Join us on the Jack Hopkins Show as we have a heartfelt conversation with Conor O'Callaghan, a dynamic candidate for Arizona's first congressional district. Conor shares his extraordinary journey from Ireland to Arizona, revealing how the state's public education system paved his way to earning three Ivy League degrees. His commitment to preserving and enhancing public education for all students in Arizona is a testament to his dedication and vision for the future. You won't want to miss his inspiring story and passionate advocacy for educational equity.
We also tackle the high stakes of the upcoming November elections, shedding light on critical issues affecting health, wealth, and personal freedoms. We dissect the potential ramifications for abortion rights, the Affordable Care Act, Medicare, and Social Security if candidates like David Schweikert are elected. Our discussion underscores the necessity for clear, effective political messaging and the importance of holding deceptive politicians accountable. This episode is a must-listen for anyone concerned about the future of healthcare, social safety nets, and personal liberties in America.
In our exploration of Arizona's evolving political identity, we examine the state's unique independent streak and its shift towards a modern libertarian outlook. We discuss the contentious Arizona voucher program and its implications for public financing and education equity. Our conversation highlights the broader issues of tax policy and the wealth gap, offering a critical perspective on how these policies affect the state's most vulnerable populations. Tune in to understand why maintaining a balanced and democratic political environment in Arizona is more crucial than ever.
Join us on the Jack Hopkins Show as we have a heartfelt conversation with Conor O'Callaghan, a dynamic candidate for Arizona's first congressional district. Conor shares his extraordinary journey from Ireland to Arizona, revealing how the state's public education system paved his way to earning three Ivy League degrees. His commitment to preserving and enhancing public education for all students in Arizona is a testament to his dedication and vision for the future. You won't want to miss his inspiring story and passionate advocacy for educational equity.
We also tackle the high stakes of the upcoming November elections, shedding light on critical issues affecting health, wealth, and personal freedoms. We dissect the potential ramifications for abortion rights, the Affordable Care Act, Medicare, and Social Security if candidates like David Schweikert are elected. Our discussion underscores the necessity for clear, effective political messaging and the importance of holding deceptive politicians accountable. This episode is a must-listen for anyone concerned about the future of healthcare, social safety nets, and personal liberties in America.
In our exploration of Arizona's evolving political identity, we examine the state's unique independent streak and its shift towards a modern libertarian outlook. We discuss the contentious Arizona voucher program and its implications for public financing and education equity. Our conversation highlights the broader issues of tax policy and the wealth gap, offering a critical perspective on how these policies affect the state's most vulnerable populations. Tune in to understand why maintaining a balanced and democratic political environment in Arizona is more crucial than ever.
Welcome to the Jack Hopkins Show podcast, where stories about the power of focus and resilience are revealed by the people who live those stories and now the host of the Jack Hopkins Show podcast, jack Hopkins.
Speaker 2:Okay and welcome to the Jack Hopkins Show podcast. I am your host, jack Hopkins. Okay and welcome to the Jack Hopkins Show podcast. I'm your host, jack Hopkins, and this evening we have somebody that the thing that when I was researching that stood out in my mind, and I'll tell you why in a moment. He's got three degrees from an Ivy League school. Now, I'll tell you the significance of that in a moment. But Connor O'Callaghan is running for office in Arizona's first congressional district and we've got early voting coming up July 5th.
Speaker 3:The primary is July 30th, so a lot to talk about. Welcome, Connor Jack. Thanks so much for having me on Great to be here.
Speaker 2:Big fan of yours, so it's great to be doing the show Fantastic. I'll tell you why that stands out to me. The three degrees from an Ivy League school. I've always told my kids in the absence of any other reason, I've always told my kids in the absence of any other reason, a college degree says to a future employer I know they can at least stick with something for four years, right At a minimum. I know they can follow through on something for four years. Now to do that at an Ivy League school, that's even another notch, just going on the assumption that things are probably a little tougher at most Ivy League schools than they are at, say, a community college. So that in and of itself stands out about you, my friend.
Speaker 3:Well, listen, I appreciate that and so you know. So something I'd love to drive home for your listeners is I am the product of public schools here in Arizona, in the same district that I'm now seeking to represent. So I moved to what is now Congressional District 1. When I was four years old I was born in Ireland I still had an Irish accent. I had an Irish accent until I was in first grade.
