The New Yorker Radio Hour - ICE Comes to a Small Town in Tennessee

Episode Date: April 27, 2018

This week, a reporter looks at a rural town where the largest immigration raid in a decade has ripped apart a community; Ronan Farrow talks about his reporting on Harvey Weinstein, which just won the Pulitzer Prize; and Jeffrey Toobin speaks with a romance novelist-turned-state lawmaker who hopes to become the governor of Georgia. She would be the first black woman to lead any state in the nation. New Yorker Radio Hour listeners, we want to hear from you.  We have a few questions about the show and how you listen to it. The survey takes about twenty minutes, and your feedback will help us make our podcast better.  Take the survey here.

This is a road trade to the ballot. The Observatory is straight of the block for West Boulevard and makes that right. They didn't break that, but they have pretty good access to those people. They're self-consciously mocked that lineage. So that's happening? It seems like an incredible story here on many front. From One World Trade Center in Manhattan, this is the New Yorker Radio Hour, a co-production of WNYC Studios and The New Yorker.

Welcome to the New Yorker Radio Hour. I'm David Remnick. Now, I don't know if you saw the story that ICE, immigration and customs enforcement, recently conducted what's believed to be the largest workplace raid in 10 years. Agents arrested almost 100 workers at a meatpacking plant in eastern Tennessee, and we sent Jonathan Blitzer, who covers immigration for the New Yorker, to report on how the raid is affecting immigrant families, business, and the wider community. So the raid itself happened on Thursday morning, April 5th, and it was early. It was about 9 o'clock in the morning. A helicopter began circling above this plant. This plant is the third largest business in Bean Station in Granger County, but it's actually a very small, unassuming place, just a series of sort of a string of dilapidated barns. And all of a sudden, all of these law enforcement agents converged on the place. So you had Tennessee Highway Patrol, you had IRS agents, you had ICE agents.

All of them swarmed this plant because the owner of the plant stood accused of being tens of millions of dollars behind in taxes over an extended period of time. So you owed the IRS just a ton of money. And it turned out that when the IRS further investigated, they learned that, that he also employed a large number of undocumented laborers, mostly from Mexico and from Guatemala. 97 people were arrested, almost all of the Mexican or Guatemalan, and they were taken to Morristown to the National Guard Armory, where they were going to be booked and processed,

caused an immediate stir. As family members figured out what had happened, some started to gather outside the National Guard armory, there was a commotion in the roadway, and one of the people who noticed what was going on, even before he fully understood what had happened, was David Williams, the pastor of the Hillcris Baptist Church in town. So all day on Thursday, Hample of the 5th, I'm going up and down State Highway 11E, and I see this large Tennessee State Patrol presence there. And I'm thinking, what in the world's going on?

Are they having a funeral? What's the deal? It's right next to the school where my wife teaches fourth grade. And we live a mile from there. So it literally impacted my wife and I. directly and very emotionally. And so by 5 o'clock the afternoon, the wives, the family members, the children, the nephews, and nieces, they were gathering across the state highway out of the open, wondering, you know,

what's happened, where's my loved one, what's going to happen? The southeastern provision meat processing plant is in Bean Station, Tennessee. This is eastern Tennessee, small, rural area, tiny population. but really the community that was most affected by this raid lived in a town about 10 miles south, town called Morris Town, in a county that's called Hamblin County. 11.5% of the population in Hamblin County is Hispanic, which is more than twice what the average is

throughout the rest of the state of Tennessee. There were 160 kids, all U.S. citizens who had grown up in town, who had a parent who had been arrested in a raid itself. And one person said to me, look, someone's father is someone else's uncle, and a third person's brother. If you tallied up all of the lives affected by the raid, it amounted to much more than 97.

And then, of course, the next day, most of the Hispanic population did not allow their children to attend public school, and that happened to my wife's school, too. The children and the families were afraid to come to school the next day because they're like, you know, are we going to be deported also? And so you can really see the emotional impact upon the families. and it was just really disturbing.

