Tester, former national journalist, team up for new podcast about news, government, common ground
It's almost a cliche in 2025: Two people who recently lost their jobs start a podcast.
But these two recently unemployed people might not be who you'd expect — former U.S. Sen. Jon Tester and longtime Montana and national journalist Maritsa Georgiou. Tester lost his re-election bid as the lone Democrat elected to statewide office while Georgiou had most recently been the lead national anchor for Scripps Broadcasting.
Both lost their jobs in November; Tester, at the hands of Montana voters who voted political newcomer Republican Tim Sheehy into office; and Georgiou at the hands of a network that saw a diminishing number of people tune in for a nightly news broadcast, as opposed to commentary or talk shows.
'That doesn't mean there aren't people there who don't want to hear the messages coming from the news,' Georgiou said.
She acknowledges a fatigue — even plain old exhaustion — with the bombastic, uncertain and unrelenting national news cycle, but Georgiou and Tester see that has an opportunity.
'There are people who are out there who are trying to figure it, though,' Georgiou said. 'That's what I've always done as a journalist — breaking it down.'
She said that message was made repeatedly when she was at home instead of in the studio during the COVID-19 pandemic as things started shutting down. What did it mean? Why was it dangerous? And what was being done to stop it? Those were all questions that she had, like many viewers.
Then she realized: It was her responsibility to find the answers and explain it to her audience — a model she hopes to replicate on 'Grounded.'
In a podcast that plays off Tester's autobiography, 'Grounded,' the podcast takes the same name, and the purpose is for Georgiou to continue to ask tough questions and help readers understand the dizzying flood of national news, while Tester, who served for 18 years, helps listeners navigate by describing how government works — or at least how it has previously worked.
'My goal is to let people know government doesn't just run on autopilot,' Tester said. 'For years, people came up to me and said that what happens in Washington, D.C., didn't affect them, but I hope we show them that these real-world decisions matter, whether you're in D.C., New York City, Billings or Box Elder.'
Both Tester and Georgiou see a future when the news cycle, on rapid-fire since President Donald J. Trump took office, will slow, and residents in far-flung places like Montana will realize the connection they have to different levels of government, including the federal government.
Tester pointed to the exodus of fired or suspended federal workers, saying they're becoming the most recent target of Trump and Elon Musk, who has been named head of a quasi-government department that doesn't exist by Congressional mandate, the Department of Government Efficiency, or 'DOGE.'
'Now, if you work for the federal government there's a popular belief that you must be evil, or crooked or corrupt,' Tester said. 'But those are none of the ones I know or worked with for years. And firing these people will have consequences.'
Tester wonders what will happen when millions of people come to visit Montana's national parks, like Glacier and Yellowstone, but can't get access because there's not enough staff — especially in places that already have a backlog of maintenance and suffer from low staffing. Or, Tester said, what about delivery of mail to places that are rural?
'In places like Montana, you have to fight like hell to get funding, or you won't get it,' Tester said. 'You take that money away, and by the time people find out, it's too late.'
The podcast, for now, will release weekly episodes that usually run about 30 to 45 minutes, although last week, Tester and Georgiou released two.
'I don't want people to stop watching the news and thinking about the news,' Georgiou said. 'Think about all the news outlets we've lost, all the journalists we watched, and the news deserts it has created. That's when we start to lose information and we need the Fourth Estate.'
Tester said the middle-ground, a tradition he credits the U.S. Senate for maintaining because of people like the legendary former U.S. Senate Leader Mike Mansfield of Montana, is also part of the message of the podcast.
For example, Tester said that looking for waste and running the government more efficiently is a good goal, one that he shares.
'But we don't have a dictator, and Congress needs to do its job,' Tester said. 'But we should look for ways to eliminate waste and get more efficient because that makes a wiser expenditure of taxpayer money.'
However, Tester stressed that with any American movement, the history has not yet been decided.
'This whole thing could be screwed up just like in Colombia or Brazil where people have fewer freedoms and liberties,' Tester said. 'You have to work for democracies.'
He said that often people don't realize what the government does until it disappears and impacts them personally.
'People don't know the half of what happens on the things they depend on,' Tester said. 'For example, you don't think about public lands. You have access to them because someone maintains trails, but if those public agencies go away, you won't have access. Then rich people will try to buy those lands and the American public won't care as much because they think, 'Hey, I can't use them anyway.''
He said that the potential for damage is great if too much of government is dismantled.
