The World and Everything in It: January 9, 2024

PREROLL: The World and Everything in It is brought to you by listeners like us. My name is Stephen VanKampen, and I'm from Saint Johns, Michigan where I work as an electrician. I hope you enjoy today's program.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Good morning! The Supreme Court will consider whether two states have the power to remove former President Trump from the ballot.

BELLOWS: This is not a criminal matter. And Section 3 of the 14th Amendment does not require a conviction.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Also today, the Biden Administration tries—and fails—to block pro-life state laws. And, finding a jazz composer’s original voice.

AUDIO: It's an amazing moment in music history to think that this guy is premiering this piece and nobody knows on a whole big page of solo piano, what's going to come out except for him.

And WORLD Opinions commentator Daniel Darling.

REICHARD: It’s Tuesday, January 9th, 2024. This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Mary Reichard.

EICHER: And I’m Nick Eicher. Good morning!

REICHARD: Time for the news with Kent Covington.

KENT COVINGTON, NEWS ANCHOR: Israel » Secretary of State Tony Blinken is urging leaders in the Middle East to help prevent the Israel-Hamas war from widening.

BLINKEN: It’s clearly not in the interest of anyone, Israel, Lebanon, Hezbollah, for that matter, to see this escalate.

His remarks follow an Israeli airstrike in Lebanon that killed a high-ranking commander … in the Iran-backed Hezbollah terror group.

Wissam al-Tawil reportedly took part in the 2006 cross-border kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers that triggered the last war between Israel and Hezbollah.

Blinken has traveled to several Middle Eastern countries in recent days.

BLINKEN: Everywhere I went, I found leaders who were determined to prevent the conflict that we’re facing now from spreading, doing everything possible to deter escalation.

While Israeli forces are at war with Hamas in the Gaza Strip to the west, they’ve been working to keep Hezbollah in check to the north. The group has launched attacks against Israel in recent months, but has not yet fully joined the war.

Mayorkas » As lawmakers continue talks over legislation to tackle the border crisis, the Biden administration is laying blame for that crisis on the steps of the U.S. Capitol.

Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas visited the southern border in Texas on Monday and told reporters:

MAYORKAS: We need Congress to provide the supplemental funding that President Biden requested months ago. We need more Border Patrol agents and more case processors.

But Republicans say the Homeland Security secretary has been derelict in his duty to secure the homeland … by failing to secure the border.

And Mayorkas will be the subject of an impeachment hearing that House Republicans are scheduled to begin tomorrow.

But GOP lawmakers say the root of the crisis is President Biden’s policies.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell:

MCCONNELL: The answer is to fix the broken policies that the cartels are exploiting to devastating effect.

Republicans are demanding policy changes in exchange for approving a major funding package the president is asking for.

Lloyd Austin » The White House says it will review the failure of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin to notify Congress and the White House that he was hospitalized.

National Security Council spokesman John Kirby told reporters:

KIRBY: We’ll do what’s akin to a hot wash and try to see if processes and procedures need to be changed at all or modified so that we can learn from this.

But while some Republicans have called for the secretary’s resignation, the White House says Sec. Austin still has President Biden’s full confidence.

The Pentagon maintained its silence on why Austin was hospitalized and said he has no plans to resign. He reportedly suffered complications after an elective surgery.

Republican Sen. Tom Cotton says Congress wants answers:

COTTON: What kind of procedure this was, why it was chosen to undergo now, and why no one chose to inform the president of the United States or his senior aides, much less Congress or the American people, that the secretary of defense was hospitalized and unable to perform his duties.

The 70-year-old secretary was hospitalized on Jan. 1st. But the White House only found out about it three days later.

Austin was in intensive care for a time, but has been moved to a private room and has resumed his duties

Boeing panel found » The National Transportation Safety Board has located the part of an Alaska Airlines jet that blew out in mid-air over the weekend, leaving a gaping hole in the side of the fuselage.

It looks like a cabin door, but it’s called a door plug as it was not a functioning door.

NTSB Chairwoman Jennifer Homendy said a school teacher in the Portland, Oregon area found it.

HOMENDY: He found it in his backyard. Thank you, Bob. I will reach out to you so that I can thank you myself.

She called the panel crucial to her agency’s investigation.

