In this episode, Senator Ron Johnson discusses the One Big, Beautiful Bill, focusing on the implications of government spending, deficits, and Medicaid expansion. He emphasizes the need for fiscal responsibility and the challenges faced in communicating these issues to the public, especially in the context of upcoming midterm elections. The conversation also touches on the role of media in shaping public perception and the importance of addressing government inefficiencies. The Tudor Dixon Podcast is part of the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Podcast Network. Find more at TudorDixonPodcast.com
Watch The Tudor Dixon Podcast on RUMBLE
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Welcome to the Tutor Dixon Podcast.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
I am pleased to say that we have the United
States Senator for Wisconsin back here, Senator Ron Johnson.
Speaker 1 (00:09):
Thank you so much for joining me.
Speaker 3 (00:11):
I hope you're doing well.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
I am so you have had quite a busy last
few weeks going through the one big, beautiful bill, and
I wanted to talk to you about it because I
know you have been fighting against some of the things
in the bill, and you say that you believe you'll
have another bite at the apple. So I wanted to
go through exactly what that means and what the American
people would like to know from the inside from you.
Speaker 4 (00:34):
It's not so much about what's in the bill. It's
much more about what wasn't in the bill. I mean,
the major components of the bill I absolutely agreed with.
We had to prevent a massive automatic tax increase avoid default.
Speaker 3 (00:48):
Again.
Speaker 4 (00:48):
The President took over for you know, with all these
messes left behind by the Democrats, the open borders, so
we needed border funding, raging loards, and then of course
and we need defense funding. But then the fact that
Biden and Democrats in their four years in office, they
averaged defice a one point nine trillion dollars, and to
put that in perspective, the seven years prior to COVID
(01:10):
we averaged defice of six hundred and sixty billion, and
still way too high. But you know, any rational human being,
any responsible president and members of Congress, would have returned
to a reasonable pre pandemic level spending once employment returned
to normal and the economy is roaring back. But that's
how Democrats did. Instead, they sparked forty your high inflation
and again, just establish this spending level and this deficit
(01:33):
levels is the new baseline. And so, starting with my
column in January first in the Wall Street Journal, I
started proposing returning to a reasonable pre pandemic level spending.
I laid out three different options would range somew between
five point five and six point five trillion dollars just
by using actual total expenditures, total lot lays from Clinton, Obama,
(01:54):
and Trump, plussing them up, plussing them up for inflation
and population growth, exempting security, Medicaid or sociecurity Medicare, and interests.
Speaker 3 (02:03):
Spend what you need to spend.
Speaker 4 (02:04):
That's to end up with five point five versus six
point five versus the over seven tillion dollars will spend
this year and probably approach to about seven point three
trillion dollars next year. So again, what I was hoping
is that by laying out those facts, laying out how
eminently reasonable you can go back to again. I don't
think Clinton spent too little or Obama or Trump twenty nineteen.
(02:25):
Just go back to those actual hallways again plus jup
for inflation, population growth. That would have been a reasonable baseline.
In business, this is isd been a easy tutor, right.
I would have gone to my managers and go, hey,
you guys, okay, I said, you can increase your budgets
based on inflation and the number of customers you serve.
But you're twenty three percent higher, you're forty percent higher,
you're ninety percent higher.
Speaker 3 (02:45):
Get it back in line.
Speaker 4 (02:46):
Would have been about a five minute conversation, or would
have fire them. Unfortunately, it's not that easy in government.
Speaker 2 (02:52):
And that's where I think people don't understand. You have
a lot of minds coming together. You have people who
want things for their state. What is that negotiation process like?
Because obviously you were on the fence, someone talked to
you and said, no, you've got to vote.
Speaker 1 (03:07):
How did they get you across the line.
Speaker 4 (03:10):
Well, again I always I always wanted to be a
yes because I didn't Again, I didn't want to increase
taxes to anybody, and that was the major component of
that bill.
Speaker 3 (03:19):
So I fought hard.
Speaker 4 (03:20):
To, for example, repeal the most damaging part of Obamacare.
Speaker 3 (03:26):
And Rick Scott had a great idea.
