Brad (55:45)
Well, I think. I think what people expected, frankly, is, you know, immediately after people started seeing the relationship with Trump, what's the first thing people did? They all started speculating how long until the relationship blows up. And, you know, Trump always fires everybody and just the opposite is happening. And then I think they all expected Elon just to come to Washington and not do anything, like, just to maybe make some recommendations to Congress on things that could be cut. But you and I know Eli, like, there's no chance he's going to Washington to just, like, you know, run some research and make some recommendations. So I think that was misplaced. So let me tell you how I think Doge fits in with the normal budget process, because I also think this is very misunderstood. Right. So, remember, I think the way to think about this in your head is we have two tracks going on here. Track one is the normal budget process, and in this case, they're using a parliamentary tool called reconciliation. Okay. And basically what that means, I'll spare you the details, but this is out of the White House, led by Kevin Hassett in the House, obviously led by the speaker and the House Budget Committee. But basically, reconciliation is a special budget process that allows you to get an omnibus budget bill, pass Congress without having to get to the 60 votes in the Senate. That is filibuster proof. Okay. And they're working hard on this. I expect some meaningful improvements that will come out of this in spending. I suspect that Doge will be offering their ideas how to save some money in this. But this is kind of the normal process that occurs in Washington. And the President, I think, has said he wants something to sign out of the reconciliation process in April or May. Right. And so it has to go through this normal. All the committees are going to have their hearings, they're going to put together the budget that they think complies with reconciliation. There's going to be a grand negotiation. You know, that occurs with 10 people, people around the table, and, you know, all the horse trading that usually occurs in Washington. So that's track one bill. Track two is Doge and cuts in spending by executive authority. And this is the part that I think has Washington up in arms. So that's what you see that's causing the fury. Elon is advising the President, and then the president is deciding in real time whether certain people need to be cut and whether certain spending should be stopped. And when the answer is no, this amount of money and these people are not required to faithfully execute the laws that I've been given, they say they're just going to downsize the executive agency tasked with executing the law, and they're going to stop spending the money that they believe is wasteful and not needed to fulfill the law. So they're saying, especially in the face of a national fiscal crisis where we're falling further and further into a debt spiral, we need to do this. So they. In the town hall, on Monday night or on Sunday night, you know, for example, Elon called usaid. So this is an organization that's quite controversial. You can research it, that spends $50 billion a year on foreign aid. Okay. And has thousands of people in the agency. And he said, well, between, I think among employees, it's probably closer to a thousand or two and then a lot of contractors. And basically what Elon said on Sunday night is, I called the president. I told him, unfortunately, there's no apple to be saved. It's a total ball of worms. If there was just one worm in the apple, we'd pull the worm out. But the whole thing is a ball of worms. So the whole thing needs to be shut down, and we're going to let thousands of people go, and we're going to save $50,000 on the budget or $50 billion on the budget. It subsequently looks like on Monday that, you know, they made a deal where Marco Rubio, right, who's the secretary of State, is going to become the acting director of the agency. And now it looks like they're going to eliminate whatever they think is wasteful, and then they'll consolidate perhaps other parts of that spending into the State Department. But basically, this is what Bill caused Schumer and folks to come out on Monday morning, declare all of this activity unconstitutional. To say that, you know, nobody elected Elon, he can't do this. It's unconstitutional. And this is where I think you're going. The whole challenge is now going to move. But remember, this has nothing to do with track one. Right. Except you're angering a lot of people on the Democratic side. But this is really about track two. Does the president have executive authority not to spend money that they deem as wasteful? So you asked me a question, and maybe we'll touch on it for a second earlier, which is, is it constitutional right? And so I think that's a pretty fascinating constitutional question. I've consulted with a lot of People, I think, are experts in the area. Area. And I do expect that Schumer or a group of members, as early as this week is going to file, you know, a, A claim, a lawsuit in federal court where they say that this is a violation of the constitution under Article 1, Section 9, Clause 7, where Congress has the power of the purse strings. And the Supreme Court, you know, has long upheld this. Um, you know, basically the Supreme Court has said separation of powers generally support the idea that it's Congress who appropriates funds and anybody else who doesn't spend those monies, that would be unconstitutional. So that. That's likely the argument they're going to make, Bill. And they're going to say immediately they got a cease and desist from, you know, Elon shutting off wires or not spending money or shutting down usaid. Now, I happen to think that's on pretty weak footing. Okay, but it is go. I think it's going to happen, but it's on weak footing. Why? So just think about this for a second, right? The president has the authority to execute the laws, and there's this doctrine that's known as impoundment, which the courts largely recognize. And it's basically the President saying, okay, I see the law that we're supposed to uphold, and I don't need all this money. And in fact, I have a further and maybe supreme duty, an overriding duty to the Constitution that supersedes the constitutional control of the purse to execute faithfully the laws to protect the general welfare of the American people, which he might argue includes protecting the country from bankruptcy. Right. So he's just saying, listen, I'm doing my duty. Yes, I'm executing all the laws they told me to execute. However, I'm doing it for less money. And given that we're in a national debt crisis, I need to do that in order to protect the American people. So I think that this is going to eventually come to head. Imagine it goes to the Supreme Court to decide. And I think there's a decent chance along the way that at a minimum, think about what, what Chuck Schumer's gonna have to defend. He's gonna have to defend some of this really crazy spending that we all know exists. I mean, I don't think there's anybody in either side of this argument who doesn't think there's a bunch of inefficient and silly spending by the government. So effectively, that's the. That's the what you're going to have to defend if you want to defend this lawsuit. So I think the political pressure is going to be massive. That's brought to bear, particularly because Doge is being so transparent on this. Right. Like, you do not want to be defending every single line item to the American people, which is exactly what Doge is going to put you on the spot to do. And so I think two potential outcomes. Number one, the political pressure causes, you know, them to cut a lot more as part of track one. Right. This reconciliation process. Or number two, that the Supreme Court actually does, in fact, cut, recognize some more expansive, you know, executive power around empowerment. But, you know, I think either way, you know, I imagine before this is all said and done, Bill, that we're going to see headlines that say, elon causing a constitutional crisis. Right. That, you know, we have the, we have the courts involved and you have the solicitor General that's, that would be defending the executive branch in the White House on, on this matter.