The panel blew off of a Boeing 737 Max 9 jet shortly after takeoff from Portland over the weekend. Boeing reportedly did not manufacture or install the panel in question.

And a note of correction: In our report yesterday, I stated that the Max 9 is the same model that the FAA grounded for nearly two years. But the previously grounded planes were in fact Max 8 jets.

China space » Pentagon officials say China could cripple U-S satellites in the event of a military conflict. WORLD’s Josh Schumacher has more.

JOSH SCHUMACHER: A report released last month out of the Air War College details ways that the Chinese military could disable the U.S. presence in space and the command centers that control it.

Beijing could jam satellite communication or seek to hack U.S satellites. But it could also launch missiles from the ground that could take out many satellites in orbit above its territory.

The report says the Chinese military has been testing such missiles for several years.

For WORLD, I’m Josh Schumacher

Russian missile attacks » Russia launched its latest barrage of hypersonic and cruise missiles against Ukrainian targets on Monday. The missiles struck near the front lines of fighting in the east as well as in central and western parts of the country.

At least four civilians were killed.

Western officials and analysts had previously warned that Russia was stockpiling its cruise missiles in preparation for a strategy of winter bombardment, as bad weather keeps the front line largely static.

I'm Kent Covington.

Straight ahead: Rescuing the ballot before the 2024 election. Plus, a classic composition turns 100.

This is The World and Everything in It.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: It’s Tuesday, the 9th of January, 2024.

You’re listening to today’s edition of The World and Everything in It. Good morning, I’m Mary Reichard.

NICK EICHER, HOST: And I’m Nick Eicher. First up: Trump’s place on the 2024 ballot.

Last month, the Colorado Supreme Court and Secretary of State in Maine removed Donald Trump from their primary ballots. They argued that Trump was ineligible to run for office, citing an obscure part of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.

REICHARD: Section 3 of the 14th Amendment was originally drafted to prevent former Confederates from returning to government office after the Civil War, and now the U.S. Supreme Court will consider whether it applies to Trump’s behavior on January 6th, 2021.

EICHER: Joining us now to talk about it is Daniel Suhr. He is an attorney in Milwaukee, he served as a senior adviser to the Governor of his state, Scott Walker. He’s also a contributor to World Opinions.

REICHARD: Daniel, good morning.

DANIEL SUHR: Good morning, Mary. Thanks for having me.

REICHARD: Well Daniel, let’s start with the text. What does Article 3 of the 14th Amendment say, and how has it traditionally been interpreted?

SUHR: I don't know that it's ever really been interpreted, Mary, that's one of the unique parts of this whole case. Article, or Section 3, rather, of the 14th amendment was adopted in the wake of the Civil War. And it had a very clear purpose. It was to say that Confederates who had fought against the United States were traitors, right in a very real sense, in particular, that those who had taken an oath to serve the United States, and then betrayed that oath, had done something even more objectionable, even more wrong than the other Confederates who served in the rebellion. And so the Section 3 lays down a rule. It says simply, if you had taken an oath, and then turned around and engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States, you cannot run for office in Congress, you cannot run for President or Vice President.

EICHER: Well, given that background, what grounds did the Colorado Supreme Court cite to justify its decision last month?

SUHR: So obviously, January 6th, 2021, was a minimum unique moment in our nation's history. And one of the hot interpretations from that day was what role President Trump's public statements had in prompting the protesters who eventually went on to take over the Capitol. So how does that apply in this legal context? Well, if the 14th Amendment says that any person who is engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States cannot serve as president, well, then President Trump, if he engaged in insurrection or rebellion, if that's how one characterizes his role in January 6, then he's ineligible to serve as president again in 2024.

REICHARD: Daniel, some who oppose what Maine and Colorado have done point out that Donald Trump has not been convicted of insurrection. Even special counsel Jack Smith avoided charging Trump with committing insurrection in his recommendations for indictment last year. But Maine’s Secretary of State Shenna Bellows says that doesn’t matter.

BELLOW: This is not a criminal matter. And Section 3 of the 14th Amendment does not require a conviction.

Daniel, how would you respond to that argument?

