reading in the House.
You know, it came out of committee on Tuesday, second
reading yesterday, third readings today. It'll get voted on in
the House. Uh, presumably passed out the votes are there,
(32:10):
it'll go over to the Senate on Monday. We are
hearing that a hearing will happen Monday, so in the afternoon.
So it's it's gonna move quicker. And that's you know,
that's not even on the calendar yet. So but that's
what we're that's what we understand is it will be
a Monday afternoon hearing and a committee hearing, and so
(32:33):
this is gonna move pretty quickly. Potentially in the Senate.
I would have guessed, uh, you know, at the beginning
of the week it would have the same cadence as
his head as it's had in the House. That doesn't
seem to be true. They're they're moving it a little
bit quicker. So my sense is to that it'll get
out of committee. Uh, it'll go through the same process
with the potential of you know, series of amendments that
(32:55):
would happen on second reading. My guess is most of
those will I uh, probably all of them die, and
then we just see where we're at on third see
if see if this thing will pass. Remember, though, too,
we do have in the Senate the Lieutenant governor who
can break the tie. So so if we're if we're
(33:19):
here where he stands, So if we're you know, if
we're that close, at least we can break the tie. Okay. Uh,
So that's where we're That's what we're saying. I believe
it's about five votes that have to shift, and we
feel optimistic that many of that those folks are headed
in the right direction.
Speaker 2 (33:40):
Paul, can you stay around for our last segment? It's
about six minutes. I hate to put you on the
spot like that, but would you be able to yes? Sure, Okay,
let's let's wrap up on the other side of the break,
I gotta tke a quick time out though you're listening
here to conservative not better talk my friends, talking with
Paul Logoman of the Heritage Action. He's the state advocacy
manager there. Quick time out back in just a minute welcome.
Speaker 3 (34:03):
Back, my friends.
Speaker 2 (34:04):
Last segment here last I know it's a tough time
of the week. This is the last time you're going
to hear this program until Monday, and it's been a busy, busy.
Speaker 3 (34:14):
Week for sure. Friends. Let's be honest.
Speaker 2 (34:16):
When your financial world starts getting a little more complicated,
you need more than one size fits all advice.
Speaker 3 (34:22):
That's where full Sweet Wealth shines.
Speaker 2 (34:25):
Jason and his team specialize in working with families and
individuals at your level, offering personalized guidance that goes far
beyond the basics, from private equity and private credit to
options strategies and coordinated legal planning. Full Sweet Wealth helps
you see the big picture and make confident decisions about
your legacy. It's all about having a dedicated team guide
(34:49):
you every step of the way so you can focus
on what matters most. Your family, your goals, your future.
If you want real confidence in your financial life, visit
full sweetwealth dot com. That's full sweetwealth dot com. Build
your legacy, secure your future. I'm on the phone here.
I've been talking today with Paul Logoman. He is the
(35:12):
state Advascacy manager of Heritage Action, and during the break
I shared with Paul, I didn't tell him before this
that my representative, my senator in this state is is
Senator Rod Bray, a leader in the Senate. And I've
shared with Paul, but I've shared with you in this
audience as well. I've reached out to Rod Bray many
(35:33):
times email, I've tagged him in social media post where
friends on Facebook at where we were, I don't know.
I'm not sure now, but I've tagged him on posts.
I've called and left voicemails. I know him a little bit.
I've never had any problem with Rod or whatever. He
can listen, he can even decide that he's you know,
he redistricting is the wrong thing. But he as a representative,
(35:57):
as a senator with constituents, he owes it not to
me as a talk show host, but to us as
constituents to share his position. And I've not gotten that now.
I don't mean that to be inflammatory. I'm just telling
you the realities of the situation Paul was saying. And Paul,
you can chime in here that a lot of senators
are being more engaging. Who are the ones that you
(36:20):
find are the maybe the critical ones to sway for
folks to reach out to and maybe give some tips
if they do reach out, What should that interaction sound like?
Speaker 4 (36:32):
Sure? I think first of all, Senator Mitchler is an
interesting one. He didn't vote on the original vote on
organization Day. He wasn't there, you know, I don't know
if that was planned or if it just worked out
that way. He's not publicly made a statement. Senator Mischler
writes the budget for the state for all intents and
purposes from the Senate side, and so a lot of influence.
(36:57):
I think that is a critical district that's up around
the Orsaw area in uh more than Indiana. You've got
Senator good uh in the Terre Haute area, another influential
senator that that is. I think, you know, more and
more open to the issue, had been to know and
(37:20):
is beginning to shift. And I think because of constituents
pressure who you know, and these guys are listening. Uh
So I would say the key to it is, you know,
we talk about civil discourse, you know, to get on
the phone with them and yell Adam doesn't really help.
Nobody wants that. Nobody wants to yelled at, you know.
I think make the case, get on the phone, make
(37:41):
the case, and and the most important thing is to say, Hey,
I'm not in Peoria, Illinois. I'm not you know, I'm
not in southern California. I'm a Hoosier. I'm in your district.
I see you when you go to the grocery store
and uh and when you come back here because we
live in a you know, we have a part time legislature. Know,
I want to be supportive of you. I really think
(38:02):
this is a key, you know, one of the most
important votes that you'll make, you know, in your career,
and we need you to be there. I think that
kind of sentiment, those kinds of conversations are the most productive.
