November 6, 2025 • 21 mins
Flight reductions coming because of the Government Shutdown. Bessent optimistic about tariffs, but he might just be overly hopeful. New State Rule Holds Back 3,000 Third Graders. It's the Economy Stupid
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 (00:14):
Ten flight productions.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
I'd actually love to hear from someone over at the
airport to give us an idea on how this is
going to affect.
Speaker 1 (00:29):
Indianapolis International Airport.
Speaker 2 (00:30):
Tony Katz, ninety three WIBC, Good morning. This was Sean Duppy,
the Secretary of Transportation, stating.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
Quite clearly we don't have the people.
Speaker 2 (00:44):
They have walked off the job because they are not
getting paid in this government shutdown.
Speaker 3 (00:51):
He was.
Speaker 1 (00:53):
Very very clear in.
Speaker 4 (00:56):
Regard to your traffic control.
Speaker 5 (00:58):
We've had a conversation over the course of the last
month about some of the challenges that we're having in
the airspace. Many of you know that we are two
thousand controllers short, air traffic controller short, and we have
surged our academy to bring more controllers into our system.
We are twenty percent up in controllers through the academy.
Speaker 1 (01:19):
Thus far this year.
Speaker 5 (01:21):
I've also offered air traffic controllers who are of the
age of retirement a twenty percent upfront cash bonus to
actually stay on. Some of the best controllers we have,
don't retire, keep working for us. All of that has
been reducing the pressure on the staffing side of air
traffic control. It's working but it takes years to bring
(01:42):
more well trained, certified controllers into the airspace.
Speaker 2 (01:45):
You don't rush that stuff. It's like Bourbon. It can't
be rushed. It needs the time in.
Speaker 1 (01:51):
Order to mature.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
Oh sure, you can just have any old whiskey and
I'm not going to tell you no, but you're not
going to have the same smooth landing. My gosh, that's
a very good analysis right there. Bravo to me, well done,
well played. You know what, I've put that in the
Marconi nomination. That's where that's going. You can caring air
(02:12):
traffic controllers to Bourbon and get that on NPR.
Speaker 1 (02:16):
That's not happening, but the effect is going to be everywhere.
Speaker 2 (02:21):
And if the effect, if the reduction happens in places
like Atlanta or New York, Chicago, these major hubs, of
course you're going to feel the effects if you have
any level of connection. So as you're traveling, as you're flying,
be prepared for the delays. Don't be yelling at the staff,
don't be yelling at other people. Hang loose, bring snacks
(02:46):
all right, and to the airlines provide snacks. Don't tell
these people who did nothing wrong that somehow they have
to spend eleven dollars on whatever airport coffee there is,
and to the airport, no eleven dollars coffee. Please look
at that. I'm just solving all the problems left and right.
My gosh, it's going to be a fantastic morning. Tony Katz,
(03:10):
that's me, by the way, ninety three WIBC, Good morning. Yesterday,
the Trump administration goes in front of the Supreme Court
and says, you know these tariffs, Yeah, yeah, yeah, we
can do this, we can do this. And the Supreme
(03:32):
Court says, not so sure, not so sure, you can
do this, and and and the Trump administration, through the
Solicitor General, is like, oh no, no, no, we can
do this. And the Supreme Court kind of tilted their
head and they were like, well.
Speaker 1 (03:51):
Huh.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
It wasn't a great day for them yesterday. Be clear,
don't know what the Court's going to do.
Speaker 1 (03:59):
No one does. But a first blush.
Speaker 2 (04:03):
This did not go the way the Trump administration wanted
it to. Tony Katz, ninety three WIBC, Good morning, Good
to be with you. This is all about the IEEPA.
So this is about whether or not the president has
the unilateral authority to impose a tariff utilizing these emergency powers.
(04:28):
The solicitor General making the case for the administration for
the country, if you will, is John Sower. His argument
was that the president's power to regulate foreign financial transactions
when he declares an emergency includes the authority to impose taris.
Speaker 1 (04:52):
The justices said, you know, taris.
Speaker 2 (04:54):
Are taxes, So how in the world does the president
impose a tax on the American people. That's not how
it works. It has tom and A from Congress. The
argument rests on the idea of how much or how
(05:15):
does the president?
Speaker 1 (05:18):
What does it read?
