Return to Transcripts main page
Amanpour
Interview with The New Yorker Staff Writer Susan Glasser; Interview with "Redemption: Faith, Justice and Sisterhood on Death Row" Author Lawrence Wright; Interview with The New York Times Reporter Lisa Lehr. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired October 27, 2026 - 13:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[13:00:00]
PAULA NEWTON, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone, and a warm welcome to "Amanpour." Here's what's coming up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: We'll make it a fricking fortune. Our country is getting stronger and stronger all the time.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEWTON: One week to go with economic anxiety sky high. Can Trump keep his party's grip on power? We'll discuss. Then the death penalty. Famed author
Lawrence Wright tackles the tough moral questions in his latest book, "Redemption: Faith, Justice and Sisterhood on Death Row."
Plus --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LISA LERER, REPORTER, THE NEW YORK TIMES: The people who left, it's very hard, if not impossible to get them back. So, this is just a long-term
health care issue that the state is going to have to deal with.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEWTON: -- doctors fleeing, doctors cracking. Reporter Lisa Lehr talks to Hari Sreenivasan about the real-world impact of Idaho's near total ban on
abortion.
Hello and welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Paula Newton in New York, sitting in for Christiane Amanpour.
In virtually every corner of the globe, people are tuned into the American elections, eagerly awaiting to see which direction voters will take the
most powerful country on Earth.
With just one week to go campaigning in overdrive, President Trump is crisscrossing America, trying to keep Democrats from taking control of both
the House and the Senate. But it is a tough task. Cost of living concerns rank as voters most important issue. And Trump's approval rating is landing
at historic lows in poll after poll. Our own Kyung Lah went to Nevada and met restaurant workers who, despite Trump's promises to them on the 2024
campaign trail, they're still struggling to make ends meet.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KYUNG LAH, CNN SENIOR INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It wasn't supposed to be like this.
JAVIER BARAJAS, OWNER, IL TORO E LA CAPRA: Why? Why things start to go better, but we go backwards. Everything is worse.
LAH (voice-over): Javier Barajas was promised the cost of running his Las Vegas restaurant would get better. With economic proposals that President
Donald Trump first unveiled in a 2024 campaign stop at Barajas' restaurant to help working families in Nevada.
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: We've come here today to talk about the biggest promise I think that the restaurant workers have had in a long
time. And that's no tax on tips.
LAH (voice-over): Service workers make up nearly a quarter of the state's workforce, twice as large as the country's average.
BARAJAS: He's the right person to help most businesses to do better and better.
LAH: It's been two years since Trump made those promises and they've become policy. But the people who come through this restaurant and other
places in Nevada say it doesn't really matter because of affordability.
BARAJAS: It used to be $16 two months ago. It used to be $39, between $39 and $44.
LAH: Wow.
BARAJAS: Now, it's almost $75. Maybe because the diesel is too expensive.
LAH: Because diesel is too expensive.
BARAJAS: Yes. Maybe.
LAH: Trucks have to bring the produce in.
BARAJAS: Yes. Iran war, it went up more. We hoping every day that the war ends, hopefully the prices. Gracias.
LAH (voice-over): In 2024, the swing state swung to Republicans. With the midterm election in the final stretch, the Trump policies aimed at keeping
voters in their column are falling short.
LAH: Some of these elements of the big beautiful bill were supposed to make things better. Did they make things better?
BARAJAS: Well, I don't see things getting better. That's when I start thinking, oh my God, what about my employees, you know? How they living?
How they pay the rent?
FERNANDO PEREZ, CHEF, IL TORO E LA CAPRA: I've been doing this for over 20 years and I never felt like this before. I work full time.
LAH (voice-over): Chef Fernando Perez makes nearly double the minimum wage in Nevada. Under Trump's policy changes, he should be making more because
his overtime is tax deductible.
PEREZ: I would say I'm making enough money, but I still can't make it. Every single one of us, we feel it one way or another. We feel the pain.
LAH: So, more than one employee is taking a scooter to work?
[13:05:00]
PEREZ: They're taking a scooter, yes. Because the gas price is really, really high. If they park their scooters back there, like a little parking.
My scooter.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): I sold my car because it's very expensive right now.
LAH: How far do you ride your scooter?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): About 40 minutes from here.
LAH (voice-over): Among the policies that impacted Nevada workers was no tax on tips.
LAH: How much are you working per week?
KEVIN BANDA, BARTENDER, IL TORO E LA CAPRA: Over 100 hours.
LAH: A week?
BANDA: Yes. I know. I have to get a second job just to, like, be caught up with payments and stuff like that, you know.
LAH: Did any of the policy changes that the president made impact your life?
BANDA: Well, not really.
BARAJAS: If things keep going like this, I'm either going to sell this restaurant or close it.
LAH: If you could go back to two years ago when you were talking to President Trump, what would you encourage him?
