July 17, 2025 • 39 mins
In this conversation, Ryan and Rosemary Jenks discuss the current state of immigration enforcement, particularly in agriculture and hospitality sectors. They explore the pressures on the White House to halt enforcement, the role of technology in modernizing agriculture, and the historical context of amnesty laws. The discussion also delves into judicial challenges to immigration laws, the implications of legalizing undocumented workers on voting rights, and the effectiveness of the H2A visa program. It's a Numbers Game is part of the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Podcast Network - new episodes debut every Monday & Thursday.
Learn more about the Immigration Accountability Project HERE
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
Welcome back to a numbers game with Ryan Gardowski. This
episode today is unfortunately not on the happiest topic. For
a while, I had been hearing that there's this quiet
push to get President Trump to backpedal on his calls
for mass deportations. They were too cruel. It would hurt people,
or heard his reputation with Hispanic voters. It would sour
his poll numbers with American people, It would hurt the economy.
(00:26):
The constant fear of rotting fruit in the fields was
plagued politicians for decades. You know, no, no, no, you
can't take away our illegal labor. We need them. Think
of the lemons. All of those things were now haunting
President Trump. As if places like Japan were importing a
million Mexicans a year to pick rice patties, we absolutely
could not, under any circumstance lose our illegal labor. This
(00:49):
is what has been emphasized by Trump by a number
of sources, right from big agriculture, in the hospitality industry especially,
but the Chamber of Commerce has been very involved, and
according to several sources, it's been by both Senate Republicans
and some celebrities. A few days ago, I was on
a call with somebody who was very well tapped into
(01:11):
the White House, and he said to me in the conversation,
you know, it's not all Brooke Rowlinds. He actually said
it was not Brooke Rowlins at all. And the source
said to me, don't put too much blame on her.
And he was not a Brooke Rowins fan. The source
he said Joe Rogan had met with the President and
had emphasized the President that he should not be doing
(01:32):
these raids at construction sites, that these were just people
showing up for work and it would be harmful. And
I don't know if Joe Rogan has any like investments
in a construction business or anything like that, or it's
just because he saw the videos online. I have no
clue whatsoever. But Joe Rogan was the one sitting there
and saying that to Trump and leaving a very very
big impression. Now I had heard this, and then right
afterwards I went on the Vince Colignies radio show and
(01:55):
I said it up there, and I didn't say for
this podcast. I should have saved it for this podcast.
But I almost unbelievable. I couldn't believe that. I also
heard that his daughter Ivanka was also making calls to
sit there in Paul's deportations that they were too cruel.
President Trump said in a speech as well, I'm just
adding all the people together. So it's the Chamber of Commerce,
and it's the agriculture industry and the hospitality industry, and
(02:18):
Joe Rogan and Ivanka, he said. And this has been
wildly reported. So I do believe this is true that
Agricultural Secretary Broke Rollins, who has been for mass immigration
and amnesty for well over a decade, was giving him,
was giving him the word that we had to stop
these raids on farmers. We had to start these raids
on meat packing, packing industry, we had to stop the
(02:39):
raids on hotels and hospitality industry. According to Axios, Rollins
went to Trump without the knowledge of either Stephen Miller
or Susie Wilds, which infuriated the two. This is this
is how people, by the way, in Trump's orbit, or
who have access to Trump's orbit, get around the guardrails.
I tell you a little story. Last year, I was
(03:02):
twenty twenty four, So last year, early last year, someone
well known in politics. When you inane, you would have
definitely if you don't know who he is. You would
have heard him, heard of him. He wanted to get
his boyfriend, which no one knows that they were dating
at the time. His boyfriend an endorsement from Trump, who
was running for Congress. Allegedly they had had a meeting
(03:23):
just the two of them, and Trump got him all wild,
riled up, got him all angry at certain people, certain
people that were being backed by his boyfriend's opponent being
backed by other people in that race. Got Trump very angry,
and then made the pitch for the endorsement and got
Trump to post on truth Social immediately, because once it's
(03:46):
on truth Social, it's as good as gold. He's not
going to backpedal. This happens so often in Trump world
that I've heard of so many times in Trump were
either before he was president in twenty fifteen, then when
he was president the first term, then in the mid
years those four years he wasn't president, And still to
this day they know if they get him saying something
(04:06):
on the Internet, it is then of record, and then
to backpedal makes it so much harder. Did Rollins meet
with him privately without Susie and Stephen saying anything, and
then puts in the outand truth social I don't know
for a fact it's been reported in Axios, but it
follows the long history of how people work around any
(04:30):
you know, America first types that are in his orbit
and that try to promote the agenda that he ran
on in twenty sixteen and still today. According to that
same report in Acxio, Stephen Miller Rollins wanted to go further.
She wanted a visa basically for illegal farm labor to
(04:51):
get a visa if they went back to their home country,
if they did a backpedal, they went back to their
home country, they went to Mexico, El Salvador, Ecuador, whatever
got and then they came back to the country, they
would get a visa for legal status as if they're
a legal labor. Apparently Miller put a squash to that
and just made sure that that wasn't going to happen.
There's also pockets of establishment conservatives sitting there and pushing
(05:14):
this to him. Maybe not in phone calls in the meetings,
although they may be, but definitely in the media, because
I've seen them. People like Eric Bowling, who was on
Fox and was on Newsmax, who's has a relationship with
the president. Sean Spicer, his first press secretary, has been
on to Way constantly saying, this is the time Republicans
get to pass an amnesty. And the Senate Republicans who
(05:36):
for decades have been teetering up this idea of we're
going to get something, We're going to give something to
you know, the Chamber of Commerce, and to all of
our donors. The Lindsey Grahams, the Bill Cassidy's, the Tom Tillis's,
the James Langford's, they are all getting ready to go.
They are all saying, this is our moment, we can
do this, and they're not afraid of the Republican voters.
(05:58):
If Trump gives the okay, if Trump gives the okay
in a year, in three years and five years, Wheny're
running for re election and the deal is done, they
could sit there and tell the voters, I was just
falling orders. Do you hate the president? Now you don't
hate the president, so you can't aim me for doing
that for backpenlly on everything. Now, on the other side,
you have a lot of people like my friend Ann Coulter,
you have Laura Ingram, Jack so Big, Charlie Kirk, Steve
(06:18):
Bannon and Tucker Carlson sitting there and saying, this is
a warning sign. You can't do this. You have to
do mass deportations. You have to do what you promised.
President Trump, for his part, has been kind of all
over the issue. He's talked about pausing the raids, then
the administration restarted. Now he's talking about doing selective enforcement.
(06:39):
It's kind of a bit everywhere. Maybe he's floating an
idea to see what the most positive and negative reactions
will be. Now, for my knowledge, current agricultural deportations are
still ongoing. They haven't all been frozen. There was a
case just late last week where a marijuana farm, which
does count as agriculture, a marijuana farm, they head over
I think one hundred legal aliens working on it, including
(07:01):
children from my knowledge from what I've read, that were rated.
It was rated literally until last week. I know it's
a marijuana farm, but it still counts as agriculture. So
that did happen. And on June tenth, the Department of
Labor announced that President Trump had created the Office of
Immigration Policy, which was a quote red tape cutting one
(07:21):
stop shop to help employers get faster approval for temporary
work visas for non citizen labor. That would suggest to
me about trying to work within the system as it stands, right,
because what we have currently in our system is we
have in agricultural visa. It's the H two a visa.
It's a limitless visa. There's no caps to it. You
(07:42):
can It's one of the few visas like tourist visas,
that there are no caps. Endless amount of people can
come in and work in farms. It's not like there's
a set number. So if they're trying to make farmers
go through the legal system, and if I guess if
there's growth in the legal system, it will give a
sign to Trump, Look what I've given you an easy
way to get them. Maybe he's going to waive some
(08:03):
of the rules or fines or restrictions or not restrictions,
but like you know, forty five day, sixty day permit laws, whatever,
in order to sit there and get agricultural labor. But
it seems like he's sitting there and going to lean
more heavily into the current legal system. I don't think
an amnesty the way that Republican voters have thought about
it for years, which is citizenship is on the table.
(08:25):
But any time you do not enforce the laws, it
is an amnesty. If I was speeding, if I was
going forty in a twenty five or fifty five in
a forty or whatever, I would have every right to
get pulled over. Well, that's the thing about laws, And
this is why American people have so been so kicked
around about trusting the government. Is because there's one set
(08:48):
of rule for the working class, for the middle class,
for the upper middle class, and even for the lower
upper class, and then there's another set of rule for
the pe deities of the world, or the illegal immigrants
of the world, or the very very well connected of
the world, or the very very under well connected, as
long as the cheap labor they do helps the well connected.
(09:09):
It seems that way to a lot of people, which
is why you need to constantly enforce the law. And
here's the truth of it. Right when you apply for
a legal visa farm lab with visa an H two
a visa, there's all sorts of requirements, like you have
to pay a certain type of wage or prevailing wage.
You have to make sure that those wages won't hurt
American workers. You need to provide free housing for your workers.
