Loading summary
Transcript35 lines
- [00:00]
A
Not a lot of people traveling these days, especially by air. And when you do travel by air, it's not particularly comfortable. That is, unless you were on a private 747 with the President of the United States. That's an experience that my co host just had. We will get into what the senator spoke about with the President. This is Verdict with Ted Cruz. Welcome back to Verdict with Ted Cruz. I'm Michael Knowles. Senator, you know I often express envy and hurt that I'm not invited to your Senate Republican lunches. And I gotta tell you, the ride aboard Air Force One sounds like, well, I don't know, someday, I assume my invitation was lost in the mail. Please. It sounds like you had a crazy day yesterday. Take us through it.
- [00:50]
B
Well, we did as you and I were supposed to film Verdict yesterday together in D.C. and I'm embarrassed to admit that I canceled on you. I stood you up because, well, the President was coming to Texas and so he asked if I wanted to come along as he was heading to Midland and was highlighting energy production and America's energy independence. And that's an issue I care deeply about and I'll pretty much always come along if someone's going to Texas. And so it was an interesting day though. So the way it started, I had to be at the White House about 7am yesterday. And for anyone that comes in contact with the President, they do a COVID test. So that's obligatory. Before you can get on, you go get tested. So I went into the White House, got tested yesterday morning. The folks here in the studio will be glad to know. As of yesterday morning, I confirmed negative, went and got in the van to head to Andrews Air Force Base. And there were couple of Texas members of Congress that were flying with us. And suddenly we're sitting there and we hear, well, Louie Gomer's not coming. What do you mean Louie Gomer's not coming? He was going to join us. He was going to be on the flight. Louie is hysterical, by the way. Like anytime you spend time with Louie, you will be holding your ribs, laughing. So we're all like, well, why isn't Louis coming? Well, he was at the White House and he tested positive. So that's how the morning started with Louis had to turn around and leave and was not allowed on the plane because he just tested positive. So we take the van, we go jump on Air Force One. The president joins us, we take off while we're in the air. So we're headed to Midland, Texas. A whole bunch of Republican candidates for Congress who are running in various seats. They're not incumbents. They're running against Democrats or in open seats. They were all meeting us in Midlands, and the plan was that those Republican candidates, they were gonna invite on the plane and meet the president and do a photo op, and they're all excited. Well, we find out midair that one of those Republican candidates, guy named Wesley Hunt, who's running here in Houston in my home district, great guy. He tested positive for Covid. So he was literally heading to meet Air Force One, and he tests positive for Covid. And as a result, they said, well, okay, all of you candidates, none of you can go in and see the president now because of that. So it was a fairly surreal beginning to the day. And listen, it's an underscoring that this remains a dangerous disease, and we need to continue to take serious steps to limit its spread.
- [03:30]
A
Right. If for no other reason, then you might miss your chance to go on Air Force One. So you got to make sure you behave responsibly and don't catch it.
- [03:39]
B
Well, it's one of the biggest reasons, actually, that you joined the president on a trip, and I've done, at this point, a number of trips on Air Force One with the president, is that you spend a lot of time with him. And so if there are issues going on, it is some of the most concentrated, intense time, and it's a stark difference. So first four years I was in the Senate, Barack Obama was president that entire time. I went on Air Force One once, if you remember, when five Dallas police officers were murdered and there was a funeral for those police officers. Obama came down to speak at it, and he invited me to come along. Actually, I sat next to Nancy Pelosi on Air Force One. It may have been the first time I had met Nancy. We had a very pleasant conversation, mostly about her grandkids, not about anything remotely related to politics. And the interesting thing about Obama is he wouldn't hang out with us. He briefly came back and talked with. There were several folks that were coming down and that had been invited a guest. He came back briefly and kind of said, hi, how you doing? Okay, great. And then went off. Went off to his office, and we didn't see him the rest of the flight. Trump is totally different. Like, Trump hangs out. He wants to like the office on Air Force One. It's exactly like the movie. It's a cool desk with the seal. And it's. So there were the Texas House members and look. Or they're Texas members of the US House who were there who were pretty excited. And so I was taking pictures of all of them. All right, go stand by the President. Gimme your phone, I'll take a picture. So I was the designated photographer, you're the photographer. But it's actually really valuable because you're sitting down with the President for significant time talking. And right now there is a lot to talk about. So we had probably seven hours of he and I discussing in particular the economic challenges in the country and the legislation moving through the Senate right now. And so it was a propitious time to be there with him.