Speaker 3 (38:18):
Well, it's interesting too.
Speaker 2 (38:19):
I know as a as a principled conservative, it can
be maddening. It's maddening to me sometimes. But this is
a process. I've said on this program, this is not
going away, This this fight that we have. Reagan said,
freedom is always just one generation away from extinction. We
don't pass it along to the next generation in their bloodstream,
(38:41):
in our bloodstream. We have to basically educate the next generation,
make sure they understand what they've got, and then build
upon that and improve upon that, make sure it's passed
along to the next generation, and so we can't expect
you know, some of these folks. You know, there's a
lot of pressures, a lot of viewpoints, but these are important.
(39:02):
This battle is critically important, and we're not going to
find a perfect senator or representative, but we need to
be moving in the right direction and it's imperative that
Indiana do this. Paul, I got about a minute left
closing thoughts. As we go into the UH, into this
rally today and into this final vote next.
Speaker 4 (39:21):
Week, well I would say, if your senator anywhere in
the state has said yes, yeah, you need to call
them and thank them. I think that's really important too,
because a lot of times we get to the yes
and then we walk away and we forget about them.
We need to say thanks. I can tell you Senator
Johnson from the Fort Wayne area has really been pivotal,
(39:42):
pivotal in this process, and I got to say, now,
you know, a public thank you to Senator Tyler Johnson.
But but do that also in this process. And I
think you know, as we roll into next week, pressure
on your state senator is going to be critical. So
be on the phones, send emails, get in touch any
(40:03):
way you can. It's really this, I mean, the freedom
is at stake and you know now's the time.
Speaker 2 (40:11):
Well, Paul, I appreciate you being on the program. I
appreciate what you do at Heritage. I appreciate the partnership
with Turning Points. It's been a pleasure, sir to have
you on. This is a critically important thing. Thank you
for sharing your insight and expertise on this matter.
Speaker 4 (40:27):
My pleasure and thank you for all you do.
Speaker 2 (40:29):
And I'll look you up today as I get to
the State House and we'll introduce ourselves. So it's a
pleasure to have you.
Speaker 4 (40:34):
Gus well looking forward to it.
Speaker 2 (40:36):
That is Paul Logoman. He is the Heritage Action State
Advocacy Manager. Music tell me it's time to wrap it
up for the day. Folks, have a great weekend.
Speaker 3 (40:47):
SDG.
Attention. You're listening to the Todd Huff Show, America's home
for conservative not bitter talk and education. Be advised. The
content of this program has been talking about it two
prevents and even cure liberalism, and listening may cause you
to lean to the right. And now, coming to you
(00:28):
from the full suite Wealth Studios, here is your conservative
but not bitter host Todd Huff.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
Well, my friends, we are down to the nitty gritty,
the final stretcher as Indiana has this fight come to
a conclusion between now and Monday on this redistricting fight,
which is critically important. Listen, I know for those of
you that are not in Indiana, this may seem like
all that matters is Indiana this week, and I know
(00:56):
it matters because it's my state. But listen, this has
nash implications. We've talked about this, we'll get into this today.
In fact, I've got a special guest who's going to
be joining us here in a minute from Heritage Action,
and we'll introduce him here in just a moment. My friends,
But this battle impacts Congress, this battle impacts the fight
(01:17):
that we're in, and we're in a cold civil war.
Make no mistake about it for political control and victory
in this country, and we've got to beat back these
radical leftists. And it starts in Indiana with this fight
over redistricting. So we'll get to that in just a moment, friends,
But you know, one of the biggest challenges that we
as conservatives have is finding ways to ensure our values
(01:38):
align with the way that we live our lives. Where
you know, the job that we have uh whether or
not the places that we do business with are supporting
conservative principles or they're empowering radical leftists. And that also
includes the way that we invest our money. That's why
I love what four eight financial is doing. They specialize
in biblically responsible invest and that means that they go
(02:02):
to find companies the level that those companies align with
your faith and your values. They do all this heavy
lifting for you. All you have to do is complete
a short assessment.
Speaker 3 (02:13):
I did it.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
You can as well visit for eightfinancial dot com slash
todd to take that quick and easy assessment for eight
financial dot com slash todd. Because your money should work for,
not against, your values. All Right, that being said, my friends,
I'd like to welcome to the program today a special
guest from Heritage Action. His name is Paul Logoman. He
(02:36):
is the state advocacy manager for Heritage Action. Paul, Welcome
to the program today.
Speaker 4 (02:42):
How are you, Todd. It is great to be on
the program. It's a beautiful morning in Indiana. As I'm
en rude to the State House, we have a huge
event that we're partnering with, Turning Points on And when
we talk about Arning Point, not only can we talk
about the organization, but hopefully we can talk about the
(03:06):
position that we are all in in Indiana as we
are very very close to seeing a mid mid decade
redistricting happen. So this is pretty exciting times. And and
this isn't just about Indiana, as you mentioned, this is
about keeping Congress read and not seeing that change over
(03:32):
as we as we wrap up the last two years
of the Trump administration.
Speaker 2 (03:37):
That's right, that has unbelievable ramifications. If Democrats get in control,
of course, we know we'll see law fair, we'll see
the weaponization of government and all sorts of crazy radical
ideas that the end of.