Speaker 2 (05:19):
What is a clear reading of the statute state this
is the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of nineteen seventy seven.
The part of the statement, part of the writing of
(05:41):
the of the legislation, if you will, discusses whether or
not or where the president's power is in terms of
being able to regulate. So part of the statement reads
that the truck that the president can regulate tariffs, can
(06:03):
can regulate through these powers things coming into the country,
which would mean goods and services, and what the administration
says is that includes the ability to tariff them.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
The argument is you.
Speaker 2 (06:18):
Could state whether something is allowed to be sold, whether
it's allowed entrance into the nation, But it is a
much different thing by leaps and bounds to make the
statement that you can de facto just offer up some
(06:45):
tax to it and everybody just goes along with it.
That's not how any of this works. Now, this has
gotten and taken on a little bit of a weird
life of its own because some people have started to
ask what I consider to be a truly ridiculous question.
Speaker 5 (07:09):
Pointed ones coming from all sides of the court.
Speaker 4 (07:11):
They're very pointed questions.
Speaker 3 (07:13):
But we can just start with Chief Justices Robberts. Why
not use the chief justice? As he mentioned, generally, the
Congress has the power to tax, and that's the power that's.
Speaker 4 (07:21):
Reserved only for them.
Speaker 3 (07:23):
Trump's lawyers of the administration lawyers are saying that this
isn't a tax. What they're doing is essentially regulating imports.
This is more about foreign policy, and what they're doing
is trying to bring manufacturing jobs back to the United States,
So they're regulating import to allow that to happen, and
that any taxes that comes from that is incidental.
Speaker 4 (07:43):
The lawyers on the other side are saying.
Speaker 3 (07:45):
As bs, this is a tax and only.
Speaker 4 (07:47):
The Congress has the right to do that.
Speaker 3 (07:49):
Now, it is a note that just as the Leito
did bring up that in emergency situations, the president does
have more power, and we're going to hear this question
answered of Trump has this this notion now that he
can decide when it's an emergency, and he's tried to
use that with immigration, he tried to use that with terrorists.
Speaker 4 (08:07):
I think we're going to get an answer as.
Speaker 3 (08:08):
To whether or not a president can unilaterally decide when
it's an emergency, so he should get more.
Speaker 2 (08:13):
Power if it's not the president who decides it's an emergency.
We already know on a military side that if the
country should be invaded, you don't have to wait for the.
Speaker 1 (08:24):
Declaration of war to defend the nation. We already know
this to be true.
Speaker 2 (08:33):
How is it possible that anybody other than the chief
executive could declare an emergency? How else could that possibly work?
What an odd statement.
Speaker 1 (08:45):
There from CNN from one of their commentators.
Speaker 2 (08:49):
And it's an odd statement because on its face it
hits you as well. If not the president, then who
Now you could argue, well, if not the president, then
it's going to be.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
Congress. You can argue that.
Speaker 2 (09:06):
You could also argue that emergency powers may very well
have some kind of wait for it time limit. You
could make that argument that simply it does not go
on for forever.
Speaker 1 (09:22):
It can't go on for forever.
Speaker 2 (09:27):
So this this conversation in front of the Supreme Court yesterday,
when I say it didn't go the way that the
President wanted, it's.
Speaker 1 (09:39):
Because the pushback.
Speaker 2 (09:41):
To the Solicitor General sour was, it's a tax.
Speaker 1 (09:46):
You know, it's a tax. Tax come from the House.
Speaker 2 (09:50):
What do you think you're doing, Meaning that if there
was a pause on allowing the import that would be allowed.
Speaker 1 (10:00):
If you are.
Speaker 2 (10:01):
Utilizing the emergency to make dollars gain revenue, that isn't
its purpose as a matter of just the law itself,
the Emergency Powers Act itself.
Speaker 1 (10:14):
That was the initial read.
Speaker 2 (10:17):
On it, and it's we won't see a decision for
a couple of months, but that was the first take. Oh,
I don't like the fact that this is the way
it went down. I'm just sharing with you how it's
going down. But this idea that the president can't declare
(10:38):
the emergency is such a radical idea.
Speaker 1 (10:43):
You can't hate Trump so much oh wait, of course
they can.
Speaker 2 (10:46):
But you can't hate Trump so much that you want
to take away from the president the ability to denote
or to proclaim the emergency and then take action.