- [05:48]
A
Well, without asking you to violate any confidences or tell any tales at a school, I, I would like to know something about perhaps what you spoke about or what you're thinking about this economic relief bill that seems to be coming down the pike in the midst of all this kind of bad economic news.
- [06:05]
B
Well, let's take it in a couple of pieces and I'll tell you what I think. I'm not gonna share what the President said. And that's usually the line I try to follow is what I said. I'm happy to relay. I'll leave it to others to share what they said.
- [06:19]
A
Right.
- [06:20]
B
But, but let me just give you my views. The Nancy Pelosi $3 trillion bill that they passed a couple of months ago is an absolute monstrosity. It is. $3 trillion, even in government speak is a crap ton of money. Yeah, and, and it's a bill. Look, Pelosi wasn't intending to pass that into law. It's a bill that is just a, a Democratic wish list. And she didn't talk to any Republican, she didn't talk to the Senate. It was a campaign document. They passed it so the Democrats could campaign on it in November. That's all it's about. Then we get to the Senate. Unfortunately, in the Senate this week, the Republican leader, Mitch McConnell rolled out his own plan. And the so called Republican leadership plan is. It's cheaper than the Democrats plans. Instead of 3 trillion, it's only 1 trillion. But it's fundamentally flawed. And so I have been very outspoken against it, very outspoken at our lunches that we do every day in the Republican conference that you and I have talked about before. But I've been very outspoken publicly and I was very clear with the President what I thought yesterday when we were together.
- [07:44]
A
I seem to recall if some people haven't been following your takes on this. You said that as the legislation currently stands, you're not just a no, you're a hell no.
- [07:53]
B
Yep. That is exactly right on a couple of levels. First of all, let's talk the amount, like the 1 trillion, which is a ton of money, is clearly just an opening bid. And nobody's hiding the fact, okay, we'll start at a trillion. But the plan is to get a negotiate up to one and a half or two or two and a half. And we don't have it. There's no magic money tree in Washington. It's not like there's some secret vault hidden in the Capitol nobody knows about. This is all money that we're either printing or borrowing from China. But it doesn't exist. We've already spent over $3 trillion. And so the amount is a problem. But actually my concern, Michael, is much bigger than the amount. And this is at, this was the center of what I was arguing to the President yesterday. The focus of the bill. The objective of the bill is wrong. The objective of the bill is just shoveling cash. It's just spending trillions of dollars shoveling it into the economy, but none of it creates jobs. And so what I've been arguing to the other Republicans, what I've been arguing to the President, our focus on this bill should be one thing in particular. It should be creating jobs. We've got now 51 million Americans who've lost their jobs because of this catastrophe that's hit this country. We've got to get them back to work. That is overwhelmingly the priorities. Get people back to work. And you know, you look at these first bills, the bills that we passed several months ago in the height of the, the crisis, those were overwhelmingly bipartisan. The big one, the CARES Act, 96 to nothing. Every Democrat, every Republican voted yes, I voted yes, Bernie Sanders voted yes. That was not a stimulus bill. It wasn't designed to stimulate the economy. The press calls it a stimulus bill, but that's not what it was. It was a relief bill. It was designed to give emergency loans, short term loans to people at the very height of the crisis. Now our focus has gotta be different. It's got to be getting people back to work. We need a recovery bill. Now what does a recovery bill do? Our entire focus, I think, should be cutting taxes and reducing regulations that are killing jobs, making it easier for small businesses to open. That's the issue. And by the way, the entire election in November turns on it. So the Democrats, what does Nancy Pelosi want? She wants all 51 million people who've lost their jobs to stay unemployed, to stay at home, to not be working, to not have their kids in school because she is gambling on that. 51 million people who are broken, unemployed, and out of a job and pissed off are gonna go in and vote to throw the bums out. And she's most interested in defeating Donald Trump. Well, the case I made to the president and to the other Republicans is we shouldn't be complicit in that objective. If the president wants to win in November, we need people going back to work. We need people earning a paycheck. We need people providing for their families again. And simply spending trillions for Nancy Pelosi's buddies ain't gonna get the job done.
