All Episodes

June 2, 2024 64 mins
Mark as Played
Transcript

Episode Transcript

Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
We got to talk about this Trumptrial, right, I mean yeah,
I mean I don't have words fornow. If you have words, I
have got for he's in the studio. You got word. I know you
got words for it. The wordthat everyone keeps using is unprecedented. That's

(00:23):
a word that you'll expect the Democratsabout something. I don't even know.
I am outrage. That's something likethat. No, it's it is,
it's it's I'm gonna last for words. It's a misuse, for sure.
It's amuse, use of people's time, people's money, the justice system.

(00:43):
I told you guys a couple ofweeks ago, we've become the U s
s A. We have become theUS s A. If you have people
in political power and they don't liketheir political opponents there, let's just let's
just go after them and do everythingwe can to. I mean, FEDS
didn't want to press the case,statutes and limitations had run out. You

(01:06):
got Hunter Biden. Every time youturn around, there's something going on with
Hunter Biden. There's references to hisdad and emails and texts and different things
like that they received money from Chinaand the Ukraine and all these kinds nothing
to see here but a guy Ihad somebody paid somebody for a non disclosure

(01:26):
agreement. He's a crook. Yeah, should he should go to jail.
The ironic thing is the charges wereso so trumped up even to get it
to a felony There was no wayit should have even been a felony trial.
But here we are, and herewe have Joe Biden sitting on his
high horse saying no one is abovethe law. Are you kidding me?

(01:49):
Are you kidding me? That's themost ironic thing of this, all this
whole thing. I like you say, there's no words for this. It's
incredible. I kind of I kindof feel, you know, let him
keep shooting his mouth off, andif he keeps walking back whards, he's
not gonna realize he steps in abear trap something like that. You know,
there's got to be a bear trapsitting in their form somewhere. I'll

(02:10):
tell you what. There's a listof people longer than my arm that should
be in jail sooner than Donald Trump. He's gonna get sentenced here in July
apparently. And the big and thebig question is if the judge is the
enough balls to jail him or not. But we shall see about that.
The crazy thing is is that thiswas gonna this is gonna help Donald Trump.

(02:31):
Fifty fifty three million he's raised online. Oh good, crash the server
sensus. So obviously his camp isnot not voting for him. Now.
It wasn't like this changed their minds. And now I think a lot of
the people who if there are anyindecided people, if there are any moderates
in America anymore, I'm not surehow could they look at this and say,

(02:53):
oh, yeah, that was afair trial, that seems legit,
that checks out. Well, who'snext? Right, who's next on the
list? I mean, and thinkabout the money that Trump has to fight
this. Well, how any otherguys said did they go after? They

(03:13):
went after Giuliani, they went afterFlynn? Who else did they go after
Scott? Is that you got torecall for any of those guys. I
mean, there's been a whole bunchof guys. There's been a lot of
guys whose names don't rise to alevel that most people know him, but
there have been several President Trump theother day when he addressed the nation after
ten o'clock, which we carry hereon KFAB yesterday morning, talked about one

(03:34):
of US associates and is in hislate seventies. They were threatening with fifteen
years of jail time on some similarlytrumped up charges. He said, well,
I can't go to jail until I'min my nineties. And they said,
you got to you gotta turn onTrump. You guys like that.
Now, I just I just can'timagine what we've become. And then they

(04:00):
were given authorization to use deadly forceto go down tomorrow law go and bash
down Trump's stores. Yeah. No, there's a list as long as my
arm of people who should be jailedsooner than Donald Trump. I mean not
even don't even bother with the Obamasand Clintons, the Biden family, Trump
or Biden saying that no one's abovethe law. And he literally got off

(04:24):
of his whole aspect of the secretdocument's scandal by simply being ruled a dodding
old man. And now yet he'she's eligible to run for re election.
Now all of a sudden, he'sthe prime candidate. Now his sudden they're
trying to convince us this is anactual candidate for the presidency. Like that's

(04:44):
just incredible to me, And What'sso funny to me about this too,
is that, like we were saying, this is gonna only help Donald Trump.
This can only help Donald Trump because, like I said, it's not
like Biden's people are going to changetheir minds, and it's not like Trump's
people are and change their minds aboutthis whole thing. Well, can they
throw him in jail? They can? They can before them, the judge

(05:05):
merchant can sentence. Well, theythey'll throw the whole kitchen sink at this.
But Scott, can they throw himin jail even though he appeals it?
Uh? No, Usually, ifif you have sentencing and an appeal
already on top of it, theywill probably I mean I think they can,

(05:26):
but they'll probably defer that until theappeal. He's all right, listen,
folks, I'm going to open thephones for just a little bit.
If you want to chime in onthis. I'm kind of without words.
Let's go to the phone and talkto Don. Don Thanks for calling the
show. Yeah, no one isabove the law. Oh yeah, there's
the senile man. That the manthat is too se now if id be

(05:51):
too se now to be charged withwas that seen classified documents? I mean,
like you stated before the irony inthis. Anybody with any modicum of
morality or sense or anything knows thatthis is just the most ludicrous thing,

(06:15):
then maybe it's happened in American history. This is just this is going to
be one for the historic. It'sbeyond it's beyond real words. You know
that this is going on absolutely,And to have two lawyers on that jury.
What kind of lawyers are these guys? I mean, I mean they

(06:38):
should be disbarred. This is themost ridiculous thing I have heard of in
my life. Well, they mighthave been manipulating them. I don't know
how hard we can lean into this, because it's really hard to assume stuff
like this. But how early isit to assume that the jury was manipulated?
Was somehow malleable? So the BabylonBea chimed in on this. Donald

(07:00):
Trump found guilty of being Donald Trump, an outcome that was sure to shake
the foundations of the entire country.The first criminal trial of a former president
reached its close as Donald Trump wasconvicted of being Donald Trump. The verdict
was handed out today in a NewYork courtroom, with the jurors unanimously agreeing
that the evidence presented by the prosecutionoverwhelmingly proved that the defendant was Trump.

(07:27):
Yes, Megan Kelly made a reallygood point. She said, you know,
the Republicans are going to have togo after the Democrats in the same
fashion the e because they've tasted blood. And if this is not met with
equal pushback, then all is goingto be lost in this country. Well,
and hey, don I appreciate youcalling very much, thank you.

