Has Donald Trump permanently transformed the Republican Party?
On this episode of It's a Numbers Game, Ryan Girdusky sits down with Senator Jim Banks of Indiana to discuss the rise of working-class conservatism, the future of election integrity legislation, the battle over redistricting, America's economic challenges, and the ongoing effort to reduce dependence on China.
Senator Banks shares personal stories about his union-worker father, explains why Trump's message resonated with working-class voters long before the political establishment understood it, and discusses how the GOP is evolving into a party focused on everyday Americans rather than political elites.
The conversation also covers the SAVE Act, Senate filibuster reform, redistricting battles across the country, inflation, government spending, the national debt, manufacturing jobs, and efforts to bring critical supply chains back to the United States.
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Welcome back to a Numbers Game with Ryan Grodowski. Thank
you guys for being here. We've sentatored Jim Banks from
the great state of Indiana on the podcast. Today. We're
going to talk about the primary fight in Indiana State
Senate that he was a part of. We're going to
talk about the Save America Act, which I know a
lot of my listeners care a lot about, and the
issue of decoupling from China with our industry. I know
that I care a lot about that, so it's going
(00:22):
to be great. Can't wait for the interview and something
I've wanted to talk about for quite a while with him.
I also wanted to mention something on Monday's episode about
a recent election that's very important, and I couldn't. I
didn't have time because also the election had been late
on Monday, and I had to cover Grand Platner because
you know, I want to tell my audience this. I've
(00:43):
had this guy, Graham Plattner or nailed from the second
I saw him. I was one of the first people
saying this is a bad guy. This is a guy
with a lot of issues who should not be an
elected office. And now was reported and he admitted to
it that he was sexting between six to twelve women,
cheating on his wife. She had admitted to it. And
the crazy thing is they've only been married for like
(01:04):
eighteen months, so he's sexted six to twelve women in
eighteen months. That is wild when you think about it.
And cheating is never okay. Not condoning cheating, however, that
is different than having an affair after you've been married
for a couple of years. Like there's a difference between
those things. Not saying one's good, not saying one's bad,
(01:26):
but the feverishness of needing constant, you know, praise and
attention and affection from multiple people in such a short
period of time while you just are recently newly weds,
while your wife is going through IBF treatment, while your
wife had a miscarriage. She's doing all these things to
build a family, and you're doing this at a feverish pace.
(01:47):
This is Anthony Wiener vibes. This is I mean, this
is sociopathic behavior to a certain degree, Like there is
there is something to him. This is not a man
who's changed his stripes over time or from you know,
the quote unquote PTSD hardened combat marine, like the SOB
story that the Left is betraying him as this is
(02:09):
a person who has very little self control and very
little discipline. And what's interesting about the old sexting story
that has not made as much news is the fact
that he was using the app kick kikse i spell
it kick to cheat on his wife to meet these women.
And if you've never heard of the website Kick or
(02:30):
the app Kick rather, and you're over the age of forty,
I want to congratulate you because you're probably never going
to go on to get your predator. Kick is a
very popular or it used to be very popular, but
it's a popular encrypted message app that is considered one
of the top apps for child predators to lure children
into sexual relationships. In Britain, it was involved in over
(02:54):
eleven hundred child's abuse cases. A convicted child molester told
CBS's News Is forty eight Hours that Kick is a
quote predator's paradise and according to The New York Times,
law enforcement officials have said that they have run to
Kick in many cases of blackmail in which sexual predators
coax young people to send nude photos of themselves. And
(03:17):
that's the app that Grant Platner was using. He wasn't
like using Okay Cupid, he wasn't using Tinder. That's weird.
I'm not saying I'm not saying anything, hmm, but I'm
saying something. How old were these women? Does anyone know?
I'm sure the papers do, because according to Platner right,
(03:38):
Platner's team, right after the story broke blamed it on
a former staffer. The former staffer came forward and said that,
basically saying the staffer elitd is what they said. The
staffer came forward and said, no, I didn't leak it.
The paper came with me with these women with this story,
and I just confirmed it. That probably means that they're
(03:58):
talking like they're going to come out to talk to
the papers. It's my guess, just a guess, is just
an assumption, assumption. If what this former staff is saying
is true, that these women are already coming forward to
the papers and saying this man was cheating on his
wife with me or reaching out asking for nude photographs
or send me new photographs, that's that's a big that's
(04:18):
a big deal. That's probably a big question in mind
of what's going to come in the future, like it's weird.
We've seen this movie before. We've watched Anthony Leener, like
we've we like, we've seen this movie before. We know
kind of how it ends, and yet we're still playing
along like we were like this is gonna who knows
what's gonna happen. We kind of know what's gonna happen.
(04:39):
And I want to bring one other thing that's really
pissed me off. The left has said, oh, but you
have Keim Paxson and Donald Trump and Kim Paxson Donald
Trump and Kim Paxson's corrupt and he cheated on his
wife and he had it. Okay, great, fine, we all
said Mark Robinson and the entire gop unendorsed Mark Robinson
and refused to fund his campaign. So, and Mark Robinson
(05:00):
a weird guy. He did weird thing. It's like one
hundred percent of weird things. I talked to him on
a podcast. He was a very hmm. He was not
the friendliest person in the world. I just say like that.
So we've we've held people to a certain standard, not always,
but we have Grand Planner should be held to a
standard by the left at all, by any which way
(05:20):
and I wonder what happens with Senator Angus King, who
has been completely and totally silent on this issue, on
a grand planner, not saying a word. He's an independent
who caucuses with the Democrats. I think he has a
good working relation with Susan Collins. If his son is
running for the Democratic primary for governor, if he loses,
he should endorse Susan Collins and make a statement about this.
(05:43):
This is reprehensible behavior and this is a man who's
got who should not be in office. Also, one other
thing he said which was wild. He said that he
his wife and their joint psychiatrists or working them through it.
Two people deny you three psychiatrists, Like I mean, that's
I'm not shaming him for you see a psychiatrist. I've
(06:04):
seen a psychiatrist many times around my life in different periods, however,
or psychologists or whatever. However, that's that's a lot. You
need a lot, and if you're if you need a
lot constantly, you probably shouldn't be in a place where
you're making major decisions. And I you know, I've fred
friends on the laft who have been very combative and
saying you're just doing this because you want sus in
(06:25):
college to win. No, I have not been like this
with Shared Brown or Mary Patola or you know, the
the guy Sands from Iowa, or or even Talla Rico.
I haven't been like this for Talla Rica or whoever
is running in Florida I don't even know the name,
or or Cooper from North Carolina. This is different. I
want you all to realize that this is different. This
(06:47):
man is different. This is and if you're so upset,
if anyone's so upset about the norms that Donald Trump
broke and we need to return to norms, that's in depth.
And that's what a lot of Democrats have been saying,
saying than it is your job at this point to govern,
to police yourselves, and to say this man should not
(07:07):
be in office, especially because Susan Collins, of all people,
not exactly the you know, fire breathing right winger. I mean,
these people need to get a grip. Okay, enough with
Angus King. I'm not going to make this the Angus King,
the Grand Platiner. I'm not going to make this the
Grand Platiner or the AI podcast. I just I this
guy is whack. I mean, we'll have more stories in
(07:27):
the future, I guarantee it. I want to talk put
an election and not the election in California which happened yesterday,
where they're going to still count the votes and we'll
be counting votes for six months, because that's California and
we can't live in a first world society in California.
I want to put the election that happened in Colombia
the country in South America. Trust me, we'll like Columbia.
I don't care I'm in South America. Why should I?
(07:48):
Because it's very important and it picks on a big
political trend that will change what's happening overall in our hemisphere.
On Sunday, Columbia held its first round of presidential elections.
And the right wing candidate, and I'm sorry if I
butcher his name. I've tried to memorize it, but they
only say it in Spanish and they say, like you know,
you know one syllable they speed rush his name. It's
(08:09):
Alboildo di la Esperala. I believe he's the right wing candidate.
He came in first of forty four percent, and the
left wing Canada Ivan Subpita came in second with forty
one percent, sorry, forty four and forty one percent, So
the right winger forty four, the left winger forty one.
Other minor parties also trailed, but they came in like
you know, they got like seven percent was the other
(08:30):
conservative party, and then other minor parties got less than that.
Because neither party got an outright majority, they're gonna have
a runoff election on June twenty first. De la Esperala,
the right wing candidate, has portrayed himself as really a
political outsider who said that liberals want to turn Colombia
into the next Venezuela. He's also promised to crack down
on crime and rising crime, by the way, is rising
(08:50):
in Colombia at a very fast pace. He says he's
going to build ten bu Kelly style maximum security prisons
in the jungle and rid the country of crime. Bo Kelly,
when we're referring to, is the president of al Savador.
If you don't know, he has a ninety percent approval
rating because he turned that country from one of the
most dangerous in the world to one of the safest,
and especially definitely in Latin America, but also in the
(09:10):
Western Hemisphere. So why should Americans care well Diida Esparala
wins this election, it will be the most recent election
where almost a wave of populist conservative candidates have won
across Latin America, across like the continent and the Greater
Latin America region. And it's really turning Latin America from
(09:33):
a socialist experiment into a right wing populist haven, one
that is much more likely to work with the United
States than China and really give us an opportunity to
decouple South South America from China in a in a
big way. In the last couple of years, you've seen
right wing parties such as like the Victive had victories
(09:53):
in places like Argentina, Paraguay, Al Savador, Panama, Ecuador, Bolivia, Hondora,
As Costa Rica, and now potentially Colombia. And let's not
count by the way, the arrest of Nicholas Mondoro in Venezuela,
which definitely needcapped that regime, which is spend decades funding
left wing parties across South America and Latin America. Now
(10:15):
that's pretty extraordinary, especially when you're given that the continent's
left wing parties have been very hostile to the United States,
very favorable towards Cuba, towards Venezuela, and towards China, and
it helps build America's sphere of influence in the West.