Speaker 1 (10:57):
If the president can't declare.
Speaker 2 (10:58):
An emergency regard guarding adversaries nations that he believes are
treating us wrong, can you declare an emergency on a storm?
And you say to me what the legislation says this?
The legislation says that now you want carve outs. We
vote for somebody to make these choices. You might not
(11:19):
like the choices. To say no to this, It's going
to be harder and harder to be able to respond
to things quickly when it's necessary. Right now, first blush,
I think the Trump administration is going to lose this argument.
(11:41):
The follow up is, this is only utilizing tariffs to
the I E E p A.
Speaker 1 (11:45):
I E E p A doesn't mean that there aren't
other tactics, so get ready for that. I'm not gonna lie.
Speaker 2 (11:56):
I have so many options for the music moment today
at eight thirty five, presented by killadent Removal dot Com.
Speaker 1 (12:05):
I I do not know which.
Speaker 2 (12:07):
One I'm gonna do. There are too many good choices
so good you'll have to tune in. And that's at
eight thirty five the TK Thursday Music Moment presented by
kill a Dent Removal Tony Katz. That is me, by
the way, ninety three WIBC, Good morning.
Speaker 1 (12:28):
Good to be with you.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
What is this that we're holding back thousands of students?
Speaker 1 (12:37):
Right? Is that? That was the story that.
Speaker 2 (12:41):
In the state of Indiana, we are now saying, hey,
we have certain demands here and if you're not meeting
the standard, no, no.
Speaker 1 (12:52):
Just social promotion.
Speaker 2 (12:54):
We've got the story at WIBC dot com via the
Indiana Capitol Chronicle. Three thousand students are repeating the third
grade this school year for not meeting state reading proficiency standards.
Three point six percent of the eighty four thousand children
who took the I Read were retained in third grade
(13:16):
under the first enforcement of a requirement approved by the
legislature in twenty twenty four. Now the question before us
is is this a good plan? The numbers dictate that
two years ago we held back four hundred and twelve children.
Speaker 1 (13:31):
Now it's three thousand and forty children.
Speaker 2 (13:36):
The question, I think should be asked as do we
have a standard or not, and it is painful to
see a kid be left back. It's painful for the parent,
might be painful for the kid. The kid gets over
it like real quick. The important thing here is that
(14:03):
there's a way we look at education as a whole.
We have a standard and we're going to adhere to it,
and that standard is going to mean that everybody does better.
Speaker 1 (14:16):
There can be exceptions.
Speaker 2 (14:19):
If your kid's dyslexic, saying that there's a specific greeting proficiency,
that's a real problem. I don't say no to that,
and I think that should be worked into everything. That's
what IEPs are for individualized education plans and things like that.
But if you say that in the main you should
never leave a child back, that argument is the argument
(14:39):
for Oh, and while we're here, let's end the public schools,
let's break the teachers' unions in two and let's go
back to local municipalities handling everything, and let us decide
in our local communities how it works, which I favor. Regardless,
you either if you don't adhere to a standard, if
you don't believe in a standard, what do you believe in?
(15:01):
It's a question for those people who may have issue
with this concept. I think this concept is actually impressive
and it shows a seriousness about what it is we're
trying to get done here. And it shows parents that
to the extent that you're able to and you maybe
(15:23):
have to sacrifice a little. You got to read to
your kids, you gotta do homework with your kids. It's
it's not all screen time all the time, or whatever
else is getting in the way in the main. Tony Katz,
ninety three WIBC, Good Morning. It is possibly the quickest
(15:47):
election post mortem I've ever seen.
Speaker 1 (15:52):
Where Republicans are like, Okay.
Speaker 2 (15:54):
We lost these races, all right, we have identified part
of the problem.
Speaker 1 (15:59):
Okay, we can fix this. Huh, what do you know
about that? Tony Katz, ninety three WIBC, Good morning. Good
to be with you.
Speaker 2 (16:15):
Affordability, Are you actually telling me that Zaron, Mom Donnie
hit on something when it was a conversation about housing
is unaffordable and prices.
Speaker 1 (16:28):
Are too high, and that moved levels of the electorate.
Speaker 2 (16:41):
Maybe it was this from President Trump speaking to Brett
Baer on Fox News.
