What's Happening at the State Capitol?

Today on the Jimmy Barrett Show:

• Rep. Steve Toth on the Texas Legislature

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:02):
Well, what we need is more common sense.

Speaker 2 (00:07):
The.

Speaker 3 (00:10):
Breaking down the world's nonsense.

Speaker 4 (00:12):
About how American common sense.

Speaker 5 (00:14):
We'll see us through with the common sense of Houston.
I'm just pro common sense for Houston. From Houston dot com.
This is the Jimmy Barrett Show, brought to you by
viewind dot com.

Speaker 3 (00:29):
Now here's Jimmy Barrett. How long has event since I
talked about food on the show?

Speaker 6 (00:35):
At the risk of making myself hungry yet again, at
you know, a little after four o'clock in the afternoons,
I think it's been a while. I see stories about
food all the time, and I try to make a
decision do I want to talk about this or not?
And I thought, well, yeah, let's talk about this one
fast food Wendy's, KFC, McDonald's, Denny's. There's like six different

(01:01):
fast food companies that are kind of retreating a little bit.
They are closing down stores somewhere in the neighborhood of
you know, anywhere from one hundred to one hundred and
fifty stores nationwide. There the process of shutting these down,
shutting down quote unquote underperforming locations. Now I don't know
how a restaurant chain, a fast food chain decides what

(01:22):
underperforming is.

Speaker 3 (01:23):
You know, I don't know.

Speaker 6 (01:25):
Well, I get their definition is probably you know, obviously
not making enough money to worth keep keeping it open,
But I don't know how much money they need to
make above and beyond cost in order for them to
consider keeping something open or going ahead and shutting it down.
And of course, you know, everybody tries to figure out
why is this, and everybody's blaming the economy, and I'm
sure the economy has a little something to do with it,

(01:48):
but there may be some other factors at work here.
So I thought I would just discuss some of those
factors and maybe we'll see what you think about this. Also,
I'm going to do I'm going to do a little
video of the day that you can check out on
x and Instagram and you know, YouTube or anywhere you

(02:08):
want to go, and we'll ask some of our you know,
our viewers to kind of get involved in trying to
figure this one out. Okay, so it seems like some
of this, it seems to me that some of this
just might be overbuilding. I mean, after all, there's there
seems to be a McDonald's on every other corner. You
don't have to drive very far to find the McDonald's, right.

(02:29):
I don't know what their rule is about how far
apart any particular restaurant has to be from another one
of its restaurants, but it's you know, there's plenty of
Wendy's and McDonald's, and you know all of the fast
food places that seem to be struggling a little bit.
There are plenty of locations, so they probably won't miss
getting rid of some of these locations. I just wonder

(02:51):
if they overbuilt at one point in time. Obviously, you know,
you could build one in every other corner and they
would all be busy. So maybe it's not that they're
overbuilt or oversaturated. It's just that people are not going
there as often as they did. So we get to
the next possibility, which is the quality of those restaurants.

(03:15):
Do you feel that McDonald's quality is what it was
twenty years ago. I can tell you I don't think
that Wendy's quality is. We went to a Wendy's out
of necessity, I want to say, three or four weeks ago,
and it was horrible. I was shocked because if I

(03:35):
remember as a young person going to Wendy's and being
impressed with how good the burgers were for fast food
burgers in the fries and you know all that that's
not the experience we had. I don't know if they
just had at this location. They had food that's been
had been prepared and sitting around and it got old.
But you know, the burger was overcooked. I mean, not

(03:56):
to expect to get a rare or medium rare burger
from Wendy's, but I mean and juicy. It was like
a hockey puck for lack of a better or a
charcoal briquette for lack of a better example. So maybe
quality has become part of the problem, but I think
at the end of the day, for most people, it
probably is price. And I was kind of curious. So
that's why we asked the question today on ktr H

(04:18):
this morning about whether or not you know what's going
on with menu prices has changed your habits. Are you
now not frequenting the same restaurants that you were before,
And if you are frequencing, you know, going to some
of the same restaurants you are before, you're going there
less often now, as I've talked about many times, we

(04:38):
we're you know, we're eating out fools at our house.
We eat out a lot. We used to eat out
virtually seven days a week, you know, for dinner. And
you know, we've watched as menu prices have gone up
and they get a bigger chunk. And I've talked on
the show a lot about one of our favorite breakfast
places that you know, seven years ago. You know, we're

(05:02):
spending twenty two to twenty three dollars for the two
of us for breakfast. Now cost thirty eight thirty nine,
almost forty dollars for the two of us for breakfast
for breakfast. I never thought it'd be twenty dollars per
person for breakfast. I never thought we'd get to that point.
But it's rapidly getting to that point, if it hasn't
already at a lot of places. So I think, yeah,

(05:22):
I think price has something to do with it. In fact,
price probably has a lot to do with it. So
we asked our listeners about that. Here are a couple
of responses that we got.