BARAJAS: Don't get into wars. I want the powerful men to be more human, you know, to have more heart, you know.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
NEWTON: And senior investigative correspondent Kyung Lah joins us now from Los Angeles for really a command questioning, I will tell Kyung Lah. You
have logged so many miles in so many places over so many years looking at American elections.
So, first to what you've learned in the last few weeks and month about these midterms. I mean, what are you hearing from voters?
LAH (on camera): Well, specifically in Nevada, which is a swing state, which the two prior elections before Trump was reelected for his second
term. It swung to the Democrats and then President Trump won this last election. So, this was a commanding swing. What part of the reason is
everything you saw in that story, Paula, that it was those no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, no tax on Social Security.
But it just simply hasn't balanced out when you look at how much gas prices has impacted the working class, the middle class. So, all of that, when you
weigh all of that, it's really difficult for people who decided to vote for President Trump to stay convinced that his economic policies are working.
NEWTON: And yet, so many are wondering if it will actually move votes, keep people at home. I was just so taken aback by the issue of using a
scooter instead of a car. Gas has gotten that expensive.
LAH: And it's not unusual. I mean, that's just one worker who happened to be there on that day. There are other workers. And that is something when I
spoke to a union, a worker's union in Nevada, this is something they hear all the time, because that's how bad gas prices have become for the working
class.
Something we should point out is that the Trump administration still feels that it is a winning issue, the no tax on tips in the state of Nevada.
They've put out these ads saying that President Trump has delivered on that promise. He has indeed delivered on that promise. And there are some 53
million filers who have taken advantage of these tax cuts. But again, it's a question of whether the pocketbook will outweigh those benefits.
NEWTON: And then it's what happens in the hours, days, weeks, months after the election. Again, you have done so much investigative work on this and
other elections. So, many are fearing that the results of this election will be contested. What are you hearing and seeing in states? And again,
not really a partisan issue, because some Republican states are as concerned as Democratic ones.
LAH: Let's look at two states that are currently what we would consider in the red column, the State of Alaska and Arizona. Both have seen preemptive
moves by the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice has sent subpoenas to try to get some ballots from Arizona from the 2020 election.
And that's been very confusing for election workers in Arizona.
In the State of Alaska, there has been a lawsuit, a filing by the Department of Justice saying that if the Republican loses in that state
because of another candidate, a third-party candidate who bears the exact same name as a Republican candidate, they are essentially saying that the
results should be decertified. This is before the results have been actually done. So, we're seeing these moves already happen before Election
Day.
NEWTON: In terms of holding the line here, people have spoken a lot, even on this program, about American institutions and their integrity. I'm
asking you because I know you've seen this from the inside. Do you believe those institutions will hold, no matter what, through these midterms?
[13:10:00]
LAH: You know, this is a much-debated topic in America right now. How much will the courts hold? How much will the various state institutions even?
Because elections in America are at the state level. How much are they holding? They're essentially structurally still there. And there are many
Republicans, some of the people who have been really the target of some of the ire of the far-right. Those Republicans have held the line, and they
have continued to hold the line. And this is many, many years. Election workers in America continue to show up and continue to count the votes
legally.
NEWTON: And before we let you go, just one further comment. I was surprised to see in our CNN polling that actually the issue of corruption
is percolating a little bit more. Have you seen any evidence of that in speaking to voters?
LAH: I think, again, because of this issue of affordability, it is this feeling of it is getting hard to make ends meet. And why is it that it's
not just the elected officials, it's not just the Trump administration that we are publicly aware are making money on crypto, are making money on these
various investments globally.
But why is it that tech giants are contributing to political campaigns that are offering favorable decisions or practices for them in government? Why
is all of this happening? What kind of corruption is publicly in view for working class Americans and for middle class Americans? It certainly is an
issue because people are feeling they are working harder and harder and harder. You can't pay your grocery bills. You can't pay to fill up your
tank all the way. You can't pay for your kid to go to college.
And so, all of these things are really crushing Americans. And when they see what's happening at the corporate level, what's happening at the upper
echelons of the White House, certainly that is an issue that is very, very personal to Americans these midterms.
NEWTON: Yes, it has been interesting to see those issues even percolate in places like Texas, where Elon Musk has spent upwards of a quarter billion
dollars and counting. Kyung Lah, always so grateful to you and will continue to follow your reporting through this week. And obviously,
crucially, what happens after voters have voted. Kyung Lah for us in Los Angeles.
LAH: Thank you for having me. Good to see you so much.
NEWTON: Good to see you, my friend.
Now, forecasters, as we were just discussing, say Democrats are in good position here to take the House. But control of the Senate is still, we
remind you, very much up for grabs. Seven Senate races are considered toss- ups. That's according to the Cook Political Report, including the highly watched contest in Michigan between Republican Mike Rogers and Democrat
Abdul El-Sayed. And in deep red Texas that we were just discussing, Democratic candidate James Talarico is running a surprisingly competitive
race against Republican Ken Paxton.