SUHR: So I would characterize this the same as impeachment, right? Impeachment is provided in the U.S. Constitution, and it says high crimes or misdemeanors. But ultimately, impeachment is a political decision. Does a majority of the U.S. House of Representatives, does a super majority of the U.S. Senate, find what the President has done is wrong? Right, and so that is that is something they vote on, and it's not a legal conclusion. It is a political conclusion ultimately reached by political actors. And so I have some sympathy for the argument that insurrection, as that term is used in the 14th Amendment, doesn't necessarily require conviction of the crime of insurrection. That said, if you ask a lawyer, did what President Trump engaged in on January 6, did that constitute insurrection? There's a reason Jack Smith didn't charge him with it. It's because he couldn't convict him of it, right? In fact, he didn't even want to try to convict him of it, because he didn't feel like the facts would support it. And so once again, when political actors make these sort of political decisions, it's hard not to see what, for instance, the Maine Secretary of State is doing through a political prism, that this is about retaliating against Donald Trump because they don't like him, not because he broke some statutory or constitutional legal standard.

EICHER: The Supreme Court will hear Trump’s appeal against Colorado’s Supreme Court on February 8th less than a month before Colorado’s presidential primary election on March 5th. What do you expect to see?

SUHR: Yeah, as though the Supreme Court didn't have a hot enough docket already this term, right? We've got two major abortion cases, we obviously had huge cases the last several terms, and now we get this one. Ultimately, I think this Supreme Court is going to do what it has always done, which is look at the text, look at the original history and meaning of these words as they were understood at the time, and then apply them to the facts. And I think if you do that in a fair and unbiased way, you'll see that President Trump's remarks the morning of January 6, we're at well within his first amendment rights to free speech, that he did not engage in or even incite others to engage in insurrection or rebellion, that he was simply making a valid legitimate political point that several United States senators and members of Congress agreed with that was well within the realm of mainstream political discourse at the time. The fact that other people at the end of that rally got out of control and that their protests, you know, turned into something more like a riot, it's a very high standard to say that he incited that, and I think the U.S. Supreme Court will ultimately recognize that these are questions that the American people should be empowered to resolve in the ballot box, rather than having judges make the decision and denying people the opportunity to vote on these questions.

REICHARD: Daniel Suhr is an attorney and regular contributor to WORLD Opinions. Daniel, thank you for your time!

SUHR: Thanks for having me on, Mary.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Coming up next on The World and Everything in It: pro-life states versus the federal government.

After the Dobbs decision in 2022, the Biden Administration issued guidance claiming that a federal law preempted state laws protecting babies from abortion. The law in question: EMTALA—the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Texas eventually sued the federal government, saying EMTALA does not require healthcare providers to perform abortions. Meanwhile, the federal government sued Idaho, claiming its protections for unborn babies conflicted with EMTALA.

Last Tuesday, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court ruling in Texas. That decision found the Biden administration went too far in requiring doctors to perform abortions in medical emergencies. And on Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the state of Idaho to continue enforcing its protections for unborn babies in emergency room situations.

EICHER: How do these cases play into the larger conflict over abortion in America?

Joining us now to talk about it is Steve Aden. He’s the Chief Legal Officer and General Counsel for Americans United for Life.

REICHARD: Steve, good morning. Glad you’re here. Well, let’s just start with EMTALA itself what is it?

STEVE ADEN: EMTALA is a part of Medicaid that was signed by President Ronald Reagan back in the 1980s that forbids emergency departments that receive Medicaid, Medicare rather, most of them do, from engaging in what's called ‘patient dumping’—from refusing treatment for patients who are either in emergent circumstances or in active labor. It was a real problem back then, and the principal example of that practice was women in active labor. What’s happened now is that since the Dobbs case, in 2022, the Biden administration has reached through every possible argument to try to recreate a federal right to abortion that the Supreme Court set aside in the Dobbs case, overturning Roe vs. Wade. And that’s what brings us to these court cases in Texas and in Idaho and the Supreme Court's recent actions.

REICHARD: Well, what was the Fifth Circuit Court's reasoning for siding with Texas and last week’s ruling?

ADEN: The Fifth Circuit unanimously, a three-judge panel, got it right, I think. They said, look, the EMTALA statute actually refers to protecting women and infants in the womb, in active labor. The word individual in that statute means not only the health of the woman, but the health of her unborn child. So Congress in EMTALA was concerned, not just about women in labor, it was concerned about the infants in their wombs. And the Biden administration has flipped that on its head and mandated using that statute that every emergency department that receives Medicare funds provide for essentially elective abortions when a woman presents to the emergency department claiming that the pregnancy threatens her health.