Speaker 3 (03:48):
Trump's agenda and all of that.
Speaker 2 (03:50):
But I want to stop and spend a little time
talking about this as I just listened to what you
say here. I think it's a great thing, Paul, to
hear heritage and turning point partnering one of the things.
I've been doing this for ten years, and I think
a lot of times we kind of get, even well
meaning conservative groups, we get into our own little lanes
(04:11):
and little bubbles, and sometimes we're not working together as
we should. So I want to commend you for that,
maybe talk a little bit about that partnership and why
this matters so much.
Speaker 4 (04:22):
Sure, and we're gonna I hate to diverge too much
from the registrict and conversation, but I got to tell
you the story because I think it really is relevant.
Just a few months ago, we're all in you know,
our staff team is in Washington, and you know we're
working through staff issues, we're doing planning for the legislative
(04:44):
sessions that are coming up in January across the country
and working through all that, and we had the horrible
news about Charlie Kirk. And I can tell you if
the entire building shut down, we stopped everything collect in
our groups, collectively as a building of you know, three
hundred and some PhDs and lawyers and lobbyists and all
(05:10):
the rest of us. We prayed and and I'll tell
you the difference between that kind of workspace and a
corporate workspace you just can't compare it. And and I
you know, since then, I've always I've been a fan
of Charlie's work. I love to listen to him and
hear how he spoke the kids on campuses. Uh, So
(05:32):
it was it was heartbreaking for me, just really from Afar.
We had a lot of folks who were really close
to him, who knew him, you know, personally, very directly,
and to see kind of how the building as a whole,
the whole enterprise was affected and how we responded was
was really special to me. And it really reinforced I'm
(05:55):
in the right place at the right time. So I
had to start there when we talk about Turning Point.
And it certainly makes this relationship, to this level of
engagement with Turning Point all the more important because that legacy,
that Charlie Kirk legacy is absolutely critical to carry on.
(06:17):
We've got to have that honest, engaging dialogue with folks
of all ages and and I'm excited to be at
the State House with the Turning Point folks today because
I know there's going to be hundreds of students there.
I think it's going to be a great rally and
to really begin to talk, you know, and have Heritage
(06:39):
be part of that dialogue with you know, young people
who are in college and or younger or just a
little out of college, I think it's a I think
it's a really cool step in the right direction for Heritage,
and I am so excited that our senior leadership was
really focused on making this happen.
Speaker 2 (07:02):
Well, I've been a fan of your work of the
Heritage Foundation, of course Heritage Action the other I guess
sister organization there as well. It's you guys do very
important work and I commend you for what you're doing.
Let's talk a little bit about what's happening at the
state House today. I'll be speaking their Governor Brawn, I'll
be speaking their Lieutenant Governor Micah Beck, with Todd Rokeda speaking.
(07:25):
I'm forgetting somebody there's a state representative. I don't have
to listen in front of me. But the bottom line
is you mentioned having a conversation, how Charlie Kirk was
doing that with students, Engaging with students who sometimes didn't
know what they thought, sometimes who had really really bad ideas.
Sometimes these kids had it together and had it figured
out and just wanted to exchange some ideas and thoughts
(07:46):
with Charlie and all that. The need for conversation about
this is critical, and it's hard. It's hard to have
that conversation, Paul, because there's so much screaming. In fact,
as we fill that rotunda today at the State House,
as I prepared my remarks, I've thought about all the
yelling and the channing and the anger and the rage
that's been in there this week from the other side.
(08:08):
And they're free to do that. Don't misunderstand me, but man,
it is really hard to communicate the rationale and the
reasons for wanting to support this because they simply they
don't want to hear it. They don't want to engage
in that conversation. So in the event that you do
get someone who is just legitimately they don't know where
they stand on this issue of redistricting, or maybe they're
(08:30):
even against it, but they're they're open to at least
hearing you out. What do you say to them, are
the reasons that you're in favor of Indiana redistricting.
Speaker 4 (08:39):
Well, it's interesting you ask that, because usually the conversation
begins one of a couple of ways, but most often
it begins with the concerns that people have about redistricting.
And and by the way, I you know, the issue
of civil discourse today, I mean it is it's so critical.
(09:03):
And to be able to do this and to have
you participate in this and to have the kinds of
conversations that you have on your show, I just I
have to commend you for it, because I think it
just it's too infrequent and uh, you know, there's too
much you know, as you've mentioned, yelling and screaming and noise,
and the the marketplace of ideas you know needs, uh
(09:27):
needs more folks like you to really get them out.
So so thanks for what you do. So really it
comes around a couple of ways. And so some of
the questions that I've been asked is, Okay, so Texas
kicks this off, why should Indiana, you know, be part
of this fight? You know, Texas picked the fight. California responded,
(09:49):
why should Indiana get involved? And and so so my
response to that is, well that that's not exactly true.
So when you look at kind of how the Democratic
Party over the decades has handled handled redistricting and handled
drawing these lines. It goes back to Elbridge Jerry. Okay,
(10:12):
so all the way back to UH twelve to eighteen,
eighteen ten, eighteen twelve. Right, well, and he's governor between
eighteen ten and eighteen twelve in Massachusetts, and a governor
as the UH as a member of the Democratic Republicans. Okay.