Speaker 6 (16:47):
Two dollars, I guess or later did that that brings
everything else down. A grocer is your way down. Other
than beef. Now, beef is going to come down. You know,
we have to do that. You remember when I started,
eggs were up by four times what they were previous.
You know, it was in two days in the office,
and they.
Speaker 4 (17:03):
Tell me about eggs.
Speaker 6 (17:04):
I solve that because the fact is we have prices
way down. We have prices down.
Speaker 1 (17:08):
Are country is doing well.
Speaker 6 (17:10):
The stock markets hitting record highs like forty eight times
during my nine months, and just a couple of days
ago it hit another record high, like really record high.
It's it's great, and that equates it's not just rich people.
That's four o one case. I mean that equates to everybody.
And the country is doing very well. But as Republicans,
you have to talk about it.
Speaker 1 (17:31):
Now. I just want to.
Speaker 2 (17:33):
Ask for the record, what is the show that has
been discussing since the beginning.
Speaker 1 (17:40):
If you want to add tariffs, you got to explain why.
Speaker 2 (17:43):
If you're gonna go out there and say the prices
are lower, you got to go tell your story.
Speaker 1 (17:49):
Can I get to.
Speaker 4 (17:49):
Show a hands?
Speaker 1 (17:53):
You gotta tell the story.
Speaker 2 (17:55):
You got to explain your position because if you don't,
the other guy will.
Speaker 1 (17:59):
Explain your position for you.
Speaker 2 (18:03):
So now I've got the president after mont Donnie gets elected, stating, yes,
beef prices are too high.
Speaker 1 (18:11):
No kidding. We have talked about this a million times.
Speaker 2 (18:16):
If you listen to eat, drink, smoke, we talk about
it constantly. The supermarket beef prices are through the roof.
All of a sudden, I'm getting stories left and right.
(18:40):
Gotta focus on this idea of affordability. It's the quickest
post mortem I have ever seen from the Republican It
is this all right, all right, we see that. Okay,
we can fix this. Okay, let's go to work.
Speaker 1 (19:04):
This is what I want. Now.
Speaker 2 (19:06):
There are, of course, ridiculous headlines. What's really concerning Republicans
after Tuesday's.
Speaker 1 (19:11):
Romp romp.
Speaker 2 (19:14):
Off your election in states where it was believed that
the Republican would lose.
Speaker 1 (19:24):
You mean, things kind of went as expected.
Speaker 2 (19:26):
Romp okay, dosha burns whatever, whatever you want to put
in there. I have people on social media so desperate
for attention. See, the problem is you were yelling about
the text messages of Republicans who said some off color things.
(19:47):
You weren't focused on the election. Now you see you
were talking too much about Tucker Carlson. No, no, no,
you're talking too much about this.
Speaker 1 (19:53):
Guys.
Speaker 2 (19:55):
People want to know whether or not they're spending too
much money. In what you're doing to keep them from
spa ending too much money.
Speaker 1 (20:02):
We haven't learned anything from Bill Clinton.
Speaker 2 (20:06):
First, what happens in the Oval office doesn't necessarily stay
in the Oval office.
Speaker 1 (20:11):
Second, it's the economy, stupid. We haven't learned this lesson.
Speaker 2 (20:21):
You keep talking about Obamacare, for example, what's your replacement plan?
Speaker 1 (20:25):
Uh still.
Speaker 2 (20:30):
Which, by the way, the answer is, Oh, the market's fine,
the market will do the job. How about we allow
that selling across state lines for example. I was having
this conversation with someone last night.
Speaker 1 (20:39):
What happened to that idea?
Speaker 2 (20:40):
Why aren't we doing things like that, these free market
solutions that could create more opportunity, allow for different pools
of people, therefore lowering costs.
Speaker 1 (20:50):
Why all of a sudden, the market doesn't work. Nonsense.
The people who don't believe.
Speaker 2 (20:56):
The market doesn't work are people desperate to control what
happens in your market.
Speaker 1 (21:02):
But this is this is quick to it.
Speaker 2 (21:06):
I've got Trump saying it, I've got Politico with the
story that I have national review. Affordability will be everything
in twenty twenty six. You see, you can claim that
somebody is too woke from now to the end of time.
But the thing that moves Americans most is am I
(21:27):
paying less for gas? Am I paying less for beef?