Speaker 7 (05:30):
This is Shannon calling from Angleton. I think that people
are more health conscious now. Also, I do believe that
the market is saturated with fast food restaurants. There's one
on every corner. There's Wendy's and McDonald's all on the
same street, so there's too many choices. Also, I believe

(05:55):
the quality of the food and the price is just
is keeping.

Speaker 3 (06:00):
And she ran out of time.

Speaker 6 (06:02):
But do you think it's it's about that people are
going to fast food restaurants less because they're more health conscious,
because you know, no offense. But I see a lot
of fat people, you know, it's not like it's not
like I think we're shaping up as a country, and
kids always want to go to fast food places. So

(06:23):
I'm having a hard time buying the idea that we're
I mean, I hope we're trying to eat healthier, but
I'm not kind of buying into that idea. What else
we got.

Speaker 8 (06:29):
Harry from Webster, Texas. Yes, we don't go out in
there as much as we used to it. With property
taxes going up, insurance going up, cost of food, cost
of fuel going up, we stay at home and eat
a lot more. We'll maybe go out one night a week,
and usually we would kind of keep it within a budget.

Speaker 2 (06:49):
Hey, Jimmy Kyle, a lot of friends would. We're a
single income family. At five we quit eat now almost altogether.
We might do fast food two days a week, but
other than that, just too much.

Speaker 6 (07:00):
Man, I got you, Okay. You know, if you have
if you have kids, if you have a family, you
know it really is hard. I mean for Elizabeth and myself,
there's just the two of us, so which is one
of our excuses I guess for why we eat out
so much, there's just the two of us. It's yeah,
it can be hard to cook for two people, my

(07:22):
wife's that's my wife's favorite excuse. But there is some
truth to that, especially if you don't eat leftovers very much,
or don't care for leftovers, don't really want to have leftovers.
But I think, you know what, it's changed in our world.
The reason why we eat home two days a week
is I think it's not that we couldn't continue to
eat out seven days a week and it afford it.

(07:42):
I just in my mind, I can't justify it. In
my mind, I feel like, you know, the responsible part
of me feels like I really need to cut back.
I really need to get back on this stuff. I
need to stop spending so much money on this. Anyway,
it'll be interesting to see what our video of the day,
what kind of reacts that gets up. We're back with
more in a moment. It's the Jimmy Barrett Show here

(08:03):
on AM nine fifty KPRC. All Right, Musk, he is

(08:23):
making a lot of media rounds, and that is quite intentional.
I think the thing that President Trump has sort of
made very clear, I guess to people who work for him,
his cabinet members, anybody who has a role in his administration,
is that they need to be media ready and media savvy.

(08:44):
In other words, you need to be willing to go
on and explain what it is we're doing and why
we're as it is. We're doing it to as many
people as is humanly possible, because they know they have
to get their side of the story out. They know
what the progressive left is going to say about Doge
and all the things that are going on with Doge.
So it's very important to have Elon Musk, who's been

(09:09):
completely villainized over these these Doge cuts, to have him
out there explaining the things that he's finding so that
it makes sense, so that more and more people can
make sense. And I think I think they're actually making
some progress even with liberals on this. I think the
Bill Maher's of the world and the John Stewarts of

(09:29):
the world. In fact, I saw a video the other
day of John Stewart being told a story about, you know,
the Biden administration, bureaucracy and red tape, and he was like,
he was like, you could tell he was having an epiphany.
He couldn't believe what he was hearing. I mean, he
did believe what he was hearing, but he couldn't believe

(09:50):
what he was hearing. I think a lot of a
lot of people on the left, a lot of liberals
just don't know just how bad it is. They don't
having a hard time believing how bad it is. But
you've got to continue to show them. You know, It's
like Elon Musk. You know, all the left politicians will
say about Elon Musk and social Security is that he

(10:11):
wants to take it away. Somebody asked Elizabeth Warren about that,
and of course she you know, she completely overreacted, you know,
about about dose getting involved in social security. But what
he's finding is social security are massive amounts of fraud
and waste fraud. In particular, here is Elon Musk. I'm

(10:32):
Fox yesterday on the five. Actually this first time, it's
pretty rare that they have a guest on the Five
Live Guests, but they had Elon Musk on yesterday. Here
he is talking about fraud at Social Security Kadid.

