Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
How does Colorado have a one point five billion dollars
shortball when they're spending over three billion dollars more than last.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Year because a lot of what they're spending has been
money that's flowed down from the FEDS, which is mostly
borrowed money. You see this, This is why DOZE is
so important because and this has always been my you know, this.
Speaker 3 (00:31):
Is it's quite simple, Michael, I'm sorry, it's it's it's
very quite say, Okay, they still have checks. You not
out of money. You still have checks, and.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
You know what to take that one step further, they
still have credit cards. Yeah, maybe they should call American financing.
Speaker 3 (00:53):
Unfortunately, I have known people in the past that were like,
I can't be out of money.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
I got checks.
Speaker 3 (00:58):
I still got three checks. What do you mean amount
of money?
Speaker 2 (01:02):
When you were a kid, didn't you ever think of
did you ever wonder? Like I never. I remember when
my parents built a house, the house my mom still
lives in, and I remember, you know, they were sitting
around the kitchen table. They were talking about, you know,
what the payment was going to be, and they were
they were getting something called a mortgage from something called
the savings and the Loan Association, and I was like,
(01:24):
it's savings and they love it. Was my first you know,
kind of entree into you put money in there and
and then they give it back to you, but then
you have to pay it back. Today it's just going
back and forth all this time, and somehow out of
that we're going to get a brand new home. Yep.
Speaker 3 (01:44):
Wow.
Speaker 2 (01:47):
That kind of is how they think. We got a
credit card, we got a check books. Let's just keep
on spending. But to a serious point. And I've got
to remember this because I'm I'm speaking at the Universe
at University of Chicago's Institute of Politics in I don't know,
like mid April sometime, and one of the things that
(02:08):
I have on my agenda is the is this whole
concept of federalism and how it really does protect us
from the insanity or should protect us from the insanity
about what's going on in Colorado, for example. It always
bugged me that and we look, I was part of it,
(02:32):
and it bugged me, and I would fight it. But
it's one of these many battles that I lost inside
the beltway of federal grants. And we have federal grants
that I'll use two examples. One, we have fire management
grants and then we had fire grants, the fire management
(02:55):
assistance grants f mags is what they were called. There'd
be a wildfire breakout somewhere and the wildfire would be
burning Colorado, California. I got them from all over the
country all the time, night and day. It always drove
me nuts because it always made me jump. They call
it two o'clock in the morning, mister secretary, we've got
(03:17):
a fire in Colorado. It's burning, you know. And they learned,
don't wait for me to ask the questions. I'm going
to ask the following questions every time you call me,
and so just tell me the facts I need to
know so I can give you a thumbs up or
a thumbs down. Because these fire management assistance grants were
(03:41):
based on, hey, we got a giant wildfire in Colorado
and they need assistance. Well, my question would be why
do they need assistance? Have they implemented their mutual aid
agreements with New Mexico or Arizona or Utah or Wyoming
or anybody? Do they have planes or firefighters coming in
(04:02):
from anywhere else? Because that's the first response you should have,
right Why call me. I mean, my response literally was
why are you calling me? Why are you calling? Because
I represented I represented the president, I represented the federal government.
And the first, the almost always the initial gut reaction
is oh, let's call the Feds. We need some money.
(04:25):
Let's call it Feds. So they'd be a wildfire burning anywhere,
I don't care, pick a state, and the first thing
they would do is they call me, Hey, we need
your approval for a fire management assistance grant. And they
learned after the first one, where I would ask all
these questions, Well, how big is the fire, what's the
(04:46):
containment what what? What are the fire managers on the
ground telling you about it? Are they going to get
it under control? What are the weather conditions? How many
you know, structures, homes, buildings? Is threatening a town, a city? Whatever?
I mean, all these questions, and of course I would
want to know how much money have they spent? How
(05:07):
much money do they have in their budget? Have they
asked other states to come in and help them, because
every state has mutual aid agreements with other states that
say we if we've got a piece of equipment that
you need that we've spent the money on, we'll come
and let you use it. You know, we'll bring it
to your state and use it, vice versa. And they
(05:30):
go through this whole stuff, and sometimes I'd say yes,
sometimes i'd say no. And whenever I said no, you
could expect that probably within depending on what time of
night it was. If it was two o'clock in the morning,
it might be six am. If it was you know,
ten o'clock in the morning, it might be ten thirty
(05:52):
in the morning. But I would get a call from
the White House. Hey, we got a call from the governor.
We got a call from you know, Jared Poulos. You
turned down a fire management assistant grant and Colorado. Why well,
because of X y Z. Now, sometimes they back me up.