- [11:17]
A
You know, I remember early on when there were those debates over the initial relief bill. You in particular pointed out that this language that the Democrats added in on the question of unemployment insurance was going to disincentivize people going back to work. And it now seems that your prediction turned out to be true. There's a Cato Institute survey of this. It showed that 2/3 of people who went on unemployment for the COVID lockdowns are making more money than they would have made had they remained at their jobs. And one third of people actually made two times or, you know, 2x their salary, which, you know, wonderful for them. I don't think we begrudge anybody money, but that is a recipe to keep people out of work that would seem to have a political objective in an election year.
- [12:06]
B
Well, incentives matter. And the dumbest part of what Congress did already in this crisis was creating massive disincentives to work. And in particular, what Congress did is added $600 a week to the already existing unemployment compensation. So, look, we had an unemployment system. If you lost your job, you could file for unemployment. That's designed to be to help you meet basic necessities, but it's designed to be substantially less than your job was because you want people who've lost their job to have strong incentives to go back to work. The best thing if someone's out of work is help them get back to work. Adding $600 to unemployment. Let me give you some math, and I apologize to everyone. The podcast, there was supposed to be no math. They told me there'd be no math.
- [12:53]
A
I didn't sign up for this.
- [12:55]
B
Let me give you just a little bit. So it used to be the maximum weekly unemployment check in Texas was $521 a week. When Congress added $600 to that, that took it to $1121 a week, more than doubled it. That works out to about $58,000 a year. Or about $28 an hour. Now think about it for a second. If you're, if you're working waiting tables, if you're working in an hourly job, you ain't making 28 bucks an hour. And if suddenly the government pays you more to stay home than to go back to work, well, naturally you're not gonna go back to work. I mean, if you're paid more to do something else, you're gonna follow the incentives. But that's terrible for you and it's terrible for the economy, and it's why Nancy Pelosi wants to keep doing it. And the Republicans are falling in this trap that 68% of people nationally right now, because of what Congress did, are receiving more unemployment than their previous salary. 20% are receiving double their previous salary. If you're getting paid twice as much not to work as to work, what are you gonna do? I mean, that ain't complicated. And it's why Nancy Pelosi is all in on wanting to keep that going right until November 3rd, right until the election. But Republicans shouldn't be complicit in that. And I, I talk to small business owners every single day that they're trying to reopen their businesses and they can't rehire their employees. They're calling their employees, saying, come back. And they're saying, understandably, why would we come back? We're getting paid more not to. That is disastrous for getting the economy moving again and getting people back on their feet.
- [14:54]
A
Right. It's a pretty deceitful tactic, it would seem. I understand the political objectives the Democrats have, but you're not getting what they seem to be proposing. This has this underhanded aspect, I think that ties in pretty well with another underhanded display we saw from Democrats on Capitol Hill this week, which was the Bill Barr testimony.
- [15:16]
B
Yeah. And let me actually stop you there and go back to the prior topic for a second. Okay. Which is, let me tell you right now what is pretty good in the Republican bill.
- [15:27]
A
Okay.