(09:30):
You need to provide subsized transportation to and from the
farm for your workers. It's not a lot of things,
but it's you know, it's something, it's something there. If
you go through the illegal way, you don't have to
provide anything. So when a meet someone working in the
meat pop boxing and packing industry gets his arm cut
off for unsafe safety standards and he's only got paid
five dollars an hour, Well when he goes to the
(09:51):
hospital for that, for the emergency room, who picks up
that bill?
Speaker 2 (09:55):
You do?
Speaker 1 (09:55):
The taxpayer? Does I do? Who picks up all the
bills for everything illegal aliens use? From the prisons that
many of them fill, to the schools their children go to,
From the roads that they use that fill with potholes. Eventually,
as they have wear and tear all of those things,
the car accidents you know that they end up getting
into sometimes. Who pays for all of it? We do.
(10:16):
That's what illegal immigration is. It is a form of
socialism where the profits are personalized and all the core
costs are socialized. The suckers sit there and pay for
every for these few corporations to get immensely immensely wealthy. Now,
it's also very important to remember that most illegal aliens
working in the US illegally are committing multiple felons, including
(10:39):
and most importantly, identity theft. It's the number one, and
document fraud is the number two. Probably let alone doing
the jobs like Americans otherwise would do in certain industries
or farm work that could be mechanized, that could machines
could produce more cheaply and produce larger quantities of food
that would actually decrease grocery prices. That they're doing, those
illegal aliens so often in or in a situation where
(11:01):
they provide fake information to farm worker, to farmers, to
a large corporations that own farms, to meat processing industries.
By relying on cheap foreign labor, you are allowing farmers
who otherwise would mechanize, to produce less food at the
greater costs to the American citizen. In the last few years,
here are a few examples of illegal aliens causing problems
(11:24):
for American citizens working on farms. They were working in
agriculture but using identity theft. A healthcare provider was forced
to deny medical necessary prescriptions to a victim in Pennsylvania
because his identity was stolen by someone working at the
Green Valley Foods. A disabled victim in Texas was unable
to work struggled to get their Social Security disability payments
(11:46):
because a different illegal alien was fraudtionently using their identities
at the Glen Valley Foods. Two illegal aliens committing to
at one industry, the IRS requested. A victim from Colorado
repaid more than five thousand dollars after their income was
falsely increased during an illegal alien using their stolen identity.
That also happened at Glen Valley Foods. By the way,
(12:07):
that's three in a row. A full time nursing student
in Missouri lost their college tuition assistance because it was
fraudulently reported that they earned too much money. The investigation
feel that an illegal alien was using their Social Security
number for employment, so they lost their college assistant. And
a victim in California was working for nearly fifteen years
to regain their identity after being financially damaged by an
(12:29):
illegal alien working in agriculture and they stole their identity.
That is the thing that no one talks about. All
these people are just you know, wonderfully here they're all
doing the work, and they're just you know, they're you know,
angels in the field doing everything for us. Yes, some
of them are, but a lot of using your identity
and stealing your identity. And it is important, it's important
(12:49):
that people get wise to the cost of cheap labor
is incredibly expensive to the average American. I know that
this may seem like minor, like the oh the look
of these handful of incidences, right these handful of incidences
that I just named from one industry, one company when
they were raided for legal aliens, and the victims that
were caused from one company. You might say this is
(13:11):
not everybody yet, But not everybody whose speeds is going
to hit a child or a pedestrian or another car.
Not everyone who sells marijuana laces them a fetanol, or
sells things without proper documentation that they are producing a
save product. Not everyone's going to hurt intentionally hurt somebody,
but people do get hurt when lawlessness is the accepted
(13:32):
status quo. I want to make one last point, especially
to Republicans right now, because I know I've gone on
a tie rate. I know that people are probably exhausted
of hearing me talk. But one last point, Republicans are
falling into a sense of false security. A poll was
released on Friday by Gallup and it found that the
percentage of Republicans who want immigration reduced fell from eighty
eight percent to forty eight percent, and those that want
(13:54):
our current numbers to maintain the same when from four
percent to thirty six percent. Is many people look at
what Trump has done on the border, and he's done
fantastic stuff on the border, five stars across the way,
one hundred percent of the report card, no arguments, nothing,
no problems. What he's done on the border. He's done
an incredible job and he deserves all the kudos. But
they look at that and they presume that the problem
(14:15):
with mass immigration is over, and it's not. Yes, illegal
immigration is down, but all the problems that are of
our current legal immigrationism they still exist. Nothing has changed, really,
nothing has changed. Congress has not stepped in. The President
has done mass changes to our legalmgracisms. He's tweaked here
and there, but the major points are all still currently going.
(14:37):
And it's like the people who right now immigration, people
who were concerned immigration last year and are less so
this year. You are like the people who are supposed
to go on a diet lose fifty pounds and he
lose the first ten and then immediately start binge eating
because you think you're doing the successful thing. We're on
the way, but we're not there yet, and the present's
do great things, but he's not there yet. We cannot
afford to backpedal.
Speaker 3 (14:58):
Now.
Speaker 1 (14:58):
Our guest today this episode has been fight against illegal
immigration for years. She knows the ins and outs on
what's going on, the soft amnesty and how it's affecting Americans.
Stay tuned with me on today's episode is Rosemary Janks
from the Immigration Accountability Project. Rosemary, thank you for being here.
Speaker 3 (15:17):
My pleasure. Good to see Ryan.
Speaker 1 (15:18):
Rosmie. What do you make of this pressure campaign on
the White House to stop immigration enforcement in agriculture and
on hospitality workers.
Speaker 3 (15:27):
So, I mean, we have seen this repeatedly in the past,
where employers who rely on cheap illegal labor have lobbying
efforts to convince Congress or the White House whoever, to
allow them to keep their cheap illegal labor. I think
that the lobbying efforts are a little bit more desperate
this time. Around because they face a real risk and
(15:48):
they know that this is the first president we have
had in a very long time who is actually serious
about enforcing our immigration laws. And that means that they're
going to have to give up their illegal labor, which
is a good thing for America. It's a good thing
for American workers, it's a good thing for our economy.
But I do think that they are feeling kind of
desperate and trapped, and you know, again, that's a good
(16:10):
thing they should well.
Speaker 1 (16:12):
One thing that drives me crazy, and I hope I
wish some nonprofit I'm not saying yours, but some nonprofit
study this. They always from about these rotted fruits in
the field, and they always say, you're going to disrupt
the food industry and the supply chain for food. I
would love one organization to study how much food is
produced by a farm that has a mechanized labor force
(16:35):
versus that of cheap labor, both illegal and illegally in
this country. It would be fascinating because I'm going to
guess that the mechanized force would probably be cheaper, more
efficient with more food.
Speaker 3 (16:45):
Absolutely, and in fact, the Commission on Agricultural Immigration Reform
I think it was called that was created by the
nineteen eighty six amnesty bill. They actually studied what was
the impact of the amnesty, the agricultural worker amnesty and
nineteen eighty six, and they found that basically, once the
illegal ag workers got amnesty, they all left ag because,
(17:07):
you know, they went out to find other jobs because
they now had an entire national economy that they could
choose from. And so once again employers had to hire, well,
they decided they needed to hire illegal workers, just new
illegal workers. You know, we're in the twenty first century.
It is absurd that we are not employing technology to
(17:29):
harvest our food, to milk our cows, all of these
other things. We have the machines available, and you know what,
if you can't find enough American workers to go out
in the field and pick crops, you certainly can find
American workers who are willing to run the machines. It
takes a lot less labor, and it is you know,
we need to move into the twenty first century at
some point, and we should be incentivizing growers to do
(17:53):
just that. And the way you do that is to
increase the cost of labor.
Speaker 1 (17:57):
And it's not even just cows being milt, which technologies
existed for a long time. We have robots that can
pict suhrawberries. We have robots that It's not like Japan
requires a million Mexicans every year in their rice patty fields.
They have joined the twenty first century, probably even before
the twenty first century began. We are kind of at
whims of this because of farmers, which are there are
(18:19):
fewer and fewer farmers, but they still control the same
level of power. It seems it you've been around the
h and around like around the hill for a very
long time. What is the reaction from congress Congressional Republicans been.
I've gotten calls from people both saying from some Republican
Congressmans like absolute and I will not pass any amnesty bill.
I don't care what it is. And then others staffers
(18:41):
who have told me it's all the usual suspects are
plotting already.
Speaker 3 (18:45):
Yeah, well, I mean we've already had Republicans, at least
in name, introduced amnesty bills that include farm worker amnesties
like Maria Salazar.
Speaker 1 (18:55):
It's just the worst.
Speaker 3 (18:57):
And this is the problem. You know, first of all,
they don't understand what they're doing They don't understand the
impacts this has on Americans, and on especially poor Americans.
But also they don't grasp the fact that there are
alternatives to illegal labor. First of all, any grower, you know,
if that grower is at risk of having crops rotting
(19:18):
on the field, which is such a nonsense argument, then
they have to raise their rates, you know, they have
to raise the wages and attract American workers, even if seasonally.