So by the time you get to the eighteen twenties,
(10:33):
late eighteen twenties, they lost the Republican part of the
Democratic Republicans. But that is the legacy and the direct
lineage of the Democratic Party. So they wrote the book
on this literally, in fact, they got the name. They
were named for writing the book on this. So these
the redistricting in places like Massachusetts, which I think is
(10:55):
a textbook, right, it is textbook for a nine zero
a series of congressional seats, right, all Democrats, no Republicans.
And if you look at Massachusetts, the numbers aren't that
different from Indiana in terms of you know, hey, how
(11:15):
many Democrats do we have in any anniverses? How many
Republicans do they have in Massachusetts? It's about the same.
And right now we're at seven to two and they're
at nine. Oh, so this isn't as if you know
we have we've done something that is all that different
from the you know, from one hundred years of more
than one hundred years of democratic legacy.
Speaker 2 (11:37):
Well let me let me jump in here real fast. So,
so jerry mandering, which is what you're you're referencing here,
going back to the eighteen tens, eighteen twelve. I remember
I studied political science at Butler years ago, and jerry
mandering when I was there meant a deliberate attempt where
you went way out of your way to draw some
(11:59):
odd shap apes. And I believe that district in Massachusetts
was referred to a gerrymander because it resembled a salamander
or some such thing.
Speaker 4 (12:06):
And that's correct.
Speaker 2 (12:09):
But it doesn't mean to make a decision where I
draw the line, like I still have to decide as
a state legislature where the lines are drawn. And just
because I put them in a place that is maybe
politically advantageous for me, that that doesn't That is just
part of the political process, Paul. This is this is
(12:31):
baked into it. If you don't like the maps. You
can hold your state legislature responsible, but it is the
prerogative of the state legislature to put these lines where
they think they should be.
Speaker 3 (12:42):
I mean, tell me talk about that.
Speaker 4 (12:44):
Yes, and that is absolutely right, and that is exactly
how Representative Ben Smaltz spoke about this. He is the
author of HB ten thirty two, which is the redistricting
build that contains all the maps, and he was very
clear about it. He said, these, you know, we made
these decisions strictly on a political basis. And you know,
(13:08):
the only things that we took into consideration were the
geography and the politics. Those are the only two things
we took into consideration. And so, as he laid it out, yes,
that is a political these this is a purely political
process with the with the intent of gaining political seats, right, yes,
(13:30):
and so this isn't this is not And he didn't
sugarcoat it. He didn't say we're trying to be fair.
He just said we're trying to win. And the reason
I bring up Albert Jerry, you know, back all the
way to eighteen ten to eighteen twelve, is because they've
been doing it since then. Okay, And so the other
the other issue that I hear, or the other question
(13:52):
that I hear is what about the fairness? You know?
And so the other side is saying, hey, you're cheating.
And what I want to say about Indiana specifically is
in Texas for that better. Neither in Indiana, North Texas,
nor Missouri, nor North Carolina had to alter their process
(14:12):
in any substantial way. They didn't have to change their constitution.
They didn't have to, you know, completely alter their process
and system. But both Virginia and California did, right, So
Virginia's in the front end of this. California has already
done it. Both of them have to have a California
(14:34):
had it, Virginia has to have it referendum to alter
their constitution to get rid of their independent Redistricting Commission
and eliminate that and shift to a political process. Right.
And so when people say, hey, you know, you're cheating,
you're breaking the rules, you know, my answer is, look,
(14:56):
this is a fight for Congress. It's a fight for
the for control of the next two years in in
our legislative body, and the fight for the House. So yes,
this is a political process. But when you say, hey,
did you cheat are you cheating to get this done? No,
(15:17):
And in fact, we are working completely within the existing
laws of the state of Indiana, as it did Texas,
as it did in Missouri, as it did in North Carolina.
And on the other side, they have to alter their
constitutions for goodness sakes to make it work. They're breaking
their own rules. And so if there's any cheating going on,
it's not on our side of the aisle. So I
(15:39):
don't think it's cheating. I don't think it's unfair. I
think it is I think it reflects the people of
the of our Hoosier state. Right. And so if you
look across the state, you say, Okay, you know every
elected statewide official is Republican. You've got, you know, massive
supermajorities in the House and even more massive than the Senate. Right,
(16:03):
You've got almost every county organization, almost every county council,
county commission is Republican in the state of Indiana. And
yet we say it's only fair if we have seven
Republican congressmen and two Democrat congressmen. It doesn't make any sense. Well,
(16:24):
let's talk about doesn't reflect the nature of the state.
Speaker 2 (16:26):
Let's talk about fair I tell my kids, by the way,
not to use the four letter F word fair because
it is such. And listen, I'm a guy that appreciates
what I would call justice. We need to seek that.
But what is fair that this drives me absolutely bonkers?
What is it that's fair? I've seen these leftists, I've
seen them on social media come after me wanting to
(16:48):
say Indiana's sixty Republican or sixty percent Trump support, forty
percent Democrat, whatever. So there should be if we had
ten districts, it should be six to four.
Speaker 3 (16:58):
Like, who comes up with this? Thinking?
Speaker 4 (17:00):
This is not the word that works.