Speaker 4 (03:27):
Wasn't including the base bill, but it wouldn't have cossed
anybody the insurance. He just said, at some point in
the future, and there are optional dates with different scores,
you just stop and rolling single working age of able bodied,
childless adults in Obamacare, in the Medicaid expansion was what
they call it. The reason you wanted to stop doing
(03:49):
that is for normal medicaid, you know, designed for the
vulnerable disabled children.
Speaker 3 (03:55):
For every dollar estate puts into.
Speaker 4 (03:56):
That Medicaid, the federal government kicks in on average about
a dollars three three. But the medicaid expansion of the
Obamacare a portion that Democrats want to turn a bombcare
into single payer system.
Speaker 3 (04:07):
So the incentivize the states.
Speaker 4 (04:08):
For every dollar they spend on a single adult, we
kick in nine bucks. That has led to all kinds
of what I would consider legalize fraud, the stam, the
money laundering, provider taxes, provider fees, that's not healthcare, but
state's assess it on providers. They allow providers to charge
a lot more for Medicaid services than they do Medicare.
Speaker 2 (04:29):
I just saw this video last night of a man
who in California called his insurance company and said, Hey,
you didn't realize we had insurance. Our bill was six
hundred dollars. What is the bill now? And they said, oh,
the six hundred dollars is what people get if they
have a discount because they don't have insurance. Your bill
is going to be thirteen hundred dollars. And he was like,
wait a minute, what are you talking about.
Speaker 1 (04:51):
I pay more.
Speaker 2 (04:52):
I'm punished because I pay a premium every month and
I do have insurance. And I think that this is
an area where really a Democrats have not been pushed
back on here, and they have a really good party
line where they come out and they say, oh, these
poor people who have kids that are sick are going
to be taken off of health care.
Speaker 1 (05:10):
But it's not that.
Speaker 2 (05:12):
Why is it so hard to get the message across
that there is fraud, that there are people that are
taking from the system, and it's actually hurting the family
with the sick child because they're taking from a system
that it can only be so big.
Speaker 4 (05:25):
Well, no offense to the house, but the way they
structured their one point five trillion, they just kind of
pulled that number out of the air.
Speaker 3 (05:30):
Sounds like a lot. It's really not me in the moment.
Speaker 4 (05:32):
But then they assigned more than half of that cross
reduction to the E and c CO. They can only
touch Medicaid and so they weren't prepared for that. And
so immediately democrats are I say, oh, they're going to
cut your Medicaid and they're going to remove a disabled
children from their roles. And nothing could have been further
from the truth. But we just weren't prepared for it.
So we haven't explained this the way we really really
(05:55):
need to explain it. There's a great article came out
late in the process. A father of a seven year
old severely autistic child. God bless the family. They're taking
care of this kid at home. They wanted home healthcare,
but they're on a tenure waiting list because they're crowded
out by.
Speaker 3 (06:09):
The single working age adult.
Speaker 4 (06:12):
Because for example, states would rather service that person because
they're getting nine bucks for every one dollar they put
in providers. This is people need to understand this. So
for the exact same service, if you're in Medicare, that
would be one rate, but we're finding providers are getting
two or three times the rate for the same service
for a single working age adult under Medicaid. Again, another distortion.
(06:36):
So that's what we were trying to fix. Before we ever
came up with the number, before we ever assigned anything
for a committee, we should have been saying, Okay, here
are the goals, return to a reasonbook, pre pandemic alble spending,
and Senator Johnson has laid out different options, and.
Speaker 3 (06:50):
We really need to fix.
Speaker 4 (06:52):
The most damaging parts of Obamacare on Medicaid so that
disabled children aren't denied care, that we're not crowding out
disabled children, we're not spending money and making that a
program less sustainable. Again, we should have started that way,
but that's not how we did it.
Speaker 2 (07:10):
It's really hard for the American people to understand, and
I think that those of us in the media are
afraid that once we hit the midterms, this talking point
is going to take off and they're going to say, oh,
they'd rob these poor families. The Republicans are robbing these
poor families of healthcare. And you're in a swing state,
you know, I'm in Michigan. Gretchen Whitmer has already been
going after John James, going after Tom Barrett, going after
(07:33):
Bill Heisinger and saying they voted to take healthcare away
from kids.
Speaker 1 (07:38):
That is what they're going to keep saying.