(07:54):
So there's some people that are reallyupset about this whole trial process. Yeah,
yeah, you know who it is. Who's that? The Kangaroos,
No way. The Kangaroos hosted apress conference today calling for a stop to
demeaning comparisons to the US justice dim. Please, we beg you stop comparing

(08:15):
the US legal system to a kangaroocourt. It's insulting the kangaroos everywhere,
said Kangaroo spokeswoman Savannah Buttercup Savina Savannah. We are proud of our superior judicial
system and would never ever behave likethose clowns in New York. That's so
funny. So down in Australia theywere saying that, right, yeah,

(08:37):
yeah, yeah, yeah. TheKangaroos, even the kangaroos are tip.
Everyone's getting riled up. You know. It's interesting though. Don brings up
an interesting quote point. The RepublicanParty is so notorious for being defensive,
not offensive, and I don't thinkwe should get offensive to the point where
we where we misused the justice systemand go after people that don't deserve it.

(08:58):
But my goodness, should we everuse Democratic party tactics because they get
that, Like we've said before,they all get together, they get behind
it, they move fast, theymove hard, and Republican Party forever is
cursed to be well slow and theyjust argue all the time. It's so

(09:18):
frustrating. I guess my question iswhere is integrity? Where? Where is
it that you know, you canhave political philosophies that are on the left,
and you can have political philosophies thatare on the right. But where
is integrity? Where does integrity startand stop? Why can't you be a

(09:39):
person that has left leaning philosophies butstill you won't tell a lie, you
won't manipulate, you won't defame,you won't you won't fabricate and torment other
people because they don't think the wayyou do. Where's integrity? Yeah?

(10:00):
There was no integrity in what happenedback there and the whole jury. Yeah,
thirty three counts. Please, that'sridiculous. I asked my buddy Marcus
from Winnipeg to just help me understand. What are why do people like George
Sorows want to keep destroying everything?What is it? Why don't they just

(10:26):
go about doing business and making moneyand building their net worth and creating opportunities
for their family and all that kindWhat is it about people like George Sorows
and these real left waning democrats thatjust want to keep just tearing things down.
Yeah. You think in a lawabiding, capitalistic society and like a

(10:48):
more utopian American society that they wouldhave a better time making wealth, you
know, they'd be easier to Butit doesn't appear they want that. Yeah.
I mean it's almost like you thinkof a guy like Sorrows in a
control room pulling off the clevers justto try to destroy, destroy, destroyed
destroyers. All right, we're goingto take a break. When we come
back, we'll hear from Marcus.Don't go away, folks. This is

(11:09):
kfab's Morning News Saturday with Dave Navideon News Radio eleven ten kfab. I
asked my buddy Marcus of Winnipeg thatcome on, come on and help me
understand something, because why do thesewhy do these people want to tear the
country down? I mean, it'slike this open borders things. It's tearing
the country down and there's guys aroundthe world that are financing it, like

(11:33):
George Soros and Marcus. Welcome tothis show. Help me understand what the
world is going on with people likehimn of Marcus. Good morning, gentlemen.
You know I've been reading for thelast couple of weeks about Sorrows his
biography, and I am still perplexedabout what this guy is up to.

(11:58):
He uh, just just a bitof biography. So the guy was born
in Hungary in nineteen thirty. Hesurvived the Holocaust. He's Jewish Hungarian.
His father changed their name and changedtheir identity papers so they managed to escape

(12:18):
the Holocaust. After the war,he left Communist Hungary in nineteen fifty six
and went to England and went touniversity and studied economics at the London School
of Economics, and one of hisprofessors was Carl Popper, a super conservative
free market guy. So then hewas in Hungary for a while, and

(12:45):
at some point he moved to theUnited States, probably around nineteen sixty ishue
and he became a stockbroker, andhe did stockbroking up until about the late
sixties, and in sixty nine heformed a company called Quantum and that's how
he became a billionaire. So frombasically zero money he went to having forty

(13:07):
billion dollars in nineteen ninety and hedid it by basically, you know,
wheeling and dealing on the free market, which is all which is all fair,
right, Well, he shorted whatthe British pound is something like it,
so that came just a bit later, in nineteen ninety two. It's

(13:28):
too complicated to explain, but thebasic thing was he made a massive bet
that the British would not try tomaintain the value of the pound at a
certain level, and he invested aton of money and it was very risky.
He could have lost hundreds of millionsof dollars. But as a result,

(13:48):
though, because he was right,he made two billion pounds. So
two billion pounds is four billion dollarsUS dollars. That was just one transaction.
But he was already a multi billionaireby nineteen ninety. He made probably
most of the money in the eighties, and so he took that money,

(14:09):
and I guess he was bored beinga multi billionaire. He took that money,
and he, starting in the lateeighties, formed a series of foundations
in dozens of countries called the OpenSociety Foundations. And there must be probably
hundreds of these organizations all over theworld. And I have to give him

(14:35):
credit on one level. A lotof them were in the Soviet Union,
where he funneled all sorts of anticommunist organizations and activists to bring down communism,
tons in Africa, to fight corruptionin Southeast Asia like Burma, which

(14:56):
is now called Mayan mar He didall sorts of the things that you and
I and would not disagree with.But something happened to him in the nineties
where he suddenly decided that the UnitedStates was evil. He started getting involved

(15:16):
during the second Clinton term, soabout nineteen ninety six, in that election,
he started giving money from his personalmoney to the Democrats, and at
the same time he started opening OpenSociety offices to reform the United States.
And some of I think the anticriminal stuff, like the funding das and

(15:43):
all that stuff started in the earlytwo thousands in Baltimore. Baltimore seemed to
be well, no, that's nottrue. He went to Texas first,
but the Texans didn't like him thatit didn't work in Texas. Surprise level
zero. He went to Baltimore andNew York. Those would be like the

(16:03):
main But okay, so I lookat what he's funding today, Marcus,
and to me, he appears tobe Darth Vader. He's the guy behind
the mask, directing, pointing,and creating absolute chaos in the United States.
Why I am perplexed because when youread his biography, most of the

(16:30):
money the foundation spend, and theyspend about a billion dollars a year,
more than a billion dollars a yearall around the world. But most of
the money it really goes to correctcauses in the in the Third World and
in the former Eastern European, theformer communist countries. But I don't understand.

