Read Full Transcript EXPAND
SARA SIDNER, HOST: Hello, everyone, and welcome to AMANPOUR AND COMPANY.
Here’s what’s coming up.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You don’t have an economy that is currently in recession.
SIDNER: The dreaded R-word. The signs are there, soaring prices, inflation and concerns about consumer spending. What the latest figures tell us. And
what is different than recessions of the plus?
Plus:
SEN. CHRIS COONS (D-DE): We are closing that loophole, making it clear the vice president can’t overturn the election.
SIDNER: Bracing for the next U.S. presidential election cycle. Our Walter Isaacson speaks to Senator Chris Coons about why the electoral count is due
for a shakeup.
And football fever. As the women’s Euro Championship heads to its final, are women athletes finally getting their due in sport. I speak to soccer
star Briana Scurry about her extraordinary career and the case of Brittney Griner.
Then:
DALE DICKEY, ACTRESS: Howdy? You know me?
WES STUDI, ACTOR: I don’t know. You know me?
SIDNER: Old acquaintances, new romance. Actors Dale Dickey and Wes Studi tell me about their new film, “A Love Song.”
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SIDNER: Welcome to the program. I’m Sara Sidner in New York, sitting in for Christiane Amanpour.
It is felt all around the world from grocery baskets to pumps at gas stations, from electric bills to clothing, inflation like we have rarely
seen before. Amid a collision of crises, from the war in Ukraine to a slowdown of the Chinese economy, the ripple effects are being felt here in
the United States, where the Bureau of Economic Analysis just announced the economy has shrunk again for the second quarter in a row.
The International Monetary Fund called it earlier this week. A global recession could soon be at hand. Yet President Biden says the nation is on
the right path. So what are we to make of the current situation?
Rana Foroohar is an economic analysis analyst and global business columnist for “The Financial Times.” And she joins me from right here in New York.
Welcome to the show, Rana.
RANA FOROOHAR, GLOBAL ECONOMIC ANALYST: Thanks so much for having me.
SIDNER: I’m confused. I will be completely honest with you.
You have this — all the warning signs of a recession. And yet you have job growth. And we’re in this really, to me, strange position where I myself
cannot figure out what is going on. So what is going on?
FOROOHAR: Well, you’re spot on.
This technical recession, which two quarters of negative growth equals a technical recession, doesn’t feel like a typical recession, doesn’t feel
like a typical slowdown, in large part because unemployment is so low.
Now, why is that? Why are things different this time? Well, a few different factors. After the financial crisis, the Federal Reserve put a lot of money
into the economy, sort of stretched out the business cycle. We were due for a slowdown at some point even before COVID hit.
Then COVID hits. We get supply chain disruptions. We get a lot of fiscal stimulus coming in from different governments at different times. And then
you get the war in Ukraine on top of that. So there are all these geopolitical factors, coupled with the longer-term economic factors that
were already there.
And it’s leading to a situation that is, frankly, more unusual than anything I have seen in my 30-plus years covering the economy.
SIDNER: President Biden has said that the nation is on the right path.
Is he correct? I mean, I know that there was going to be — we’re going to pay the piper for what happened with COVID and with the stimulus and with,
as you mentioned, the supply chain, but are we on the right path?
FOROOHAR: I think we are on the right path.
I mean, the last couple of days have actually seen a almost a sort of a Lazarus-like turnabout in the Biden administration’s agenda, with Joe
Manchin agreeing to investments in climate and energy. I think that these are the sorts of things that the administration needs to be pushing
forward.
But let’s be honest. Some of these things are not going to help curb the inflation problem in the short term. In fact, you could argue that they may
even contribute some to higher inflation. When you make investments, it can be inflationary.
But, honestly, we have to stop looking in this country quarter to quarter, because it is simply not helping us. We need to get on a more sustainable
path, a path that’s much more strategic, like other countries, like China, like Germany.
And I think that’s what the administration is trying to do.
SIDNER: Is a recession inevitable? You talked about a technical recession, that technically we’re in one, because you just said, quarterly — we’re in
the second quarter of a downturn.
To a lot of people, it certainly feels like a recession because of inflation and because people, especially those in the lower economic
bracket, are having trouble buying food and gas and the things that you need to live.
On the other hand, there are jobs everywhere. So is the recession fully just inevitable at this point?
FOROOHAR: So, two things I want to make — two points I want to make there.
When we talk about recession, recessions, really to most economists, who don’t pay so much attention to the idea of a technical recession, even
though that gets lots of headlines. It’s about how people feel. It’s about a period of more sustained slowdown in the economy.
And are we headed towards that? Probably yes, because we have just come through, pre-COVID, the longest economic expansion since records were kept
in 1845. And that’s in large part because no political administration, Democrat or Republican, wants to pull the plug.
But we do have recoveries and recessions. They’re natural. They used to come in shorter cycles that were actually a little bit easier to deal with.
Now we use monetary policy to stretch out those cycles. And so, when they come, they can feel a lot more painful.