Speaker 2 (07:40):
I feel like we need like a Preger You video
on this or something that we play everywhere, because I
think it's hard to understand.
Speaker 4 (07:46):
Well, they always say the best defense is good offense,
and we had no offense. It's it's just a sad fact.
That's where we're at.
Speaker 1 (07:52):
So, but how do we have an offense? Going into
the election?
Speaker 4 (07:56):
They're all back on their heels as a result. We're
already pregnant with this, right, It's like, okay, we've already
done it. They are going to tell the lies about it.
So why didn't we do what Rick Scott proposed, which
is just stop adding new enrollies to Medicaid.
Speaker 3 (08:09):
Expansion end it.
Speaker 4 (08:11):
That would have saved us like literally more than a
half a trillion dollars, But we couldn't get the votes
of the Senate didn't even have enough votes to bring
it up as an amendment, and of course leadership god Asthley,
President Trump did not want include into the base bill.
Speaker 3 (08:26):
And that was a huge disappointment to me.
Speaker 2 (08:28):
So you're saying, not enroll new people, but the old
people wouldn't be kicked off.
Speaker 1 (08:32):
But now the people okay, and by the.
Speaker 4 (08:35):
Way, states, why did offer medicaid to single adults? Fine,
but you're going to get reimbursed at the same rate
as we reimbursed for a disabled child.
Speaker 3 (08:44):
I mean, is that reasonable? Yes, But I don't think
this is that hard to explain.
Speaker 4 (08:48):
We never even tried to explain it, you know, once
it got in the Senates court, I tried to explain it,
but all the attention was on the House and they
were just, you know, kind of backed into the corner
taking the blows.
Speaker 3 (09:00):
Again. We can't keep doing that.
Speaker 4 (09:01):
So I guess what I'm hoping tutors will happen is
a few months down the road when people realize, oh,
my be disabled child, she sales medicaid.
Speaker 3 (09:10):
Oh the Democrats were lying. Now that's a big hope that.
Speaker 4 (09:14):
The Democrats or the media would actually cover that way,
but that will be the reality. Nobody's going to lose
Medicaid unless there's a work requirement. Now in a single
age or a single working age adult gets a job,
that's a good thing.
Speaker 2 (09:27):
So this president has been unique in the way that
he informs the public what he's doing, because he has
taken ads out on TV and said, here's what we're
doing with the border, here's what we're doing with security.
There's been a different way of informing the public because
of exactly what you're saying. The media is not going
to be friendly to Republicans. The media is certainly not
(09:48):
going to be friendly to President Trump. Do you think
that come midterms there's going to have to be an
explanation of what's happening with Medicare and Medicaid.
Speaker 4 (09:58):
There's going to have to be and again hoping we
will get a second by the Apple so that we
can really.
Speaker 1 (10:03):
What do you mean by that?
Speaker 4 (10:04):
Another reconciliation bill that is that will allow for example,
you know, one of the reason I voted yes is
because we're going to set up this call it, you know,
budget Efficiency Review Panel or whatever you want to call it,
but where we're going to set up a house Senate
and Executive Branch effort to go line by line, program
(10:25):
by program through the entire federal budget. Except for social
creating Medicare we won't touch, we won't examine those, but
go through and expose it very doze like from a
standpoint of you can't defend this. And again, when you've
gone from four point four trillion dollars in twenty nineteen
to over seven trillion dollars this year fifty eight percent increase,
and have twenty six hundred programs in the federal government,
(10:47):
did you know that twenty six hundred. I've got to
believe there are hundreds of billions of dollars and hundreds
of programs that if you just eliminate them, nobody would know,
Nobody who'd notice except for the grifters who are sucking
on the waist froud abuse in pork, and of course
the news media, who are the communication all over the
Democrat Party. They catch one of it, they'll blow it
(11:08):
into some story that's just not true.
Speaker 1 (11:11):
Let's take a quick commercial break. We'll continue next on
a Tutor Dixon podcast.
Speaker 2 (11:18):
So you have been sort of told there's an opportunity
for this second bite, and the part of the reason
that you voted for this is that you've made the
comment I.
Speaker 1 (11:27):
Want to be involved, highly involved in that process.