- [15:28]
B
And what could be good in the Republican bill? So there are two elements that are mildly good in the Republican bill. Number one, it includes actually legislation that I've introduced that is for school choice that creates federal tax credits for contributions to scholarship granting organizations for K through 12 education. That's really good and it's really important and it's really substantive and it's transformational. And as you know, I'm passionate about school choice. Now, the problem is the Democrats are passionately opposed because the teachers unions oppose choice. And my concern is The Republican negotiators will give that up at the table that it's in there, but it's not going to stay in there, that it's in there to be a bargaining chip to be given up. The second good element right now is some liability protection. And there's no doubt it's a real problem right now for any small business, for any school, for any university that opens. They're going to be sued, all of them are going to be sued. Trial lawyers are going to descend upon them because if any customer gets sick, if any employee gets sick, immediately they're getting sued. So I very much agree with the objective of providing some reasonable liability protection so that people can open. It's not their fault. It's not like the, the small businesses. It's not like the movie theater created this, this, this coronavirus from Wuhan, China. And it doesn't make sense for billions of dollars of damage judgments to make a bunch of plaintiffs lawyers rich suing everybody. But the problem is those same plaintiffs lawyers are, along with the teachers unions, the biggest donors to the Democrats. So they're going to fight to water that provision down. So those two provisions are right now pretty good. But my concern is they will be gutted. Here's what we ought to be doing instead. We ought to be engaged in pro growth policy. So for example, instead of just shoveling cash out the door, one thing we could do is between now and the end of the year, suspend the payroll tax that results in, for you and for everyone, basically an immediate pay raise in your job. Because the payroll tax you pay out of your pocket, suddenly your take home pay is higher. But that's an incentive for work. Suddenly your employer, a portion of your payroll tax, your employer pays, suddenly the cost of employees, of bringing back an employee has gone down. For your employer. That is a pro growth incentive. That is a pro jobs incentive that is all about helping encourage people to go back to work and work more. That's a very worthwhile thing to do. Another example of a very good thing to do. I've got legislation on health savings accounts. So health savings accounts are accounts where you can save in a tax advantaged way for healthcare needs. The problem is current law prohibits most people from having a health savings account. The only instance in which you're allowed to have a health savings account is if you have a high deductible health insurance plan, which most people don't have. I have legislation that says everyone can have a health savings plan that just lets everyone have one. That is really important Health care reform right now in terms of changing the system, driving down the cost of health care, making healthcare more affordable, and we're in the middle of a pandemic. People are understandably concerned with, with health care costs. This would be really meaningful reform. So I, this is something I urge the President and I said, by the way, for the Republicans that want to shovel cash, look, we've got the checks of $1,200 sent out to everyone. My parents both received $1,200 checks. They don't need a $1,200 check. But, but Congress sent them one. The proposals to do it again. I said, listen, if you are really intent on, on throwing money out of a helicopter, how about taking the $1,200 and populating it in a health savings account for everyone so that everyone can suddenly have a health savings account to meet health care costs. If you must spend the money, actually spend it in a way that does some positive good. Right. Next week I'm going to introduce a bill that I'm calling the Recovery act that is going to be a whole series of pro jobs, pro growth steps that if we're going to take, our focus should be getting people back to work. And right now the current so called Republican bill that is going to lose a lot of Republican votes if and when we vote on it is not focused on jobs. Pelosi wants jobs to go away. And right now, basically the Republican bill took the Nancy Pelosi bill, divided all the numbers by three and proposed the same damn thing. We should have different ideas, ideas that work. And a final political point. So are this. There are some Republicans who are really scared. We gotta do this. We just gotta do it. It's an election. You gotta spend money. Look, in the battle to be Santa Claus, Republicans will always lose. If suddenly we pony up $3 trillion. They'll go to four. Like there's no limit. And frankly, show me the voter out there that's really looking for a bunch of cash that's actually going to vote for the President because of it. If you want someone to bankrupt the country and bankrupt your kids and grandkids in order to get more cash, right now you're going to vote Democrat. Yeah, I think it's from Null Set. We should be the party of jobs and growth and prosperity and higher wages. Look, another proposal. I told the President. All right, fine, you want to spend money, waive the federal income tax for the next six months up to a certain amount. That again puts real money in people's pockets now. And unlike what's being proposed, it doesn't kill jobs. We should be creating jobs, not killing jobs.