Speaker 3:My first grade teacher thought that I had a speech impediment. I called my parents in for an emergency parent-teacher conference and then thought, oh my goodness, all three of them have speech impediments. She was like oh, I guess it's just an Irish accent. That's how Irish people talk. This, of course, being Arizona in the late 80s, we're probably the first Irish people they'd ever met, probably the first Irish people they'd ever met, right. So you know, and of course, the agreed upon solution was to teach the proper American. So I've spoken like this ever since the first grade. But I, you know, k through 12 public school kid and I seriously just had the best time. Just unbelievable teachers, unbelievable coaches, administrators, guidance counselors, volunteers, and so, yes, everything you said, I think, is true, and you know, I was blessed to go on and get a tremendous education at the University of Pennsylvania.
Speaker 2:But none of that would have been possible without my public school experience right here in the district, and I'm glad you brought that up because so often when we hear Ivy League school, we immediately we tend to think, oh, privileged family, you know, born with a silver spoon in their mouth, which it's pretty unfair because that's simply not the case in every situation. So I think it's great that you've got that. Start with public education. I think public education is so important and clearly it was sufficient enough to provide you with the foundation to be able to go to an Ivy League school, so that's a great point.
Speaker 3:I think that's spot on and, candidly, that's one of the reasons that I'm running for Congress. So my wife and I are raising our three beautiful boys in the same city, scottsdale, same public school system that I grew up in there's zone to go to the same high school. I went to Chaparral High School and I do feel like and this is an unfortunate thing, jack that things aren't as good and the opportunities aren't as good now as they were for me, you know, 30 years ago. So when I was going to school here, you know women had the right to have an abortion, we had an assault weapons ban, fighting climate change in school, you know. You remember reduced reuse, recycle, you know.
Speaker 3:And there's been this fight here in Arizona which I won't bore your listeners with, but there's really a fight over the public school system. You know, and it's the other battle lines aren't super cleanly drawn but it's pretty much the Republicans want to kind of deemphasize and sort of, you know, deconstruct the public school system, make it more charter and religious and private focused schools. You know the Democrats sort of view it as their mission to save the public school system. I'm very much on the front lines of that fight, given that I'm a product of public schools, myself and my kids. But it's a little bit depressing from the standpoint, jack, that you know I want.
Speaker 3:I'm in this fight because I want my kids and my kids, friends and their kids and everybody's kids here to have the same opportunities that I had. You know, normally it's like I want people to have a better opportunity. I had it. So I get us back to a place where you really think that you can be anything you want to be and achieve anything you want to achieve, be and achieve anything you want to achieve, because that's how I felt and I want all the kids you know in our district and in Arizona and in our country, frankly to you know, be able to go to their local public school and still have all the opportunities that I have.
Speaker 2:And that's such an important distinction to make, because to be able to go beyond, we first have to catch up to what you were able to have. It's such an important distinction. This is a question I have for you, and it's kind of on two different levels, I guess. First, let's do it on a national level. I think anybody listening has their own personal map or view of what's at stake in these November elections, but I always like to hear everybody's individual interpretation. So, on a national level, on a federal level, what's at stake in the November elections?
Speaker 3:I mean listen, I think there's three things that are at stake nationally it's your health, it's your wealth and it's your individual freedoms, and I think that's what's on the ballot. People say abortion's on the ballot or people say democracy's on the ballot, but I think it's your health, your wealth and your personal freedoms, and we can get into all of what that means. But health, it's abortion rights, absolutely. It's also aspects of the Affordable Care Act. It's Medicare, which David Schweiker who I'm hopefully running against in November he's on the record. He wants to slash Medicare, wants to slash Social Security so that Social Security gets into the wealth part of things.
Speaker 3:You paid into Social Security your whole life. David Schweiker doesn't necessarily want that money to be there for you when you retire. That's wrong. That's just fundamentally wrong as far as I'm concerned. And then the individual liberty side of things is obvious. Again, that ties back to abortion rights. But even just look at Project 2025. Some of the things that are being proposed by the MAGA extremists like Donald Trump and David Schweikert one of his acolytes are really, really scary, scary things. So I do not think it's hyperbole to say your health, your wealth and your personal freedom are on the line in November. So vote like your life depends on it, because your life may depend on it.
