The Rod and Greg Show: Govt Shutdown/ Air Traffic Control Problems; GOP Crackdown; What is the Plan now for Reconstruction?

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
I took the weekend off, went to my hometown in
upstate New York. I had my youngest brother passed away
a week or two ago. We went for his memorial service.
Also had a chance to take my three sons with
me and my wife and showed them where their dad
grew up. And it was a great experience. But it
is good to be back with you. A lot went
on while we were gone, and we have a lot

(00:22):
to talk about today. Here in a minute, I'll share
with you a real interesting experience we had when we
were flying back last night. I've never had this happen before,
but maybe some of you have and can relate to that.
But I'll get to that here in just a minute.
But the show today, we're going to talk about the
government shutdown, how it's impacting traffic control towers around the country.

(00:44):
Los Angeles, New York. There have been several major airports
impacted by delays. We'll get into that. We'll talk about
the GOP cracking down on illegal truckers in this country.
Remember the horrible accidents we've seen over the past several months,
especially the one in Florida where a trucker who hardly
spoke any English, don't know how we got a CDL

(01:06):
just decided to do a U turn on a major
highway and a van carrying three people rammed into him,
killing all three of them. We'll talk about what the
Republicans would like to do in that regard a little
bit later on in the show, a little bit of
pivoting on the part of the Utah Republican Party when
it comes to the redistricting debate. There's a new poll
out on that. We'll take a look at the numbers,

(01:27):
and we'll talk about jail time for first time DUI offenders.
That's right, you're caught the first time. You're going to
jail in Oklahoma. We'll talk about that law and if
in fact it would work here in Utah, we'll get
into that. So we've got a lot to get to today.
Great to be with you. If you want to be
a part of the program. Eight eight eight five seven

(01:48):
eight zero one zero triple eight five seven eight zero
one zero, are on your cell phone dial pound two
to fifty and say hey, Roden, don't forget. You can
leave a message on our talkback line as well. Now,
I think many of you, I don't know how many
of you can relate to this, but I've never had
this happen on a plane the way it did last night.
So we're coming back from the East coast. We flew

(02:09):
out of Baltimore, about a four hour trip back to
here in Salt Lake City, and the wind was blowing
pretty good coming over the mountains, dropping in the valley
a little rough last night. But we're coming in from
the north, heading heading south, attempting to land on the
at the airport's All Lake International Airport. We were, my guess,
maybe five or ten feet off the ground if in

(02:31):
fact that okay, very close to touching down, and we're
ready for the you know little jar that you get
when you hit the ground going at the speeds we're going,
and we'd be home. All of a sudden, the plane
immediately started climbing again, and instead of landing, is almost
like we were taking off again. And I thought to myself, Okay,

(02:54):
have we got a problem. Do we have a pilot
who maybe you lost it? Did we land at the
wrong airport? You know, all these things go through your mind.
Well several minutes later, while we're still climbing and wondering
what is going on, and I think everybody on the
plane a little restless, going, Okay, we're just about to

(03:15):
touch down here, and all of a sudden, we're back
in the air, climbing again to a higher level. You
know what is going on? Well, that's when the captain
came on and he said, folks, let me explain what's
going on. He said, we came in from the north,
but the tailwind that we had from that north wind
last night had us going way too fast to be
able to land. So we're climbing up into the end

(03:37):
of the sky again. We're gonna slowly make a big turn,
which they did, and then we're going to land to
the north in that direction. And we did, and everything
was fine. But I don't know if you've ever been
in a situation like that, but it was. I'll be honest,
it was a little nerve racking last night because you're
so close to touching down. We didn't have a schedule.
We got in late, so we didn't worry about hitting it,

(03:59):
connecting flight or having to be somewhere, so we had
a little time to spare. But the idea of almost
touching down then immediately climbing back into the sky making
a big turn and then landing in the north direction
instead of south. Kind of weird. Maybe some of you
have experienced that. Maybe pylots can tell us why they
did that, why they were going too fast, and what

(04:22):
may have happened. But it was a very very interesting
experience last night. Maybe you've done something like that. All right,
let's talk about the government shutdown. Nothing going on. There
was a big development in the shutdown. As a matter
of fact, the head we get to that information, the
head of the largest government employees union is now calling

(04:43):
on Democrats to come together and get with the GOP
and end this government shutdown. The big concern, of course,
is coming up on Friday, I believe the first first
of November. That's when the payments for food stamps or
the STAT program will basically run out of money, and
there's going to be a real charge for people wanting

(05:05):
to wanting to get some food stamps or be part
of the SNAP program. I looked today about seven point
nine percent of Utah's participate in the SNAP food program,
so not as large a percentage as other states, but
still people are going to be impacted by this. So
what is going to push the Democrats? They don't want

(05:26):
to do anything. I mean, but there is a strategy.
They're now using the media surprise surprise, right to put
the blame on Donald Trump. They're basically saying, look it,
if the President would just sit down with Hakeem Jeffries
and Chuck Schumer, they could come up with a deal,
but he won't sit down. Well, their response is why

(05:47):
sit down with them when they aren't going to move
on their position either. Listen to how the media tried
to frame Secretary of Treasury Scott Bessen last night yesterday
on the two morning news shows, first of all Martha
Raddit's on ABC and then Kirs Kristen Welker on NBC,
how they tried to freeme it that this was all
Donald Trump's fault for not bringing the shut down to

(06:10):
an end.

Speaker 2 (06:10):
People are suffering, Federal employees are starting to go to
food banks.

Speaker 3 (06:14):
Any light at the end of the tunnel on that
should the President be meeting with Democrats again?

Speaker 1 (06:20):
Well, what good does it do, Martha?

Speaker 2 (06:22):
They've dug in the American people are hostage to Chuck
Schumer and King Jeffery's poll numbers because what's changed between
now and the last time there was a clean continuing
resolution is Chuck Schumer has tanked in the polls.

Speaker 4 (06:36):
When will President Trump meet with Democrats to try to
bring this shut down to a close and get federal
workers their paychecks back again, Mister Secretary.

Speaker 2 (06:45):
Chris, I'm going to have to reject the premise of
your question. Why did President Trump have to meet with Democrats?
Democrats just need to go into the Senate and vote
to in the Shutdore.

Speaker 1 (06:56):
A kind of interesting is to how you can see
how the media is trying to sway this a little
bit away from Schumer and now blaming the president basically
saying if he just sit down with everybody, we could
end this shutdown. Well, the Democrats aren't going to move.
The President is not going to move. Something's going to
have to change. It's going to have to be the
Democrats in my opinion. Now, I want you to listen
to this comment. This is a question posed on CNBC

(07:17):
this morning. Her name is Becky Quick. She completely wrecked
Hakeem Jeffries on his shutdown hypocrisy list of the questions
and points she makes.

Speaker 5 (07:26):
What you are asking the Republicans to do right now
when they control the White House, the Senate, and the
House is effectively what the Democrats could not do when
they controlled all three of those heads of government themselves.
The ten year setup for this for these the three
year setup for the expiration of these credits was intentionally

(07:49):
put in. It was put in when you controlled the
White House, the House, and the Senate. You couldn't get
it passed for longer. And so this is a setup
kind of your own creation, that you all couldn't extend
beyond that. Now you want the Republicans to do something
you didn't do when you.

Speaker 6 (08:02):
Were in power, it's not a setup beyond what we
could do. We extended the Affordable Care Act tax credits
in twenty twenty two for three years. The program is working.
It's providing healthcare to tens of millions of people in
an affordable way, and it should be continued. It's interesting
to us that Republicans decided that they would prefer to

(08:26):
permanently extend massive tax breaks for their billionaire donors in
their one big, ugly bill.

Speaker 1 (08:32):
Don't you get sick and tired of the Democrats saying
tax the rich? That was the chant last night at
the big rally in New York. But you can see
the Democrats had an opportunity to extend these benefits when
they were in charge. They could not get it done,
so now they want the Republicans to do it for them.
You think that's going to happen, Not a chance. All right,
when we come back, we'll talk about air travel in

(08:54):
the US right now, that's coming up. Great to be
with you on this Monday afternoon, Rod our Kid on
the Rod and Gregg Show takes a day off on
talk radio one oh five nine cannas live everywhere on
the iHeartRadio app around the country. The delays are starting
to build. Los Angeles had to shut down, Burbank shut
down for a little while, or delayed flights for a
little while. You're also looking back east, But can the government.

(09:17):
It raised a lot of questions about what about air
traffic controllers. You know, the United States is one of
few countries in the world. There aren't many of us
left anymore that still allow the government to control air
traffic controlling. Many of the countries around the world have
privatized the industry. Well, is this a time to start

(09:38):
talking about it. Let's talk about it with our next guest,
Robert Poole. He is director of the transportation policy at
Reason Foundation. Robert, thanks for joining us. Robert, talk about
this idea of getting the government out of the air
traffic control towers. What benefits and why should we do it?