Speaker 9 (10:45):
There's really so much for it's deciding what should we
prosecute at first, because it's such a long list. You
have to actually prioritize the list. We can pay the
list to the Department of Justice, but the DOJ has
a process that they go through to review and think
about it. The wheels of justice turned slowly. In fact,
obviously I'm a I'm a maniacal sense of urgency. So

(11:07):
to me, when I see that terrible floord has happened,
I'm like, why haven't we arrested someone already? But as
I'm saying, goes, the wheels of justice turned slowly, but surely,
and and I think probably the person that stole four
hundred thousand social Security numbers at least maybe more will
be arrested, hopefully this week. And you know, with respect

(11:28):
to the the non governmental organizations, these these sort of
fake NGOs, I think there needs to be a number
of arrests in that regard as well, because.

Speaker 4 (11:37):
These these are these are fake charities.

Speaker 9 (11:39):
Uh where mostly Democrats are listen, well, it's I don't
want to pay that. There sometimes a little bit of
a Republican in there, because they sometimes throw the Republicans
a bone to say, hey, be quiet about this.

Speaker 4 (11:50):
So it's it's it's that's that's that's where you start
getting the uniparty thing going on.

Speaker 9 (11:56):
But it is overwhelmingly to Democrats, and they give these
billions of dollars to NGO's run by Democrats that then
go through a whole network of additional genre in Joseph's
giant money laundering scheme. Really, at this point, I think
the word engio and money laundering are almost synonymous.

Speaker 6 (12:17):
And of course he's talking about for example, what is
her name? Her name is escaping me at the moment,
Stacy Abrams. Stacy Abrams, you know, heading up this environmental group. Well,
she doesn't give a ripper know anything about an environment
but they're funneling, funneling multi billions of dollars to this group.

(12:38):
You know, there's a there's a payoff in there for
her obviously. So that's what that's what the LUFT does,
That's how they enrich themselves. I think it's fantastic, and
of course one of the reasons why they're trying so
hard to villainize him and to try to figure out
how to get rid of Elon Musk is because they
know the progressive left he's coming after them. He's going

(13:02):
to expose the ones who have the Nazi pelosis, who
have enriched themselves on a two hundred thousand dollars year salary,
and it built a fortune, you know, twenty thirty forty
or more million dollars. They've made themselves rich through these
these money laundering schemes that they do. You go to
Congress and get rich. That is not what the founding fathers,

(13:24):
I don't think imagine. By the way, while on the five,
he also asked Elon Musk about Tesla terrorism and why
he has become such a target.

Speaker 4 (13:33):
Yes, it is remarkable that there is so much violence.

Speaker 9 (13:38):
You know, people have burnt cars that fired bullets into dealerships.
They've scratched swastegis into Tesla's. Of the innocent people that
have they're just going about their lives. They've done nothing wrong,
and Tesla's done nothing wrong as the company. And so
I find it ironic and incredibly hypocritical that the same
Democrat politicians who would want to throw someone in prison

(14:03):
for twenty years simply for watching things at January six
but not actually doing any violence. Have you don't hear
a single word from them about the actual violence happening
against Tesla.

Speaker 4 (14:17):
What incredible hypocrites they are.

Speaker 9 (14:19):
It's outrageous. I mean, really, this is fundamentally a case
of terrorism. It's wise scale domestic terrorism with the purpose
of intimidation, and it's harming innocent people. It's really terrible,
and I think what we actually have to get to

(14:40):
are the people who are organizing and paying for.

Speaker 4 (14:43):
These attacks and protests.