Right wing populist candidates are also currently leading, by the
way in the upcoming election in Peru in the first
(10:38):
round the right wing candidate one, and the second round
it's supposed to be very tight. They're also in a
close second with the elections very close in Brazil. And
if Brazil and Peru go towards conservatives, to conservative candidates
or right wing candidates, Mexico becomes an island within itself.
It'll be like the last major nation aside from Venezuela
(11:00):
and Cuba, but those aren't democracies. Mexico be is the
last major nation to really have a sizeable left wing
party infrastructure. Other countries will, but none are as big
as Mexico. If the Trump administration can work on forging,
you know, positive relationships, positive cohesive working relations with these
right wing parties in a way that left wing parties
(11:21):
were resistant to, I think that it could be gigantic
for the United States and Latin America. Remember, most of
these countries that these right wing parties will control, have
a majority of the ports all throughout the Pacific Ocean,
they will have access to a lot of things. They
will probably a lot of them will start, you know,
(11:42):
cutting regulations and making their making their countries dynamic in
the sensible. It will attract investors, a lot of them
from the United States. That is really really important to
kind of gain national trust and build relationships on so
many issues that are in im portant to Americans. You know,
(12:02):
the cartel, human smuggling, drugs smuggling, you know, fetanol, and
what's going on with their All of that stuff matters
a lot when it comes to working positive relations with
these countries and once again kicking China out of our sphere.
I think that and also, by the way, it would
(12:23):
be so ironic, and it is so ironic that you
see Latin America, which has been backwards on so many
issues for decades, Latin America electing dynamic, interesting populist candidates
who are trying to change their country's destiny. And in
Europe they are just clinging onto things that have been
controlling their nations for decades and are leading to like
(12:46):
a dying continent. It's a very strange dichotomy of which
places are trying to forge a new path forward and
which places are really trying to kind of leave themselves
in the past. I don't know. There's a real chance though.
Right now we're at a real moment for South America.
And we'll see what happens in Brazil and what happens
in Chile and Columbia if they go to the right.
(13:08):
We're really in a new day in our continent, in
our in our sphere, in our western hemisphere, and that'll
be great. I mean, there's a lot of opportunity. Okay.
Coming up next is my interviet Centenator Jim Banks from Indiana.
That's coming up. Stay tuned. Senator Jim Banks has represented
the state of Indiana in the US sentenceince twenty twenty five,
and before that, he was the congressman from Indiana's third
congressional district since twenty seventeen. You won your election to
(13:31):
the first day that Trump the first time that Trump
won his election in twenty sixteen.
Speaker 2 (13:35):
Right, that's right.
Speaker 1 (13:36):
And you told me that I think you know one
time that your dad was more excited that Trump won
that you won.
Speaker 2 (13:41):
Yeah, the same election night. It's true. My dad was
for Trump. He was one of those voters. It was
for Trump from the day he came down the escalator
and I told my dad, I thought he was crazy.
There's no way this guy's going to win.
Speaker 1 (13:55):
But my dad bought in early on.
Speaker 2 (13:57):
And Indiana our prime, I Mary in May is usually
late enough primary that it doesn't matter in presidential politics.
But in that case, in twenty sixteen, the Republican primary
came down to Indiana. If you recall, that's the it
was the Indiana primary that that night that Ted Cruz
(14:18):
finally dropped out and Trump cemented the Republican nomination. It
was a lot of voters like my dad who carried
him through it.
Speaker 1 (14:26):
Yeah, you definitely worked manufacturing, right. He was like an
early figured out in fact working class backbone right there,
that's right. Yeah, and he just he got it. I
mean he he bought into it from day one. And
I think a big part of it was, you know,
as a working class voter. I mean when we were kids,
my dad was he hated politics and politicians, but he
(14:49):
supported Ross Perrot. I'll never forget the parole bumper sticker
on the pickup truck, and which at that time I
thought that was a little crazy too, But it wasn't
until twenty sixteen when Trump ran because my dad didn't
like the Bushes. He was anti NAFTA. NAFTA was a
four letter word in our house.
Speaker 2 (15:07):
And it wasn't until Trump coming down the escalator that
he got pumped up and excited about a presidential candidate.
Between Perrot and then it was the first time that
he was motivated. I just happened to be on the
ballot at the same time too, And election night, I
remember pulling off my I narrowly won my primary and
(15:28):
Trump won Indiana, Cruise dropped out, and I remember my
dad being he was on cloud nine about that. I mean,
of course he was. He was especially especially excited about
President Trump. He's been right about him since day one.
I mean, Trump has changed American politics.
Speaker 1 (15:45):
I think forever does your dad does having a dad
who's working class, because there is a general disconnect between
working class people in Congress. By having a father who's
legitimately working class, does it tap you into a certain
Zeit guys in the populace that a lot of other
people are not attuned to.
Speaker 2 (16:02):
Without a doubt, I mean, I grew up in it.
I've lived it in a family that lives paycheck to
paycheck from week to week and struggles. I find that
to be true today more than ever. It's the people who,
the elites and the rich who don't. They don't struggle,
and I don't. I don't. I don't demean them, for
(16:26):
that is a lot different than most of my voters
in Indiana who when when you have when when you
have gas prices at five bucks a gallon, they feel it.
I mean, the the elites and the rich in our society,
they don't. They don't feel it when health care costs
go up. My dad and all the members of my
family they feel it. That the elites and the rich
(16:48):
in this country they don't feel it. So I think,
I think you are. You are dialed into that, tuned
into that. My grandma is still alive, My mom's mom
is still alive, and she's my only grandparent left. And
she she was a union factory worker as well. And
you know she she regularly is on Facebook and sees
the fake memes about Congress cutting her, Republicans cutting her
(17:12):
Social Security or issues like that. And she she's one
of two people who are still allowed to call me
Jimmy my mom did the other one. And she'll call
and say, Jimmy, are you cutting my Social Security? And
I have to tell Grandma that no, that's a that's
a fake meme or a fake post on Facebook. And
so when you hear from your grandma or your dad,
(17:34):
or members of your family that you know most and
and you realize what they're suffering through. And you know,
another example of that, Ryan completely off topic, was during COVID.
As you know, Amanda and I have three three daughters.
They're teenagers now, but COVID was what five or six
years ago. I remember how how much my wife struggled
(17:56):
through that period, especially at the at the outset of it,
when our kids were the lockdowns on the schools, and
and I just remember my just intuitively understanding because it
was an experience that we were living through and sharing
with with everybody else having kids in school and the
schools locked down, and and how how hard that he
(18:16):
how painful that was psychologically for moms. And and uh,
if you don't have kids in school and you're an
elite in Washington, uh, or you're a policy maker or
a decision maker of some of some sort, you don't
understand it so the same is true for working class voters.
You if you didn't, you didn't grow up in a
(18:36):
trailer park like I did, and have have parents like
I did, and and still see what my parents struggle
through and with what they experienced. You don't understand it.
But I find ryan that I'm elected in the Senate
now and it's like it's an incredible honor to be
a senator. But most of these senators come from a
very different place than what I come from, and they
(18:59):
they've been very successful, which is great that many of
them have lived the American dream or others have have
benefited from their parents their grandparents living the American dream,
but they don't they don't share the same experience that
my that I've lived with my dad.
Speaker 1 (19:14):
Yeah, well, I wanted to bring up something different, I
mean different election, which was the recent elections in the
Indiana State Senate, which you pled a big part in.
You were you were a big push promoter of the
most of the can I think everyone but two won
their primary people who had run promising to redistrict. The
redistricting fight is really interesting nationwide because you had some
(19:36):
legislators like Texas and North Carolina and you know, Tennessee
jump right on board. And then you had Indiana, Alabama,
and South Carolina really resist. And it was one of
those moments that even though Trump's been office now for
over a decade, where Republican voters rank and file, Republican
voters feel like the party isn't willing to fight for them.
(19:58):
And this was felt like the most obviou this case,
especially considering every Democratic state outside of like independent redistrict ones.
And by that I really just meet New York, even California,
even New Jersey. They are jerrymandered even before the reform,
they were jerrymandered. What do you make of that? To BAI,
where just Republican voters feel like the party isn't fighting
(20:18):
for them.
Speaker 2 (20:19):
That's the difference between the old school Republican Party and
the Trump Party, the new Republican Party. And when President
Trump called on these legislators to simply do that, to
simply fight back redistricting, was an opportunity to fight back
against the games the Democrats play, I mean the way
the Democrats cheat like they did, by the way and
(20:39):
the twenty twenty census. President Trump was president when the
census was conducted, but when Biden took over the way
they took the census data and the shady formula that
they use, the way that they counted the data and
gave blue states extra congressional seats and took away seats
(21:02):
from red states or denied states like Texas and Florida.
It's a fact they would have they would have gained
congressional seats, and states like Rhode Island and Illinois and
other in Colorado, blue states would have lost congressional seats.
But the way that they scattered the data and counted
(21:22):
illegals and some of the other games that they played,
they manipulated the census datus. There was a real there
was a true intellectual case here to make in favor
of mid cycle redistricting. The Democrats picked the fight. Republicans
then and President Trump called on Indiana legislators to do
(21:43):
what we could and make up for the games that
the Democrats played and do a redistricting in Indiana. We've
been way too nice for wait for decades when it
comes to redistricting, and our state is is drawn as
a seven to two map, but easily could be a
nine to zero app in a red state. A barn
read pro Trump State Lake, Indiana. So you had most
(22:07):
Republican legislators in Indiana who supported redistricting, but you had
you had a handful in the state Senate, led by
the state Senate President Rod Bray, who denied, who denied
redistricting and blocked it. The House passed it, the Senate
blocked it by handful of votes. I mean maybe a
dozen Republicans and a super majority of forty Republicans and
(22:28):
a chamber of only fifty state senators that blocked it.
Five of them just lost their primary because those Republican
primary voters said, you weren't willing to fight back. President
Trump highlighted that, and we got involved in those primaries
through my through my organizations and my campaign entities, and
helped helped President Trump make that case. And you saw.
(22:50):
You saw the the whole the whole country saw the outcome.
