Meet the Press NOW — February 22

You have a reason to care. You know someone. You've lost someone. You've lived it.

The darkest times are no match for what we can do together. Join us for the CAMH Sunrise Challenge from May 25th to 29th. Canadians are waking up with the sun to raise funds for a future where everyone can access the mental health care they need, the moment they need it. Get up with the sun.

Show up for CAMH and rise up for mental health. Register today at sunrisenchallenge.ca. That's sunrisenchallenge.ca. If it's Thursday, a rift in the Republican Party widens.

After that major Alabama Supreme Court ruling that embryos are children. As fertility clinics halt treatment, and the White House tries to seize on the issue politically. Plus, divisions in both parties on full display as some Democratic voters in the critical battleground state of Michigan look to rebuke President Biden and his handling of the Hamas war at the polls. And after months of inaction on Capitol Hill, the White House is now considering cracking down on the southern border with new asylum restrictions without the help of Congress.

I'll talk to a Republican House lawmaker who's still holding out hope for a bipartisan deal. Welcome to Meet the Press Now. I'm Kristen Welker in Washington as we track the growing legal, medical, and political fallout of the recent Alabama Supreme Court decision that embryos are children. It's a ruling that has major implications for fertility treatment and reproductive health in Alabama and beyond.

And the White House is trying to seize on the issue politically to paint Republicans as out of touch and extreme. The ruling issued by Alabama's all Republican Supreme Court says that the state's wrongful death statutes legally apply to frozen embryos. The court says those embryos are the same under Alabama civil law as unborn children, meaning fertility clinics could face potentially severe penalties for destroying them. At least three IVF clinics in the state have now paused treatments amid the legal uncertainty.

The ruling is putting pressure on Republicans to take a stand on the case. Speaking at a conference today, Republican governors were quick to say they support IVF, with New Hampshire's governor going as far as to outright criticize the Alabama court. I think it's a terrible ruling. I think the one thing folks should take from this is these are state issues now.

Are you comfortable with IVF as a procedure? I am. You have a lot of people out there in this country that they wouldn't have children if it wasn't for that. At this year's CPAC conservative gathering underway right now near Washington, D.C., Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville seemed to struggle to answer questions from NBC's Dasha Burns about the ruling.

Take a look. Right now, IVF services are paused at some of the clinics in Alabama. Are you concerned that this could impact people who are trying to have kids? Well, that's for another conversation.

I think the big thing is right now you go back to the situation and try to work it out to where it's best for everybody. I mean, that's what the whole abortion issue is about. I guess what really isn't about abortion, it's about IVF and the concern that now families might not have access to it. But it's about the same direction, but I agree.

People need to have access. People who need to have access. We need more kids. We need people to have the opportunity to have kids.

Presidential candidate Nikki Haley, meanwhile, who has struck a more moderate tone on abortion and reproductive rights, is now attempting to clarify remarks she made to NBC's Ali Vitale yesterday. Here are Haley's initial comments and then her attempted clarification later that evening. The Supreme Court there said that embryos created through IVF are considered children and are offered those same protections. Do you agree?

I mean, I think, I mean, embryos to me are babies. I didn't say that I agreed with the Alabama ruling. What the question that I was asked is, do I believe an embryo is a baby? I do think that if you look in the definition, an embryo is considered an unborn baby.

And so, yes, I believe from my stance that that is the difference is, and this is what I say about abortion as well. We need to treat these issues with the utmost respect. Meanwhile, Democrats are looking to seize on the ruling as they try to leverage issues tied to abortion and reproductive rights in this year's election. Speaking this afternoon in Michigan, Vice President Kamala Harris referenced the ruling and blamed former President Trump for the current reproductive rights landscape in America.

Here's what she said. So on the one hand, the proponents are saying that an individual doesn't have a right to end an unwanted pregnancy. And on the other hand, the individual does not have a right to start a family. When you look at the fact that the previous president of the United States was clear in his intention to handpick three Supreme Court justices who would overturn the protections of Roe v.