Speaker 7 (09:53):
Well, I say that because it's really captive to the
federal budget. That's because that's where the budget comes from.
And most countries around the world over the last thirty
years have said, well, that didn't really work so well.
They said, air traffic control is basically like a utility,
like electric utility or water utility, and charged. It should

(10:14):
charges fees or should charge fees directly to the users
that they pay, and that becomes a bondable revenue stream
that the air traffic entity can use even if it's
still a government corporation. It doesn't get any of its
budget then from the legislature or the Congress. In our case,
it's completely depoliticized in that sense and able to run

(10:35):
like a real business. And that started in nineteen eighty
seven when New Zealand government decided to try that. It
worked really well. The Clinton administration when it was in power,
tried to do the same thing as a reinventing government thing,
but they didn't get it. Passed, and in the years
since then, over today, about ninety nine countries kept their

(10:55):
air traffic control from a government utility corporation gets no
money out of the government's budget and gets all of
its revenue from users airlines and business jets that pay
user fees all over the world.

Speaker 1 (11:09):
What is the argument against it? What are the arguments
against it?

Speaker 7 (11:12):
Robert argument, Congress loves to micromanage these things. Yeah, and
there has never been much support in Congress for this
kind of a change, despite the fact that it's working
really well. In Canada. They did this about twenty years
ago and now of Canada has better technology, better facilities.

(11:34):
I've heard pilots talk about when they fly north across
the Canadian border, you know, from the United States into Canada,
that going from a backward system to the state of
the arts really really works well.

Speaker 1 (11:47):
Really really. Has the president tried to do anything about this?

Speaker 7 (11:50):
President Trump, well, in his first term he actually endorsed this.
What there was a bill being worked on in Congress
by the House Transportation Committee that was basically modeled after
ned Canada. It would have been a very good, big
positive change. We are the world's biggest air traffic system
and so it would even you know, following the model

(12:13):
it has been working for about thirty years overseas, would
be a big step forward. But President Trump did not.
He had a White House event saying this was a
good idea, but he did not lobby any members of Congress.
And there was a lot of opposition. Private pilots really
opposed this, particularly the business jet people because all of

(12:34):
the world business jets pay fees based on gross way
of the airport and the distance floan, and only in
the United States they pay a small fuel tax, which
is about a third of what they would pay in
any other country. So they're happy with being able to
get control on the cheap and if they've lobbied against

(12:55):
it very ferociously every time it's come up in Congress.

Speaker 1 (12:59):
Robert Is, one of the airlines, said about this, and
the air traffic controllers themselves, have they ever weighed in
on this?

Speaker 7 (13:05):
Yes, they have. In fact, the time that I mentioned
in about twenty sixteen to twenty eighteen, when there were
bills in the Congress for this, the Air Traffic Controllers
Union was strongly supportive and I testified side by side
with the president of the Air Traffic Controllers Union in
a congressional meeting on this, and the airlines were also strongly.

(13:30):
I went with people from the Airline Trade Association and
gave newspaper briefings on this in half a dozen cities.
So this whole coalition that really said this is really
a good idea, and that coalition has not been reassembled.
There's a different leadership at the Controllers Union. They have
not taken the position per or con, but they haven't

(13:52):
revived the idea, and the airlines have decided what they
really want is a big handout from Congress. They want
thirty to thirty billion dollars to improve the system, and
they got They got a down payment of ten or
twelve billion, But that's that's all they've gotten so far.
And I hope it's really a bad Air Traffic control

(14:14):
has always been supported by user taxes in the United
States and in other countries where it hasn't still been depoliticized.
So the idea makes sense, it's it's proven worldwide, but
it's hard to get political support for it. Well, you know,
maybe maybe with this shutdown of the air traffic system

(14:36):
being really working very you know, with controllers calling and
sick being overworked and overstressed, partly because they're not getting paid.
This may turn out to be it may revive the idea.
I hope that would be the case.

Speaker 1 (14:52):
It sounds like Robert that initially the airlines were a
part of your coalition that you talked about, but then
all of a sudden they changed their minds. Is the
federal bailouts that they were getting what changed their minds?

Speaker 7 (15:05):
Do you think there was a whole coalition of aviation groups,
including the business shift people and the small private plane
people that all said, well, you know, we have a
government now that wants to spend money on infrastructure, so
let's get our share. Basically, I'm you know, yeah, yeah,
exaggerating a little bit. That's basically the idea. And there

(15:27):
were about thirty aviation organizations that all got together for this,
and the airline just said, okay, well, if that's going
to happen, we'd like to be sure we're part.

Speaker 8 (15:35):
Of it now.

Speaker 1 (15:36):
Yeah. A final question for you, well, two final questions.
How would the consumers like this, the people who travel
by air what change would they see? And again, do
you think this will ever happen?

Speaker 7 (15:49):
I think it will happen. I think it's almost inevitable
because almost the whole world has done it. Consumers, over
a few years, there would be revenue bonds that the
air Traffic Organization could issue, and new and better facilities
would come quicker, more more high tech equipment that now
gets because the ASSAYE gets an annual budget and they

(16:10):
have if they have to equip all of the air
traffic facilities, it's new tech. They can only do it
in drips and drabs over ten to fifteen years. By
the time they get the last facility set in the
air fifteen, the stuff is probably obsolete.

Speaker 1 (16:22):
On our newsmaker line. That's Robert Poole. Robert, thanks for
joining in seats with the Reason Foundation talking about getting
the government out of the air traffic controller business. I know,
for quite a few years, former Utah Congressman now all
Fox News contributor Jason Chafitz has wanted to privatize the TSA.
You know, the less we have government doing for us,
I think the better off will be. I kind of

(16:43):
like the idea of privatizing air traffic control. Maybe that's
a way to upgrade the system, modernize the system, and
make it so it's not so dependent on government, then
government shutdowns like we're having to go through today.

Speaker 9 (16:56):
Mate.

Speaker 1 (16:56):
We'll talk about that, guess some of your reaction coming
up on that here on the Rowden greg Show on
this Monday afternoon. All Right, more coming up on Utah's
Talk Radio one O five to nine knrs. It was
a couple of months ago we heard the story about
this horrific crash on I believe it was in Florida
where a tractor trailer driven by a man who barely

(17:16):
spoke English and who also somehow got a hold of
a CDL license to drive a big rig, decided in
the middle of an interstate to make a U turn,
ended up killing three people who were in a van.
And there have been several other incidents over the past
few weeks that we've heard about it. Well, what do
we do? How do we crack down on illegal, illegal

(17:37):
migrant truck drivers in this country today? How on earth
are they getting CDLs?

Speaker 10 (17:42):
Well?

Speaker 1 (17:43):
Joining us on our newspaper line to talk about that
is Jason Hopkins. Jason is an immigration reporter at the
Daily Caller. He's been digging into this and Jason, by
the sounds of it, some work is headed in that
direction and who's behind all of this.

Speaker 11 (17:55):
Yeah, So we've got a growing number of lawmakers in
Congress that are looking to put forward their own bills
really codify the Trump Administration's reforms that they put forward,
you know. Right, So, we've seen a growing number of
horrific traffic accidents on American highways, right, I mean this
really splashed on the news first in August with that

(18:17):
one illegal migrant truck driver allegedly Hargender c to Earn
smashed into a vehicle, killed three. Just a few days ago,
we've had just a nearly similar accident take place right
in southern California, Josh and pret Sin allegedly got behind
the wheel of a big rig smashed into three vehicles,
killed several. So just really herritic accidents in the Trump administration,

(18:40):
I mean they're taking this seriously.

Speaker 10 (18:42):
You know.

Speaker 11 (18:42):
Earlier this year they put forward some English language proficiency standards,
stricter proficiencies, you know, English language standards. And then after
the crash in Florida, they've put down sweeping crackdown on
CDL drivers, non domiciled CDLs and those who know know
non dominicilt PDL, it's non domsilve commercial driver's licenses largely

(19:05):
applies to individuals who are you know, non American citizens,
they are migrants here, they would get that non domicile license.
So essentially the new rules who make it where I mean,
they can't even get them, right. But the thing about
this is that these are just administrative changes and they
can be rolled back because they have before the Obama administry.

(19:25):
We had tighter English language standards for truck drivers for years,
but that was rolled back by the Obama administration kind
of the wing days of his administration in twenty sixteen.
So really, I mean the US would be like, well,
they've been rolled back before, they could be rolled back again, right,
So it really has to be changed at the legislative level.

(19:46):
So that's where we do have a lot of lawmakers
now they're putting for their own bills that would codify this,
and to law I spoke to, you know, Representative Mary
Miller from Illinois. Right, she's got her own bill that
would codify Trump's non domicile PDA crackdown. And then you've
just gotten now just so many others. Right the day
of the crash in California, Pat Harrigan for North Carolina,

(20:07):
he put down his own bill in the Senate, Cynthia Loomis,
she's having her own legislation. So yeah, there's just a
lot of n makers who are trying to answer the
call here.