For more on all of this, we want to bring in New Yorker staff writer Susan Glasser from Washington. We want to welcome you to the show. Always great
to see you, especially a week out from such a pivotal moment in history for the United States. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that.
I mean, let's get to that latest polling, right? It's painting a very tight picture in states and Senate races that I would not expect, right? Kansas
is tied. Iowa, Democrats lead by one point. Michigan and Texas in play. Now, these are places where Republicans have historically outperformed
polls by as much as 4 percent.
And yet, Susan, you and I both know, right, there is persistent distrust of polling. One of the only thing Americans agree on is their distrust of
these polls. So, how are you reading it a week out?
SUSAN GLASSER, STAFF WRITER, THE NEW YORKER: Yes. Look, I think you're right to underscore the extent to which it's really up in the air, in part
because Republicans are defensive in places we would not have imagined.
I mean, six months ago, frankly, even six weeks ago, I don't think we would be having a conversation like this about the Democrats' possibility of
winning the Senate because the map, only one-third of the Senate is up each two-year election cycle. And this third of the Senate happens to be really
on very Republican territory, places like Kansas, you mentioned.
Kansas last elected a Democratic senator in the 1930s, OK? So, almost a century ago. Texas last elected a Democratic senator, Lloyd Benson, in
1988. More than half of the United States has been born since there was ever a Democratic senator from Texas. So, in that sense, it's quite
remarkable. And it actually speaks to a really out there wave of discontent across the country. We can already say that. We don't know the outcome of
the election yet.
[13:15:00]
But we can say pretty definitively that Republicans wouldn't be spending hundreds of millions of dollars in these states if their private polling
was not suggesting what we're seeing as well in the public polls, which is that they are in big trouble. Even in places like Mississippi, the
president of the United States was doing a rally there in Mississippi, which is now officially, quote, "in play," unquote, according to Senate
Republicans.
South Carolina, another state that Trump won by double digits. You know, you're looking at almost a dead even race now. You had the former
Republican governor of South Carolina joining a former Democratic governor in endorsing the Democratic candidate. You know, these are the kinds of
things that are indicative of a big wave building.
And so, it comes back to this question that you asked, which is, well, what about the polls? You know, should we should we think that somehow, they're
still undercounting Trump voters in a kind of systematic way? The point here, though, is that it's not just polls, right?
NEWTON: Right.
GLASSER: You know, there are enormous other indicators that suggest where things are going. But yes, if I were you, I would say don't go into next
Tuesday expecting that, you know, the outcome when it comes to the Senate, because there's just too many close races right now.
NEWTON: Yes. Especially, as you said, in the Senate. You know, we just heard from Kyung Lah just affordability that that is an issue. And yet in
speech after speech, the president really -- he's not really giving that whole argument much credibility.
I am wondering if Republicans in those battleground states can actually overcome that, because, you know, the argument that the White House and the
president himself is making is that, look, I'm here to bring out that Republican base and that vote. So, I'll let the Republican candidates speak
on affordability. As far as the president goes, he's not buying it.
GLASSER: Yes, that's right. I mean, look, Joe Biden tried this strategy. It's not a very good strategy. If people are upset about the state of the
economy and the inflation, you know, it doesn't help for the leader of the country to say, oh, you must be imagining things or, you know, the
Democrats made up this affordability hoax. You know, you and I both know if you go to the grocery store, you know, and it costs, you know, $8 for a
dozen eggs, then, you know, that's not you making it up. You're not the victim of a Democratic hoax.
And especially many of these Senate races, by the way, that are competitive are in the upper Midwest region, the breadbasket region, the center of the
country, the United States, particularly hard hit by a couple of economic policy choices that Donald Trump very personally made, right?
So, it's a very personal story about the president driving up costs for Americans. Number one, rising cost of diesel fuel. Donald Trump
unilaterally decided to launch a war of choice in Iran and the Middle East that's driven up prices in a way that they weren't, you know, I think
prices of diesel are up something like more than two-thirds, two-thirds higher than they were just a year ago. That's attributable to a choice
Donald Trump made.
Compounding that is the president's tariff war with our neighbors in Canada. Those economies, especially in the northern part of this country
intertwined with that of Canada and, you know, really hurting economies in places like Maine and Michigan and Minnesota that are directly, you know,
going to decide control of the U.S. Senate this year. That's all on Donald Trump.
NEWTON: Yes. And Susan, we do want to talk about the integrity of these elections. There have been concerns about the Trump administration
attempting to meddle in the voting process. And then again, we have the issue of the midterm results.
We've heard Donald Trump himself so doubt about the security of the elections. His administration has tried unsuccessfully to change mail-in
voting rules, even though he's done it himself. I want you to listen now to the attorney general from Minnesota who expressed some concern about the
Justice Department and what they're doing to monitor Election Day. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KEITH ELLISON, MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL: I think the tone is very different. The tone during the Biden administration was cooperative to just
help us do what we needed to do to make sure we had a good election. Now, it feels like the president is using this as another weapon that he often
deploys against states that don't support him.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEWTON: Do you think this issue might be a bit overblown? I mean, there have been commentators that have said, look, if you're looking at the
integrity of this, it could actually be helpful to have more officials on the ground. And again, many Americans do agree with the president on voting
I.D., that you should have to show some I.D. at voters when they turn out. Now, again, that is not an issue that can necessarily be contested in these
midterms.