I arrived in Morristown a few weeks after the raid, and even then there was still a palpable sense of crisis. The population in Hamblin County is about 30,000 people. It's a small, close-knit community, conservative, religious. In 2016, 77% of the county voted for Donald Trump. So definitely a conservative place, and on paper, a place that would seem maybe inhospitable to immigrants. But actually, the reality in the reality,

the ground is somewhat different. One of the first things I was told when I arrived in town was that local residents had helped raise $60,000 for the families who had been affected by the raid. They were proud of this fact. One person I spoke to was Hank Smith. Someone who's always voted Republican considers himself a supporter of Donald Trump. And he said to me that this was the first time he'd really actually grappled with the human impact of what immigration enforcement in the new era meant. And it led him to reconsider some of the positions he had. And it led him to reconsider some of the physicians he had held before. I met him through David Williams as pastor. And Pastor Williams said a similar thing to me about other parishioners of his who he said were engaging in different

forms of soul-searching themselves. How did you begin discussing this with your own parishioners at church? Did this come up? Did people ask you about it? Did you feel they need to bring it up with them? Well, exactly. I mean, as a community leader, you know, an old-timer once said, you know, preacher every Sunday with the Bible in one hand and the newspaper of the other. And so, you know, if you're going to be relevant and practical in your ministry, you can't have your head in the sand. And I mean, this was obviously the talk of the town, the community, made national news. And you said to me, and this is something that really moved and impacted me when you first told me, you said, this is about being a good Christian, about treating your neighbors in a certain kind of way.

And that, you know, that struck me as a different way of talking about this issue, because, you know, you talk about this politically and immediately get into a certain, um, kind of pitched battle. But you said to me, you know, look, there's a sort of biblical imperative here to,

to, to thinking compassionately about, uh, immigrants living in our community. Well, Christian teaching is the love God with your whole heart and love your neighbor as yourself. I mean,

that's Matthew 3. And Jesus commanded us to love our neighbors. And he never got into any details about the, um, status of their citizenship. And if you go back to the Old Testament, Deuteronomy chapter 10, God is very specific to the nation of Israel, the Jewish people, to look after the widows, the orphans, and the foreigner. Why? Because the Jews were foreigners in captivity for 400 plus years in Egypt. So we have a, as a true believer in Christ, we have a moral obligation and a commandment.

to look after the widows and orphans and foreigners, and those have been kind of cast aside by culture and society. In the aftermath of this raid, as you said, this became kind of the talk of the town, this raid, questions about how to enforce immigration laws, things like that, the fact that community members were effective. Did you have any particularly tough or dramatic or memorable conversations with individual parishioners who were wrestling with some of the moral

and legal issues at play here? Well, you know, I'm going to answer that and say yes. And there was, maybe there were the two extremes and the middle. And what I mean is I heard from parishioners and from folks that basically did not budge. These illegal immigrants, they should be rounded up and set home. And the other extreme was, no, we've got to step up and love on these people. Did you gain or lose any parishioners as a result of, you know, your outspokenness on this issue?

Because I know this in flames. Well, not. Not yet. Not yet. No, not, no, not yet. Not correctly. It's just, no. I think, there again, I think the bottom line is the people to the far left, the far right.

I don't know that they were moved much. But I think, and I hope and I pray that those of us in the middle, we began to rethink this. And have you felt that views on immigration more generally have shifted a bit in recent weeks in Morristown as a result of some of the stuff you're discussing? Well, I'm going to say it's just me shaking things up. I think it's brought it back to the forefront. It is making people think. And I think people have to understand. And I think this will be a lot of stuff in fact.

These are our neighbors. These people have, these families have been here for 10, 15, 20 years. and that they're raising their families here, they work here, they go to school here, they play ball here, they go to church, they're part of the fiber of our community. It's very unnerving to see such a state and federal law enforcement in your community, at your public elementary school, the street that you live on, it was unnerving. It was disturbing. And again, my prayers are for those law enforcement people, too, because they were just doing their jobs and what they were asked to do. It's a difficult, sensitive issue.