- [21:58]
A
Well, I love this point you're making. You know, you're never gonna out Democrat the Democrats. You're never gonna out liberal the liberals. There's a famous conservative book from many decades ago called A Choice, not an Echo. You want to actually have a choice in your politicians when you go to the ballot box. And I gotta tell you, as somebody who has an HSA, who uses an HSA, I love HSAs. I think it's brilliant. It's shocking to me that they have not been more popular, they haven't been more encouraged over time. And I think of that is federal law prohibits it.
- [22:29]
B
The reason they're not more popular is Congress. Unless you have a high deductible health insurance plan, it is illegal for you to have an hsa. The point I'm trying to make to the other Republicans, like, is there anything we want to accomplish that actually would be good and fix the problem? We shouldn't rush out like Chicken Little and say, we must do something to do something. Let's do something that would work and help people get back to work.
- [23:00]
A
That's right. There are a lot of perverse incentives I notice going on on the left side of the aisle on Capitol Hill. And I think nowhere was this clearer than when our former verdict guest, the Attorney General William Barr, was invited to testify on Capitol Hill. He was. Actually. He accepted the invitation on the very day that you and I sat down with him at the Department of Justice. And so he finally goes to sit down for this hearing. And then it turned out that the Democrats in the House of Representatives didn't really want to hear a single word he had to say.
- [23:31]
B
It really was stunning. When you and I were interviewing Bill Barr, you recall we nicknamed him the Honey Badger, which wasn't planned, that was off the cuff. But if anyone didn't believe that nickname, you just had to watch the, you know, the. The Lilliputians trying to tie him down. I mean, it was small and petty Democrats relentlessly attacking him. And I love that Barr is completely not concerned. I don't know that I've ever seen anyone drink coffee in a more dismissive way. There's something about the coffee cup that just said, you are an utter buffoon. And the part that was really ridiculous is you'd have a Democrat go give an histrionic speech, and then they'd declare, I reclaim my time.
- [24:29]
A
I reclaim my time.
- [24:31]
B
Which basically means, shut up. I'm scared of your Answer. I don't want you to answer me, and I'll look really dumb if you do. And they did it over and over again, reclaiming their time. Reclaiming their time. And it ultimately was an expression of fear. And I'll tell you, Michael, I actually had a conversation about House Democrats reclaiming their time a couple of days before Bill Barr testified, and let me tell you why. So next week, I'm chairing a hearing in the Senate on riots, on violence, on antifa, on the organized terrorists who are burning and attacking our city. And first witness we're going to have is Ken Cuccinelli. Ken is the Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security. Ken is the former Attorney General of Virginia. He is a rock rib conservative. Ken is a good friend. And right now, Ken is leading the efforts to secure the border, but he's also fighting for the federal law enforcement officers. And the Democrats are, you know, Nancy Pelosi's calling them Nazi stormtroopers, which is grotesque. So when Ken and I are talking on the phone and I'm telling him, hey, Ken, I really want you to come, come to this hearing we're chairing, he said, listen, one thing that he said, I really don't like when I testify at the House is they'll attack you. And then the Democrats will say, I reclaimed my time. So they attack you and they don't give you a chance to respond. And this is before the bar hearing, by the way. And I laughed and I said, well, Ken, let me tell you this. In any hearing I chair, the Democrats are going to attack you. That's for sure. They're going to come after you hard because they've decided to demagogue every police officer in America. But I can promise you, if I'm chairing the hearing, you're damn well going to get a full chance to respond to each and every attack headed your way. We have that conversation. Ken is coming to the hearing, and then like a day or two later, Bill Barr goes through this, this ridiculous charade where they are terrified of his answers and, quote, reclaim their time. If the words I reclaim my time ever come out of my mouth, other than quoting them, throw something at me, Michael, they simply will. I ain't gonna say that.
- [27:02]
A
Senator, you've been spending too much time with the Democrats. You must come back to yourself. You know, I don't think I had read anywhere that Ken Cuccinelli is going to be testifying, is that this is.
- [27:13]
B
News that is breaking news. Where we were gonna announce that next week, but I just announced it with you.
