Jean Bruggeman and Beatrice Waldrop
DescriptionFriends and former colleagues Jean Bruggeman (50) and Beatrice "Lindsay" Waldrop (43) talk about the work they shared as employees of Office for Victims of Crime, such as starting survivor forums where survivors could share feedback about responses to human trafficking. The two discuss some of the flaws of anti-trafficking work and where they hope to see it go as it continues.
Subject Log / Time Code
- Jean Bruggeman
- Beatrice Waldrop
Recording LocationVirtual Recording
Partnership TypeFee for Service
StoryCorps uses Google Cloud Speech-to-Text and Natural Language API to provide machine-generated transcripts. Transcripts have not been checked for accuracy and may contain errors. Learn more about our FAQs through our Help Center or do not hesitate to get in touch with us if you have any questions.
00:02 I'm Jean Bruggeman. I am 50 years old and one day today. It is Monday. May 10th 2021. I'm recording from Arlington, Virginia my home. And I'm recording with Lindsay Waltrip, who is my friend and colleague.
00:19 Thank you, Jean. My name is Lindsey. Waldrop. Sometimes known as Beatrice and I am 43 years. Old. Today is Monday, May 10th, 2021. I am calling today from my home in Annapolis, Maryland. And speaking with my friend and colleague, Jean Bruggeman, hygiene and I happy, happy birthday. I know you had a special one yesterday. Thank you.
00:49 I'm so let's just start chatting about when we first met. Do you remember when and where that was? Yes, we were two lost souls. We can't just started working at the Department of Justice as a human trafficking fellows, and we were trying to neither one of us. I think had worked ever for a government agency. So we're trying to find our way through their Hoops to get the badges. So we could get into the building that we were supposed to be in. And in order to do so, we had to go to a completely different building across town. And I remember that I had overdressed for the occasion because it was my first day and I wanted to make a good impression. So I was all dolled up and hiking around downtown DC, very right. I think it was cold and rainy and we were walking the halls of Justice together. And fellowship was it was such a weird position.
01:49 And we were only see the office for victims of crime at Department of Justice. We were there first human trafficking fellows. And so we were just, we were not federal government employees. But yet they brought us into the office to give them guidance and subject matter expertise. So together. I think we were sort of walking a gray area are trying to really find Our Place. How do we talk to the field and tell them? We're not said, how do we talk to the federal agents? Are you going to federal Offices and kind of make sure they're really hearing our voice? But it wasn't hard for you. You're, you're quite vocal with your book as well indeed. And that was the one thing that almost I think I kept me from getting the job. I remember the interview with joy Frost, who was the obici director at the time and she brought me in for the interview and said, you know, she has been an advocate all these years and you're known for being very direct, but can you can you find her?
02:49 Bremen police I said, well, I think so if I have to I'd rather not but if I really have to I will and so that I think that was I think that's why they brought me down. I think I'm the Laurel to your hearty. I think they said we need a straight man here. You know, we need somebody with a government just so yeah, there's just one Fellowship. I like that's the story that our team lead had told later and said, you know, there was just one position that they were advertising and I could have came in and they said there were these two, we got these two great application, one person's got strong legal and pick up service background, the others going to strong training, and technical assistance background and somehow, you know, Joy brought in her wisdom. Found ways to bring us both on or two Awards out of one. So it was a really good lesson from the get-go that that we can make change in government, right? And that things can happen, when you got a strong leader, who is is really work.
03:49 For you before we met? What was your intro into trafficking?