Yeah, it's for sure. It needs a lot of attention. That's David Williams, pastor of Hillcrest Baptist Church in Morristown, Tennessee. He spoke with staff writer Jonathan Blitzer, and you can find Jonathan's reporting from Morristown, his coverage of the fight over DACA and many other immigration issues at New Yorker.com. This is the New Yorker Radio Hour.

More to come. Welcome back to the New Yorker Radio Hour. I'm David Remnick. The Pulitzer Prize for Public Service, the highest award in journalism, was just recently handed to the reporters who broke the first stories about sexual harassment

and Harvey Weinstein's various predations. The allegations they reported, both in the New York Times and the New Yorker, were stunning and they literally changed the culture. They gave rise to the cultural reckoning that we now refer to as Me Too. And now as we hear the news that Bill Cosby has been found guilty, that sea change is impossible to ignore. The journalists were Jody Cantor and Megan Toey and many more at the New York Times,

and working separately, of course, Ronan Farrow at the New Yorker. Ronan Farrow joined me on the show in the fall just a couple of weeks after the Weinstein story broke, along with staff writer Alexander Schwartz. She was covering the Me Too movement too as it began rippling through social media. Ronan, I'd like to start with you, and the issue I'd like to begin with is why, in your experience, women don't bring these charges forward to it and are silent for so long. And then what happened? Why has this moment happened when the New York Times and the New Yorker were finally able to get women to talk about, in this instance, Harvey Weinstein? And then obviously this has had a kind of gate opening effect. This has been a major theme in our reporting, right? Trying to convey the nuances of why it is so hard for sexual assault survivors to speak. And it's a panoply of reasons. It's personal reasons to do with the often paralyzing effect of this kind of trauma on an individual level. You know, the women we've interviewed talk at length about the career fears as well. Some of these concerns are pragmatic. It's a whole range. And I think one of the things that has been an awakening associated with, you know, the women we've interviewed talk at length about the career fears as well. Some of these concerns are pragmatic. It's a whole range. And I think one of the things that has been an awakening associated with, this entire moment is people understanding in a way they didn't before just how hard it is to speak. Well, what happened when you began your reporting? When you went and you probably started hearing about three, four women in the beginning.

Obviously, there are many more to come. And when you approach these women, what kind of resistance did you get or did you get immediate acceptance? What was the process? A torturous process of many, many months. Almost every source in this story started out off the, record and then became an anonymous background source and then went, you know, what we call on the record. And many of those decisions to put their name on this didn't happen until

the 11th hour. So give an example that you can talk about in that way. Well, you know, a good example is actually the way in which people wavered. This wasn't always linear. Rose McGowan went on the record, showed her face, told her story in agonizing detail very painfully. When you were reporting this for NBC initially. Precisely. An on-camera interview, alleging rape. But she is a lot of then entered a, you know, legal confrontation with Harvey Weinstein and became fearful and for a time wavered, you know, and then after that she was voluble and talking once again. In another case, Annabella Shiora, the actress said, nothing happened, nothing happened. And it was only

seven months later, you know, after our initial piece ran, that she called me and broke down and said, actually, here's what happened. And it turned out that story checked out. Did she describe to you why initially she decided not to talk at all, why she lied to you in the beginning? She did. Annabella was one of the people to talk about this fear that I think so many survivors of sexual assault have, of being branded, of this being the one thing they're known for for the rest of their lives. And, you know, perhaps we're coming to a point in this conversation where it overshadows one less, but I think that's still a very legitimate concern. But, you know, she also talked about the specific fears here of this robust PR machine, a person who was very powerful and very litigious. And as we've chronicled in our reporting, also a really unthinkable before I reported on this machine of private investigators and, you know, people operating undercover going after these women. Annabella Shura was one of the many women who received a call that she found suspicious from a journalist who turned to. out to be linked to this whole thing. But Alex, most women don't face public relations challenges.