And I think it affected how other states, as state
legislators around the country, how they've reacted to it too.
But it all comes down to the point that you
made at the outset. President Trump has taught us how
to fight back, and the new Republican Party has to
fight back against the games that the Democrats play.
Speaker 1 (23:11):
Was a point where it made you a leader in
the state, not just liketed to state. What there's a
lot of elect to state with officials, but they no
one took the took the mantles as aggressively as you
did and was as victorious as you were. You know,
I worry about the idea of, you know, the race
to the bottom where blue states have no Republicans and
red states have no Democrats. Uh, And it's not Trump's
(23:33):
fault about I hate the line of like, oh, you know,
Texas started. It's been going on for decades. Democrats are
doing California back in the seventies and in Texas in
the sixties, so it's gone on longer than I've been alive.
What what I worry about that is that too is gerrymandering,
like a nationwide gerryman or anything. Is there a way
to kind of not have it in this aggressive manner
(23:55):
where there will be no Democrats or Republicans in entire
regions of the country. Well, in the perfect ideal world,
we would ban mid cycle redistricting and only do it
once every ten years. But right now we don't live
in that ideal political world. So at President and the
Democrats knew that. That's why they seized on the.
Speaker 2 (24:15):
Opportunity that they had in California, and states like Indiana
had had a role here to play that Indiana punted on,
but other states did play that did take to make
up for it. But I think you could pass a
constitutional amendment or states could pass state laws to ban
the mid cycle redistricting.
Speaker 1 (24:34):
But if you don't.
Speaker 2 (24:34):
But if you don't have that, then you have you
sort of have this arms race among the states.
Speaker 1 (24:40):
I mean.
Speaker 2 (24:40):
The other part of it, though, too, is that the
again go back to the way the census was conducted
and how the Democrats manipulated the census counting illegals. Indiana,
we have the first district of Indiana has been held
by has been held by a Democrat for one hundred years.
It's the it's the district outside of Chicago that we
call the regions, so East Chicago, Gary Hammond. But it's
(25:06):
also the largest steel producing district in the country. So
those steel workers and the black voters that have that
make up that district have long voted Democrat. But because
the President Trump and the working class values of the
of the Trump era Republican Party, those those voters are
largely coming our way, so that that is a competitive
(25:27):
district at the NRCC is already competing in and the
fact that they counted illegals and and made that may.
Speaker 1 (25:36):
Yeah, the sensus a ton of problems, There's no doubt
about it. And there's definitely, you know, hopefully in the
twenty thirty census, which is going to be a major
game changer for the entire depth totally with California, New York,
and Illinois and Oregon especially, they lose almost ten seats
between all that, or more than ten seats. Even. Yeah,
an issue that my voter, my listeners are, my voters,
(25:57):
my listeners are always bringing up is the same. I
mean I get an email about it at least once
a week. It is kind of like the policy issue
that people are obsessed with. And here's and we know
why it's not moving forward. They don't have enough votes.
Trump's call for entering the filibuster. This is my question.
Even if we ended the filibuster, we have Markowski, Curtis Collins, Tillis,
(26:20):
lots of Republican McConnell, lots of Republicans who probably wouldn't
be on board. Is there do you think that that
would happen even if we ended the philibuster, that we
could get this piece of legislation through.
Speaker 2 (26:32):
Well, we know that's a fact already because we had
an amendment a few weeks ago on a larger piece
of legislation that was the content of the Save America Act,
and it failed by less I think it only got
forty seven or forty eight votes. So you already know
I'm all for nuking the philibuster. I mean I was
(26:55):
agnostic mostly about this subject when I got to the
Senate a year and a half ago. Now now count
me in the category of being all on board. I mean,
this is senseless to have a majority of the Senators
and a body who can't do anything that the voters
elected us to do because of these arcane Senate filibuster
(27:15):
rules that don't go back to Thomas Jefferson but but
are more modern rules that tie our hands. We need
to do, if it's not totally nuking the filibuster, change
changing the Senate rules in a way that allows us
to legislate, I mean, just on any subject. But the
Save America Act is enormously popular, not just among Republicans
but among independents and Democrat voters as well. So I'm
(27:39):
all for doing whatever it takes, whether it's the eliminating
the talking filibuster or changing changing the rules somehow to
allow for an up or down vote on the Save
America Act and give us a chance to vote.
Speaker 1 (27:54):
The rule if you wanted to filibuster, you'd have to
be talking the entire time. Yes, was the old rule
that you just have to just keep talking until eventually
it means you have to stop. I mean, you can't
go on forever the way you can now.
Speaker 2 (28:07):
Yeah, that's what I mean when I'm talking about these
modern rules that are in place that don't date back
to the founding of our country, that you could you
could change those rules to allow for the change the
eliminating the talking philibuster. We only get to give one
speech instead of two speeches or multiple speeches, and and
and and ways to do that. But the sad reality
(28:29):
is we still have sque enough squishy Republicans in the
Republican majority. They even if you nuke the filibuster we have,
we don't have the fifty votes for a tie vote
to allow jd Vance to break the tie, the Vice
president to break the tie vote to give us the
Save America Act has passed out of the House, A
majority of the House voted for it, A majority of
(28:50):
the Senate if they did, if they right now.
Speaker 1 (28:53):
Majority of the Senate doesn't support I.
Speaker 2 (28:55):
Mean talking about McConnell, and I think some of these
these guys that are retired. I think if I think
if push came to shove, if you if you actually
had a vote on it, you have enough of these
retiring Republican senators who come from the old GOP, the
establishment winning of the GOP, or those who just hate
President Trump who are going to vote against it and
(29:15):
block it. You go back to the McCain thumbs down moment,
you might have a few more of those types of
protest votes that aren't protesting the policy, but who dislike
President Trump that much. Is their their their payback opportunity.
It's really it's really sad because it's it's so fundamental
and important that we secure our elections, stop illegals from voting,
(29:36):
and we can't get it past because we have that
kind of mindset with some of these old schools.
Speaker 1 (29:41):
Is it true? I mean, this is the way it
feels that the Democrats are a lot more I don't
want to say organized, but on the same page than
Republicans are. And you you served in both the House
and the Senate. Now the Senate is obviously much smaller.
Is it much more collegial where people are friendly with
one another or like, you know, because it is considered
like a club. You know, you're there for a long
(30:01):
time and everyone's kind of hanging out a little longer.
A lot of people are.
Speaker 2 (30:05):
Yeah, I don't know if I don't know if I
think it's more clubby, but you know, there is a
different uh there, there is a different environment. And the Senate,
I mean, I get I don't want to give her
a credit for anything because in so many ways I
think she's evil, But Nancy, the Nancy Pelosi led Democrat
party in the House. I mean, my my grandpa, who
was also my my my mom's dad, also worked at
(30:28):
the same factory that my dad did and belonged to
the union, and he was that he was that kind
of voter. Uh, he he would and he passed away
right around the time I got elected to the to
the House for the first time. He would always ask
that question, why why do the why why do the
Democrats all fall in lockstep and do exactly what Nancy
Pelosi tells him to do, and then you're the Republicans
(30:51):
just fight with each other. I mean, they there's no
there's no unity. I think President Trump has changed that.
He's he's got involved in so many of these primaries
and change the makeup and the look of the Republican Party,
the fighting spirit of the Republican Party. So I think
that's a little bit different now. But I do I
do think that the Democrats are more they eat their
(31:12):
own more. So you do you do see some of
that dynamic, although I think they're I think, you know,
the good news is President Trump has changed things enough
that these Republicans are struggling. I mean, they nominate these
lunatic left wing candidates in some of these states, and
look at what they got going on in Maine.
Speaker 1 (31:30):
I have a Grand platin or I think almost every
day on this podcast. It's not even funny.
Speaker 2 (31:34):
The Democrats own him, right, I mean they're they're they're
they're potentially going to own a lunatic left wing radical
in Michigan. So you look at you look at these, uh,
the types of candidates, and the Democrats are are nominating.
They can't nominate that the moderate UH Republican, the moderate
(31:55):
Democrat type of candidate that can win in states like
every now and then the state's Indiana or the in
states like Maine, they can't. They can't pick those candidates
because the lunatic, radical left wing base of their party
has taken over.
Speaker 1 (32:10):
So another policy question I really have for you is
during your last term in the in the House, you
became a big leader on the issue of decoupling industries
from China, especially supply chains. It's been six years since COVID,
China is still the largest supply of our medical supplies.
Where are we on trying to bring supply chains home
from China or do we get any closer? Is there
(32:32):
any progress being made? Like at all?
Speaker 2 (32:35):
I think so there's been good news through the Trump
tariffs and both iterations of them from Liberation Day was
at the White House when the President signed the Tariffs
CENTTOL law, and we immediately saw the outcome of that,
and then the changes in tax policy from the Tax
Cuts and Jobs Act back in twenty seventeen and extending
(32:57):
and modernizing many of those tax cuts in the the big,
the so called Big beautiful bill that we passed last year.
You've seen, you know, companies like Eli Lilly and Indiana
bring back substantial amount billions of dollars of manufacturing to
the US instead of placing that that uh manufacturing abroad. Uh.
(33:18):
All all of the auto uh uh companies, the big,
the big auto companies have been growing and increasing over time.
And in Indiana we've seen many, many announcements. Indians the
top manufacturing state per capita in the country. So you've
seen the outcome of it, I think more heavily in
(33:38):
states like mine. But there's there's been a good deal
of good news. Has there been enough? I mean, I
think I think President Trump is very focused on this
and if anything is his legacy would be many things.
But restoring the mate in America economy, especially the manufacturing
base of our economy, is something that we've seen healthy
signs that there will be a lot of that to
(33:59):
come even after he's gone.
Speaker 1 (34:01):
Yeah, I don't one thing I'm fush with. I mean,
I don't understand my Biden didn't do this. I don't
understand why Trump has done this yet. But mandating that
we buy the Pentagon, like buy medicine from companies that
only manufacture in America would make that a lot easier.