Speaker 2 (17:03):
I did some research in the nineteen sixty In nineteen sixty,
the World Series was between the Pittsburgh Pirates and the
I think the New York Yankees and the New York
Yankees lost the series four to three, but they scored
twice as many runs as the Pittsburgh Pirates. To me,
this is exactly the point. We're not looking at the
World Series champion to say who had the most runs
(17:25):
over seven games. You have to win individual games, just
like you have to win individual districts. This stuff, to
me is so cut and dry, black and white. But
talk about fairness. What does that even mean in this
practical sense that the Democrats get two seats? Who says,
so why do they have the right to those? How
do we even know how people are going to vote?
I mean they can run people in all nine districts, Paul,
(17:46):
And if they changed their ideas a little bit and
not embrace this radical left bull craft we've been dealing with,
then maybe they could win some of these races. So
what does that all mean?
Speaker 3 (17:56):
To begin with? What is fair? This stuff is mind
boggling to me.
Speaker 4 (18:01):
Yes, and I really appreciate that. And I think that
the key word here isn't fairness, It is honesty. And
I can tell you when I sat through you know,
literally hours of committee hearing on Tuesday, it was it
was all about honesty and there was no bones about it.
(18:24):
Representative Small says, these are political decisions. We've based it
purely on that. We you know, the idea is to
get more to you know, to get more runs than
our opponent, right, I mean, we're in a head to
head fight here to get more districts than our opponent.
And that's how we've designed it. We're in power, we
have the opportunity to do it, and you know the
(18:48):
nation is in balance, right, that's just about Hoosiers. It's
about a bigger picture. And you know, so I think
the way Indiana's handled this this, you know this pretty
direct honesty. Even the the the ranking member on the
Democrats side on the Elections and Reapportionment Committee on Tuesday,
(19:09):
you know, said to Representative Smalls, I appreciate you being
purely honest about what's trying to do. And I think
that's that's the right thing. I think that's exactly how
we should We shouldn't veil it in anything other than
what it is exactly, which is this is a fight
for our nation and we intend to win. But yeah,
and here's how we're going to do it.
Speaker 3 (19:30):
We came to the current maps in the same way.
Speaker 2 (19:33):
I mean, you know, there might have been a difference
give and take EBB and flow there, but it's the
same stinking thing that said, well, we think Democrats should
have should be I guess competitive in these two districts.
I mean, I don't even It's just mind boggling to me,
especially when you factor Paul things like how illegal immigration
affects the census. I mean, you know that Biden's administration.
Speaker 3 (19:56):
They counted.
Speaker 2 (19:58):
Illegal aliens in the census, and they allocate federal funds
and they allocate representation to states based upon those tallies. Like,
I mean, we know that that's impacted it. And I've
seen some that said that it's multiple districts that have
been assigned and those are also those translate into electoral votes.
I mean, this is a massive problem and it's diluting
(20:19):
the voice of Hoosiers.
Speaker 3 (20:20):
Talk about that.
Speaker 4 (20:22):
Absolutely. And I have got to make a shameless plug
for a piece of model legislation that we're introducing in
Indiana and probably about fifteen other states and I'm so
excited about. And it is state redistricting. And in the
state Redistricting model bill, you don't count folks who aren't eligible.
You don't count non citizens. If you're not eligible to
(20:45):
vote as a citizen, you're not counted. Okay. That will
change lines, and it even could potentially have an impact
of reducing the number of elect of congressional districts in state,
So there could be some negative impact to it. It's
an honest response, you know, to a dishonest problem. And
(21:05):
the right now as we say, okay, it's got to
be you know, one hundred or seven hundred and ninety thousand,
you know per congressional district, which is the right number.
You know, as we look at each congressional district, then
you know how we count that number of people just
includes all the people that are there. It doesn't matter
(21:27):
if they're citizens, if they're eligible, it was a citizen
devote or not. And so that is problematic and that's
why we at Heritage have come up with an alternative. Now,
it can be kind of expensive for states.
Speaker 2 (21:40):
Yes, sorry, let's pick up there. I'm getting to the
end of my segment. I'm sorry, let's pick up there.
Let's talk about this on the other side of the
break before I take that break out. My friends, Let's
face it, living with discomfort can be tough, and prescription
medications can help you. Sometimes those often come with a
long list of side effects, not to mention the risk
of dependency.
Speaker 3 (22:01):
That's why a lot.
Speaker 2 (22:02):
Of people are exploring natural options like Creative. Now, I
know Creative has a bad reputation out there, but that's
because of the synthetic jump junk that has chemicals that's
not managed the right way.
Speaker 3 (22:15):
You can work with.
Speaker 2 (22:16):
Christopher's organic botanicals you can get a work with a
family run company that does things the right way. They
work directly with Indonesian farmers. They lab test every batch
to make sure that you're getting a product that is
good and properly handled.
Speaker 3 (22:32):
My friends.
Speaker 2 (22:32):
So Christopher's Organic Botanicals keeps it real, they keep it clean,
they keep you informed. You can research it, and I
encourage you to research it. You can go to their
website or do it on your own. But Christopher's Organic
Botanicals dot com. If you decide that this is something
you want to give a try, start with the Kratim
starter pack.
Speaker 3 (22:50):
Use code tot huff. You'll save ten percent.
Speaker 2 (22:52):
Christopher's Organic Botanicals dot com. My friends, Truth, Transparency, tradition.