'The damage done to the institutions will take decades. The chances are is that President Trump will be long gone, then it'll be someone else's fault,' Tester said.
He said that agencies should be brought into the process, and Congress needs to exercise its own autonomy.
'If you want to know how something will affect Montana, ask someone who is from there,' Tester said. 'The same thing with the federal government. But, they're not bringing the agencies into the process.'
Tester also sees familiar themes that he spent his career railing against, including ever-growing cash and contributions during political campaigns.
'Look at Elon Musk, he can literally fund the candidates,' Tester said.
Georgiou said that it's easy for people in Montana to picture federal workers as wearing suits, sitting in some office buildings in Washington, D.C. Instead, she said that it's a lot harder for them to think about the rangers or foresters in places like the U.S. Forest Service.
And she feels a kinship with those who have been hit with the unexpected news that they're unemployed, too.
'I had no idea the psychological impact it carries. It's emotional to think about the huge impact and going through it. We knew the (Scripps) show was being cancelled, and you had this feeling of masked grief with your colleagues,' Georgiou said. 'I can understand the confusion, anger, sadness and anxiety, because it was similar to what happened with Scripps. It derailed what I had been doing with my entire adult life and this was my career.
'Now what? It's very real, very emotional. The unknown is so scary. And they have family and friends in the community who are experiencing it with them, so the ripple is massive.'
Despite the turbulent, even rocky news, Tester and Georgiou said that they're hopeful that by giving a more thoughtful, balanced conversation — they've already featured two Republicans as guests — that they give their audience a better understanding.
'Even now, early on, we've heard messages of support like people are feeling confused, but now they understand better,' Georgiou said. 'If we've done that, we've already won.'
And continuing to play on the 'grounded' theme — something that is easy for Tester, who is a self-billed 'dirt farmer' from Big Sandy — he said that he is still convinced by a huge swath of common ground still present in Montana and throughout the country.
'There is common sense and common ground in the middle, and when the country gets back to that, we'll be stronger, before it gets to the point where it can't be rebuilt,' Tester said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Democrat Katelyn Zach announces run for Missouri House seat in southwest Springfield
Katelyn Zach, a Springfield "community organizer and advocate for working families," announced Friday, Aug. 1 she will campaign as a Democrat for a Missouri House District in Springfield currently held by Rep. Melanie Stinnett. Stinnett, a Republican, was first elected to Missouri House District 133 in 2022, beating Democratic candidate Amy Blansit by about 400 votes, a margin of about 5 percentage points. Challenged in 2024 by Democrat Derrick Nowlin, Stinnett was reelected with more than 56% of the vote. She announced earlier this year she plans to run in 2026 for Senate District 30, currently held by term-limited state Sen. Lincoln Hough. In her campaign announcement Aug. 1, Zach, who has worked as a legislative assistant in the state capitol, said she wants to "bring bold, compassionate leadership to Jefferson City, and to flip a seat that's been out of touch with the needs of Missourians for far too long." 'I'm running because I believe every Missourian deserves a safe home, a great public school, access to affordable healthcare, and the freedom to make decisions about their own body,' Zach said. 'The people of Springfield are done being ignored by politicians whose only goal is climbing the ladder in Jefferson City. We're ready to build a future where everyone, not just the well-connected, gets a fair shot.' District 133 covers parts of central and southwest Springfield, generally west of Campbell Avenue between Chestnut Expressway and James River Freeway. Zach, who attended college in Springfield, said her campaign is focused on people, from youth and working families to small businesses, with the goal of "defending public education and reproductive rights to addressing the housing crisis and fighting for common-sense gun safety laws." More: Despite 2024 losses, Crystal Quade among women encouraging others to run for office 'I'm here to represent every voice in our community, no matter your political party or background,' Zach said in the release. 'I believe in leading with empathy, listening first, and fighting for solutions that actually help people.' Her campaign committee, Citizens for Katelyn Zach, lists former state representative and Democratic candidate for governor Crystal Quade as treasurer. She has candidate sites on Facebook and Instagram. This article originally appeared on Springfield News-Leader: Democrat Katelyn Zach announces run for Missouri House District 133 Solve the daily Crossword


USA Today
2 hours ago
- USA Today
Republicans are afraid of Mamdani in New York. That's a good thing.