They don't face private investigators, but some unbelievably high percentage of women who are harassed in the workplace or who face much, even much more serious assaults and rape and all the rest don't report. Just as a baseline understanding, why is that the case? Well, I think the first thing that we've seen in a number of stories that have come out since Ronan his reporting is that, first of all, sometimes people do report and very, very little is done. That seems to be quite consistent across industry, across workplace. I mean, we've now seen this in tech. We've now seen this in publishing. It goes on and on. And I think the other part of it is that often people who are in this position, women who are in this position, have to continue to work closely with the men who have harassed them. So the barrier to get through is very high. One of the particularities of this story is that it happened with show business. But as we know, this is just this is one instance of many, many, many, many fields. And is it good that this is broken through with a show business moment or is there a negative side to that, do you think? Well, I actually think in some ways it's crucial that it broke through in this kind of field because this is the first example I can really think of where famous women have come forward. as a group and said, this happened to me, this was a problem for me, rather than women becoming

famous because they came forward with a sexual harassment or assault claim. Nobody knew who Anita Hill was before the Clarence Thomas hearings. Nobody knew. That's what she became known for. In this case, we're dealing with actresses who the public knows. And I also think that the public has a really intimate relationship with Hollywood stars. You see them, you know, for much of your own life. You you feel close to them in a certain way. That's what acting is. And I think it was huge to have that, you know, that level of public figure be able to come forward. To both of you, do you think that fame makes an accuser more credible or in the court of public opinion?

Is that somehow transferable then to the rest of society? I think it can cut both ways, you know. Even I would say within that Hollywood community, one of the comments that has stuck with me in this is Annabella Shiora said, you know, I looked at these other women, Gwyneth Paltrow, Mira Sorvino, and I thought they're so beautiful, they're so poised, they come from great families, it could have never happened to them. Yeah, I think that's going on with, I think that's one of the reasons why the ball got rolling to the degree that it has, because you could look at women who are extremely accomplished and say, oh, if this is a problem, I think that's part of what Me Too has been about. If this was a problem for someone like her, then, wow, it's not just about me personally. I still have trouble making sense of the degree to which a gate has opened here, but something obviously has happened. I have to tell you a lot of men that I know, younger and my age and older two, in this moment, have, even though they know themselves to be innocent of anything grotesque or anything on a par of what's what we've been discussing, is suddenly sort of doing a sort through their romantic history of what jokes did I tell in 1998 in the workplace or, There's a sorting through of conscience that I hear about all the time.

And the flip side of this, Alex, I wonder what the conversation among women or women you know, not just the office, just your friends, and how that's changed. I think there's shock. I think it's kind of amazement and shock. But surely this is not the first time anybody's thought about this or spoken of it. What changed? No, no. The amazement in shock is the idea that,

that men are thinking about this. This has not been something that men have had to think about as a group or clearly individually. And I think it is good that men are, as you say, are asking themselves, what did I do? Did I do anything? What should I've done differently? What could I've done differently? I'm not in any way advocating for a mass paranoia or a mass – I guess I am advocating for mass reckoning, but not for a sense of personal fear and did I do something and did I screw something.

But these are questions. It cannot just be on women to police this whole situation. It has to be everyone. And so I think just the sense that we may not be in it alone is profound. Ronan, purely as a matter of journalism, where does this story, if you want to call it a story, go next? Well, one of the striking things in talking to women about why they wouldn't talk was, you know, they just assumed this would never happen. That it would fall on deaf ears. Maybe something would trickle out and he'd be fine.

His career would go on. I think now there is a growing body of precedent for you talk about this. It can have an effect on the world. You know, it's going to continue to keep the floodgates open. Does it make you feel differently about the way you might have thought about Bill Clinton in the 90s? For me personally, I don't think my view on that has shifted. I think that the inquiries on that were serious and valid. I do think that it has triggered.

You know, there's already been a set of hot takes on this spilling out over the internet, a much-needed reassessment of Monica Lewinsky, you know, who I think was badly victimized in the way that was covered. Who's to be believed automatically in these cases? Are we in danger of overcorrecting, of automatically believing anybody? Should anybody be automatically believed? I read something the other day that I think gets at it really well. There's a phrase believe women. Believe women doesn't just mean automatically believe women the man's word has no weight.