(16:52):
Well, the nearest I can figureis this. So he says,
there's three million people in the USj and maybe a million in juvenile detention,
and this is unfair, he said, you know, this is diminishing
equality of opportunity for the people injail, and we need to reform that.

(17:12):
So a friend of mine I wastalking to the other day and he
said, one of the problems withreformers is they never know when to stop.
They just keep going and they neverstop until they wrecked things. So
in the United States, he's decidedto reform something. Now, the crime

(17:33):
rates from you know, the lateeighteen hundreds, up until nineteen sixty five,
the US crime rates, the westernworld crime rates were very low,
and then in sixty five crime justshot up, completely shot through the ceiling.
And it was high up until theearly nineties, and it fell then.
But part of the reason it fellwas because the Reagan government and conservatives

(17:56):
the United States decided to get reallytough on crime. And so that the
reason there's three million people in jailand one million juveniles in the United States
is because they've committed crimes. Now, we all know that there's a certain
number of innocent people in jail,and you know, the Trump trial result
tells us that right, that thatnot all justice is fair. But most

(18:21):
of those four million people that arein jail probably did something that was illegal.
But Sorrows, when you read theSorrows material, he doesn't. It's
almost like he thinks the four millionpeople in jail lost the lottery and randomly
got chosen to serve time in jail. See, there's something's how can you

(18:42):
be, on the one hand,an incredibly competent businessman doing market trading and
all those sorts of things and buildingfoundations all over the world. How can
you be really competent there and beso incompetent on the other side, it's
certainly not insulated. Like this isa guy who's not been coddled in anyway
or sheltered from the world. He'sseen so much of actual, true evil,

(19:04):
and then this is what he comesand decides to do with his own
money. What a great point hesaw the Holocaust. Oh my goodness.
So my reading says that he thoughhe is very I mean, clearly he's
brilliant in terms of reading markets andmaking moves, and he's brilliant at that,

(19:25):
but he's not brilliant at politics.And one of the things my reading
tells me is people on the rightand the left who and he's published all
sorts of books, they read hisbooks and they have no idea what he's
talking about. It's a little bitlike Einstein. Einstein was quite brilliant in
physics, but if you read someof the quotes he said on political matters,

(19:47):
he wasn't that right, and that'ssorrows. Huh, well, I
guess, I guess I to me, I think sometimes evil's overlooked. You
know, we can ration lies somebodydoing this and rationalize something doing that.
But at some point in time aperson is overwhelmed by evil in some form

(20:11):
or fashion, and you know,they end up acting out in ways that
just defy all all logic, character, integrity. Uh, I don't know.
I So my whole thing is ishis fingerprints. Every time you turn
around, his fingerprints are on somethingthat's awful. Yeah, yeah, it's

(20:36):
fail that it's something bad. It'sso weird. The other thing I got
from the reading is that, youknow how the the Wokies since the nineties
have taken over universities, governments,you know, the Democratic Party. It
seems that the wokies have also takenover his foundation. Get the guy's ninety

(21:00):
three years old. Now he turnsninety four in August, so you know,
for even in his prime, hedidn't know. He says in his
book, he didn't really know allof the things his foundations were doing.
So he because it's so vast theamount of money that he's just throwing around.

(21:21):
But when you read the book,there are hundreds of these wokie types
that run his foundations. And thefeeling I get is that as those people
got more and more control of thefoundation and he took less, look direct
control, they they've basically taken itover the way they've taken the universities.

(21:42):
Okay, and so some of whatwe're seeing that appears to be sorrows stuff,
Yeah, it's sorrows money, butit's not sorrows anymore. Okay,
we got we got like, holdon, Marcus, we got like thirty
seconds. Hey, he's got fivesons, doesn't he Yes, and one
of them is very much like him. Well, this is what I'm wondering.

(22:03):
This Soros problem isn't gonna go awayanytime soon. Probably not. It
doesn't seem it looks like the sunwill continue it if he gets control of
all the money. Time is there'sprobably thousands more just like this guy.
Well you want to you really wonder? Yeah, all right, Marcus,
thanks so much for putting the timeinto research that that's Marcus from Winnipeg.

(22:25):
We're gonna take a break. Whenwe come back, we're gonna have a
special guest that's gonna tell us abouthow the federal government is kicking people out
of the park areas around reservoirs.Yeah, you're this is gonna get interesting,
So don't go away. We'll beright back. I have a special
guest on with me this morning,Kent Confert. Kent's from McCook, Nebraska,

(22:52):
and I through him, I've learneda little bit about a strategic plan
to federal government has to basically wipeall the permanent trailers that you know,
people will rent a place and justkind of put it down, maybe put
a deck next to it or something. So are you talking about like just
national parks, federal federal some timeof federal. Well, they've got all

(23:15):
these reservoirs right in western Nebraska thatare there for irrigation and everything, and
people use them as places to havekind of a getaway. Right. Yeah,
Good morning, Kent, Welcome tothe show. Good morning days.
Glad to be here. So startstart, if you would, from the
basics as far as what people havebeen doing since the fifties. It's my

(23:37):
understanding and what the federal go ahead. Actually in the sixties. Uh,
these lakes were built in southwest Nebraska, and they were they were put in
for irrigation and recreation initially, andwhen they were after the lakes were all
constructed and built, then the recreationalfacility started being built. In the case,

(24:07):
certainly at Red Willow and Swanson,they allowed the farmers to actually come
in and plow roads for trailer parksand at that time they started existing in
the sixties and basically have been inexistence ever since. In twenty seventeen,

(24:33):
we actually had a meeting with theBureau of Reclamation in Nebraska Game and Parks
where they told us that we weregoing to have to remove all trailers at
basically Swanson near Trenton, Red Willownear McCook, and Harry Strump near Cambridge

(24:55):
to what they called eliminated public useor private use of public property exclusive private
use of public property. Now,they did tell us at that time that
that that amounts only to trader housesand not cabins. There are a handful

(25:15):
of cabins at the Willow in ain a few at Swanson. H However,
Uh, at that time they saidyou don't have a choice. And
and uh so basically eight years ago, actually we started a little bit before
that. We started, uh thisfight with the Bureau of Reclamation in the