Speaker 2:Absolutely, and I like the categorization of those three things because, as you said, there's a lot that falls beneath each of those headings and that's kind of where we get caught up sometimes is in some of those not to diminish them, but they're subcategories of these bigger overarching frames of reference, and so I think we sometimes can lose sight of the big picture because we do get so zeroed on one issue, and not that that's a bad thing, but we do so at the exclusion of everything else and there's not just one thing.
Speaker 3:You're completely right and, jack, I got to hand it to you. You know you are a great Twitter warrior and you're great at messaging and I think it's something that Democrats, historically, we collectively haven't done a great job of it. You know, I think you're fantastic. I think Rachel Bitticoffer, you know who authored Hit Him when it Hurts, which has sort of become a little bit of a Bible for candidates and campaign managers in the Democratic Party nationally. You know, you're absolutely right.
Speaker 3:We have to be, you know, sharp and pointed in our messaging because there is a lot at stake and you know it's the age where, like, if you're explaining, you're losing, and I've heard Hakeem Jeffries say that the and this is a negative on the Democratic Party that you know Republicans govern in headlines and Democrats govern in fine print and, as future Speaker Jeffries said, no one wants to read the fine print, right? So we need to refine the way we message. Again, you know, akeem Jeffries has done a wonderful job of this. You've done a great job, rachel's done a great job, but we need to sort of mirror what the Republicans do, frankly, very well and just tell people in very simple terms what's at stake, why this election matters and why we have to elect President Biden, why we have to elect Ruben Gallego over Kerry Lake and why we have to get me into office over David Schweikert and flip the house. Thank you for that.
Speaker 2:First of all, I agree on everything that you just said, and one thing, if we stick with that since I'm not running for office, I tend to be a little more edgy than what a typical candidate can afford to be. With that being said, let's talk about David Schweikert for a minute, because when I was researching this guy, I was like this is a bad, bad dude. This guy's not for democracy. He seems very deceptive. For example, he won't answer the question if he's for national abortion ban, but he co-sponsored a national abortion ban six different times. A national abortion ban six different times. No-transcript bingo.
Speaker 3:It's like what else do you need to know? You know, after that court ruling came out in Alabama restricting IVF, he said he will. You know he'll always be a defender of IVF. It's like well, david, you co-sponsor the Life and Conception Act six times, which would have been tantamount to a national abortion ban and restrict IVF nationally in much the same way as happened in Alabama.
Speaker 3:So, like so many of these MAG extremists, they want to talk out of both sides of their mouth. And now that we're onto them, you know, now that we're pointing out these guys are draconian Like he didn't. This isn't something David Schweikert co-sponsored once. You know it's not an opinion he had 20 years ago and maybe he's genuinely evolved. He sponsored this thing six times and as recently as 2021. So, to your point, you're right, he won't go on the record, but the record is very, very clear and we have to call these things out for what they are. You know the MAGA extremists, in particular Donald Trump, their master, is at gaslighting, and I mean that as a compliment. You know they're so good at it, but it's like it's all right. It's all right there. We just have to shine a light on it and be like this, this this guy is for a national abortion ban. How how much more clear could it possibly be?
Speaker 2:Right, you, you, you nailed. It is etched indelibly on his back. He cannot escape that. It's etched in stone. Election denier as well, somebody who's in lockstep with Trump in every imaginable way. Again, not a good guy, certainly not somebody that embraces democracy, or at least not in the way that we view democracy moving forward. But let's take a step back and let's look at July 30th, because we've got some people to get through. Before we get to David Schweikert, tell me about your opponents. I know that we've got some not-so-good people there either in terms of what they stand for, so tell me a little bit, just kind of some surface-level stuff on where your opponents stand.