(06:12):
Other times they wouldn't, and they'd say you need to
approve it. Well, okay, so I call him back. I'd
approve the grant. You see, when it's other people's money,
when it's oh, PM, doesn't make any difference, And when
it's politics doesn't make any difference. It's got to go
with it. The other grant that we would have that
oh and so let me back up. So what that
(06:33):
does is that means that legislatures like here at the
Colorado POLOIT Bureau know that they don't have to. If
they were going to budget, just again pulling numbers out
of my butt, if they're going to spend a bill
a million dollars to have in the state budget to
fight wildfires, they would start calculating, Oh, we can always
(06:55):
give a fire management assistance grant and that'll cover you know,
sending twenty let's say twenty five percent of it. So
let's reduce our budget from a million to seven hundred
and fifty thousand dollars. Well, that means they've got two
hundred and fifty thousand dollars that was in the budget
to fight wildfires that they can now give away to
(07:17):
illegal aliens, or they can give away to expand Medicare
and Medicaid, or they can spend on some you know,
reintroducing wolves or whatever bull craft they can come up with,
which makes the budget what. Well, it means that the
budget is a fake budget. It's not really based on
(07:38):
your income. It's based on money that you think you're
going to get from the Feds, and you become addicted
to it. It's like cracked fentanyl, herrowin anything else you
become addicted to it. Then there were things like the
fire grants themselves, where these were competitive grants, but we
(07:58):
would provide firefighting equipment and the states would compete for it,
and they go through this whole competitive process, and then
we would award them the money moneys to buy a
fire truck. Let's just say, you know a a a
seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars fire truck. Well, so
(08:19):
if they got the grant, what would they do? They
would take the seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars if
they had budgeted to buy a fire truck out of
the fire truck budget and put it somewhere else. So
then the next year when they needed another fire truck,
well they probably weren't going to get a grant because
they'd just gotten a grant. So now they're short seven
(08:40):
hundred and fifty thousand dollars for fire trucks because they
spent the money elsewhere and didn't have it in the
budget for fire trucks because they were hobbly. WHOA, we'll
get a grant again. Well, no, you're not going to
get the grant two years in a row. Any any
idiot ought to know that even if you qualified for
it because we want to spread the wealth around. We
wouldn't give it to you two years in, but they
wouldn't think about that. So federalism starts to get weakened,
(09:06):
and state and local governments become more and more dependent
upon the federal government. And that's precisely what's going on
in Colorado during the COVID years. And then during the
Biden administration, you get all of this money, Inflation Reduction Act,
the Infrastructure Bill, whatever I mean, all of it, they're
thrown together, gets thrown at the states. And what do
(09:28):
they do. Will they take that money that comes from
the Feds, put it into actual things that state government
ought to be spending money on, and then take the
money that they should be spending money on, but which
they replace it with federal dollars. And they use that
state money for stupid stuff like expending Medicare or medicaid
(09:55):
to people that don't deserve it, or providing you know,
shelter housing, food, clothing, phones, you name it, to illegal aliens,
for sanctuary city status, all of that crap. And then
when the Feds say, as they are inevitably going to
do at some point, and which is what Trump's doing,
and I sing the Hallelujah chorus for it. No, we're
(10:16):
not going to do that anymore. Now Colorado finds itself
uh oh, we're short one point five billion dollars. And
so the answers for them is not to figure out, Oh,
we've been using too many federal dollars. So now we've
got to find places to cut where we've been throwing
(10:36):
money away. And they're not willing to do the hard
decisions that we elected them to do. So what do
they do. They now want to sue that They want
to sue in essence themselves. They want to sue us
as a state and say the taxpayer Bill of Rights
is unconstitutional because it takes away which I find so
(10:57):
deliciously ironic. It takes away our republican form of government. Really,
so in nineteen ninety two, when the taxpayers who hold
when voters shouldn't even say taxpayers, when voters who are
the ultimate authority in a republican form of government, we
(11:19):
ultimately hold the power because we elect the people to
represent us. So a republican form of government starts with
the people. And we voted in nineteen ninety two to
limit spending and taxation you know, I shouldn't even say
limit spending because tabor allows for increases in spending based
(11:41):
on a formula that includes revenues with inflation and everything else.
But you can't go beyond that formula. And if you
want to raise taxes or implement a new tax, you've
got to come to oh, the people who ultimately hold
the power, the voters, and ask for approval. You cannot
(12:03):
get much more of a republican form of government than that.
So what the colorad of legislature is doing, what the
Poloit Bureau is doing, is really trying to say, by
them exercising their power in a republican form of government,
they have taken away our power and that's violated the
(12:24):
US Constitution, which gives every state a guarantee to a
republican form of government. It's a certain near firing squad,
but that's how desperate they are. And you know, can
I just really be well, I'm always honest with you,
but I want to be brutal here. I think it's hilarious.
(12:47):
I think you know, it's like when you see somebody
that is really doing something stupid and you go, oh,
what's that They're gonna they're gonna regret that in a minute. Well,
we've watched what the legislature has done in terms of
spending year after year after year, stupid program after stupid program,
and we've all sat back and said it's all going
to come crashing down at some point, and here we are.
(13:09):
It's crashing down. They are unwilling if if you want
me to cut one point five billion dollars, give me
an etch of sketch, give me, you know, just I
want time to have lunch, maybe take a nap, you know,
maybe listen to a podcast or something, dragon, I might
(13:31):
want to go have a drink or something. But give
me an etch of sketch and an eight hour day,
and I'll cut one point five billion dollars. Because when
the people start screaming, I don't care, I don't care.
You're you're not spending it on the things you should
be spending it on. Anyway, We've already done the story
this week about the Common Sense Institute showing how the
(13:54):
tax money some what was it, two hundred or four
hundred million dollars, I forget what I think it was
two hundred million, two hundred million dollars that the State
of Colorado has taken in from all the taxes and
fees and you know, the gas tax and everything else
that we pay. It's supposed to go to roads, bridges,
and highways, and it's not going to that. M Well,
(14:16):
wherever it's going, I would say, well, guess what if
it's going to illegal aliens, or if it's going to
expand a medicaid or whatever else sucks to be you,
but we're going to put it back where it belongs
because we told the voters, we told the taxpayers you
pay this tax, it's going to go to fix the potholes,
(14:40):
you know, widen the highways, rebuild the crappy bridges. And
what was it. We're at number forty seven and forty
eighth in the entire country in terms of surface conditions
on our roadways. We're at the bottom. We're absolutely at
the bottom. And you're still trying to figure out where, Oh, well,
we can't find any money anywhere. You're idiots, You truly
(15:05):
are idiots. Actually, let me rephrase that, you're gutless idiots
because you don't want to say to your constituents, oh,
you're willing to say it to the taxpayers. We want
more money. Out of your pocket, but you're not willing
to say it to those preferred constituents. Hey, some of
(15:27):
your benefits, some of the things, some of the freebies
that you've been getting, now you're not going to get
them anymore because we have to actually spend it on roads,
bridges and highways, We actually have to spend it on
unemployment insurance, We actually have to spend it on the
things that we're required to provide as governmental services, inherently
(15:48):
governmental services. And so your response to that problem is
to sue, in essence, sue ourselves and claim that we
you've taken away a republican form of government thirty three
years ago, if we've where were you thirty three years ago? Oh?