GLASSER: Yes. I mean, that's a policy argument. Donald Trump failed to get a Republican-controlled Congress, by the way. The Republicans control both
houses of our Congress right now. They didn't pass the law that he wanted to do that.
[13:20:00]
So, you know, that's very separate from the very specific direct threats that the president and his Justice Department have made to these elections.
And I think, you know, the idea that you would dismiss this out of hand, after we've all lived through 2020 in this country when Donald Trump become
the first and only president in the history of the United States of America to refuse to accept his defeat in a legal and fair election, OK, certified
by the U.S. states, as recognized by federal courts around the country, OK.
So, he spent the last six years lying about the results of the 2020 election after having been willing to do things that no other president in
our entire history would have even contemplated doing to challenge the lawful results of a lawful election.
So, yes, you know, if you don't want to take Donald Trump at his word, he came back into office last year, and immediately began to preemptively
question the results of these midterm elections before there were even candidates, never mind voting, why did he do that? Donald Trump you know,
has never accepted the outcome of any contest, even before he entered politics, in which he was not the winner. And even then, by the way, he's
questioned it, as he did actually in the 2016 election.
So, you know, Democrats and all Americans would be foolish not to take his threats very seriously when he says that he's not going to trust the
outcome, and he's telling his followers not to. The question really here that I hear from Democrats, as well as many Republicans who are deeply
concerned about what Trump might do is there a point at which it's sort of, quote, "too big to rig." And you could say that might be self-soothing on
the part of Democrats that, you know, they're going to win such a big victory that, you know, Trump won't be able to challenge it.
That Alaska lawsuit you've alluded to earlier in this program, that to me seemed like a tipping of the hand a little bit about their strategy because
it specifically is trying to get Alaska to say that it should not certify the results of the Alaska Senate election if the Republican loses. And I
think the fear here is that in addition to whatever they might do to intimidate voters at the polls on Election Day itself next week, that the
bigger threat might be to try to block certification before the new Congress comes to meet in January. And so, I -- if I were you, I would say
watch that very closely.
NEWTON: Yes, and very serious given the fact that the Senate on one senator could tip f- either for the Democrats or for the Republicans. Susan
Glasser, always good to speak with you as we continue to wait for this momentous midterm cycle. Appreciate it.
GLASSER: Thank you.
NEWTON: Now, stay with CNN. We will be right back with more after a quick break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEWTON: Is the death penalty wrong? Should those already sentenced to death be given a second chance? These are, of course, big moral questions.
For many Western liberal democracies, America's use of the death penalty seems both barbaric and immoral. And yet, a majority of Americans do still
support the death penalty for those convicted of murder.
Well, a master of narrative nonfiction, Lawrence Wright has turned his focus to this deeply difficult subject in his latest book, "Redemption:
Faith, Justice, and Sisterhood on Death Row."
[13:25:00]
In Texas, he meets seven women awaiting execution, all convicted of unimaginable crimes. And he asks, are they capable of redemption? At the
heart of the story, too, is a group of nuns.
And Lawrence Wright joins us now to tell us more about this extraordinary journey of discovery and what it tells us about American society. And
welcome to the program.
LAWRENCE WRIGHT, AUTHOR, "REDEMPTION: FAITH, JUSTICE, AND SISTERHOOD ON DEATH ROW": I'm delighted to be here. Thank you.
NEWTON: So, listen, religion runs through much of your work, from "Saints and Sinners" to "Going Clear on Scientology," and now this book on
"Redemption." You know, you describe yourself as a religious skeptic, and yet many religions, they're equivocal on capital punishment and self. What
was it about telling this story with Catholic sisters at its very heart? Why do this now?
WRIGHT: You know, I had never really been interested in the death penalty. I'd been on death row before. It didn't pose a moral quarrel for me. And
so, when I went into this, I was thinking, I'm curious about these ladies, the nuns and the women on death row who live such similar lives. And is it
possible that, you know, they could draw something from each other and never really reflected on how it might affect me?
And I've had struggles with religion, as you noted. And -- but seeing the injustice that's been done to some of the women on the row has just shaken
my sense that there's a moral argument for the death penalty in this country.
NEWTON: It is extraordinary, the bond between the condemned and the sisters of Christ. And one that, I'll be honest, is quite unexpected for
me. You saw these relationships develop firsthand. Did witnessing these transformations change your understanding of what redemption means? Because
from a religious point of view, it offers quite a counterpoint to capital punishment.
WRIGHT: Yes, it does. It was fascinating to watch this process because, you know, as I said, they live similar lives. You know, they both live in
small rooms they call cells. They wear the same garments. They live without, you know, family or society. The nuns I talked to are
contemplative, so they rarely even talk.