REICHARD: After the 5th Circuit issued its ruling, a pro-abortion writer named Jessica Valenti, she's a pro-abortion writer, posted an article on her Substack that’s called Abortion, Every Day and that article was titled, “Of Course They Want Us Dead.” and she said that the ruling—quote— “is part of a much broader plan to normalize women's deaths and to get voters used to the idea of divorcing abortion from health care,”—close quote. How would you respond to those claims?

ADEN: Well, that’s outrageous and misguided, of course Mary. The point is that abortion is not actually a part of health care properly understood. It's an elective procedure in the states where it is still legal. And it doesn't do anything to prevent or treat disease. Pregnancy is a natural state for women who are pregnant. Even though the Biden administration's Food and Drug Administration recently changed the rules related to chemical abortion to insist that pregnancy is a quote unquote, “disease” that needs to be treated, that's not so. Pregnancy is a natural state. And just as pregnancy is not a disease, the health of women and their babies in the womb, is safeguarded by federal law, and we're glad that the the Circuit Court of Appeals recognized and respected that and we hope that the Supreme Court will also. I have good hopes that the Supreme Court will see it the same way as well.

REICHARD: In the Idaho case, a 3-judge panel from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals initially ruled in favor of the state, but then reversed course. It imposed an injunction against Idaho’s pro-life law. What do you make of the Supreme Court's decision to let Idaho continue to enforce its abortion law between now and when the high court hears that case in April?

ADEN: So the way that I interpret that is that the Supreme Court from time to time does get a little tired of the Ninth Circuit's shenanigans. And in this case, it saw that the Ninth Circuit had moved to impose for a big chunk of the whole United States—the western part of the United States, a directive that emergency departments at hospitals act as abortion centers, in essence, at the behest of the Biden administration. So I think that it augurs well for the review and ultimate decision in the Supreme Court.

REICHARD: Well, that raises a question in my mind and this is my last question. Roe versus Wade was overturned in 2022. Following that, pro-life ballot measures largely failed. So what do you expect to see in 2024?

ADEN: Well Mary, Americans United for Life reminds everyone that what we have seen is in some instances, state popular ballot initiatives go the wrong way. That’s simply an exercise of, in our view, subverting the will of the people as expressed through their state legislatures, by getting 51 percent of voters out of blue districts to vote for abortion. They have done that in several states. There’s a limited number of states where they can try that we think they will have far less success. But look, the point is when you look at elections, pro-life candidates have won hands down in the last in the last run 12 pro-life governors won, many of them handily, running on pro-life platforms. And the move to protect life in the states in the state houses continues to grow strong, Americans United for Life clocked over 60 new pro-life laws this past year and we expect to see at least as many at the spring in the state houses. So the push for life-protecting legislation is still strong. You know, we’re watching closely and working against those pro-abortion state ballot initiatives. But I believe that the the general initiative, the general inertia is still in the right direction.

REICHARD: It’s a long game, isn’t it? Steve Aden is the chief legal officer and general counsel for Americans United for Life. Steve, thanks so much for joining us today.

ADEN: My pleasure, Mary, thank you.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Cecil the goldendoodle couldn’t hide it forever.

By “it” I mean an envelope filled with cash left out on the kitchen counter of Clayton and Carrie Law. Cold, hard cash and Cecil put their money where his mouth was.

Scarfed it right down.

CARRIE LAW: And at one point, he's sitting on the couch and we're just laughing thinking like there's potentially $2,000 inside of this dog. And we're just like waiting. Where is it going to end up?

Rrrrright where you think. He, ah, dropped it in the backyard and left it to his people to piece things back together.

LAW: We have a six for the serial number and try to get that taped in. But we had to have like the majority of the serial number on both sides and the bank said if we taped it that would help. So I’m bringing everything in in a plastic bag.

After all that, out of the $4-thousand in cash, they’re getting 35-hundred of it back.

So let’s call him Cecil the Tax Dog, though his refunds are a little unconventional.

It’s The World and Everything in It.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Today is Tuesday, January 9th, 2024.