And I think that that’s where we are now. That said, I think that the government is doing the right thing by investing, thinking about the future
and doing what they can to buffer costs for working people, as you say.
SIDNER: Is it foolish for the administration and, to be fair, us in the media to even make these distinctions between technical economies —
technical recession, not technical recession, when people are really feeling this in a substantial way?
I think we just lost our guest. I think her answer was going to be yes to that. We will try to get her back.
And we will move on.
With inflation wreaking havoc on so many citizens’ lives, as we have just discussed, Senate Democrats have reached an agreement, as you just heard
there from Rana, to kick-start President Biden’s long-stalled economic agenda.
U.S. Senator and close Biden ally Chris Coons played a key role in advancing those talks. He joins Walter Isaacson to discuss the new deal and
its potential to survive the congressional gauntlet.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
WALTER ISAACSON, CORRESPONDENT: Thank you, Sara.
And, Senator Chris Coons, welcome to the show.
COONS: Thanks. Great to be on with you, Walter. Good to see you again.
ISAACSON: So it’s a big day to day. We seem to have an agreement between, Senator Manchin, Senator Schumer and the Democratic Party on a
reconciliation bill that will do everything from reduce the deficit and take on climate change, drug prices.
Let’s start with climate change. Tell me what’s in that bill and why — how that worked out.
COONS: Well, so, there’s a whole lot in this bill.
And you’re right. It tackles many of the core challenges the American people are facing, prices at the pump, prices at the prescription drug
counter, and the prices for health care. But it also will invest $369 billion in combating climate change.
How big a deal is this? It’ll cut our emissions by 40 percent in the next eight years. It’ll provide incentives for new technologies like green
hydrogen. It’ll provide technology incentives for investments in things like carbon capture and sequestration.
It’ll help strengthen our grid. It’ll create high-quality U.S. manufacturing jobs, and it’ll help accelerate the adoption and deployment
of technologies like electric vehicles across our country.
ISAACSON: Do I get a little rebate or something if I buy an electric vehicle now?
COONS: Yes, you do. I believe it’s $7,500 for a new one that has significant components from North America. And I think it’s $4,000 for
buying a used one.
The other thing we just did, Walter, is pass a significant semiconductor chip bill. We just passed that out of the Senate yesterday that would
invest $52 billion in onshoring, in bringing back to the United States the manufacturing of cutting-edge semiconductors.
Why do these two things connect? Because one of the reasons it’s been hard to buy used cars, to buy a whole lot of different things is because of a
shortage of chips. So we are dealing with both of these pressing issues in these two major bills.
ISAACSON: But there’s a big difference between these two bills.
You’re somebody who has always been able to walk — work across the aisle to get bipartisan support. For the CHIPS bill, this semiconductor bill you
talked about, there are a lot of Republicans support. Why was it impossible to get any Republican support for the climate and deficit reduction bill?
COONS: Because the way we raise the money to pay down the deficit, $300 billion, and to invest $369 billion in climate and extend the Affordable
Care Act subsidies, is by allowing Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices for the first time ever and by closing some of the tax loopholes
that were created in the Trump tax bill in 2017.
I will remind you, Walter, that 2017 tax bill also passed with only one- party support, in that case, Republicans. And it reduced taxes, particularly for the very wealthiest Americans and the most profitable
companies.
This bill includes a few things, like a 15 percent minimum tax, so that all corporations, particularly corporations over a billion dollars in revenue,
pay some tax.
President Biden has a longstanding commitment that people making under 400,000 won’t have their taxes increased. That was also one of the key
provisions. Why did we get no Republicans on this reconciliation bill? It negotiates prescription drug prices down, and it raises tax rates on the
very wealthiest Americans and most profitable corporations.
ISAACSON: Are you sure that you’re going to be able to get this passed? Senator Sinema hasn’t yet come out for it. Have you talked to her?
COONS: I have.
And, Walter, I got to tell you, nothing’s done until it’s done here in the United States Senate. There are of course, going to be a lot of efforts to
try and amend this package one way or the other. We have been in negotiations around this once-a-year 50-vote margin reconciliation package
for a long time.
And I am optimistic we can get this passed next week. But, of course, don’t count your chickens until they hatch.
ISAACSON: One of the big things you mentioned just briefly was the minimum corporate tax. That’s not just something affecting the United States. It
was something that was negotiated by our Treasury secretary, Janet Yellen, and many other countries to say, let’s do this, so companies can’t hop
around to different places. They will face at least a minimum tax around the world.
That would seem like something that would have large bipartisan support. Does it?
COONS: You would hope so. As of now, it doesn’t.
But that was a significant accomplishment of the Biden administration was to globally negotiate a base rate for corporate tax, so that tax havens,
places where corporations have been able to shelter their assets and to avoid taxation for a long time, have come into a global agreement that
we’re going to have a basic tax rate worldwide.
ISAACSON: So it’s pretty much of a surprise to those of us who woke up and read about this, because Senator Manchin had been against some of these
provisions.
How did this fall into place?