Speaker 2 (11:30):
And I think that's something that I had somebody say
to me the other day, Gosh, our senators are never working,
And I said, really, because I believe that they were
there all night, every night, all of last week. And
then I saw our congressman right up until the holiday
spending all night negotiating. So I really take exception to that.
(11:50):
But I think that there is there this perception that
it's like, Oh, we're all just hanging out and then
we vote and we leave you. I want you to
talk about what it means to be highly involved in
the process.
Speaker 1 (12:02):
You just went through the discussions that.
Speaker 2 (12:04):
You'll have, But tell us when you say that, what
kinds of work is it behind the scenes too? And
can you negotiate it all with Democrats on this stuff?
Is there any reasonable Democrat left in Washington DC?
Speaker 3 (12:19):
Now?
Speaker 4 (12:19):
When it comes reducing spending, we'll get no help whatsoever.
I mean, they're complaining about the deskt now, but they're
the ones that in four years the average desk at
one point nine trillion. W again, prior the pandemic the
average was six hundred and sixty billion. So, by the way,
when they had the similar situation, they were using budget reconciliation,
they could have increased taxes on anybody.
Speaker 3 (12:38):
They didn't.
Speaker 4 (12:38):
They could have repealed the Tax Cutting Jobs Act. All
we did is we just extended it. We didn't cut taxes,
you know, we didn't. You know, obviously the promises of
President Trump made and a few other tax credits, which
honestly I would have done, but nobody wanted to increase taxes,
including Democrats. So again no, there are no Democrats to
help us out there. But specifically in terms of what
(12:58):
I did with budget reconcilation, it really started over the
holidays Christmas holidays where I came up with the concept
of a pre pandemic level spending. Did my research, came
up with Clinton in ninety eight, Obama twenty fourteen, Trump
twenty nineteen, laid out those options, wrote a.
Speaker 3 (13:14):
Column in the Wall Street Journal.
Speaker 4 (13:16):
They published it that gained that traction, followed up with
two other columns, one proposing a bunch of review panel,
and then finally I wrote I wrote it myself, a
thirty page report laying out all the options in terms
of all the scenarios of growth and spending reductions. I mean,
what it's going to take to ballast a budget and
(13:38):
economic growth just won't do it.
Speaker 3 (13:39):
I mean, you can have a three percent growth and
that kind of flattens the curve, but.
Speaker 4 (13:42):
It literally would take about a three percent average growth,
which we haven't had since the last century. And we've
been averaging about two one percent two point two one
percent since the year two thousand and about a fifteen
percent reduction in spending, and nobody's even coming close to,
by the way, that would be right in the midpoint
of my five point five to six point five trillion
dollar pre pandemic baseline.
Speaker 3 (14:04):
So it's very doable. Again, just go back to where
did it all go?
Speaker 1 (14:08):
I mean, I don't understand.
Speaker 2 (14:09):
I get that we had to have increased spending during
the pandemic.
Speaker 1 (14:13):
There were programs that went into place.
Speaker 2 (14:15):
Why why didn't those all just disappear now that we
were back to did.
Speaker 4 (14:19):
But Democrats won the presidency the House of the Senate,
and they used budget reconciliation to pass massive you know,
they did a COVID relief, but then they did the
Inflation Reduction Act, which was or wellly named laying all
these and as you task credits and just all new
spending programs that against Once Ronald Reagan say that the
(14:40):
closest thing to eternal life on earth is the government
program So again government rattless in one direction. We get
no help from the media in terms of this is
why we're trying to reduce spending to a reasonable pre
pandemic level. I mean what the media should have been
doing is which Austin is time about, was eminently reasonable.
Speaker 3 (14:59):
WED spent too little under Clinton.
Speaker 4 (15:01):
He's taking the one point seven and increasing it to
five point five based on population growth, inflation, leaving associalcating medicaid,
our Medicare, and.
Speaker 3 (15:09):
Interest to law. I mean, this is a reasonable proposal.
Why aren't you on board? Mister Democrats?
Speaker 1 (15:13):
Senator we ever one of those guys. Where is Clinton?
Speaker 2 (15:17):
I mean, he wants to come out and occasionally talk
to people when they're running for office, But where is
the leadership in the Democrat party saying we cannot continue spending?
And is this a situation where the American people are
now just used to it? So it's okay because nobody
is outside of you.