This is WORLD Radio and we’re so glad you’ve joined us today. Good morning. I’m Nick Eicher.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: And I’m Mary Reichard. Coming next on The World and Everything in It: Rediscovering a classic piece of music.

Next month marks the 100th anniversary of what is considered one of America’s most iconic pieces of music.

EICHER: Here with the story is WORLD reporter Bonnie Pritchett.

BONNIE PRITCHETT: It’s the evening of February 12th, 1924. The Aeolian Hall, New York City. On the program? An Experiment in Modern Music produced and promoted by popular jazz band conductor Paul Whiteman and his band that shares his name.

Whiteman wants to showcase the history of Jazz. His band will perform existing works plus two pieces commissioned for the program.

Curious musical notables pack the hall. Into the program’s fourth hour they become restless. Then the composer of one of the commissioned pieces takes the stage and sits at the piano.

Pianist Kevin Cole describes what happened next.

KEVIN COLE: When he came out, and people were starting to fidget, and some were starting to leave, and that clarinet let go of that glissando, that whoop, at the beginning. It was, you know, like, Zeus threw a lightning bolt into the hall, because all of a sudden, what is this?

MUSIC: [1924 RHAPSODY IN BLUE]

COLE: So, they had to stay. And George, you know, gave the performance of his life…

George is George Gershwin. The performance: Rhapsody in Blue.

Until that evening, the 25-year-old Gershwin was known as little more than a musical theater songwriter, a Tin Pan Alley hack to his detractors.

He lacked formal training.

He never studied in Europe.

But, one hundred years ago, the Brooklyn-born son of Jewish Russian immigrants gave American music its voice.

Gershwin scored Rhapsody in Blue in a matter of weeks because—depending on who you ask—he had forgotten about the commission. So, he hastily scored a piano line and gave it to the band’s orchestrater Ferde Grofé who assigned instrumentalists their parts.

David Miller is music director and conductor for the Albany, New York Symphony. He describes what conductor Paul Whiteman saw on the solo piano line.

DAVID MILLER: So, there's this one very big blank page. And at the bottom, it says, “Wait for nod,” because George was at the end of that page would be like done with his solo thing. And then he nodded, and Whiteman came back in. It's an amazing moment in music history to think that this guy is premiering this piece and nobody knows on a whole big page of solo piano, what's going to come out except for him? He's got it in his head.

Rhapsody in Blue was first recorded in 1924, and then three years later Gershwin and the Paul Whiteman Band recorded it again. What you just heard was from the earliest recording.

The band’s orchestrator Ferde Grofé collaborated with Gershwin to orchestrate symphonic and theatrical versions from the original jazz band score.

Those manuscripts and recordings are vital evidence to musicologists today. Because, shortly after his death from a brain tumor at age 38, critics began “improving” Gershwin’s rhapsody.

MUSIC: [RHAPSODY IN BLUE — Royal Philharmonic]

MILLER: Gershwin orchestrated the pieces. And he orchestrated them beautifully. And then Mr. Campbell Watson came and changed them up and made them not as authentic, sort of more orchestral. He added instruments to make them sound thicker or whatever. He thought he was improving them.

MUSIC: [RHAPSODY IN BLUE — BERSTEIN]

The so-called improvements exasperate Kevin Cole who is considered one of the premier Gershwin interpreters.

COLE: Lenny Bernstein said, “Well, it's just a bunch of tunes strung together. It's not really a piece, you know.” And I thought, well, what tunes? You should be so lucky…

Unfortunately, those editions represent most published scores. So, for the past 80 years audiences have rarely heard Rhapsody in Blue as Gershwin intended.

For 20 years Cole and Miller have collaborated on stage and off to restore Gershwin’s mark on his signature work. Also contributing to that effort is The University of Michigan’s Gershwin Institute.

Andrew Kohler serves as the Institute’s managing editor of the George and Ira Gershwin critical edition. 

ANDREW KOHLER: We are going through the works of George and Ira Gershwin—both what they wrote together and what they wrote independently or wrote with other collaborators, and we are preparing scholarly editions that reflect the original texts. Because particularly in the case of George, there have been a lot of tampering over the years…

And, just in time for Rhapsody in Blue’s centennial celebration, the institute completed restoration of the jazz band and symphonic orchestrations.