COONS: Well, first, Senator Manchin never gave up. When there was a sort of a blowup and a walk-away more than a week ago with, Senator Schumer,
Senator Manchin kept saying to many of us privately who reached out to him that he wasn’t done negotiating and he was still willing to come to the
table.
His key issue was being reassured that this was not going to be inflationary. He’s very concerned about inflation. And that’s partly why
the title of this bill and one of the main areas of focus of this bill is combating inflation by paying down our deficit by $300 billion.
I happened to be this past weekend in a place you know well, Aspen, with Larry Summers at a retreat, and was both texting and calling Larry Summers
and Joe Manchin, saying, you two really need to talk, because, Joe, Senator Manchin, listens to Larry Summers, believed that he was one of the few
economists more than a year ago saying that the Build Back Better bill would be inflationary.
Larry was able to reach out to and connect with Joe Manchin and help persuade him that this was the right thing to do. But, at the end of the
day here, Walter, credit goes to President Biden and his team for letting the Senate work, to Leader Schumer and his team for not giving up on the
possibility of a really significant bill here, and more than anything to Joe Manchin for driving a hard bargain.
He secured some significant opportunities and investments for fossil energy, as well as the biggest, most important climate change investment in
our country’s history. In the end, this is a compromise, which means nobody got everything they wanted, but I think it will move forward and move
forward fairly quickly here in the Senate.
ISAACSON: You talk about the economic strategy group that you were with him in Aspen that has Larry Summers in it.
One of the things about Aspen groups like that, it’s about half Republican, half Democratic. It’s supposed to be bipartisan. People like Hank Paulson,
I think, were there.
Are the traditional Republicans you were with, are they supportive of this? Do they believe it’ll be deficit reduction, even though the members of
their party in the Senate are voting against it?
COONS: Well, I’m not going to cite any particular person. As you know, those conversations are off the record.
But what was really helpful to me and to the other — it was a bipartisan group of senators that were there, both Republicans and Democrats — was,
we heard from senior leaders and economic and strategic intelligence, defense and diplomacy leadership from the Bush, Obama, Trump and Biden
administrations, and had the opportunity to really talk through the issues we’re facing in the world, Russia’s brutal invasion of Ukraine, China’s
expansionist role in its region.
And there was some real debate about whether a reconciliation package like this would be anti-inflationary. And I think there was broad consensus that
it could be and that, if it secured American energy leadership, it could really contribute to our security as well.
ISAACSON: Now, you’re talking about America’s energy leadership.
Joe Manchin also has asked, not as part of this bill, but as part of the understanding that comes with the compromise, that there be some more
energy infrastructure, including pipelines, as well as maybe some offshore drilling. Is that a good thing?
COONS: Well, one of the things we discussed, actually, last weekend was critical minerals. We are not going to be able to move to a green energy
future without being critically reliant on China if the United States doesn’t find a way to develop and process critical minerals, for example,
lithium.
You can’t make large-scale batteries, battery storage, without lithium. And there are sources of lithium in North America, in the United States and
Canada. But current environmental laws make it very difficult to mine and process lithium in the United States or Canada.
And we will be critically reliant on China if we don’t make progress in permitting. One of the things Senator Manchin insisted on was permitting
reform. And, yes, that would also quite possibly expedite the permitting of pipelines.
It’s also critical that we have permitting reform to expedite transmission lines, so that if we have, as we do, abundant wind and solar in places like
the Midwest and Southwest, but that’s not where people are who need the energy, we have to be able to build transmission lines to connect the wind
farms of Iowa and Nebraska to the population centers of Chicago and New York and the solar centers of Nevada and Arizona to Los Angeles and San
Francisco.
So, I do think permitting reform, if done right, can be a positive contributor to a clean energy economy and to America’s energy security.
ISAACSON: You talk about bipartisanship. You had it with the semiconductor CHIPS bill, but also something you have been pushing real hard. You have
had a great bipartisan victory, so far at least, with electoral reform.
Tell me what the problem was you were trying to solve there.
COONS: So, the main thing a bipartisan group of us focused on was closing the loopholes that former President Trump and his team exploited to
inappropriately try and overturn the results of the 2020 election.
The narrowest and simplest example is an extreme reading of the law that they were pushing that claimed that the vice president himself personally
could overturn the results of the election. That misreading, in no small part, led to the January 6 riot, where folks stormed the Capitol. An angry
armed mob assaulted and in several cases led to the deaths of police officers, and then broke into the Capitol and led to all of us fleeing, the
vice president being removed by the Secret Service.
So we are closing that loophole, making it clear the vice president can’t overturn the election. One other thing we’re changing in this proposed bill
is raising the threshold for how many members of the House and Senate are required in order to challenge the electors of a particular state.
This bill, now in draft form, doesn’t go as far as I would like. I would like to have seen Voting Rights Act reforms and more investment in security
for elections officials and election locations, but it does make some significant progress.
ISAACSON: Perhaps one reason you got some good Republican support on this is the notion of the vice president just overturning or choosing the
electors, they would then face Kamala Harris being able to do that in two- and-a-half years.