But they taught these women on the row how to live together in community. The nuns have been exposed to, you know, monastic traditions thousands of
years old. And they were able to teach these women how to get along with each other, which is something they hadn't been able to do in the entire
time of their confinement. And that was very moving. But the nuns say that they got more out of it than they gave.
They -- I mean, they come from a convent, you know, to a prison. And it's a real prison with the high fences and the razor wire and the guard towers
and all that sort of stuff. It took a lot of nerve for these ladies to break out of their little hermitage and give themselves over to the work of
working with these condemned ladies.
NEWTON: And you use the word condemned, the juxtaposition of having the sisters there with them on death row. And yet, there is a through line. I
was interested in the issue of what the sisters themselves have endured in the Catholic Church. They wouldn't see it that way, but certainly the
accusations against the Catholic Church are something to behold. What do you think, do you think that established a particular bond between these
women?
WRIGHT: You know, the women on the row weren't really aware of the history of the chapter, of the convent that these women belong to. And when I asked
the nuns about, you know, their origin, it's a fairly new order, the Sisters of Mary Morningstar. They were coy, which is probably not the best
stance to take with an investigative reporter.
So, I naturally kind of dug around and found this -- you know, there'd been this incredible sex scandal in the community of St. John in the Loire
Valley in France. And these women had fled from that. And they had been hounded by the Catholic French press. And they wind up in Waco, pursued by
this. And they didn't want me to write about that.
But I could not write about it because I was being so forthright with the condemned women. Finally, the nuns and I came to an agreement about what I
can say. But they had their own trials. And so, they've been up against, as one of them said, an implacable power. And so, they had something to offer
in that regard as well.
NEWTON: An implacable power, that is oh so interesting. And again, something that was completely unexpected to me in reading the book.
[13:30:00]
I mean, look, putting someone to death who may be innocent is one of the main arguments against capital punishment in this book. The case of Melissa
Lucio, we just had a picture of her. She was convicted of killing her two- year-old daughter. I mean, one of the worst accusations you can make of anyone. Her conviction has faced serious scrutiny.
How did her case inform your opinion of capital punishment? How did her case inform your opinion of capital punishment?
WRIGHT: Well, she was convicted of murdering this two-year-old girl, her youngest daughter. And she was convicted in Southern Texas in Cameron
County. That's the county that's the very tip bottom of Texas. And come to find out that the person who prosecuted her, Armando Villalobos, the
district attorney, was a criminal. He was in the cartel. He was selling sentences. He was skimming bail fund. He went to prison. He spent six years
in prison himself.
And none of this -- you know, none of this dealing played a role in the trial. He suppressed evidence, eyewitness testimony of how the little girl
fell down some stairs, and that accounted for the bruises that they said was caused by child abuse. It shocked my conscience to think that in my
state, and I think it must be true of all states.
Justice, as we like to think of it, is very human. Greed and incompetence and ignorance play a role, a big role. And in several cases of the women on
the death row, there are people there that don't belong there. And Melissa is certainly one of them. She's gone through several appeals now. And it's
been weird. You know, sometimes a court will say, this woman needs a new trial, and then it'll be overturned. And, you know, now it's going to go to
the Supreme Court for a final resolution.
But everybody knows that she was convicted by a criminal and that the little girl fell down the stairs rather than being beaten. It's shocking to
think that the courts would not take mercy on this lady.
NEWTON: And you still continue to follow that case. And again, as you said, it continues to go through the courts. And we have to say it, right?
There's been renewed attention to the death penalty, including the failed execution attempt of Christa Pike.
WRIGHT: Yes.
NEWTON: Yes. We said, right, a recent poll says that support for capital punishment is still in the majority. It sits at about 55 percent. That has
been shifting, though, in recent years. Now, that you've spent so much time investigating some of this, what do you understand the opinions of
Americans to be on capital punishment? And how much of it does it come from their face, not necessarily the Catholic face, but other face that look on
capital punishment as just punishment?
WRIGHT: You know, I have to say, I was in the majority opinion myself for the longest time and it's not as if I hadn't been exposed to the death
penalty, I just didn't have any sympathy for the people who had committed such heinous crimes. But I always felt that justice had been done. And what
happened with me on this story is I've discovered that it wasn't done in so many cases.
This is a small sample, seven women. But, you know, in one case, you know, Linda Carty, she was, the judge appointed her lawyer, very experienced in
capital crimes. He's tried 36 cases of capital murder and lost every single one of them. So, you know, she was condemned to death before she went to
trial. And that's just one example.
It has shaken my belief in the idea of justice. But it certainly undermined the sense that we have a moral authority to take a human life when there's
so much doubt about the outcome.
NEWTON: But do you think the case of Christa Pike, though, really put that front and center for Americans who may not have given it much thought? As
you say, before this book, you didn't either.