(16:10):
I know you did. You challenged it in federal court
and you got your ass beaten. So now you want
to try it in state court because you might you
think you might find a friendly judge. Well, ultimately you
might find a friendly judge. It's not going to make
any difference because that's going to get appealed. And I
don't know what the Colorado Supreme Court could do. I mean,
I could guess that probably uphold it too, but it's
(16:33):
going to end up at the US Supreme Court, and
the US Supreme Court is going to look at it
and go, are you kidding me? This is the very
this is the very definition of a republican form of government.
The people said, the people who owed the ultimate power, said,
you can spend up to this level, and taking into
(16:55):
inflation and other factors, you can spend up to this level,
but you can't go be on that. We're the ones
that makes that decision. Now your job is to fill
the hole that you dug, but not out of my pucket.
Got anymore out of my pucket. I've already paid my
(17:16):
fair share, so by my ass I'm not paying any more.
Speaker 4 (17:30):
You know, Michael and Dragon. One thing I'm not sure
you guys brought up. Didn't They just get several billion
more in real estate taxes last year the year before.
I think, so, what's happened all that money?
Speaker 2 (17:47):
Well, I just happened to have. It's kind of man,
I'm amazed sometimes how this program flows. In fact, Dragon
even watching this morning and said, oh, we got to
check art.
Speaker 3 (18:03):
Yeah, I got a chart printed it in color and everything.
Speaker 2 (18:06):
It's printed in color because otherwise I wouldn't be able
to read it. Uh, yeah, we got a lot of money,
you know, increase in property taxes. We got a lot
of extra money out there. Well, I shouldn't say extra,
because they found a way to spend it. This is
a chart. This is from the Digest of Education Statistics,
(18:28):
the National Center for Education Statistics, any other those those,
those are the two sources of this chart. And Corey
Deangelus had this on his x feeed. Corey is the
school choice advocate, does amazing work. Anyway, It shows the
(18:48):
growth in administrative staff, principles, teachers, and students in public schools. Now,
you would think that as the number of students increases,
there would naturally be an increase in principles or assistant principles.
There would be obviously an increase in teachers, right, and
there might be a slight increase in you know, administrative
(19:11):
staff because you have more students to deal with. Well,
let's start at a baseline of zero in the year
two thousand, from two thousand to twenty twenty one, or
actually I think this goes to twenty twenty two, the
last year for which, yes, this goes through the fall
of twenty twenty two. The school year of twenty twenty two.
(19:36):
The number of students, starting at a baseline of zero
in the year two thousand, slightly grew, just slightly grew
over that twenty two year period. Back in twenty seventeen
was approaching a ten percent growth. But then interestingly, at
(20:00):
the time COVID hit twenty nineteen through twenty twenty two,
the growth rate dipped so that the overall growth rate
in the number of students from two thousand to twenty
twenty two was five percent. Yet a growth rate of
(20:20):
five percent number of students, so you had well five
percent pretty nominal growth, right, So you would think there
would be an increase in teachers, and there was from
twenty to twenty two. Again, starting at zero, the number
(20:43):
of teachers in that twenty two year period grew by
ten percent, so double the growth rate of the number
of students. I'd say that's that's pretty good. In fact,
I'd say that that seems to be in line with
what I would calculate a five percent growth rate in
the number of students. You want to keep class sizes,
(21:05):
you know, a reasonable size, So you have a ten
percent growth in teachers, double the growth what you had
in students. Now you want to know where your money's going.
It's not going to education. It's not going to education whatsoever.
So let's just remember keep in mind, number of students
(21:26):
grew by five percent, the number of principal and assistant
principles grew by forty percent four zero percent. Now, I
could argue, I don't think rationally, but I could argue
(21:49):
that because discipline has become such a problem in schools,
that you need a dramatic increase times the growth rate
of students for principles and assistant principles. But I don't
really believe that. I believe that the tendency of government
(22:11):
and schools are a government entity. The number of people
that don't contribute to the principles out there are gonna
get pissed when I say this. But you don't really
contribute to the direct education of students. Yes, you oversee
and supervise the teachers, you work to manage to create
(22:32):
a good learning environment. You do all of that, but
in terms of actually teaching reading, writing, arithmetic, and you're
not really involved in the direct teaching of students. You're managers.
Nothing wrong with being a mid level manager, nothing wrong
with that at all. In fact, one of my best friends,
I think is one of the best principles that's ever
existed in the history of this country. Just an amazing principle.
(22:56):
But do you need a forty percent increase in growth
of principles? Now you're ready for the whopping number to
address your questioned about Look, we got all this money
where to go In a twenty two year period, you
had a five percent growth in students, you had a
ten percent growth in teachers. Seems reasonable. You had what
(23:20):
seems to me to be an unreasonable growth of forty
percent growth rate in principles and assistant principles and assistant
assistant assistant principles. Well, let's get to the administrative staff.
Starting in the baseline of zero zero percent growth in
(23:41):
the year two thousand, the number or the growth rate
of administrative staff was ninety five percent, and that increase
the increase was pretty steady between two thousand and eleven
to twenty nineteen. Now, twenty nineteen, when COVID hit, the
(24:05):
growth rate dropped. It dropped from ninety percent down to
seventy percent. So it was still growing, but the upward
trend had had temporarily stopped during COVID. But the minute
COVID was over It jumped from seventy to ninety five percent.
(24:26):
The growth rate.
Speaker 5 (24:29):
What why why?
Speaker 2 (24:35):
Teacher unions, unions in general, and the idea that we
don't really care about the kids, We don't really care
about education. We just need more administrators. A ninety five
percent growth rate in administrators. So you wonder where your
money's going. Now, this is national. I don't have figures
(24:58):
for Colorado. But my guess is, and it's just an
educated guess, is that if I could find a similar
chart for Colorado growth rates and overlay it on this one,
it'd be pretty close to mean almost, if not the same.
I missed that one. That's the first time I've missed
(25:21):
a paper throw in months. I told you it was
a day of stupidity.
Speaker 5 (25:27):
Boom.
Speaker 2 (25:29):
If a member of Congress is not present to vote,
are they really representing their district? Now that may sound
kind of Oh, Michael, okay, boomer, you can do a
(25:49):
In fact, I've got one scheduled this afternoon. I've got
a stupid meeting I've got to go to. I need
to be here, but I need to be here because
it's also a remote meeting, and so I got to
be so you know, I get his I get a
team I'm sorry, a teams meeting.