Speaker 3:Sure. So I'm in a six-way race, me being one of the six running against five other candidates, and I guess, to sort of hit it head on, I'm running. The two probably most formidable competitors in the race that I need to make sure that I defeat and we're confident we will, but we have to get it done are very recent former Republicans. So you have Marlene Gallon Woods, who was a Republican for almost 40 years and she was a Republican until after the midterms in 2018. So her whole narrative is that Donald Trump is crazy and the Republican Party left her and she had no choice. She had to become a Democrat. So you waited two years after Trump got elected more than two years after Trump got elected to switch. So it wasn't like it was a quick switch. You know, and we're talking about somebody who switched in their mid 50s, you know, and now she's this paragon of virtue. No one's going to fight like she will for women's rights. But meanwhile, when you go back and look at the record, her husband was a very well-respected state attorney general here in the 90s, but he was a Republican. He led literally led court cases against Planned Parenthood. He took on Planned Parenthood in court here in the 90s Woods versus Planned Parenthood, granted some of that's part of his job, but where was Marlene sort of speaking out? Then Marlene at the time gave a max donation. She said it was only $140. Turns out $140 was the most you could give because Jan Brewer was a clean elections candidate. She supported Jan Brewer, supported Jan Brewer so extensively that she was literally standing over jan brewer's shoulder on her re-election night, clapping as she was. Waving around you. Everyone was waving around signs saying fire pelosi, plotting the fact that nancy pelosi got evicted from her house. And then this was after jan brewer signed the draconian sp 1070 law, which was one of the most racist immigration laws in the history of this country, and it's rearing its ugly head again now because there's going to be a ballot signed the draconian SB 1070 law, which was one of the most racist immigration laws in the history of this country, and it's rearing its ugly head again now because there's going to be a ballot measure. It's very similar to what SB 1070 was. So she supported her after that and then in that second term that Marlene helped her get, she went and signed the most draconian abortion law in the country at that time, which was a 20-week ban. Now, of course, ironically, that feels quaint now. You know, like gee, only a 20 week ban, but at the time, it was the most restrictive ban in the country.
Speaker 3:You know she went on to support Mitt Romney. You know Mitt Romney was unabashedly pro-life. You know, in 2017, she was retweeting a tweet from Ben Sasse, who was a very pro-life senator. You know, now she says, oh, it was a tweet about adoption and I have an adopted daughter and God bless Marlene. She's a great mom, you know, and being an adoptive parent is an amazing thing. I don't know that. You know, elevating Ben Sasse's message, whether it was about being pro-life, which it seemed to be, or whether it was about adoption, it just again, it doesn't really add up. No, and I'm a firm believer, if you want to know where someone's headed, look at where they've been I.
Speaker 2:I want to. I want to talk to this point and kind of expand on it on your behalf. As you know, I'm a former republican, right I'm, I identify as a democrat. Now I I'm anti-Trump, I'm hardcore anti-MAGA and I've built a decent following. But let's be clear, my followers aren't really taking much of a risk because I'm not running for office, right, I mean, I'm just, I'm a messaging guy and I'm fighting for something they believe in. I'm, I'm locked arm and arm with him.
Speaker 2:But let me say this, let me go on record and say no one should ever trust a jack hopkins who's running for office. I wouldn't trust a jack hopkins who, oh, you know what. I think I'm going to jump in and run as a Democrat Now. I could make a case all day why you should trust me, right. But just as a general rule, in the atmosphere that we are in now, I don't think we can afford to take the risk of betting on somebody who, not so long ago, was rah-rah Republican. It's just too great a risk. And I think, just having a general way of thinking about the world and saying you know what Jack Hopkins seems like a great guy and I've followed him for a while now, and you know, I think he's a good guy, I think he's a trustworthy guy, but even yet I would not vote for Jack Hopkins for an important office, because we just can't take that risk. We need somebody with a proven record running as a Democrat. So that's my view on that.
Speaker 3:Look, jack, I think that's very well said. I appreciate those sentiments and here you can feel free to steal this. Here's how I sort of describe it. Right, it's great and I want to talk about Amish Shah also, because he's in the same boat, but it's great that Marlene and Amish got off their crazy train. That's great. There's plenty of room on our train. We want to build a big tent. We welcome those independents. We welcome those disaffected Republicans, moderate Republicans, republicans who are just fed up with MAGA. We want them on our train and I know, jack, you want them on the train, but we don't have to give up the conductor seat on the train. You know there's plenty of room and a couple of cars back, right, you know. But it's like, hey, I'm here now. I figured out Trump was crazy after the midterms in 2018. Now let me drive.
Speaker 3:It's like what I like that, and so that's sort of how I think I like that. And you have Amish Shah, who is another formidable competitor. He was a Republican in 2016, voted in the Republican presidential primary here in Arizona, said he voted for Donald Trump. Claims he did it to help Hillary Clinton. The problem with that is we're late in the primary cycle, so it was over, and it was Trump and Cruz, so I don't know what he was really thinking anyway.