WRIGHT: You know, I think it's appalling. You know, I have to say, I had an operation just a couple of months ago and they couldn't find my vein
either. So, it's how can you execute people relying on such a frail means of execution?
NEWTON: It is so visceral with her lawyers, Christa Pike's lawyers saying that she was trying to help, if you can believe it, trying to help the
technicians there find her vein. I mean, listen, we have to talk about the gender stereotypes here, right? Our perceptions of women and guilt and
punishment.
WRIGHT: Yes.
NEWTON: Sometimes when these stories come out of women, you know, doing the worst kinds of crimes that anyone can imagine, people are still
surprised. Why?
[13:35:00]
WRIGHT: Well, you know, there are seven women on death row and there are 160 men in Texas. So, you know, there is a huge disparity. And most of the
women on the row, capital murder is their first conviction, which is really unusual with men.
And so, when a woman comes up with a capital murder charge, the jury is predisposed to think of her as being something less than a murderer. There
must be some reason. And the strategy for many of the prosecutors is to strip away any sense that she is a woman, that they have to defeminize her.
And so, you often see women described in kind of biblical terms as being a demon or something like that. And it's, you know, the juries in Texas are
not going to convict people -- they're not going to convict women unless they've been completely convinced that they're evil in some way.
NEWTON: I have a provocative question for you. We talk about redemption, right? It's redemption. And this is for the condemned. And yet, some on
death row, and I've heard their interviews for myself, believe that the death penalty is redemption. They're at peace with it.
WRIGHT: Yes, that's true of at least two of the women that I've talked to about this. And one who doesn't really believe in the death penalty, but
believes she should be punished. They're individuals, they each have different takes on it. And some say that they're innocent, two absolutely
accept their guilt. Others, I think, are innocent. So, there's a spectrum. And you can't come out of there with a consensus, it's just seven different
opinions.
NEWTON: It is so very personal even for them.
WRIGHT: You know, I think because of the nuns, these women have grown together into a community and they share a lot of things. They have a
garden that the Morden let them establish. They built this garden with plastic cups and broken sticks and made it into a half-acre garden with a
rototiller and that sort of thing. So, they love that and they work together. And it's a transformation, you know? And I think the nuns have so
much to do with creating that sense of community.
And the nuns, I think, they've come away sobered, I think, by their experience in the prison, but also aware of the suffering that others have
gone through. And I think it's been ennobling for them.
NEWTON: You say ennobling, but to read from your book, you say that these people carry the spiritual burden of being exposed to the darkest side of
human experience. We can all appreciate that, but not in the same way that these people do. How changed are you by these experiences?
WRIGHT: I've had many quarrels with religion. I was a very pious teenager, but since then, I have written about, you know, my first book was about the
Amish, you know, and you mentioned the Scientology. I've written about the Mormons. I've written about Baptists. I've written about Satanists. Of
course, Al-Qaeda and, you know, and radical Islam.
So, you could think that I was sort of on a warpath, and I have looked at the dangers that religion can bring to us. I mean, religion is like a
powerful magnet with two poles, one of attraction and one of repulsion, and they're equally powerful.
But this is probably the first story where I really looked at religion as being a healing, a balm, and something that's incredibly valuable to the
people who believe.
NEWTON: Lawrence Wright, I want to thank you for the thought-provoking conversation. Thanks for being on the program.
WRIGHT: I enjoyed being with you. Thank you.
NEWTON: Stay with CNN. We'll have more in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:40:00]
NEWTON: So, as we've been discussing, the cost of living and the Iran war are among the top issues concerning voters in the looming U.S. midterms.
But in four states, another key issue is on the ballot, those of abortion rights.
In Idaho, more than 100,000 signatures were collected by volunteers as part of an initiative advocating to legalize abortion to the point of fetal
viability. At present, Idaho bans abortions in all stages of pregnancy, a consequence of the Supreme Court's 2022 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.
Four years on, New York Times reporter, Lisa Lehr, tells Hari Sreenivasan about the impact that ruling has had on women and doctors in Idaho.
HARI SREENIVASAN, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Paula, thanks. Lisa Lehr, thanks so much for joining us. You reported all across Idaho recently
for a piece titled "When Idaho Banned Abortion, OBGYNs Fled, the Doctors Who Stayed Are Cracking." What did you find and why did you want to do this
story?
LISA LERER, REPORTER, THE NEW YORK TIMES: Well, I had done a book on the fall of Roe v. Wade, and I was interested in sort of following up on that
reporting and see what the impact was of these laws. As I'm sure many of your viewers know, about 20 states, the United States now, ban abortion at
a standard earlier than what was set in Roe v. Wade, which was fetal viability.
But I wondered, these laws were not really written often with a sense of science or women's health or medical advisories. And so, I was curious what
the impact were of these bans beyond just abortion and abortion rights.
And so, I went to Idaho because what happened in Idaho is since they had passed their ban in 2022, about a third of the OBGYNs in that state had
left or stopped practicing or retired.