Speaker 1 (20:16):
Do we know why the Obama administration and its final
days decided to roll this back with their pressure from
the trucking industry. You know, the old argument out there
was we need more truck drivers doing I know why
they rolled them back.

Speaker 12 (20:27):
Jason, You know that is such an interesting question because
you're just hearing different things from different people right now.
You have heard in just you know, days past Association
saying we just don't have them. You know, there's a
truck driver shortage, you know, we need to make relieved here.
I've spoken to so many truck drivers, all of them
are just saying I was just there was just a

(20:49):
bullcrap reason that there's.

Speaker 11 (20:50):
Not a shortage. You know, you need to have tough
English standards or you're just going to have what you
know you're seeing here, right the guy in Florida, he
failed the English test. You can read any road signs,
So it really depends too you have and honestly, I mean,
now that we've have these new rules in place, We're
not seeing any sort of issue as far as the

(21:10):
shortage goes. If anything, roads are safer, and we're seeing
truck drivers, at least in some markets, American truck drivers
enjoying better rates.

Speaker 1 (21:21):
If in fact this new law gets passed, whatever form
it takes shape, will it be up to the states
then to enforce it? What can the government do to
enforce states to enforce this law? What do you? What
do you? What do they hope to see have happened?

Speaker 8 (21:34):
Here?

Speaker 11 (21:36):
You're diving into another really good view here, because even
if you qualify this into law right now, it's still
up to states to enforce these things. And that was
actually a big issue still going on right now between
the DOT and California. The DOT put, for you know,
Sean Duffy, he put for these new emergency rules on
non DOSSI, non dinasile CDL drivers not that long ago,

(21:59):
but it was before this driver Joshu preed scene was
able to upgrade his non dom style teamail now California,
so this was entirely on California. They were supposed to
and they said that they were following the new rules,
but if they had been, his license would have been
revoked when he upgraded his license, but that did not happen.

(22:19):
So this is up to the states to enforce these rules. Now,
you've actually got some other people you go on these
structing websites that create waves and such. They're saying, really
a great reform would to just be putting at the
federal level. It just needs to be up to them
to enforce these rules, not the states, just for a
more uniform policy across the country.

Speaker 1 (22:39):
How much final question for you, how much of a
push is underway right now, either by the administration or
backers of this bill. How much of a push is
there right now to get this to the finish line?

Speaker 11 (22:50):
And they want to see it happen. I mean, you've
got so many of these bills here, numerous co sponsors.
They wanted to happen. This does seem to be a
bit of a kind of a one party issue. You
do have some people on the other side of the aisle,
Democratic isle who are interested in trucking issues, but really
as a price to you know, like overtime paying such.

(23:11):
But I mean, as far as the Trump administration wanting
this to go down, they are very supportive of it,
and a lot of these bills. They are being championed
by the American Truckers United Association. Here they're saying this
is great legislation. They're betting their full weight behind this
because it would not only make the American roadway safer,
but it actually helps the average truck driver. I mean,
they want these rules in place.

Speaker 1 (23:32):
We've got to get safety on the highways. And you
see these accidents anymore with these these illegal immigrants who
are driving trucks. I don't know where they get their CDLs,
but we've got a crack down on it, and I
hope the Republican Party will be able to do something
about it. All Right, more coming up, it is the
Rod and Greg Show. Mine is Greg on this Monday
afternoon right here on Utah's Talk Radio one oh five
nine can Arrest. You would be uncomfortable if air traffic

(23:57):
control in this country was turned over the private sector.
It's an idea that's been kicked around in the past,
but you know, would you feel unsafe? Safer? And what
about this new law that actually does go into effect
come first of November in a couple of days down
in Oklahoma, where if depending on the aggravating circumstances, but

(24:18):
if you're kant drunk driving for the first time, you're
going to spend some time in jail. Now, there are
some laws already I'm not sure what they say here
in Utah that do require some jail time, but it's
rarely enforced. And you have these attorneys out there who
work on that to keep you out of jail if
you have a DUI. But maybe we'll try and get

(24:38):
into that with you as well. Now as we wrap
up this hour, I want to take you back. This
is two thousand and four. This is after the Iowa Caucus.
Remember Howard Dean. Howard Dean came in third place, a
bit surprising, and he went on this rant to talk
about his victory and what lies ahead for the Democrats.
Back in two thousand and four, We're going to.

Speaker 13 (24:58):
South Carolina at oklahom and Arizona and North Dakota and
New Mexico.

Speaker 5 (25:03):
We're going to California and Texas and New York, and.

Speaker 3 (25:07):
We going to South Dakota.

Speaker 4 (25:08):
And Oregon and.

Speaker 14 (25:09):
Washington and Michigan, and then we're going to Washington, d C.

Speaker 15 (25:13):
To take back the White House.

Speaker 1 (25:17):
Remember that, by the way, that little rant basically sunk
his campaign. Because everybody out there at the time, we're
just making so much fun of this guy for that thing,
and he never could he never could get past it.
So that cost his campaign. Well, there was a big
rally in New York last night for Zorim Memdani and
AOC decided to go on her own rant lest what

(25:39):
she had to say and see if he can follow
this one.

Speaker 15 (25:41):
Choose escaping Holocaust, lack Americans fleeing sand slavery and Jim
Crow Latinos then seeking a better life, Native people standing
for themselves, Asian Americans coming together in Queens and Brooklyn
and the Brooks.

Speaker 1 (26:05):
You know what's so funny about this. The Democrats are
not hiding the ball anymore. Their strategy is simple, weaponize
various identity groups like many she just listed to usher
in a third world socialism and communism in the United
States of America. That's what they're attempting to do. It'll
be a big win for Memdani when the vote comes

(26:25):
up in a couple of weeks in New York. My
guess is he's probably going to win, and we'll keep
her eye on it and see what's going to happen here.
But found that to be fascinating the rant she went
on last night, but they love her and you saw
the power of the Democratic Party on display there, Bernie Sanders,
AOC and Zoran mom Dan. That's the new power within

(26:46):
the Democratic Park. Sorry, Chuck, all right, more coming up
Power number two with the Rotting Greg Show on this
Monday right here on Utah's Talk Radio one oh five
nine knrs. Halloween on Friday, and then we move into November.
A couple of big football games this weekend, so a
lot to get to. A busy weekend coming your way.
The weather we've had, I think we had records no

(27:08):
rain in October and I'm I'm looking out. We've got
snow in the mountains today, so that's good news for
the potential for the ski industry and this coming to
winter now, a lot of things you know, I want
to talk to you today about and kind of get
your reaction. So we're going to open up the phones
to you eight eight eight five seven eight zero one

(27:28):
zero eight eight eight five seven eight zero one zero
on your cell phone dial Pound two fifteen and say
hey Rod, or you can leave us a message on
our talk back line. Just download the iHeartRadio app and
search for KNRS. And once you find that, you'll be
able to see a little red microphone button up in
the right hand corner corner and you can tap that

(27:48):
and leave us a thirty second message. Now, several things
like I wanted to talk to you about today. The
government shut down now, and it's what twenty seven twenty
eighth day. Republicans at this point are standing firm. The
Democrats are standing firm as well.

Speaker 16 (28:07):
Now.

Speaker 1 (28:08):
If you weren't listening earlier, we had to come in
from Hakeem Jeffries in which he was questioned by an
anchor on CNBC saying, look it, you are the party
that extended or created the Obama subsidies three years ago
when you were in control of the White House and
the Senate at that time, and even before that, you

(28:30):
were in control of all three branches of government when
it comes to the legislative branch and the executive branch.
You could not make these subsidies permanent. That's what you
want to do now, or extend them even farther. You
couldn't do it. So what you're doing now is asking
the Republicans to do something that you yourselves could not

(28:53):
get done. And he stammered arounds on yeah, but you know,
the Republicans won't approve this extension, but they will approve
tax cuts for the rich. Here we go again, right,
same old song. So, but you have a very interesting
date coming up. As of Saturday, the first of November,

(29:13):
the program, the SNAP program Supplemental Nutrition Program will no
longer have any money unless the government reopens, and there
will be millions of people who will be going without
food stamps and the ability to purchase food. Here in Utah,
I think about eight percent of the population uses or

(29:37):
participate in the SNAP program. Other states it is significantly higher.
We are one of the lowest in the country. Because
I think this community does care about people. There are
several options for you to consider. The food bank that
we have here in Utah, magnificent program that has run
very very well and gets food to a lot of people.