Can I afford a house? And that can all be
part of a conversation that we win interesting interesting, interesting stuff.
Speaker 1 (21:39):
The speed is the story here
Ten flight productions.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
I'd actually love to hear from someone over at the
airport to give us an idea on how this is
going to affect.
Speaker 1 (00:29):
Indianapolis International Airport.
Speaker 2 (00:30):
Tony Katz, ninety three WIBC, Good morning. This was Sean Duppy,
the Secretary of Transportation, stating.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
Quite clearly we don't have the people.
Speaker 2 (00:44):
They have walked off the job because they are not
getting paid in this government shutdown.
Speaker 3 (00:51):
He was.
Speaker 1 (00:53):
Very very clear in.
Speaker 4 (00:56):
Regard to your traffic control.
Speaker 5 (00:58):
We've had a conversation over the course of the last
month about some of the challenges that we're having in
the airspace. Many of you know that we are two
thousand controllers short, air traffic controller short, and we have
surged our academy to bring more controllers into our system.
We are twenty percent up in controllers through the academy.
Speaker 1 (01:19):
Thus far this year.
Speaker 5 (01:21):
I've also offered air traffic controllers who are of the
age of retirement a twenty percent upfront cash bonus to
actually stay on. Some of the best controllers we have,
don't retire, keep working for us. All of that has
been reducing the pressure on the staffing side of air
traffic control. It's working but it takes years to bring
(01:42):
more well trained, certified controllers into the airspace.
Speaker 2 (01:45):
You don't rush that stuff. It's like Bourbon. It can't
be rushed. It needs the time in.
Speaker 1 (01:51):
Order to mature.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
Oh sure, you can just have any old whiskey and
I'm not going to tell you no, but you're not
going to have the same smooth landing. My gosh, that's
a very good analysis right there. Bravo to me, well done,
well played. You know what, I've put that in the
Marconi nomination. That's where that's going. You can caring air
(02:12):
traffic controllers to Bourbon and get that on NPR.
Speaker 1 (02:16):
That's not happening, but the effect is going to be everywhere.
Speaker 2 (02:21):
And if the effect, if the reduction happens in places
like Atlanta or New York, Chicago, these major hubs, of
course you're going to feel the effects if you have
any level of connection. So as you're traveling, as you're flying,
be prepared for the delays. Don't be yelling at the staff,
don't be yelling at other people. Hang loose, bring snacks
(02:46):
all right, and to the airlines provide snacks. Don't tell
these people who did nothing wrong that somehow they have
to spend eleven dollars on whatever airport coffee there is,
and to the airport, no eleven dollars coffee. Please look
at that. I'm just solving all the problems left and right.
My gosh, it's going to be a fantastic morning. Tony Katz,
(03:10):
that's me, by the way, ninety three WIBC, Good morning. Yesterday,
the Trump administration goes in front of the Supreme Court
and says, you know these tariffs, Yeah, yeah, yeah, we
can do this, we can do this. And the Supreme
(03:32):
Court says, not so sure, not so sure, you can
do this, and and and the Trump administration, through the
Solicitor General, is like, oh no, no, no, we can
do this. And the Supreme Court kind of tilted their
head and they were like, well.
Speaker 1 (03:51):
Huh.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
It wasn't a great day for them yesterday. Be clear,
don't know what the Court's going to do.
Speaker 1 (03:59):
No one does. But a first blush.
Speaker 2 (04:03):
This did not go the way the Trump administration wanted
it to. Tony Katz, ninety three WIBC, Good morning, Good
to be with you. This is all about the IEEPA.
So this is about whether or not the president has
the unilateral authority to impose a tariff utilizing these emergency powers.
(04:28):
The solicitor General making the case for the administration for
the country, if you will, is John Sower. His argument
was that the president's power to regulate foreign financial transactions
when he declares an emergency includes the authority to impose taris.
Speaker 1 (04:52):
The justices said, you know, taris.
Speaker 2 (04:54):
Are taxes, So how in the world does the president
impose a tax on the American people. That's not how
it works. It has tom and A from Congress. The
argument rests on the idea of how much or how
(05:15):
does the president?
Speaker 1 (05:18):
What does it read?
Speaker 2 (05:19):
What is a clear reading of the statute state this
is the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of nineteen seventy seven.
