The Show for June 26, 2026: Friday NewsCap, 'Remaining Native' documentary and more

There may be a proposal to avoid having Arizona school vouchers on November’s ballot at all. Our Friday NewsCap panelists analyze that and the rest of the week’s top stories. Plus, an Indigenous teenager retraces the 50-mile run his great-grandfather took to escape a boarding school.

Transcript

UNDERWRITER: KJZZ’s original production, The Show, is supported by Banner Health, Arizona’s largest nonprofit healthcare system. Last year, Banner reinvested more than $1.1 billion in community health and charity care. Banner Health, nonprofit for Arizona. bannerhealth.com/nonprofitforaz.

MARK BRODIE: Hi, I’m Mark Brodie, co-host of The Show, an original production from KJZZ. Every weekday, we bring you the latest news and culture from across the state. You can find much more at theshow.kjzz.org. Here’s today’s episode.

Good morning. It’s The Show here on KJZZ 91.5 in Phoenix, I’m Mark Brodie. Coming up, an Arizona-based healthcare system gets a new CEO and he comes from within the company. And a teenager retraces his great-grandfather’s steps in escaping a Native American boarding school. But first, it is time for the Friday Newscap and some voices from the news this week.

RUBEN GALLEGO: Super Bowl was in Arizona. I represent Arizona. We threw a Super Bowl fundraiser in Arizona where we raised money for my election in 2023.

KATIE HOBBS: Look, I am really not interested in playing the “who gets credit” game. The fact is that Arizonans are going to benefit from these tax cuts.

JOSEPH CHAPLIK: Well, day one, first important issue is balancing that budget in D.C. Our country is $2 trillion in debt every budget cycle. We need to cut that waste, fraud and abuse and stop the overspending. We have a spending problem.

JAY FEELY: That’s why the president reached out to me. It’s why he endorsed my campaign. It’s why Speaker Johnson and the rest of the Republican leadership reached out to me and said, “We need you in this district because we need to make sure it stays a Republican seat.”

MARK KELLY: So he suddenly decides he’s going to tie two of these things together and not sign a strongly bipartisan piece of legislation. Clear to me, he doesn’t care.

MICHAEL BAILEY: It implicates a citizen-ratified code provision with regards to the qualifications for a councilmember, I believe, not only for the city but even in the best interest for Councilmember Conchas, that the city appeal this ruling.

MARK BRODIE: And with me to talk about the possible deal to keep school vouchers off this fall’s ballot, Republicans and Democratic debates in a hotly contested congressional district and more, Paul Bentz of High Ground. Good morning, Paul.

PAUL BENTZ: Good morning.

BRODIE: And Jason Barraza of Veridus. Jason, good morning to you.

JASON BARRAZA: Good morning.

BRODIE: So Jason, looks like law makers are playing “Let’s Make a Deal” at the Capitol. This is sort of a redux of what we saw at the very end of the legislative session where Republicans are looking to maybe put some guard rails in place on vouchers, some new rules on voucher use in exchange for taking a union-backed initiative off the ballot, maybe some other legislative referrals off the ballot as well. Do you think that there’s going to be any different outcome this time than at the end of the session, which did not clear the Senate?

BARRAZA: Yeah, well, that’s an important point because we’ve kind of already done this, and I think that both the members and everybody involved in the Capitol community thought we were done with this process. We wrapped up session, and everyone was moving on.

But low and behold, we’re now back, we’re discussing this again. We see tons of moving pieces that would need to bring this together in a very short amount of time. To me, that makes this a very high hurdle for everyone involved to be able to cross.

BRODIE: Paul, do you get the sense that at least part of this is based on each side having nerves about what voters might do?

BENTZ: Absolutely. I think when you think it through and look what happened especially a lot of these referrals happened in the dead of night. Bad things happen after midnight. It’s the witching hour, as it were.

And I think they were close to a deal — and it seemed like an actual agreeable deal — but it does seem getting opposition on both ends of the political spectrum on the far right and more of the far left.

But they didn’t get across the finish line and instead the Republicans turned around and referred several items to the ballot, almost seeming like it was a bit of revenge for the idea of coming to a deal. So now they’re sort having to live with that.

And we’re seeing that there’s implications outside the voucher discussion that ostensibly this is the voucher discussion. But what it comes down to is there’s a lot of unintended consequences. I think one of the biggest ones is the anti-union deal that’s supposed to be aimed at teachers specifically does seem to be wide enough to be interpreted that public safety organizations and others have great concerns about it. And there’s several candidates that need these public safety endorsements as voting is taking place right now.

BRODIE: So Jason, I think the maybe the one difference between what happened at the end of the session and now is the the referral that the legislature sent ostensibly dealing with vouchers for military families, but also containing that poison pill that says it would invalidate any other voucher-related initiative that voters pass. And there is a lawsuit challenging that, but how much does the presence of that change the equation on either side?