Speaker 1 (15:33):
There are very.
Speaker 2 (15:34):
Few people that are pulling the alarm and saying this
is going to be catastrophic.
Speaker 4 (15:40):
Well, I can tell you my thirty page report was
largely ignored by my colleagues in the American public.
Speaker 3 (15:45):
Okay, and again I laid on all the options.
Speaker 4 (15:47):
I could tell he's ignored because I was hearing questions
being posed inside the conference going, well, if you would
have read my report, you already have the answer on
that one. So I think in Washington, DC, people really
don't like numbers. I mean, this is a budget process.
Were well, the only thing you ever heard was one
point five trillion and sounds like a lot. But compared
to the two point one trillion we increase in just
one year versus one point five trillion over ten years,
(16:11):
I mean, the spending increases order magnitude worse than the
spending reduction. Or we heard the only numbers account to
eighteen and fifty one, you know, the number of most
people had to get and in the end that those
were the relevant numbers.
Speaker 2 (16:27):
So how does this all play out in states like Wisconsin?
I mean, I know in Michigan, I just told you
what's going to happen in Michigan. I think that makes
it challenging come the midterm, because, like you said, the
information didn't go out ahead of time to make sure
that the American public knew.
Speaker 1 (16:42):
And I think you know, when we talk about.
Speaker 2 (16:44):
Things like this, it's not even a situation where you
have to go into red states and have these conversations.
But there are some key swing states that need to
have some offense because we are going to go into
a very tough race in Michigan, and I spect you'll
have very tough races in Wisconsin. So what do you
see playing how do you see this playing out in
(17:04):
twenty six Well.
Speaker 4 (17:06):
First of all, Democrats can have to find somebody that
got kicked off.
Speaker 3 (17:08):
The medicaid rules, and they won't be able to that.
Speaker 4 (17:11):
They'll be able to maybe find a single adult who
had to get a job and now is getting insurance
to their job. That's actually a good thing, that's a
good news story. So again, hopefully that the lives would
be revealed. Yeah, we certainly should promote the fact that
we didn't increase your taxes. You know, had it not
been for us, your taxes would have gone up by
you know, however many dollars or what percent we had
(17:33):
to fund border security because by an open of the border.
Speaker 3 (17:37):
So again, I.
Speaker 4 (17:38):
Think the American people are highly appreciative of the things
that they know only President Trump would do. So he's
doing things that had to be done that only he
would do, and I think an awful lot of Americans
do appreciate that, which is why his approval ratings still
remain pretty high.
Speaker 2 (17:52):
Well, that's what I was going to say. His approval
rating is high. And then over fourth of July we're
hearing all of these conversations about patriotism that to me
was a stunning number. When you see patriotism for Republicans
at ninety percent or higher and patriotism for Democrats at
twenty five percent or lower, that to me, the Democrats
(18:12):
have a bigger problem than they're willing to admit, I
think so.
Speaker 4 (18:15):
And just the the ideological policies they've been pushing, I
mean boys and girls, locker rooms and bathrooms and competing
in sports and putting our girls and women at danger again,
just the open borders, I mean, just all this insane
policy that they support that the American people don't. So no,
they're they're they're pretty well captured by the radical leftists
(18:37):
and their ranks, and that's going to be difficult for
them to overcome. Again, They've got the news media on
their side, which is an enormous advantage. But now we've
got alternate media, we've got podcasters, and more and more
people are getting the news this way, less and less
through the mainstream media. Is you know, the time shifting
from standpoint of what messages and what reality is getting
out there.
Speaker 2 (18:58):
I think those of us in alternative meeting are watching
this and we're kind of balancing what the mainstream media
is doing with the truth and getting the information out there.
But also there is a concern about the midterms. There's
a lot of people out there that are saying, oh,
they always go to the other side. I think that
this is a case where we have a real opportunity
(19:19):
to stop that from happening. Because the president is so
popular and because his policies have been so popular, it's
hard to argue against keeping the country safe and.
Speaker 1 (19:28):
Closing the border.
Speaker 2 (19:29):
There are really no countries that allowed this to happen
at the rate that it's happened, And even in the
European countries where we see mass immigration, they are now
we see warnings all the time from them saying don't
do this, it actually didn't work out so well. But
there is still a past that we have to deal
with with Joe Biden, and there's been discussions of investigating
(19:49):
what happened the auto pen all of the decisions that
were made that seem to have not been made by him.