We invited some Republicans on. They’re in favor of this bill, but they didn’t seem eager to come on television.
Do you think they’re worried about crossing the Trump base or that this somehow is a rebuke of Trump?
COONS: I think there are certainly some colleagues who will see it that way.
The challenge here, as it always is in Congress, is that there are some who will criticize this bill is not going far enough and some, particularly in
the Republican Caucus, who will be concerned that it will upset Donald Trump and his supporters.
We need to fix the Electoral Count Act. It is a flawed, poorly drafted bill that goes back to the late 19th century, and had never really been closely
examined until this attempt by President Trump and some of his inner circle to overturn the 2020 election.
So, yes, I think that’s right, Walter, that some of the concern is that President Trump and the few of his folks who stayed with him to the bitter
end, as revealed by the January 6 commission, were using this law and some of the ways in which its language was open to misinterpretation.
ISAACSON: A lot of election deniers are running for secretaries of state in various states. They’re running for governor or other places where they
might have the right to just throw out electors.
This bill doesn’t address that. Jamie Raskin and others say, well, we had to go further. Is there any way to take on that problem?
COONS: We debated this over and over and over. We spent months as a bipartisan working group.
And there were some Republicans willing to go farther than what’s in our finished package. There were several of us in the Democratic side who were
insisting we go farther. But, in the end, after months, we are out of time. If we’re going to get anything done before the end of this Congress, we
need to adopt it.
(CROSSTALK)
ISAACSON: … do it before the midterms, you think?
COONS: Correct. We have to have…
ISAACSON: And what about the House?
You have got Zoe Lofgren? You have got Liz Cheney with a slightly separate bill. Are you sure you can get this all together?
COONS: I’m hopeful, but it’s going to be hard, Walter. We have got a significant distance to go to close this.
And your viewers may not be aware just how few days are left. It’s July now. It would seem like we have six months to go. But the work calendar of
this Congress, actually, we will be in session very few days between now and the end of this calendar year.
ISAACSON: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says she’s going to visit Taiwan. She’s even trying to get other people from Congress and senators to go on a
delegation with her.
China says, with some justification, that this violates the spirit of the one-China policy that the United States has always had. Do you think it’s
wise for her to be visiting now Taiwan?
COONS: Well, Walter, I have been to visit the PRC and Taiwan. Many members of Congress have.
Former Speaker Newt Gingrich, as speaker of the House, went to Taiwan now decades ago. But I will tell you that my principal focus and the real focus
of the debates and conversations last weekend in Aspen were on Europe and the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and how to sustain our support for the
Ukrainians.
My principal concern would be that this could significantly distract the focus of the world, if there were to be some escalation. I respect Speaker
Pelosi’s long record of leadership on foreign policy, and I hope she will take the input and advice of a wide range of sources from our intelligence
community, our military leadership and make the right decision in terms of, what’s the area we should focus on right now?
ISAACSON: Senator Chris Coons, as always, thanks for joining us.
COONS: Thank you, Walter.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SIDNER: You heard Senator Coons there mention the war in Ukraine. And amid that crises, a potential prisoner swap is on the horizon between Russia and
the United States, as the Biden administration works to bring home former Marine Paul Whelan and WNBA star Brittney Griner.
The U.S. is offering to exchange convicted Russian arms trafficker Viktor Bout, nicknamed the Merchant of Death, for the release of the two
wrongfully detained Americans.
CNN exclusively reported the deal hours after Griner took to the stand for the first time in her criminal trial. Secretary of State Antony Blinken
confirmed a substantial proposal was presented to Russia weeks ago. Today, the Kremlin said there has been no agreement on this issue thus far.
Of course, Brittney Griner went to play in Russia because, despite being one of the best basketball players in the United States, her income was a
fraction of that of her male counterparts, something my next guest knows all too well, another female trailblazer.
Briana Scurry won gold in Atlanta in 1996, the first time women’s soccer was ever played in the Olympics. Her new memoir, “My Greatest Save,” is a
poignant recounting of her triumphs and her struggles as a woman in sport, a timely conversation, as women’s soccer is taking Europe by storm and the
Euro Championship.
And Briana joins me now from Washington, D.C.
Welcome to the show, Briana.
BRIANA SCURRY, AUTHOR, “MY GREATEST SAVE”: Hi. Thank you. Thanks for having me. Nice to see you.
SIDNER: I am very excited to speak with you. You have had such an amazing career.
Both physically and mentally, you have been through a lot.
(LAUGHTER)
SCURRY: Yes.
SIDNER: Can we talk about this book that you have written?
What made you decide that you wanted to put this all down on paper? There are some really painful things that you had to work through and that you
let people in on.
SCURRY: Absolutely.
I sat down in 2019 with my business manager, Chryssa Zizos, and my publicist, Patrick Renegar, and we sat down and we said, OK, I think I have
a book that I want to write. Am I ready to write it authentically and honestly?