I mean, I spent a summer in high school picking
green beans. It was a terrible job. I hated it,
but I did it. I showed up every day because
I got paid for it. You know, there are Americans.
Roughly thirty percent of current agricultural workers right now are
(19:41):
American citizens native born Americans. Another thirty percent are either
lawful permanent residents or temporary legal immigrants. So sixty percent
of the workforce is already legal. It's that last forty
percent that the farmers are basically just refusing to acknowledge.
And here's the problem. There are a lot of small
(20:02):
farmers and ranchers who are only using legal labor. So
what are we going to tell them? You're stupid because
you've been following the law. That's just crazy. You don't
reward people who broke the law.
Speaker 2 (20:14):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (20:14):
I went to a farm one time and I was
like maybe twenty two, twenty two, twenty three, and all
the people who worked on the farm were not only Americans,
they were all white Americans. Now it was a food
to table farm that service mostly restaurants, but every single
one of them. I was actually surprised by it. I
was thinking I would see a different thing, and it
(20:35):
was a completely different thing, completely different than my opinion
based upon what the image that I had seen were.
And you could always mechanize, you could always go to
machines that replace them. I was going to ask you
specifically about well, I want to go and I want
to talk one one thing first. What you hear from
a lot of established Republicans these are like the Sean
Spicer has repe of these talking points at nauseum on
(20:57):
two Way. Eric Bowling was on two Ay Talk talking
about this. They put up this pipe dream, they put
up this what if scenario that is not based in
reality at all. And you've heard it's not just the
two of them. You hear all the time about what
if we just did this form of amnesty, right, and
I want you to talk about if this form of
(21:19):
amnesty has been trying in the past and unsuccessful, and
if it's possible now. So the first is what if
you only did an amnesty where it was for people
who did not commit a crime and had a job.
Is it possible for people to fraudulently produce job records
for years saying oh, yeah, I had a job, I
(21:39):
qualify Is that right? Does that happen?
Speaker 3 (21:41):
Of course? And that was one of the biggest problems
with the nineteen eighty six amnesty, especially the agricultural worker
part of it was the fraud. I mean, we had
people who said that they picked watermelons from the trees
and they got amnesty. Their job was picking watermelons from
a tree. That's insane. We all so, by the way,
had one of the nineteen the World Trade Center bombers,
(22:05):
mackmood Abu Halima, was granted amnesty under that nineteen eighty
six amnesty bill. So you know, the vetting is crazy.
And here's the problem.
Speaker 1 (22:15):
And that was for three million this is now and
it was.
Speaker 3 (22:20):
One mosted one million, right, and then all of a
sudden there are two million extra illegal aliens that we
haven't accounted for who are applying for this amnesty. And
so the then I ins was completely overwhelmed with the applications.
And of course Congress doesn't understand any of that, and
so they set ridiculous parameters as to how long it's
supposed to take to approve the applications, so it becomes
(22:41):
a rubber stamp process. Vetting isn't done, and we end
up with terrorists with green cards. This guy got a
green card through this process, so you know, the fraud
is ridiculous. And then also Congress, in its infinite wisdom,
does stupid things like say that in order to prove
that you've been here for five years or ten years
or whatever, you can get an AFFI David from a
(23:03):
friend or a relative.
Speaker 1 (23:05):
I'm sure those are all Wait, so wait, I talk
about the eighty six amnesty for just one. I know
this is not like what Trump's proposing, but this is
something that makes me scream at my television. I've turned
into my father. Want to hear people regurgitate this. And
maybe I'm wrong on the information. So if I am,
please correct me. But I don't think I am. The
eighty six amnesty federal judges were granting amnesty for years
(23:28):
past the quote unquote deadlines, and we're granting it to
people who were not even in the country at the
time when the amnesty was being discussed. Do I have
that correct?
Speaker 3 (23:38):
Yes, one hundred percent. There were all kinds of lawsuits
about you know, well, my family wasn't here during the
amnesty and so now I need to be able to
bring my family in. I mean, there were literally hundreds
of thousands of illegal aliens who are allowed to come
in and claim that amnesty as family members of the
amnesty aliens or you know, people who first whatever reason
(24:00):
and didn't get to file their applications in time, probably
because they weren't here. So yeah, the judicial system ran
amok on that.
Speaker 1 (24:07):
So this is what listeners and Republican regular Joe Schmoe
Republicans need to understand when they hear people saying we're
only going to do it for certain people who don't
have a criminal record and who have a job and
can learn English, a federal judge will overrule every one
of those requirements, including the penalties and back taxes they're
(24:28):
supposed to pay. Because it happened hundreds of thousands of
times during the eighty six amnesty. It will happen millions
of times. If you think that the woman with the
unpronounceable African name in California who just ruled you can't
profile someone for speaking Spanish on a job site to
deport them or to investigate their here illegally, would not
(24:48):
waive all those restrictions and granted for somebody who is
not even in the country. Now you're being lied to
because it happened before. I know. This is a tyrant
and I ran I know only do an interview, and
I don't get this like much. I want to drill
a hole in my head. But I hear it from
people forever that we're going to have this special We're
going to find the next Einstein among the thirty five
(25:11):
million legaliands, and only he's gonna get it and everyone
else is going to go home. It has never ever, ever,
ever happened. And liberal judges, who are hundreds of them
filled the courts will absolutely be like, now, wave them
all in and their family who are currently in Mozambique
right now.
Speaker 3 (25:27):
Yeah, you're absolutely right. And here's one of the problems
that leads to this judicial excess is Congress. Of course,
Congress puts into these laws all kinds of waivers. You
can wave the criminal restrictions, you can wave the fees,
you can wave the you know, all sorts of things.
If they don't have proof of such and such, you
can wave that in the national interest or in the
(25:49):
public interest or whatever, and so everything gets waved. So
I mean, if you're a judge and you're looking at
the way the law is written in, it says you
can wave everything. Okay, Well, why wouldn't you wave everything?
You know, it's crazy that you cannot take a group
of illegal aliens, people who have not been vetted, people
who basically we ask them who are you, and they
(26:12):
tell us and we accept that as their identity. You know,
these are people who in most cases dump their documents
on the other side of the Rio grand before they
came in. We have no idea who they are. It's
why we keep finding criminals from their home countries, Like
they were convicted of crimes in the home countries. We
find them here and we had no idea that they
were wanted by whatever country. Because there's zero vetting. You
(26:35):
cannot vet people. You don't have any.
Speaker 1 (26:37):
Data on right and the notion that we're going to
make ten to twenty million people into legal residents, non voters,
which is the other thing that Republicans say, will never
make them voters. They will never have the right to vote. No,
that's not true, because I guarantee the ACLU will bring
up a lawsuit day one. They have to have the
(26:59):
right to voute your disenfranchising them, which one hundred percent
a San Francisco judge is going to like absolutely grant
them the right to vote, and we will have districts
across the country suing until Kingdom come and their legal
legal American citizens thanks to the Birthright Citizenship Act, which,
by the way, even if Trump's lawsuit is successful, their
kids would still be citizens if they are legal residents.
(27:22):
Their children will be absolutely available to have every Medicaid, welfare,
Social Security, FOODSNAP program under the sun. The cost of
our welfare state will aiming to relast questions, I promise
I won't go on tires. I'll let you talk. Theirstion
is I'm sorry, this just rais me crazy. I'm not
like this normally, and on the podcasts in personal life,
(27:44):
I am this insufferable. But the the other thing was
one the English requirement, the idea that we're gonna have
an English crewman Rosemary for people who have not applied
for citizenship. Is the English requirement that is on this
Poston on the standard of the test to become our
is that waived currently for people.
Speaker 3 (28:02):
It's waved for people over I think it's the age
of sixty five. It's waved for young people. So and
there are other possibilities of waivers for disability and so on,
so it can be waved.
Speaker 1 (28:12):
Yes, yeah, so even that.
Speaker 3 (28:13):
But even if it's not waived, it's a ridiculously simple test.
I mean, it's basically, can you say one sentence or
can you answer my question when I ask you what
your name is? And if you can answer, then you
know enough English to become a naturalized citizen.
Speaker 1 (28:29):
I help my Auntsery for her citizenship test. She's been
in the country for a very long time, she's married,
had children or whatever, and I could not believe how
easy the questions were to begin with. I was like,
if you fail this, you, I mean, just shouldn't you
should be ejected? As my aunt I'm saying this, So
two last questions one there, I do not believe that
these farmers want their illegal labor to even get visas
(28:53):
because we have a limitless visa program for agriculture workers currently,
but there are requirements. You have to pay them a
lit wage or is there a provincial wage. You have
to provide housing, transportation, there's a lot of expenses illegally
lay in labor. You don't even have to put them
in safe working conditions. And when they go to the
hospital because they lost an arm and the meat packing plan,
(29:13):
who pays for it is the taxpayer. Do you get
any notion that they want even this legal STAIZI they
just don't want raids anymore.