The part of the statement, part of the writing of
(05:41):
the of the legislation, if you will, discusses whether or
not or where the president's power is in terms of
being able to regulate. So part of the statement reads
that the truck that the president can regulate tariffs, can
(06:03):
can regulate through these powers things coming into the country,
which would mean goods and services, and what the administration
says is that includes the ability to tariff them.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
The argument is you.
Speaker 2 (06:18):
Could state whether something is allowed to be sold, whether
it's allowed entrance into the nation, But it is a
much different thing by leaps and bounds to make the
statement that you can de facto just offer up some
(06:45):
tax to it and everybody just goes along with it.
That's not how any of this works. Now, this has
gotten and taken on a little bit of a weird
life of its own because some people have started to
ask what I consider to be a truly ridiculous question.
Speaker 5 (07:09):
Pointed ones coming from all sides of the court.
Speaker 4 (07:11):
They're very pointed questions.
Speaker 3 (07:13):
But we can just start with Chief Justices Robberts. Why
not use the chief justice? As he mentioned, generally, the
Congress has the power to tax, and that's the power that's.
Speaker 4 (07:21):
Reserved only for them.
Speaker 3 (07:23):
Trump's lawyers of the administration lawyers are saying that this
isn't a tax. What they're doing is essentially regulating imports.
This is more about foreign policy, and what they're doing
is trying to bring manufacturing jobs back to the United States,
So they're regulating import to allow that to happen, and
that any taxes that comes from that is incidental.
Speaker 4 (07:43):
The lawyers on the other side are saying.
Speaker 3 (07:45):
As bs, this is a tax and only.
Speaker 4 (07:47):
The Congress has the right to do that.
Speaker 3 (07:49):
Now, it is a note that just as the Leito
did bring up that in emergency situations, the president does
have more power, and we're going to hear this question
answered of Trump has this this notion now that he
can decide when it's an emergency, and he's tried to
use that with immigration, he tried to use that with terrorists.
Speaker 4 (08:07):
I think we're going to get an answer as.
Speaker 3 (08:08):
To whether or not a president can unilaterally decide when
it's an emergency, so he should get more.
Speaker 2 (08:13):
Power if it's not the president who decides it's an emergency.
We already know on a military side that if the
country should be invaded, you don't have to wait for the.
Speaker 1 (08:24):
Declaration of war to defend the nation. We already know
this to be true.
Speaker 2 (08:33):
How is it possible that anybody other than the chief
executive could declare an emergency? How else could that possibly work?
What an odd statement.
Speaker 1 (08:45):
There from CNN from one of their commentators.
Speaker 2 (08:49):
And it's an odd statement because on its face it
hits you as well. If not the president, then who
Now you could argue, well, if not the president, then
it's going to be.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
Congress. You can argue that.
Speaker 2 (09:06):
You could also argue that emergency powers may very well
have some kind of wait for it time limit. You
could make that argument that simply it does not go
on for forever.
Speaker 1 (09:22):
It can't go on for forever.
Speaker 2 (09:27):
So this this conversation in front of the Supreme Court yesterday,
when I say it didn't go the way that the
President wanted, it's.
Speaker 1 (09:39):
Because the pushback.
Speaker 2 (09:41):
To the Solicitor General sour was, it's a tax.
Speaker 1 (09:46):
You know, it's a tax. Tax come from the House.
Speaker 2 (09:50):
What do you think you're doing, Meaning that if there
was a pause on allowing the import that would be allowed.
Speaker 1 (10:00):
If you are.
Speaker 2 (10:01):
Utilizing the emergency to make dollars gain revenue, that isn't
its purpose as a matter of just the law itself,
the Emergency Powers Act itself.
Speaker 1 (10:14):
That was the initial read.
Speaker 2 (10:17):
On it, and it's we won't see a decision for
a couple of months, but that was the first take. Oh,
I don't like the fact that this is the way
it went down. I'm just sharing with you how it's
going down. But this idea that the president can't declare
(10:38):
the emergency is such a radical idea.
Speaker 1 (10:43):
You can't hate Trump so much oh wait, of course
they can.
Speaker 2 (10:46):
But you can't hate Trump so much that you want
to take away from the president the ability to denote
or to proclaim the emergency and then take action.
Speaker 1 (10:57):
If the president can't declare.
Speaker 2 (10:58):
An emergency regard guarding adversaries nations that he believes are
treating us wrong, can you declare an emergency on a storm?