Republicans think Zohran Mamdani will turn NYC into a socialist mecca because they forgot what a functioning government looks like. We're a few months out from New York City's municipal election, and Democratic nominee Zohran Mamdani is still the frontrunner in the mayoral race. It's a positive sign for progressives who want to see democratic socialists transform the party. In a July poll by Zenith Research and Public Progress Solutions, Mamdani received 50% of support while the rest of the candidates trailed behind. Former Democratic governor Andrew Cuomo, who is now running as an independent, received 22% of support, followed by Republican Curtis Sliwa at 13%. Current Mayor Eric Adams, who is also running as an independent, received just 7% support. Mamdani may be polling well, but his path to victory in November is anything but smooth. There are already five anti-Mamdani PACs that have formed since the primary, backed by business moguls and real estate tycoons who warn that the Democratic nominee would be bad for the city's economy. He's also having to answer for some of his previous posts about 'defunding the police' and comments on Israel. Republicans criticizing Mamdani for 'defund police' comment are hypocritical The biggest criticism of Mamdani has come from his previous comments about the New York City Police Department. In the wake of George Floyd's murder in 2020, Mamdani posted to X that the NYPD was 'racist, anti-queer & a major threat to public safety' and called for defunding the force. Mamdani has also proposed creating a Department of Community Safety separate from the police department, which would respond to mental health calls. But the Democratic nominee is attempting to distance himself from these previous claims, calling the posts 'out of step' with his current stance on public safety. He recently met with the family of Officer Didarul Islam, one of the four people killed in a recent shooting in Midtown Manhattan. Republicans criticizing him seem more than willing to ignore the way President Donald Trump pardoned Jan. 6 rioters who attacked police officers, or his own criminal convictions. But he is the "law and order" president, for sure. And the GOP is the "law and order" party, right? Voters are increasingly agreeing with Mamdani on Gaza Another criticism from the right is that Mamdani is too critical of Israel. Fox News recently resurrected a clip of Mamdani from a 2024 panel where the mayoral candidate claimed, 'Israel is not a place, it is not a country.' Mamdani seems to be taking these attacks to heart. He recently said he would not use the phrase 'globalize the intifada,' and would also discourage others from using it. Mamdani had previously refused to condemn the phrase. On the other hand, Mamdani's criticisms of Israel proved to be popular with voters in the Democratic primary. A poll from Data for Progress and the Institute for Middle East Understanding Policy Project found that his 'support for Palestinian rights' was important for 96% of his voters, while his 'willingness to criticize the Israeli government' was important to 88% of his voters. Opinion: People are starving in Gaza. Why are we so comfortable just letting that happen? While conservatives are trying to attack Mamdani for his previous stances on Israel and his sympathy for the Palestinian people, it doesn't seem like it'll work. Democrats should listen to their voters, not conservatives, to know how to approach this issue. Only 8% of Democrats support Israel's actions in Gaza, according to a recent Gallup poll, while 71% of Republicans support it. Some Republicans are even breaking with the party to denounce mass starvation in the region, including Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Georgia, who recently called the crisis a "genocide." Republicans are afraid of what Mamdani stands for. Good. Mamdani won the primary largely thanks to his mobilization of young voters. It worked out for him: voters under 40 made up 40% of early voting turnout. Now, the question is whether they'll turn out for the general election. I'm hopeful that they will. I have personally seen the way my generation has reacted to Mamdani's campaign. There is a palpable excitement reminiscent of Barack Obama's first run for the presidency, an excitement fueled by the idea that the Democratic Party can change, in spite of itself. Opinion: Zohran Mamdani rallied Gen Z voters. We can't abandon him now. The reasons conservatives are criticizing Mamdani are the reasons people my age voted for him. We believe in moving funding from the NYPD into areas like mental health care and community building. We support Palestinian rights. We want to see that working-class New Yorkers can remain in this city. We see taxing corporations and the wealthy as a good thing. Some may call these things unrealistic, and they may have a point. There's no way New York City becomes a socialist utopia if Mamdani is elected, since he must work with the city council, state and national governments to achieve many of his campaign priorities. But his very election could signal to the Democratic Party that they should run to, not from, progressive politics. Mamdani's path to victory is not an easy one. He will continue to face criticism from the right throughout the next few months. But if polling is any indication, he's still likely to be the next mayor of the largest city in the United States. Follow USA TODAY columnist Sara Pequeño on X, formerly Twitter, @sara__pequeno

3 hours ago
After a reference to Trump's impeachments is removed from a history museum, complex questions echo