So what you have here is a colorful journey of not only my greatest moments in my life, but also some of my more difficult times. It’s a real behind-
the-scenes vision and view of a team that has been a trailblazing team for 30-plus years.
My team, the U.S. Women’s National Soccer Team, has been one of the most successful sports teams in history. And through my lens of my 14 years
playing on the team, you see a lot of the amazing triumphs and also difficulties that we have had.
And also, my concussion, I had a really difficult time with that. And I was very, very painfully — symptoms, and not only physical symptoms, but also
emotional symptoms. And I talk very candidly about the subject of mental health, which is also very relevant now.
And I really wanted to do my entire story justice. And I think, in this book, “My Greatest Save,” I have done exactly that, with Wayne Coffey.
SIDNER: Let’s talk about what happened to you.
I remember, back in the day, when someone would say, concussion, it was like, shake it off, right? I didn’t play as high of a level of sport as you
did. But I did play sports in college and noticed that sometimes you felt just like a piece of meat that was there to perform. And if you didn’t
perform, you were pretty much set to the side and, like, figure it out yourself.
You suffered with mental health, you mentioned, because of this head injury. And you had an issue with insurance. Can you explain what that
issue was, and how that really speaks to the issues in the United States, in particular, when it comes to health care, and particularly the
difficulties with insurance?
SCURRY: Absolutely.
So, in my case, I had this concussion happened in April 2013. And, as you know, the brain back then essentially was a black box. And so there was a
lot of different doctors trying to give me a diagnosis. And, a lot of times I was misdiagnosed, for one.
And in my situation, my injury was originally from playing. And so I had a team of doctors from the team and other sources looking at me. But then,
unfortunately, the league folded. So my case went from an athlete that’s injured to a worker’s comp situation.
And that classification change is really what ended up making the situation so much worse for me, getting denied so often by the insurance company,
claiming that my injury wasn’t a product of my work, also that the symptoms that I was having weren’t related to that.
I had to fight several times in court to get them to do the right thing. And when I finally did find an experimental procedure that I could get done
to help me, they denied wanting to pay for it and denied that I needed it.
And so, for me, the journey became so much longer because of the battle with the insurance company. And what that said to me was, if someone like
me, a two-time Olympic gold medalist, World Cup champion, could have such a hard time with the insurance companies, I can imagine how many other
females, soccer players and other people must be having.
And so I became an advocate for mental health for TBIs, and I have been one ever since.
SIDNER: Thank you for that. I think that speaks to a lot of people.
And to hear that someone like you, who had the world at your fingertips at one point, it was well known, had to fight, it’s a real difficulty for
people who don’t have a strong community around them as well to help them push through.
Speaking of some of the things that you have been through, not just this head injury, but you have broken quite a few barriers, the only black
player on the team at one point, the first openly gay person on the team.
What do you think it meant for the generation of female players to see you out there being your authentic self?
SCURRY: I think it meant the world to them.
For example, Abby Wambach and Megan Rapinoe were teammates and also said to me that, because I was willing to be my authentic self, and the fact that I
didn’t hide that I was gay, made them feel like they could be confident in being authentically who they are.
And then, also, recently, in the W. Championship, the qualifiers for the women’s national team in Mexico, there were eight players on that team of
color. And so, that’s another thing that I feel like I’ve been able to blaze a trail, not only as, you know, one of the openly gay African-
American players but also, as a stalwart player, someone who played consistently, someone who is a starter, someone who represented not only
those of us who are gay and maybe in a closet at the time, but also, you know, women of color, you know, young girls who are seeing that, you know,
that sport is not just for white people only but it’s also for girls of color.
And I think over the, you know, 30 plus years since them, you know, I’ve really been able to show that soccer is an option. And right now, also,
with equal pay just passing this year by one of my teammates, Cindy Parlow Cone, at the helm of U.S. soccer as president, we’ve been able to do some
amazing things. And I’m so proud of my legacy and I’m proud of my teammates and what we’ve done for, not only for soccer, but for women all over this
country and the world.
SIDNER: When I listen to your story it really brings some old emotions back, because, well, I played volleyball. And so, that was a predominantly
white sport, and it’s like, volleyball, gymnastics, tennis, swimming, those were all things black folks can excel in, but they’re always seen a sports
that are not as open to having, you know, black folks and people of color in.
Can I talk to you about the pay gap? Because, you know, women’s soccer, in particular, has been badass. We’re on cable, I think I can say that. And
even, sorry, but comparison to the men and what they’ve been able to do. And yet, you had to fight for even close to a similar compensation. What
was that fight like and is the fight over?
SCURRY: The fight was long. It was definitely adversarial, not only between the women’s team and the federation, but for the men’s team as
well. For three decades we fought for equality, with resources, like massage therapists and, you know, nice hotels, having the same level of
care and fairness with resources and money to help support the team and grow that.