Speaker 3:And Trump had it all locked up. But here's the thing he says I switched parties. You know I switched parties to help Hillary. I thought Trump would be easier to beat, so that's why I did it. That's not a terrible narrative, except that Amish moved here in 2016, registered as Republican, voted for Donald Trump. So let's go back.
Speaker 3:Where was Amish before he was in New York City 2004 to 2016,. Not a registered Democrat. So the implication of switching parties would imply you were a Democrat. You switched for a few months and switched back. That's not what happened here. So again switched for a few months and switched back. That's not what happened here. So again, it's more gaslighting. You know, when he was in the state house, he lobbied hard against over-the-counter access to contraceptives for women. You know he led some brutal hearings on gay conversion therapy and they ended up allowing religious exceptions for gay conversion therapy. So again there's a room on our train and people can change, and these people may be gay rights champions now. They may be vehemently pro-choice, you know. They may be vehemently pro-democracy. That's awesome.
Speaker 3:So stay in our tent and help us win and get over the goal line. You know, but we've seen this too many times, you know. We saw it here in our stay with Kyrsten Sinema. We don't need to replace a heinous 14-year MAGA extremist with somebody who may or may not be a Democrat. It's just too big of a risk to take. As you said, I agree.
Speaker 2:Well stated. Well stated, Tell me what the atmosphere is like in Arizona. Of course we see the news feeds and we see the stories, but to live there and to operate in that environment, is it edgy right now. Can you feel the tension?
Speaker 3:You know it's interesting, jack, it's not super edgy. As I mentioned, I grew up here, raising my family here. I think this state and this district is the best place in the world, best place in the country, and I love it here. And the first thing you might say is like wow, it's interesting, given your politics, that you feel that way. Arizona is a very interesting place and one of the things I love about it the most is it has a real still like independent in the literal sense, like Wild West sort of streak to it. You know, in the modern times you might call it libertarian, right. But you know, when I was growing up here, and even now, there's sort of always been a little bit of like a to each their own thing, like, hey, you do your thing, I'm going to do my thing, you don't bother me, I won't bother you, and we're all good. And that sort of has persisted and pervaded over the course of time. You know, has the temperature gotten turned up here? Sure, but the temperature has gotten turned up nationally. So I don't think that it's turned up any higher here than it is anywhere else, right?
Speaker 3:Something else, too, I think is interesting to highlight is everybody nationally kind of talks about how Arizona is a purple state, you know, or even a blue state, because we now, you know, thank goodness, we have, you know, a great Democratic governor in Katie Hobbs. We have a great Democratic Attorney General in Chris Mays. We have a great Democratic Secretary of State in Adrian Fontes. You know, we have Mark Kelly. Obviously, you know, kyrsten Sinema was a Democrat. Hopefully Ruben Gallego will be winning that seat, so you can look at Arizona and say, wow, it's a purple state or maybe even a blue state.
Speaker 3:I actually think it's still kind of a pink state, and what I mean by that is I think there are still a lot of McCain Republicans here who have a real identity crisis, and these are the people that we want to reach out to, and independents as well. We want to bring them to our side of the tent, and we've done that to a large degree, including people like Marlene and Amish, but we want to continue to do that, because those are the folks that basically they have an identity crisis. They're like well, I don't usually support Democrats, but I'm not a MAGA extremist. I really don't like Donald Trump. I really don't like the direction that we're going in with that.
Speaker 3:So, you know, I think I'm willing to make that leap over and support a good, moderate Democrat who grew up here raising his family or has some financial expertise from working on Wall Street. You know those are the people that we need to appeal to. But I think if you're really thinking about what is Arizona, I would say it's pink, but it's not deep red. And the Republican Party, to a degree, can't get out of its own way because they keep nominating these crazy MAGA candidates that can't win general elections and I think you find those moderate R's that like they just want their party back, right, you know? And the longer this MAGA stuff goes on, the more things continue to come our way and, quite frankly, jack, rightfully so, you know.
Speaker 2:I couldn't agree more. I lived in Mesa 1990. And I remember Arizona did at that time it had this feel of it didn't really, it wasn't really hooked into any other state in terms of what it thought, what it did. It was just kind of like you said, it's kind of the Wild West, it's just kind of like, okay, this is Arizona, almost like it wasn't even connected to anything around it. I lived in California for many years and it did not have that feel that was unique to Arizona. So when you talk about Arizona being a pink state, that resonates with me and I say, yeah, you know, I've heard nobody else talk about it in that way, but that really captures the essence. I think of Arizona and of Republicans who, like you said, don't normally vote for Democrats, but they're going, you know what. But I can't vote for this either, you know.