- [27:19]
A
Terrific. Well, I very much look forward to hearing that because obviously I think this issue of the mobs, the organized violence, antifa, has been at the top of a lot of people's minds. So I look forward to seeing that. I look forward also to not having just echoes of Reclaim My Time take up all the time that we could actually be hearing from someone who has so much to say on this. One last question before we let you go, Senator. This is from Kyra. I think a lot of people are wondering this these days. If they're living in urban centers in America, is there any hope for sane people in New York City or should we flee? What about New York in general? What is the future? Not just maybe of New York, but. But of all the cities. Do we all have to flee down to Texas?
- [28:02]
B
All right, so let me take New York actually. Okay, listen, I'm an optimist by nature. I believe in America. I believe in freedom. I even believe in New York. And I'll point. I often point to history as foreshadowing of the future. I'll confess. I think things are gonna get worse in New York in the short term. I think the malignant politics there, I think radicals like de Blasio, when they're proposing cutting a billion dollars from the NYPD and aoc, saying not enough, basically burn it to the ground. That's not quite what she said, but she said defund it and abolish it, which is the same thing. In the short term. New York is going to head to some dark, dark days. And it's. But New York went through this in the 60s and 70s and we saw rampant crime in New York. New York was facing bankruptcy. I mean, the policies of the far left, they don't work. And every time they're implemented, particularly in the extreme, they are a disaster. So what's the good news is that when people see the disaster, they often open up their eyes and say, hey, this doesn't make any sense. Let's change it. And New York had a renaissance. Why do they have a renaissance? Remember Rudy Giuliani when he was elected and not Rudy. Rudy today is a very different person than Mayor Rudy was when he was first elected. But New Yorkers were sick and tired. They were sick and tired of the crime. They were sick and tired of the violence. They were sick and tired of. Of the shambles the city had gone through. And Rudy got elected on. Remember the broken windows theory, which is when you go into a neighborhood and you see shattered windows, you see graffiti and you see rot that makes all of the rest of violent crime more likely. And so go repair the windows. Go clean up the graffiti. Go stop the squeegee guys who used to just dump crap on your car in the streets. And it actually stops the rest of violent crime, too. So de Blasio and the radicals have forgotten those lessons. I think they will go through a dark period, and many of our cities may go through a dark period. But when the failures of radical left policies become evident, I think people will turn back to them and say, hey, we want a New York City where you can walk in Central park again and be safe. We want a New York City where you can open a business and survive. There are many things about New York that are extraordinary, that are wonderful, that it has been a The Statue of Liberty invites the whole world. We've seen immigrants from across the globe come to New York to make it. But the policies of the socialists can destroy all of that. But we'll come out of it.
- [31:02]
A
That's why I think a lot of the moving trucks are heading down to your state senator. And you know, I'm a New Yorker and I live in Los Angeles. Both my cities have me wanting to fly straight down to where you are. Probably not aboard Air Force One. I haven't gotten that invitation yet, but maybe I'll fly commercial and see you there.
- [31:17]
B
Hey, Southwest One, you can sit in any seat.
- [31:20]
A
That's true. I got some drink tickets, too. We will have to pause it there until next time. Thank you, Senator. I'm Michael Knowles. This is Verdict with Ted Cruz.
- [31:35]
B
Foreign this episode of Verdict with Ted Cruz is being brought to you by Jobs, Freedom and Security pac, a political action committee dedicated to supporting conservative causes, organizations and candidates across the country. In 2022, jobs, freedom and Security PAC plans to donate to conservative candidates running for Congress and help the Republican Party across the nation.
- [32:00]
A
Now, taxes is 100% free when you file in the TurboTax app. If you didn't file with us last year. Oh, yeah, yeah. Just do your own taxes in the app by 218. What if I have lots of forms? All good, all 100% free. What if I had three jobs? Still 100% free. What if I once saw Bigfoot? That has nothing to do with taxes. So still 100% free.
- [32:21]
B
That's what I'm talking about.
- [32:23]
A
Now this is taxes. See if you qualify in the TurboTax app. Excludes TurboTax Live must start and file an app by 218.