Wade. And he did it. And that's what got us to this point today. A lot to impact today, folks.

Joining me now from South Carolina, where she's following the Haley campaign after that incredible interview yesterday is NBC's Ali Vitale. Mike Memoli has the very latest on the vice president's speech. Also with me is Naomi Kahne, a law professor at the University of Virginia and co-director of their Family Law Center, and Dr. Mamie McLean, a physician with Alabama Fertility Specialists.

Thanks to all of you for starting us off on what is just a huge day. Ali, let me start with you. You had that really revealing conversation with Governor Nikki Haley yesterday. In light of her clarification that we just played, do you think that that is what Republicans want to hear?

Is it enough? Because we know that she is among many Republicans who's frankly struggling on this issue. Well, look, I do think that as much as we have all been talking about the comments that she made to me yesterday and then, of course, the cascading effect that they've had as more Republican governors have been forced to answer the question, as well as other Republican lawmakers writ large, it marks a litmus test in political circles. But in the brief conversations that we've had with voters out here, I'm not sure they've trickled in as much as we might assume.

That being said, when we've told voters what Nikki Haley said, many of them say that that's not what they believe about IVF and that there should not be limitations placed on would-be parents trying to seek fertility care so that they can start a family. That's why Nikki Haley, though, is beginning to try this walk back clarification that she's attempting to do. Of course, to me, there's two problems with what she said last night on CNN. The first, of course, being that she said she wasn't asked the question that she was.

I did directly ask her, as you played, what the Alabama Supreme Court did and if she agreed with what they decided here. And then, of course, the second part of it is she seems to not be engaging with the idea that this is not popular among the American public. And for someone who has tried to be such a moderating voice on reproductive access and abortion, this is really out of step with that persona. I think for me, it's why I asked so many follow-up questions over the course of the next few minutes in that interview trying to understand where Haley's position on this was, because, again, it is out of step with the sort of nuanced position she's tried to espouse out here on the campaign trail on a really thorny issue for Republicans.

And I think that right there, Ali, that finding a nuanced position that resonates with Republicans is the very challenge. I think that so many Republican candidates, whether running for president or other offices, have right now. Let's talk about the perspective of other Republicans, because I've spoken to a number of Republicans who say they are concerned that there is not a unified message when it comes to reproductive rights, whether we're talking about abortion or now, of course, this issue, which is even more complicated, the issue of IVF. What are you hearing inside Republican circles, Ali?

Is there a sense that they need to get on the same page? There's a reason that Republicans are struggling with this, Kristen. It's not just because, let's assume that the conversation around overturning Roe was a quote-unquote easy conversation for Republicans to have. It's what they've been pushing for for 50 years.

They finally got it over a year ago with the Dobbs decision. Now they're struggling in the aftermath of that because, A, it's more popular to campaign to them on the possibility of that than it is on the idea that they are taking away a right from women that they have had for almost five decades. But then there's also the offshoot issues here. As you put that map up, it's not just states limiting abortion access.

I've covered reproductive rights for the last 10 years that I've been at this company. It's also the ways that we're watching conservative legislatures start broadening their overreach into things like IVF potentially, but then also things like the abortion pill and the idea that people may or may not be able to travel over state lines. Texas previewed a lot of these early storylines when they put out their abortion restrictions well before the Dobbs decision. And the fact that all of this is out of step with the American public remains why it's difficult for Republicans to continue talking about this issue.

Absolutely, Ali. Great analysis. And again, congratulations on an incredibly newsmaking interview with Nikki Haley yesterday. We really appreciate you bringing it to us.

Let's turn to Mike Memoli now. Mike, you are out on the trail with Vice President Harris. Not surprisingly, she has seized on this issue. This is something we've heard her talk forcefully about before.

A lot of Democrats feel like this is her strong suit, talking about issues like reproductive rights. What did you hear today? What do you think the big takeaways are? Do you think we're going to see an even larger ramp up in her schedule now, Mike, given this new Oh, absolutely.