(25:37):
federal government keep our lake community.Okay. So Aaron Thompson is the guy
that is at the front end ofall of this, isn't he He's with
the is it the Bureau of Reclamationin Nebraska and Kansas. Yeah, he's
a he's the regional director of theBureau of Reclamation in uh In in this

(25:59):
in this region. And what's hismotive is his motive there? Originally their
motive was at Cambridge, which didlose their traders. We can get into
that more later. They were noncompliance with health and safety issues and that's
what like what like stepick and andclean up. You know. They never

(26:30):
I have to clarify that, theynever didn't make a lot of this stuff
very clear for us what they didwant as trader owners and I'm I'm I'm
a trader association at Red Willow andthere's a trader association also at Swanson.
They really never, in fact,from the beginning, we just said,
tell us what you want, We'regoing to comply and do it. Well,

(26:52):
they never have accused the other twolights of being out of compliance.
And then they just basically went backto exclusive private use of public property.
And and that's that's their policy,which we learned later was nothing more than
a policy. Uh, there's nothingin the federal register that says they have

(27:14):
to do this. Because this isRadio Kent, we gotta we got to
clip along. We're going to takea break here in a minute. When
we come back, we're going tohave to be concise. But the reason
that these trailer communities are good forthe areas what well. Number one,
that's one of the reasons that thethat the counties, UH Frontier County for

(27:37):
Red Willow in Hitchcock County for Swansonhave become involved is there's a tax base
that they're collecting there for seventy trailersat Red Willow, one hundred and ten
at Hitchcock. Uh. There aremarinas that produce at both locations that will
not survive if the traders are removed. They're basically are businesses about that.

(28:00):
So you got all that economic activityhappening with all those people there. I'm
sure there's probably places to eat somewherearound there for people that don't want to
cook for themselves, and you gotthat Marina there. I'm just curious,
what are they trying to reclaim?Why are they suddenly after you know,
fifty years of having people hang outand come and inviting people to be on

(28:22):
these reservoirs as a recreation area.What is the federal government trying to do
here? I mean, I guessthat's the question. We're taking to the
break. Why it's the question?And don't try to breed common sense into
this equation because it doesn't exist.Yeah, more power and control. Okay,
we're going to take a break.Cant when we come back. Let's
keep going on this because there's afew other things here that I really want

(28:45):
to get into. We'll be rightback, folks. So they decided to
pull all the trailers off of alake. Which lake was that they pulled
them all off at Cambridge, Nebraska. We thought we were going to be
able to say that one also,but we couldn't. So at the owner's
expense, sometimes up to ten thousanddollars a trailer, the Bureau made them

(29:07):
pay for the removal. So,which was once a bustling area full of
kids playing and people fishing, andand so on and so forth. They
completely tore everything out, removed it, removed everything, and all there is
now is we patch. And thelast time we were there there was a

(29:27):
log blocking it saying no no vehiclesallowed. And basically there's nothing there and
no one uses it. So theycompletely destroyed it. What kind of cash
flow do you suppose the county lost? That's that is also Frontier County,
And that's one of the reasons thecommissioners were so interested in saving Red Willow.

(29:51):
They had fifty five traders at Cambridgethat are no longer there. They
haven't been able to buy a bagice there for over five years. Think
about that. They've gone to drivefifteen miles to Cambridge to get that.
And the most bizarre thing is throughall of this they said, well,
we're going to improve the lakes.We've got thirty five miles of shoreline.

(30:14):
We the at Red Willow. Wecompromise a half a mile of shoreline,
and there's thirty five more miles.There are much better places to build facilities
that they want to tear these downto build new facilities. So let's slow
down a minute. You're saying there'sthirty five miles of shoreline, and this
trailer area took up a half amile that is correct. So at Swampson

(30:38):
Lake there the trailer area is noton the shoreline. So they've got thirty
miles of free area where they couldbuild anything they want. But there's zero
ideas to destroy the marina the concessionwas there septic leakage into the lake that

(30:59):
was a edged at Cambridge, notat the other two lakes whatsoever. So
so these trailers get kind of hunkereddown permanently enough to have a septic system.
These traders, absolutely they are.They are trader just as any other
trader park And if you live inthe Midwest, if you live in a

(31:21):
rural area, you're gonna have septicsystems. So they're all approved septic systems
through the state of Nebraska, andso they have to approve it. State
of Nebraska's got to approve it.When you build something like that, you
just can't do it. Well.They know a meeting with the DEA that
that basically said that, Okay,when you talk about trailers, we're not
talking about the kind of pull behinda truck. You're talking about something that

(31:42):
you get in there. Bubble homesmobile homes. Okay, there are camping
areas uh that are that are temporaryat both areas also that are being utilized
and people people enjoy those. Also, we've got their parks, there's playgrounds,
we have it all and they planon destroying this. What can we
do? What's help thrue? Congress? What's the call to action? What

(32:05):
do we do? What do youwant the listeners to tell them? Okay,
well, basically there are two billsand committee at the House of Representatives
in the Senate. We've got HReighty four thirteen at the House and S
forty three forty seven at the Senate. We've we've we want everyone to get

(32:28):
a hold of their representatives, congressionalrepresentatives and let them know that this is
absolutely the wrong thing to do.We had we had almost two thousand signatures
in McCook of people saying we don'twant this. People don't want their their
these communities destroyed and their marina isgone. They use them for the public.

(32:51):
So this is a thing that they'retrying to do for all reservoirs federally
nationwide, or is this something that'shappening locally for some reason that you can't
understand why they're talking Q. It'shappening in southwest Nebraska. They the trader
parks still exist at some locations inKansas, they exist in Colorado, they
exist in Wyoming, they exist inNorth Dakota. Uh, And why they

(33:15):
would pick on southwest Nebraska is beyondthat, right. So it makes you
think that there's some kind of regionalbrutal regional motivation. Yeah, well,
so I'm thinking of Harlan Reservoir downfarther east. That's that's still I mean,
that's a that's a bustling, bustlingreservoir. I mean there are cabins
and trailers and mobile homes and marinathat is just operating constantly. So they're

(33:38):
not targeting anything like that. They'rejust targeting you guys. There's these few
reservoirs and you can't figure out,I mean, what are they doing with
the lake? What are they doingwith the reservoir being managed by the Army
Corps of Engineers, not the Bureauof Reclamation there in, lives are different,
Okay, okay, is uh thismight be a dumb question, But

(33:59):
of the people that go out thereand stay in these trailers in the weekend
and stuff like that. What percentageof them are the rural farmers and those
folks, and what percentage of themare people coming from the cities. Oh,
that's a good question. We havewe have people from all walk to
life and there are farmers there,there are people from towns. There are

(34:22):
people from out of state that come, which obviously is part of tourism.
Oh yeah, I mean the morethe more people we can get mid part
of Yeah, the more people wecan get in this state to spend money
on sales tax, the lower thetaxes are going to be for the local
residents. Just go talk to SouthDakota and these are natural places to create

(34:43):
revenue. Yeah. Yeah, I'mlooking at the map now and I'm looking
at you got looks like you've gota lake outside of Trenton, and one
west of Juanita, and one offof Highway eighty three north of McCook.
Are those the lakes you're talking about? Cambridge is thirty miles east of McCook.