Speaker 3 (26:02):
It makes sure you change your shirt.
Speaker 2 (26:04):
No, maybe I'll maybe I'll just make it even worse.
Maybe I'll put an arrow pointing to it. But that presumes, you, idiot,
that I'm gonna have my camera on. I'm not gonna
have my camera on during a iHeart teams meeting.
Speaker 3 (26:16):
Well as ugly as you are. Yeah, that sounds like
a great Yeah.
Speaker 2 (26:19):
No, I don't want to see the uglier people, even
though it might make me feel better. But Congress is
not a telehealth clinic. Congress is not a teams meeting.
It's not a tech startup. Representation for you and me
in a constitutional republic is not a remote job. Now,
(26:41):
this is not just rhetorical. This is constitutional. Article one,
section five the United States Constitution says that a majority
of each House shall constitute a quorum to do business.
So historically and by long standing Supreme Court interpretation, this
(27:02):
has meant physical presence. The Supreme Court in eighteen ninety two,
not nineteen eighty two. In eighteen ninety two, in a
case called US versus Ballin emphasize the limits placed by
the Constitution, on the rules that they that each House
and the Senate could adopt. And the requirement for presents
(27:24):
is not just some old relic of horse and buggy days.
It's a structural feature of representative government. And I thought
about where do I stop here? I mean, where do
I go from here? I want you to think for
a moment. Yeah, I got time to do this real quickly.
(27:44):
Being a representative is being part of the team, even
if your opponent is on the other team, Republics and
Democrats alike. Constitute eighteen. A team needs to be together
to do its job. You can't have your quarterback sitting
(28:06):
in Cincinnati while your team plays in Denver or vice versa.
They all need to be together. And why is that?
Because you need to have the personal interaction day in
and day out. I really need your vote on this bill.
Well why well because of X Y z oh. I
hadn't thought about that. It's the kind of exchange that
(28:30):
means you're truly representing your constituents, the people back home.
You're interacting with the representatives of the other people that,
in a republican form of government, hold delgimate power. And
we sent you there to represent us and part of
representing us is having those kinds of interpersonal exchanges, the debates,
(28:51):
the committee hearings, everything so that when you actually cast
a vote, you push the button on your desk, gay
or nay. You've had the benefit of all the arguments,
all the personal interactions, everything that's required to work as
a team. Which is why the Congress said a majority
(29:17):
of each House shall constitute a quorum in order to
do business. And that's why the Supreme Court said that, yes,
that is constitutional. That is a limit to founders put
on the operation of the House, and the Senate rules
you must be present. You gotta have a quorum to
do business. So why is this push for proxy voting
(29:38):
going on? The latest is yesterday. Now, this blew up yesterday,
and I've heard a lot of conservative commentators bitch and
moan about I can't believe you're having this fight when
you should be focusing on Trump's agenda. Okay, I understand
(29:58):
that argument, but just point out that if you really
want to push for Trump's agenda, you need everybody there,
Republican and even those who oppose you, because you never
know when miracle of miracles Jesus might just convince somebody
(30:20):
that as a Democrat, you know the right thing to
do is to vote with Republicans on this proxy Voting
for new Parents resolution sponsored by Representative Patterson from Colorado,
Luna Jacobs, and Lawler. So it was a bipartisan resolution.
(30:44):
It was to allow new parents to vote remotely for
up to twelve weeks after the birth of a child. No. No,
If you need to take off after having had a
baby in order to take care of the baby, then
(31:05):
that's just part of the problem. That's just part of
the job that you took. I can't be there to
vote because I have to take care of the baby.
But let's think about what's really going on, because there's
more to this story than oh, I had a baby
and now I've got to stay back in my district
(31:25):
and take care of the baby. Well, first and foremost,
you were probably throughout your entire pregnancy, you were probably
in DC voting, and you probably have an apartment of
condo house or something that you live in most of
the time when you're in DC, and you probably spend
very little time actually outside the district. So why do
(31:45):
you need proxy voting? Hmmm, that's next.
Speaker 5 (31:49):
Part of Mike or Michael I have a solution for
the coloraud of pollut Bureau's hard place that they found
themselves into.
Speaker 2 (31:55):
I would like.
Speaker 5 (31:56):
To charge a nominal fee for it. If each of
the ten payers would just send me one dollar. They
can send it through Mike or Michael see and say
you've already illegally mind my personal information. Uh and uh,
I can help out everybody. You'd save a lot more
money here you go, stop my stin. Our money loses.
Speaker 2 (32:22):
That'll be one point five billion dollars. Just then then
mo your then mo your money too at at Michael D. Brown,
I think it is just then then.
Speaker 3 (32:34):
Mow your share or Dragon red Beard at Dragon Rebord.
Speaker 2 (32:38):
Yeah, yeah, but really it needs to go to me
because I Dragon can't be trusted with the money, but
you can certainly trust me with the money. Let's let's
go back to the proxy voting, because I'm really pissed
that conservatives are blowing this off and and arguing like
(32:58):
Chip Roy was on a terror yesterday about I can't
believe we wasted time on this. Well, this is actually
a pretty serious issue. Let's start with some basics and
I'll finish this at the on the other side of
the news, one of the basics is this. Serving in
Congress is not a right, it's not an entitlement. It's
(33:22):
not granted to every citizen, irrespective of what your circumstances are.
There are some minimal requirements, and then if you meet
the minimal requirements, then you have to go out among
the people and convince them that you would be a
good representative. Just the word a representative. I'm going to
(33:48):
go eighteen hundred miles from here to the east and
land at Reagan or Dulles or Bwi, and then I'm
going to travel inside the Beltway and get inside the district,
and I'm going to be your voice for taxes and
foreign policy and all sorts of rules and regulations and
(34:11):
fighting these I'm going to be your representative inside the Beltway.