03:56 So I came out of law school, wanting to save the world and had done had been in a domestic violence clinic in law school. And so that was sort of some experience and then got hired on at a drug Service Agency in in DC to represent an immigrant survivors of domestic violence in their immigration cases. And then a year-and-a-half later. The trafficking victims protection act. So like a key legislation for the US past and part of that was immigration protections for immigrant survivors of human trafficking and it was very similar to the protections for domestic violence survivors. So, the agency that was working with a huge trafficking case of
04:50 Vietnamese workers, who had been enslaved in a in a sweatshop on the island of American Samoa. We're all meeting immigration help. And that's when they first released the application form in the process and end, so that agency hired me to help them figure it out. What is this new TVs of thing? How do we get it? What's the process? And then what happens next? So, so that's how I got started in it. How did you even do that? I mean the case with orders so Foundation also if you know, how would you even figure it out? Where did you start or yeah. Now you're an expert. What? What lessons did you learn?
05:41 Yeah, it was, I mean, the good thing is it built so much on the work for immigrant domestic, violence survivors, and that, you know, that that took Decades of work to have to pass Bella, and including Bella immigration protections for immigrants. And so, it was very similar. So, I've been doing that work for year-and-a-half and it's kind of very specialized and it'll frankly, there aren't you know, sort of there aren't that many people doing that work around The Conjuring. So I got to know so many of them through that work. So so when I got hired on to, to do the TV, the case, and you're right, it was oddly like protections for folks from American Samoa is specifically included in the legislation because of this case it was like a big thing is happening at the time that they passed legislation. So so the good thing was I couldn't really screw it up.
06:41 I told him that like helps my confidence because it was like the Department of Justice very invested in making sure that it didn't get screwed up. So so anyway, so I just use those networks that I had developed and like them people around the country cuz the survivors had been brought from American Samoa to Hawaii first to get services to get out of that Sweatshop. And then and then like find sponsors and supporters just all across the United States to help them out until they were scattered all over the country and it was over two hundred people. So I kind of
07:23 Made up a packet of like a how-to and found people around the country who were willing to figure it out and was a little bit of a traveling Road Show. Yeah, it was, it was quite interesting. And so, I mean, I think, what I learned from that is that, that there's this there is this really dedicated network of of folks out there and, and when new new things become available, like, you know, where we are able to adapt, and if you just keep building on that Network and and that human trafficking, I mean, that's one of the things I think we talked about it. It's like, it's so different. It's different than domestic violence is different than sexual assault is so different but really it's not that different. It's really on the spectrum of abuse and exploitation along with all of these other crimes. And so, and in the same way, like the immigration remedies are similar to the other ones. And so, so there's a lot of work out there that people have been doing for decades that we can build on it.
08:23 We just collaborate better, but you came into this really differently Lindsay. I did. I did some crazy times my friend so it won't get into the crazy trying to Jean but it was early 2000s that I was in graduate school and really seeking ways to be part of the conversation professionally or at least it doesn't make that difference, you know, quietly from a desktop and this is what I appreciate you doing. And I found it. There was a small, human trafficking specific organization and its, you know, very, very new burst in DC and I started volunteering there and that was really when I professionally started work on human trafficking and I haven't stopped since. So after that I started working with law enforcement and creating tools trainings for
09:23 Law enforcement Chiefs going and giving them trainings at the time. It was is very basic 101. This is this is what human trafficking is and feels like we're still having that conversation and I are figuring things out and, and really making stuff up as you went along, right? Absolutely. That's something I can look back and say, it's been so amazing to see the organization's and, and approaches and thanking. There have been a few steps forward. A few steps back and some lessons learned. And again, that's what I think keeps me going to his kind of writing that way, then sort of saying that they were continually learning and we're continually trying to find new ways to do things. So at first, if we share those wild story is, you know, they would seem very unconventional, these days. It would seem not appropriate these days and maybe they were
10:23 Then either, however, I think, you know, trafficking because it was coming as, as we're very unique. It was not taking a lot of lessons learned in the beginning from other fields. I think there were some hard Lessons Learned just a sort of how we're gaining information about a population. How are providing services? And I think the fields has has come and tremendous way since then, I mean back when, you know, when I started to work, like there was this
10:53 We never had interpreters, professional interpreters. You didn't pay an interpreter. You had somebody's friend or family member or whoever random person showed up. I mean it was
11:04 In retrospect. And then afterwards, I went on to do like language access were absolutely inappropriate, was that we were figuring things out and
11:22 Yep, we learned a lot weave, weave weave, definitely. There's a lot that we would do differently. I think if we could go back in time, but but putting that to good use going forward. I think it's probably probably what's important, right? Yeah, and I think, you know, like thinking about my training afterwards. So, you know, so I started supporting the office for victims of crime and in all of their training materials, I worked really supporting them with a lot of ways before we were spelled I was I was a contractor for them. So I seen The Good the Bad and the Ugly in terms of Powerpoints and grantee materials and training approaches. And, you know, I seem sort of nationally the way folks are coming at at these materials are at their approaches for years. And you know, any again as we said it's it's sort of learning a few new things. But continuing to the to find different points of sophistication. I was, I think when we were talking a little while ago, we were talking about the 2010 doj conference and, you know, it's, it's sort of a thorn in my side cuz I would love to have another Federal conference. It's been a long time since we've had one of those, but I think about that conference.