Speaker 3 (29:21):
Yeah, no, that's absolutely right. They don't want enforcement. They
want to continue with the status quo. I mean the
status quo is basically they have slaves and you know,
or at least indentured servants who can't do anything about it.
They can't complain because then you know, the employer consider, well,
I'm gonna call eyes if you complain. But yeah, I mean,
that's exactly what they want, and that is exactly the
(29:43):
opposite of what they should get. You know, the H
two A program, the legal guest worker visa for agriculture,
that thing has exploded. I mean it clearly works. It
went from like thirty I think somewhere around thirty seven
and twenty fourteen to three hundred and eight five thousand
visas issued last year, So there are farmers using it,
(30:05):
So it obviously works. Is it bureaucratic? Do they have
to provide extra things? Yes? But guess what these.
Speaker 1 (30:11):
Are the people picking a food?
Speaker 3 (30:14):
Right? Right?
Speaker 1 (30:15):
But were you talk about this minimal?
Speaker 3 (30:18):
If you think about any workforce in the United States
where it is important to have a legal, identifiable workforce,
don't you think picking our food is that industry. I mean,
this is potentially a national security issue. This is our food.
And all these Democrats saying, oh, well, you can't take
away the people who are picking the food. You can
(30:40):
if they're not here legally. We need to know who
they are. We need to know that they don't have,
you know, bad intentions for whatever they're doing. I mean,
with the number of illegal aliens that came over in
the last four years, we have no idea who those
people are, where they are are they working on farms?
I don't know, do you? And we have got to
(31:01):
get a grip on this.
Speaker 1 (31:02):
There was a case in my last question. There was
a case in Omaha, Nebraska, just like a couple of
weeks ago, where they rated a meat packing plant and
the stories the day after the raid were, well, this
is upsetting our farms and we won't have this meat
and prices are going to explode and they'll never fill
these jobs again. And I think within a week Americans
that applied for every one of those jobs, wages had
(31:22):
gone up, safety genders have gone up. Can you explain this?
And this is not the only time this has happened.
It happened in Chicago around a bakery a black woman. Yeah.
Can you explain some examples of this where the prices
did not explode Americans did feel the job. I mean,
if you know any of many examples, but this one
included where this fear mongering over the idea of the
(31:43):
lazy American is so preposterously you know, it's like it's
fear porn of the lazy American who just will not
do anything as if you know, our history as a
nation has been built off the backs of bumps.
Speaker 3 (31:56):
Yeah. Well, and that's one of the things that the
Commission on Agriculture Reform found is that the largest cost
for food production is actually transportation. It's getting the strawberries
from California to the supermarkets on the East Coast. It's
not labor. So if you could snap your fingers and
replace all of the illegal aliens with legal workers at
(32:18):
the wages that they would demand, you would potentially increase
the cost of ahead of lettuce by a nickel. Are
Americans willing to pay a nickel to have a legal
workforce picking their food? I think they probably.
Speaker 1 (32:30):
Are, so, I mean, I mean, I know you don't
know these numbers, and I don't know them either, but
I'm just throwing an idea there. So basically, if the
government were to create like a bullet train type in
like China has, as parts of the EU have, that
could transport stuff very quickly between coasts, that would do
far more to reduce the cost of food than an
illegal workforce.
Speaker 3 (32:50):
Well, I think what President Trump has done with the
cost of energy is doing far more to reduce the
cost of food than the labor supply over will. But
you know the other thing is by local agriculture, you know,
buy local food products that reduces the costs and increases
the quality.
Speaker 1 (33:08):
Right, Well, Rosemary Jenks, where can people go to learn
more about the Immigration Accountability Project.
Speaker 3 (33:13):
We're at iaproject dot org on the Internet, and all
of our social media is linked from our homepage there
IA project dot org. We have all kinds of resources,
including the every single immigration vote of every member of
Congress is on our member accountability page, so you can
find out how your representative or senator votes and how
(33:34):
that differs, perhaps from what they say on the campaign trip.
Speaker 1 (33:37):
That's so Greg, I wonder my I did. I ran
Brandon Gills race the last show's a GC so I
think he's one of the better ones.
Speaker 3 (33:43):
But he's fantastic.
Speaker 1 (33:45):
He's great. I will thank you for being here and
hopefully we'll have you on again soon, and please check
out the Immigration Accountability Project.
Speaker 2 (33:52):
Thanks Ryan, you're listening to It's a Numbers Game with
Ryan Grodowsky. We'll be right back after this message. Now
it's time for the Ask Me Anything segment or the show.
I want you do part of the Ask Me Anything
segment by emailing me ryanat Numbers Gamepodcast dot com. That's
Ryan plural and Numbers Gamepodcast dot com. I will get
to your emails. I know I'm backlogged a few for.
Speaker 1 (34:14):
A few days but I will absolutely get to your
questions on the air. This one comes from Rafael Castilla.
I hope I'm pronouncing your last name correctly, Rafael, I
never do, but I hope so, he says, Hi, Ryan,
I've listened to your podcast since the inception. I especially
enjoyed your episode with Alex Thompson. Thank you so much
for that. My question for day is to campaign finance.
(34:34):
Are there any politicians you consider most efficient users of
campaign resources? The prerequisite being that they are able to
raise sufficient funds and their race, but predominant they're able
to extract high payoffs for ad spence and other expenses.
My interest is aptitude of the person and their judgment
on who they hire, rather than the source of their funding. Basically,
I want the opposite of Bloomberg's one billion dollars just
(34:56):
to win American in Samoa. Thank you, Rafael. Okay, great question.
So here is First of all, Rafael, thank you for listening. Truly,
from the bottom of my heart. I'm always amazed that
people listen, so I'm very grateful when you're looking at
how campaign spending goes. There's a law on the books
that campaigns and candidates get a certain rate that is
(35:17):
lower than super packs or even other things like they
can't get their rates jacked up. So when it comes
to ad spends per dollar, right, they're all at the
same level, and unless they book at the very very
end when things are increased, but they're basically at the
same level. The packs have to pay more, though, And
I think that when you're looking at I'm assuming you're
(35:39):
talking about Congress, by the way, because the president has
been just Trump for the last twelve years, and I
you know, I could go into tires at Ronda Santa's
or Nikki Haley or whatever, but it's not really pertainable,
and I haven't paid that much attention to what the
Democrats have done. So I'm going to assume you're talking
about House and Republicans in Congress. When it comes to
House and Republicans in Congress, there's two separate kinds of
House members. Right. There's something called the frontline members. Those
(36:01):
are like want of Scamani or Ken Calvallet or Mike Lawler.
Those are people who are very very competitive seats that
they need a massive amount of investments. And then there's
like Marjorie Taylor Green or Harriet Haberman or Ronnie Jackson.
Those are districts that Democrats can't win even in a
landslide election. So House members in very safe districts will, oftentimes,
(36:22):
especially after the primary season is over, give a lot
of their money to frontline members who are in danger
of losing. The person who did this the most was
Kevin McCarthy. Kevin McCarthy gave in his last cycle when
he was running for speaker, when he might have been
the speaker I think was running for speaker, he gave
two million dollars of campaign funds to endangered Republicans. The
(36:44):
leadership Reuplican leadership generally gives a lot of money. Steve Scalise,
Tom Emmer, and Elis Stefanik gave another combined two million,
and that doesn't include their leadership funds. That's just their
campaigns giving money to frontline members because they're safe. The
way you kind of angle yourself as a future leader
or member of leadership is by raising money for endangered Republicans,
(37:06):
either in the primary process and getting on board early,
or in the general election when they're in very tough
and competitive districts which there are fewer and fewer of
them as far as incumbents. I went through a lot
of the twenty of the last the one hundred and
eighteenth Congress is filing data when I saw this question.
As far as the incumbents who spend most efficiently, people
(37:26):
in the House that I saw, like Congressman Gary Palmer
from Alabama and Greg stu from Florida were very efficient
with their spending, but they also are in very uncompetitive seats,
so that might have been the reason. I did a
quick look at people's burn rates. That's how much you
spend versus how much you bring in in any given
election cycle. The cost of fundraising is one of the
(37:48):
highest burn rate parts of it, but there's other parts
like staff and ads and whatnot. I want to see
who had the most efficient burn rate. The people who
were basically not overspending, especially they were not in hard districts.
People in hard districts a little leeway. But the people
that I saw who had great burn rates and were
spending money very efficiently was Andy Barr from Kentucky, At
(38:08):
Fallon from Texas, Chuck Fleischmann from Tennessee, and Drew Garbarino
from New York. Beth ban Dyed from Texas actually Hintson
from Iowa and Darryl Isislol from Carol call those with
who in me. I looked at their stuff and I said, Wow,
they're actually spending money very very very efficiently. I don't
know the specific ad rates for certain people from certain
frontline members, so it's hard to get into that, but
(38:29):
I was able to really dig into those kind of
safe in combents and give you a really astute assessment.
I hope that answered your question. Money in politics is
very interesting to a lot of people, and I always
say your first dollar matters a lot more than your
one billionth dollar. It has a diminishing effect. So that's
kind of where I lay on it. I hope that
answer your question. I found that question really interesting. Was
(38:51):
a very very smart question, Raphael. Thank you an for listening.