Time out for me. Be back in just a minute.
Welcome back, my friends. Been talking with Paul Logoman. He
is the state advocacy manager for Heritage Action.
Speaker 3 (23:12):
We're talking about redistricting.
Speaker 2 (23:14):
I ever so rudely interrupted Paul because I had to
cut it off there before so we could take that
time out. So Paul, I do apologize. Before the break,
you were talking a little bit about some things some
work you're doing in Indiana regarding just the way that
districts are drawn and encountered and so forth. Maybe pick
that up and set that up and explain what you're
(23:35):
working on there.
Speaker 4 (23:37):
Absolutely, and sorry for the long winded part of it,
but we get excited and these beautiful, semi sweet morsels
of conservatism are hard to let go even with breaks.
That's right. So the bill that Heritage is pushing around
the country and we're working on in a number of
about fifteen or sixteen state legislatures this year in the
(23:59):
coming year in the twenties cycle is is state sponsored census.
So it puts the state centers, puts the census in
the hands of the states so they can control that,
they can eliminate non citizens, uh and get an actual
honest count. And the one thing you do find is
particularly in urban areas, it will affect those spaces because
(24:23):
that's normally where you end up with, you know, more
folks that are here that don't have the ability to vote.
So you know, whether they're here legally as a non
citizen that can't vote, or illegally as a non citizen
that can't vote, they shouldn't be counted. You know, in
terms of what the design and what the size and
(24:44):
what the parameters are of a congressional district, a state
legislative district, a county council district, or any such thing.
So better census county is the goal.
Speaker 2 (24:54):
Yeah, and that sounds great, and that's there's some that
makes a lot of sense in certain ways.
Speaker 3 (25:00):
So would would the bill.
Speaker 2 (25:03):
Does the US is the federal government still? Would they
be conducting the US census overall? Would in this legislation?
Would states try to take that over completely?
Speaker 3 (25:14):
What what happened? How does that work?
Speaker 4 (25:16):
It wouldn't eliminate the federal census. The federal government has
the ability to do whatever they want, is what I thought.
I would do what they want to do. Right. However,
for the purpose of creating uh political subdivisions and districts. Uh,
it would it would use the state numbers as opposed.
Speaker 2 (25:34):
In federal Okay, So, so if a state had its
own number that differed from the federal government census numbers,
would that impact the number of congressional seats that would
be allocated?
Speaker 3 (25:49):
Or how does that come from the federal census?
Speaker 4 (25:53):
The number of seats probably can't change unless there is
a federal change, right, but it would certainly alter the
you know, the potential dimensions and the look and feel
of many of these congressional districts. And at that point,
(26:14):
really if we say, okay, well the Feds say we
have to have nine in Indiana, we just divide them up,
you know, based on legal citizens and you know, instead
of you know, seven hundred and ninety thousand, it might
be seven hundred and sixty thousand, you know, for each district.
But then that alters the way that this looks. Yatcha.
Speaker 2 (26:35):
Well, I've seen some testimony, ironically in Congress recently about
the census, and you know, sometimes you get in the
weeds on some of this stuff. But I got to
tell you, listening to the testimony of people that are
experts on.
Speaker 3 (26:49):
The census, and I'm it is mind boggling.
Speaker 2 (26:51):
I mean, they're basically admitting we're just guessing on numbers
in a lot of ways. I mean I saw a
panel of four or five people and they all basically said,
we don't know. At some point, there's algorithms and you know,
mathematical estimates, and you know, you factor in the illegal
alien count being in there, and it's a recipe for
(27:12):
this disaster.
Speaker 3 (27:13):
How did we get here, Paul? How do we get to.
Speaker 2 (27:15):
The point where we're defying all sorts of common sense
to avoid what's the obvious thing, which is you count citizens,
and if you don't count them, if they don't exist,
you don't just guess and make up a number. I mean,
how did we get to this point?
Speaker 4 (27:29):
Right? Well? And I have to admit I'm a states
government guy as opposed to a federal government guy. So
I have a I have a bias that I'm going
to disclose. You know, I think the states can do
this sort of thing better. I think the problem is
that we've handed this off to the federal government. We
have said to the states, you know so much for
(27:50):
you know, federalism and the being the patri dish of democracy.
You know, we're going to do it our way, says
the federal government. Right, and we end up with systems
that could be a lot better. The beauty of having
fifty states, you know, really kind of govern this process
and govern it and create it and improve it the
(28:14):
way that states do when when they're really free to
make policy decisions. I think you get a much better
product overall. And I think shifting and believing in federalism
and letting it work is definitely the way. And you know,
we argue, we have conversations about internally in the building
(28:34):
about sort of the state versus federal you know, the
pace of how work goes and that sort of thing.
When we talk to our analysts and the folks and
the foundation side who are really doing the deep thinking
about policy, you know, and we're saying, hey, we need this,
you know, literally tomorrow. You know, they don't even understand
it because they're so used to working with a facial
(28:56):
federal government. They don't understand the speed of states and
the engagement level in states. And you know, I really
firmly believe that this is where the action is and
this is where things are headed. And I think a
bill like this, you know, sort of begins to put
that pressure on the Feds and say, you know, and says, hey,
(29:16):
let lose that iron grip that you have on all
of these issues. Let the states do it better.