(29:57):
But that is to be going to come up on
November first, and of course the Democrats are going to
blame Trump. They're starting to blame him now, basically saying
if Donald Trump would just sit down with the Democrats,
you know, there would be an opportunity for us to
come due to agreement, get the government open again, and
the Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessendt said over the weekend, why

(30:21):
should he sit down with Schumer and Jeffries. They aren't
going to budge on these subsidies. They aren't. They are
so locked in the far left wing of their party,
or we really shouldn't call it the left winging their
party anymore. It basically is the party, the Democratic Party
is a social democratic party. There aren't if you're a

(30:42):
moderator in that party anymore, you can't survive. And that
wing is what is preventing Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries
from moving simply because at this point they do not
want to be primary and it's likely they could if
in fact they backed out. So one of the questions
I have for you today is, you know what's going

(31:05):
to move the needle here? You know, I hope that
that President Trump, Mike Johnson, John Thune, and the Republicans
in the Senate and the House, and the President himself
hold steady, hold firm. This is the continuing revolution that
you the Democrats approved several months ago. We have another one.

(31:28):
It is clean. All it says is we keep the
government open, and we don't do anything about those subsidies
that expire at the end of the year. That's all
they want, and the government could be back open tomorrow.
But no, they aren't going to give in. So I
want to get your feel as to you think the
Republicans in any way should concede on anything. I hope not,

(31:51):
but you know, maybe because of the pressure we saw
today the union president for the government workers come out
and say, Democrats, you need to come back to the
table and reopen the government because, let's be honest, it
is Chuck Schumer, Keem Jeffreys, really Chuck Schumer that is

(32:11):
holding this thing up. Come Saturday and Sunday and into
next week. If in fact, this government shutdown does not
come to an end, there'll be people who cannot go
out and buy food now. They'll run to the food
banks and they'll get some help at the food banks

(32:31):
as much as they possibly can. I'm not sure what
type of limited all the food banks put on, but
they'll go to the food banks. They'll go to their
various churches and ask for some help and buying food,
and people will do that. We do not want anybody
in a country as rich and blessed as we are
to go hungry. Okay, so you know that is not

(32:54):
going to happen. But you know the money to keep
the SNAP program going has basically out because the government
is not being funded. That is when I think the
pressure is going to mount. Now, who is going to
blink first? I sure do hope it's not the Republicans.
They have got to stand their ground. This is not

(33:15):
a confusing issue. A clean resolution to let the government reopen.
That's all they're asking for. All they need are a
couple of more votes in the US Senate and they
can get that going. They need five more, five moderate
Democrats who are willing to say to the crazies in

(33:36):
their own party, for the good of the country, we
are going to vote to get the government reopened. And
will they blink? And who's out there who would do that?
I don't want and I don't want the president. I
think if the President concedes on anything here, he will
face an uproar, and I think the Democrats do as well.

(33:57):
But I want to get your thoughts on that. A
couple of other things I want to talk to you
about today. This idea that the government shutdown is having
an impact on air traffic control. Is it time that
we privatize air traffic control in this country today? There's

(34:17):
been talked for quite some time of doing that to
the TSA, but it is is it time as well
to think about air traffic control? Ninety nine other countries
in this world today have privatized air traffic control, not
under the rule of government. Why don't we do the
same thing in this country today? It could improve service.

(34:38):
You know, a company may take it over, maybe they'll
pay their people better, Maybe we'll get better equipment. We
knowled our equipment is antiquated compared to the rest of
the world. What about that idea as well? Any time
we can get the government, in my opinion, out of
our daily lives, like airport security, like air traffic control,

(35:01):
and there are other things to get them out. And
I know people who are working or have worked for
air traffic control. I wonder what their opinions on this
would be as well. But that idea is now being
tossed around, kicked around simply, And an opportunity is right
in front of us now, simply an opportunity right now
to do so because of the shutdown. And would you

(35:25):
feel comfortable in doing that? Eight eight eight five seven
eight zero one zero triple eight five seven eight zero
one zero on your cell phone dial pound two fifteen
and say hey Rod, or leave us some message on
our talk back line. Just download it from the iHeartRadio
app and search for kN ars and there are instructions
there how to do that. All right, let's go to
the phones. Let's go to Walter, who's in Salt Lake

(35:46):
tonight here on the Rod and Greg Show. Walter, how
are you? Thanks so much for joining us.

Speaker 9 (35:51):
I'm doing all right, and thank you for letting me on.

Speaker 1 (35:54):
You're welcome.

Speaker 9 (35:55):
My only InCoB my only income is military retirement and
social security. And what they're doing is high treason, thirty
eight trillion dollars in deficit, high treason, and they need
to be arrested and put in prison.

Speaker 1 (36:13):
Walter, have you been have you been impacted by this
as of yet through either social Security or the benefits
you have.

Speaker 9 (36:22):
I won't receive my military retirement now because they do
not pay back pay. And this is the third time
that it's happened.

Speaker 1 (36:32):
Who do you blame more, Walter? Both of them, both sides.

Speaker 9 (36:37):
It's both sides that that's playing these this card.

Speaker 1 (36:42):
Yeah, it is all right, Walter, thank you appreciate that call.
Let's go to Marshaw, who's in provo tonight on The
Rodden Greg Show minus mister Hughes. Marsha, How are you
welcome to the show?

Speaker 17 (36:51):
Hi? Hirod, I'm fine. I have a question that's similar
to the one you just had about the high treason. Yes,
why can't we get the Supreme Court involved in this?
Because they are the high court of the land. They
are over the presidency, they are over the for both
houses of Congress. Why can't someone file and bring a
case about this to them? It is the Democrats. It's

(37:15):
not the Republicans because they already passed it in the House.
It's clear that most of the Democrat party wants this past. Yeah,
So why do we keep playing games with people's lives
and their income, their you know, their jobs. This is
and now that the little people who are depending on

(37:35):
the foot scare Yeah. Come on, I think the Democrats
need to be, you know, gotten in big trouble in this.

Speaker 1 (37:44):
I hope they do. Marshall, thank you. I've got to
get to a break. But you're right. I mean, the
Democrats are the ones who are going to pay for
this and they should uh, they could end this today,
all they Chuck Schommer just needs to tell five of
is his Democrats in the Senate step up and vote
and let's get the go back Holden. But he won't
do it because he's afraid of losing his job. Hasn't
even been there long enough. All right, more of your

(38:06):
calls coming up. It is the Rod in Greg Show.
Eight eight eight five seven eight zero one zero on
your cell phone dial pound two fifty and say hey Rod,
or leave us a message on our talk back line
as well. But the top is the issue the government
shut down. As of Friday or as of Saturday, I
should say, people in this country who receive assistance to
purchase food the STAT program will no longer be able

(38:28):
to do so because the government has no money to
give to the program and allow it to continue. So
there are going to be may Americans who could go hungry.
Is that something that you want? I think a lot
of communities will step up and help people, but they
can't do that forever. We're getting your phone calls on
that eight eight eight five seven eight zero one zero

(38:49):
on your cell phone dial pound two fifty and say
hey Rod to the phones.

Speaker 10 (38:52):
We go.

Speaker 1 (38:52):
Let's talk to Teresa in Farmington, who's been waiting tonight. Teresa,
how are you? Thanks for joining us? Hi Ron, how
are you? Terresa?

Speaker 4 (39:00):
Right?

Speaker 8 (39:01):
Good?

Speaker 1 (39:01):
Good good?

Speaker 4 (39:02):
I'm good at you.

Speaker 1 (39:03):
I'm well, thank you. What's on your mind?

Speaker 4 (39:07):
Well, government shut down isn't just hurting people with snap benefits.
Section eight will also have no money to pay out
for the people that are on housing programs. So we're
not only going to lose our food money, we're going
to lose our rent money. And at this point, I
am just set up. I don't care what they're fighting over.

(39:27):
They need to figure it out and get it done,
or I'll tell you what. Next time that ballot comes
in the mail and that's got an incumbent, they're not
getting my vote.

Speaker 1 (39:35):
Let me ask you this, Teresa, who should blink first?
I think it should be the Democrats. I hope it's
not the Republicans.

Speaker 4 (39:42):
I don't care who blinks. The American people, the citizens
of this country who are especially poor, are suffering. The
government employees who rely on their checks are not getting paid.
They are suffering. I don't care what they're fighting over.
I don't care who blinks somebody's got to get.

Speaker 1 (40:00):
Yeah, and we hope they do because people are going
to start feeling the pinch of this. It's already starting
to happen, and as of Saturday, they'll feel it even
more with no more money on the staff program. All right,
let's go to our talkback line. Here are a couple
of comments from our listeners tonight. Here's one calling in
with a thought on the shutdown.

Speaker 16 (40:17):
Hey, Rod, hope you're having a great Monday. So here's
my thought about the shutdown. Hauntem Jefferes, Chuck Humer. They're
going to say the same craft time and time again.
What really needs happening is Democrat voters need to look
at what those Democrat senators are doing for them and
if they're suffering, you might want to think twice about

(40:40):
voting for them again.