And so, that battle lasted over 30 years. It wasn’t until recently that one of our own, I like to say, Cindy Parlow Cone, who is a teammate of mine on
the 99 team, was elevated from vice president at the federation to president. And I truly will say this, and I don’t know, I think she gets a
little embarrassed, but I think she deserves so much credit for bringing the men’s and women’s teams together. And also, the federation board to the
table and to discuss with an honest face and an honest feeling what was going on.
And finally, by doing that, she was able to get the men to agree that the women did, in fact, deserve equal pay and to share the prize money from
FIFA and also, to do a completely new CBA agreement, which is going to revolutionize the way the federations react and respond with their teams,
and hopefully, will be a starting point for other federations in the future.
But, yes, these battles they can take a really long time. You have to be ready to go the long haul and to pass the baton to the next generation
behind you. And as an example, for women’s team, we’ve done exactly that and fought for it, and finally got at this year.
SIDNER: Yes. It’s really incredible that in 2022 or 2021 that this power fight over money is still going on —
SCURRY: it is.
SIDNER: — between men and women. I want to talk to you about Brittney Griner, because this is also a powerplay that’s happening right now between
Russia and the United States. But there are some other issues here. There are a lot of people that will look at this and say, look, if this had been
Michael Jordan, back in my day, or Lebron James, you know, you name the player in the NBA, and they had been the ones that was, you know, stuck
there in Russia under really horrible circumstances, would we still be waiting for them to come out?
What do you think about her predicament there and how it’s been handled, not just by the administration, but by regular folks who would probably be
more up in arms if it were someone like LeBron?
SCURRY: Sure. I think the first part of her situation that people need to understand is what she was doing there in the first place. She had been
playing basketball in Russia for several years, in part because of the salary issues in the WNBA. So, she felt that she needed to go over to
Russia in order to be able to equalize, at some degree, some level, her pay. And so, she did that for many years.
And I do agree. I think if this were a male superstar in the NBA that was detained in a foreign country that he would probably be home already, by
now. And so, that is also another issue that is so frustrating for me. And I know that a lot of the powers that be, the WNBA, the NBA and the
administration are now making it a lot more noise about her predicament, but it took them a while. It took them a long time to finally speak out.
And just recently, Megan Rapinoe spoke about B.G. at the ESPY’s. And so, I think now, finally, maybe we’ll see some lengthy ended the tunnel and get
her home. She deserves to be home and we need to do the best that we can. And everybody needs to do what they can to achieve that end to get her
home.
SIDNER: Yes. Our Abby Phillips also spoke with her wife and she talked about how they’re still able to joke. But there have been some pictures of
Brittney Griner that have really been quite shocking because she looks stunned, she looks exhausted. And we all have heard the stories of what
it’s like to be imprisoned there.
And you have a lot of family, the Whelans, who are also waiting for their loved ones as well. And now, there is this potential swap of prisoners. So,
everyone is kind of waiting with baited breath to see if they are both going to be able to come home.
I want to lastly asked you about what your absolute favorite moment has been as a trailblazer in sport, and if you have on, you probably have more
than one, but if you have one that really stands out?
SCURRY: I actually have several. I have one on the pitch would be one that most people wouldn’t expect. In 2004 Olympic Games, my father passed away
two months before the games began, I was actually at his bedside when that happened. And to play in the Olympic Games two months later and to have my
mom there and for us to win a game that no one expected us to win, that was definitely my most proud on the field moment.
And then, off the field would be when, in 2016, when I was approached by the curators of the National Museum of African American History and Culture
to be inducted into the museum as part of the game changers exhibit as the representation of Title IX, that was absolutely astonishing to me. I was so
proud. I didn’t realize that my body of work on and off the pitch had resonated that much with the community. And I’m so honored to be in that
museum. And that’s one thing that is so humiliating — like humbling and really just humbles me to my soul. And I’m so honored and privileged to be
in that museum, right next to Serena and Venus Williams, Muhammad Ali, Althea Gibson and the like.
SIDNER: It is a true, true honor. And just curious, are you watching? The finals are coming up for the women in Europe, are you watching those games?
SCURRY: Oh, yes, I am. Yes, I am. It’s so exciting. Let me tell you what, the final, Germany against England, is going to be fantastic. It’s on
Sunday. 87,000 tickets have already been sold for that game. And actually, those tickets were sold before the tournament even began.
And so, the fact that England made it to the final is a fantastic event. And I’m so excited for this game. I think it’s a great showcase for women’s
soccer. We’ve come so far, not only in our country, but in Europe and around the world as well. I’m really fired up to see that game.
SIDNER: Briana Scurry, a true pleasure to get to talk to you. A trailblazer in sport, and I would argue in life. I appreciate your time.
SCURRY: Thank you so much for having me. Appreciate it.
SIDNER: And finally, we turn to perhaps the most universal story of all. In a new movie called, “A Love Song,” two former childhood friends find
each other again and a tale of yearning, longing, and loving set against the sweeping backdrop of the American West.
A quiet drama of understated magnificence, that’s according to the Hollywood reporter. Veteran actors Dale Dickey and Wes Studi deliver a
stunning and often touching performance. And I have the privilege of speaking to them both. They are in Los Angeles.