BARRAZA: To Paul’s point, I think it drastically changes the equation for all the initiatives that were passed in the middle of the night at the Legislature because now we know what the playing field looks like. And we know what’s out there and we know what needs to be debated and what is potentially going to go to the voters.

And I think that when you look at the parties of interest here that are coming to the table, they have a lot of fear about what’s going to go out there and what the voters are going to do because there’s a lot of uncertainty. If they can clear off some of the things that they view as being the most dangerous initiatives out there, I think that that’s why they’re trying to make this move because they’re trying to take care of this before it even goes to the ballot.

BRODIE: But Paul, it also potentially puts lawmakers in a tricky spot — both Republicans and Democrats, to Jason’s point — as voting is happening because it seems like the bases of both parties are not super thrilled with this proposal. So if you’re a legislator and this comes up for a vote, you’re potentially ticking off some number of your voters.

BENTZ: That’s right. I mean, it will require a bipartisan level of support. I mean, the interesting thing is this would be a special session, which is a very high bar.

But the problem with thinking about a special session — and it does seem like that they’re they’re looking at it and trying to figure out who would be in town and everything else — but it opens up the door.

So this puts a lot of power in the Democratic Party’s hands, those legislators down there, to consider other options. Like one of the issues that wasn’t addressed was Proposition 123. Do they try to put that out there as well? And then we also see that there’s other things being offered up to try to move the ball.

The challenge with special sessions is kind of like opening the candy store and it’s like, well, what does everybody want? And so to nail it back down and bring it to more that specified ESAs and other things is going to be a challenge, number one.

Number two, yeah, when you look at who’s speaking out against it, the Freedom Caucus individuals and some of the the groups on the left, like the Save Our Schools, both seem to be in opposition. But there’s a big segment that’s trying to narrate why this might be helpful, that it puts guard rails on ESAs, it eliminates tricky lawsuits, it removes things that are open for interpretation, and takes a lot of the uncertainty out of the ballot.

But like you said, ballots are voting right now. People have ballots in their hands, and so how the reaction to this is going to play a big role. But at the same time, we’ve got candidates that might be risking their public safety endorsements right now if something isn’t done. And I think that’s a big — especially in some of these races — I think that’s a big deal. The rescindment of the public safety endorsements might be even more impactful than the initial giving of the public safety endorsement.

BRODIE: But Paul, I wonder if given um who we know votes in primaries, typically the bases of a party, that’s got to be a consideration for these policymakers too, right?

BENTZ: Absolutely, I mean, they think about, there’s some of the portions of the base, particularly say on the right, that really don’t want any sort of restrictions on ESAs. But at the same time, that same group cares a great, great deal about law enforcement. And in a lot of these races, law enforcement can be the difference between winning and losing a very narrow primary. And so um if they don’t address law enforcement’s concerns on some of the other bills that are out there, I think they might be in trouble as well.

BARRAZA: To that point, I think that it’s also split on the Democratic side drastically when we’re talking about base voters because you have the AEA, the Education Union and the other unions on one side that are trying to push forward with the deal, and you have Save Our Schools, which is an incredibly powerful and election-active education advocacy organization, that is on the complete opposite side. So as a Democrat, what a horrible position to be in when the two individuals that you really want to have on your side are now warring in the complete opposite corners.

BRODIE: All right, so before we move on, I’ll ask each of you, do you think ultimately, Jason, that there is a deal and a special session?

BARRAZA: Too many moving pieces to bring it together in a short amount of time.

BRODIE: Paul, what do you think?

BENTZ: I think there is a chance for a deal, but it will not be a grand bargain. I think it will be a much more narrow, smaller deal than I think originally people are going to think.

BRODIE: All right. So guys, this week, the candidates in both parties for the 1st Congressional District — one of the more competitive districts not just in Arizona but around the country, they there are two separate debates, one for the Democrats, one for the Republicans. Paul, what were the the key takeaways for you listening to these?

BENTZ: Well, I mean, I think first of all, I think CD1 is the most competitive if not in the state for sure, but in the country. It’s been back and forth year after year, one of the most competitive races. When redistricting happened, I think one of the biggest things that we saw is Democrats sacrificed several other congressional districts to make sure that Congressional District 1 in the long term could be in play.

And I think they see this with the unpopularity of Trump being a big opportunity. But like you see in the primary here, it’s the same old thing that we see all the time, people run to the right and to the left. And actually, what my biggest takeaway was, just like everything else in politics right now, whether it’s the reflecting pool or the MMA fight on the White House lawn, it’s all about Trump.

You saw that on the Republican side, it was who’s closest to Trump, why did Trump pick them, what are they going to do to defend and protect Trump and his policies. And then on the left side, in the CD1 Democratic debate, it was about who’s going to stand up the most to Trump. I think ultimately, he’s been a driving force, particularly throughout the debates.

BRODIE: Jason, what were your takeaways?

BARRAZA: In the Republican primary, I did think it was very interesting where you had Schweikert that was taking a position that the economy is bad and we need to fix the economy. And I was sitting there thinking, do you not understand who’s controlling the economy right now?