People are very, I mean, that's one of the reasons that University of Alabama at Birmingham decided to shut down or to at least temporarily stop some of its IVF treatments, was fear of criminal liability. Although this case only deals with civil liability under the wrongful death for minors act and explicitly says, we are not going so far as to talk about what will happen under criminal law. It's easy to imagine that that's what the next step is going to be, is bringing a cause of action under criminal law for this. And right now, Alabama may not, is unlikely to stay in Alabama.

Okay. That was my next question. Where does this go next? And will this go to the Supreme Court?

Is that your expectation? I'm actually not sure it will go to the Supreme Court. This is a state law issue. And one of the things that the Supreme Court said in Dobbs, the case that overruled Roe and said there was no fundamental right to abortion, is we want to return these issues to the state.

And the Supreme Court also said that the state has a legitimate interest in the preservation of prenatal life at all stages of development. So I think it's unlikely to go to the Supreme Court. And I'm not sure that the Supreme Court would want to weigh in on an issue of state law in this context. Well, it's just fascinating and so incredibly complicated from a legal perspective.

Naomi Kahn, thank you so much for your perspective. We really appreciate it. I do want to turn to Dr. Mamie McClain, who's a physician with Alabama Fertility Specialists.

As you said, as we said earlier, Dr. McClain, you wrote an op-ed about the court ruling. And I just want to read a little bit of this for folks so that they know how you view this. You say, I have never felt so helpless as a physician.

If we are unable to use IVF and embryo freezing in my practice, it makes upholding the standard of care for my patients impossible. That is an incredibly powerful statement. Explain more about what you mean and why it makes it impossible. So we're facing significant legal penalties as the Supreme Court ruling states for practicing modern day IVF.

So if I am worried that myself or my embryologist are going to be thrown in jail for wrongful death, then I can't continue to operate a practice here. There are a lot of people who may not understand exactly how IVF works. Can you walk us through, you know, how embryos are frozen and why many patients have multiple embryos that are frozen, why that is such an important part and a normal part of the IVF process? So every patient makes elections regarding the designation for their embryos.

But creating multiple embryos allows couples to have more than one child. And, you know, while we wish that every embryo implanted 100% of the time, best cases is only 50 to 60%. So most people need two to three embryo transfers to have a healthy baby. Yeah, it's such an important point to make that often an initial embryo transferred doesn't necessarily take.

And then in terms of what happens to the embryos next, you referenced this. Couples have a choice. It's not as if all of these embryos just get tossed away. Couples have a choice if they want to donate them, if they want to donate them to science, to another couple.

And yes, one of the options is also for the embryos to be destroyed, right? Yes, correct. Those are the options as it stands now. And we're not clear on what that looks like now after the Supreme Court ruling.

And what about for couples who decide that they're going to keep their embryos stored for several years? There's a financial cost to that as well, right? There is. There's a financial cost to keeping embryos frozen, as well as to shipping embryos to different sites across the country.

So unfortunately, our patients are bearing the burden of this decision. It will lead to IVF clinics closing and ultimately fewer babies born in Alabama. And I just want you to talk kind of on a more personal level, because again, your clinic announced they are pausing treatment for now as you sort through the legality of all of that. Talk through what that means for the families who are trying to expand their families and how that's, what are they saying to you about how that's impacting them?

So they're devastated. These are heartbreaking decisions that we made and discussions that we're having to cancel a transfer for a patient who's been prepping for this for three months and this is, you know, essentially I'm telling them that they're not able to become pregnant. We believe that it's a fundamental American right to choose to become a parent, to choose when that happens and how that happens. And this fundamental American right has been taken away by the Supreme Court ruling.

So Dr. McClain, for families who are not going to give up, what is your message to them? The families in Alabama who say, we are going to be parents no matter what. What do you say to them?

So we're by your side. We won't give up until there's a path forward to offer modern day fertility care in Alabama. Share your story. Spread awareness.

Call your legislator. We're so hopeful that the state of Alabama, that the legislature can find a workaround to offer IVF. All right. Well, Dr.