I think it's meant as a corrective to what is often the situation, which is often a sense of not believing women as a default. Can you overcorrect? I don't know, but I think trying to correct to some degree is it's past time. My strong feeling is that we will for a time overcorrect. And I think in a way that's healthy as a redress for how the conversation is. been for so long. The pendulum is swinging furiously now. And I do think in the long term it will find equilibrium, but there's going to be a painful period of reassessment before that happens. When the two of you were following this on social media, what do you make? What do you learn

about the conversation in the country about this? Well, I've been struck by how often this question comes up of sort of why now that suspicion does still run through this whole conversation. And also... What's your answer to that? You know, I think it is that emerging body of precedent that people who didn't feel heard now understand that, oh, there is a mechanism through the media where they can be heard.

But as you know better than anybody, 13 years ago, this magazine tried very, very hard to write a story that included these kinds of charges against Harvey Weinstein and he was able to fend it off. It couldn't reach print because we didn't have nearly, nearly the level of evidence

or voices in Canoletta's attempt at this. He wrote a very tough profile of him of Harvey Weinstein, but it wasn't quite there, journalistically. And I think that is a point of complication, and rightly so both for women coming forward now and victims of all kinds, and for reporters looking at this.

I mean, look, there is... But Ken tried like hell. I mean, I've never seen anybody work harder on a piece than he did at that time on Harvey Weinstein, and we couldn't get anywhere near what you had probably six months ago, eight months ago. And as brave as it is, what each survivor has come forward to say, they also struggle with feelings of complicity because of that. You know, did my staying silent over the years allow another person to get attacked? A question for you both in terms of the near future, at least.

What will happen that disappoints you as we move forward and what will you see as a successful world? forward. I would like to see a situation in which workplaces of all kinds can put in protections for their workers. I mean, everything from Silicon Valley down to hotel housekeeping. And so I will be disappointed if this kind of major public reckoning moment does not lead to that kind of concrete change. I have some hope it can. I can say on the reporting side of things, look, there is this discomfort that people are grappling with in real time of. of the court of public opinion versus the court of law. And of course, we would like to have a society

in which criminal claims of this type are fully and fairly heard in the criminal justice system. That is not the reality we live in. And I think that one thing the reporting on this has illustrated is that meticulous investigative reporting can actually interrogate the truth in a really useful way. Now, I think that there is something to the critique that there's now a flood of claims that are not being investigated in that way.

That doesn't mean that they're not valid. It means that they merit further interrogation. So I hope that one thing that comes out of this is an understanding of that distinction and the fact that if you report these in the right way, you know, they can be fairly out there in the conversation. Alex Schwartz, Ronan Farrow. Thank you. Thanks. Ronan Farrow, who just received the Pulitzer Prize and the New Yorker's Alexandra Schwartz. I spoke with them in November, and you can read all of their work at New Yorker.com.

You've heard, I'm sure, about the many women seeking congressional seats this year. Nearly 500 women are running in the midterm races, which is up from 300 women in 2012. And some 78 women are expected to run for governor, another all-time high. Among those gubernatorial candidates is a Georgia lawyer, a businesswoman, an author, and a former state representative named Stacey Abrams. If Abrams becomes the governor of Georgia, and that's no sure thing at all, she'd be the first black woman to serve as a governor in our country's history. Not to mention one of the first novelists to hold out office. Abrams is the author of a number of books under the name Selena Montgomery.

And her new book, written under her own name, is nonfiction, and it's called Minority Leader. She recently spoke with the New Yorker's Jeffrey Tubin. Now, your book is a combination of a memoir, self-help, political manifesto. And I want to try to talk about all of that. But let's start with you, okay? One theme in your book is ambition and unapologetic ambition. And there's a memorable passage where a boyfriend breaks up with you when you're in college. And you wrote on a spreadsheet what you wanted to accomplish. And the spreadsheet had columns. for age, job tasks. By 24, you would write a best-selling spy novel. By 30, you would be a millionaire running a corporation. By 35, you would be mayor of Atlanta. Like, where did that come from? Well, I was 18, so all of those things seemed to coalesce and live in perfect harmony in my mind. By 24, I had not written a spy novel, but I wrote my first romantic suspense novel. publishers at the time did not believe that women read spy novels or that men would read a spy novel by or about a woman, especially not one with an African-American woman as the main character.