It's just very frustrating. A last policy question for you,
because I know you're a busy guy. There was because
(34:21):
of COVID. One of our national hangovers because of COVID,
which you've mentioned a few times, is the explosion in
the deficit and the dead and you know, we're running
close to two trillion dollars. When you first got elected,
it was five hundred and eighty billion, which was also crazy.
Is there anything I mean, the debt is the deficit
is what's killing working class people's paychecks. It's what's eating
away at their dollar. We're having inflation, it's a tax
(34:44):
you don't hear about. Is there any is anyone in
Congress even having this conversation like, well, this deficit is
crazy high?
Speaker 2 (34:53):
Yes, and many many of us have voted. You go
back to the early Doge debates and this Congress and
many of the spending cuts that many of us supported. Unfortunately,
you still have a large number of Republicans who have
been soft on this. And you're right about this. You're
you're identifying the the biggest source of inflation is government debt.
(35:19):
And while while co while COVID was part of it,
the Democrats used, but the under Biden, they increased. Biden
increased spending by two trillion dollars and the debt and
the debt ballooned substantially more, and inflation skyrocketed because of that,
because of the Green New Deal and energy policy, energy costs.
(35:40):
Now you have it, you have an interesting dynamic. Trump
brought down gas prices immediately because he eliminated what he
could of the Green New Deal. We extended the tax cuts.
If you get under under the hood, the economy is
very healthy. But the war in Iran has sent gas
prices back up, spike gas prices again, and inflation is
in increased with it. The good news about that is
(36:02):
as soon as President Trump signs a deal and we
get out of Iran and hopefully get out of it
what we want to get out of it, gas prices
will immediately go back down. India and Indiana we just
did a gas tax holiday. The governor suspended the gas
tax and so our gas prices are temporarily low. But
I drove from Indiana to Washington yesterday and see, you know,
(36:25):
the sky high gas prices has sent inflation back up.
So the good good news is when the war is over,
which I hope will happened very soon, and we sign
a deal and Iran doesn't have the ability to create
a nuclear weapon and all of that's over, gas prices
are going to immediately go back down, and inflation is
going to go back down. You're going to see the
(36:45):
signs of a very healthy economy at that point. That's
that's sort of covered up with the gas price issue
dynamic that we're seeing. But the bad news is that
all of that COVID era spending, all of the Biden
massive increases in spending, is still sending the deficit and
(37:08):
the debt through the roof. And and you're right, the
people who are going to pay for that aren't. Aren't aren't.
The boomer is going to be the you know, the
fifty somethings and younger, my kid, my teenage daughters, their generation.
Speaker 1 (37:23):
My generation, we're in the same generation, our generation.
Speaker 2 (37:25):
Our generation, our kids generation. They're going to pay the
price for it. And it's because so far I've voted
for all of these spending, all of the Doge spending cuts.
I have a couple of colleagues and you know, myself included,
they'll offer a spending cut amendments, and you might only
get ten twenty Republicans in the Senate who vote for
(37:47):
those spending cuts. Is whatever you're cutting is you know,
something that's popular with somebody, and the Senators are afraid
to vote to cut it. So you still have those
squishy Republicans. I found, as you know, when I shared
the Republican Studi Committee, this was our biggest focus when
I was in the House and putting budgets, putting budget
proposals on the table that would UH, that would eliminate
(38:09):
the UH that would bring down the bring down deficits,
eliminate deficits, and bring down the debt, eliminate the debt
and in ten years you know those UH we would
put those proposals on the floor and the House there's
more of an appetite for it those I think partlyas
because these two year cycles, in the six year cycle
(38:31):
in the Senate, you have a lot of senators who
are afraid of their own shadow and or whore just
who don't want to vote for it.
Speaker 1 (38:38):
But the also present company excluded Red states in the
Senate oftentimes elect very moderate members and and I've discovered
that over and over and over again.
Speaker 2 (38:48):
Well I would, I would encourage anybody listening to go,
you know, take a look at how your senators vote
on these these spending cuts. I mean I when I
got to the Senate ran Paul. Whenever we have these
vote ramas, he'll he'll put some of these big spending
cut amendments on the floor and it's fascinating to see
who votes. Who actually when it comes to a vote,
(39:09):
who actually votes to cut spending and who doesn't.
Speaker 1 (39:11):
I think your point, Okay, where go We'll go to
read more about what you're working on. Subscribe to like
a newsletter or social media account where people go to
hear more about what Jim Banks is doing.
Speaker 2 (39:21):
I always appreciate feedback, and we post a lot on
social media on my Facebook page Senator Jim Banks, on
my x account at Senator Banks, and you can find
me on Instagram too, which is just more more fun.
But we appreciate the feedback and we have a lot
of work to do. I'm proud here to be to
(39:41):
be here on behalf of Indiana and to fight for
our country and for our values and this cause. And
appreciate you Ryan and all that you do. I read
your newsletter every Sunday. It's the most substantive substack that
I read every week and shape the material that.
Speaker 1 (39:57):
You put out.
Speaker 2 (39:58):
It makes me a better senator.
Speaker 1 (40:00):
I appreciate that. Thank you everyone this podcast, I really
appreciate it. You got it.
Speaker 2 (40:03):
Take care.
Speaker 1 (40:04):
Now it's time for the Ask Me Anything Question. If
you want to be part of the Ask Me Anything Question,
email me Ryan at Numbers gamepodcast dot com. That's Ryan
at plural Numbers gamepodcast dot com. First question comes from Robbie.
Robbie says, Ryan, thank you for the excellent explanation of
perceived housing crisis that I asked. I watched an interry
with Jim Jordan a committee and I'm not positive who
was talking to a discussion about additional Supreme Court justices.
(40:25):
Came up at his point with we need thirteen justices
instead of nine. Why don't we do it? Now? I
know he's calling Democrats bluff. Would And the question, though,
is would adding additional justice requires simple majority or two thirds?
That is a great question. The answer is a simple majority,
you don't need two thirds. The key reasons is the
Constitution does not fix the size of the Supreme Court
(40:48):
I have been saying to Republicans, this should be a
constitutional you know, this should be an issue tray down
the constitution. This would be overwhelmingly supported by a majority
of people, including Democrats, I think. But the Counselation does
not fix it to nine members. It simply just says,
as one Supreme Court, Congress has the authority set the
(41:08):
number of justices through ordinary legislation. This power comes from
the same clause, let's Congress create inferior federal courts. And
the number has been changed several times. The Digital Act
of seventeen eighty six eighty nine rather had six justices,
eighteen oh one had five to six, eighteen thirty seven
had nine, eighteen sixty three had ten. They reduced that
to seven, and then in eighteen sixty nine they increased
(41:30):
it to nine, its current size. And all these legislations
passed with simple majorities in both the House and Senate.
So yeah, they just need some majority. They do not
need a super majority, which is what would make it
almost impossible if they wanted to do it. But that
means that they can. Next questions from Michael, he says,
great job on the podcast, keep plugging away. Thank you,
(41:50):
Michael for listening. It was very interesting to see that
students graduations bootspeakers who mentioned AI. I wonder how many
boot ai use AI to complete their college a sign
My guess probably a lot. But that's besides the point.
Do never, never let hypocrisy stand in the way of
your values. My son will be going to a senior
of college is fall. He's a computer science major. He
(42:11):
had an internship with a software company that the team
that was supposed to start on June first. He was
on the AI development and implementation team. He worked for
them last summer. They loved him and he expected a
permanent offer. Last day, they called him and said his
internship was canceled. Apparently the existing AI team I made
such great strides using AI, they would not need him
or other new people. He was upset, started working for
(42:33):
his network and then three offers came on a Monday.
Congratulations to him, he was his son is smart and
hard working, but he's not a genius. I love that
honesty from parents, and that's not a shame. I do
love on parents like this, and my kid's great, but
he's not a genius. It's important, I think, to to
not be because those parents that are like my kids
incredible at everything. You're like, calm down, take the lexapro.
(42:55):
All young people need to learn AI, not just tech guys.
I worry more if I was forty two and I
was twenty two. Cities and states need to start up
about data centers. They are in the driver's seat and
should not be giving big tax breaks to developers for
these buildings. They really need to coordinate. What are the
governors and mayors associations for anyway, That is a great point.
(43:16):
Local governments are in the driver's seats as far as
what they want from these data centers, especially these rural,
smaller communities that can make these deals. They need the land,
and only these rural communities have the land they could
be I mean, I get if you don't want a
data center in your area, but let's say you're like, listen,
this will bring tax revenue, This will bring some construction
(43:37):
jobs and maybe a few temporary jobs. I don't mind
with the noise or the light or whatever. And your
community wants the majority of the community wants it. It's
at that point that the that the legislators, the local
legislators should be saying, you need to give X, Y
and Z to this community to build this data center,
and they would probably give it. The problem that these
legislators are having is they are so they're wind and
(44:00):
nine that these benefits are absolutely gonna come that now
they're all rushing to give goodies away to kind of
get ahead of the next person. What they should be
doing is saying, how do I benefit my community any
which way possible? Say you're not going to face a backlash,
We will do whatever, but you're gonna pay the taxes.
You're not going to get a tax break, and you
(44:22):
have to give a you know something back to the community.
You have to you have to fund our I don't know,
programs for X Y and Z or like. Even better,
you could say to them, you could say to your constituents,
and I think this would work. If we bring this
data center in, they're going to pay property taxes for
the entire community for the next ten years. They'll be
(44:42):
a tax moratorium for existing property owners for ten years.
That would be so popular. This is so many easy wins,
and local legislators, unlike national ones, never have to or
rarely have to kind of hold big companies to the
their feet to the fire and they get intimidated by
(45:03):
these big guys, and they shouldn't. They're in the driver's seat.
Local government is in the driver's seat. You need to
demand things to make your districts and your areas better.
I completely agree and I hate these tax up to
these for these data centers. They are the richest companies
in the world and they should pay like it.
Speaker 2 (45:19):
That is all.