Mamie McClain, thank you so much for being here. We really appreciate it. Thank you. Coming up, Republican divisions run deep and go far beyond abortion and reproductive rights.

We'll dig into what that means for November. Plus, we're live in Battleground, Michigan, where it's Democrats' divisions on display as key voters there say they're not backing the president in Tuesday's primary because of his handling of the Israel-Hamas war. That's next. You're watching The Press Now.

Welcome back. As we mentioned, the debate over reproductive rights continues to divide Republicans. But Democrats have an issue of their own that is splitting their voters, the Israel-Hamas war. President Biden's support for Israel and his handling of the war has drawn some sharp criticism from progressives as well as from Muslim and Arab American voters.

That tension is perhaps most palpable in Michigan, a state with a significant Arab American population and which is also a must-win for the Biden re-election campaign. In a new poll of likely Michigan voters, former President Trump leads President Biden by a small margin. Not helping the president, his favorability numbers in the state, just 38%. Compare that to Democratic Michigan Governor Whitmer's 53% favorability.

My colleague Yasmin Vasuvius sat down with a group of Michigan voters who are planning to voice their frustrations with President Biden in the state's Democratic primary next week by voting uncommitted. Take a listen to some of what they had to say. Raise of hands, who voted for Joe Biden? And who is voting uncommitted in the primary?

Who's undecided in the general election? Anyone about you? Were you on the fence with Joe Biden for the war? Yes and no.

I have never liked him. He really has not delivered on a lot of things he said he was. Now with the last four months in Gaza, I feel like you can't ignore it. It's really what he does in the next next eight months is going to make or break whether I vote for him in the general.

I think Joe Biden is beyond redemption. I think that in late October we said when there were only 3000, only look at me, only 3000 Palestinians were killed. We said that's way too much. You've got to call for a ceasefire.

And if you don't, we're going to abandon you. If you just look at it from a like purely like a domestic policy perspective, there are people who need food. There are people who need water, health care, housing. We're sending billions of dollars in aid to everywhere else around the world in general.

We're spending money on wars. We're spending money on all these different foreign policy interests that we've seen for decades. You have been so distant from your constituents. You took our money, you turned around, stabbed us in the back, took our money.

Our money is used to kill our brothers and sisters. How this is just is inexcusable. It's just inexcusable. Joining me now is NBC News national correspondent Yasmin Vasuvius.

Yasmin, incredible conversation. Thank you for bringing it to us. What were your other key takeaways? And did you get the sense that some of those voters would consider going out to vote for President Biden at the end of the day if it's between Biden and Trump?

So let me address your first question first. The key takeaways here, it was about the war, right? That's kind of where it all began. That was the straw that kind of broke the camel's back.

Many of them were already on the fence because there were promises made in 2020 and promises not delivered. Student loans, for instance, came up. The environment came up as well multiple times, especially amongst our younger voters. It was the war really for for these four folks that really put things over the edge, right?

And the number of casualties that continued to grow and the amount they were seeing it every single day. Right. College, for instance, the older man that was sitting there talked about how things like this have happened in the past. We have been in the midst of war in the past, but now we're seeing it in our hands every single day.

Right. College for instance, the older man that was sitting there talked about how things like this have happened in the past. We have been in the midst of war in the past, but now we're seeing it in our hands every single day. We're watching the Super Bowl at one second.

In the next moment, we're scrolling and seeing the bodies of young Palestinians dead in Gaza. And these are their friends and these are their family members as well. I asked if there is any way in which the president could regain their vote come November. Two I think it does probably focus the mind of the Biden House even more.

But I'm convinced that they already know this. This cannot be a hot war in the fall. It absolutely will drag him down. Well, that's why they're making various trips to the Secretary of State to get that ceasefire and hostage deal done.

I want to turn to your column this week because you focus on the divides within the Republican Party, which you say are just devastating. I'm going to read a little bit of what you write. You write the GOP is likely too divided to win. And until Republicans can agree on an ideology that unifies and on a character that unifies, it's going to be a similar story to what they experienced in 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022 and 2023.