And so I decided to write my spies as in a romance novel. And so I wrote a romantic suspense novel. So that one got done. I have been woefully inadequate in achieving my millionaire status. But I have hope. I have hope. I've started a few small businesses. and my goal is one day for one of them to, you know, achieve greatness and I can hit that goal too.

The mayor of Atlanta piece was really driven by my growing up years, with growing up poor, growing up, understanding that government has a real role to play in how we live our lives for good and ill. And particularly at that point, I had been at Spelman College during the time of the Rodney King riots. And while everyone focused on L.A., there were riots in Atlanta. They actually shut down the Atlanta University Center, which is a collection of black colleges, and Spelman College was one of them. I was very agitated. I organized my fellow students to push back against the man, complaining about how they were treating young people. And I ended up getting into a disagreement with the mayor of Atlanta, the famed Maynard Jackson,

who was an amazing man. We disagreed about the role that the city had played in helping address youth poverty and a few months later he hired me to work for the Office of Youth Services and that really gave me a lens

into the role that the mayor could play and how to address poverty. So there was an inherent desire on my part to find the means possible to disrupt poverty to eliminate it and the mayor seemed like the best job I could find

where I'd seen a person of color especially a black person, take on that job and really do some good things with it. And you are now a candidate for the Democratic nomination for governor. There's been a lot of talk about the demographic changes that will help the Democratic Party in the West and the South. But it hasn't seemed to have kicked in yet. What do you see as the root to a Democratic, capital D, revival in the South? Sure. When I became minority leader in 2010, it was at the Nader for Democrats in Georgia. We lost every statewide office. We lost members of the House the day I became leader.

And so I came into leadership at the worst possible moment for Democrats in our history in the South, especially in Georgia. The demographic shifts have happened. The challenge has been having the candidate and the campaign and the infrastructure to leverage that. demographic change. My campaign is very different than most campaigns being run in the South, being run across the country. How so? Most campaigns will raise money and hold it, really focusing on the last few weeks of the election. And typically field apparatus, the field organization, waits until the general. My belief is that we have to actually cultivate relationships with those potential voters now because they do exist. We have the numbers. What we haven't had is the intentionality of investing in those voters and engaging them in a way that makes them believe that

voting is a realistic option for them. Because if they haven't seen change and if they haven't seen anyone bother to ask for their vote in a real thoughtful and meaningful way, they stay home. And so our campaign, the Atlanta Journal Constitution, our local paper, called our strategy unconventional because we have been very direct about investing early in the kind of infrastructure and the kind of cultivation of non-traditional voters that you normally wouldn't see until a general election. What about the role of race? I mean, there has never been an African American governor of Georgia. There are no African-American governors in the entire country now. Why is that? In part because there has been a dis...

I don't know if it's a disengagement or a disbelief, but getting people of color into executive positions has been difficult at every strata of government. Race has a role to play. It has a role to play in even conversations about my viability for this office, because when you haven't seen something happen, it's hard to believe it's possible. President Obama, Deval Patrick, Doug Wilder are all emblematic of what is possible. But for me, there is absolutely no clear roadmap to this.

There's never been a black woman ever elected to lead a state in the history of the U.S. And so I do talk about race. I think it is a critical part of my campaign, not because I only want to win a certain segment of the population, but because that distinction illuminates the other challenges we face. How much of the potential for your campaign relates to Donald Trump? Do you think, you know, it's widely believed that this coming year is going to be a good Democratic year?