Speaker 1 (45:20):
Thank you for this podcast episode. If you like this podcast,
please like and subscribe on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts,
wherever you get your podcasts, and on YouTube. Like it,
subscribe on YouTube. I appreciate you all. Talk to you
guys on Friday.
Welcome back to a Numbers Game with Ryan Grodowski. Thank
you guys for being here. We've sentatored Jim Banks from
the great state of Indiana on the podcast. Today. We're
going to talk about the primary fight in Indiana State
Senate that he was a part of. We're going to
talk about the Save America Act, which I know a
lot of my listeners care a lot about, and the
issue of decoupling from China with our industry. I know
that I care a lot about that, so it's going
(00:22):
to be great. Can't wait for the interview and something
I've wanted to talk about for quite a while with him.
I also wanted to mention something on Monday's episode about
a recent election that's very important, and I couldn't. I
didn't have time because also the election had been late
on Monday, and I had to cover Grand Platner because
you know, I want to tell my audience this. I've
(00:43):
had this guy, Graham Plattner or nailed from the second
I saw him. I was one of the first people
saying this is a bad guy. This is a guy
with a lot of issues who should not be an
elected office. And now was reported and he admitted to
it that he was sexting between six to twelve women,
cheating on his wife. She had admitted to it. And
the crazy thing is they've only been married for like
(01:04):
eighteen months, so he's sexted six to twelve women in
eighteen months. That is wild when you think about it.
And cheating is never okay. Not condoning cheating, however, that
is different than having an affair after you've been married
for a couple of years. Like there's a difference between
those things. Not saying one's good, not saying one's bad,
(01:26):
but the feverishness of needing constant, you know, praise and
attention and affection from multiple people in such a short
period of time while you just are recently newly weds,
while your wife is going through IBF treatment, while your
wife had a miscarriage. She's doing all these things to
build a family, and you're doing this at a feverish pace.
(01:47):
This is Anthony Wiener vibes. This is I mean, this
is sociopathic behavior to a certain degree, Like there is
there is something to him. This is not a man
who's changed his stripes over time or from you know,
the quote unquote PTSD hardened combat marine, like the SOB
story that the Left is betraying him as this is
(02:09):
a person who has very little self control and very
little discipline. And what's interesting about the old sexting story
that has not made as much news is the fact
that he was using the app kick kikse i spell
it kick to cheat on his wife to meet these women.
And if you've never heard of the website Kick or
(02:30):
the app Kick rather, and you're over the age of forty,
I want to congratulate you because you're probably never going
to go on to get your predator. Kick is a
very popular or it used to be very popular, but
it's a popular encrypted message app that is considered one
of the top apps for child predators to lure children
into sexual relationships. In Britain, it was involved in over
(02:54):
eleven hundred child's abuse cases. A convicted child molester told
CBS's News Is forty eight Hours that Kick is a
quote predator's paradise and according to The New York Times,
law enforcement officials have said that they have run to
Kick in many cases of blackmail in which sexual predators
coax young people to send nude photos of themselves. And
(03:17):
that's the app that Grant Platner was using. He wasn't
like using Okay Cupid, he wasn't using Tinder. That's weird.
I'm not saying I'm not saying anything, hmm, but I'm
saying something. How old were these women? Does anyone know?
I'm sure the papers do, because according to Platner right,
(03:38):
Platner's team, right after the story broke blamed it on
a former staffer. The former staffer came forward and said that,
basically saying the staffer elitd is what they said. The
staffer came forward and said, no, I didn't leak it.
The paper came with me with these women with this story,
and I just confirmed it. That probably means that they're
(03:58):
talking like they're going to come out to talk to
the papers. It's my guess, just a guess, is just
an assumption, assumption. If what this former staff is saying
is true, that these women are already coming forward to
the papers and saying this man was cheating on his
wife with me or reaching out asking for nude photographs
or send me new photographs, that's that's a big that's
(04:18):
a big deal. That's probably a big question in mind
of what's going to come in the future, like it's weird.
We've seen this movie before. We've watched Anthony Leener, like
we've we like, we've seen this movie before. We know
kind of how it ends, and yet we're still playing
along like we were like this is gonna who knows
what's gonna happen. We kind of know what's gonna happen.
(04:39):
And I want to bring one other thing that's really
pissed me off. The left has said, oh, but you
have Keim Paxson and Donald Trump and Kim Paxson Donald
Trump and Kim Paxson's corrupt and he cheated on his
wife and he had it. Okay, great, fine, we all
said Mark Robinson and the entire gop unendorsed Mark Robinson
and refused to fund his campaign. So, and Mark Robinson
(05:00):
a weird guy. He did weird thing. It's like one
hundred percent of weird things. I talked to him on
a podcast. He was a very hmm. He was not
the friendliest person in the world. I just say like that.
So we've we've held people to a certain standard, not always,
but we have Grand Planner should be held to a
standard by the left at all, by any which way
(05:20):
and I wonder what happens with Senator Angus King, who
has been completely and totally silent on this issue, on
a grand planner, not saying a word. He's an independent
who caucuses with the Democrats. I think he has a
good working relation with Susan Collins. If his son is
running for the Democratic primary for governor, if he loses,
he should endorse Susan Collins and make a statement about this.
(05:43):
This is reprehensible behavior and this is a man who's
got who should not be in office. Also, one other
thing he said which was wild. He said that he
his wife and their joint psychiatrists or working them through it.
Two people deny you three psychiatrists, Like I mean, that's
I'm not shaming him for you see a psychiatrist. I've
(06:04):
seen a psychiatrist many times around my life in different periods, however,
or psychologists or whatever. However, that's that's a lot. You
need a lot, and if you're if you need a
lot constantly, you probably shouldn't be in a place where
you're making major decisions. And I you know, I've fred
friends on the laft who have been very combative and
saying you're just doing this because you want sus in
(06:25):
college to win. No, I have not been like this
with Shared Brown or Mary Patola or you know, the
the guy Sands from Iowa, or or even Talla Rico.
I haven't been like this for Talla Rica or whoever
is running in Florida I don't even know the name,
or or Cooper from North Carolina. This is different. I
want you all to realize that this is different. This
(06:47):
man is different. This is and if you're so upset,
if anyone's so upset about the norms that Donald Trump
broke and we need to return to norms, that's in depth.
And that's what a lot of Democrats have been saying,
saying than it is your job at this point to govern,
to police yourselves, and to say this man should not
(07:07):
be in office, especially because Susan Collins, of all people,
not exactly the you know, fire breathing right winger. I mean,
these people need to get a grip. Okay, enough with
Angus King. I'm not going to make this the Angus King,
the Grand Platiner. I'm not going to make this the
Grand Platiner or the AI podcast. I just I this
guy is whack. I mean, we'll have more stories in
(07:27):
the future, I guarantee it. I want to talk put
an election and not the election in California which happened yesterday,
where they're going to still count the votes and we'll
be counting votes for six months, because that's California and
we can't live in a first world society in California.
I want to put the election that happened in Colombia
the country in South America. Trust me, we'll like Columbia.
I don't care I'm in South America. Why should I?
(07:48):
Because it's very important and it picks on a big
political trend that will change what's happening overall in our hemisphere.
On Sunday, Columbia held its first round of presidential elections.
And the right wing candidate, and I'm sorry if I
butcher his name. I've tried to memorize it, but they
only say it in Spanish and they say, like you know,
you know one syllable they speed rush his name. It's
(08:09):
Alboildo di la Esperala. I believe he's the right wing candidate.
He came in first of forty four percent, and the
left wing Canada Ivan Subpita came in second with forty
one percent, sorry, forty four and forty one percent, So
the right winger forty four, the left winger forty one.
Other minor parties also trailed, but they came in like
you know, they got like seven percent was the other
(08:30):
conservative party, and then other minor parties got less than that.
Because neither party got an outright majority, they're gonna have
a runoff election on June twenty first. De la Esperala,
the right wing candidate, has portrayed himself as really a
political outsider who said that liberals want to turn Colombia
into the next Venezuela. He's also promised to crack down
on crime and rising crime, by the way, is rising
(08:50):
in Colombia at a very fast pace. He says he's
going to build ten bu Kelly style maximum security prisons
in the jungle and rid the country of crime. Bo Kelly,
when we're referring to, is the president of al Savador.
If you don't know, he has a ninety percent approval
rating because he turned that country from one of the
most dangerous in the world to one of the safest,
and especially definitely in Latin America, but also in the
(09:10):
Western Hemisphere. So why should Americans care well Diida Esparala
wins this election, it will be the most recent election
where almost a wave of populist conservative candidates have won
across Latin America, across like the continent and the Greater
Latin America region. And it's really turning Latin America from
(09:33):
a socialist experiment into a right wing populist haven, one
that is much more likely to work with the United
States than China and really give us an opportunity to
decouple South South America from China in a in a
big way. In the last couple of years, you've seen
right wing parties such as like the Victive had victories
(09:53):
in places like Argentina, Paraguay, Al Savador, Panama, Ecuador, Bolivia, Hondora,
As Costa Rica, and now potentially Colombia. And let's not
count by the way, the arrest of Nicholas Mondoro in Venezuela,
which definitely needcapped that regime, which is spend decades funding
left wing parties across South America and Latin America. Now
(10:15):
that's pretty extraordinary, especially when you're given that the continent's
left wing parties have been very hostile to the United States,
very favorable towards Cuba, towards Venezuela, and towards China, and
it helps build America's sphere of influence in the West.
Right wing populist candidates are also currently leading, by the
way in the upcoming election in Peru in the first
(10:38):
round the right wing candidate one, and the second round
it's supposed to be very tight. They're also in a
close second with the elections very close in Brazil. And
if Brazil and Peru go towards conservatives, to conservative candidates
or right wing candidates, Mexico becomes an island within itself.