And you say to me what the legislation says this?
The legislation says that now you want carve outs. We
vote for somebody to make these choices. You might not
(11:19):
like the choices. To say no to this, It's going
to be harder and harder to be able to respond
to things quickly when it's necessary. Right now, first blush,
I think the Trump administration is going to lose this argument.
(11:41):
The follow up is, this is only utilizing tariffs to
the I E E p A.
Speaker 1 (11:45):
I E E p A doesn't mean that there aren't
other tactics, so get ready for that. I'm not gonna lie.
Speaker 2 (11:56):
I have so many options for the music moment today
at eight thirty five, presented by killadent Removal dot Com.
Speaker 1 (12:05):
I I do not know which.
Speaker 2 (12:07):
One I'm gonna do. There are too many good choices
so good you'll have to tune in. And that's at
eight thirty five the TK Thursday Music Moment presented by
kill a Dent Removal Tony Katz. That is me, by
the way, ninety three WIBC, Good morning.
Speaker 1 (12:28):
Good to be with you.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
What is this that we're holding back thousands of students?
Speaker 1 (12:37):
Right? Is that? That was the story that.
Speaker 2 (12:41):
In the state of Indiana, we are now saying, hey,
we have certain demands here and if you're not meeting
the standard, no, no.
Speaker 1 (12:52):
Just social promotion.
Speaker 2 (12:54):
We've got the story at WIBC dot com via the
Indiana Capitol Chronicle. Three thousand students are repeating the third
grade this school year for not meeting state reading proficiency standards.
Three point six percent of the eighty four thousand children
who took the I Read were retained in third grade
(13:16):
under the first enforcement of a requirement approved by the
legislature in twenty twenty four. Now the question before us
is is this a good plan? The numbers dictate that
two years ago we held back four hundred and twelve children.
Speaker 1 (13:31):
Now it's three thousand and forty children.
Speaker 2 (13:36):
The question, I think should be asked as do we
have a standard or not, and it is painful to
see a kid be left back. It's painful for the parent,
might be painful for the kid. The kid gets over
it like real quick. The important thing here is that
(14:03):
there's a way we look at education as a whole.
We have a standard and we're going to adhere to it,
and that standard is going to mean that everybody does better.
Speaker 1 (14:16):
There can be exceptions.
Speaker 2 (14:19):
If your kid's dyslexic, saying that there's a specific greeting proficiency,
that's a real problem. I don't say no to that,
and I think that should be worked into everything. That's
what IEPs are for individualized education plans and things like that.
But if you say that in the main you should
never leave a child back, that argument is the argument
(14:39):
for Oh, and while we're here, let's end the public schools,
let's break the teachers' unions in two and let's go
back to local municipalities handling everything, and let us decide
in our local communities how it works, which I favor. Regardless,
you either if you don't adhere to a standard, if
you don't believe in a standard, what do you believe in?
(15:01):
It's a question for those people who may have issue
with this concept. I think this concept is actually impressive
and it shows a seriousness about what it is we're
trying to get done here. And it shows parents that
to the extent that you're able to and you maybe
(15:23):
have to sacrifice a little. You got to read to
your kids, you gotta do homework with your kids. It's
it's not all screen time all the time, or whatever
else is getting in the way in the main. Tony Katz,
ninety three WIBC, Good Morning. It is possibly the quickest
(15:47):
election post mortem I've ever seen.
Speaker 1 (15:52):
Where Republicans are like, Okay.
Speaker 2 (15:54):
We lost these races, all right, we have identified part
of the problem.
Speaker 1 (15:59):
Okay, we can fix this. Huh, what do you know
about that? Tony Katz, ninety three WIBC, Good morning. Good
to be with you.
Speaker 2 (16:15):
Affordability, Are you actually telling me that Zaron, Mom Donnie
hit on something when it was a conversation about housing
is unaffordable and prices.
Speaker 1 (16:28):
Are too high, and that moved levels of the electorate.
Speaker 2 (16:41):
Maybe it was this from President Trump speaking to Brett
Baer on Fox News.
Speaker 6 (16:47):
Two dollars, I guess or later did that that brings
everything else down. A grocer is your way down. Other
than beef. Now, beef is going to come down. You know,
we have to do that. You remember when I started,
eggs were up by four times what they were previous.