Thank you all for listening. Please like and subscribe to
this podcast in the iHeartRadio app, Apple podcast wherever you
get your podcast, and I will see you next time.
Welcome back to a numbers game with Ryan Gardowski. This
episode today is unfortunately not on the happiest topic. For
a while, I had been hearing that there's this quiet
push to get President Trump to backpedal on his calls
for mass deportations. They were too cruel. It would hurt people,
or heard his reputation with Hispanic voters. It would sour
his poll numbers with American people, It would hurt the economy.
(00:26):
The constant fear of rotting fruit in the fields was
plagued politicians for decades. You know, no, no, no, you
can't take away our illegal labor. We need them. Think
of the lemons. All of those things were now haunting
President Trump. As if places like Japan were importing a
million Mexicans a year to pick rice patties, we absolutely
could not, under any circumstance lose our illegal labor. This
(00:49):
is what has been emphasized by Trump by a number
of sources, right from big agriculture, in the hospitality industry especially,
but the Chamber of Commerce has been very involved, and
according to several sources, it's been by both Senate Republicans
and some celebrities. A few days ago, I was on
a call with somebody who was very well tapped into
(01:11):
the White House, and he said to me in the conversation,
you know, it's not all Brooke Rowlinds. He actually said
it was not Brooke Rowlins at all. And the source
said to me, don't put too much blame on her.
And he was not a Brooke Rowins fan. The source
he said Joe Rogan had met with the President and
had emphasized the President that he should not be doing
(01:32):
these raids at construction sites, that these were just people
showing up for work and it would be harmful. And
I don't know if Joe Rogan has any like investments
in a construction business or anything like that, or it's
just because he saw the videos online. I have no
clue whatsoever. But Joe Rogan was the one sitting there
and saying that to Trump and leaving a very very
big impression. Now I had heard this, and then right
afterwards I went on the Vince Colignies radio show and
(01:55):
I said it up there, and I didn't say for
this podcast. I should have saved it for this podcast.
But I almost unbelievable. I couldn't believe that. I also
heard that his daughter Ivanka was also making calls to
sit there in Paul's deportations that they were too cruel.
President Trump said in a speech as well, I'm just
adding all the people together. So it's the Chamber of Commerce,
and it's the agriculture industry and the hospitality industry, and
(02:18):
Joe Rogan and Ivanka, he said. And this has been
wildly reported. So I do believe this is true that
Agricultural Secretary Broke Rollins, who has been for mass immigration
and amnesty for well over a decade, was giving him,
was giving him the word that we had to stop
these raids on farmers. We had to start these raids
on meat packing, packing industry, we had to stop the
(02:39):
raids on hotels and hospitality industry. According to Axios, Rollins
went to Trump without the knowledge of either Stephen Miller
or Susie Wilds, which infuriated the two. This is this
is how people, by the way, in Trump's orbit, or
who have access to Trump's orbit, get around the guardrails.
I tell you a little story. Last year, I was
(03:02):
twenty twenty four, So last year, early last year, someone
well known in politics. When you inane, you would have
definitely if you don't know who he is. You would
have heard him, heard of him. He wanted to get
his boyfriend, which no one knows that they were dating
at the time. His boyfriend an endorsement from Trump, who
was running for Congress. Allegedly they had had a meeting
(03:23):
just the two of them, and Trump got him all wild,
riled up, got him all angry at certain people, certain
people that were being backed by his boyfriend's opponent being
backed by other people in that race. Got Trump very angry,
and then made the pitch for the endorsement and got
Trump to post on truth Social immediately, because once it's
(03:46):
on truth Social, it's as good as gold. He's not
going to backpedal. This happens so often in Trump world
that I've heard of so many times in Trump were
either before he was president in twenty fifteen, then when
he was president the first term, then in the mid
years those four years he wasn't president, And still to
this day they know if they get him saying something
(04:06):
on the Internet, it is then of record, and then
to backpedal makes it so much harder. Did Rollins meet
with him privately without Susie and Stephen saying anything, and
then puts in the outand truth social I don't know
for a fact it's been reported in Axios, but it
follows the long history of how people work around any
(04:30):
you know, America first types that are in his orbit
and that try to promote the agenda that he ran
on in twenty sixteen and still today. According to that
same report in Acxio, Stephen Miller Rollins wanted to go further.
She wanted a visa basically for illegal farm labor to
(04:51):
get a visa if they went back to their home country,
if they did a backpedal, they went back to their
home country, they went to Mexico, El Salvador, Ecuador, whatever
got and then they came back to the country, they
would get a visa for legal status as if they're
a legal labor. Apparently Miller put a squash to that
and just made sure that that wasn't going to happen.
There's also pockets of establishment conservatives sitting there and pushing
(05:14):
this to him. Maybe not in phone calls in the meetings,
although they may be, but definitely in the media, because
I've seen them. People like Eric Bowling, who was on
Fox and was on Newsmax, who's has a relationship with
the president. Sean Spicer, his first press secretary, has been
on to Way constantly saying, this is the time Republicans
get to pass an amnesty. And the Senate Republicans who
(05:36):
for decades have been teetering up this idea of we're
going to get something, We're going to give something to
you know, the Chamber of Commerce, and to all of
our donors. The Lindsey Grahams, the Bill Cassidy's, the Tom Tillis's,
the James Langford's, they are all getting ready to go.
They are all saying, this is our moment, we can
do this, and they're not afraid of the Republican voters.
(05:58):
If Trump gives the okay, if Trump gives the okay
in a year, in three years and five years, Wheny're
running for re election and the deal is done, they
could sit there and tell the voters, I was just
falling orders. Do you hate the president? Now you don't
hate the president, so you can't aim me for doing
that for backpenlly on everything. Now, on the other side,
you have a lot of people like my friend Ann Coulter,
you have Laura Ingram, Jack so Big, Charlie Kirk, Steve
(06:18):
Bannon and Tucker Carlson sitting there and saying, this is
a warning sign. You can't do this. You have to
do mass deportations. You have to do what you promised.
President Trump, for his part, has been kind of all
over the issue. He's talked about pausing the raids, then
the administration restarted. Now he's talking about doing selective enforcement.
(06:39):
It's kind of a bit everywhere. Maybe he's floating an
idea to see what the most positive and negative reactions
will be. Now, for my knowledge, current agricultural deportations are
still ongoing. They haven't all been frozen. There was a
case just late last week where a marijuana farm, which
does count as agriculture, a marijuana farm, they head over
I think one hundred legal aliens working on it, including
(07:01):
children from my knowledge from what I've read, that were rated.
It was rated literally until last week. I know it's
a marijuana farm, but it still counts as agriculture. So
that did happen. And on June tenth, the Department of
Labor announced that President Trump had created the Office of
Immigration Policy, which was a quote red tape cutting one
(07:21):
stop shop to help employers get faster approval for temporary
work visas for non citizen labor. That would suggest to
me about trying to work within the system as it stands, right,
because what we have currently in our system is we
have in agricultural visa. It's the H two a visa.
It's a limitless visa. There's no caps to it. You
(07:42):
can It's one of the few visas like tourist visas,
that there are no caps. Endless amount of people can
come in and work in farms. It's not like there's
a set number. So if they're trying to make farmers
go through the legal system, and if I guess if
there's growth in the legal system, it will give a
sign to Trump, Look what I've given you an easy
way to get them. Maybe he's going to waive some
(08:03):
of the rules or fines or restrictions or not restrictions,
but like you know, forty five day, sixty day permit laws, whatever,
in order to sit there and get agricultural labor. But
it seems like he's sitting there and going to lean
more heavily into the current legal system. I don't think
an amnesty the way that Republican voters have thought about
it for years, which is citizenship is on the table.
(08:25):
But any time you do not enforce the laws, it
is an amnesty. If I was speeding, if I was
going forty in a twenty five or fifty five in
a forty or whatever, I would have every right to
get pulled over. Well, that's the thing about laws, And
this is why American people have so been so kicked
around about trusting the government. Is because there's one set
(08:48):
of rule for the working class, for the middle class,
for the upper middle class, and even for the lower
upper class, and then there's another set of rule for
the pe deities of the world, or the illegal immigrants
of the world, or the very very well connected of
the world, or the very very under well connected, as
long as the cheap labor they do helps the well connected.
(09:09):
It seems that way to a lot of people, which
is why you need to constantly enforce the law. And
here's the truth of it. Right when you apply for
a legal visa farm lab with visa an H two
a visa, there's all sorts of requirements, like you have
to pay a certain type of wage or prevailing wage.
You have to make sure that those wages won't hurt
American workers. You need to provide free housing for your workers.
(09:30):
You need to provide subsized transportation to and from the
farm for your workers. It's not a lot of things,
but it's you know, it's something, it's something there. If
you go through the illegal way, you don't have to
provide anything. So when a meet someone working in the
meat pop boxing and packing industry gets his arm cut
off for unsafe safety standards and he's only got paid
five dollars an hour, Well when he goes to the
(09:51):
hospital for that, for the emergency room, who picks up
that bill?