It'll be like the last major nation aside from Venezuela
(11:00):
and Cuba, but those aren't democracies. Mexico be is the
last major nation to really have a sizeable left wing
party infrastructure. Other countries will, but none are as big
as Mexico. If the Trump administration can work on forging,
you know, positive relationships, positive cohesive working relations with these
right wing parties in a way that left wing parties
(11:21):
were resistant to, I think that it could be gigantic
for the United States and Latin America. Remember, most of
these countries that these right wing parties will control, have
a majority of the ports all throughout the Pacific Ocean,
they will have access to a lot of things. They
will probably a lot of them will start, you know,
(11:42):
cutting regulations and making their making their countries dynamic in
the sensible. It will attract investors, a lot of them
from the United States. That is really really important to
kind of gain national trust and build relationships on so
many issues that are in im portant to Americans. You know,
(12:02):
the cartel, human smuggling, drugs smuggling, you know, fetanol, and
what's going on with their All of that stuff matters
a lot when it comes to working positive relations with
these countries and once again kicking China out of our sphere.
I think that and also, by the way, it would
(12:23):
be so ironic, and it is so ironic that you
see Latin America, which has been backwards on so many
issues for decades, Latin America electing dynamic, interesting populist candidates
who are trying to change their country's destiny. And in
Europe they are just clinging onto things that have been
controlling their nations for decades and are leading to like
(12:46):
a dying continent. It's a very strange dichotomy of which
places are trying to forge a new path forward and
which places are really trying to kind of leave themselves
in the past. I don't know. There's a real chance though.
Right now we're at a real moment for South America.
And we'll see what happens in Brazil and what happens
in Chile and Columbia if they go to the right.
(13:08):
We're really in a new day in our continent, in
our in our sphere, in our western hemisphere, and that'll
be great. I mean, there's a lot of opportunity. Okay.
Coming up next is my interviet Centenator Jim Banks from Indiana.
That's coming up. Stay tuned. Senator Jim Banks has represented
the state of Indiana in the US sentenceince twenty twenty five,
and before that, he was the congressman from Indiana's third
congressional district since twenty seventeen. You won your election to
(13:31):
the first day that Trump the first time that Trump
won his election in twenty sixteen.
Speaker 2 (13:35):
Right, that's right.
Speaker 1 (13:36):
And you told me that I think you know one
time that your dad was more excited that Trump won
that you won.
Speaker 2 (13:41):
Yeah, the same election night. It's true. My dad was
for Trump. He was one of those voters. It was
for Trump from the day he came down the escalator
and I told my dad, I thought he was crazy.
There's no way this guy's going to win.
Speaker 1 (13:55):
But my dad bought in early on.
Speaker 2 (13:57):
And Indiana our prime, I Mary in May is usually
late enough primary that it doesn't matter in presidential politics.
But in that case, in twenty sixteen, the Republican primary
came down to Indiana. If you recall, that's the it
was the Indiana primary that that night that Ted Cruz
(14:18):
finally dropped out and Trump cemented the Republican nomination. It
was a lot of voters like my dad who carried
him through it.
Speaker 1 (14:26):
Yeah, you definitely worked manufacturing, right. He was like an
early figured out in fact working class backbone right there,
that's right. Yeah, and he just he got it. I
mean he he bought into it from day one. And
I think a big part of it was, you know,
as a working class voter. I mean when we were kids,
my dad was he hated politics and politicians, but he
(14:49):
supported Ross Perrot. I'll never forget the parole bumper sticker
on the pickup truck, and which at that time I
thought that was a little crazy too, But it wasn't
until twenty sixteen when Trump ran because my dad didn't
like the Bushes. He was anti NAFTA. NAFTA was a
four letter word in our house.
Speaker 2 (15:07):
And it wasn't until Trump coming down the escalator that
he got pumped up and excited about a presidential candidate.
Between Perrot and then it was the first time that
he was motivated. I just happened to be on the
ballot at the same time too, And election night, I
remember pulling off my I narrowly won my primary and
(15:28):
Trump won Indiana, Cruise dropped out, and I remember my
dad being he was on cloud nine about that. I mean,
of course he was. He was especially especially excited about
President Trump. He's been right about him since day one.
I mean, Trump has changed American politics.
Speaker 1 (15:45):
I think forever does your dad does having a dad
who's working class, because there is a general disconnect between
working class people in Congress. By having a father who's
legitimately working class, does it tap you into a certain
Zeit guys in the populace that a lot of other
people are not attuned to.
Speaker 2 (16:02):
Without a doubt, I mean, I grew up in it.
I've lived it in a family that lives paycheck to
paycheck from week to week and struggles. I find that
to be true today more than ever. It's the people who,
the elites and the rich who don't. They don't struggle,
and I don't. I don't. I don't demean them, for
(16:26):
that is a lot different than most of my voters
in Indiana who when when you have when when you
have gas prices at five bucks a gallon, they feel it.
I mean, the the elites and the rich in our society,
they don't. They don't feel it when health care costs
go up. My dad and all the members of my
family they feel it. That the elites and the rich
(16:48):
in this country they don't feel it. So I think,
I think you are. You are dialed into that, tuned
into that. My grandma is still alive, My mom's mom
is still alive, and she's my only grandparent left. And
she she was a union factory worker as well. And
you know she she regularly is on Facebook and sees
the fake memes about Congress cutting her, Republicans cutting her
(17:12):
Social Security or issues like that. And she she's one
of two people who are still allowed to call me
Jimmy my mom did the other one. And she'll call
and say, Jimmy, are you cutting my Social Security? And
I have to tell Grandma that no, that's a that's
a fake meme or a fake post on Facebook. And
so when you hear from your grandma or your dad,
(17:34):
or members of your family that you know most and
and you realize what they're suffering through. And you know,
another example of that, Ryan completely off topic, was during COVID.
As you know, Amanda and I have three three daughters.
They're teenagers now, but COVID was what five or six
years ago. I remember how how much my wife struggled
(17:56):
through that period, especially at the at the outset of it,
when our kids were the lockdowns on the schools, and
and I just remember my just intuitively understanding because it
was an experience that we were living through and sharing
with with everybody else having kids in school and the
schools locked down, and and how how hard that he
(18:16):
how painful that was psychologically for moms. And and uh,
if you don't have kids in school and you're an
elite in Washington, uh, or you're a policy maker or
a decision maker of some of some sort, you don't
understand it so the same is true for working class voters.
You if you didn't, you didn't grow up in a
(18:36):
trailer park like I did, and have have parents like
I did, and and still see what my parents struggle
through and with what they experienced. You don't understand it.
But I find ryan that I'm elected in the Senate
now and it's like it's an incredible honor to be
a senator. But most of these senators come from a
very different place than what I come from, and they
(18:59):
they've been very successful, which is great that many of
them have lived the American dream or others have have
benefited from their parents their grandparents living the American dream,
but they don't they don't share the same experience that
my that I've lived with my dad.
Speaker 1 (19:14):
Yeah, well, I wanted to bring up something different, I
mean different election, which was the recent elections in the
Indiana State Senate, which you pled a big part in.
You were you were a big push promoter of the
most of the can I think everyone but two won
their primary people who had run promising to redistrict. The
redistricting fight is really interesting nationwide because you had some
(19:36):
legislators like Texas and North Carolina and you know, Tennessee
jump right on board. And then you had Indiana, Alabama,
and South Carolina really resist. And it was one of
those moments that even though Trump's been office now for
over a decade, where Republican voters rank and file, Republican
voters feel like the party isn't willing to fight for them.
(19:58):
And this was felt like the most obviou this case,
especially considering every Democratic state outside of like independent redistrict ones.
And by that I really just meet New York, even California,
even New Jersey. They are jerrymandered even before the reform,
they were jerrymandered. What do you make of that? To BAI,
where just Republican voters feel like the party isn't fighting
(20:18):
for them.
Speaker 2 (20:19):
That's the difference between the old school Republican Party and
the Trump Party, the new Republican Party. And when President
Trump called on these legislators to simply do that, to
simply fight back redistricting, was an opportunity to fight back
against the games the Democrats play, I mean the way
the Democrats cheat like they did, by the way and
(20:39):
the twenty twenty census. President Trump was president when the
census was conducted, but when Biden took over the way
they took the census data and the shady formula that
they use, the way that they counted the data and
gave blue states extra congressional seats and took away seats
(21:02):
from red states or denied states like Texas and Florida.
It's a fact they would have they would have gained
congressional seats, and states like Rhode Island and Illinois and
other in Colorado, blue states would have lost congressional seats.
But the way that they scattered the data and counted
(21:22):
illegals and some of the other games that they played,
they manipulated the census datus. There was a real there
was a true intellectual case here to make in favor
of mid cycle redistricting. The Democrats picked the fight. Republicans
then and President Trump called on Indiana legislators to do
(21:43):
what we could and make up for the games that
the Democrats played and do a redistricting in Indiana. We've
been way too nice for wait for decades when it
comes to redistricting, and our state is is drawn as
a seven to two map, but easily could be a
nine to zero app in a red state. A barn
read pro Trump State Lake, Indiana. So you had most
(22:07):
Republican legislators in Indiana who supported redistricting, but you had
you had a handful in the state Senate, led by
the state Senate President Rod Bray, who denied, who denied
redistricting and blocked it. The House passed it, the Senate
blocked it by handful of votes. I mean maybe a
dozen Republicans and a super majority of forty Republicans and
(22:28):
a chamber of only fifty state senators that blocked it.
Five of them just lost their primary because those Republican
primary voters said, you weren't willing to fight back. President
Trump highlighted that, and we got involved in those primaries
through my through my organizations and my campaign entities, and
helped helped President Trump make that case. And you saw.
(22:50):
You saw the the whole the whole country saw the outcome.
And I think it affected how other states, as state
legislators around the country, how they've reacted to it too.
But it all comes down to the point that you
made at the outset. President Trump has taught us how
to fight back, and the new Republican Party has to
fight back against the games that the Democrats play.
Speaker 1 (23:11):
Was a point where it made you a leader in
the state, not just liketed to state. What there's a
lot of elect to state with officials, but they no
one took the took the mantles as aggressively as you
did and was as victorious as you were. You know,
I worry about the idea of, you know, the race
to the bottom where blue states have no Republicans and
red states have no Democrats. Uh, And it's not Trump's
(23:33):
fault about I hate the line of like, oh, you know,
Texas started. It's been going on for decades. Democrats are
doing California back in the seventies and in Texas in
the sixties, so it's gone on longer than I've been alive.