What do you make about his doctor pleading the fifth
and saying that he won't come and speak to a
congressional hearing about about President Biden when he was in office.
To me, that's very scary to think that he's not
willing to even come and testify to what he told
(20:12):
the public back then.
Speaker 3 (20:13):
Well, I think it speaks vioence.
Speaker 4 (20:15):
But I think you also have to respect the doctor
patient relationship as well, So he'd probably be the last
person I would be doing compulsory measures to force some testify.
But we are requesting and we've done our first interview
with people, these cabinet members, that type of thing.
Speaker 3 (20:32):
So we're doing a serious investigation in this. We're not holding.
Speaker 4 (20:35):
Here is We're just doing interviews to see what we
can find out. I think the American people have a
right to know this is this is serious business. I
think we also need to have future cabinet members and
future vice presidents understanding this. If something is happening here,
they also be held accountable. They have a constitution. They
swore on oath the Constitution at the twenty fifth Amendment
for a reason, and if it needs to be invoked,
(20:57):
they have the responsibility to invoke it.
Speaker 2 (20:59):
Well, it's interesting that she was willing to come out
and take his position when the rest of the party said, yes,
it's okay now for you to come out and step in.
But at the time when it was really critical and
he was making these decisions, she stayed quiet. And I'm
talking about Vice President Harris. Going into twenty eight, we're
going to see these same characters coming back up. I
(21:20):
think that what you're talking about with this massive spending.
To me, the scariest part is we talked about Clinton,
we talked about Obama. We don't even really talk about
Biden because nobody believes that he was making these decisions.
Do you think that the party itself, whoever was making
decisions in the Democrat Party while Joe Biden was in office,
was just completely irresponsible when it came to spending, or
(21:43):
do you think it was.
Speaker 1 (21:44):
True grifting and there was true corruption behind the scenes.
Speaker 3 (21:49):
I think it's a combination.
Speaker 4 (21:50):
But no, let's face the Democrats are the party big government,
and they'll do anything they can to grow it because
they realize as government grows, their power increases, the freedom
of all all of us recedes. That's that's what they want.
I mean, I don't understand it. I think that the
essential ingredient to America's freedom. It's what you know we've
(22:11):
all used to dream, inspired build and creates this mind
level country. It's about freedom and the last thing we
got to be doing is willingly giving away our freedom.
But that's what far too many of Americans are doing.
But no, Democrats love government. They love to spend. They
could care less, and you know they're just whistling by
the graveyard.
Speaker 3 (22:28):
We've been getting away with it for years.
Speaker 4 (22:31):
I would have thought we would have a debt bubble
burst prior to this. By the way, we've seen a
chronic debt crisis now for decades. It's called the devaluation
of the dollar, you know, with along those pre pandemic
clubs of spending. I also just calculated what a dollar
was worth in nineteen ninety eight. It's not with fifty
one cents a twenty fourteen dollars worth seventy four cents
and twenty nineteen dollars worth eighty cents. That's that's the
(22:53):
silent tax of inflation, the devaluation of the dollar, the
robbing of anybody with an asset. That's what big government
has done. That's what Desk is spending is done. Literally,
it's immoral. It's what we're doing to mill income Americans
and particularly our young people.
Speaker 1 (23:09):
That has been our frustration on the state level.
Speaker 2 (23:11):
I think what you said just now is really that's
the ad that people need to hear. The bigger the
government gets, who's paying for that? We're paying for that
every time there's a new program. And I mean I
look over at LA and San Francisco and their homelessness
programs are in the hundreds of millions of dollars, and
yet homelessness keeps growing. If you grow in a portion
(23:35):
of government and they don't, they don't actually come up
with a solution, then perhaps you need to get rid
of that arm of government. But once it's there, it's
so hard to get rid of. And I just appreciate
that you are staying. I know that you had originally
said that you would only serve two terms, and it
sounds like you will run again.
Speaker 1 (23:52):
And I think it's so crucial.
Speaker 2 (23:53):
To have people who are thinking about these things and
thinking about the future and thinking about reducing the power
that government has, and it's rare.