If you got a problem with the debt, I think that it’s it’s your side of the aisle that’s driving up the debt right now. If you got a problem with the economy, it’s your side of the aisle that’s doing that.

So, as far as a talking point, I don’t know if attacking Trump and the current administration is the way to go for Congressman Schweikert in that primary. On the Dem side, yeah, it was all who can wrap themselves as much with the talking points of the party the most. They all don’t like Trump, they all want to impeach him, and I think everybody signed up for that. So, it was kind of like who can be the most Democrat or who can be the most Republican in these primaries.

BRODIE: I wonder, Paul, a lot of the times the candidates in primaries, like there’s not a lot of distance between them in terms of actual policy. Like they a lot of times they generally agree on the same kinds of policies. So, is it maybe in some ways not surprising that the issue for the Republicans of who does Trump like more or on the Democratic side who might be more electable. Maybe that is sort of the focus of a primary debate in a case like this?

BENTZ: Absolutely, especially in a competitive race like that. They have to be careful in these primary elections to not make themselves unelectable or say something that makes them disqualified for the general election.

But I mean, CD1 in particular, the whole northeast Valley, I don’t know if you’ve driven through there lately, but the incredible just sea of campaign signs and the sea of everything else. It is just a mess. There’s no getting clarity out of any of it, whether it’s the Scottsdale City Council races, CD1, any of those legislative races up there, LD3. It’s just the everyone is winning the sign race by virtually that everyone’s losing the sign race.

And I’m not sure the debate’s going to change minds, but I think what it comes down to is who’s speaking to their grassroots the most that is energizing those folks that are going to get out and knock on doors, talk to their friends and neighbors. These kinds of races in these crowded fields are going to come down to that word of mouth and who can build that, which is a little different. Because there’s ads on the air, there’s lots of things going on, but at some point it becomes just noise. And so then it’s going to come down to that personal appeal: Who do they like the most? I think that’s the challenge over the next few weeks as we go into the election.

BRODIE: And Jason, if you are running in that district as a Democrat, Paul mentioned that the Democrats kind of played the long game on this one. They’ve been trying to defeat David Schweikert for cycles now and haven’t been able to. Now that it’s an open seat, how important is it for the Democrats to not run too far to the left because they’re going to need independents and Republicans to win in a general?

BARRAZA: I think it’s critical, not just for the Democrats but for the Republicans also. I think that that’s a critical campaign point across the board. The problem is that your primary voters don’t necessarily see the world that way. They’re not necessarily looking at the electability question. They want to know who’s carrying the flag the highest and the brightest. Um and that becomes the problem because the trick for the candidate is as soon as I get out of that primary, I seriously have to pivot back to the middle and start talking about electability. And that’s true on both sides.

BRODIE: Interesting. All right, guys, got to take a quick break. That’s Jason Barraza. I’m also joined by Paul Bentz. I’m Mark Brodie in Phoenix. The Friday Newscap continues in just a moment.

BRODIE: Good morning. It’s the Friday Newscap on KJZZ 91.5, I’m Mark Brodie. My guests this week are Jason Barraza of Veridus and Paul Bentz of HighGround.

Jason, this week, a Politico reported a pretty long story about the U.S. Sen. Ruben Gallego and some trips he took, some fundraising events he held where his family came along, his wife and kids came along. There’s some payments for travel, for childcare, that kind of thing.

Obviously, he is not on the ballot. He’s not up for anything right now, but he is potentially considering a run for president in a couple of years. How concerned, if you are Senator Gallego or or in his camp, like how concerned should you be or maybe are you at reporting like this?

BARRAZA: I’d be concerned if if he hadn’t been complying with the law, but that’s not the case. He’s been reporting, he’s been making all the disclosures that need to occur. These expenses have been contemplated by those who put forward our campaign finance laws, and he’s complied with that.

For me, it would be a good sign. It means whenever anybody’s throwing punches at you, it means that somebody thinks that you’re a danger. So, there’s people out there that are considering him to be a threat, maybe for presidential run later on in his career here coming up here. So, who knows why they’re doing it, but the realization of it all is that he’s done everything that he has been allowed to do under the law.

BRODIE: Is it a tough optical look though? I mean, even though — and he has said like, “I’m following the law, we’re allowed to, you know, use campaign money for childcare. That is perfectly legal.” But I’m just wondering, for voters who maybe don’t look at campaign finance law, like is it a bad look?

BARRAZA: I think it would be a bad look if you didn’t have it happen on both sides of the aisle. But we see these fundraising events happening at spring training games, at the Phoenix Open, obviously. I think that the question in here was at the Super Bowl for him.

So, I mean, these events occur on both sides of the aisle. They’re something that candidates engage in to be able to raise money. The childcare issue is something that is contemplated under the law because, as a candidate, yeah, having childcare so that you can do the work of the campaign is something that could be an expense of the campaign, it’s contemplated, and he and he’s doing what what he needs to do to be able to be a successful candidate.