(35:04):
So the other one you're talking aboutis not does not have traders.
It's it's basically the one outside ofTrenton and the one north of McCook.
Off at eighty three gotcha. Okay, So now these so now these reservoirs
are sitting there doing nothing except fortheir natural irrigation purposes, which I'm sure
not yet. I mean, there'sonly one lake. They butchered the place

(35:25):
and took everybody out, so andthere and then and then you said their
plan is to do what with that? They're supposedly trying to rebuild or make
it better or something and then openit up, or they're just it's it's
it's over. It's it's never comingback to say. Use is they need
these areas, this half a mileof shoreline to build, to build their
new facilities, which they're not goingto do anyway. That's that's if they

(35:49):
wanted to do. If they've gotanother five miles. Oh no, kidden,
Yeah, no, kidden. Showus four years Cambridge is harry S
Trunk Lake has been baked four years. They haven't touched it. They're not
planning on touching it. He basicallysaid, show me what you can do,
and hey can't. How can somebodyget a hold of you? Uh,

(36:15):
I'll give you my email address.Go, it's very simple. Can't
confer k E n T co On F E r at yahoo dot com.
All right, Kent confer Co On F E. R at yahoo
dot com. Hey, thanks forbeing on the program. Hopefully this will
make some difference anyway, but geta ground So maybe if you petitioned against

(36:38):
Palette for Palestine at the same place, you'd have a better chance. Hey,
have a great weekend. We'll beback. Peter. You know you've
been You've been sitting here listening tomedia yak about taxes in Nebraska and how
we need to make all these reforms. And we've had Governor pilling On talking
about all the kind of stuff thathe's wanting to do, and he just

(36:59):
wanted to do a lot. Yeah, he's wanting to expand the sales tax
and then use those funds to reduceproperty taxes. He's got a vision.
And then lo and behold, loand behold. A guy named Jim Vocal,
who runs the Plaid Institute, hascome up with an idea that might
be a Eureka moment. We don'tknow yet, but Jim's in the studio

(37:22):
with us. Good morning, Jim, morning, Dave Morn Peter, good
to have you here. To beback, So tell everybody what the Plaid
Institute is first of all, sothe Plat Institute, we are a free
market think tank. We look atthe policy solutions that are working across the
country, and we leverage that researchand leverage those best practices. We take
them to Lincoln, we testify,we provide the research, We provide the

(37:45):
best practices to make Nebraska a morecompetitive state. So we deal with issues
that affect our state's growth, liketaxes, regulation, workforce issues, how
we spend money in Nebraska, andjust overall good government transparency. So you
got to thinking about what the governorwas trying to do and looking at your

(38:06):
research from around the country, whatkind of a strategy have you come up
with? Well, these aren't necessarilynew ideas, but we're certainly making sure
that the policymakers and the public understandthese ideas that we've been floating around for
a couple of years. And thiscomes on the back of a couple things
that I think are important for thelandscape. First off, valuations have increased

(38:30):
substantially across the state over the lastdecade. And what's happening, guys,
is that when the various political subdivisions, schools are the greatest defenders, cities,
counties, all the political subdivisions.They're receiving a windfall because valuations go
up, but get a blank check. Yeah, and what they're not doing

(38:51):
is lowering the rate to completely offsetthose valuation windfalls. So what are they
doing with it? They're spending it. So when you hear elect officials say,
well, we're keeping the the levyrate the same portraying that they're keeping
taxes consistent, it's not true.If you look at their property tax collections
Omaha's since we're here in Omaha,I mean, they're collecting tens of millions

(39:14):
of more in property tax revenue everyyear. That's a tax increase. So
that's the number one problem before Iget into these solutions. The other thing,
when you send money from the state, as the governor and policymakers did
last year, over three hundred milliondollars went towards the schools with the intent
of curbing and lower in property taxes, what did they do. They spent

(39:38):
it, and they got around thesoftcap. The elected boards voted to get
around the softcap that was in place, and they spent the money that came
from the state instead of lowering theproperty taxes. So I think it's important
that we understand that those two problemshave contributed to the landscape before we get

(40:00):
into these solutions. Okay, sowhat are you What are your nuts and
bolts to what you're talking about?Well, first off, I think the
first step is if we're going tosend money from the state down to a
local government, you have to havea hard cap, meaning that money must
go to reduce property taxes. Andoh, by the way, you can
increase your budgets beyond that, soproperty taxes increase further. So if we're

(40:22):
going to send hundreds of millions ofdollars from the state, you have to
lower the levy rate so that taxpayersacross the state see lower taxes. And
then they can't go above and beyondthat and increase their budgets and raise the
property taxes so that taxpayers actually seelower taxes when they go to pay their
property taxes. That you know,people, the AKS right now is against

(40:45):
the assessors. And I understand thatnotices have gone out this week. My
property has gone up thirty one percentover the last two years. Okay,
but they're I hate to say this, they're doing their job. The state
law requires them to value your propertybetween ninety and hundred percent of market value.
The problem is these elected officials thatare getting this windfall and they're spending

(41:07):
it, and each year the budgetgoes up because that becomes their new base.
Well it sounds goodhead Peter, Soyour your net worth. It's good
for your net worth, but sure, but you're paying for it in property
tax at the level you mean therate that they're multiplying their homes valuation towards
right right, And that's what determineshow much each political subdivision gets. And
so that goes into the part twoof the solution. Part two of the