So that is a duty. It's undertaken for a term
of for the House members twenty four months, and you
know the conditions under which you take on those responsibilities,
which includes a requirement to be present inside DC
How does Colorado have a one point five billion dollars
shortball when they're spending over three billion dollars more than last.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Year because a lot of what they're spending has been
money that's flowed down from the FEDS, which is mostly
borrowed money. You see this, This is why DOZE is
so important because and this has always been my you know, this.
Speaker 3 (00:31):
Is it's quite simple, Michael, I'm sorry, it's it's it's
very quite say, Okay, they still have checks. You not
out of money. You still have checks, and.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
You know what to take that one step further, they
still have credit cards. Yeah, maybe they should call American financing.
Speaker 3 (00:53):
Unfortunately, I have known people in the past that were like,
I can't be out of money.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
I got checks.
Speaker 3 (00:58):
I still got three checks. What do you mean amount
of money?
Speaker 2 (01:02):
When you were a kid, didn't you ever think of
did you ever wonder? Like I never. I remember when
my parents built a house, the house my mom still
lives in, and I remember, you know, they were sitting
around the kitchen table. They were talking about, you know,
what the payment was going to be, and they were
they were getting something called a mortgage from something called
the savings and the Loan Association, and I was like,
(01:24):
it's savings and they love it. Was my first you know,
kind of entree into you put money in there and
and then they give it back to you, but then
you have to pay it back. Today it's just going
back and forth all this time, and somehow out of
that we're going to get a brand new home. Yep.
Speaker 3 (01:44):
Wow.
Speaker 2 (01:47):
That kind of is how they think. We got a
credit card, we got a check books. Let's just keep
on spending. But to a serious point. And I've got
to remember this because I'm I'm speaking at the Universe
at University of Chicago's Institute of Politics in I don't know,
like mid April sometime, and one of the things that
(02:08):
I have on my agenda is the is this whole
concept of federalism and how it really does protect us
from the insanity or should protect us from the insanity
about what's going on in Colorado, for example. It always
bugged me that and we look, I was part of it,
(02:32):
and it bugged me, and I would fight it. But
it's one of these many battles that I lost inside
the beltway of federal grants. And we have federal grants
that I'll use two examples. One, we have fire management
grants and then we had fire grants, the fire management
(02:55):
assistance grants f mags is what they were called. There'd
be a wildfire breakout somewhere and the wildfire would be
burning Colorado, California. I got them from all over the
country all the time, night and day. It always drove
me nuts because it always made me jump. They call
it two o'clock in the morning, mister secretary, we've got
(03:17):
a fire in Colorado. It's burning, you know. And they learned,
don't wait for me to ask the questions. I'm going
to ask the following questions every time you call me,
and so just tell me the facts I need to
know so I can give you a thumbs up or
a thumbs down. Because these fire management assistance grants were
(03:41):
based on, hey, we got a giant wildfire in Colorado
and they need assistance. Well, my question would be why
do they need assistance? Have they implemented their mutual aid
agreements with New Mexico or Arizona or Utah or Wyoming
or anybody? Do they have planes or firefighters coming in
(04:02):
from anywhere else? Because that's the first response you should have,
right Why call me. I mean, my response literally was
why are you calling me? Why are you calling? Because
I represented I represented the president, I represented the federal government.
And the first, the almost always the initial gut reaction
is oh, let's call the Feds. We need some money.
(04:25):
Let's call it Feds. So they'd be a wildfire burning anywhere,
I don't care, pick a state, and the first thing
they would do is they call me, Hey, we need
your approval for a fire management assistance grant. And they
learned after the first one, where I would ask all
these questions, Well, how big is the fire, what's the
(04:46):
containment what what? What are the fire managers on the
ground telling you about it? Are they going to get
it under control? What are the weather conditions? How many
you know, structures, homes, buildings? Is threatening a town, a city? Whatever?
I mean, all these questions, and of course I would
want to know how much money have they spent? How
(05:07):
much money do they have in their budget? Have they
asked other states to come in and help them, because
every state has mutual aid agreements with other states that
say we if we've got a piece of equipment that
you need that we've spent the money on, we'll come
and let you use it. You know, we'll bring it
to your state and use it, vice versa. And they
(05:30):
go through this whole stuff, and sometimes I'd say yes,
sometimes i'd say no. And whenever I said no, you
could expect that probably within depending on what time of
night it was. If it was two o'clock in the morning,
it might be six am. If it was you know,
ten o'clock in the morning, it might be ten thirty
(05:52):
in the morning. But I would get a call from
the White House. Hey, we got a call from the governor.
We got a call from you know, Jared Poulos. You
turned down a fire management assistant grant and Colorado. Why well,
because of X y Z. Now, sometimes they back me up.