BRODIE: What do you think, Paul? Like how concerning would this be or should this be for Gallego?

BENTZ: Well, I think Jason’s right that someone’s taking aim at him. Politico didn’t decide one day, “I’m going to look through Ruben Gallego’s campaign finance reports and see how much money he spent on childcare,” though it was $18,000. And he also took a $9,000 trip to St. Barts. He’s had to “clear the air a couple” of times now, it’s been observed. But Sen. (Kyrsten) Sinema was doing the same stuff: traveling all over the country, going to 5Ks or marathons and wine country and everything else. It never amounted to much.

I don’t think campaign spending is going to be a thing that takes him down. And to Jason’s point also: We know about it because he reported it. So, while it may not look great optically, I think his talking point about “I’m one of the few senators that has young children, and I want them to be near me.”

But putting Disneyland on the expense report always is going to raise a few eyebrows as you go through it.

But, ultimately, he’s not going up for election for another five years. I mean, he may or may not run for president. I don’t think he’s quite ready for that. But from the Senate perspective, there’s plenty of time between now and then. …

He seems to be in the crosshairs of some individuals because he seems to be gaining notoriety. He he was a bright spot in 2024 when a lot of other Democrats weren’t successful. He seems to have some of the magic elixir here of how to accomplish the goal of feeling like an everyman, which is something that a lot of Democrats struggle with. So, there seems to be definitely an effort to try to take him down.

BRODIE: Listening to both of you talk, I’m reminded of the quote from Reggie Jackson, the great baseball player who said, “They don’t boo nobodies.”Right? Like if you’re not a great player, they’re not going to bother booing you.

It sounds like what you’re both saying — and Paul, I’ll I’ll stick with you — is that if Gallego wasn’t sort of a notable person in the political world or somebody that maybe somebody is concerned about, nobody would care, nobody would bother going through all his campaign finance reports and look at this stuff.

BENTZ: Right. There’s another version of that that says if you’re taking on artillery, you’re over the target. And I think there’s certainly something to be said about that. … He brings a different perspective to the party. You know, he’s the guy that, as they said, one of the reasons he was able to win is because he’s the kind of guy you want to have a beer with. But between the Swalwell stuff and this, they’re certainly trying to build a case long-term, it would appear, against him.

BRODIE: All right, so guys, we’ve referenced the fact that early ballots are out, they were mailed out this week, people are and will be voting over the next several weeks. And yet Jason, we still don’t really know who in Maricopa County is responsible for doing what. The sides were going to mediation, then that was paused, now it’s back on.

Like, what do you make of this whole situation given where we are in the calendar?

BARRAZA: I don’t think anybody in Arizona expected we had to be at a point where our election would be underway, but our administrators for that election would be arguing amongst themselves about how to conduct it, while we have ballots that are out there and live.

So it’s an interesting situation. What makes it complicated is the court keeps on starting and stopping this process. We were at mediation, then we’re not at mediation, and it sounds like now we’re back at mediation.

In the end, I think that folks, let’s get together and talk this out and work it out so that we can have a successful election and we can move on with the primary and get onto the general.

BRODIE: Paul, what do you think?

BENTZ: Well, I think it erodes confidence in the election. I think we were starting to come back around post the 2020 election fraud allegations, and I think we were a little bit out of the woods.

But this brings it back, and we’re starting to see an erosion of confidence in elections once again, and that’s an incredible shame that there’s certain segments, particularly a portion of the Republican Party that Heap represents, that do not believe that our elections are secure and do not believe and do believe that there’s a significant number of non-citizens voting in the in our elections.

Neither of those things are true, A, but B, it’s not a majority-held belief. But it does erode the overall confidence. And the challenge is that I think Republicans, certain segments are starting to see that they’re going to have a real big challenge this fall.

With the lack of popularity of Trump and other things, they’re likely to lose seats, and this is a great scapegoat. This is a great place to point. So, continue to raise questions about how the elections are conducted, continue to be intransigent about the way things are done, is a great place for them to be.

I think they should have held to the Purcell rule, which is what part of the what the original thing was: avoid changes right before the election. And I think that’s a wise place to be.

Maricopa County proceeded with their election plans this week, they announced both the general and the primary and general election plans. I think that’s where we should be. Certainly, they got to sort this out and come together on it, but um I think voters should have confidence that our elections are conducted well, there’s some of the best in the country, and have faith in the results.

BRODIE: All right, so guys, a couple of minutes left before we have to wrap up, and with early voting underway, I’m curious from each of you: There are obviously a lot of competitive primaries going on both here in the Valley and around the state.

Jason, I’ll start with you. Which primary are you most interested in seeing how it plays out? And I recognize this is like asking a parent to pick their favorite child. So, I will apologize in advance.

BARRAZA: Yeah, we’ve got about seven competitive districts right now that everyone is kind of watching what’s the actual makeup going to be in the general election. I’m looking at the Central Phoenix districts in in 2 and 4. That’s where I care about like

BRODIE: So the state Legislature.