(41:30):
solution is what Texas does. Ifvaluations go up this amount x amount,
rates must come down each year bythat same amount, so that mister and
missus Jackson across Nebraska is paying thesame amount of property taxes. That prevents
political subdivisions from spending the windfalls,and it makes sure that each year taxpayers

(41:55):
are at least starting out with thesame amount of taxes that they paid last
year. Now that's not going tolower taxes immediately, but what it does
prevent is this this continuous spending spreethat we're on because valuations go up and
political subdivisions and elect officials. Sohow do you execute a strategy to make

(42:16):
sure that these districts are have tosubmit to those restraints. Well, it
becomes state law, so we gotto do it in the legislature. Has
to be in the legislature, andthat that idea has been floating around and
been considered, so it's been onthe table. We're probably heading into a

(42:37):
special session to address property taxes thissummer. I plaud the efforts of the
governor to push for this because wehave the seventh highest property taxes in the
in the country. We may thinkabout that we're the seventh highest in the
nation. In the nation, whatwe got a million seven and population and
we were the seventh, were rightthere with New York and California and New

(43:00):
Jersey and where else. So you'vebeen Illinois maybe sure, No, I
mean that makes sense. So you'vebeen looking at Texas. What other states
have you been influenced by and whetherpolicies are really working well? Well,
Dave and Peter, I think it'simportant to understand that all property tax issues

(43:22):
in Nebraska are a result of spending. So it's it's it's it's hard for
the state because they're not a propertytaxing entity. They can certainly implement some
of these strategies that we're going totalk about today. But if if we
don't curb local spending and do someof the things that we're talking about here
today, it doesn't matter how muchmoney that the state's going to send,

(43:43):
we still have a spending issue.Like I said before, the governor can
launch these performance out of groups andall that stuff to go in and look
at that, Kenny Well, Imean he can, man, Yeah,
I mean, certainly the policymakers onthe state level could mandate the local subdivisions.
But at the end of the day, the schools representing over sixty percent
of your property tax bill each year, they're getting more and more money,

(44:06):
the City of Omaha getting more andmore money. They're not lowering the levy
rate enough to offset they're spending.And what's the enrollment like with schools today?
I mean, with people having fewerand fewer kids, are we seeing
higher and higher costs with less andless kids? Yeah, I mean the
per people costs and the Ministry ofcost per student is certainly going up.

(44:29):
But let's get into solution number three. All right, Solution number three was
part of the governor's package LB.Three eighty eight, and this would be
so let's take a step back.A few years ago, the legislature approved
and adopted an income tax credit thatgoes towards the amount of property taxes you

(44:50):
paid to your school. Now,the problem with that is that to claim
that, you have to claim iton your income tax return. And if
you look at the the program sinceits inception, uh, many taxpayers are
not taking advantage of that that creditthat's available. So that's not it's not
the most If you look at theprinciples of taxation, you want to be

(45:12):
transparent, you want to be simple, right, I applaud and you know
the intent is good, but youknow it's a it's not a very high
percentage of folks claiming that that incometax credit. So instead of making a
cumbersome process to go get the incometax credit, let's take those billions of

(45:34):
dollars whatever the amount is, hundredsof millions and billions of dollars, and
let's send them down to the schoolsand mandate that that rate goes down.
So instead of the credit, you'reactually going to see a lower mount and
that that becomes more transparent, itbecomes more direct, and taxpayers are actually

(45:57):
going to see visible evidence that theirtaxes are going going down. And for
those people that haven't claimed the credit, this is a much better option.
Yeah, I mean less bureaucracy forone thing. I mean that's just less
everything, less go around, lesseverything, less paperwork that people don't want
to do, clearly, So justmake it easy on your citizens. All
right, We're going to take abreak more with Jim Vocal when we come
back. That data is available andNebraska actually is in the top fifteen as

(46:22):
far as the amount of funding thatgoes to each pupil based on the amount
of state and local property taxes paidfor each kid fifteen. So we're in
the fifteen most expensive pupil school districtsin the nation. Correct, So we
have the high we're in the topseven highest property tax and we're in the

(46:45):
top fifteen of what we spend theeducate kids. And and one time I
haven't looked in a few years,we're top five in the amount of money
per kid for administrative costs. Andyou can understand why. I mean,
we've got a lot of old districtsout there and our population. When I
ran for governor. One of thebig issues was was the consolidation school districts.

(47:08):
And the listeners have heard me saythis before, but Osborne went with
the consolidation idea, and I thinkthat's probably what hurt him in the election.
One of two things. Yeah,and of course we split the vote
and Dave Heineman one. But theReason Foundation did a study and found that

(47:30):
the school districts that had six thousandsof kids are under were the most efficiently
run. And when they get bigwhat you just said, the administration goes
through the roof and the costs forpupil just skyrockets sky rockets. Well,
forgive me for if this is anuneducated question, but it seems like we
hear about the underpaid teachers all thetime, how teachers are just underpaid,

(47:52):
not enough of them and whatnot.If they're getting such big windfalls, like
you're saying, why is it justgrossly mismanaged by the schools or what's the
deal there? Yeah, I can'tattribute what's what's going on within each school
district, but they certainly have plentyof money flown around. Yeah, especially
with the federal money that came inas well. So there's one more idea

(48:14):
that we have and then we canopen it up for some other discussions.
Certainly so. A few years ago, the PLAT Institute champion and effort one
of three states across the country calledTruth and Taxation and Truth and Track.
What Truth and Taxation is is thatif a political subdivision there's four of them,
county, City school district, CountySchool district, and community college,

(48:37):
if they raise taxes above three percenteach year, two percent, two or
three percent each year, it triggersan additional hearing, and that hearing has
to be in September. Notices goout the pink postcards or whatever color they
are across the state showing you exactlyhow much your taxes are going to increase
and giving you an opportunity at nightin the evening to come address and face

(49:01):
the elect officials are planning to raiseyour taxes. So this has been going
on for two years, and I'vewatched the hearings. I've attended the hearings,
and they just grow and grow everyyear because people are frustrated with the
property taxes going up. And whatwe'd like to see changed in that legislation
is that if property taxes are evenraised one cent that would trigger those hearings.