That is a bold statement. No, well, I do think the reason I focus on this is because I think a lot of legacy media and a lot of partisan media sort of, particularly on the left, does it sort of lumps Republicans all in one column. Look, Trump has control of the party, but he doesn't own the entire party. Nikki Haley is out there getting 30 to 40 percent of the vote.

And she's going to continue, even though the message has been sent, she can't win. All of her voters know that, yet they're still willing to cast an anti-Trump vote. You've got a Senate candidate in Arizona secretly taping the state party chair. You've got two different state party chairs in Michigan.

Texas Republicans shoot each other all the time. It was a Republican House that impeached a Republican attorney general, who was appointed by a Republican state Senate. So this is a party Trump really has the party. It's not evenly divided, but it's extraordinarily divided.

And in an election that is going to be decided by small margins. This is why when you look around, particularly in the state of Michigan, I know we sit here and you talk about this Arab American vote. It is there's no doubt. It's potentially crucial.

But I would posit that the Michigan Republicans and Trump is so damaged there. Right. That in some ways it counteracts it. Right.

And you have this. Look, there's similar. Many of these battleground states. There are two wings of the Republican Party at each other's throats.

So, yes, there's some divides in the Democratic Party. But Joe Manchin still says nice things about Joe Biden. You think ultimately he's going to vote for Joe Biden? You think he comes?

Did you see his interview on one hand? He's worried about the future of the American Republic if Donald Trump wins reelection. Right. And on the other hand, he wishes that Biden wouldn't speak so woke.

I mean, it's sort of like, geez, I wonder how you're going to vote, Senator Manchin. You you hold up one as a threat, existential threat. And you hold up the other as a disappointment. Right.

So which way you going to vote? You think he's going to make his announcement sometime this summer? I would assume he'll try to do it when it matters. All right, Chuck, thank you.

Great to see you. Appreciate it. And up next, I will talk to one House Republican pushing Congress to break through the gridlock with a new bipartisan bill to send military aid to Ukraine and to address the crisis at the southern border. Stay with us.

You're watching Meet the Press Now. Welcome back. With border security currently stalling Congress amid pressure from former President Trump, President Biden may be gearing up to go his own way on the border. My NBC colleagues today broke the news that President Biden is considering executive action that could prevent individuals who illegally cross the border from claiming asylum in the United States.

Now, that was a key part of the bipartisan border bill Republicans shot down in the Senate. In a statement this afternoon, Speaker Johnson, who's long called for Biden to take executive action at the border, referred to reports that he would use presidential powers to reform the asylum system as, quote, election year gimmicks that won't secure the border. Joining me now is the Nebraska Republican Congressman Don Bacon. Congressman Bacon, it is always great to have you in the seat.

Thanks for being here. It's great to be with you. Let's start right there with these executive actions that my colleagues say President Biden is considering. Effectively, they could restrict asylum claims at the border.

Of course, it comes after the Senate blocked that compromise deal with similar policies. Would you welcome that action by the president? Is that the right move? Yes, I'm less worried about the political pros and cons, what's going to help out two months from now, four months from now.

Let's fix things now. The American people want this. It's the number one issue in our district is the border security. 7 million people have been released in the country.

It's created tremendous amounts of strain in our cities. So I think that's the case that we've always known the president has had authorities that he's not decided to take advantage of. And so I would move on. But in the meantime, we've offered legislation that would like remain in Mexico title 42.

Myself and a few bipartisan colleagues of mine to help mandate some of these things to make them optional, optional, let's mandate them. But I welcome any fixes at the border at any time. I want to talk to you about your legislation in just a second that you're proposing. But let me just get your reaction to what we've heard from Speaker Johnson.

As I just read in that statement, he called this potential executive action, quote, an election year gimmick that won't secure the border. And of course, what's notable about that, he's been the one, including on this program, calling for President Biden to take executive action, unilateral action. Do you think he's trying to have it both ways? Is he undercutting his own argument here, Congressman?

Well, I think the president is saying what Speaker Johnson was saying three months ago that he could take action. The president said he couldn't. He had to have legislation from the House. And frankly, the president's had these authorities for three years.