NEW YORK -- It would seem the most straightforward of notions: A thing takes place, and it goes into the history books or is added to museum exhibits. But whether something even gets remembered and how — particularly when it comes to the history of a country and its leader — is often the furthest thing from simple. The latest example of that came Friday, when the Smithsonian Institution said it had removed a reference to the 2019 and 2021 impeachments of President Donald Trump from a panel in an exhibition about the American presidency. Trump has pressed institutions and agencies under federal oversight, often through the pressure of funding, to focus on the country's achievements and progress and away from things he terms 'divisive.' A Smithsonian spokesperson said the removal of the reference, which had been installed as part of a temporary addition in 2021, came after a review of 'legacy content recently' and the exhibit eventually 'will include all impeachments.' There was no time frame given for when; exhibition renovations can be time- and money-consuming endeavors. In a statement that did not directly address the impeachment references, White House spokesperson Davis Ingle said: 'We are fully supportive of updating displays to highlight American greatness.' But is history intended to highlight or to document — to report what happened, or to serve a desired narrative? The answer, as with most things about the past, can be intensely complex. The Smithsonian's move comes in the wake of Trump administration actions like removing the name of a gay rights activist from a Navy ship, pushing for Republican supporters in Congress to defund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and getting rid of the leadership at the Kennedy Center. 'Based on what we have been seeing, this is part of a broader effort by the president to influence and shape how history is depicted at museums, national parks, and schools,' said Julian E. Zelizer, a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University. 'Not only is he pushing a specific narrative of the United States but, in this case, trying to influence how Americans learn about his own role in history.' It's not a new struggle, in the world generally and the political world particularly. There is power in being able to shape how things are remembered, if they are remembered at all — who was there, who took part, who was responsible, what happened to lead up to that point in history. And the human beings who run things have often extended their authority to the stories told about them. In China, for example, references to the June 1989 crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrators in Beijing's Tiananmen Square are forbidden and meticulously regulated by the ruling Communist Party government. In Soviet-era Russia, officials who ran afoul of leaders like Josef Stalin disappeared not only from the government itself but from photographs and history books where they once appeared. Jason Stanley, an expert on authoritarianism, said controlling what and how people learn of their past has long been used as a vital tool to maintain power. Stanley has made his views about the Trump administration clear; he recently left Yale University to join the University of Toronto, citing concerns over the U.S. political situation. 'If they don't control the historical narrative,' he said, 'then they can't create the kind of fake history that props up their politics.' In the United States, presidents and their families have always used their power to shape history and calibrate their own images. Jackie Kennedy insisted on cuts in William Manchester's book on her husband's 1963 assassination, 'The Death of a President.' Ronald Reagan and his wife got a cable TV channel to release a carefully calibrated documentary about him. Those around Franklin D. Roosevelt, including journalists of the era, took pains to mask the impact that paralysis had on his body and his mobility. Trump, though, has taken it to a more intense level — a sitting president encouraging an atmosphere where institutions can feel compelled to choose between him and the truth — whether he calls for it directly or not. 'We are constantly trying to position ourselves in history as citizens, as citizens of the country, citizens of the world,' said Robin Wagner-Pacifici, professor emerita of sociology at the New School for Social Research. 'So part of these exhibits and monuments are also about situating us in time. And without it, it's very hard for us to situate ourselves in history because it seems like we just kind of burst forth from the Earth.' Timothy Naftali, director of the Richard M. Nixon Presidential Library and Museum from 2007 to 2011, presided over its overhaul to offer a more objective presentation of Watergate — one not beholden to the president's loyalists. In an interview Friday, he said he was 'concerned and disappointed' about the Smithsonian decision. Naftali, now a senior researcher at Columbia University, said museum directors 'should have red lines' and that he considered removing the Trump panel to be one of them. While it might seem inconsequential for someone in power to care about a museum's offerings, Wagner-Pacifici says Trump's outlook on history and his role in it — earlier this year, he said the Smithsonian had 'come under the influence of a divisive, race-centered ideology' — shows how important those matters are to people in authority. 'You might say about that person, whoever that person is, their power is so immense and their legitimacy is so stable and so sort of monumental that why would they bother with things like this ... why would they bother to waste their energy and effort on that?' Wagner-Pacifici said. Her conclusion: 'The legitimacy of those in power has to be reconstituted constantly. They can never rest on their laurels.'