(49:23):
And the other thing that we'd liketo see changed is those hearings need
to happen before political subdivisions elect officialsset their budget, so that the hearings
and the input could become more valuablebefore the budgets are set. Now,
the hearings right now certainly happen beforethey have to certify their levey. But

(49:45):
there's a feeling out there that they'renot really as effective as they could be
because they're not happening in front ofthe budget. So we have to strengthen
that truth and taxation. It justrequires an amendment from on legislation legislature,
and there is support out there forit in the legislature, right, there's
no doubt about it. Okay,So all of this hinges on having the

(50:05):
right people in the legislature correct wishraces. Can you talk about I can't.
You can't. I can't as anonprofit, I can't get involved with
elect officials or elections. George doeswell, George, So I'm not George
Soros. Okay, So you knowwhat, Peter, Let's make a point
to try to get somebody in thereto really get into the races that need

(50:27):
the most attention. I don't whatyou talked about it in the past.
I can talk about, you know, what we need in the legislature.
We need we need elect officials thatunderstand the policy solutions are going to grow
the state. You know, thewhen we're talking about taxes. We need
elect officials that are going to embracebudgetary restraint, simplicity, transparency, and

(50:50):
those policies that are going to promoteeconomic growth. And we need senators also
out there that understand that even thoughyou're from western Nebraska or east and brass
of your center for the whole stateand try to avoid the urban rule divide,
that there are issues that affect ourstate that may not you know,

(51:12):
be part of your geographic area.But we've got to look at the policies
that affect the whole state and growthe whole state. And I think those
are the pro business, pro taxpayersenators that are willing to embrace, working
with senators across the aisle, andthose policies that are going to grow the

(51:34):
whole state. What organizations are theones that are the toughest to fight against,
that do everything they can to stopbefore well, I think that's a
great question. In our unicameral system, it only takes seventeen picking off seventeen
senators peeling them off. Under ourfilibuster rules, we don't even get to

(52:00):
vote on critical issues that affect thestate. So so out of forty nine,
you just have to find seventeen,and you've stopped any pro growth legislation.
So the or the labor unions goafter them, and I mean the
teachers union. I mean they're spendinghundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars every

(52:21):
legislative cycle, and I would saythat they want to see government growth.
They want to see more money goinginto the state for education, for other
for other priorities, and so they'rethey're generally going to pose the pro growth
tax strategies that we're talking about.They don't necessarily want to see property taxes

(52:42):
go down. They want as muchfunding coming from taxpayers as possible. And
so I would say that's probably theorganization that has the greatest effect on the
landscape and fight against the things thatwe want to see. Certainly, there
are other organizations, nonprofits down inLincoln that we see on a regular basis.

(53:02):
Lobbyists as an example that want carveouts for their industry. Carve outs
and credits come at the expense oftax relief for everybody. And we have
a lot of carve outs in oursales tax system. And so I applaud
the governor and policymakers for looking atthat landscape and looking at the number of
car outes, because like in comparisonto other states, South Dakota and some

(53:25):
of the other states around Nebraska,we have more carve outs. And that's
been that's the thing. That's thething that's been real frustrating to me,
because I think if you just wentand took the top fifteen more tax efficient
states in Nebraska and you looked athow they tax their citizens, and you
built a model, say it's thetop ten. You build a model that

(53:46):
says, okay, well they taxall this for sales tax. We don't
they do this, We don't youknow what I mean? Why can't we
build a model and say, okay, here's the model, here's where Nebraska
is. If Nebraska will copy theaverage of what the top ten most efficient
states do, we'd be able tolower taxes a lot. But what you

(54:06):
just said is what the plants.It's all about is showing the best practices.
The plans are out there, theresearchers out there. The problem is,
is your previous question, what's stoppingit? And it's the lobbyists behind
the glass that are advocating for thestatus quo, advocating for their individual carve
outs to remain that have been theresince the sixties. Okay, So my
opinion is it's pr We haven't beenvery good in this state of coming up

(54:31):
with a strategic plan that everybody canbuy in on and then market the living
daylights out of it through commercials,through speeches. I don't even know if
the rotary clubs are still meeting alot. I mean every rotary club,
every social group, every place.You get an army of marketing and salespeople

(54:52):
to come out and communicate what isgoing on, especially in the districts where
you've got state senators that are kindof on the fence, and you get
a I think they ought to brand. They ought to brand it something the
Nebraska Transformation Act or something like that, and have all these fundamentals that you're

(55:13):
talking about, and then market thedaylights out of it. We've never done
that, as far as I cantell. I think that would certainly be
helpful. But it's also by electingthe right people that understand what sure,
what the landscape is. I thinkthat would help because if you went into
those districts, the person running foroffice says, look, I got all
this pressure to do this stuff.I guess I got to do it.

(55:36):
I don't know if you remember,you remember the old stop Overspending initiative?
I don't, Okay. Back inthe early two thousands, I was involved
in a ballot initiative called stop Overspending, and we were going to limit the
growth of state government to the inflationrate plus population growth, and basically government

(55:58):
was going to be capped at itsability to grow. And it lost by
I think three or four percent atthe ballot box. But it's been tried
before. What sort of resistance willyou have just from the general public.
I don't think you'd have resistance fromthe general public. And the resistance comes
from the policymakers that get down toLincoln or any level of government, and

(56:23):
they have various priorities. They wantto spend, they want to advocate through
spending, and as I said atthe outset of our conversation, today,
all taxes are the result of spending, and we have a local spending problem.
Yeah. And it's interesting because,like they was saying, if you
get out in each county, ineach legislative seat election and you let people

(56:46):
know what's going on, people likeme that are not necessarily experts on taxes,
and we let them know what theterminology means and what all this is.
And that way, when you havecandidates who have union interests or school
board interests and they're trying to saythey say, oh, the future,
right, it's all about the kids, it's for the education or whatever,
then you can actually show them,no, no, that they're actually keeping
us back, they're actually holding usback into non progress and slowing us down.