BARRAZA: For the state Legislature, that’s where my focus is right now and how those are going to play out. But obviously, like I said, I think there’s seven on the table. Paul, I don’t know if you know the exact number, but those are the ones that everybody’s paying attention to because they’re the ones that are going to decide who’s going to control the Legislature next year.

BRODIE: All right, Paul, which ones are you most interested in?

BENTZ: A couple of down-ballot that maybe aren’t getting as much attention right now. I think at the attorney general race, (Rodney) Glassman versus (Warren) Petersen, I think that’s a big race, especially with what we talked about earlier with the special session and public safety endorsements on the line.

I am also interested in the treasurer’s race, (Elijah) Norton versus (Katherine) Haley. Haley got all of the former treasurers to endorse her, but Norton’s been — I’ve gotten more in my mailbox from Norton than anybody else by a significant amount.

BRODIE: A lot of signs he’s got up, too.

BENTZ: Tons. And then the last one I’m really interested in is that CD5 Republican primary. You’ve got former Sheriff Mark Lamb, who has gotten a lot of coverage and allegations against him, versus (Daniel) Keenan, who’s been spending money on that race. But that’ll be a real eye-opener for how much do primary Republicans care about something like that?

But every day between now and July 21 is election day. Voters are voting every single day. And if you want campaigns to leave you alone, send your ballot in right away. They leave you alone once you’ve once you’ve actually voted in your election.

BRODIE: Public service announcement from Paul Bentz. Jason, any statewide primaries you’re particularly interested in?

BARRAZA: I’m actually interested to see how the CD5 race turns out with Lamb, Sheriff Lamb.

BRODIE: This is Andy Biggs’ old seat. Sort of Southeast Valley.

BARRAZA: Correct. And and my big concern there is, OK, so now you have the Maricopa County Attorney that has come out and has kind of cleared Lamb of any wrongdoing. OK, so he didn’t do anything wrong, but how are voters going to treat that? Has enough damage been done that voters are going to turn away? Maybe it wasn’t bad activity, but is it activity that we don’t approve of, and now do we want to pivot there? It’s something that the Democrats should be watching who the candidate comes out that way with.

BRODIE: Interesting. All right. Jason Barraza, Paul Bentz, thanks to you both for the conversation, really appreciate it.

BENTZ: Thanks.

BRODIE: Good morning. It’s The Show on KJZZ 91.5, I’m Mark Brodie. Coming up, a road trip home brings fond memories in the latest edition of our SOAPBOX series.

But first, Native Americans have a long history as runners. But for one high school student in rural Nevada, it was personal. Ku Stevens’ great-grandfather escaped an indigenous boarding school when he was just 8 years old, running 50 miles across dangerous terrain to get home. Then, two generations later, he decided to retrace those footsteps. He called it a remembrance run. And now, that event and the high schooler at the center of it are the subject of a new documentary that’s making waves in the festival circuit called “Remaining Native.”

KU STEVENS: I think about my great-grandfather running away over 50 miles from a boarding school. Ran back for his family, for the love of his people, his culture. He was running. For me ...

BRODIE: Indigenous filmmaker Paige Bethmann made the film. My co-host Lauren Gilger spoke with her more about it, and they started with where this project began for her.

PAIGE BETHMANN: You know, my family is Haudenosaunee, you know, on my dad’s side, came from Akwesasne and my mom is Oneida. And, you know, this history of Indian boarding schools definitely impacted my family. My great-grandmother attended a Indian boarding school, and so when the news was coming out in Kamloops, Canada, of all the unmarked graves of Native children, it definitely struck a chord for a lot of different community members, but, you know, thinking about the stories that, you know, my grandmother told me and and just, you know, the memories that I had in my life growing up hearing different things about the boarding schools, it was definitely really emotional.

And a friend of mine who is Paiute, he shared this article with me that was written in a local newspaper, the Reno Gazette-Journal, and it was talking about, you know, the 17-year-old kid who was going to retrace his great-grandfather’s 50 miles, and, and that story and it was really moving.

Not only from that perspective of wow, like an 8-year-old had to traverse such a, you know, scary landscape so young, but really, I was interested in like, who is this self-aware 17-year-old kid who is going to do something about that and, and use his skill as a runner to bring his community together?

So, yeah, I did what any good Native storyteller does and I reached out on Facebook. And I talked to his mom and just shared a little bit about, you know, my background, where I come from, you know, my connection to this, you know, really horrible history, and just, you know, see if if they’d be willing to let me come out and and film the run.

Yeah. And then before you know, I was relocating to Nevada a few months later to continue to follow this story.

LAUREN GILGER: Moved across the country for it, right? You didn’t want to drop in. I mean, so tell us about Ku, about this 17-year-old kid, right, who was willing to do this big thing.