Speaker 1 (40:42):
Plain and simple, Yeah, plain and simple, that's right. If
if if you're representative now here in the state of Utah,
with our Republican delegation, two senators for Congress, members of Congress,
you know we we have solid backing. All of them
at this point have supported what, you know, what is
taking place in this country. They are ready to move
forward on a clean resolution and a resolution which would

(41:06):
allow a continuing resolution, a clean bill, I should say,
for the government to reopen. But it is the Democrats
who's holding all of this up. They know it, and
more and more people, more Americans are becoming well aware
that this is a Schumer shutdown, even though you're kind
of hearing a different tune from the Democrats. Now, they

(41:26):
aren't winning in that regard. So what they're going to
do is attack Donald Trump and say, if the President
would just sit down with these Democratic leaders, we could
find a path to get the government open again. Not
going to happen, folks, because they aren't changing their minds,
and I doubt Donald Trump will either back to the funds.

Speaker 2 (41:43):
We go.

Speaker 1 (41:43):
Let's go to Jase in South Wever tonight on the
Rotting Greg Show. Jase, how are you? Thanks so much
for joining us?

Speaker 14 (41:50):
Yeah, how they're going good?

Speaker 1 (41:51):
Thank you?

Speaker 17 (41:53):
Yeah.

Speaker 14 (41:53):
So once in a while we get tasted admissions about
the ridiculousness from the Democrats of the kind of let
the quiet part come out loud. Yeah, this shutdown has
shown two things to us. They're saying, why are they
shutting it down? Because, well, we've got to keep spending
money on Obamacare because healthcare is too expensive. That's interesting,

(42:14):
uh huh. But the other tasks that admission and the
wild thing about this is they're out you're saying forty
million people are going to lose their food. Wait a minute,
there's forty million people getting free food from the rest
of us every month. Forty million people. That's a staggering
number of people. That's what one in six ish.

Speaker 1 (42:37):
Yeah, you're close a little bit higher, I think. Yeah.

Speaker 3 (42:40):
So, yep.

Speaker 14 (42:41):
The mask slips off once in a while, and I
think that's just that's that's an astounding number of people.

Speaker 1 (42:47):
It is. It is in the richest, most prosperous country
in the world today, and we're having to get food
for people who can't get it themselves and the struggles
that they have. We do not want anybody to go hungry.
But I think it is waking up Americans, many Americans
out there, like Jays just said, to the number of
people who depend on the government for their basic needs.

(43:11):
And that's a challenge in this country that we need
to take a serious look at.

Speaker 8 (43:15):
All.

Speaker 1 (43:15):
Right, more of your calls coming up. It is the
Monday edition of the Rod and Greg Show right here
on Talk Radio one oh five nine knrs twenty to
forty million Americans who get some, if not all, of
their food through the stamp program used to be called
food stamps. That program will not have any money as
of Saturday, so people who purchase their food through that

(43:38):
program will not be able to do so. Most likely
they'll turn into food banks like we have here in
the state of Utah, the Utah Food Bank, and it
will put a lot of pressure in these various organizations
to be able to deliver. That's just one of the
issues when it comes to the shutdown. We're seeing flights delayed,
You've got people not being paid. They will be reimbursed
for the lost time, but they aren't being paid right now.

(43:59):
So who's going to blink first on all of this?
You know, I'm hoping the Democrats just hold firm or
the Republicans hold firm. You know the Democrats are, but
is pressure going to mount on them? You had the
head of the union, which represents most of the federal
employees today call on the Democrats to end the shut down,
and the impacts are starting to be felt around the country.

(44:21):
What say you eight eight eight five seven o eight
zero one zero and again on your cell phone dial
pound two to fifteen, say hey Rod, or leave us
a talkback comment on our talkback line. We go back
to the phones. We had to Sandy and hear what
Rob has to say tonight, Rob, how are you welcome
to the Rod and Greg Show?

Speaker 10 (44:38):
Hey buddy, how you doing? How you doing today? My friend?

Speaker 1 (44:41):
I am doing just well. Rob? What say you about
this shutdown?

Speaker 10 (44:46):
Well? You know, I'm disturbed about how many Americans are
dependent on other Americans because it's not the government they're
dependent on. It's it's.

Speaker 1 (44:59):
It's us, Rob, They're depending on all of us.

Speaker 10 (45:05):
So I'm almost I mean, I'm hoping that I'm pretty
sure the Democrats are going to fold before but I
really hope they don't. And I hope these people get
off their bums and go get a job and figure
out that their way of life isn't working and you

(45:26):
should not depend on the government. That's communists way of living,
and they need to start figuring it out for themselves.
I mean, it's sad. I'm disturbed. What's your take on this, Rob?

Speaker 1 (45:38):
Well, I would like to thank you Rob for your coming.
I mean, I understand the role of the staff program
for some people it is real, it is necessary, but
it has expanded over the years to the point. It's
typical a democratic approach. Propose something that they know is
going to get bigger and bigger and bigger without figuring
out a way to without figuring out a way to

(45:59):
pay for it. This a typical democratic Obamacare. Let's create Obamacare.
How it's going to work, we don't know, but we
think is a good idea. And now we're all suffering
because of that. A typical democratic approach. Back to the
phones we go. Let's talk with Ted, who's in Riverton
tonight on the Rod and Greg Show. Hi, Ted, how
are you.

Speaker 10 (46:18):
Good?

Speaker 18 (46:20):
You know, I'm getting tired of this game that the
politicians are playing. But the biggest thing I'm sick of
is the constant increase in their budget and wanting to
spend more and more and more and more and more.
You know, if they would back off and we could
all save many on our taxes. We need to be

(46:40):
able to afford a lot of stuff on our own
instead of having to have government handouts.

Speaker 1 (46:46):
Yeah, Todd, I totally agree. You know what frustrates me,
all of us out there are complaining. You know, we
just got to get rid of the guys. Guess what
we never do? What is it? The figures round?

Speaker 8 (46:57):
What?

Speaker 1 (46:58):
Eighty eight eighty nine percent of the incumbents return to
office each and every year. I mean, you know, we
can all complain about it, but nobody wants to seem
to do anything about it. Pretty amazing, all right, more
of your calls and comments coming up eight eight eight
five seven eight zero one zero, or on your cell
phone to I'll pound two fifty and say, hey, Rod,
we're getting your reaction to the ongoing government shut down.

(47:19):
We're nearly a month into it. Big day coming up
on Saturday. The program, the SNAP program, I refer to
it as the food stamp program he used to be
called that in which the government helps people pay for
some of their groceries. Will not be doing that because
they don't have any money to do so. Will that
be the breaking point that then Democrats finally say to themselves,

(47:39):
all right, we need to get the government back hoping.
I doubt it. I think they're dug in. I think
Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffrey, especially Schumer is so afraid
of AOC that he's not going to give in at all.
Right now, and is he expecting the president to step in?
I hope not. That's what the Democrats, the legacy media
is now asking where's Trump. President Trump is leaving it

(48:02):
up to John Thune and Mike Johnson to get this done,
and that's the way it should be. We're getting your
reaction to it. Eight eight eight five seven o eight
zero one zero on your cell phone, dial pound two
to fifty and say hey, Rod or leave us a
comment on our talkback line. Just download the iHeartRadio app
and look for K and rs. We go back to
the phones. We're in West Point tonight talking with Mark

(48:23):
on the Rod and Greg Show. Hi, Mark, how are you?

Speaker 8 (48:30):
I completely agree that right as you We've heard Perry
on when we sing.

Speaker 1 (48:40):
Mark, Mark, I'm going to have you a call back, Mark,
if you would. The number is that the line is
really breaking up. I don't know if you're on a
cell phone bluetooth, but it is really breaking up. I'd
love to get your comment, but hopefully you'll have a
chance to give us a call back. Eight eight eight
five seven o eight zero one zero triple eight five
seven oh eight zero one zero. Let's go back to
or talkback line. Here's a comment on the topic right now.

Speaker 19 (49:02):
This is my name is Gustavo Taurus, and I just
wanted to say that one guy running for governor that
said that he would be the Democrat guy, that he
would be okay with killing his opponent's children.

Speaker 20 (49:17):
For getting people to vote the right way. Isn't that
the same thing that the Democrats are doing. They're hurting
people just to get their own way in the vote.

Speaker 1 (49:29):
Yeah, I agree with your colin. Thanks for calling or
leaving a comment on our talk back line. You're talking
about the candidate for attorney general. They're in the state
of Virginia, who wrote the majority leader of the Virginia
House some nasty text messages saying he'd like to put
two bullets in his head and to urinate on the

(49:50):
grave of his children after he killed him. And it
was disgusting stuff. He's still in the rage. The candidate,
the Democratic Democratic candidate for governor there, has condemned the text,
but is still endorsing him, even though she took his
name off her campaign bus. Over the weekend, a lot
of people notice that. All right, let's go back to
the phones. I think we have Mark back on the

(50:12):
line from West Point hopefully the line is better. Mark,
go ahead, sir, can you hear me now? I sure
can go ahead, Mark.