12:22 The missed opportunity, because in 2010 survivors were just not invited to the conference as participants as equal partners of collaborators. At the time. It was just not something we would think about. I think we were thinking the survivors in 2010 from a special perspective, at least as victim Witnesses, or please come join the conference so you can give it an impact statement and tell us. Tell us about your experience and then leave from San Jose to learn anything weekend, story and then like, that's all we need from you and then we'll talk about it and, you know, all the good things we've done for you. I just I don't feel like that would happen. I do not feel in this day. We would have any sort of federal conversation without Survivor engagement from the beginning. I think an agenda planning and who are choosing a speaker's excetera. So, I mean, if we just look at how things have changed in some ways, there's just so much positive.
13:21 A big part of frankly, our fellowship, right? Like so we were at doj from 2012 to 2015, right? And and it was during that time, I think.
13:34 One of the things we spent, most of our time was time on was like, working with survivors in doing that, new Outreach series with interviews and videos, and training materials. And then and then the Survivor Forum. I think that was probably frankly, my favorite thing that we got to work on together and that was again, you know, our director at the time. So, I frost, I think you proposed that to her, that we should have a Survivor forum and bring together a really diverse group of survivors, to really talk to federal agencies about what federal agency should be doing. So not about survivors and what is trafficking like we knew that but what was missing in the response, what what does the federal government get wrong again and again and again and to hear that directly from survivors like this is how it impacts me this.
14:34 How you're making things worse or failing to make things better directly? And that was a conversation. They've never really had before. Absolutely, and it was scary for them. It was really scary to say, horrible at this level. We work with the organization's, we don't work, directly with the victims. Are, we don't work directly with survivors, but yet I think you and I were in a place where we had the luxury of time on our position was to sort of be between the government and the field. And so, we had the ability to make sure we were doing it with spot. We were not trying to be a exploitive. We were trying to educate our, you know, our federal colleagues on sort of hey, this is their time. Let's sit and listen, let's not ask a lot of questions and let them just share, will kind of give us some guidance and it had White House backing. And, you know, it meant a lot to people. I mean, the Survivor movement. And I think advocacy was was going to take itself where it needed to go. So it's not that we did.
15:34 Anything other than being in the right place at the right time to kind of help support those conversations and sort of help bring that that meeting together over time. So this is, you know, 10 years into kind of the federal government response and it has really changed because you do it as we sat at the time when I got into the work in the early 2000s, it was this labor trafficking case and American Samoa of Vietnamese workers who were exploited using legal Liza's. So there was a lot of focus on labor trafficking and exploitation of immigrants. And then over 10 years, the focus started shifting really to US citizens and sex trafficking. And this concept of human trafficking really being sex trafficking of US, citizen women and girls and it being a women and girls issue.
16:33 And although,
16:35 About the exploitation of women and girls, is is a key part of this work.