Speaker 9 (14:45):
That's who we really need to go after, because the
people that we're actually throwing the monotov cocktails, they are
the foot soldiers. But we need to go after the generals,
and we're going to do so. The President has made
it very clear that we're going to go after those
that are and organizing, uh, these these violent attacks at
a Tony General Bondi has said the same thing.

Speaker 4 (15:06):
I believe that that is exactly what will happen.

Speaker 6 (15:08):
Okay, Well, that means they know who they are then, right,
and if they know who they are, why, well we
know why the Biden administration didn't because the Biden administration
was completely behind it. But I would, I would urge
the Trump administration if you know who these generals are.
I realize you have to build a case, and you
have to you have to have proof, but I would,
I would highly suggest that you should get on this

(15:30):
right away.

Speaker 3 (15:31):
All right?

Speaker 6 (15:31):
What more to share with you here? And it kind
of goes back to how I began this segment, which is,
you know, maybe the Bill Mochers of the world, uh,
the John Stewarts of the world, maybe if presented with
enough facts, they can be convinced that Trump is not
such a bad guy and that what is going on
here in this administration are things that really need to happen.

(15:52):
Kid Rock, who was at the White House when President
Trump signed in an executive order on concert ticket prices
get Rock, evidently had dinner with Dana White President Trump
and brought Bill Maher along, who had never been to
the White House, so that he could meet and talk
with President Trump. Here is Kid Rock dishing on how

(16:16):
all that went.

Speaker 10 (16:16):
I went on Bill's show, I went on his podcast,
and I said, man, you know, nothing happens if people
don't break bread together and me face to face. He's
been one of the president's hardest critics. And we came
to dinner with me, Bill, Dana White, and it could
not have been better. Everyone was so surprised, so so pleasant.
The most shocking thing to me was, you know, Bill's

(16:37):
obviously very big liberal, been very hard in the president.
But he's donated a lot of money to other politicians.
You know, you've had Biden, Clinton, Obama, everybody. He had
never been to the White House and the President was
so gracious. He took us up to the private residence.
We saw the Gettysburg address in the Lincoln bedroom and
I was like, you've never been here, Bill, And I
was like, how about this President Trump, you know, extending

(16:57):
this olive branch and like and we talked about things
we had in common, you know, ending wokeness, you know,
you know, securing the border. You know, the President was
asking him what he thought about policy, you know, going
on with Iran and Israel and things. It was, it
just meant, it blew my mind. It was I was,
I was, you know, very very proud.

Speaker 3 (17:16):
Do you think he walked away liking him? Because you know,
Trump is the type of person that you got to
meet him to understand it one hundred percent. One hundred percent.

Speaker 10 (17:26):
Me and Dana both said there was like there's everybody
that's ever ever met the President and any scenari that's
walked away without saying like, Wow, what a great guy,
so funny's so engaging, he's so smart, and absolutely Bill
even said to me, you know after that, he goes, wow,
that was you know, everybody's mind was kind of blown,
even the presidents, I think, because the President called me

(17:46):
late night last night, and you know, everyone was a
little suspect about going into this, and even the President
kind of alerted to me a little bit like what
do you got me doing? And I go, man, we're
just trying to show people that, you know, even though
we've been pretty hard on each other, that when you
get face to face, maybe we could have a little
more civility in this country and try to bring people together.

Speaker 6 (18:04):
Yeah, and that was my whole intention. Well, and God
bless your kid, Rock for doing it. I hope it's
not too frustrating here. Like I said, maybe the Bill
Mahers of the world, the ones that aren't completely insane,
maybe maybe if enough of them come over and and

(18:26):
at least stop, you know, bad mouthing President Trump and
and actually stick up for him every now and again.
Maybe that could have an impact, I hope. So there's
some there's some on the progressive left that are beyond help,
you know, the ones that truly have trumped arrangement syndrome.
You're never going to change their mind. But you can't
worry about that. All right, quick little break work visit

(18:48):
with Representative Steve Toth from from the Texas House in
just a moment. Are they going to get anything done?
I guess they finally passed the bill, but are they
going to end up in a special session? More coming
up next. Jimmy Bear Jowger a NAM nine fifty KPRC.

(19:16):
Representative Steve top joins us. You know the houses in session,
there hasn't been a lot seemingly done.

Speaker 3 (19:22):
Didn't you guys just finally pass your first bill?