Speaker 2 (29:22):
So let's let's get returned specifically to where we are
in Indiana today with redistricting. Do you have a gauge
on where some of these senators stand. I know that
I spoke with Brett from Turning Point earlier this week.
He had a list of senators that we've think there
were eight or nine of them that he said, we're
(29:44):
on the fence that people should reach out.
Speaker 4 (29:45):
To and call.
Speaker 2 (29:47):
Do you have any gauge of where these senators are
as to where they're going to come down? Are there
people that can still be persuaded? What's your understanding of
what's going to happen next in the Senate?
Speaker 4 (29:57):
Well, I mean, I think the fact that the Senate
is having a you know, a special session at all
after voting on Organization Day not to do it, says
that they're moving in the right direction. Okay, so you know,
the the vote on organization Day was a surprise to everyone,
including the speaker it uh. I think it sort of
(30:19):
shocked the House that they that they did it. No
one really anticipated it, and and then all of a sudden,
you have this vote on whether or not to do
a special session, whether or not to dooper restricting. So
it was a surprise to everyone. So I think you
can somewhat discount that vote overall and look at where
the yes is and no's are. I think we're about five.
(30:39):
I think if we shift five votes, we went and
so that's that's about where we are. And I can
tell you, like in the conversations I've had with state
senators and state House members who are getting tons of
calls on this, you know, if it's coming from Peoria, Illinois,
or you know, or Kansas City or someplace like that,
(31:01):
they're pretty much disregarding it. If it's coming from within
their districts, they're not only taking the call, they're having
a real conversation. And you know, so we've said to
our team, you know, our sentinel base, the grassroots network
that we have across the state of Indiana and really
across the country, but specifically for our Indiana sentinels, you know,
we have said, hey, this is a polite conversation. You know,
(31:25):
they need to know that if they make the decision
for redistricting, that they're going to support them not only
in the primary, but in future races. That you know,
you're that this is a pivotal decision, and that you're
encouraging them, you know, and standing with them and making
the right call here as opposed to And I can
tell you a lot of the members have just gotten
you know, they've been sworn at, they've been yelled at,
(31:46):
they've been you know that stuff just isn't helpful, and
you know, civil discourse, right, and so I think you know,
we're about five offs in the Senate, as you know, Uh, yesterday,
you know, we moved off a second reading in the House.
You know, it came out of committee on Tuesday, second
reading yesterday, third readings today. It'll get voted on in
the House. Uh, presumably passed out the votes are there,
(32:10):
it'll go over to the Senate on Monday. We are
hearing that a hearing will happen Monday, so in the afternoon.
So it's it's gonna move quicker. And that's you know,
that's not even on the calendar yet. So but that's
what we're that's what we understand is it will be
a Monday afternoon hearing and a committee hearing, and so
(32:33):
this is gonna move pretty quickly. Potentially in the Senate.
I would have guessed, uh, you know, at the beginning
of the week it would have the same cadence as
his head as it's had in the House. That doesn't
seem to be true. They're they're moving it a little
bit quicker. So my sense is to that it'll get
out of committee. Uh, it'll go through the same process
with the potential of you know, series of amendments that
(32:55):
would happen on second reading. My guess is most of
those will I uh, probably all of them die, and
then we just see where we're at on third see
if see if this thing will pass. Remember, though, too,
we do have in the Senate the Lieutenant governor who
can break the tie. So so if we're if we're
(33:19):
here where he stands, So if we're you know, if
we're that close, at least we can break the tie. Okay. Uh,
So that's where we're That's what we're saying. I believe
it's about five votes that have to shift, and we
feel optimistic that many of that those folks are headed
in the right direction.
Speaker 2 (33:40):
Paul, can you stay around for our last segment? It's
about six minutes. I hate to put you on the
spot like that, but would you be able to yes? Sure, Okay,
let's let's wrap up on the other side of the break,
I gotta tke a quick time out though you're listening
here to conservative not better talk my friends, talking with
Paul Logoman of the Heritage Action. He's the state advocacy
manager there. Quick time out back in just a minute welcome.
Speaker 3 (34:03):
Back, my friends.
Speaker 2 (34:04):
Last segment here last I know it's a tough time
of the week. This is the last time you're going
to hear this program until Monday, and it's been a busy, busy.
Speaker 3 (34:14):
Week for sure. Friends. Let's be honest.
Speaker 2 (34:16):
When your financial world starts getting a little more complicated,
you need more than one size fits all advice.
Speaker 3 (34:22):
That's where full Sweet Wealth shines.
Speaker 2 (34:25):
Jason and his team specialize in working with families and
individuals at your level, offering personalized guidance that goes far
beyond the basics, from private equity and private credit to
options strategies and coordinated legal planning. Full Sweet Wealth helps
you see the big picture and make confident decisions about
your legacy. It's all about having a dedicated team guide
(34:49):
you every step of the way so you can focus
on what matters most. Your family, your goals, your future.
If you want real confidence in your financial life, visit
full sweetwealth dot com. That's full sweetwealth dot com. Build
your legacy, secure your future. I'm on the phone here.
I've been talking today with Paul Logoman. He is the
(35:12):
state Advascacy manager of Heritage Action, and during the break
I shared with Paul, I didn't tell him before this
that my representative, my senator in this state is is
Senator Rod Bray, a leader in the Senate. And I've
shared with Paul, but I've shared with you in this
audience as well. I've reached out to Rod Bray many
(35:33):
times email, I've tagged him in social media post where
friends on Facebook at where we were, I don't know.