What what I worry about that is that too is gerrymandering,
like a nationwide gerryman or anything. Is there a way
to kind of not have it in this aggressive manner
(23:55):
where there will be no Democrats or Republicans in entire
regions of the country. Well, in the perfect ideal world,
we would ban mid cycle redistricting and only do it
once every ten years. But right now we don't live
in that ideal political world. So at President and the
Democrats knew that. That's why they seized on the.
Speaker 2 (24:15):
Opportunity that they had in California, and states like Indiana
had had a role here to play that Indiana punted on,
but other states did play that did take to make
up for it. But I think you could pass a
constitutional amendment or states could pass state laws to ban
the mid cycle redistricting.
Speaker 1 (24:34):
But if you don't.
Speaker 2 (24:34):
But if you don't have that, then you have you
sort of have this arms race among the states.
Speaker 1 (24:40):
I mean.
Speaker 2 (24:40):
The other part of it, though, too, is that the
again go back to the way the census was conducted
and how the Democrats manipulated the census counting illegals. Indiana,
we have the first district of Indiana has been held
by has been held by a Democrat for one hundred years.
It's the it's the district outside of Chicago that we
call the regions, so East Chicago, Gary Hammond. But it's
(25:06):
also the largest steel producing district in the country. So
those steel workers and the black voters that have that
make up that district have long voted Democrat. But because
the President Trump and the working class values of the
of the Trump era Republican Party, those those voters are
largely coming our way, so that that is a competitive
(25:27):
district at the NRCC is already competing in and the
fact that they counted illegals and and made that may.
Speaker 1 (25:36):
Yeah, the sensus a ton of problems, There's no doubt
about it. And there's definitely, you know, hopefully in the
twenty thirty census, which is going to be a major
game changer for the entire depth totally with California, New York,
and Illinois and Oregon especially, they lose almost ten seats
between all that, or more than ten seats. Even. Yeah,
an issue that my voter, my listeners are, my voters,
(25:57):
my listeners are always bringing up is the same. I
mean I get an email about it at least once
a week. It is kind of like the policy issue
that people are obsessed with. And here's and we know
why it's not moving forward. They don't have enough votes.
Trump's call for entering the filibuster. This is my question.
Even if we ended the filibuster, we have Markowski, Curtis Collins, Tillis,
(26:20):
lots of Republican McConnell, lots of Republicans who probably wouldn't
be on board. Is there do you think that that
would happen even if we ended the philibuster, that we
could get this piece of legislation through.
Speaker 2 (26:32):
Well, we know that's a fact already because we had
an amendment a few weeks ago on a larger piece
of legislation that was the content of the Save America Act,
and it failed by less I think it only got
forty seven or forty eight votes. So you already know
I'm all for nuking the philibuster. I mean I was
(26:55):
agnostic mostly about this subject when I got to the
Senate a year and a half ago. Now now count
me in the category of being all on board. I mean,
this is senseless to have a majority of the Senators
and a body who can't do anything that the voters
elected us to do because of these arcane Senate filibuster
(27:15):
rules that don't go back to Thomas Jefferson but but
are more modern rules that tie our hands. We need
to do, if it's not totally nuking the filibuster, change
changing the Senate rules in a way that allows us
to legislate, I mean, just on any subject. But the
Save America Act is enormously popular, not just among Republicans
but among independents and Democrat voters as well. So I'm
(27:39):
all for doing whatever it takes, whether it's the eliminating
the talking filibuster or changing changing the rules somehow to
allow for an up or down vote on the Save
America Act and give us a chance to vote.
Speaker 1 (27:54):
The rule if you wanted to filibuster, you'd have to
be talking the entire time. Yes, was the old rule
that you just have to just keep talking until eventually
it means you have to stop. I mean, you can't
go on forever the way you can now.
Speaker 2 (28:07):
Yeah, that's what I mean when I'm talking about these
modern rules that are in place that don't date back
to the founding of our country, that you could you
could change those rules to allow for the change the
eliminating the talking philibuster. We only get to give one
speech instead of two speeches or multiple speeches, and and
and and ways to do that. But the sad reality
(28:29):
is we still have sque enough squishy Republicans in the
Republican majority. They even if you nuke the filibuster we have,
we don't have the fifty votes for a tie vote
to allow jd Vance to break the tie, the Vice
president to break the tie vote to give us the
Save America Act has passed out of the House, A
majority of the House voted for it, A majority of
(28:50):
the Senate if they did, if they right now.
Speaker 1 (28:53):
Majority of the Senate doesn't support I.
Speaker 2 (28:55):
Mean talking about McConnell, and I think some of these
these guys that are retired. I think if I think
if push came to shove, if you if you actually
had a vote on it, you have enough of these
retiring Republican senators who come from the old GOP, the
establishment winning of the GOP, or those who just hate
President Trump who are going to vote against it and
(29:15):
block it. You go back to the McCain thumbs down moment,
you might have a few more of those types of
protest votes that aren't protesting the policy, but who dislike
President Trump that much. Is their their their payback opportunity.
It's really it's really sad because it's it's so fundamental
and important that we secure our elections, stop illegals from voting,
(29:36):
and we can't get it past because we have that
kind of mindset with some of these old schools.
Speaker 1 (29:41):
Is it true? I mean, this is the way it
feels that the Democrats are a lot more I don't
want to say organized, but on the same page than
Republicans are. And you you served in both the House
and the Senate. Now the Senate is obviously much smaller.
Is it much more collegial where people are friendly with
one another or like, you know, because it is considered
like a club. You know, you're there for a long
(30:01):
time and everyone's kind of hanging out a little longer.
A lot of people are.
Speaker 2 (30:05):
Yeah, I don't know if I don't know if I
think it's more clubby, but you know, there is a
different uh there, there is a different environment. And the Senate,
I mean, I get I don't want to give her
a credit for anything because in so many ways I
think she's evil, But Nancy, the Nancy Pelosi led Democrat
party in the House. I mean, my my grandpa, who
was also my my my mom's dad, also worked at
(30:28):
the same factory that my dad did and belonged to
the union, and he was that he was that kind
of voter. Uh, he he would and he passed away
right around the time I got elected to the to
the House for the first time. He would always ask
that question, why why do the why why do the
Democrats all fall in lockstep and do exactly what Nancy
Pelosi tells him to do, and then you're the Republicans
(30:51):
just fight with each other. I mean, they there's no
there's no unity. I think President Trump has changed that.
He's he's got involved in so many of these primaries
and change the makeup and the look of the Republican Party,
the fighting spirit of the Republican Party. So I think
that's a little bit different now. But I do I
do think that the Democrats are more they eat their
(31:12):
own more. So you do you do see some of
that dynamic, although I think they're I think, you know,
the good news is President Trump has changed things enough
that these Republicans are struggling. I mean, they nominate these
lunatic left wing candidates in some of these states, and
look at what they got going on in Maine.
Speaker 1 (31:30):
I have a Grand platin or I think almost every
day on this podcast. It's not even funny.
Speaker 2 (31:34):
The Democrats own him, right, I mean they're they're they're
they're potentially going to own a lunatic left wing radical
in Michigan. So you look at you look at these, uh,
the types of candidates, and the Democrats are are nominating.
They can't nominate that the moderate UH Republican, the moderate
(31:55):
Democrat type of candidate that can win in states like
every now and then the state's Indiana or the in
states like Maine, they can't. They can't pick those candidates
because the lunatic, radical left wing base of their party
has taken over.
Speaker 1 (32:10):
So another policy question I really have for you is
during your last term in the in the House, you
became a big leader on the issue of decoupling industries
from China, especially supply chains. It's been six years since COVID,
China is still the largest supply of our medical supplies.
Where are we on trying to bring supply chains home
from China or do we get any closer? Is there
(32:32):
any progress being made? Like at all?
Speaker 2 (32:35):
I think so there's been good news through the Trump
tariffs and both iterations of them from Liberation Day was
at the White House when the President signed the Tariffs
CENTTOL law, and we immediately saw the outcome of that,
and then the changes in tax policy from the Tax
Cuts and Jobs Act back in twenty seventeen and extending
(32:57):
and modernizing many of those tax cuts in the the big,
the so called Big beautiful bill that we passed last year.
You've seen, you know, companies like Eli Lilly and Indiana
bring back substantial amount billions of dollars of manufacturing to
the US instead of placing that that uh manufacturing abroad. Uh.
(33:18):
All all of the auto uh uh companies, the big,
the big auto companies have been growing and increasing over time.
And in Indiana we've seen many, many announcements. Indians the
top manufacturing state per capita in the country. So you've
seen the outcome of it, I think more heavily in
(33:38):
states like mine. But there's there's been a good deal
of good news. Has there been enough? I mean, I
think I think President Trump is very focused on this
and if anything is his legacy would be many things.
But restoring the mate in America economy, especially the manufacturing
base of our economy, is something that we've seen healthy
signs that there will be a lot of that to
(33:59):
come even after he's gone.
Speaker 1 (34:01):
Yeah, I don't one thing I'm fush with. I mean,
I don't understand my Biden didn't do this. I don't
understand why Trump has done this yet. But mandating that
we buy the Pentagon, like buy medicine from companies that
only manufacture in America would make that a lot easier.
It's just very frustrating. A last policy question for you,
because I know you're a busy guy. There was because
(34:21):
of COVID. One of our national hangovers because of COVID,
which you've mentioned a few times, is the explosion in
the deficit and the dead and you know, we're running
close to two trillion dollars. When you first got elected,
it was five hundred and eighty billion, which was also crazy.
Is there anything I mean, the debt is the deficit
is what's killing working class people's paychecks. It's what's eating
away at their dollar. We're having inflation, it's a tax
(34:44):
you don't hear about. Is there any is anyone in
Congress even having this conversation like, well, this deficit is
crazy high?