PAIGE BETHMANN: Yeah. You know, Ku grew up on the Yerington Paiute Reservation. He’s always been really good at sports. You know, he’s just won like everything from like the fish derby to playing in rez ball tournaments and, you know, just being a really gifted runner.

And, you know, he always had his eyes set on the University of Oregon. You know, he learned that it was the best track team in the country and always wanted to be a Duck and, you know, really became his main motivation. But, you know, he didn’t have like a big support system back home when it came to running and the competitive environment that it takes to become a D1 athlete. Like he didn’t have a coach, he was the only person on his cross-country team, you know, it was just very hard for him to access the spaces that he needed to become a competitive runner, you know, at that level.

But he had such strong heart and just pure dedication. He really like did everything he could on his own and, you know, his own parents, you know, being there to support him and act as his coaches and and just really, you know, give him that full shot.

But, you know, he’s he’s a really funny kid. He’s a quietly funny kid. He really loves to, you know, play basketball and play video games, and so Ku really became like a brother to me, you know. It was really nice being able to move out to Reno and just take that time to not only, you know, shoot the film, but to also, you know, play Super Smash Bros. at the end of the day and have him come over and eat all the food out of my fridge and and to really develop that, you know, brother-sister relationship.

LAUREN GILGER: Then there’s this 50-mile run, right, inspired by his great-grandfather, as you mentioned. Talk about the history of that and what happened to his great-grandfather because it’s such a remarkable story and in the sense that also, I think, you alluded to, that he survived and he was 8 at the time?

PAIGE BETHMANN: Yeah, so, the U.S. federal policy of assimilation, you know, severed relationships between children and their families to indoctrinate them into Western society. So, these schools were funded and regulated by the U.S. government and also religious institutions to be able to, you know, as like Henry Thomas Pratt said, “Kill the Indian and save the man.”

And yeah, it was a really brutal process, you know, government agents would show up in communities and round up kids and take them to these schools. And the school that his great-grandfather attended was the Stewart Indian Boarding School, which, you know, was in operation for 90 years. It opened in 1890 and closed in 1980.

And so, Ku’s great-grandfather, Frank Quinn, when he was 8, he went there and he managed to escape and run 50 miles, which is not just a straight shot down the road, it’s over an incredibly landscape. It changes in elevation, you know, it’s very hot, there’s wildlife out there, it’s the conditions are really, you know, something that you can’t imagine, you know, 8-year-olds needing to navigate.

But he had to do that three times. You know, he was taken back to the school the first time and the second time and then finally, I guess, the school decided that he wasn’t worth time to keep, you know, bringing back in.

So, yeah, it’s, it’s a heartbreaking story, but it’s also one that really shows you, you know, one, like how connected he was to that landscape and, and how he was, you know, had these survival tactics being so young, but being so able to like survive out there, and then also the legacy that he left behind, you know.

A lot of children didn’t make it home from that school, and there’s a cemetery on that campus. And there are folks who, you know, suffered great trauma, you know, from sexual abuse to physical abuse, and, you know, I think when we understand about his great-grandfather who, you know, then became a tribal councilman and also, you know, was a good community member and spoke Paiute and, you know, would go hunting and share his game with the rest of the community. Like he really was able to pass down these values and traits to Ku’s father and then, you know, down to Ku.

LAUREN GILGER: Yeah. I mean, in so many ways, like it’s a sad history and a very hard one to tackle. But I feel like a lot of what you’re you’re talking about and maybe and what you’re getting at in the film is the the resilience that’s come out of that, from this, you know, this 17-year-old, but from this thing he inspired.

PAIGE BETHMANN: Yeah, absolutely, you know, it’s it really shows how Ku, using his skill as a runner to bring people together, and to create the space to be able to talk about these issues and the experiences in a way where we could also, you know, eat food together and laugh and experience joy, and to cry and to just have this this opportunity to have a safe environment.

And I think it really shows that, you know, there is hope for healing to happen. And and it’s really through just being able to be your own Indigenous person and to celebrate that because, you know, for so long, it was it was, you know, you’re told you should not be.

LAUREN GILGER: Yeah. So, you filmed this, you know, four or five years ago. Where is Ku now? Did he make these big goals happen?

PAIGE BETHMANN: Yes, spoiler alert, I guess, for the film. But he did, he got recruited by the University of Oregon as one of the first Native American runners to be on their track and cross-country team. He ran there for two years, and then he decided to take a year off, and then was ultimately cut from the team, sadly.

However, a coach from Washington State University who had wanted to recruit him when he was a freshman, you know, reached out and he was able to transfer, and now he’s a senior at Washington State University. He’s a Cougar now instead of a Duck, but he’s doing phenomenal, you know. He just ran a sub-4 mile — for any runners out there knows that’s an incredibly fast. I can’t even do that on a bike probably. But he’s studying art and anthropology and is interested in perhaps a career in politics or even getting his law degree to continue to advocate for his community.

LAUREN GILGER: Oh wow, there you go. Well, lots to watch for from him as well. It sounds like, all right. Paige Bethmann, film producer, director of the new documentary “Remaining Native,” joining us. Paige, thank you very much for coming on and congratulations on the film.