Do you think that's true in Georgia? Do you think it's true because of Trump? I think the Trump effect is that people understand in an acute and real way how vital voting is. Every day brings a new fresh horror that demonstrates how important voting is. But my campaign is not about running against Donald Trump. I think the way Democrats win is by using the enthusiasm generated by how terrible he has been as a president for so many of the communities we speak for. And so I see Trump. and his effect on this election more as creating a zeitgeist that allows me to really explain why voting this year matters. But his mismanagement of our country is not the core reason for my race. There's one of the main causes you've been involved in both as a legislator and now as a candidate is voting rights. and the assault on voting rights from the Trump administration, but also your efforts to expand it in Georgia. What are you doing in Georgia?

So for the last few years, I have been the leader of a group called the New Georgia Project. In 2014, we registered a little over 86,000 voters of color throughout the state of Georgia. And between 2014 and 2016, we've registered more than 200,000. And to put that in context, in 2014, there were 800,000 unregistered people. of color. So we've tackled about a quarter of those numbers. But in addition to the registration piece, we've had to fight hard against voter suppression. And that has included having almost 35,000 registrants, including some of our own, who were illegally canceled by the Secretary of State. And because of our efforts, because of my organization, we were able to fight. It took us two years,

but we were able to prove that the Secretary of State had illegally canceled these registrations, and he was forced to restore them. And so I've been very proud of the work we've done. And this campaign has led me to separate myself. We've now spun off the New Georgia Project. It's its own standalone 501c3. But more work has to be done, including making certain that the Secretary of State, who was the architect of much of this voter suppression, does not become the next governor of Georgia, which is something he's trying to do. And don't you sometimes think, you know, when you look at an issue like voting rights, we're back to the days of Martin Luther King and there is just blatant racism in what public officials are doing.

I wouldn't say we ever left. I think greater attention is focused because of the changing demography of our state and the tactics are changing. But there has always been an attempt to limit whose voices could be heard. in the body politic. And I do think it is emblematic of a great deal that in the year that we recognize the assassination of Dr. King that across this country we are fighting so many entrenched battles on the conversation of voter suppression. Let me ask you a sort of a big picture question as we come towards the end here is that, you know, the subtitle of your book is how to lead from the outside and make real change. But isn't the message of our politics today,

that it doesn't matter how you lead. All that matters is whether Democrats or Republicans win because the gulf between the parties is so great right now. I mean, is it realistic to think that you're ever going to persuade Republicans of anything? I mean, aren't we so locked in to a partisan divide now that only the voters can make a choice? After that, people are just locked into their positions? I started writing this book in 2015, 2016, when I first started having the thought. And while the political piece is an inherent part of who I am and what I do, leadership is much bigger than being in politics. Leadership is about understanding that there are challenges that you see that need to be addressed.

And this can be in your company, this can be in your community, it can be in your politics, it might be in your family. And when it comes to political leadership, my job as minority leader was a very specific one. It says in the title, I have fewer votes than the other guy who's the majority leader. And my job was to still get things done. And I was very good at it. I worked with Republicans. I negotiated good deals. I was able to navigate differences of ideology, differences of region, differences of economics.

And one of the ways I did so was by not diminishing what they believed and why they believed it. That insight is actually a powerful tool that we can use, especially in our politics. Stacey Abrams, author of Minority Leader, How to Lead from the Outside and Make Real Change, candidate for governor of Georgia. Thanks for joining us at The New Yorker. Thank you so much for having me, Jeffrey. This has been delightful. Stacey Abrams is a candidate to be the governor of Georgia, and she's currently facing Stacey Evans in the Democratic primary.

Polls close on May 22nd. I'm David Remnick, and that's the show for now. Thanks for listening. I hope you'll join us next time. The New Yorker Radio Hour is a co-production of WNYC Studios and The New Yorker. Our theme music was composed and performed by Merrill Garbus of Tune Yards with additional music by Alexis Quadrado. This episode was produced by Alex Barron,

Emily Boutin, Ave Corrieau, Rianne Corby, Jill Duboff, Karen Frillman, David Krasnow, Louis Mitchell, Sarah Nix, Mithelie Rao, and Stephen Valentino, with help from Susan Morrison, Emma Allen, Michelle Moses, Emily Mann, and Jessica Henderson. The New Yorker Radio Hour is supported in part by the Cherina Endowment Fund.