Speaker 11 (19:26):
Yeah, this is like a fifty year record. It's taken
us to actually hear a bill, forty five years the longest,
and forty five years that it's taken us to get
committee asignments. This is like the longest and fifty years
that it's taken for us to hear legislation. And this
is what happens, Jimmy when you make deals with Democrats.

Speaker 6 (19:50):
Well, and it worked us fine. I guess for Representative Burrows,
do you think though, that he's going to be a
one and done House Speaker. I mean, how upset are
the more conservative Republicans in the Texas House right now?

Speaker 11 (20:03):
We're starting to light the place on fire. And that's unfortunate.
But that's unfortunate for Texas. It's really unfortunate for Burroughs.
Burroughs could have been Speaker for the next twelve years
if he had only seek to lead from the conservative
side of the aisle. But he doesn't. He wants to
get Garner's power from the Democrats.

Speaker 6 (20:26):
Well, he kind of studied at the right hand of
the predecessor, didn't Hey, yeah.

Speaker 11 (20:31):
Pretty much. So we went to him later on and
we said, the Speaker, you know, if if you'll just
be about the Republican agenda, if you'll be about the
Republican priorities, we'll support you and you can be Speaker
as long as you want. But he turned a deaf
ear to us.

Speaker 6 (20:50):
Okay, well, hopefully there's a price to be paid for that.
I guess he thinks that as long as he can
keep the Democratic coalition together and just get a handful
of Republicans.

Speaker 3 (20:58):
He can just keep doing what he's doing.

Speaker 11 (20:59):
Huh, Yeah, it didn't work. It didn't work for date Feeling.
It won't work for him. I mean we took date
Feeling out. We'll take him out if we have to.

Speaker 6 (21:07):
Okay, I love to hear that. Okay, let's talk about
what is left and what is likely to happen. Do
you think in the House are there any more bills coming?
How much more time do you have in this session?
And there's already talk about the governor calling a special session.
Do you see that happening?

Speaker 11 (21:24):
I absolutely see a special session for this reason. We're
only here for five months once every two years. We're
three months over three months Jimmy into it, and we
just heard our first bills yesterday. That's crazy. So we've
got realistically, we've got another three to four weeks where
we can hear Republican bills so that they can get

(21:45):
over the Senate, be heard, and to be passed. That's it.

Speaker 3 (21:50):
Okay.

Speaker 6 (21:50):
Now, of the bills that are out there for consideration
by the Texas House, which ones do you think have
the best chance of actually being heard before the end
of the seeson.

Speaker 11 (22:01):
Well, we know school choice is going to be heard,
but whether or not it can be passed, that's a
good question because Burrows has chosen to hear the budget
and to pass the budget before school choice, and that's
a huge mistake because if we pass the budget then

(22:23):
Democrats can just walk and we'll never hear it.

Speaker 3 (22:29):
That doesn't sound very promising, then, does it.

Speaker 11 (22:32):
No, it doesn't. And one of the other big issues too,
is the transition of our children. Social transition of our
children is still going on. We're hearing about it at
Texas Children's We're hearing about it from isds all over
the state of Texas, and we've got to pass the
legislation to stop and protect these kids.

Speaker 6 (22:51):
Well, I saw that the governor wrote wrote you a
little letter about this, directing the Texas Education Agency the TA,
to investigate Social Tree in this particular incident. Do we
trust the TEA to do a thorough investigation?

Speaker 11 (23:06):
Yeah?

Speaker 5 (23:07):
I do.

Speaker 11 (23:07):
I know who's going to be heading up the investigation.
I've been talking with the mom the Osbourne's at Bellair
High School and bel Air, the reign of the serious
hell is going to come down on that school for
doing what they did.

Speaker 6 (23:21):
So for our listeners who are not familiar with the case,
and for my sake as well, tell us a little
bit about what happened. What, what is the school accused
of doing? What is how were they attempting to transition?

Speaker 3 (23:32):
Uh? These parents child?

Speaker 11 (23:35):
So she was feeling a little bit of confusion, and
the teacher gave her a male name, and several weeks
several months after where she had worked through it with
help of counseling everything else, she turned a paper in

(23:55):
and the teacher turned around and crossed out her name
with a red pen and wrote in a male's name
and told the little girl do not hand a paper
unless it has a male pronoun on it. And the
mom and dad complained to the school, and the school
said they take care of it, but they didn't. They

(24:17):
continued to do it. Now they're playing basically a deaf
ear to mom and dad.