Speaker 8 (50:21):
Okay, Yeah, I still agree hundred percent this Democrat shut down.
We've had several theories of whin we thought they might break.

Speaker 18 (50:31):
After the note.

Speaker 8 (50:32):
Kings than is now the snap running out. The other
theory I'm hearing is after Virginia and New Jersey races
are done. Ill, and they could very well but fold
after that. I don't believe it. But what I am

(50:53):
definitely afraid of is I don't want the Republicans to
feel so much hate that they that they execute the
nuclear option and go down.

Speaker 10 (51:03):
With just majority votes.

Speaker 8 (51:05):
Because once, once the Republicans do that, Katie, are the
doors as the Democrats ever get back.

Speaker 1 (51:12):
Yeah? Yeah, And there Mark very good point that scares
me as well. You know, the Democrats are going to
be controlled someday again. I mean, they could end up
being in control of the House after the election next year.
I mean that's a possibility, even though the chances for
that are looking a little bit slimmer each and every day.
But you're right, I mean, stick to your guns, stand

(51:33):
your ground. You have passed and continuing resolution the Democrats
went along with it earlier this year. What you're asking
now is is basically the same darn thing. Yet the
Republicans chuck. Remember the heat Shumer took from within his
own party when he voted in favor that that clean

(51:55):
continuing resolution. He got a lot of heat. He doesn't
want that heat anymore, and that's why he is backing
down and backing away from giving in. Right now, the
pressure is going to mount. Hopefully the Republicans will not
be the one superlas all right, more coming up, we'll
talk to the chairman of the Utah Republican Party. Some

(52:16):
changes in the redistricting battle. We'll tell you all about
it when we come back. Stay with us right here
on Utah's Talk Radio one oh five nine K and
r Ass. Well. The redistricting battles continue, not only here
in Utah, but around the country. It seems almost daily
we're seeing stories now of yet another state battling over redistricting. Well,

(52:37):
here in the state of Utah is kind of in
the hands of a judge right now, even though efforts
are being made to convince this judge that what the
Utah legislature has come up with is what it should
be and the way those districts should be set up.
But late last week I was gone, Greg was gone.
The Republican Party did a bit of a change in
its efforts to overturn Prop four, And that's why I

(52:59):
wanted to bring Rob Ackson, chairman of the Utah Republican Party,
back on the show to explain you. Rob, how are
you welcome back to the Rod and Gregg Show?

Speaker 21 (53:07):
Hey, Rod, always going to be with you, my friend, Rob.

Speaker 1 (53:09):
Let me ask you this. First of all, I want
to get your reaction. As I mentioned just a second ago,
all around the country, we're seeing battles in various states
over redistrict What do you think is actually going on
right now?

Speaker 8 (53:19):
Rob?

Speaker 21 (53:20):
With all these states, you know, it certainly is this
partisan in political push and states with different political majorities
they are leaning into that. I know, on the surface,
it's easy to compare like a California to a Texas
and what's happening there. If you actually dive into the analytics,

(53:41):
what Gavin Newsom is trying to do in California is
beyond the pale. Now, Texas certainly is trying to push
their Republican majorities, but they're doing it in a way
that still is adhering to the majority status of their
legislature rather than just completely hog tying the opposition, so
that one's kind of an interesting one that off times
gets compared.

Speaker 1 (54:01):
Rob I know there was a hearing that I believe
last Friday you had Sean Trendy from one of the
great organizations. He really looks at the numbers, testifying on
behalf of what the legislature is trying to do or
has done. And didn't he come out and say, look
at there are two districts the Democrats could actually win here.

Speaker 19 (54:20):
Yep, yep, that's exactly right.

Speaker 21 (54:21):
And I'm glad you're looking at what's happening here in Utah,
because here's what's interesting. I know there's a lot of
these efforts happening around the country on redistricting, but what's
happening here is really a function of the courts coming
in and in my opinion, going beyond what they should
be doing, of interpreting the law to enact kind of
effectively their will. In the case of Judge Gibson, she's

(54:42):
been on the record saying that Utah has an opportunity
to showcase how redistricting should be done. Well, that's verbiage
that sounds appropriate coming from a legislator, not a jurist.
But you're exactly right. In these hearings, there's been plenty
of evidence shown that this is certainly a fair.

Speaker 1 (55:00):
Process.

Speaker 21 (55:01):
With our maps that existed before and now with the
hoops we have to jump through. The map that was
adopted by the legislature still complies with proposition for So
the idea that somehow this judge should go and select
anything but Map C, I think is ridiculous and potentially
a constitutional crisis.

Speaker 1 (55:20):
Let me ask you, Rob, from what I understand, you've
changed strategies a little bit initially. What were you trying
to do and have in fact you change things? And
why did you do it?

Speaker 10 (55:32):
Yeah?

Speaker 21 (55:32):
So, in Article six, section two of the Utah Constitution,
it gives the people the right to offer propositions and
to initiate legislation through the initiative process, and then it
says that it needs to receive a ratification of sorcer
a vote of the majority of Utahon's as laid out
in statute. Well, in statute there's two paths. One is

(55:54):
to have an indirect initiative that then is ratified by
the people's elected representatives in the legislature of fifty percent
or more. The other one is referred to as a
direct initiative that has to be ratified by going back
to the ballot and receive fifty percent or more or
over fifty percent. I should say of the people's vote, now,
what happened and why we moved from the indirect to

(56:16):
the direct? And actually at the forefront, I'll say the
reason we wanted the indirect was we could answer this
question sooner. We want to provide resolution and clarity to
the process into uton's as quickly as possible. While those
opposed to our efforts, opposed to representative government, filed legal
motions which would have taken us far too close to

(56:36):
the deadline we would have had to comply with.

Speaker 10 (56:39):
It would have been.

Speaker 21 (56:39):
Nearly impossible to get the signatures necessary. So made the pivot,
and we're going to prevail.

Speaker 1 (56:44):
Nonetheless, let me ask you the approach that you're now taking,
what will it take to get it before voters.

Speaker 21 (56:52):
Yeah, so instead of that November fifteenth deadline that we
were dealing with, we now will pivot to a February
fifteenth deadline. But we have to get eight percent of
registered voters signatures rather than four percent, So there's certainly
this higher barrier that we will have to clear, and
I'm confident we'll do so. We have strong momentum and

(57:13):
buy in from Utah's all across the state. So we'll
be engaging and asking for their signature between now and
February fourteenth, and as long as we meet that threshold,
then it will be placed on the ballot in November
of twenty twenty six for ratification, where a majority of
voters will need to ratify it. And I want to
be clear, what we are asking for is not new laws.
We are not proposing any new language. We are merely

(57:35):
striking the language of proposition for it. There's not a
single piece of a language that would be added to
Utah's code should we prevail. It would merely be stripping
Title twenty A Chapters nineteen and twenty, which is the
part of Utah Code that was established by Prop four
that needs to be gone so that we no longer
have this contradiction of our constitutional order.

Speaker 1 (57:56):
Rob The Prompt four initially was approved by a It's
very very slim majority, as you well know. Are you
confident that this approach that you can easily change the
things and put them back to where you want them
to be.

Speaker 21 (58:09):
Yeah, absolutely we can, And this is an opportunity when
there was such a close vote. It was fifty point
three four percent of the vote in twenty eighteen, after
two point eight million dollars were spent promoting proposition for
and zero dollars spent in opposition, So it's a razor
thin margin. I believe that the people of Utah have
an opportunity now and want an opportunity to answer this question.

(58:32):
Keep this in mind too, if you go back to
the ballot in twenty eighteen, it referred to the independent
quote unquote Redistricting Commission to be a recommending body. Well,
because of the courts and because of interpretation, it's not recommending.
It's a binding committee now. So I would argue that
the people that voted for it in twenty eighteen, a
large number of them certainly did not bind or intend

(58:56):
to vote to bind our legislature. So this went well
beyond recommending body. It needs to be gone from our
process here in Utah.

Speaker 1 (59:03):
I want to get your reaction to this poll that
was in the des Red News today about a poll
finding that about forty four percent I guess of Utah
voters would would vote in favor of Prop four today.
Two thirds say they have not followed the redistricting battle,
and the GOP is defending the push to repeal Prop
for What about that vote forty percent? Forty four percent

(59:24):
say they would vote today for Prop four. That leaves
what quite a few who say they would not.

Speaker 21 (59:30):
Yeah, it leads to here's a very interesting question. We
have effectively just begun communicating on this issue, and they
don't have the votes necessary to pass it again, should
it be on the ballot right now? That's pretty telling,
and it's what I've been saying and why a number
of us stood up to establish Utah's for Representative Government.
UFRG dot org is the organization pushing this with the

(59:53):
Utah Republican Party. And you look that people of Utah
don't agree with this. It's forty four percent at best,
And again we are just starting to message. I am
confident a number of those people who right now maybe
feel that they support it, when you provided the fact
for the information, they'll realize this is undermining representative government

(01:00:13):
and cannot stand.