Welcome to “Amanpour” and company.
DALE DICKEY, ACTRESS, “A LONG SONG”: Think you. Thanks, Sara.
WES STUDI, ACTOR, “A LONG SONG”: Great to be here.
SIDNER: So, first and foremost, you both have done so many things, I will not go down the long list. But we see you often in these rough and tumble
roles where you are tough guys or tough chicks or dealing with tough situations. This is so very different.
So, I am going to ask you both, have you felt in your careers that you have been typecast, and this is the one time where someone has seen you in a
completely different light?
SIDNER: Dale?
DICKEY: Yes. Yes. Yes. You know, I think I learned early on as an actress, I was terrified of typecasting, being from the south. But I learned that
that’s really what casting directors want. They want to see what you do, what is special, what’s in your heart and soul.
And so, being from the south, I — that was my essence. And so, I — you know, it was my calling card. I — it’s how I paid my bills. I love all the
gritty, crazy, hardscrabble roles that I’ve played. And so, it was — it’s a good thing to be typecast for a while.
And every now and then somebody takes a risk and Max Walker-Silverman took a big risk on this. And I’m just so grateful that he picked me for this
beautiful story, and a kinder gentler me, I hope.
SIDNER: Wes, do you feel the same, about the typecasting issue?
STUDI: Essentially the same. I think that’s typecasting can be — there’s a plus side to it all. And if you — if an actor can get to the point of
being typed, you know, it’s a sort of step in the right direction. I think like if a casting person is looking for a Wes Studi type or a Danny Trejo
type or, you know, a type, then you sort of make a step in the right direction in terms of advancing your career, I think.
But I also speak the downside of being typecast, and that’s you can’t work anywhere else, you know, or at anything else, which is something that I
definitely would like a break out of if ever I were to be caught in that situation. And I don’t think I have, totally.
SIDNER: Wes, I have to ask you because I heard that this may have been the first time you were asked to kiss someone on film. Is that true?
STUDI: In a movie, yes. In a movie. I’ve done so in a television program, but not ever in a feature film, like this one. Yes.
SIDNER: That sounds like almost impossible, especially in sort of Hollywood’s world. So, that is really fascinating. This was a really
beautiful, and sort of — I like the word quiet, because you have to really sit with it and listen. And we’re seeing you now playing — strumming
guitars together. You know, somebody called it sublime. It really is.
I want to ask you, Dale, what do you think the film is trying to say about love and sort of community, and reconnection?
DICKEY: There is a lot of different tangents there. But I’ve heard Max, our director, writer, talk a lot about it and I think that the main themes
are isolation and loneliness, which we can all relate to, particularly during COVID, people being isolated, that are alone.
Many people that — most of us have been through some kind of grief or loss of a family member, whether it’s a spouse or not. And how you find the
courage and the hope to sort of break out of that and move forward. And what is love without anyone to share it with? Well, just the possibility of
it is hopeful, and learning to just be alone, and you’re never alone when you’re in nature. It’s so much beauty around you, and listening to the
birds and this greatness is with you.
So, connecting, reaching out in connection with people is important and it’s hopeful. I just — I think it’s ultimately a hopeful, really beautiful
peaceful, quiet, film that is about love, loss and reconnection, and moving on.
SIDNER: Dale, you’ve had — you both had long careers, which is a hard thing to do. It’s hard to stick around in Hollywood and keep making your
mark. Can I ask you about the struggles of actors who are, as we like to say, seasoned in the business, and what those struggles are and if they’re
starting to lessen some, if there are more roles for people who aren’t in their teens and 20s?
DICKEY: Wes, you want to go first?
STUDI: Sure. Yes. I think, it’s definitely been — that’s what’s been happening. And I think filmmakers are beginning to — as well as studios
are beginning to think of making films, stories, television, or films that actually reflect the kind of world we live in, you know, whether it’s not
so much just the perfectly athletic looking people that used to pretty much dominate television programs, as well as films.
I think we’re beginning to see a different — well, take a different look at our world our, America for one. But, yes, I think that we’ve expanded,
and it’s a good thing. And as well as, we’re seeing older people, seasoned people, if you will, as you said, and maybe it’s like a blow against
ageism.
SIDNER: And that sounds like a good thing to me. It certainly exists across all sort of genres, television, and even, I would argue, news as
well. But certainly, in Hollywood you see it very starkly. What is it been like for you, Dale, as your career, and as you have matured?
DICKEY: I’ve been doing this a really long time. I started in theater. I was in New York for 12 years back in the ’80s and ’90s. And I was always a
difficult type. People didn’t know where to put me, I wasn’t pretty enough this way or weird enough that way, and I just kept putting myself out
there. And I have found — you know, I’ve been very lucky to work as much as I have in some really gritty wonderful supporting roles, which I love. I
sort of like sort of being in the background.