SREENIVASAN: You know, you write that, by banning abortion, Idaho has become a more dangerous place to give birth. I mean, what was the intention
of the law versus the actual consequence?
LEHR: Well, the intention of the law, of course, was to ban abortion. You know, very few, none of the doctors I spoke with for my piece were doing
elective abortions before the law. They were only doing abortions that were medically indicated, you know, that someone, their life was going to be at
major risk or their future fertility or they'd have severe health consequences if they carried that pregnancy to term.
There was a Planned Parenthood in Boise that was doing sort of elective abortions, but they were pretty much the only ones with maybe a few other
exceptions. So, I think the intention was, of course, as all these laws intend to do, to ban abortion. I just think abortion exists as an issue in
this sort of morass of morality and religion and politics. And it's become sort of disconnected from the actual thing that's about, which is that
abortion is a medical procedure, whatever your feelings about it is that it is something that involves medication or surgery. And I think that
disconnect is what led to this outcome in Idaho.
SREENIVASAN: You know, what's interesting is you start the story out, not with a story specifically about abortion, but about a woman who was
hemorrhaging and the doctors called in and she's kind of coming back from vacation. What did that scene reveal to you and what did you want our
readers to know about how health care for women overall has changed?
LEHR: Well, it's an excellent point. Conservative lawmakers in Idaho wanted to ban abortion and that's what they did. But the effects of that
ban, in part because Idaho criminalized any doctor who performs an abortion and is suspected of performing an abortion, can face, you know, jail time
or civil penalties. So, as a result, many doctors decided that they didn't want to practice in Idaho anymore, that the stakes were too high.
And so, the impact of that is not just on abortion, which remains, you know, decently rare. And for most women who are eager to have children, but
on women's health care, on giving birth.
[13:45:00]
So, the reason I started with that story is, first of all, it was very moving and I think it gave a really good glimpse into what women's health
care looks like in Idaho now and how the doctors have been constrained by the exodus of OBGYNs from that state.
SREENIVASAN: And you point out how common hemorrhaging is, something I wasn't aware of.
LEHR: Yes, hemorrhaging is one of the most common severe impacts of childbirth. It's something that can happen hours after childbirth and it
can be really life-threatening. And the course of treatment for that is first medication, some minor surgical interventions, and then if the
bleeding from the uterus can't be stopped, you have to remove the uterus. You have to have a hysterectomy, which is a really common procedure. It's
one of the most common surgeries in the country, but it's something that really OBGYNs are trained specifically to do.
So, if there's no OBGYN available, which in many counties in Idaho there is not, you're really patching together that surgery either with general
surgeons or family doctors or you're getting on a helicopter if that's possible and flying out of state.
SREENIVASAN: You know, you reported that one-third of the state's OBGYNs have stopped practicing obstetrics, left the state, closed practices, or
retired since this total ban, near total ban, took effect in '22. Can you give us an idea of the scale of that loss?
LEHR: Right. I think the thing to think about here -- well, first of all, I think it's really important to put this in concrete terms for the
patients rather than in terms of broad numbers and the number of OBGYNs per capita of patients, which is quite one of the worst in the country in
Idaho.
What it means is that if you need your annual OBGYN appointment, maybe that's a year wait, maybe that's nine months, doctors there told me. If
you're delivering most places in Idaho, you're getting special insurance for flights because if there's a complication that they can't treat in the
state or the OBGYN is not available because they have so many patients to care for, you're likely being put on a helicopter and flown out of state to
Washington.
So, there's real practical implications for patients, but I also think it amounts to what -- public health experts told me is it amounts to a
generational loss. If you are one of these OBGYNs who left the state, say you moved to Washington or Minnesota or wherever you chose to move, just
because the law changes it does not mean you're necessarily going to uproot your entire life and move back.
So, it makes it more difficult for Idaho to recruit new OBGYNs to come into the state and practice because people are not eager to go to a state where
they know they can face criminal or civil penalties. And it also means that the people who left, it's very hard, if not impossible, to get them back.
So, this is just a long-term healthcare issue that the state is going to have to deal with.
SREENIVASAN: You also point out that only about five full-time maternal fetal medicine specialists remained for the highest risk pregnancy. So,
give us an idea of what's that shortage mean for patients who are facing these crises?
LEHR: I mean, what it means is that traveling long distances for care has become very routinized in Idaho. I was really struck by the number of
patients who are traveling two hours each way for appointments, who are, you know, going to see specialists and driving across state lines to do so.
That has just become a standard part in many cases of giving birth. If that birth is complicated in any way, it can be very, very difficult to get the
maternal care that women need.
SREENIVASAN: Well, one of the stories you reveal in this article is the story of a woman who had a wanted pregnancy and learned in the second
trimester that the fetus had died. Tell us a little bit about how the doctors were trying to provide miscarriage care, not an elective abortion,
but what happens?