Speaker 2 (09:55):
You do?
Speaker 1 (09:55):
The taxpayer? Does I do? Who picks up all the
bills for everything illegal aliens use? From the prisons that
many of them fill, to the schools their children go to,
From the roads that they use that fill with potholes. Eventually,
as they have wear and tear all of those things,
the car accidents you know that they end up getting
into sometimes. Who pays for all of it? We do.
(10:16):
That's what illegal immigration is. It is a form of
socialism where the profits are personalized and all the core
costs are socialized. The suckers sit there and pay for
every for these few corporations to get immensely immensely wealthy. Now,
it's also very important to remember that most illegal aliens
working in the US illegally are committing multiple felons, including
(10:39):
and most importantly, identity theft. It's the number one, and
document fraud is the number two. Probably let alone doing
the jobs like Americans otherwise would do in certain industries
or farm work that could be mechanized, that could machines
could produce more cheaply and produce larger quantities of food
that would actually decrease grocery prices. That they're doing, those
illegal aliens so often in or in a situation where
(11:01):
they provide fake information to farm worker, to farmers, to
a large corporations that own farms, to meat processing industries.
By relying on cheap foreign labor, you are allowing farmers
who otherwise would mechanize, to produce less food at the
greater costs to the American citizen. In the last few years,
here are a few examples of illegal aliens causing problems
(11:24):
for American citizens working on farms. They were working in
agriculture but using identity theft. A healthcare provider was forced
to deny medical necessary prescriptions to a victim in Pennsylvania
because his identity was stolen by someone working at the
Green Valley Foods. A disabled victim in Texas was unable
to work struggled to get their Social Security disability payments
(11:46):
because a different illegal alien was fraudtionently using their identities
at the Glen Valley Foods. Two illegal aliens committing to
at one industry, the IRS requested. A victim from Colorado
repaid more than five thousand dollars after their income was
falsely increased during an illegal alien using their stolen identity.
That also happened at Glen Valley Foods. By the way,
(12:07):
that's three in a row. A full time nursing student
in Missouri lost their college tuition assistance because it was
fraudulently reported that they earned too much money. The investigation
feel that an illegal alien was using their Social Security
number for employment, so they lost their college assistant. And
a victim in California was working for nearly fifteen years
to regain their identity after being financially damaged by an
(12:29):
illegal alien working in agriculture and they stole their identity.
That is the thing that no one talks about. All
these people are just you know, wonderfully here they're all
doing the work, and they're just you know, they're you know,
angels in the field doing everything for us. Yes, some
of them are, but a lot of using your identity
and stealing your identity. And it is important, it's important
(12:49):
that people get wise to the cost of cheap labor
is incredibly expensive to the average American. I know that
this may seem like minor, like the oh the look
of these handful of incidences, right these handful of incidences
that I just named from one industry, one company when
they were raided for legal aliens, and the victims that
were caused from one company. You might say this is
(13:11):
not everybody yet, But not everybody whose speeds is going
to hit a child or a pedestrian or another car.
Not everyone who sells marijuana laces them a fetanol, or
sells things without proper documentation that they are producing a
save product. Not everyone's going to hurt intentionally hurt somebody,
but people do get hurt when lawlessness is the accepted
(13:32):
status quo. I want to make one last point, especially
to Republicans right now, because I know I've gone on
a tie rate. I know that people are probably exhausted
of hearing me talk. But one last point, Republicans are
falling into a sense of false security. A poll was
released on Friday by Gallup and it found that the
percentage of Republicans who want immigration reduced fell from eighty
eight percent to forty eight percent, and those that want
(13:54):
our current numbers to maintain the same when from four
percent to thirty six percent. Is many people look at
what Trump has done on the border, and he's done
fantastic stuff on the border, five stars across the way,
one hundred percent of the report card, no arguments, nothing,
no problems. What he's done on the border. He's done
an incredible job and he deserves all the kudos. But
they look at that and they presume that the problem
(14:15):
with mass immigration is over, and it's not. Yes, illegal
immigration is down, but all the problems that are of
our current legal immigrationism they still exist. Nothing has changed, really,
nothing has changed. Congress has not stepped in. The President
has done mass changes to our legalmgracisms. He's tweaked here
and there, but the major points are all still currently going.
(14:37):
And it's like the people who right now immigration, people
who were concerned immigration last year and are less so
this year. You are like the people who are supposed
to go on a diet lose fifty pounds and he
lose the first ten and then immediately start binge eating
because you think you're doing the successful thing. We're on
the way, but we're not there yet, and the present's
do great things, but he's not there yet. We cannot
afford to backpedal.
Speaker 3 (14:58):
Now.
Speaker 1 (14:58):
Our guest today this episode has been fight against illegal
immigration for years. She knows the ins and outs on
what's going on, the soft amnesty and how it's affecting Americans.
Stay tuned with me on today's episode is Rosemary Janks
from the Immigration Accountability Project. Rosemary, thank you for being here.
Speaker 3 (15:17):
My pleasure. Good to see Ryan.
Speaker 1 (15:18):
Rosmie. What do you make of this pressure campaign on
the White House to stop immigration enforcement in agriculture and
on hospitality workers.
Speaker 3 (15:27):
So, I mean, we have seen this repeatedly in the past,
where employers who rely on cheap illegal labor have lobbying
efforts to convince Congress or the White House whoever, to
allow them to keep their cheap illegal labor. I think
that the lobbying efforts are a little bit more desperate
this time. Around because they face a real risk and
(15:48):
they know that this is the first president we have
had in a very long time who is actually serious
about enforcing our immigration laws. And that means that they're
going to have to give up their illegal labor, which
is a good thing for America. It's a good thing
for American workers, it's a good thing for our economy.
But I do think that they are feeling kind of
desperate and trapped, and you know, again, that's a good
(16:10):
thing they should well.
Speaker 1 (16:12):
One thing that drives me crazy, and I hope I
wish some nonprofit I'm not saying yours, but some nonprofit
study this. They always from about these rotted fruits in
the field, and they always say, you're going to disrupt
the food industry and the supply chain for food. I
would love one organization to study how much food is
produced by a farm that has a mechanized labor force
(16:35):
versus that of cheap labor, both illegal and illegally in
this country. It would be fascinating because I'm going to
guess that the mechanized force would probably be cheaper, more
efficient with more food.
Speaker 3 (16:45):
Absolutely, and in fact, the Commission on Agricultural Immigration Reform
I think it was called that was created by the
nineteen eighty six amnesty bill. They actually studied what was
the impact of the amnesty, the agricultural worker amnesty and
nineteen eighty six, and they found that basically, once the
illegal ag workers got amnesty, they all left ag because,
(17:07):
you know, they went out to find other jobs because
they now had an entire national economy that they could
choose from. And so once again employers had to hire, well,
they decided they needed to hire illegal workers, just new
illegal workers. You know, we're in the twenty first century.
It is absurd that we are not employing technology to
(17:29):
harvest our food, to milk our cows, all of these
other things. We have the machines available, and you know what,
if you can't find enough American workers to go out
in the field and pick crops, you certainly can find
American workers who are willing to run the machines. It
takes a lot less labor, and it is you know,
we need to move into the twenty first century at
some point, and we should be incentivizing growers to do
(17:53):
just that. And the way you do that is to
increase the cost of labor.
Speaker 1 (17:57):
And it's not even just cows being milt, which technologies
existed for a long time. We have robots that can
pict suhrawberries. We have robots that It's not like Japan
requires a million Mexicans every year in their rice patty fields.
They have joined the twenty first century, probably even before
the twenty first century began. We are kind of at
whims of this because of farmers, which are there are
(18:19):
fewer and fewer farmers, but they still control the same
level of power. It seems it you've been around the
h and around like around the hill for a very
long time. What is the reaction from congress Congressional Republicans been.
I've gotten calls from people both saying from some Republican
Congressmans like absolute and I will not pass any amnesty bill.
I don't care what it is. And then others staffers
(18:41):
who have told me it's all the usual suspects are
plotting already.
Speaker 3 (18:45):
Yeah, well, I mean we've already had Republicans, at least
in name, introduced amnesty bills that include farm worker amnesties
like Maria Salazar.
Speaker 1 (18:55):
It's just the worst.
Speaker 3 (18:57):
And this is the problem. You know, first of all,
they don't understand what they're doing They don't understand the
impacts this has on Americans, and on especially poor Americans.
But also they don't grasp the fact that there are
alternatives to illegal labor. First of all, any grower, you know,
if that grower is at risk of having crops rotting
(19:18):
on the field, which is such a nonsense argument, then
they have to raise their rates, you know, they have
to raise the wages and attract American workers, even if seasonally.
I mean, I spent a summer in high school picking
green beans. It was a terrible job. I hated it,
but I did it. I showed up every day because
I got paid for it. You know, there are Americans.