Speaker 3 (24:22):
Yeah, I assume that teacher is still there.

Speaker 11 (24:24):
Yep, show us the principal.

Speaker 6 (24:26):
Okay, is she still is that little girl stuck in
that class or if at least has she changed classes
and teachers.

Speaker 3 (24:34):
I don't know if.

Speaker 11 (24:35):
They've pulled her out and put her in another class
or not. I really don't.

Speaker 6 (24:38):
I hope so, I hope so at the very least,
so the governors turned this over to the TA. Hopefully
they do an investigation. What if anything, what kind of
power does the tea have as far as punishing this school,
that teacher, and that principle.

Speaker 11 (24:53):
That's the biggest problem is that education law. It's not
part of the criminal code, and the criminal code isn't
part of education law, and so we can't do anything.
And what we realistically need to do is pass legislation.
House Bill twenty two fifty eight stops this. That's my bill.

(25:14):
But Dustin Burrows is sent it to a committee to die. Well, no,
I won't even get a hearing.

Speaker 6 (25:21):
And there we go. There, now we're back to Now
we're back to the original problem. Right as long as
as long as Dustin Burrows is Speaker of the House,
nothing is going to change, and these bills are not
going to get passed. Okay, right, all right, Well we're
gonna have to figure out some creative ways to get
rid of this, dude.

Speaker 11 (25:36):
Absolutely, I mean, the people of Lubbock have got to
make their voice heard in the primary.

Speaker 6 (25:45):
That's really kind of the only way to get this
done isn't he has to be primary Because Dade Feeland
proved it's not that easy. They found a pretty good
worker ond then for him, didn't they It's not but.

Speaker 11 (25:58):
We still got rid of him. I mean, at the
end of the day, they ran him into a runoff
and Carl Rove and the Associated Republicans of Faith Texas
had to get three thousand Democrats to turn out and
vote for him, and he's still only won by twelve
hundred votes.

Speaker 6 (26:16):
Buddy won and he's still there. He's ninety one, he's
he's not the speaker, but he's still serving in the
Texas House. I mean, I think in order to get
rid of that kind of influence, these people just have
to be out of politics. Yeah, you have to figure
out absolutely, you have to figure out how to make
sure they are not re elected in any way, shape
or form. All Right, I wanted, as long as I have,
you too, Len explain this one to I don't know

(26:37):
where you stand on this particular issue, but I do
know that, uh, Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick has drawing the
ire of Michael Barry among others, for his push on
the THHC ban so much so that he's saying that
he'll have he'll call a special session if they fail
to ban THCHC. What is it about? I don't know

(26:59):
if you've talked to Lieutenant Governor at all. What is
it about THHC that has him so concerned.

Speaker 11 (27:04):
So this has nothing to do with with natural cannabis
and THAC. Veterans and compassionate use by people that that
need THC can still get it, including veterans of post
traumatic stress. This is about the synthetic use of THC.
And it is lethal, it's deadly, it's it's it just

(27:27):
should not be used. And so this is not about
this is not about natural cannabis THAC.

Speaker 6 (27:35):
Okay, because I think that Michael Barry thinks it is
and it's not, and he's rarely wrong about that.

Speaker 11 (27:41):
That would be that would be my concern as well,
because I share Michael's conviction.

Speaker 6 (27:46):
Okay, all right, Well we'll see if if that you
think that that bill goes anywhere.

Speaker 3 (27:51):
The THC bill hard to say it really is. Yeah,
all right?

Speaker 6 (27:57):
Uh, let me also ask you, as long as they've
got you here, what else I want to ask you
about here? Oh, bail changes, that's the other thing that
the Lieutenant Governor is very seriously wants to dealt with
either in the current session or a special session if
if need be. What the bail reform issue? Where are
we at on that? What if anything is being proposed

(28:18):
as far as bail.

Speaker 11 (28:19):
Reform, You know, you would think that this would be
something that Republicans and Democrats can come together on that
violent people, somebody that just killed his wife or his
girlfriend ought not walk the streets. But yet we've got
these Democrat judges that turn these people loose on a
personal recognizance bond without putting any money down. And what happens?