PAIGE BETHMANN: Thank you so much.

BRODIE: Arizona-based healthcare system Honor Health says it’ll be getting a new CEO early next year. Dr. John Neil will take over from the current CEO Todd LaPorte. Neil currently serves in leadership roles at Honor Health, including as executive vice president and chief strategy officer. Other healthcare systems in the state have taken a variety of approaches to finding their new leaders. Banner Health did a national search to hire a chief operating officer who eventually moved into the CEO role. Phoenix Children’s Hospital also did a national search last year for its current CEO. Valleywise is currently doing a national search to find the successor for its leader who’s retiring this fall.

Jim Hammond is the publisher and CEO of The Hertel Report, a newsletter and website connecting the Arizona healthcare industry. He joins me to talk more about all this. And Jim, what do you make of the fact that Honor Health went with an in-house candidate rather than doing a national search?

JIM HAMMOND: Well, I’m not surprised. That system has been very kind of self-sustaining for a long time. They’ve had good success with their leadership using succession planning and not having to go outside the system. So, I’m not surprised. We also don’t really know if they didn’t do a search, you know, a quiet one or a loud one. I don’t think they did a loud one, but they might have done a quiet search. But I think, you know, John Neil is a real natural successor.

BRODIE: In what way?

HAMMOND: Well, he knows the system, he is excited about what they’re doing. He’s been involved in this growth and their embracing of the value-based system. You know, they’re very active in what we call the ACO world. They have an accountable care organization, they call it Innovation Care Partners, and John has been involved in that since it was an idea, you know, back before it really even got a contract with Medicare. So, he’s a value-based and network-driven guy. He wants to build through relationships, and he’s really good at that. So, I think he’s a natural fit.

BRODIE: Is it desirable or in any way better for a company like HonorHealth to promote from within as opposed to bringing in somebody new to run it?

HAMMOND: Well, I think it’s potentially less disruptive. And when you have a leadership change like this, you don’t want there to be disruption. There were a couple of examples recently in the rural markets where they’ve made searches and then had disruption. They’ve had somebody have to leave, not be a good fit or in one case, somebody got ill. So, kind of having your bench ready and having leaders lined up behind you, I think is a thoughtful way to do it. And a lot of the systems have done that. Not all of them, but a lot of them have.

BRODIE: So, if you are John Neil, what are your top priorities going forward now for HonorHealth?

HAMMOND: Well, they have to keep the momentum on the value-based side. It’s very hard work to go in and and do a better job every year than you did the year before, which is kind of a metric we use in in managed care, in value-based care. That you should keep your cost down every year, you should try not to let anybody grow their cost. Well, that’s impossible.

So it’s a very hard task to to manage costs of patients. So they have to keep their eye on that, but they also, you know, have been keeping their eye on growth through buying existing assets. And not just networking, but actually buying other hospitals, buying radiology centers or urgent care centers. So, they’re really in a multi-phase, multi-armed growth pattern right now.

BRODIE: So, is it safe to say that they’re almost trying to become like a self-contained healthcare unit where they have physician practices, they have a radiology facilities, they have urgent care, they have hospitals? They have pretty much anything that a patient could need?

HAMMOND: Right. Yeah, that’s exactly true. And, you know, they’re emulating Banner. Banner’s been a leader in our market doing that. But it’s more than just having the network and that’s what we call it, you know, it’s a network that’s attached to them. Some of the buildings they own, some of the buildings they don’t, some of the doctors they have contracts with, some of the doctors they actually pay their payroll.

But it very many different models of working with each other, and that’s kind of where the art of the deal is right now in in healthcare is, how do you connect with these other organizations and know how much you need to actually integrate with them? Do you have to own them or can you just have a deal where they’re in your value-based network and you’re trying to meet the same goals and get money back from Medicare at the end of the year? And they’re doing all those things.

And it’s very tough at this time because there’s also kind of a contraction of the money. You know, the money’s going to get tighter. We’ve all heard about the what we call HR 1, the president calls the great Big Beautiful Bill. I call it Bub. It’s a big bill that essentially is going to cut some revenue from hospital systems um, and they’ve got to be prepared for that now, too.

BRODIE: Yeah, so in the universe of challenges that John Neil and other hospital CEOs around the Valley are going to have to be dealing with, how big is that one?

HAMMOND: Oh, it’s huge. It’s it’s fundamental. It it may be, I don’t know, 5-10% of their revenue that’s that’s potentially at risk. That’s a lot, that’s a big number. So they’ve got to figure out how to take care of people that don’t have insurance. And that’s that’s something that’s kind of new and I think it’s going to be a challenge for these big systems.

So I think the next level of this network building is going to be with what we call FQHCS — federally qualified health centers. And these are organizations that get money directly from the federal government, and they’re designed to take people that don’t fit into any of the other systems. So, these folks that are going to get knocked out of Medicaid, they can still go to their FQHC, and their FQHC doesn’t get paid by the Medicaid plan anymore, but they get paid by the federal government. So, I expect a lot of care ... being directed toward them.