16:42 We, I think we were really focus on making sure it was a ballast conversation and we spent a lot of time really working to make that Orem representative of the full diversity of trafficking survivors. So it was, you know, both men and women who have been trafficked in various different sectors, in labor, sectors, and in sex work as a different ages and who spoke different languages, and we're different colors. And I think that was that was something, especially even the survivors. I remember one of the things I remember most most sharply from that experience with survivors themselves talking about that. They had never been brought together with a group. So diverse. To learn from each other and hear from each other, how their experiences in different labor, sectors. Where is coming from different parts of the world or
17:42 You two were similar or different and to be able to have those conversations together. I think that's why I think it a lot of that comes from because we had the office records of crime and I think being housed there, that's where our mission was. And I think that's why leadership is so was so fine to keep the pendulum in the middle when it has always longed for is sex trafficking or, you know, one way or the other. I think the professor victims of crime has done a good way of saying but what about everyone? Cuz that's the mission of our office. I think and try not to re-explain people or be a problem in in Solutions are trying to find her and trying to assist. I think you. And I also worked on the faces four phases of human trafficking video series where again, talking about that intentionality, where we really were intentional about who we are. Representing the stories were representing and not even stories, but that the message we were looking to move Beyond stories and and move to
18:42 What is your message? What services were helpful? What, what are you doing? Now? Things are really proud about what your life experience like really, but I think in that we also took a lot of intentionality to say, what's your vacuum atation? Can we put in place because you know, the federal government will now have this video. If you you know, it might be used in other ways. You might not feel comfortable with or it might your picture might be used in other ways. And we, I think it a lot of educating of ovc leadership to say, you know, what are opportunities we can get survivors. If it's the everyone, or we use this material. Can we go back to them and ask or can we make sure this is a one-time. I know you have that right? As a federal in her eyes as having their video, but what can we do to deserve respect that moving forward? And I I think I'm I mean that was really great work. We did there that I think I know it's still has an impact in the office today. I know. I recently, they asked, could we do know somebody in the nation called and asked? Could we reuse these these video images because they are public material for a big billboard campaign on the side.
19:42 The highway and I know a few of these survivors that had been in the video are no longer part of an advocacy. They've moved on to other fields. And so just to respect that. We really needed to go back and just really make sure that that was something they'd be comfortable was like, getting the release and and not just men at once. Like we kept going back and the conversations review, the transcripts now, review the video. Is there anything you want to change and really being aware of the fact that people's content might change over time? That consent is a a momentary thing and for survivors who are in the process and that process can take years of a moving through that healing process. If their opinion about that and what they want to share and what they feel comfortable with and what they want for.
20:42 To the outside world changes so much overtime and that that it was critical that we really take that seriously and carefully it slowed down the project it took longer than they wanted it to go. And we got a little pushback about that. But yeah, I think that's right. You remind me, we even asked about the images on the DVD disc. You know, how are you? You may be okay being in the video, but are you okay being on the video on the DVD or on a poster on those are those are different ways of using your amateur, you know, so non-fans at the time as grantees and just US citizens within the government really had the opportunity to cuz we worked on the federal spooky action plan for victims services in the US instead of under the Obama Administration. I marked as it was really just putting pen to paper on this Federal strategic action plan. So you and I had the opportunity. We were pulling together interagency even bit, you know bigwigs we were at the
21:42 Again that the ITF and other pulling together folks to sort of get their commitments, to be honest on the Strategic action plan. And then we were having to sit there and write it rather quickly. Yeah, that was a fascinating and I mean pros and cons, right? Like you, you you grow up in this country. You have your experience to movies and TV shows and whatever and you get this opinion about federal workers, but but really being in there and interacting first, just with our colleagues in, at the Department of Justice, but then with folks from across the government and seeing how that works and how sometimes it didn't work and that four months of leadership or whatever. But but really getting getting agencies across the government to commit to what they can do and and what was. So I think interesting about it and strategic was that it was a five-year plan which by definition is going to potentially cross.