And now he's talking about doing it. That said, we can argue going backwards all we want. We want to fix problems now. And I'm more interested in solving problems for our country.

And this is the number one issue facing New York, Denver, Chicago. I could go on and on. And so I think instead of pointing fingers, let's move forward. That would be my thing.

But the fact is, the president just said what the speaker's been saying all along, that he could take actions right now. Yeah, I mean, the challenge, of course, with unilateral actions, as you know, as we saw during Trump, I covered the Trump administration. They are often blocked by legal challenges. So he will take this executive action.

We'll wait and see what happens. It could get blocked. That's part of the argument for why he hasn't done so so far and why he has been calling for and a number of Republicans, Republican colleagues, have been calling for real legislative change. But I guess the question is, we should be doing legislative fixes.

And there's a lot of good things that were in that Senate bill. If it passed the Senate, you got to get 60 votes. But there were a lot of positives that could be built on legislatively there. Well, let me follow up with you on what you are working on, because you're working on a border bill with a bipartisan group of House members.

And as you say, it has things like remain in Mexico in it. Now, of course, the challenge there is Mexico said they don't want to work with us on remain in Mexico. United States would need Mexico's help. But just on the politics of this, have you spoken to Speaker Johnson?

Is he open to bringing this to the House floor? What do you think the reception has been so far? We were scheduled to talk to him Thursday night, but as you know, the schedule changed. So I'll talk to him his staff this afternoon.

I was optimistic. I'm not gonna say they committed for him because it's only the speaker could do that. But I saw a lot of optimism. A lot of the chairmen of subcommittee or of the committees are supportive of this.

But we've got more work to do. I can't say for sure how the speaker will fall on this. I do know this. He wanted to secure the border.

And by the way, Mexico will work with us on this. If it's a priority of the president, President Trump engaged Mexico and they accommodated him on this. They would do the same with President Biden if he made this a priority. But I know the speaker wants to secure the border and he wants military aid to Ukraine and Israel and Taiwan.

And he thought the Senate bill was too much. Our bill cuts $30 billion off of their Sunday. So I see a lot of goodness in our compromise legislation. Okay, we'll track and see what happens.

As you know, the Biden administration has been working with Mexico on a range of different issues, including trying to crack down on fentanyl. But I do want to say on foreign policy, former president Trump, as I'm sure you're aware, again said this week that he would not honor the NATO alliance with member states that don't meet their defense spending benchmarks. Basically, what was your reaction to that? What kind of a message do you think that sends to Vladimir Putin?

Does that effectively invite him to come in and invade other countries? On one hand, it could be said a lot better because I know what his goal was. He wants all the NATO countries to put in 2%. And that's what we should say.

Just say it. Just say it clearly. All the countries bordering Russia are doing over 2%. Those are the ones who are at risk to Russia.

So when you look at all the practicality of it, the Baltic countries, Poland, Romania, and so forth Peter Nicholas, really fascinating. It is just out right now. You can get more of Peter's reporting on this in today's issue of the new NBC News Politics newsletter from the Politics Desk. Peter, thank you so much.

Great reporting. Coming up next, Lonnie Bunch, secretary of the Smithsonian, will be here to talk about the importance of celebrating and teaching Black history. You don't want to miss that conversation. You're watching Meet the Press now.

Welcome back. February is, of course, Black History Month. This year, we celebrate at a time when there is a national debate about how Black history should be taught. Late last year, 157 years after The Atlantic magazine published Frederick Douglass's famous essay on Reconstruction, the magazine revisited that fraught era in American history.

Among the authors featured in that edition, Lonnie Bunch, secretary of the Smithsonian, who asked the question, why is America afraid of black history? And Lonnie Bunch joins me now in person. Thank you so much for being here. It's wonderful to see you.

My pleasure. Thank you. Let's start right there with that question you asked in The Atlantic. Why do you think America is, as you say, afraid of black history?