Roughly thirty percent of current agricultural workers right now are
(19:41):
American citizens native born Americans. Another thirty percent are either
lawful permanent residents or temporary legal immigrants. So sixty percent
of the workforce is already legal. It's that last forty
percent that the farmers are basically just refusing to acknowledge.
And here's the problem. There are a lot of small
(20:02):
farmers and ranchers who are only using legal labor. So
what are we going to tell them? You're stupid because
you've been following the law. That's just crazy. You don't
reward people who broke the law.
Speaker 2 (20:14):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (20:14):
I went to a farm one time and I was
like maybe twenty two, twenty two, twenty three, and all
the people who worked on the farm were not only Americans,
they were all white Americans. Now it was a food
to table farm that service mostly restaurants, but every single
one of them. I was actually surprised by it. I
was thinking I would see a different thing, and it
(20:35):
was a completely different thing, completely different than my opinion
based upon what the image that I had seen were.
And you could always mechanize, you could always go to
machines that replace them. I was going to ask you
specifically about well, I want to go and I want
to talk one one thing first. What you hear from
a lot of established Republicans these are like the Sean
Spicer has repe of these talking points at nauseum on
(20:57):
two Way. Eric Bowling was on two Ay Talk talking
about this. They put up this pipe dream, they put
up this what if scenario that is not based in
reality at all. And you've heard it's not just the
two of them. You hear all the time about what
if we just did this form of amnesty, right, and
I want you to talk about if this form of
(21:19):
amnesty has been trying in the past and unsuccessful, and
if it's possible now. So the first is what if
you only did an amnesty where it was for people
who did not commit a crime and had a job.
Is it possible for people to fraudulently produce job records
for years saying oh, yeah, I had a job, I
(21:39):
qualify Is that right? Does that happen?
Speaker 3 (21:41):
Of course? And that was one of the biggest problems
with the nineteen eighty six amnesty, especially the agricultural worker
part of it was the fraud. I mean, we had
people who said that they picked watermelons from the trees
and they got amnesty. Their job was picking watermelons from
a tree. That's insane. We all so, by the way,
had one of the nineteen the World Trade Center bombers,
(22:05):
mackmood Abu Halima, was granted amnesty under that nineteen eighty
six amnesty bill. So you know, the vetting is crazy.
And here's the problem.
Speaker 1 (22:15):
And that was for three million this is now and
it was.
Speaker 3 (22:20):
One mosted one million, right, and then all of a
sudden there are two million extra illegal aliens that we
haven't accounted for who are applying for this amnesty. And
so the then I ins was completely overwhelmed with the applications.
And of course Congress doesn't understand any of that, and
so they set ridiculous parameters as to how long it's
supposed to take to approve the applications, so it becomes
(22:41):
a rubber stamp process. Vetting isn't done, and we end
up with terrorists with green cards. This guy got a
green card through this process, so you know, the fraud
is ridiculous. And then also Congress, in its infinite wisdom,
does stupid things like say that in order to prove
that you've been here for five years or ten years
or whatever, you can get an AFFI David from a
(23:03):
friend or a relative.
Speaker 1 (23:05):
I'm sure those are all Wait, so wait, I talk
about the eighty six amnesty for just one. I know
this is not like what Trump's proposing, but this is
something that makes me scream at my television. I've turned
into my father. Want to hear people regurgitate this. And
maybe I'm wrong on the information. So if I am,
please correct me. But I don't think I am. The
eighty six amnesty federal judges were granting amnesty for years
(23:28):
past the quote unquote deadlines, and we're granting it to
people who were not even in the country at the
time when the amnesty was being discussed. Do I have
that correct?
Speaker 3 (23:38):
Yes, one hundred percent. There were all kinds of lawsuits
about you know, well, my family wasn't here during the
amnesty and so now I need to be able to
bring my family in. I mean, there were literally hundreds
of thousands of illegal aliens who are allowed to come
in and claim that amnesty as family members of the
amnesty aliens or you know, people who first whatever reason
(24:00):
and didn't get to file their applications in time, probably
because they weren't here. So yeah, the judicial system ran
amok on that.
Speaker 1 (24:07):
So this is what listeners and Republican regular Joe Schmoe
Republicans need to understand when they hear people saying we're
only going to do it for certain people who don't
have a criminal record and who have a job and
can learn English, a federal judge will overrule every one
of those requirements, including the penalties and back taxes they're
(24:28):
supposed to pay. Because it happened hundreds of thousands of
times during the eighty six amnesty. It will happen millions
of times. If you think that the woman with the
unpronounceable African name in California who just ruled you can't
profile someone for speaking Spanish on a job site to
deport them or to investigate their here illegally, would not
(24:48):
waive all those restrictions and granted for somebody who is
not even in the country. Now you're being lied to
because it happened before. I know. This is a tyrant
and I ran I know only do an interview, and
I don't get this like much. I want to drill
a hole in my head. But I hear it from
people forever that we're going to have this special We're
going to find the next Einstein among the thirty five
(25:11):
million legaliands, and only he's gonna get it and everyone
else is going to go home. It has never ever, ever,
ever happened. And liberal judges, who are hundreds of them
filled the courts will absolutely be like, now, wave them
all in and their family who are currently in Mozambique
right now.
Speaker 3 (25:27):
Yeah, you're absolutely right. And here's one of the problems
that leads to this judicial excess is Congress. Of course,
Congress puts into these laws all kinds of waivers. You
can wave the criminal restrictions, you can wave the fees,
you can wave the you know, all sorts of things.
If they don't have proof of such and such, you
can wave that in the national interest or in the
(25:49):
public interest or whatever, and so everything gets waved. So
I mean, if you're a judge and you're looking at
the way the law is written in, it says you
can wave everything. Okay, Well, why wouldn't you wave everything?
You know, it's crazy that you cannot take a group
of illegal aliens, people who have not been vetted, people
who basically we ask them who are you, and they
(26:12):
tell us and we accept that as their identity. You know,
these are people who in most cases dump their documents
on the other side of the Rio grand before they
came in. We have no idea who they are. It's
why we keep finding criminals from their home countries, Like
they were convicted of crimes in the home countries. We
find them here and we had no idea that they
were wanted by whatever country. Because there's zero vetting. You
(26:35):
cannot vet people. You don't have any.
Speaker 1 (26:37):
Data on right and the notion that we're going to
make ten to twenty million people into legal residents, non voters,
which is the other thing that Republicans say, will never
make them voters. They will never have the right to vote. No,
that's not true, because I guarantee the ACLU will bring
up a lawsuit day one. They have to have the
(26:59):
right to voute your disenfranchising them, which one hundred percent
a San Francisco judge is going to like absolutely grant
them the right to vote, and we will have districts
across the country suing until Kingdom come and their legal
legal American citizens thanks to the Birthright Citizenship Act, which,
by the way, even if Trump's lawsuit is successful, their
kids would still be citizens if they are legal residents.
(27:22):
Their children will be absolutely available to have every Medicaid, welfare,
Social Security, FOODSNAP program under the sun. The cost of
our welfare state will aiming to relast questions, I promise
I won't go on tires. I'll let you talk. Theirstion
is I'm sorry, this just rais me crazy. I'm not
like this normally, and on the podcasts in personal life,
(27:44):
I am this insufferable. But the the other thing was
one the English requirement, the idea that we're gonna have
an English crewman Rosemary for people who have not applied
for citizenship. Is the English requirement that is on this
Poston on the standard of the test to become our
is that waived currently for people.
Speaker 3 (28:02):
It's waved for people over I think it's the age
of sixty five. It's waved for young people. So and
there are other possibilities of waivers for disability and so on,
so it can be waved.
Speaker 1 (28:12):
Yes, yeah, so even that.
Speaker 3 (28:13):
But even if it's not waived, it's a ridiculously simple test.
I mean, it's basically, can you say one sentence or
can you answer my question when I ask you what
your name is? And if you can answer, then you
know enough English to become a naturalized citizen.
Speaker 1 (28:29):
I help my Auntsery for her citizenship test. She's been
in the country for a very long time, she's married,
had children or whatever, and I could not believe how
easy the questions were to begin with. I was like,
if you fail this, you, I mean, just shouldn't you
should be ejected? As my aunt I'm saying this, So
two last questions one there, I do not believe that
these farmers want their illegal labor to even get visas
(28:53):
because we have a limitless visa program for agriculture workers currently,
but there are requirements. You have to pay them a
lit wage or is there a provincial wage. You have
to provide housing, transportation, there's a lot of expenses illegally
lay in labor. You don't even have to put them
in safe working conditions. And when they go to the
hospital because they lost an arm and the meat packing plan,
(29:13):
who pays for it is the taxpayer. Do you get
any notion that they want even this legal STAIZI they
just don't want raids anymore.
Speaker 3 (29:21):
Yeah, no, that's absolutely right. They don't want enforcement. They
want to continue with the status quo. I mean the
status quo is basically they have slaves and you know,
or at least indentured servants who can't do anything about it.