Speaker 2:I can't and they don't want to let democracy crumble. You know the McCain Democrats or the McCain Republicans. Rather, they didn't want to see democracy crumble.
Speaker 3:No, I mean McCain took on Trump before he unfortunately passed. I mean that's a feud that's still going on today. Donald Trump can't let it go Right.
Speaker 2:So we've got this pink situation message that you think has been connecting most directly to those McCain-ish people.
Speaker 3:Yeah, it's a great question and you know, again, I think it gets back to that sort of pragmatism. You know, mccain obviously was known as a maverick and it's the same kind of thing. You know, now we as Democrats are really the Mavericks. We're the ones trying to keep the country together. And I think it's a few things. One I think you know, we, I Democratic Party, you know we're right on the abortion issue and what I mean by that is you know, you look at states like Ohio. You look at states like Kansas. You know states that are probably lean Republican, if not, you know pretty Kansas. You know states that are probably lean Republican, if not. You know pretty properly read, you know, and abortion rights are passing in those states of 5743. You know we have an abortion access amendment petition on the ballot this November that would enshrine abortion rights in our state constitution. That's going to bring a lot of voters out and I think you'll see something similar to what you saw in Ohio 55, 45, whatever the case may be. So my point is that's one thing that's bringing over some of those moderates, you know, because you wouldn't get to those numbers if you didn't get some moderate Republicans coming over and voting again for what, at the end of the day, in my opinion, is an individual right and individual liberty and individual freedom. You know, and some Republicans are helping kind of us get that over the goal line. So I think that's one thing.
Speaker 3:I think the other thing is, if you look at Secretary Fontes, if you look at Chris Mays, if you look at myself, you need Democrats that can talk about the border and can talk about the economy and can be strong on these issues and, going back to the very start of our conversation, can message properly and can distill what's going on and say listen, the economy is not in a tank under Biden. What are you talking about? Stock market's at near record highs. Unemployment's at near record lows. Unemployment for minorities is at historic lows in terms of we're at almost full employment, and so, from that perspective, the economy has been doing great. Has inflation squeezed families? Absolutely. Do people feel less well off than they did a few years ago? Even they're making more money, they have a better job, but they feel like it hasn't kept up with the cost of inflation, of course, and so we need to be sensitive to those kitchen table issues and a lot of hidden costs insurance, know insurance tax, home insurance, auto insurance, health insurance, affordable Care Act premiums have gone way up. So you know there are affordability issues, no question, and you know. But inflation's come way down under Biden Biden's working on combating price gouging.
Speaker 3:These are all things that we need to do, but we need to go right back in the Republicans' face and say, hey, do you know who's added the most debt of any president since 2000? Donald Trump. So 24 years. Donald Trump was in for four years and added a quarter of the total debt that we've accumulated in that timeframe. We need to be able to message on these things. We're the ones that are going to be able to. On these things. We're the ones that are going to be able to fix Social Security. We're the ones that are going to be able to expand Medicare. We're the ones that are going to make the average American you know, in the middle class more economically sound and on better footing. So we have to be able to tackle that issue. You know.
Speaker 3:And same with the border. You know the notion that it's a Biden open border policy. It's a Democratic invasion. It's complete insanity. It is. The Republicans blocked a good faith effort at bipartisan immigration reform. That wasn't even that bipartisan. Sure, basically, republicans wrote the bill and Democrats said, hey, it's fine, we need to move forward, let's do it. And Donald Trump killed it Right. So any chaos and dysfunction that's happening at the border now directly attributable to Donald Trump. And these are the messages that we have to be able to deliver, because those moderate Republicans and independents they get it, they listen to that and they're like yes, that is exactly what happened and that's why we're going to support a Democrat. What happened? And that's why we're going to support Democrats.
Speaker 2:You're right, they do get it. Before we wrap up, I want to because I know this is near and dear to your heart, because it almost just jumps out of your mouth what are you afraid will happen to public education in Arizona under Republican leadership?