(28:41):
The psychopaths kill again, and yet Democrats want to let
them out. And so I don't know what kind of
success we're going to have given the current leadership of
the Texas House. But if we can't get it done, yes,
there will be a special session.

Speaker 3 (28:56):
Okay.

Speaker 6 (28:56):
So the bail reform measure would require judges set a
monetary bail for certain defenses I'm guessing right.

Speaker 11 (29:03):
And some offenses you won't get bail.

Speaker 3 (29:06):
Okay. What what offenses would not qualify for bail? Murder?

Speaker 11 (29:11):
Murder?

Speaker 3 (29:13):
Well, good, that's the way, that's that's the way. It
should be.

Speaker 6 (29:17):
I mean we've we've had we've had people, as you say,
released even if they weren't released on personal recognisances. They
were released on like a fifty thousand dollars bond or
one hundred thousand dollars bond. You only have to put
up ten percent if you can. If somebody will put
up ten grand to get you out of jail and
you're charged with murder, you're free to go about murdering again.

Speaker 11 (29:37):
Yeah, I mean, when you've got strong prime e facia evidence,
direct evidence that someone has done something they ought not
walk the street period.

Speaker 6 (29:49):
Now one last question for you, sir, and that is
I understand you are running for reelection, and I'm wondering
why you are going to continue to frustrate yourself this way.

Speaker 11 (30:02):
But BT and I see it is a service to
our state. We do. It's it's just something that we
feel called to and we're trying to decide now whether
it's best to do that. And here in Austin, in Washington.

Speaker 6 (30:17):
Well, I'll tell you what we sorely need you in Austin.
You're you're one of the few voices of reason and sanity,
and I know how I can hear in your voice
how frustrated you are in dealing with what you're dealing
with right now to Texas House. But the only way
to effectuate change is by having more people like you
forcing that change. So I hope you stick with it.

Speaker 11 (30:37):
Thank you brother.

Speaker 6 (30:38):
All right, do you have a great day. Representative to
thank you for joining us. Appreciate it.

Speaker 11 (30:43):
Thanks you.

Speaker 6 (30:44):
Bet back with more to moment. Jimmy Verrett show here
an Am nine fifty KPRC. All right, we are back

(31:12):
to wrapping up for today, and one of the things
I wanted to share with you. I didn't give a
chance to do this story at all this morning on
our morning show between five and eight on news radio
seven forty KTRH, so I'm pleased to be able to
bring it to you now because I think it's well
worth sharing. It's another example of how difficult it is

(31:32):
to get a rain on the bureaucracy in Washington, d C.
But it's very clear to me that we have good
people in place that are attempting to do so, and
they are following through with investigating things that need to
be investigated. In this case, the FAA, the Federal Aviation Administration,
and you may be wondering what if anything, is happening

(31:54):
as a result of some of the issues that we've seen,
the the Washington d C plane crash and some of
these near misses that we've had, and reports of understaffed
and undermanned air traffic control, and and and and an
even more important question that's come up, other than not

(32:16):
having enough air traffic controllers, is the quality of the
air traffic controllers that we have. And evidently, uh the
FAA has been getting investigated by the Department of Transportation,
which is good. Sean Duffy, who's the Transportation Secretary, is
evidently hired in outside law firm in order to go

(32:38):
in and examine exactly what the FAA has been doing
as far as testing for their employees, because they they
believe that they have found, you know, evidence that what
has really been going on there is that they have
been you know, dumbing down the test if you will,

(32:58):
and discribe orberinating against white applicants for air traffic control jobs.
Here is Mountain States Legal Foundation General Counsel William TrackMan
talking about what they have found so far in the
investigation into the FAA and DEI.

Speaker 12 (33:17):
Right, Well, sometimes when you want to get help. The
first step is having a friend tell you that you
have a problem. And here Secretary Duffy is clearly honed
in on the fact that the FA has a problem
and that meritocracy has been going away and gone away
for over a decade since the Obama administration flushed the
pre employment test that was raced neutral and instead adopted

(33:40):
one that thought about race and wanted to reduce the
number of white people.

Speaker 3 (33:44):
In the hiring pool.

Speaker 12 (33:45):
And so I'm optimistic the hiring an outside law firm
will get to the bottom of these things, and given
the direction of the Secretary, I think it will actually
have an effect.

Speaker 3 (33:54):
Hopeful at least it will have.