Speaker 2 (34:53):
Yes, and many many of us have voted. You go
back to the early Doge debates and this Congress and
many of the spending cuts that many of us supported. Unfortunately,
you still have a large number of Republicans who have
been soft on this. And you're right about this. You're
you're identifying the the biggest source of inflation is government debt.
(35:19):
And while while co while COVID was part of it,
the Democrats used, but the under Biden, they increased. Biden
increased spending by two trillion dollars and the debt and
the debt ballooned substantially more, and inflation skyrocketed because of that,
because of the Green New Deal and energy policy, energy costs.
(35:40):
Now you have it, you have an interesting dynamic. Trump
brought down gas prices immediately because he eliminated what he
could of the Green New Deal. We extended the tax cuts.
If you get under under the hood, the economy is
very healthy. But the war in Iran has sent gas
prices back up, spike gas prices again, and inflation is
in increased with it. The good news about that is
(36:02):
as soon as President Trump signs a deal and we
get out of Iran and hopefully get out of it
what we want to get out of it, gas prices
will immediately go back down. India and Indiana we just
did a gas tax holiday. The governor suspended the gas
tax and so our gas prices are temporarily low. But
I drove from Indiana to Washington yesterday and see, you know,
(36:25):
the sky high gas prices has sent inflation back up.
So the good good news is when the war is over,
which I hope will happened very soon, and we sign
a deal and Iran doesn't have the ability to create
a nuclear weapon and all of that's over, gas prices
are going to immediately go back down, and inflation is
going to go back down. You're going to see the
(36:45):
signs of a very healthy economy at that point. That's
that's sort of covered up with the gas price issue
dynamic that we're seeing. But the bad news is that
all of that COVID era spending, all of the Biden
massive increases in spending, is still sending the deficit and
(37:08):
the debt through the roof. And and you're right, the
people who are going to pay for that aren't. Aren't aren't.
The boomer is going to be the you know, the
fifty somethings and younger, my kid, my teenage daughters, their generation.
Speaker 1 (37:23):
My generation, we're in the same generation, our generation.
Speaker 2 (37:25):
Our generation, our kids generation. They're going to pay the
price for it. And it's because so far I've voted
for all of these spending, all of the Doge spending cuts.
I have a couple of colleagues and you know, myself included,
they'll offer a spending cut amendments, and you might only
get ten twenty Republicans in the Senate who vote for
(37:47):
those spending cuts. Is whatever you're cutting is you know,
something that's popular with somebody, and the Senators are afraid
to vote to cut it. So you still have those
squishy Republicans. I found, as you know, when I shared
the Republican Studi Committee, this was our biggest focus when
I was in the House and putting budgets, putting budget
proposals on the table that would UH, that would eliminate
(38:09):
the UH that would bring down the bring down deficits,
eliminate deficits, and bring down the debt, eliminate the debt
and in ten years you know those UH we would
put those proposals on the floor and the House there's
more of an appetite for it those I think partlyas
because these two year cycles, in the six year cycle
(38:31):
in the Senate, you have a lot of senators who
are afraid of their own shadow and or whore just
who don't want to vote for it.
Speaker 1 (38:38):
But the also present company excluded Red states in the
Senate oftentimes elect very moderate members and and I've discovered
that over and over and over again.
Speaker 2 (38:48):
Well I would, I would encourage anybody listening to go,
you know, take a look at how your senators vote
on these these spending cuts. I mean I when I
got to the Senate ran Paul. Whenever we have these
vote ramas, he'll he'll put some of these big spending
cut amendments on the floor and it's fascinating to see
who votes. Who actually when it comes to a vote,
(39:09):
who actually votes to cut spending and who doesn't.
Speaker 1 (39:11):
I think your point, Okay, where go We'll go to
read more about what you're working on. Subscribe to like
a newsletter or social media account where people go to
hear more about what Jim Banks is doing.
Speaker 2 (39:21):
I always appreciate feedback, and we post a lot on
social media on my Facebook page Senator Jim Banks, on
my x account at Senator Banks, and you can find
me on Instagram too, which is just more more fun.
But we appreciate the feedback and we have a lot
of work to do. I'm proud here to be to
(39:41):
be here on behalf of Indiana and to fight for
our country and for our values and this cause. And
appreciate you Ryan and all that you do. I read
your newsletter every Sunday. It's the most substantive substack that
I read every week and shape the material that.
Speaker 1 (39:57):
You put out.
Speaker 2 (39:58):
It makes me a better senator.
Speaker 1 (40:00):
I appreciate that. Thank you everyone this podcast, I really
appreciate it. You got it.
Speaker 2 (40:03):
Take care.
Speaker 1 (40:04):
Now it's time for the Ask Me Anything Question. If
you want to be part of the Ask Me Anything Question,
email me Ryan at Numbers gamepodcast dot com. That's Ryan
at plural Numbers gamepodcast dot com. First question comes from Robbie.
Robbie says, Ryan, thank you for the excellent explanation of
perceived housing crisis that I asked. I watched an interry
with Jim Jordan a committee and I'm not positive who
was talking to a discussion about additional Supreme Court justices.
(40:25):
Came up at his point with we need thirteen justices
instead of nine. Why don't we do it? Now? I
know he's calling Democrats bluff. Would And the question, though,
is would adding additional justice requires simple majority or two thirds?
That is a great question. The answer is a simple majority,
you don't need two thirds. The key reasons is the
Constitution does not fix the size of the Supreme Court
(40:48):
I have been saying to Republicans, this should be a
constitutional you know, this should be an issue tray down
the constitution. This would be overwhelmingly supported by a majority
of people, including Democrats, I think. But the Counselation does
not fix it to nine members. It simply just says,
as one Supreme Court, Congress has the authority set the
(41:08):
number of justices through ordinary legislation. This power comes from
the same clause, let's Congress create inferior federal courts. And
the number has been changed several times. The Digital Act
of seventeen eighty six eighty nine rather had six justices,
eighteen oh one had five to six, eighteen thirty seven
had nine, eighteen sixty three had ten. They reduced that
to seven, and then in eighteen sixty nine they increased
(41:30):
it to nine, its current size. And all these legislations
passed with simple majorities in both the House and Senate.
So yeah, they just need some majority. They do not
need a super majority, which is what would make it
almost impossible if they wanted to do it. But that
means that they can. Next questions from Michael, he says,
great job on the podcast, keep plugging away. Thank you,
(41:50):
Michael for listening. It was very interesting to see that
students graduations bootspeakers who mentioned AI. I wonder how many
boot ai use AI to complete their college a sign
My guess probably a lot. But that's besides the point.
Do never, never let hypocrisy stand in the way of
your values. My son will be going to a senior
of college is fall. He's a computer science major. He
(42:11):
had an internship with a software company that the team
that was supposed to start on June first. He was
on the AI development and implementation team. He worked for
them last summer. They loved him and he expected a
permanent offer. Last day, they called him and said his
internship was canceled. Apparently the existing AI team I made
such great strides using AI, they would not need him
or other new people. He was upset, started working for
(42:33):
his network and then three offers came on a Monday.
Congratulations to him, he was his son is smart and
hard working, but he's not a genius. I love that
honesty from parents, and that's not a shame. I do
love on parents like this, and my kid's great, but
he's not a genius. It's important, I think, to to
not be because those parents that are like my kids
incredible at everything. You're like, calm down, take the lexapro.
(42:55):
All young people need to learn AI, not just tech guys.
I worry more if I was forty two and I
was twenty two. Cities and states need to start up
about data centers. They are in the driver's seat and
should not be giving big tax breaks to developers for
these buildings. They really need to coordinate. What are the
governors and mayors associations for anyway, That is a great point.
(43:16):
Local governments are in the driver's seats as far as
what they want from these data centers, especially these rural,
smaller communities that can make these deals. They need the land,
and only these rural communities have the land they could
be I mean, I get if you don't want a
data center in your area, but let's say you're like, listen,
this will bring tax revenue, This will bring some construction
(43:37):
jobs and maybe a few temporary jobs. I don't mind
with the noise or the light or whatever. And your
community wants the majority of the community wants it. It's
at that point that the that the legislators, the local
legislators should be saying, you need to give X, Y
and Z to this community to build this data center,
and they would probably give it. The problem that these
legislators are having is they are so they're wind and
(44:00):
nine that these benefits are absolutely gonna come that now
they're all rushing to give goodies away to kind of
get ahead of the next person. What they should be
doing is saying, how do I benefit my community any
which way possible? Say you're not going to face a backlash,
We will do whatever, but you're gonna pay the taxes.
You're not going to get a tax break, and you
(44:22):
have to give a you know something back to the community.
You have to you have to fund our I don't know,
programs for X Y and Z or like. Even better,
you could say to them, you could say to your constituents,
and I think this would work. If we bring this
data center in, they're going to pay property taxes for
the entire community for the next ten years. They'll be
(44:42):
a tax moratorium for existing property owners for ten years.
That would be so popular. This is so many easy wins,
and local legislators, unlike national ones, never have to or
rarely have to kind of hold big companies to the
their feet to the fire and they get intimidated by
(45:03):
these big guys, and they shouldn't. They're in the driver's seat.
Local government is in the driver's seat. You need to
demand things to make your districts and your areas better.
I completely agree and I hate these tax up to
these for these data centers. They are the richest companies
in the world and they should pay like it.
Speaker 2 (45:19):
That is all.
Speaker 1 (45:20):
Thank you for this podcast episode. If you like this podcast,
please like and subscribe on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts,
wherever you get your podcasts, and on YouTube. Like it,
subscribe on YouTube. I appreciate you all. Talk to you
guys on Friday.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
Hey Jonas!
Hey Jonas! The official Jonas Brothers podcast. Hosted by Kevin, Joe, and Nick Jonas. It’s the Jonas Brothers you know... musicians, actors, and well, yes, brothers. Now, they’re sharing another side of themselves in the playful, intimate, and irreverent way only they can. Spend time with the Jonas Brothers here and stay a little bit longer for deep conversations like never before.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.