They can't complain because then you know, the employer consider, well,
I'm gonna call eyes if you complain. But yeah, I mean,
that's exactly what they want, and that is exactly the
(29:43):
opposite of what they should get. You know, the H
two A program, the legal guest worker visa for agriculture,
that thing has exploded. I mean it clearly works. It
went from like thirty I think somewhere around thirty seven
and twenty fourteen to three hundred and eight five thousand
visas issued last year, So there are farmers using it,
(30:05):
So it obviously works. Is it bureaucratic? Do they have
to provide extra things? Yes? But guess what these.
Speaker 1 (30:11):
Are the people picking a food?
Speaker 3 (30:14):
Right? Right?
Speaker 1 (30:15):
But were you talk about this minimal?
Speaker 3 (30:18):
If you think about any workforce in the United States
where it is important to have a legal, identifiable workforce,
don't you think picking our food is that industry. I mean,
this is potentially a national security issue. This is our food.
And all these Democrats saying, oh, well, you can't take
away the people who are picking the food. You can
(30:40):
if they're not here legally. We need to know who
they are. We need to know that they don't have,
you know, bad intentions for whatever they're doing. I mean,
with the number of illegal aliens that came over in
the last four years, we have no idea who those
people are, where they are are they working on farms?
I don't know, do you? And we have got to
(31:01):
get a grip on this.
Speaker 1 (31:02):
There was a case in my last question. There was
a case in Omaha, Nebraska, just like a couple of
weeks ago, where they rated a meat packing plant and
the stories the day after the raid were, well, this
is upsetting our farms and we won't have this meat
and prices are going to explode and they'll never fill
these jobs again. And I think within a week Americans
that applied for every one of those jobs, wages had
(31:22):
gone up, safety genders have gone up. Can you explain this?
And this is not the only time this has happened.
It happened in Chicago around a bakery a black woman. Yeah.
Can you explain some examples of this where the prices
did not explode Americans did feel the job. I mean,
if you know any of many examples, but this one
included where this fear mongering over the idea of the
(31:43):
lazy American is so preposterously you know, it's like it's
fear porn of the lazy American who just will not
do anything as if you know, our history as a
nation has been built off the backs of bumps.
Speaker 3 (31:56):
Yeah. Well, and that's one of the things that the
Commission on Agriculture Reform found is that the largest cost
for food production is actually transportation. It's getting the strawberries
from California to the supermarkets on the East Coast. It's
not labor. So if you could snap your fingers and
replace all of the illegal aliens with legal workers at
(32:18):
the wages that they would demand, you would potentially increase
the cost of ahead of lettuce by a nickel. Are
Americans willing to pay a nickel to have a legal
workforce picking their food? I think they probably.
Speaker 1 (32:30):
Are, so, I mean, I mean, I know you don't
know these numbers, and I don't know them either, but
I'm just throwing an idea there. So basically, if the
government were to create like a bullet train type in
like China has, as parts of the EU have, that
could transport stuff very quickly between coasts, that would do
far more to reduce the cost of food than an
illegal workforce.
Speaker 3 (32:50):
Well, I think what President Trump has done with the
cost of energy is doing far more to reduce the
cost of food than the labor supply over will. But
you know the other thing is by local agriculture, you know,
buy local food products that reduces the costs and increases
the quality.
Speaker 1 (33:08):
Right, Well, Rosemary Jenks, where can people go to learn
more about the Immigration Accountability Project.
Speaker 3 (33:13):
We're at iaproject dot org on the Internet, and all
of our social media is linked from our homepage there
IA project dot org. We have all kinds of resources,
including the every single immigration vote of every member of
Congress is on our member accountability page, so you can
find out how your representative or senator votes and how
(33:34):
that differs, perhaps from what they say on the campaign trip.
Speaker 1 (33:37):
That's so Greg, I wonder my I did. I ran
Brandon Gills race the last show's a GC so I
think he's one of the better ones.
Speaker 3 (33:43):
But he's fantastic.
Speaker 1 (33:45):
He's great. I will thank you for being here and
hopefully we'll have you on again soon, and please check
out the Immigration Accountability Project.
Speaker 2 (33:52):
Thanks Ryan, you're listening to It's a Numbers Game with
Ryan Grodowsky. We'll be right back after this message. Now
it's time for the Ask Me Anything segment or the show.
I want you do part of the Ask Me Anything
segment by emailing me ryanat Numbers Gamepodcast dot com. That's
Ryan plural and Numbers Gamepodcast dot com. I will get
to your emails. I know I'm backlogged a few for.
Speaker 1 (34:14):
A few days but I will absolutely get to your
questions on the air. This one comes from Rafael Castilla.
I hope I'm pronouncing your last name correctly, Rafael, I
never do, but I hope so, he says, Hi, Ryan,
I've listened to your podcast since the inception. I especially
enjoyed your episode with Alex Thompson. Thank you so much
for that. My question for day is to campaign finance.
(34:34):
Are there any politicians you consider most efficient users of
campaign resources? The prerequisite being that they are able to
raise sufficient funds and their race, but predominant they're able
to extract high payoffs for ad spence and other expenses.
My interest is aptitude of the person and their judgment
on who they hire, rather than the source of their funding. Basically,
I want the opposite of Bloomberg's one billion dollars just
(34:56):
to win American in Samoa. Thank you, Rafael. Okay, great question.
So here is First of all, Rafael, thank you for listening. Truly,
from the bottom of my heart. I'm always amazed that
people listen, so I'm very grateful when you're looking at
how campaign spending goes. There's a law on the books
that campaigns and candidates get a certain rate that is
(35:17):
lower than super packs or even other things like they
can't get their rates jacked up. So when it comes
to ad spends per dollar, right, they're all at the
same level, and unless they book at the very very
end when things are increased, but they're basically at the
same level. The packs have to pay more, though, And
I think that when you're looking at I'm assuming you're
(35:39):
talking about Congress, by the way, because the president has
been just Trump for the last twelve years, and I
you know, I could go into tires at Ronda Santa's
or Nikki Haley or whatever, but it's not really pertainable,
and I haven't paid that much attention to what the
Democrats have done. So I'm going to assume you're talking
about House and Republicans in Congress. When it comes to
House and Republicans in Congress, there's two separate kinds of
House members. Right. There's something called the frontline members. Those
(36:01):
are like want of Scamani or Ken Calvallet or Mike Lawler.
Those are people who are very very competitive seats that
they need a massive amount of investments. And then there's
like Marjorie Taylor Green or Harriet Haberman or Ronnie Jackson.
Those are districts that Democrats can't win even in a
landslide election. So House members in very safe districts will, oftentimes,
(36:22):
especially after the primary season is over, give a lot
of their money to frontline members who are in danger
of losing. The person who did this the most was
Kevin McCarthy. Kevin McCarthy gave in his last cycle when
he was running for speaker, when he might have been
the speaker I think was running for speaker, he gave
two million dollars of campaign funds to endangered Republicans. The
(36:44):
leadership Reuplican leadership generally gives a lot of money. Steve Scalise,
Tom Emmer, and Elis Stefanik gave another combined two million,
and that doesn't include their leadership funds. That's just their
campaigns giving money to frontline members because they're safe. The
way you kind of angle yourself as a future leader
or member of leadership is by raising money for endangered Republicans,
(37:06):
either in the primary process and getting on board early,
or in the general election when they're in very tough
and competitive districts which there are fewer and fewer of
them as far as incumbents. I went through a lot
of the twenty of the last the one hundred and
eighteenth Congress is filing data when I saw this question.
As far as the incumbents who spend most efficiently, people
(37:26):
in the House that I saw, like Congressman Gary Palmer
from Alabama and Greg stu from Florida were very efficient
with their spending, but they also are in very uncompetitive seats,
so that might have been the reason. I did a
quick look at people's burn rates. That's how much you
spend versus how much you bring in in any given
election cycle. The cost of fundraising is one of the
(37:48):
highest burn rate parts of it, but there's other parts
like staff and ads and whatnot. I want to see
who had the most efficient burn rate. The people who
were basically not overspending, especially they were not in hard districts.
People in hard districts a little leeway. But the people
that I saw who had great burn rates and were
spending money very efficiently was Andy Barr from Kentucky, At
(38:08):
Fallon from Texas, Chuck Fleischmann from Tennessee, and Drew Garbarino
from New York. Beth ban Dyed from Texas actually Hintson
from Iowa and Darryl Isislol from Carol call those with
who in me. I looked at their stuff and I said, Wow,
they're actually spending money very very very efficiently. I don't
know the specific ad rates for certain people from certain
frontline members, so it's hard to get into that, but
(38:29):
I was able to really dig into those kind of
safe in combents and give you a really astute assessment.
I hope that answered your question. Money in politics is
very interesting to a lot of people, and I always
say your first dollar matters a lot more than your
one billionth dollar. It has a diminishing effect. So that's
kind of where I lay on it. I hope that
answer your question. I found that question really interesting. Was
(38:51):
a very very smart question, Raphael. Thank you an for listening.
Thank you all for listening. Please like and subscribe to
this podcast in the iHeartRadio app, Apple podcast wherever you
get your podcast, and I will see you next time.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.