(57:10):
To me, it's marketing, brandingand marketing. And can you remember
in our adult lifetimes, can youremember anybody branding and marketing a complete transformation
strategy for the state. No.No, it's never been done. No.
And there's some big ideas out there. We've talked about county and school
consolidation, there are other big ideasthat would certainly make a big den in

(57:32):
how we do government here. Well, we finally have a governor that I
think is really willing to embrace thosesorts of strategies. So anyway, we're
going to take a break. Whenwe come back, Jim, I want
you just to be able to giveeverybody an idea what you need from the
public to help support absolutely the PlaidInstitute. So we're going to take a
break. We'll be right back,Jim, I want to give you an
opportunity to tell everybody what you needfrom the public. I mean, the

(57:55):
Plaid Institute can't exist without donations.Thing. Certainly, we are nonprofit and
we welcome any contribution from Nebraskans acrossthe state, and you can certainly go
to our website at platinsuit dot organd have that opportunity to donate. We've
got donors from Scott's Bluff, Omaha, and that's how we have the resources

(58:15):
to do what we do. Thesecond thing is we need as much many
taxpayers and insistents across the state engagedin public policy. So there's two things
that you can do there. Numberone, contact your state senator and your
policymakers, even on the local level. Attend these truth and Taxation hearings to
engage your elect officials and let themknow that you have expectations that they stop

(58:37):
their spending and lower your property taxes. The other thing is I have a
weekly email Dave. About twenty thousandsubscribers get it every Wednesday. You can
go to our website at platins throughdot org. It's about a ninety second
read each week. So it's platInstitute dot org, dot com dot dot
org. And if you're interested inlearning more about the policies that are going

(58:58):
to grow the state and more aboutour mission, which is to eliminate the
barriers to growth and opportunity in Nebraska, then hop on our website. We
get about two hundred thousand unique khitson our website post a lot of great
things, but my weekly email isa great way to stay engaged motivating Nebraskans.

(59:19):
Peter, how are we going tomotivate Nebraskans do care about this next
election? Come on, man,I thought you're going to call me out
for not being motivated. I knowyou're motivated. I think what you were
saying was right, though. Imean, we literally it's all about awareness
and I know that's a super tiredword and I hate that word for most
things, But like you were sayingabout marketing, the tax policies that need

(59:44):
to happen. People aren't going toknow about them unless they know about them,
and people like the planets PR Yeah, I mean it's all PR.
Plant Institute is doing its darnedest tohelp the government and the legislatures know what
they should do. But we needto help the public people know who to
put in the legislatures, who canbe influenced by Well, I come back
to the governor. I'd love tosee the governor build a brand the Nebraska

(01:00:07):
Transformation Act or something, and Ihad five key points like you talked about,
and uh, they get out andjust sell the daylights out of it.
You put bumper stickers on, youknow, I mean, you really
market this thing. So it's beenamazing watching the growth and the activity in
the in these truth and Taxation hearings. People want to be engaged, they
want to learn more, and they'refrustrated. Well, what I want you

(01:00:30):
to do is tell me when Ineed to tell. I will the public
that this is going on. Giveme the current you know, updated events
and when they're happening and that sortof stuff, and we'll make sure we
let everybody know people care about whathits their pocketbooks because they may not care
about other stuff that people trying toraise awareness for. But if you let
them know and educate them on what'shappening with their money, they're going to

(01:00:50):
care. All right, Jim,thanks for being flaid Institute dot org.
All right, we'll be right back. Okay, So we've got to launch
into this weekend. We do,and I wanted to. I want to
come back to a little bit ofnews. In a recent press conference,
President Biden has confirmed that rather thangoing to the trouble of building another temporary
pier to provide humanitarian aid to Hamas, he will simply instruct the US military

(01:01:17):
to dump three hundred and twenty milliontaxpayer dollars into the ocean just off the
coast of Gaza. That would bemore direct. Betrun wouldn't beat around the
bush as much. So this isa good Babylon Bee. This is a
good that says you know that pierwe built in Mexico, Jack Biden asked,

(01:01:37):
addressing a pat crowded journalist, Thistime we'll build it back better by
just throwing it all into the river. Oh, he couldn't even I don't
even know if you have a problemfiguring out whether you're for this plan or
against it, then you ain't Palestinian. If you don't get this, you

(01:02:01):
ain't Palestinian. So foreign policy analystshave hailed the plan as a time saving
four D chess move that will provemuch more efficient and just as effective as
the original peer Real talk though,So he made a peer to the beachhead
of some gaza. Yeah, theybuilt a temporary peer to be able to

(01:02:22):
offload food to the people in gaza, and the whole thing sunk. And
he spent three D and twenty milliondollars on a peer on a peer.
This. Oh my goodness. Thefact that I haven't heard about this is
hilarious to me. That the factthat they're somehow covering this all up from
the general public. I don't knowabout you, but this appears to be

(01:02:44):
a very terrible investment. I thinkthat is the definition of diminishing returns right
there. That is that is itappears it appears yeah peer, Okay,
Yeah. Other headline they have istwelve jurors unanimously vote to ensure Trump reelection.

(01:03:09):
Yes, I'm saying, man,huh, so that's what I'm saying.
I think this is gonna backfire soterribly on Alvin Bragg. Well,
when he raises fifty three million,Yeah, in no time, in twenty
four hour period, forty eight hourperiod. Unbelievable. I guess the question
is is how do you spend thatmoney to help? I think I think

(01:03:30):
one thing he needs to make surehe does is just keep as cool.
When he did that first debate withBiden, he was just so outraged and
ticked off that he just he lostthe debate by being out of control emotionally.
That's going to be interesting to watchin these so called next debates,
if they happen supposedly they're supposed tohappen this summer, very interesting to watch.

(01:03:53):
I cannot imagine a way that Bidencomes off coherent. Hey, a
great weekend.
Advertise With Us

Popular Podcasts

Dateline NBC
Who Killed JFK?

Who Killed JFK?

Who Killed JFK? For 60 years, we are still asking that question. In commemoration of the 60th anniversary of President John F. Kennedy's tragic assassination, legendary filmmaker Rob Reiner teams up with award-winning journalist Soledad O’Brien to tell the history of America’s greatest murder mystery. They interview CIA officials, medical experts, Pulitzer-prize winning journalists, eyewitnesses and a former Secret Service agent who, in 2023, came forward with groundbreaking new evidence. They dig deep into the layers of the 60-year-old question ‘Who Killed JFK?’, how that question has shaped America, and why it matters that we’re still asking it today.

Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang

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.

Music, radio and podcasts, all free. Listen online or download the iHeart App.

Connect

© 2024 iHeartMedia, Inc.