22:42 Silver Administration, right? And it's so that was a whole like that's a real commitment to be able to commit within, you know, the time of won presidency to doing things is something people I think are it is easier to do. But but what that Administration required everyone to do was to say this goes beyond one president or one Administration like this needs to be an ongoing governmental effort and it needs to be collaborative. Like it's not, this is not a criminal legal issue that the Department of Justice has to solve for the Department of Homeland, Security has to solve. Like everybody has to take a piece of this. And I think that really started with that strategic action plan on getting close to and then people wrote different things and we were all like, Hey guys, you're all doing the same thing thing. How can we collaborate in making this? I think that's where we failed. Trying to force federal government agencies to
23:42 Elaborate from different agencies was like, that's just what I think. I think the lesson plan comes with forward funding or comes with something of that nature. It was really hard for them to to make those commitments. And so we get things like a PowerPoint will do a training and it was his meaningful, a five-year look as we would have liked and I think some of that comes with money or or the the knowledge that they'll be able to commit those actions. They didn't want to let people down. So I mean, right and here I am still, I'm still in the monkey got here and so I've been since the creation we now have it at standing human trafficking division. So that is all I do is human trafficking Grant work. I seen the coming and going of our beautiful database systems Tim's. I have seen the evolution of our passwords this weekend.
24:43 Again have another whole conversation on those and just put up the changes and services and what's needed and and where the gaps kind of stay, but where have you been Gina? Hardly hear from you? I well, I ran away as I am want to do. I really enjoyed being in the federal government because I felt like
25:05 Things took a long time, but you could have a really big impact. And so, you know, I did enjoy that. But I needed something a little more immediate and I needed to be able to be a little more critical. And so I left and I'm now leading a coalition of service providers and doing a lot of government advocacy, which for the past, you know, under the previous administration, which was the Trump Administration was, was really hard. I mean, it really, everything took.
25:38 Twenty thousand steps backwards with the, the way trafficking was used to justify really racist, policies, really, abusive policies, against immigrants to cut back, on civil rights and and services by trying to claim that, you know, that, you know, we needed a wall to keep people out to protect people from trafficking when we know that. In fact, you know, people are trafficked on legal visas and US citizens are being trapped. So it was just it was a very frustrating time and I'm glad I was on the outside to be able to to say that stuff out loud and say, you know, you're lying and you're making scapegoats of trafficking victims and that's exploitive and it's wrong and you're lying. And I know a lot of our colleagues inside the federal government, you know, we're saying things in.
26:38 Currently that they couldn't say external. And so I think that again that was something I took away from being in that position, sort of as a quasi-governmental person is that is that there's a lot of amazing dedicated hard-working Advocates inside the federal government and they really need at the lake. It's a really symbiotic relationship like outside the government. We can we can complain about things and say things and and be really critical in a way that then the folks inside can take that up to their leadership and say I see this, you know, this is what they're demanding outside, we need to respond to it. So it must have been an interesting thing inside the government, during all of that.
27:20 I mean, I can only speak out and read your iPad where I said, oh, wow. Jean is really speak in its, and then I, I see you're turning down White House invitations and everything. What I mean that's got to feel that's a story to tell your grandkids right turning down, a White House and invite. Did you feel like you were losing your voice at the table in some ways? Or do you feel like the statement by not going with? I mean, I sort of felt like they weren't you know, it it was so extreme. It was in a way it was sort of easy because that is ministration was so extreme. They weren't listening to any reason any, right? So there was no point in my life from my perspective. There was no point to be at the table because what we, you know, what we're working for is
28:08 Protecting immigrants in order to reduce trafficking and you know, expanding civil rights in human rights as a way of eliminating human trafficking and out. So when I got the invitation, it was funny cuz it first. So I sort of thought it would be like most of the invitations I got, which are to sort of low-level meetings with all the, you know, the government grants, which sort of goes nowhere. But whatever you do, what you can. And but then I realized I started getting calls from from the Press. Are you going to this meeting and other Advocates? Are you going to that meeting? You know, we got invited. Are you turning at that? And then I was like, oh, is it, is it not just like with the same Nina working-level talks that we usually meet with? And then I realize know, it was actually going to be
29:06 The president in.