(06:12):
Other times they wouldn't, and they'd say you need to
approve it. Well, okay, so I call him back. I'd
approve the grant. You see, when it's other people's money,
when it's oh, PM, doesn't make any difference, And when
it's politics doesn't make any difference. It's got to go
with it. The other grant that we would have that
oh and so let me back up. So what that
(06:33):
does is that means that legislatures like here at the
Colorado POLOIT Bureau know that they don't have to. If
they were going to budget, just again pulling numbers out
of my butt, if they're going to spend a bill
a million dollars to have in the state budget to
fight wildfires, they would start calculating, Oh, we can always
(06:55):
give a fire management assistance grant and that'll cover you know,
sending twenty let's say twenty five percent of it. So
let's reduce our budget from a million to seven hundred
and fifty thousand dollars. Well, that means they've got two
hundred and fifty thousand dollars that was in the budget
to fight wildfires that they can now give away to
(07:17):
illegal aliens, or they can give away to expand Medicare
and Medicaid, or they can spend on some you know,
reintroducing wolves or whatever bull craft they can come up with,
which makes the budget what. Well, it means that the
budget is a fake budget. It's not really based on
(07:38):
your income. It's based on money that you think you're
going to get from the Feds, and you become addicted
to it. It's like cracked fentanyl, herrowin anything else you
become addicted to it. Then there were things like the
fire grants themselves, where these were competitive grants, but we
(07:58):
would provide firefighting equipment and the states would compete for it,
and they go through this whole competitive process, and then
we would award them the money moneys to buy a
fire truck. Let's just say, you know a a a
seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars fire truck. Well, so
(08:19):
if they got the grant, what would they do? They
would take the seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars if
they had budgeted to buy a fire truck out of
the fire truck budget and put it somewhere else. So
then the next year when they needed another fire truck,
well they probably weren't going to get a grant because
they'd just gotten a grant. So now they're short seven
(08:40):
hundred and fifty thousand dollars for fire trucks because they
spent the money elsewhere and didn't have it in the
budget for fire trucks because they were hobbly. WHOA, we'll
get a grant again. Well, no, you're not going to
get the grant two years in a row. Any any
idiot ought to know that even if you qualified for
it because we want to spread the wealth around. We
wouldn't give it to you two years in, but they
wouldn't think about that. So federalism starts to get weakened,
(09:06):
and state and local governments become more and more dependent
upon the federal government. And that's precisely what's going on
in Colorado during the COVID years. And then during the
Biden administration, you get all of this money, Inflation Reduction Act,
the Infrastructure Bill, whatever I mean, all of it, they're
thrown together, gets thrown at the states. And what do
(09:28):
they do. Will they take that money that comes from
the Feds, put it into actual things that state government
ought to be spending money on, and then take the
money that they should be spending money on, but which
they replace it with federal dollars. And they use that
state money for stupid stuff like expending Medicare or medicaid
(09:55):
to people that don't deserve it, or providing you know,
shelter housing, food, clothing, phones, you name it, to illegal aliens,
for sanctuary city status, all of that crap. And then
when the Feds say, as they are inevitably going to
do at some point, and which is what Trump's doing,
and I sing the Hallelujah chorus for it. No, we're
(10:16):
not going to do that anymore. Now Colorado finds itself
uh oh, we're short one point five billion dollars. And
so the answers for them is not to figure out, Oh,
we've been using too many federal dollars. So now we've
got to find places to cut where we've been throwing
(10:36):
money away. And they're not willing to do the hard
decisions that we elected them to do. So what do
they do. They now want to sue that They want
to sue in essence themselves. They want to sue us
as a state and say the taxpayer Bill of Rights
is unconstitutional because it takes away which I find so
(10:57):
deliciously ironic. It takes away our republican form of government. Really,
so in nineteen ninety two, when the taxpayers who hold
when voters shouldn't even say taxpayers, when voters who are
the ultimate authority in a republican form of government, we
(11:19):
ultimately hold the power because we elect the people to
represent us. So a republican form of government starts with
the people. And we voted in nineteen ninety two to
limit spending and taxation you know, I shouldn't even say
limit spending because tabor allows for increases in spending based
(11:41):
on a formula that includes revenues with inflation and everything else.
But you can't go beyond that formula. And if you
want to raise taxes or implement a new tax, you've
got to come to oh, the people who ultimately hold
the power, the voters, and ask for approval. You cannot
(12:03):
get much more of a republican form of government than that.
So what the colorad of legislature is doing, what the
Poloit Bureau is doing, is really trying to say, by
them exercising their power in a republican form of government,
they have taken away our power and that's violated the
(12:24):
US Constitution, which gives every state a guarantee to a
republican form of government. It's a certain near firing squad,
but that's how desperate they are. And you know, can
I just really be well, I'm always honest with you,
but I want to be brutal here. I think it's hilarious.
(12:47):
I think you know, it's like when you see somebody
that is really doing something stupid and you go, oh,
what's that They're gonna they're gonna regret that in a minute. Well,
we've watched what the legislature has done in terms of
spending year after year after year, stupid program after stupid program,
and we've all sat back and said it's all going
to come crashing down at some point, and here we are.
(13:09):
It's crashing down. They are unwilling if if you want
me to cut one point five billion dollars, give me
an etch of sketch, give me, you know, just I
want time to have lunch, maybe take a nap, you know,
maybe listen to a podcast or something, dragon, I might
(13:31):
want to go have a drink or something. But give
me an etch of sketch and an eight hour day,
and I'll cut one point five billion dollars. Because when
the people start screaming, I don't care, I don't care.
You're you're not spending it on the things you should
be spending it on. Anyway, We've already done the story
this week about the Common Sense Institute showing how the
(13:54):
tax money some what was it, two hundred or four
hundred million dollars, I forget what I think it was
two hundred million, two hundred million dollars that the State
of Colorado has taken in from all the taxes and
fees and you know, the gas tax and everything else
that we pay. It's supposed to go to roads, bridges,
and highways, and it's not going to that. M Well,
(14:16):
wherever it's going, I would say, well, guess what if
it's going to illegal aliens, or if it's going to
expand a medicaid or whatever else sucks to be you,
but we're going to put it back where it belongs
because we told the voters, we told the taxpayers you
pay this tax, it's going to go to fix the potholes,
(14:40):
you know, widen the highways, rebuild the crappy bridges. And
what was it. We're at number forty seven and forty
eighth in the entire country in terms of surface conditions
on our roadways. We're at the bottom. We're absolutely at
the bottom. And you're still trying to figure out where, Oh, well,
we can't find any money anywhere. You're idiots, You truly
(15:05):
are idiots. Actually, let me rephrase that, you're gutless idiots
because you don't want to say to your constituents, oh,
you're willing to say it to the taxpayers. We want
more money. Out of your pocket, but you're not willing
to say it to those preferred constituents. Hey, some of
(15:27):
your benefits, some of the things, some of the freebies
that you've been getting, now you're not going to get
them anymore because we have to actually spend it on roads,
bridges and highways, We actually have to spend it on
unemployment insurance, We actually have to spend it on the
things that we're required to provide as governmental services, inherently
(15:48):
governmental services. And so your response to that problem is
to sue, in essence, sue ourselves and claim that we
you've taken away a republican form of government thirty three
years ago, if we've where were you thirty three years ago? Oh?