But I have noticed, definitely, in the past five years, a tremendous amount of more diversity. You know, often a role that I might be auditioning for,
the breakdown will say, any ethnicity, any physicality. So, they’re not necessarily looking for a large person or small person or a black woman or
nation woman or a white woman, it’s sort of open. And I think that’s very wonderful.
I’ve also experienced a lot of sets recently with tremendous amount, more women on working behind the camera, which is lovely to see. And I do —
SIDNER: I want to —
DICKEY: Yes. I think they’re — go ahead.
SIDNER: No, no, no. Go ahead. Please.
DICKEY: I was going to ask, I wonder which seasonings I’ve been seasoned with?
SIDNER: Mine’s oregano. I definitely have some oregano in my systems.
DICKEY: I love tabasco. So — no, I just want to (INAUDIBLE).
SIDNER: Tabasco? That’s — it’s a preservative.
DICKEY: No, it’s nice that — you know, we were really, really blessed with Max writing a script for two middle-aged people that are weathered and
a little romance, it’s a beautiful thing.
SIDNER: It really is.
DICKEY: We’re very happy. Very lucky.
SIDNER: We have a clip of your two characters as their reconnecting at the lakes edge. Let’s take a look at the clip.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DICKEY: We came here for a field trip, 1970. Tenth grade. Raining the whole time.
STUDI: Betty Bowman (ph) brought a tote home in her backpack.
DICKEY: Oh, God. I remember.
STUDI: You tried to kiss me that day.
DICKEY: You tried to kiss me.
STUDI: I don’t remember that.
DICKEY: I do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SIDNER: What is great about the scene is I feel like you can see the love that is happening there, but then Dale, you do you, and you come for him.
DICKEY: Yes.
SIDNER: Was there and point for you — and this is to both of you, but I’ll start with Dale. Was there a point for you where you were ever
uncomfortable? But these are not the rules that you are used to playing. Was this uncomfortable, or was it a joy to be able to play this kind of
softer person?
DICKEY: A little of both. It was mostly a joy. It’s probably quite close to who I am in real life. I love the outdoors. I love my solitude and
quiet. And I can be bad about isolating when I’m depressed or grief.
So, the uncomfortable part, I think, it was a challenge for me because I hadn’t done a lead role and particularly, with this amount of quiet, which
I love the stillness and quiet of this film, but could I carry this, could I maintain what Max needed to tell his story? So, I was insecure and
uncomfortable in that matter, but at the same time, it was so wonderful to play this vulnerable, awkward person. That’s kind of who I sometimes am in
person.
So, yes. It was a joy. And when I was uncomfortable, Max pulled me out of that. So — and Wes did too.
SIDNER: Wes, can I talk to you a little bit about, you know, the trajectory of your career? You are Cherokee. And for a long time, you’ve
talked about how important representation, particularly for native Americans is, because the representations were so off at the very beginning
when Hollywood started doing this sort of, you know, western movies.
Can you talk to me about how different this was for you, because so often you have played the role of someone who is native? And this is just so very
different. Although, you are a native American person, and that, in this context, didn’t seem — that wasn’t the focus at all.
STUDI: Exactly. And that’s — that was one of the things that I thought of it as a joyful thing to do. I just like the world joyful. But, yes. I am
definitely, you know, native. I can’t get away from that, right? But the story, of course, doesn’t focus on that at all. It’s a native guy who is
the love interest of a white woman, right? If we’re going to make distinctions.
And, yes, I think it was a turnaround on a lot of other kinds of stories. It’s usually the guy, right, that is the star the sky, this time, Dale is a
star, a white female is the lead. And then, we have the love interest, which is a native guy.
So, I think it’s, really, a great idea that Max had in terms of casting and the kind of story it is. It all served — it was served very well with the
ideas.
SIDNER: Yes, I agree. It really was well, well done by the two of you and directed so beautifully. I want to show a clip now of you all playing a
guitar together. There is nothing like music to create love.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SIDNER: all right. Now, two things, Dale, you’re going for it, right? You’re hitting those high notes — or Wes, you’re hitting those high notes.
Dale, your hands are, you know, over your face. Why? Why, Dale, are you responding that way?
DICKEY: That’s just me. It was such a — speaking joyful, that was such a joyful moment. We’ve talked about it. It was the first time they sort of
just kind of relax with each other. Because I was — I don’t play guitar very well at all, I knew a few chords. Wes is pretty dang good.
And, you know, I used to sing a lot. I love to sing. So, just when we were — we talked about the harmonies, I just sort of went for it at the end and
thought, OK, I’m going to try to hit those high notes. I’m not sure if they’ll come out. So, I’m just laughing at myself. We got to do that
sometimes. We just threw it out there and it was such fun.
SIDNER: I appreciate you both coming on the show. Dale Dickey and Wes Studi, you are wonderful in this film and have such a fantastic career.
Congratulations on this film.
DICKEY: Thank you for your support.
STUDI: Thank you so much.
DICKEY: Thank you for having us.
STUDI: Great to be here.
SIDNER: And that is it for us for now. You can always catch us online, on our podcast and across social media. Thank you so much for being with us
and goodbye from New York.