Speaker 3:It's a great question. So we need to flip the legislature. You know you were asking about what the environment is like here in Arizona. It's scary from this standpoint. You know we have Moms for Liberty and all these far right organizations coming in trying to take over school rights of potentially scary direction. You know, obviously we have the presidency, the Senate, my race for the House, that's all super important. But where that all converges is on the state legislature. So Republicans have, you know, there's 30 senators. They have a one seat advantage. There are 60 House members, they have a one seat advantage. And so you know, basically we need to kind of flip two seats in each chamber to be able to have a one seat advantage. And so you know, basically we need to kind of flip two seats in each chamber to be able to have a democratic majority.
Speaker 3:And why that matters is we have this voucher program going on in Arizona right now where if you send your kid to a private school you get $7,000 per kid. Well, you could also homeschool and get $7,000 per kid. Now here's the thing on the on the surface, like oh, maybe that's achool and get $7,000 per kid. Now here's the thing On the surface. You're like oh, maybe that's a good idea. School choice, all that kind of thing. I support school choice. Send your kids wherever you want to send your kids. Send them to a Christian school, send them to a private school, send them to a charter school, send them to a public school, that's fine. You cannot do that at the expense of the public school system, which is what's happening.
Speaker 3:So this voucher program, the price tags now at almost a billion dollars a year, and so it's threatening to bankrupt not only the public school system but also the state itself.
Speaker 3:And here's the worst part, jack 83% of that money is going to people that were already outside the public school system to begin with. So the whole notion that you're promoting school choice, you're opening up doors and opportunities that is not what's happening. 83% of the money is going to wealthy folks that were sending their kids to private school already. We have a 2.5% flat tax here in Arizona. So if you make $250,000 a year and have one kid in private school, from an income tax to voucher perspective, you're a net inflow. If you have two kids in private school and you make $500,000 a year, you're getting a bigger check back from the state than you're paying in personal income taxes. That's a problem, and if we don't flip the legislature, we're not going to be able to rein in the voucher program and it'll ultimately lead to very bad things both for the public school system and for our state. So we basically just have to win, like every single race cycle, and things will be a lot better.
Speaker 2:It's essentially the same thing we're seeing on a national level. Then this appeal to the wealthiest among us, and here, here's another tax cut, if you will, for you. You know, when this comes up, the one thing that, while they're not the exact same thing, they're close enough. You, as a candidate, you can't go out and get a huge loan or get a big influx of money and go out and pay people to vote for you. It's illegal, right? It's pretty similar what we're seeing. You know it's like we'll pay you to do this instead of this. You know, at the end of the day, that's, that's what it is. Well, you're right and you know people here, the end of the day, that's what it is.
Speaker 3:Well, you're right and you know, people here have referred to this voucher program as welfare for the rich and I think that's right. And your point, jack if you, you know you're getting seven grand, 14 grand, 21 grand, 28 grand, depending on how many kids you have you're getting that money into your pocket. I don't know. All else being equal, you're probably not going to vote against that, you're probably not going to vote for the Democrat. That's going to make the state better, and so you're absolutely right. It's a cynical take, but to a degree they're buying votes and keeping that sort of wealthy Republican donor base happy.
Speaker 2:Yes, and to people who might say, or thank, or come back with and say well, wait a minute, if their household income is $500,000 a year, what would $7,000 per kid mean to them? And, as you know as well as anybody, expenses rise to meet the income, to meet the income, and people have the same challenges with money at $300,000, $500,000 a year income as they do at $50,000 a year income, and they always want more so they can dig it a little deeper. So it's not like people get to an income level where they say so it's not like people get to an income level where they say that's enough, I don't need it anymore, right?
Speaker 3:Or they suddenly become altruistic, and I think that's sort of the bigger point is that no one turns away free money. Right, you know, billionaires don't turn away free money. Sure, absolutely. You know a billionaire, you know so to your point about income and I agree with a lot of what you say. But you know, a billionaire doesn't matter if their tax rate goes up or down. 2%, like, what difference does it make to them? Right?