I think in part, it's a lack of understanding about history. It's the notion if you illuminate the dark corners of our experience, what you're doing is making people feel guilty that you're exploring issues that are no longer important. But the reality is history shapes who we are to this very day. And I think the real thing to understand about black history is this is aspirational history.

This says we want to be a country that lives up to its ideals. So why be afraid of a history that simply says, let's do what the founding fathers said we should be? You say it's not just black history, but the history also of Reconstruction, focusing on that critical moment in our history. Why is it so important to reflect on that right now?

Reconstruction was that moment when the country said, let us change. Let us live close to those ideals about freedom. I mean, 4 million people gained freedom at the end of the Civil War. And there was this attempt to say, how do we make sure we integrate them and give them the right to be Americans?

I think it's really crucial as you think about immigration. We really need to look at Reconstruction and say, where did it really go right and where did it go wrong? And it went wrong because so many Americans ran away from it. And I think we need to realize that what history tells us is if you work hard and aspire to the dreams of America, you can be the nation of our dreams.

How do you see the Smithsonian's role playing out against the backdrop of this broader national conversation that we are having? I have to say, whenever I have friends and family in town, we go to the Smithsonian. We go to the African-American History Museum because it is an experience. It's immersive.

And it really takes you through the different stages of black history in this country. My hope is that as long as the museum is there, it means that as long as there's an America, the country will get a chance, the world will get a chance to understand history and African-American experience. What I hope more than anything else is that people recognize that this is a story not of guilt, but of hope. It's a story that really helps us understand who we are now, but really points us towards a better aspirational future.

What more can you want but to be a nation that's a work in progress? And history tells us where that progress needs to be made and where it has been made. And for me, black history, history generally, is this amazingly inspirational reservoir that I dip into for hope and understanding. And you write in The Atlantic that while you were doing this work and while you were exploring your own family's roots, you were actually brought to tears.

Talk a little bit about that moment. It's extraordinary what you discovered. Well, I realized that I'd heard that we had a family member named Candace Bunch, who was the oldest enslaved person we knew. And I was in the National Archives looking at the Freedmen Bureau papers, and suddenly I found a document that had her name on it.

And I couldn't believe it. I looked at the document. It talked about how much she was paid for cleaning the house. But then on the back, it talked about how much she owed the owner.

Basically, she owed money to buy cookie tins. And suddenly I started crying because as a little kid, really, before I was five years old, my grandmother used to make cookies in the shape of hearts and moons and cookie tins to convince me to nap. And I suddenly started crying. Is that where that idea came from?

Is it really something that goes back to the time of slavery? To me, that meant that slavery wasn't that long ago, that it touched my life in profound ways. And that it still does. I want to talk about this moment that we are in right now.

I don't want to get into politics, but I want to talk about how so many young people, people of color, young black Americans feel left out of our politics. I'm not asking you about the candidates. I'm not asking you about the issues. But why do you think that is and what needs to happen?

Because I've traveled all across this country. And so often I do hear from young people of color who say I just feel like the leaders in this country of either party don't understand me. I think part of it is, again, dipping into history, helping these students understand how they're part of a long tradition that has demanded, that has struggled, that has died to help America become the country that we want it to be. And what you want to do is give these kids an opportunity to understand that their job is to make a country better and that ultimately their job is to challenge leaders to do just that.

Lonnie Bunch, thank you. It is always so wonderful to see you and to have this conversation. I hope you'll come back soon. Anytime you ask.

Thank you. Really appreciate it. And thank you for being here this hour. Back tomorrow with more Meet the Press Now.

NBC News Now continues with Hallie Jackson right now. Everyone, I'm Dylan Dreyer, co-host of the third hour of today and mom to three wild boys. I've learned a lot in my years as a parent, mostly that I don't have it all figured out yet. And I'm not the only one.

This is my new podcast, The Parent Chat. Each week, I sit down with someone new for honest conversation and real world advice about parenting. I am over here just like winging it. Hey, I'm trying not to screw my own kids up.

I'm not giving you advice on how not to screw yours up. Search Parent Chat on YouTube and wherever you get your podcasts.