(16:10):
I know you did. You challenged it in federal court
and you got your ass beaten. So now you want
to try it in state court because you might you
think you might find a friendly judge. Well, ultimately you
might find a friendly judge. It's not going to make
any difference because that's going to get appealed. And I
don't know what the Colorado Supreme Court could do. I mean,
I could guess that probably uphold it too, but it's
(16:33):
going to end up at the US Supreme Court, and
the US Supreme Court is going to look at it
and go, are you kidding me? This is the very
this is the very definition of a republican form of government.
The people said, the people who owed the ultimate power, said,
you can spend up to this level, and taking into
(16:55):
inflation and other factors, you can spend up to this level,
but you can't go be on that. We're the ones
that makes that decision. Now your job is to fill
the hole that you dug, but not out of my pucket.
Got anymore out of my pucket. I've already paid my
(17:16):
fair share, so by my ass I'm not paying any more.
Speaker 4 (17:30):
You know, Michael and Dragon. One thing I'm not sure
you guys brought up. Didn't They just get several billion
more in real estate taxes last year the year before.
I think, so, what's happened all that money?
Speaker 2 (17:47):
Well, I just happened to have. It's kind of man,
I'm amazed sometimes how this program flows. In fact, Dragon
even watching this morning and said, oh, we got to
check art.
Speaker 3 (18:03):
Yeah, I got a chart printed it in color and everything.
Speaker 2 (18:06):
It's printed in color because otherwise I wouldn't be able
to read it. Uh, yeah, we got a lot of money,
you know, increase in property taxes. We got a lot
of extra money out there. Well, I shouldn't say extra,
because they found a way to spend it. This is
a chart. This is from the Digest of Education Statistics,
(18:28):
the National Center for Education Statistics, any other those those,
those are the two sources of this chart. And Corey
Deangelus had this on his x feeed. Corey is the
school choice advocate, does amazing work. Anyway, It shows the
(18:48):
growth in administrative staff, principles, teachers, and students in public schools. Now,
you would think that as the number of students increases,
there would naturally be an increase in principles or assistant principles.
There would be obviously an increase in teachers, right, and
there might be a slight increase in you know, administrative
(19:11):
staff because you have more students to deal with. Well,
let's start at a baseline of zero in the year
two thousand, from two thousand to twenty twenty one, or
actually I think this goes to twenty twenty two, the
last year for which, yes, this goes through the fall
of twenty twenty two. The school year of twenty twenty two.
(19:36):
The number of students, starting at a baseline of zero
in the year two thousand, slightly grew, just slightly grew
over that twenty two year period. Back in twenty seventeen
was approaching a ten percent growth. But then interestingly, at
(20:00):
the time COVID hit twenty nineteen through twenty twenty two,
the growth rate dipped so that the overall growth rate
in the number of students from two thousand to twenty
twenty two was five percent. Yet a growth rate of
(20:20):
five percent number of students, so you had well five
percent pretty nominal growth, right, So you would think there
would be an increase in teachers, and there was from
twenty to twenty two. Again, starting at zero, the number
(20:43):
of teachers in that twenty two year period grew by
ten percent, so double the growth rate of the number
of students. I'd say that's that's pretty good. In fact,
I'd say that that seems to be in line with
what I would calculate a five percent growth rate in
the number of students. You want to keep class sizes,
(21:05):
you know, a reasonable size, So you have a ten
percent growth in teachers, double the growth what you had
in students. Now you want to know where your money's going.
It's not going to education. It's not going to education whatsoever.
So let's just remember keep in mind, number of students
(21:26):
grew by five percent, the number of principal and assistant
principles grew by forty percent four zero percent. Now, I
could argue, I don't think rationally, but I could argue
(21:49):
that because discipline has become such a problem in schools,
that you need a dramatic increase times the growth rate
of students for principles and assistant principles. But I don't
really believe that. I believe that the tendency of government
(22:11):
and schools are a government entity. The number of people
that don't contribute to the principles out there are gonna
get pissed when I say this. But you don't really
contribute to the direct education of students. Yes, you oversee
and supervise the teachers, you work to manage to create
(22:32):
a good learning environment. You do all of that, but
in terms of actually teaching reading, writing, arithmetic, and you're
not really involved in the direct teaching of students. You're managers.
Nothing wrong with being a mid level manager, nothing wrong
with that at all. In fact, one of my best friends,
I think is one of the best principles that's ever
existed in the history of this country. Just an amazing principle.
(22:56):
But do you need a forty percent increase in growth
of principles? Now you're ready for the whopping number to
address your questioned about Look, we got all this money
where to go In a twenty two year period, you
had a five percent growth in students, you had a
ten percent growth in teachers. Seems reasonable. You had what
(23:20):
seems to me to be an unreasonable growth of forty
percent growth rate in principles and assistant principles and assistant
assistant assistant principles. Well, let's get to the administrative staff.
Starting in the baseline of zero zero percent growth in
(23:41):
the year two thousand, the number or the growth rate
of administrative staff was ninety five percent, and that increase
the increase was pretty steady between two thousand and eleven
to twenty nineteen. Now, twenty nineteen, when COVID hit, the
(24:05):
growth rate dropped. It dropped from ninety percent down to
seventy percent. So it was still growing, but the upward
trend had had temporarily stopped during COVID. But the minute
COVID was over It jumped from seventy to ninety five percent.
(24:26):
The growth rate.
Speaker 5 (24:29):
What why why?
Speaker 2 (24:35):
Teacher unions, unions in general, and the idea that we
don't really care about the kids, We don't really care
about education. We just need more administrators. A ninety five
percent growth rate in administrators. So you wonder where your
money's going. Now, this is national. I don't have figures
(24:58):
for Colorado. But my guess is, and it's just an
educated guess, is that if I could find a similar
chart for Colorado growth rates and overlay it on this one,
it'd be pretty close to mean almost, if not the same.
I missed that one. That's the first time I've missed
(25:21):
a paper throw in months. I told you it was
a day of stupidity.
Speaker 5 (25:27):
Boom.
Speaker 2 (25:29):
If a member of Congress is not present to vote,
are they really representing their district? Now that may sound
kind of Oh, Michael, okay, boomer, you can do a
(25:49):
In fact, I've got one scheduled this afternoon. I've got
a stupid meeting I've got to go to. I need
to be here, but I need to be here because
it's also a remote meeting, and so I got to
be so you know, I get his I get a
team I'm sorry, a teams meeting.