Speaker 12 (33:55):
An effect on the hiring of air traffic controllers and
addressing the shortage that we have.

Speaker 13 (33:59):
Current Secretary Duffy has also asked the request of the
agency's top watchdog could conduct an investigation of its own.
What might they find beyond what you have already uncovered.

Speaker 12 (34:13):
Well, that's absolutely right. They changed the questions on the
test to things like how many sports did you play
in high school? And what was your worst subject when
you went to school? In terms of what the investigation
may find, they may find more about this cheating scandal
that we just recently saw blasted across x and very
social media platforms. Imagine how much confidence you have to

(34:34):
have as someone who has the answers to the test
that is already racially biased again against Caucasians, and then
you're giving away the answers. So my hope is that
this outside law firm, Quinn Emmanuel, will be able to
uncover why that person had so much confidence that they
could give away test answers and assume that they would

(34:55):
get away with it.

Speaker 6 (34:56):
Wow, what was your subject? Why didn't they just ask
what was your favorite subject in school?

Speaker 3 (35:03):
How many? How many sports did you play?

Speaker 6 (35:07):
Why do I get the feeling I could take the
test for air traffic controler and pass it.

Speaker 3 (35:11):
That's pretty sad. That is just amazing.

Speaker 6 (35:16):
You know what's even sadder to me about this is
that these progressives think that they have to really dumb
things down in order to be able to hire minorities.
That is so insulting to minorities. If if if I
were a minority minority applicant, and I applied for a
job like that, and I got it because of my color,

(35:40):
and and and and was given a joke of a test,
and and my qualifications weren't even probably taken into much consideration.
I would be personally offended by that. I would I
would like to think everybody would be personally offended by that.
That says we we we can't hire, we can't hire
minorities unless you know, we dumb this stuff down. I

(36:01):
don't believe that. Do you believe that? I don't believe
that for a minute. All right, one more to share
with you, because I think it's one of the smartest
answers I've heard on the tariffs. Of course, today is
you know, today's tariff day, Today's liberation day, as President
Trump calls it. Senator John Kennedy got asked about tariffs
and taxes, and as usually, he had some pretty smart

(36:23):
things to say.

Speaker 3 (36:24):
Here he is I.

Speaker 1 (36:25):
Think President Trump won the selection in large part, Larry,
because people felt like he would be better in terms
of the economy. What does that mean? That means lower prices,
better quality of life. Our plan is to do that
in through ways. Number One, reduce spending, which will cause

(36:46):
interest rates to go down and stimulate the economy less
deregulate the economy, so goods and services will be cheaper.
And number three, design a tax code that looks like
somebody designed it on purpose. Now what role could tariffs
play in all of this? The truth is nobody knows.

(37:12):
I've listened to economists for the last month. Some say
this will cause a recession. His terroifs will cause a recession.
Others say it will cause growth. In my eight years
in Washington, what I've learned that for every economist, there's
an equal and opposite economist, and they're both usually wrong.

(37:36):
Some of these these experts make those late night psychic
hotlines look respectable.

Speaker 3 (37:45):
Yes, sir, I do know this.

Speaker 1 (37:48):
I understand where President Trump is coming from. America is
the wealthiest country in all of human history. Is consumers driven.
Our people like to buy stuff. So the President is saying,
let's use our leverage. He's saying to every business and
every country in the world, if you want to sell
to America, move your business here.

Speaker 3 (38:10):
I get it.

Speaker 1 (38:12):
And in the long run he's right.

Speaker 3 (38:15):
But in the long run, we're all did.

Speaker 1 (38:18):
The short run matters too, And the truth is, we
do not know yet what the impact of these tariffs
are going to be.

Speaker 6 (38:27):
I think he's just trying to say long do you
have long term it'll be good for us short term.
Who might be a little painful, might be a little painful,
And I guess we're going to find out how many
Americans are willing to go through a little pain for
the long term.

Speaker 3 (38:41):
Good.

Speaker 6 (38:42):
All right, listen, that's enough for today. You'll have a
great day. Thanks for listening. I'll see you tomorrow morning,
bright and early, five am over on news radio seven
forty KTRH. We're back here at four on AM nine
fifty KPRC.

Speaker 3 (39:00):
Had indented

Speaker 2 (39:04):
Ed