Last year Cole, Miller and the National Orchestral Institute Orchestra recorded this symphonic version. NAXOS Records provided this audio from the album due out in February.

Despite tampering, Gershwin’s Rhapsody in Blue endures. But why?

For pianist Kevin Cole, it’s the unforgettable melodies.

Andrew Kohler says it’s Gershwin’s successful blending of piano concerto and jazz orchestra, starting with that solo clarinet, that created a surprising new sound.

Miller says Rhapsody in Blue continues to inspire American composers. Its strains still echoing from the stage of the Aeolian Hall.

MILLER: This piece is so iconic, not only related to Gershwin, but related to the course of the 20th century and of American music after Gershwin. And the combination of Gershwin's extraordinary pianism, with his melodic gifts, with this unbelievably fresh amalgam of the grand tradition and of the new world of Tin Pan Alley and jazz and Broadway and New York. It's just a moment in history that's really worth celebrating.

Reporting for WORLD, I’m Bonnie Pritchett.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Today is Tuesday, January 9th. Good morning! This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Mary Reichard.

NICK EICHER, HOST: And I’m Nick Eicher. Up next: abortion and the NBA. WORLD Opinions Commentator Daniel Darling says recent revelations about one player signal a bigger problem within the league.

DANIEL DARLING: Anthony Edwards is one of the best basketball players on the planet. The shooting guard was a first-round pick in 2020 by the Minnesota Timberwolves. Edwards has already taken the NBA by storm, voted as a member of the NBA all-rookie team in his first year and later selected to play in the 2023 FIBA Basketball World Cup. This season Edwards has led Minnesota to the best record in the Western Conference.

Like many young professional athletes, Edwards is wrestling with the trappings of wealth and fame. Recently, Instagram model Paige Jordae published screenshots of a text conversation in which she revealed to Edwards that she was pregnant with his child. His response was disturbingly callous: “[I] can’t do this” and “Get a abortion lol.” Jordae shared with him that she had an abortion two years prior and regrets it “every day.” Still Edwards pushed her to take over-the-counter pills that would cause a chemical abortion, promising money in return. Later Jordae posted a screenshot of a $100,000 wire transfer from him, along with his demand to see video of her taking the pills. After she sent him the video, he grew cold to Jordae and said he’d only communicate through his lawyer.

The exchange is astonishing, but perhaps it should not be surprising. The pro-abortion movement claims to liberate women, yet ready access to abortion only empowers men who demand consequence-free sex. This is the tragic narrative of thousands of women around the country. According to one report, 64 percent of women who choose abortion do so as a result of coercion, often by the father.

When their encounter became public, Anthony Edwards released a statement, “I made comments in the heat of a moment that are not me, and that are not aligned with what I believe and who I want to be as a man. All women should be supported and empowered to make their own decisions about their bodies and what is best for them.”

In one sense, the public outcry reveals a good kind of shame still associated with abortion. As John Piper has said, “We know we are killing children.” Yet we should mourn that Edwards only appears to be apologetic for his words and not the actions that resulted in the death of his innocent child. This is not surprising in a culture, especially a sports culture, that often celebrates abortion. When the Supreme Court reversed Roe, the NBA and WNBA commissioners posted a lengthy pro-abortion statement supporting “freedom” and “reproductive healthcare.” The NBA and WNBA often encourage giving to Planned Parenthood.

Christians are right to oppose abortion on demand, despite cultural pressure to back away. And the incident underscores the need to continue to preach the gospel of Jesus, which offers forgiveness and redemption for many young men and young women who choose abortion.

Even as we enjoy Edwards’ athletic accomplishments, let’s pray he finds peace with the Creator who made him and every unborn baby.

I’m Daniel Darling.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Tomorrow: the Iowa caucuses on Washington Wednesday. We’ll take a final look at the GOP landscape before voters make their choices. And, day care for the elderly who could use a little extra help. That and more tomorrow.

I’m Nick Eicher.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: And I’m Mary Reichard.

The World and Everything in It comes to you from WORLD Radio. WORLD’s mission is biblically objective journalism that informs, educates, and inspires.

Jesus said: “Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” —Matthew 11:28-30

WORLD Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of WORLD Radio programming is the audio record.