I'm not sure now, but I've tagged him on posts.
I've called and left voicemails. I know him a little bit.
I've never had any problem with Rod or whatever. He
can listen, he can even decide that he's you know,
he redistricting is the wrong thing. But he as a representative,
(35:57):
as a senator with constituents, he owes it not to
me as a talk show host, but to us as
constituents to share his position. And I've not gotten that now.
I don't mean that to be inflammatory. I'm just telling
you the realities of the situation Paul was saying. And Paul,
you can chime in here that a lot of senators
are being more engaging. Who are the ones that you
(36:20):
find are the maybe the critical ones to sway for
folks to reach out to and maybe give some tips
if they do reach out, What should that interaction sound like?
Speaker 4 (36:32):
Sure? I think first of all, Senator Mitchler is an
interesting one. He didn't vote on the original vote on
organization Day. He wasn't there, you know, I don't know
if that was planned or if it just worked out
that way. He's not publicly made a statement. Senator Mischler
writes the budget for the state for all intents and
purposes from the Senate side, and so a lot of influence.
(36:57):
I think that is a critical district that's up around
the Orsaw area in uh more than Indiana. You've got
Senator good uh in the Terre Haute area, another influential
senator that that is. I think, you know, more and
more open to the issue, had been to know and
(37:20):
is beginning to shift. And I think because of constituents
pressure who you know, and these guys are listening. Uh
So I would say the key to it is, you know,
we talk about civil discourse, you know, to get on
the phone with them and yell Adam doesn't really help.
Nobody wants that. Nobody wants to yelled at, you know.
I think make the case, get on the phone, make
(37:41):
the case, and and the most important thing is to say, Hey,
I'm not in Peoria, Illinois. I'm not you know, I'm
not in southern California. I'm a Hoosier. I'm in your district.
I see you when you go to the grocery store
and uh and when you come back here because we
live in a you know, we have a part time legislature. Know,
I want to be supportive of you. I really think
(38:02):
this is a key, you know, one of the most
important votes that you'll make, you know, in your career,
and we need you to be there. I think that
kind of sentiment, those kinds of conversations are the most productive.
Speaker 3 (38:18):
Well, it's interesting too.
Speaker 2 (38:19):
I know as a as a principled conservative, it can
be maddening. It's maddening to me sometimes. But this is
a process. I've said on this program, this is not
going away, This this fight that we have. Reagan said,
freedom is always just one generation away from extinction. We
don't pass it along to the next generation in their bloodstream,
(38:41):
in our bloodstream. We have to basically educate the next generation,
make sure they understand what they've got, and then build
upon that and improve upon that, make sure it's passed
along to the next generation, and so we can't expect
you know, some of these folks. You know, there's a
lot of pressures, a lot of viewpoints, but these are important.
(39:02):
This battle is critically important, and we're not going to
find a perfect senator or representative, but we need to
be moving in the right direction and it's imperative that
Indiana do this. Paul, I got about a minute left
closing thoughts. As we go into the UH, into this
rally today and into this final vote next.
Speaker 4 (39:21):
Week, well I would say, if your senator anywhere in
the state has said yes, yeah, you need to call
them and thank them. I think that's really important too,
because a lot of times we get to the yes
and then we walk away and we forget about them.
We need to say thanks. I can tell you Senator
Johnson from the Fort Wayne area has really been pivotal,
(39:42):
pivotal in this process, and I got to say, now,
you know, a public thank you to Senator Tyler Johnson.
But but do that also in this process. And I
think you know, as we roll into next week, pressure
on your state senator is going to be critical. So
be on the phones, send emails, get in touch any
(40:03):
way you can. It's really this, I mean, the freedom
is at stake and you know now's the time.
Speaker 2 (40:11):
Well, Paul, I appreciate you being on the program. I
appreciate what you do at Heritage. I appreciate the partnership
with Turning Points. It's been a pleasure, sir to have
you on. This is a critically important thing. Thank you
for sharing your insight and expertise on this matter.
Speaker 4 (40:27):
My pleasure and thank you for all you do.
Speaker 2 (40:29):
And I'll look you up today as I get to
the State House and we'll introduce ourselves. So it's a
pleasure to have you.
Speaker 4 (40:34):
Gus well looking forward to it.
Speaker 2 (40:36):
That is Paul Logoman. He is the Heritage Action State
Advocacy Manager. Music tell me it's time to wrap it
up for the day. Folks, have a great weekend.
Speaker 3 (40:47):
SDG.
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by Audiochuck Media Company.
The Brothers Ortiz
The Brothers Ortiz is the story of two brothers–both successful, but in very different ways. Gabe Ortiz becomes a third-highest ranking officer in all of Texas while his younger brother Larry climbs the ranks in Puro Tango Blast, a notorious Texas Prison gang. Gabe doesn’t know all the details of his brother’s nefarious dealings, and he’s made a point not to ask, to protect their relationship. But when Larry is murdered during a home invasion in a rented beach house, Gabe has no choice but to look into what happened that night. To solve Larry’s murder, Gabe, and the whole Ortiz family, must ask each other tough questions.