29:08 His daughter and you know, whatever at high-level officials and that it was going to be a dog and pony show and then it was going to be exploitive. And so yes so that it was easy to just say no. I'm not going and I will speak about it in the press and you know, some people were really worried because my organization had government Sunday at the time and it was a real it was real concern that that Administration was going to retaliate by.
29:41 You know, by by withdrawing funding and
29:46 Yeah, so I think some organizations were very hesitant and concerned about speaking out and certainly some of our members who rely on federal funding for Direct Services. Like and so this would impact survivors, right? If they lose their access to funding because the government doesn't he know this
30:05 Horrible person cannot handle, you know, the truth about the harm that was being caused by their policies. Then the survivors themselves would be the ones to suffer and and that's a really tough position to be and luckily, our organization doesn't serve survivors directly. So it was a lot easier for us to say, like, if that's the repercussions and that's the repercussion. But, but we have to, we have to speak the truth. Then we have to, we have to represent folks out there with the, the voice that we have. And so, yeah, it was.
30:41 Who it was, it was painful. It was a wild ride. So I'm glad we're on the other side of that.
30:48 What have you, what were your advocacy points like that during the previous four years older than how they change? Now. What are you guys doing? Like, where do you think I seen? We need to go now that we're shifting now that we've left our, I think we're all really. Hoping. You know, what, the past couple of years of really, seeing what happens when you don't commit until riots and then the really amazing work that's being done in racial Equity spaces, and with people of color, really demanding change and that we build back better and seeing how the pandemic has impacted people of color and essential workers. And those were most vulnerable to all forms of abuse and exploitation including, you know, trafficking until I think that's where our commitment to go to real prevention, which is not poster campaigns and, you know, talking to teenagers about Dating Violence, which is critically important work, but but what real prevention is.
31:48 Involves systemic change, changing a racist immigration system. Changing access to education, which is based on historical and systemic racism changing access to affordable housing, which is based in systemic racism because it's it's these systems that have explored excluded, you know, primarily people of color and immigrants, lgbtq folks, folks, who have been pushed out of society and, and leave them in in places where they are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation in. And yeah, so we have to change the system. So that's that's the only way forward. So I think I'm hopeful about the yeah about that. Moving forward. I'm in the field. Just feels so right for that conversation. You hear it? I see it. So many service providers and so many advocates in their trainings and our conversations. This is what the folks working with with victims client. Survivors are talking about this ism.
32:48 And then at the same time, like I'm now seeing a really strong interest in The Binding ministration written in the new Department of Justice right now to talk about to have serious conversations about, equality and Equity access to Justice access to Services. I mean, in a way, I've never heard before, at least in my time here is, is a real. Let's, let's have these conversations. Let's Get Down Deeper. Let's educate ourselves with others and with that, the black lives matter movement. It's been all. So, how are we working with our police sand, and in these conversations, and law enforcement. Let's look at our data and resources and, you know, if I, if I look back and say no, could we have done something different sometimes I I look at we partner with them. The Task Force is with the Bureau of Justice assistance of DJ and I sometimes wonder if we had done a different approach like Community oriented policing and had a different approach if we started looking at in issues of Public Health, or I can just less arrest there would have been, you know, an inner date about who's getting arrested.
33:48 On this end and just approached people at it in a very different manner earlier on. I wonder where we'd be today. I just was trafficking and our our our law enforcement work, you know. Could that have moved the ball differently. I don't know. But an approach different than a rest would have been helpful. I think yeah.