You know, it was in two days in the office,
and they.
Speaker 4 (17:03):
Tell me about eggs.
Speaker 6 (17:04):
I solve that because the fact is we have prices
way down. We have prices down.
Speaker 1 (17:08):
Are country is doing well.
Speaker 6 (17:10):
The stock markets hitting record highs like forty eight times
during my nine months, and just a couple of days
ago it hit another record high, like really record high.
It's it's great, and that equates it's not just rich people.
That's four o one case. I mean that equates to everybody.
And the country is doing very well. But as Republicans,
you have to talk about it.
Speaker 1 (17:31):
Now. I just want to.
Speaker 2 (17:33):
Ask for the record, what is the show that has
been discussing since the beginning.
Speaker 1 (17:40):
If you want to add tariffs, you got to explain why.
Speaker 2 (17:43):
If you're gonna go out there and say the prices
are lower, you got to go tell your story.
Speaker 1 (17:49):
Can I get to.
Speaker 4 (17:49):
Show a hands?
Speaker 1 (17:53):
You gotta tell the story.
Speaker 2 (17:55):
You got to explain your position because if you don't,
the other guy will.
Speaker 1 (17:59):
Explain your position for you.
Speaker 2 (18:03):
So now I've got the president after mont Donnie gets elected, stating, yes,
beef prices are too high.
Speaker 1 (18:11):
No kidding. We have talked about this a million times.
Speaker 2 (18:16):
If you listen to eat, drink, smoke, we talk about
it constantly. The supermarket beef prices are through the roof.
All of a sudden, I'm getting stories left and right.
(18:40):
Gotta focus on this idea of affordability. It's the quickest
post mortem I have ever seen from the Republican It
is this all right, all right, we see that. Okay,
we can fix this. Okay, let's go to work.
Speaker 1 (19:04):
This is what I want. Now.
Speaker 2 (19:06):
There are, of course, ridiculous headlines. What's really concerning Republicans
after Tuesday's.
Speaker 1 (19:11):
Romp romp.
Speaker 2 (19:14):
Off your election in states where it was believed that
the Republican would lose.
Speaker 1 (19:24):
You mean, things kind of went as expected.
Speaker 2 (19:26):
Romp okay, dosha burns whatever, whatever you want to put
in there. I have people on social media so desperate
for attention. See, the problem is you were yelling about
the text messages of Republicans who said some off color things.
(19:47):
You weren't focused on the election. Now you see you
were talking too much about Tucker Carlson. No, no, no,
you're talking too much about this.
Speaker 1 (19:53):
Guys.
Speaker 2 (19:55):
People want to know whether or not they're spending too
much money. In what you're doing to keep them from
spa ending too much money.
Speaker 1 (20:02):
We haven't learned anything from Bill Clinton.
Speaker 2 (20:06):
First, what happens in the Oval office doesn't necessarily stay
in the Oval office.
Speaker 1 (20:11):
Second, it's the economy, stupid. We haven't learned this lesson.
Speaker 2 (20:21):
You keep talking about Obamacare, for example, what's your replacement plan?
Speaker 1 (20:25):
Uh still.
Speaker 2 (20:30):
Which, by the way, the answer is, Oh, the market's fine,
the market will do the job. How about we allow
that selling across state lines for example. I was having
this conversation with someone last night.
Speaker 1 (20:39):
What happened to that idea?
Speaker 2 (20:40):
Why aren't we doing things like that, these free market
solutions that could create more opportunity, allow for different pools
of people, therefore lowering costs.
Speaker 1 (20:50):
Why all of a sudden, the market doesn't work. Nonsense.
The people who don't believe.
Speaker 2 (20:56):
The market doesn't work are people desperate to control what
happens in your market.
Speaker 1 (21:02):
But this is this is quick to it.
Speaker 2 (21:06):
I've got Trump saying it, I've got Politico with the
story that I have national review. Affordability will be everything
in twenty twenty six. You see, you can claim that
somebody is too woke from now to the end of time.
But the thing that moves Americans most is am I
(21:27):
paying less for gas? Am I paying less for beef?
Can I afford a house? And that can all be
part of a conversation that we win interesting interesting, interesting stuff.
Speaker 1 (21:39):
The speed is the story here
Popular Podcasts
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.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com