BRODIE: Would you expect that to be the kind of thing where an HonorHealth or a Banner would contract with those facilities? Do you think they might just try to buy them up out right?

HAMMOND: Well ... they have different ways of doing that. Yes, the answer is yes. HonorHealth has a relationship with NOAH, which is a network of FQHCs. So they already have I don’t know exactly what the ownership relationship is, but they’re connected with NOAH. Banner, I think, has more direct relationships with certain FQHCs that are in their network, the Banner Health Network.

So they’re connected to these organizations. I think what’s going to be interesting to see is how these systems, how much they reach out to patients that are potentially in this — going to fall through the cracks, for lack of a better term, and get them taken care of by somebody. Somebody should be their primary care physician.

And I think that the health systems because they’re, like I said earlier, they’re all connected, they’re all networked. They all have primary care physicians in their networks, they’ve got to figure out how to take care of these patients even though there’s not money coming with them.

BRODIE: Does the scale of a place like HonorHealth or Banner help them in a situation like this?

HAMMOND: I think so. You know, they should be able to absorb some costs, you know, more than just a regular primary care office or a rural hospital. Yes, I think the big systems are stable enough that they can they can handle it.

But how they do it is going to be interesting. You know, do they really go out and, you know, like call their patients and say, “Hey, look, we think you’re in this group that might be losing their coverage. We want you to do X, we want you to start seeing this doctor.” Or, you know, is there is there a plan? I’m I’m very curious about that.

BRODIE: All right, that is Jim Hammond, publisher and CEO of the Hertel Report. Jim, good as always to talk to you. Thank you.

HAMMOND: Thanks, Mark.

BRODIE: Good morning. It’s The Show on KJZZ 91.5, I’m Mark Brodie. And now for the latest in our SOAPBOX series on road trips. They say you can never go home, but Tempe writer and performer Kim Porter is here to prove that wrong.

KIM PORTER: I was living in San Francisco when my daughter Colette was born. As she grew, I felt an unexpected urge to show her where I was from, which surprised me because pretty much all the memories of my hometown, Wichita Falls, Texas, were negative.

I’d fled Wichita Falls in the '80s, vowing to never return, and with no family living there anymore I had no obligation to visit.

The first time I watched Colette toddle down a San Francisco hill, pick up momentum, tumble forward, and skid downhill, completely skinning her bare legs, I had an epiphany. All my best hard-won childhood lessons, like how to survive goat-head stickers, wasps, and tornadoes, were useless in San Francisco. And lessons I needed were always learnt in retrospect. For instance; San Francisco toddlers should always wear long pants.

We had such different childhoods. When I was a kid, you could ride all the way to Dallas in the back of a pickup and roam the world unsupervised until dusk. Colette was eating sushi with chopsticks and learning to balance in moving streetcars. My wisdom was wasted.

Still, the longing to show her my roots would not go away. But I reasoned, unless we had a time machine, I couldn’t really show her my childhood, so why bother.

One day, in 2007, when Colette was 7, while on a road trip, I convinced my husband to divert our route a few hundred miles to stay overnight in Wichita Falls.

As soon as we got to town, I started pointing out where things used to be: “That was a Dairy Queen, that was an empty field, that’s where the 7/11 was before the tornado, and over there is where they rebuilt it, and where my mom worked after the divorce.”

We drove past the house I’d grown up in, which was so tiny it looked like a scale model, then headed to the park near the lake where I’d spent most of my lonely childhood sitting atop the slide, trying to avoid the chaos of a broken home. The park was still filled with the same equipment we’d played on in the 1960s, albeit repainted a drab brown.

As I watched Colette struggle to climb the same chain ladder to the top of the same slide I’d struggled to climb at the same age, something shifted. I felt understood. I was seeing back in time, seeing myself at age 7, before my family had crumbled, when I was still innocent. I’d found that time machine.

Suddenly I wanted to show her everything great: the swinging bridge, Fun Land, the prairie dog town. I wanted her to taste all our best foods: a beanie burger, a chicken fried steak and those red tacos from Casa Mañana. She marveled at all of it.

We stayed for 24 hours. As we drove past the city limits sign Colette cried from the back seat. “I’m just sad because what if we never see Wichita Falls again. I love Wichita Falls?!”

And suddenly I loved it, too.

BRODIE: That was Kim Porter. You can hear more in our summer SOAPBOX essay series by going to kjzz.org.

BRODIE: Thanks for listening to The Show’s podcast. The Show is produced by Sativa Peterson, Nick Sanchez, Amber Victoria Singer, Athena Ankrah and Ayana Hamilton. The Show was created by Jon Hoban. Our executive producer is Amy Silverman. You can find more of The Show and sign up for our newsletter at theshow.kjzz.org. You can also find us on Instagram @kjzztheshow.