Speaker 3 (26:02):
It makes sure you change your shirt.
Speaker 2 (26:04):
No, maybe I'll maybe I'll just make it even worse.
Maybe I'll put an arrow pointing to it. But that presumes, you, idiot,
that I'm gonna have my camera on. I'm not gonna
have my camera on during a iHeart teams meeting.
Speaker 3 (26:16):
Well as ugly as you are. Yeah, that sounds like
a great Yeah.
Speaker 2 (26:19):
No, I don't want to see the uglier people, even
though it might make me feel better. But Congress is
not a telehealth clinic. Congress is not a teams meeting.
It's not a tech startup. Representation for you and me
in a constitutional republic is not a remote job. Now,
(26:41):
this is not just rhetorical. This is constitutional. Article one,
section five the United States Constitution says that a majority
of each House shall constitute a quorum to do business.
So historically and by long standing Supreme Court interpretation, this
(27:02):
has meant physical presence. The Supreme Court in eighteen ninety two,
not nineteen eighty two. In eighteen ninety two, in a
case called US versus Ballin emphasize the limits placed by
the Constitution, on the rules that they that each House
and the Senate could adopt. And the requirement for presents
(27:24):
is not just some old relic of horse and buggy days.
It's a structural feature of representative government. And I thought
about where do I stop here? I mean, where do
I go from here? I want you to think for
a moment. Yeah, I got time to do this real quickly.
(27:44):
Being a representative is being part of the team, even
if your opponent is on the other team, Republics and
Democrats alike. Constitute eighteen. A team needs to be together
to do its job. You can't have your quarterback sitting
(28:06):
in Cincinnati while your team plays in Denver or vice versa.
They all need to be together. And why is that?
Because you need to have the personal interaction day in
and day out. I really need your vote on this bill.
Well why well because of X Y z oh. I
hadn't thought about that. It's the kind of exchange that
(28:30):
means you're truly representing your constituents, the people back home.
You're interacting with the representatives of the other people that,
in a republican form of government, hold delgimate power. And
we sent you there to represent us and part of
representing us is having those kinds of interpersonal exchanges, the debates,
(28:51):
the committee hearings, everything so that when you actually cast
a vote, you push the button on your desk, gay
or nay. You've had the benefit of all the arguments,
all the personal interactions, everything that's required to work as
a team. Which is why the Congress said a majority
(29:17):
of each House shall constitute a quorum in order to
do business. And that's why the Supreme Court said that, yes,
that is constitutional. That is a limit to founders put
on the operation of the House, and the Senate rules
you must be present. You gotta have a quorum to
do business. So why is this push for proxy voting
(29:38):
going on? The latest is yesterday. Now, this blew up yesterday,
and I've heard a lot of conservative commentators bitch and
moan about I can't believe you're having this fight when
you should be focusing on Trump's agenda. Okay, I understand
(29:58):
that argument, but just point out that if you really
want to push for Trump's agenda, you need everybody there,
Republican and even those who oppose you, because you never
know when miracle of miracles Jesus might just convince somebody
(30:20):
that as a Democrat, you know the right thing to
do is to vote with Republicans on this proxy Voting
for new Parents resolution sponsored by Representative Patterson from Colorado,
Luna Jacobs, and Lawler. So it was a bipartisan resolution.
(30:44):
It was to allow new parents to vote remotely for
up to twelve weeks after the birth of a child. No. No,
If you need to take off after having had a
baby in order to take care of the baby, then
(31:05):
that's just part of the problem. That's just part of
the job that you took. I can't be there to
vote because I have to take care of the baby.
But let's think about what's really going on, because there's
more to this story than oh, I had a baby
and now I've got to stay back in my district
(31:25):
and take care of the baby. Well, first and foremost,
you were probably throughout your entire pregnancy, you were probably
in DC voting, and you probably have an apartment of
condo house or something that you live in most of
the time when you're in DC, and you probably spend
very little time actually outside the district. So why do
(31:45):
you need proxy voting? Hmmm, that's next.
Speaker 5 (31:49):
Part of Mike or Michael I have a solution for
the coloraud of pollut Bureau's hard place that they found
themselves into.
Speaker 2 (31:55):
I would like.
Speaker 5 (31:56):
To charge a nominal fee for it. If each of
the ten payers would just send me one dollar. They
can send it through Mike or Michael see and say
you've already illegally mind my personal information. Uh and uh,
I can help out everybody. You'd save a lot more
money here you go, stop my stin. Our money loses.
Speaker 2 (32:22):
That'll be one point five billion dollars. Just then then
mo your then mo your money too at at Michael D. Brown,
I think it is just then then.
Speaker 3 (32:34):
Mow your share or Dragon red Beard at Dragon Rebord.
Speaker 2 (32:38):
Yeah, yeah, but really it needs to go to me
because I Dragon can't be trusted with the money, but
you can certainly trust me with the money. Let's let's
go back to the proxy voting, because I'm really pissed
that conservatives are blowing this off and and arguing like
(32:58):
Chip Roy was on a terror yesterday about I can't
believe we wasted time on this. Well, this is actually
a pretty serious issue. Let's start with some basics and
I'll finish this at the on the other side of
the news, one of the basics is this. Serving in
Congress is not a right, it's not an entitlement. It's
(33:22):
not granted to every citizen, irrespective of what your circumstances are.
There are some minimal requirements, and then if you meet
the minimal requirements, then you have to go out among
the people and convince them that you would be a
good representative. Just the word a representative. I'm going to
(33:48):
go eighteen hundred miles from here to the east and
land at Reagan or Dulles or Bwi, and then I'm
going to travel inside the Beltway and get inside the district,
and I'm going to be your voice for taxes and
foreign policy and all sorts of rules and regulations and
(34:11):
fighting these I'm going to be your representative inside the Beltway.
So that is a duty. It's undertaken for a term
of for the House members twenty four months, and you
know the conditions under which you take on those responsibilities,
which includes a requirement to be present inside DC
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.