Speaker 1 (01:00:14):
How will you get the signatures? Rob what kind of
an effort is it going to take.

Speaker 21 (01:00:19):
It's an all of the above approach. It's going to
take volunteers. We are engaged with paid signature gatherers, but
really it's all of us. And to anybody who cares
about the principles of republican government, meaning that we are
in a republic and not a direct democracy. Anybody who
cares about the principles of representative government and the efficiencies
and effectiveness that that creates. To protect our liberties, I

(01:00:42):
would encourage them to do three things. Certainly, sign and
allow us to reach that threshold necessary of signatures, but
maybe help us volunteer. Go gather some signatures with us.
Educate your friends and your family, your neighbors. If you're
in the Republican Park Party, you can engage in the
precinct level. Go and talk with your fellow precinct members.

(01:01:04):
But keep in mind you don't have to be a Republican.
I believe that this is a non partisan issue. To
protect the principles of a republic, we would invite unaffiliated voters,
you know, libertarians and Democrats. We want everybody to lean
in sign the document, and let's get back to the
order of things we can disagree on policy, let's not
disagree in our structure of government.

Speaker 1 (01:01:25):
Right on, Rob, as always, we appreciate it. You're very
gracious with your time, and we know you're very very busy.
Good luck with this campaign. Let us know whatever we
can do to help you out. Thanks Rob, Hey, thank
you sir. All right. That's Rob Ackson, chairman of the
Utah Republican Party as the redistricting battle continues here in
the state of Utah. More coming up on the Rod
and Greg Show on this Monday right here on Utah's

(01:01:46):
Talk Radio one oh five nine k NRS. Make sure
you catch us wherever you go by downloading the iHeartRadio
app and make sure we're number one on your reset button.
Makes it so easy to listen to us each and
every day.

Speaker 9 (01:02:00):
You know.

Speaker 1 (01:02:00):
One of the I think silliest stories that we've seen
over the past several days, there are a lot of them,
right is the legacy or regime media in this country
going ballistic over the announcement by the President that he
was going to tear down the East Wing and reconstruct
a brand new giant ballroom. And he's got a name

(01:02:23):
for jet. He had one the other day, I'll share
with you that's kind of a hilarious, but it is
badly needed. But he's taking a lot of heat from it.

Speaker 8 (01:02:32):
Well.

Speaker 1 (01:02:32):
Now comes along editorials in both the New York Times
and the Washington Post. Yes, apparently Hell has frozen over,
basically saying that they agree with what the President is
trying to do by building a brand new ballroom for
the White House. I mean, as the Washington Post pointed

(01:02:53):
out in their editorial, the State dining room seats one
hundred and forty people. It's not very big. The easome
seats about two hundred people. The President says the ballroom
at the center of his ninety thousand square foot edition
will accommodate nine hundred and ninety nine guests, and the

(01:03:13):
Post says the next president democratic president will be happy
to have this available. Now think of it. Now, I've
never been to one of those big dinners at the
White House, I believe greg has. But to be able
to host a state dinner and show America at its
finest and what that's basically what these things are all about.

(01:03:35):
You know, you had to put most people in tents,
those large event tends that you've all seen maybe have
had dinner in all of those and you have to
have porta potties for these events, porta potties for these events,
if you can believe that. So, the President is now
in the process of doing this now. As the Post

(01:03:58):
points out in the article, preservationists, of course, are expressing
horror that Donald Trump did not submit his plans for
their scrutiny. But the Post also says the truth is
that this project would not have gotten done, certainly not
during his term. If the President had gone through the
traditional review process, the blueprints would have faced death by

(01:04:24):
a thousand paper cuts. It goes on to say, Fortunately
for the President, the White House is exempt from some
of the required regulations that other federal buildings must comply
with because of it. Because it has become far too
difficult to build anything in America nowadays, prominent Democrats have

(01:04:45):
become vocal this year in calling out their party's loyally
obsession with process. Many homeowners have become red pilled by
their struggles. But the President is not going to put
up with it, and he's moving forward with a instruction
of a grand ballroom. Now, well, let me I want
to play this audio first. This is a report from

(01:05:07):
NBC News several years ago when Barack Obama decided to
do something in the front lawn of the White House
and build a basketball court. Here's how they reported the
news sounds like they're building another wing to the White House.
But we appreciate you keeping your could imagine to.

Speaker 22 (01:05:22):
You today it's going to happen for the next two years.
All the banging, the jackhammering, the dust, the confusion, the
noise of all places to do construction is happening right
here the front lawn of the White House. It's a
four year renovation project estimated costs three hundred and seventy
six million dollars.

Speaker 1 (01:05:43):
Oh does she sound so excited? But do they sound
excited on this process that President Trump is undertaking right now.
But the mere fact that both the Washington Post and
New York Times would come out in support of this effort.
And Donald Trump, you've seen his hotel, see done build
anything shabby. This is privately funded. We want to point

(01:06:04):
out that one of the contributors to this effort is
Jeff Bezos, who owns Amazon and who also happens in
the Washington Post. But this effort being undertaken by the
President to show America at its finest, you know, good
for him and good for him. Donald Trump does not
wait for anybody and all this regulation. You homeowners out there,

(01:06:27):
try and build a house today without going through a
myriad of regulations. We may be addressing that on the
show tomorrow. But Donald Trump steps up says, we need
a new ballroom. This ballroom. Come on, really holding what
ninety nine people? If you hold anything big outside and
usually stay dinners are pretty big, you know, we have
to have it in a tent and the guests have

(01:06:49):
to use a porta potty. Come on, America, we can
do better than that. Donald Trump knows that, and that's
why he's trying to do something about it. All right,
more coming up. It is the Monday of the Rodding
Greg Show right here on Utah's Talk Radio one oh
five nine. Anrs took in the Steelers game last night,
at least I think they did. I didn't get a
chance to talk to him, but the game did not

(01:07:11):
end up the way mister Hughes was hoping. They lost
to the Packers by twenty points. But he'll be back tomorrow. Now,
Before we go on to our next interview, we had
a caller on the show the last hour bringing up
what is called the nuclear option, and I had a
couple of people send me an email say, hey, Rod,
would you explain what the nuclear option is? Well, it

(01:07:32):
is a It refers basically to a parliamentary maneuver used
in the US Senate and to really change its rules,
typically to overcome a filibuster or other procedural roadblocks. So basically,
what is happening right now in the Senate They need
sixty votes to consider now the continuing resolution, but with

(01:07:55):
the Democrats withholding the some the votes and putting pressure
on Democrats not to vote for this thing, even though
what is it. Three Democrats have already stepped up to
do so, including fetterment. You know, there are some calls
to enact the nuclear option or impose the nuclear option,
and all that would require would be a simple majority

(01:08:16):
fifty one votes instead of sixty. So when you hear
people refer to the nuclear option, that's where they're talking about.
It's very dangerous to get rid of that. I guarantee
you it is very dangerous to get rid of that.

Speaker 9 (01:08:28):
It.

Speaker 1 (01:08:28):
You know, just think someday when the Democrats are in power,
they want to do something that is just crazy. Something
like Mom Donnie would probly propose and it would require
some Republicans to go along with it. That wouldn't happen.
You wouldn't need that under the nuclear option, So that
basically what it is. It's a procedural matter. Instead of
getting sixty votes, all you would need would be a

(01:08:51):
simple majority of fifty one. That's what it is.

Speaker 10 (01:08:54):
All right.

Speaker 1 (01:08:54):
Let's move on to our next guest. There is a
new law in Oklahomaklahoma, coming into effect on the first
of the month, that's on February, on Saturday, and the
law will increase the instances where driving under the influence
a charge could be elevated to a felony and force
even a first time offender to spend some time in jail.

(01:09:17):
Let's find out more about that. Joining us on our
newspaper line right now is Jeff Murrow, executive director of
Victims of Impaired Drivers. Jeff, how are you? Thanks for
joining us tonight. Tell us about this law, why you
push for it, and why you think it's needed.

Speaker 3 (01:09:31):
Well, this legislation will help us to prevent drug and
alcohol impaired driving fatalities on our roads.

Speaker 18 (01:09:40):
I believe I.

Speaker 3 (01:09:41):
Think that it's too late to prevent a crime if
we don't take them seriously until after someone has been
killed or injured.

Speaker 1 (01:09:49):
Now, you lost a daughter in this is that correct?
But that was killed by an impaired driver. Do you
mind sharing that story, Jeff.

Speaker 10 (01:09:56):
Yes.

Speaker 3 (01:09:57):
In October of twenty twenty, our nineteen year old daughter Marissa,
who was a sophomore in college, was driving home on
a Friday night to spend the weekend at home with
us when an impaired driver with five prior DUI convictions

(01:10:18):
was he got confused out there, and he got on
the interstate on an off ramp going the wrong direction
and hit her at seventy miles an hour head on,
and it pinned her in the car. And then he
survived the crash and fled the scene and was later arrested.