LEHR: So, the standard care in that situation, the second term fetal demise, which is fairly unusual, is first to have a procedure known as a
D&E, which was not possible to get in Idaho, in this part of Idaho, because no one was certified to do that. The second is to use a combination of two
medications, mifepristone and misoprostol. MIFI, as it's known, has been banned in the state of Idaho, but there is a carve-out for this specific
case in terms of, you know, for miscarriage care.
This is a situation where the fetus has no heartbeat, and it's just a matter of getting the woman to inducing labor so the woman gives birth to
this dead fetus and doesn't get infection from having her face more serious consequences for not expelling the fetus. It was impossible for the doctor
to find that medication anywhere in Idaho where they were.
[13:50:00]
It was impossible for them to find it on the border pharmacies with Washington, that the risk of carrying that medication feels too great for
the pharmacist, so they're not carrying it. So, as a result, the patient had to take only the one medication, which delayed the time of her
induction, the time until she went into labor, to about two days. So, she sat in the hospital room, obviously very distraught, for two days waiting
to deliver her wanted dead pregnancy.
And it was really, I think, quite stressful, not only for the patient, but for the doctor, who knew what the standard of care was in this situation
and simply was unable to obtain it. And that's the kind of difficult situation that doctors find themselves in. And it's very draining, I think,
emotionally. Doctors don't go into medicine because they don't want to help people. They go in because they want to help people, because they want to
deliver the best standard of care. And to be limited by the legal regime on what you can do, I think, is very hard for many of them.
SREENIVASAN: Yes. So, what kind of workarounds are the physicians who were left behind trying to do? Because as your reporting points out, there's
just not enough of them.
LEHR: Well, they're trying to pack appointments in where they can. And sort of their one hospital administrator or one -- sorry, one administrator
for an office describes their work as being like in a mass unit, which of course is the military medical units, in terms of triaging patients and
getting the most urgent cases and moving appointments around.
So, they're trying to deliver the best care they can. The hospitals are bringing in, when they can, temporary doctors, that kind of traveling
doctors that will fill in and give a little relief, particularly on 24-hour shifts. I think family doctors with specialties in obstetrics are coming in
and helping. In a lot of cases, they're taking on more of the patient load, but they're limited in what they can do. They're not trained, for example,
in doing a hysterectomy. So, they feel pretty vulnerable if they don't have support from OBs.
So, I think the doctors are trying to find ways to deliver the best care. Hospital administrators have said they're putting more people on
helicopters more often to send them out of the state when a birth is something that they can't manage. But it's difficult, and it's placing a
lot of stress on hospitals and on doctors.
SREENIVASAN: Yes. Right now, we're having this conversation right before a midterm election, and Idaho voters are going to be considering a ballot
measure that would restore abortion rights up to fetal viability. Now, if it passes, what could it change immediately, and what can't be changed?
LEHR: So, if it passes, it would restore the standard set-in brow, which is that abortion remains legal until fetal viability, which is now about
24, 25-ish weeks because of advances in the NICU and things like that, medical advances. The issue is that the Republican legislature can overturn
that. It's not a constitutional amendment. So, they could choose, even if it passes, to decide that it's not going to stand.
And then in terms of the OBGYN exodus, you know, it's for the reasons we talked about. People are not necessarily uprooting their life because the
law has changed, right? I think once you establish a practice and establish a life, put your kids in school in another state, just because the law
changes does not mean you're uprooting everybody and moving back.
So, I don't think that will immediately solve the problem of OBGYN care in Idaho. It may, however, if the law stands, if the amendment stands rather,
make it easier for hospitals and practices to recruit new OBGYNs.
SREENIVASAN: You know, I wonder if Idaho is that different from several of the other states who have these abortion bans, or should we be looking at
it as kind of an early warning sign of what the consequences are?
LEHR: So, while there's 20 states across the country that have banned abortion before the standard set-in brow, there's only a handful that have
this kind of strict criminal penalties. The reason we know so directly about the impact in Idaho is honestly that it was possible to collect the
data. Idaho is a relatively small state in terms of population.
So, public health researchers could and did call every OBGYN in the state and ask what their status was. That's much harder to do in a place like
Texas. And it's really hard to get that data because if you just look at whether people are licensed in the state, they could be licensed in state
but not necessarily practicing there or not delivering babies and just doing gynecological work.
So, the only way to really get this kind of data is with that person-to- person contact. And that's just really hard to do in a state with a lot more doctors.
[13:55:00]
But I definitely think the forces at play in Idaho are at play in other states and certainly are something that OBGYNs in states with abortion bans
with criminal penalties are thinking about, you know, daily in their work.
SREENIVASAN: Reporter for the New York Times, Lisa Lehr, thanks so much.
LEHR: Thanks for having me.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
NEWTON: So, when Roe v. Wade was struck down, many had indicated that this should be a state's issue, which is why you do see it now on the ballot in
some states.
That's it for now. If you ever miss our show, you can find the latest episode shortly after it airs on our podcast. And remember, you can always
catch us online, on our website, and all-over social media. Thanks for watching, and goodbye from New York.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:00:00]
END