34:11 I don't know if you know, I agree. I often think about this as well. And and I just don't know. I mean, I think there's a real Evolution and then there are times, there are moments, when sort of society, as a whole, is ready for some really revolutionary change. And I think I'm hopeful that this is one of those times and that, you know, I do think that what the attacks under the previous administration did was put together to pull together, folks working on different elements of civil rights and human rights. Work. We hadn't collaborated before I like Reproductive Rights folks and black lives matter and immigrant rights, like really collaborating and in much deeper ways, and I think I think that's the way forward is that we have to really and truly believe and accept an an act as though it is true that that we all have to move forward together. Like
35:11 These things are all entwined and we can't just make piecemeal progress. We really have to move everyone together and really change the systemic problems, you know, to really address any one of them we have to address all of them. So I'm hopeful but it's a lot of work along. We had to make that we have to be a human trafficking, only nonprofit, We have to have a human trafficking only shelter. And I don't know how many Grant applications I seen where they've been working with victims for 70 years as an organization, but they don't mention that they just mentioned there. Three years of trafficking and hotline data. They don't bring in all of their other knowledge about victims, trauma, poly victimization experiences that clients has where, you know, their housing knowledge. And it's, it's just that if I wish we can start sort of learning more. From other systems are saying, we actually do have data and we have data, we can take from best practices.
36:11 From stamps, if I'm Trauma from housing, there's so many areas where we know what we're doing, after 20 years. And I think, I think for me, that's the way to go forward. It's just a saying, this is what we know, and, and is used to get to the hard conversations, but there are some things we know after 20 years. I I wish I could never hear somebody say, but we don't have good information and trafficking. I don't want to hear any more. Right? Right, right. This hang up on prevalence data and like all but we, we can't tell you exactly how many I tell you exactly. How many anything like stop talking about that? Like, I don't understand why that's the frustrating conversation, but we know is that poverty causes abuse and exploitation like
36:56 Point Blank, like that's it. So so what are the drivers of poverty? Like, it's housing discrimination, its employment discrimination. It's discrimination against immigrants. It's our immigration system based on racism. It's, those are the things we have to change. It's not about billboard campaigns, and that's really like, that's what I really want to see happen in this next 10 years is to stop talking about stupid, billboard campaigns and putting up posters in airports, because that's stomach.
37:34 Anyhow, but really, really getting at the deeper level, systemic change. You know, I think survivors have been telling you. No, like, I had to do this because it was my only option. Like, that's what we hear time. And time again from survivors, whether they're from Detroit or, you know, New Delhi. Like it's because this was my only way to help my family. This was what I had to do, to put food on the table, to take care of my kids, to find a safer place to live, and it just shouldn't be that. Damn, hard to find a safe place to live and a way to feed your family.
38:21 It's the hard conversations though. It's like, as I think you and I have often heard people sort of roll their eyes. When we talk about supply chain, right? And they don't have the supply chain conversation, cuz it's inconvenience. And I think talking about really hard thing and getting to those roofs are it's going to be hard. I'm in. It's going to make people uncomfortable, and it's going to be inconvenience, but I think a man is, obviously, what needs to be done to make some serious changes. I think we are wrapping up on our time jeans. So I look forward to keeping on with working with you in the future seeing where we go with us or at least with our own careers.
38:57 I think we got some work ahead of us. I think he's lucky. We got some trouble to get into, it's not good trouble, right? That, that keeps us going and knowing that.
39:11 One step at a time. We just got to keep moving the ball forward and like you said, good connections. We've got I know you have a ton of good connections over the years and people who are really dedicated to working on this, and we make sure we have our last then, and we keep at it. So, we have to stay positive and enjoy each other, which I always has enjoyed calling you friend and working with you. That's true. We do have the best colleagues. We have the best jokes in the world working on this. So it makes makes makes all the frustration fun to Bear when we get to
39:46 When I get to talk about it later and hang out with good people that we know are doing good things.
39:57 Well, thanks.