Speaker 8 (01:10:36):
And so.

Speaker 3 (01:10:39):
That took place, like I said, in October of twenty twenty,
and since that time, and after the court case was adjudicated,
then my wife, Christy and I started working on advocating
to prevent that kind of thing from happening to someone else.

Speaker 1 (01:10:55):
What would have to happen for a DUI offender to
go to jail on a first time offense. What kind
of proof would be needed to make that happen in
your opinion, Jeff, Well.

Speaker 3 (01:11:05):
In the case of this new statute, there are some criteria.
A person who was convicted of d UI, whether it
was this first time or not, would have to be
convicted of an aggravated UI. And then this statute redefines
what aggravated d UI means in the state of Oklahoma,
So it includes six additional criteria. These are secondary crimes

(01:11:31):
that are committed in addition to driving impaired by either
drugs or alcohol. So a person who is eluding police,
a person who is carrying a minor, reckless driving excessively speeding,
or speeding in a school zone, or one who causes

(01:11:52):
a crash. And then the requirement for BAC at point
one point five is also one of the criteria that
a person might have.

Speaker 8 (01:12:01):
Currently, that's the only way to.

Speaker 3 (01:12:03):
Be convicted of an aggravated duy here is zero point
one five BAC. But we've added these additional criteria.

Speaker 1 (01:12:12):
What kind of a fight did you have, Jeff to
get this law in the books? What kind of a
fight was it?

Speaker 3 (01:12:18):
Well, it was a challenge. I think that we had
a lot of success with it because of the way that.

Speaker 8 (01:12:23):
We went about it.

Speaker 3 (01:12:24):
We had a lot of buy in from law enforcement
and from prosecutors across the state. And so when we
brought this to the legislature, that's that was you know,
underpinning it. And then we did struggle here with getting
the bill heard in the Senate. We did great in
all three of the committees that considered this bill. Our

(01:12:47):
Senate did not want to take up the bill, and
we just about missed the deadline. We our group Victims
of Impaired Drivers is made up of hundreds of families
across the state that we put together who have lost
a loved one, and they sent emails, called their senators
and did a great bit of work to get this
bill hurd in the Senate, and then it progressed through

(01:13:10):
the House of Representatives very easily. But then the the
governor when it when it was sent to the governor, uh,
he vetoed the bill and so then we had to
have a two thirds majority vote in both the House
and the Senate to override that. That took place on
the last day of the legislative session this year.

Speaker 1 (01:13:28):
How much controversy did this creed Jeff I mean, was
this a real buzz in Oklahoma when you tried to
get this, uh this law passed.

Speaker 3 (01:13:37):
It really wasn't it it. It wasn't as controversial as
it is. Maybe it could have been. And I think
that some of the reasons are that the you know,
in the state, what we're seeing is that we're losing
four hundred people a year, and unless you have killed
someone to in pair driving, you know, if it's just

(01:13:57):
a run of the mill to ui arrest, no one
is really going to jail. Everything is a deferred sentence,
or a person has a suspended sentence, they're serving probation.
It's a pay per sentence, and no one is doing
any time. And so this bill we modeled this jail
time after another statute that's on the books for elderly

(01:14:21):
and incapacitated victims, and basically it just says that the
first number of days of a sentence is not subject
to deferment or probation. And we started the first offense
at ten days, and then it goes thirty days, sixty days,
ninety days. So it's a low amount of jail time
that is not deferable compared to what the statute says.

(01:14:44):
Our statute here says ten days to one year for
a first, one to five years in jail for a second,
one to ten, and then one to twenty four a fourth.
So there's a lot of time in the statute, but
no one is serving any of it.

Speaker 1 (01:14:58):
Yeah, let me ask you, Joe, no question for you,
why do you think this bill and the possibility of
someone going to jail on a first time offense, why
do you think that will discourage DUIs?

Speaker 3 (01:15:13):
Well, I don't know for sure that it will discourage
someone from committing d UI, but I know this, we
absolutely fail. Our system fails anytime that the first time
a person has gone to jail for DUI is after
they've killed someone. It's a socially acceptable crime right now,

(01:15:37):
and that's what's got to change. And I think that
we need to help people understand that there will be
accountability for what they do. Hopefully that it may not
deter someone who is in jail from ever committing that
crime again in ten days, but hopefully when the public
sees what they've done, they will understand that the State

(01:15:59):
of Lahoma is not playing around and that we will
hold people accountable for this crime.

Speaker 1 (01:16:08):
On our newsmaker line. That's Jeff Burrow. Jeff is the
executive director of Victims of Impaired Drivers, talking about an
effort in Oklahoma that could mean some serious jail time
for first time drunk driving offenses, trying to get that
legislation moving around the country and even here in the
state of Utah. More coming up on talk radio one
oh five nine knrs. And while you're in studio, Larry,

(01:16:31):
I want to grab you for a few minutes. Ask
you about all these delays because of the shutdown. What
recommendations would you have for people who are traveling by
here right now? I told you go on correct even existing,
I don't know you just say what would is a
serious problem.

Speaker 13 (01:16:49):
FAA has reported staffing shortages of air controllers at twenty
two airports. Yesterday there were eighty six hundred delays and
about sixty today. What I recommend is go ahead with
your plans, get to the airport early. Have a backup plan,
meaning what other flights could I take. Something to ask

(01:17:12):
for is a FIM. FIM airlines don't have to do it.
It's an acronym for flight interruption manifest. Where I'm on
United Airlines, they cancel the flight, will you fim me
to American and United Pace for it? Now they don't
legally have to do it, but it doesn't hurt to ask.
And if your flight is delayed or canceled, get on

(01:17:35):
the phone with reservations immediately, even as you stand in
line at the service counter.

Speaker 1 (01:17:40):
If a flight is delayed for a certain period of time,
do you get reimbursed? No, no, you don't anymore.

Speaker 13 (01:17:47):
If you want to go to dot dot gov for
Department of Transportation, look under cancelations and delays. The airlines
are not legally obligated if you have a cancel. Now
they're legal obligation on excuse me, they have a legal
obligation on cancel to either rebook you or give you

(01:18:08):
a refund. You got a m place to go und
it's the refund of any unused portion of the ticket.
On a delay, they have the same obligation if it's
quote a significant delay. But the law does not define
significant delay. The airlines do. And there's the problem up. Yeah, Hey,

(01:18:33):
we had a guest on the show earlier. I know
you're a big fan of the show and you listen,
but we had a guest on saying it may be
time to privatize air traffic control. What do you think
about that idea? He said, because most countries now have
privatized A great idea. I think, uh, private industry, Trump's
no pun intended government.

Speaker 1 (01:18:53):
Every time, better idea, I think. So yeah, I really
did it. I didn't realize are's many do have private
air traffic control service now.

Speaker 13 (01:19:04):
I just think in everything it increases the level of competence.
Not to say that our air traffic controllers are in competent.

Speaker 1 (01:19:12):
They aren't.

Speaker 12 (01:19:13):
I know.

Speaker 1 (01:19:14):
Yeah, the government is going well. If you got coming
up on the show this weekend.

Speaker 13 (01:19:17):
Well we'll be talking this weekend about what to do.
If you know. The effect of the shutdown, Asia is
hot hot hot. I don't mean temperature, I mean popularity.
What cruise passed? What question should you ask before you
book a cruise? And where are the best deals on
the planet.

Speaker 1 (01:19:36):
Yeah, you've got my wife already talking about River Creuse.
What Sirland. We loved it, by the way, Yeah, and
it was so much fun. I know. Wendy's going to
be joining you see, and she did a super job.

Speaker 13 (01:19:46):
See Rod told me last year if he didn't get
Cindy to Switzerland.

Speaker 1 (01:19:50):
He was toasted. Yeah, yeah, while I got her there.
She's happy. So we're in good shack. You're still in
the house. I'm still in that, thank you. Some days
out in the garage, but still on the property. Not
tomorrow out on the lawn, all right. Larry Larry Gilwick's
in the travel show. You hear it every Saturday at
eleven right here on talk radio one oh five nine
can arrests. That does that for us tonight, as we

(01:20:11):
say each and every night, head up, shoulders back, May
God bless you and your family, and that's great country
of ours. Thanks for joining us. Greg joins me tomorrow
at four. We'll talk to

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

The Rod & Greg Show News

Popular Podcasts

Spooky Podcasts from iHeartRadio

Dateline NBC

Stuff You Should Know

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}The Rod and Greg Show: Govt Shutdown/ Air Traffic Control Problems; GOP Crackdown; What is the Plan now for Reconstruction?

Episode Transcript

The Rod & Greg Show News .css-1q01m3q{margin:0 0 -2px 0;}

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Spooky Podcasts from iHeartRadio

Dateline NBC

Stuff You Should Know

All Episodes