Speaker 3:But all else being equal, you know, aside from some very patriotic folks, you know, and there's a group called Patriotic Millionaires, you know, that's going to be endorsing me. They're a phenomenal group of people. These are very smart, very successful people that believe we need to revamp tax policy, to tax the wealthy more, you know, bring down income inequality, bring down that wealth gap. You know, mark Cuban is out there, you know, and I think he's really kind of a Republican, but he's out there, vehemently anti-Trump, vehemently pro Biden, and he says that the second most patriotic thing you can do besides military service is paying your taxes. And he's posted some of his tax bills, and they're hundreds of millions of dollars, and he says that he's happy to pay that because that's what he's doing for America. But anyway, that was a little bit of a side tangent in saying that most people, if they have the opportunity to have more money in their pocket, not less, that is how they're going to vote, that's who they're going to support, and so you know. You're absolutely correct that. You know what Donald Trump did and what David Schweikert pushed hard for with the Trump tax cuts. That was a $3 trillion gift to the wealthiest folks in this country and sadly you're not wrong they haven't forgotten it.
Speaker 3:But the reality is. One thing that I hate is I hate the term. The rich need to pay their fair share. I don't have all the numbers in front of me, but if you look at the top 5% in this country pay like 85% of the taxes or something very high like that, and so the reality is the wealthy in this country are certainly paying their fair share from a sort of aggregate percentage standpoint. So I don't like the term pay their fair share. But we have budget deficits.
Speaker 3:We have a lot of things that we need to do domestically. We need to support our allies and support democracy globally. Domestically, we need to support our allies and support democracy globally. So we need to ask the wealthiest folks in this country, we need to ask the wealthiest corporations in this country to do a little bit more, to pay a little bit more. We need to make the tax code more fair. We need to make sure that it doesn't disadvantage small businesses at the expense of large corporations. We need to make sure, on an individual level, that it doesn't disadvantage the middle class or the upper middle class at the expense of billionaires. And so those are things that we need to do. We need to close loopholes. We need to revamp our tax code. We can do that.
Speaker 3:The American experiment has been great and it's going to continue to work. We just all need to come together. We need to have common goals, common ideals, and let's set us up for success for the next 250 years. You know that's what I'm going to Washington to do. We need to be pragmatic, we need to be practical and we need to be smart, and you know this, too, shall pass as long as everybody gets out there and votes like their lives depend on it. Beautifully said.
Speaker 2:As we prepare to close out here, I want to remind people of something about the man that you'll hopefully be facing in the general election David Schweikert. He voted to throw out the Pennsylvania electoral votes. He was for throwing out a free and fair election won by Joe Biden. He was okay with watching everything dissolve, as we know now, illegally, in a manner that was not paired up with the US Constitution, because people were going to prison for the things that happened in that whole scheme. If you will, I'm going to give you the last word and then we'll close out. If you had like a 15, 20 second elevator speech for people as we head into July and early voting starts I think you said the 5th and then the election being the 30th what do you tell them on that elevator speech?
Speaker 3:It's all about electability. We have to beat David Schweikert. You know, I grew up here, I'm from the district, I'm for the district, I'm raising my family here. I've spent more time here than I've spent anywhere in my life. I've always been a Democrat. I have long held progressive values. I can flip this seat without sacrificing our principles and, most importantly, I have the team and the resources to get it done. I'm the only candidate in this race with more cats on hand than David Schweikert. We think this is a $9 million general election. I've raised money, I'm proud to say, in all 50 states and Washington DC. This is a national race with national implications, and the team that I have running my campaign is the same campaign team that got Adrian Fontes elected secretary of state in 2022. He won by the largest margin statewide of anybody. We took a great mousetrap that he'd already built. We bolted onto it and made it even better. You know my campaign manager was campaign manager of the year for Adrian Fontes. She's nominated again for my campaign.
Speaker 2:She's in the Arizona.
Speaker 3:Democratic Party. So we can get this done, jack, but we need voters to show up in July. Vote Connor O'Callaghan, get me on the ballot for November, and I promise you David Schweikert's 14-year reign will finally come to an end.
Speaker 2:Fantastic. So if you are somebody who can vote in that election, vote Connor O'Callaghan. This is the guy who's not compromised. This is a guy who's not decided late in life that he's going to be a Democrat. This is a guy who, two years ago, was not voting for Donald Trump, was not representing a Republican or a MAGA candidate in any race. This is the guy we need to put in office in Arizona's first congressional district, connor O'Callaghan. Connor, it was a pleasure to have you and after you have won the primary, I'd love to have you back on.
Speaker 3:Would love to be back on, Jack. You're awesome. I appreciate all you're doing on the front lines to help protect democracy and I would love to come back anytime We'll see you next time.