Speaker 1 (24:01):
So I appreciate what you do in Washington for us.
Speaker 4 (24:04):
Well, I appreciate that, and I already did run for
my third term. Hopefully I can get this all fixed.
Speaker 1 (24:08):
And go the fourth term.
Speaker 3 (24:11):
Let's get it all fixed.
Speaker 4 (24:13):
Let's put this on a this country and path of
the fiscal sustainability. That's that's my goal here over the
next three and a half years.
Speaker 1 (24:19):
Well, we appreciate it.
Speaker 2 (24:20):
Like I said, I hear sometimes people saying, oh, they're
not working hard enough, and I'm out there as your
champion saying, no, you guys don't understand.
Speaker 1 (24:27):
This is not a an eight hour a day job.
Speaker 2 (24:30):
They're working twenty four hours when they're there, and when
they're back home, they're out there campaigning and talking to
people and taking meetings with folks on the ground. It
is a twenty four hour job. And Senator Ron Johnson,
we appreciate.
Speaker 3 (24:41):
You well, thanks for having on every day.
Speaker 2 (24:43):
Thanks you too, and thank you all for joining us
on the Tutor Dixon Podcast. You can get this podcast
wherever you get your podcasts, or you can watch it
on Rumble and YouTube at tutor Dixon.
Speaker 1 (24:53):
Join us next time and have a blessing.
Welcome to the Tutor Dixon Podcast.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
I am pleased to say that we have the United
States Senator for Wisconsin back here, Senator Ron Johnson.
Speaker 1 (00:09):
Thank you so much for joining me.
Speaker 3 (00:11):
I hope you're doing well.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
I am so you have had quite a busy last
few weeks going through the one big, beautiful bill, and
I wanted to talk to you about it because I
know you have been fighting against some of the things
in the bill, and you say that you believe you'll
have another bite at the apple. So I wanted to
go through exactly what that means and what the American
people would like to know from the inside from you.
Speaker 4 (00:34):
It's not so much about what's in the bill. It's
much more about what wasn't in the bill. I mean,
the major components of the bill I absolutely agreed with.
We had to prevent a massive automatic tax increase avoid default.
Speaker 3 (00:48):
Again.
Speaker 4 (00:48):
The President took over for you know, with all these
messes left behind by the Democrats, the open borders, so
we needed border funding, raging loards, and then of course
and we need defense funding. But then the fact that
Biden and Democrats in their four years in office, they
averaged defice a one point nine trillion dollars, and to
put that in perspective, the seven years prior to COVID
(01:10):
we averaged defice of six hundred and sixty billion, and
still way too high. But you know, any rational human being,
any responsible president and members of Congress, would have returned
to a reasonable pre pandemic level spending once employment returned
to normal and the economy is roaring back. But that's
how Democrats did. Instead, they sparked forty your high inflation
and again, just establish this spending level and this deficit
(01:33):
levels is the new baseline. And so, starting with my
column in January first in the Wall Street Journal, I
started proposing returning to a reasonable pre pandemic level spending.
I laid out three different options would range somew between
five point five and six point five trillion dollars just
by using actual total expenditures, total lot lays from Clinton, Obama,
(01:54):
and Trump, plussing them up, plussing them up for inflation
and population growth, exempting security, Medicaid or sociecurity Medicare, and interests.
Speaker 3 (02:03):
Spend what you need to spend.
Speaker 4 (02:04):
That's to end up with five point five versus six
point five versus the over seven tillion dollars will spend
this year and probably approach to about seven point three
trillion dollars next year. So again, what I was hoping
is that by laying out those facts, laying out how
eminently reasonable you can go back to again. I don't
think Clinton spent too little or Obama or Trump twenty nineteen.
(02:25):
Just go back to those actual hallways again plus jup
for inflation, population growth. That would have been a reasonable baseline.
In business, this is isd been a easy tutor, right.
I would have gone to my managers and go, hey,
you guys, okay, I said, you can increase your budgets
based on inflation and the number of customers you serve.
But you're twenty three percent higher, you're forty percent higher,
you're ninety percent higher.
Speaker 3 (02:45):
Get it back in line.
Speaker 4 (02:46):
Would have been about a five minute conversation, or would
have fire them. Unfortunately, it's not that easy in government.
Speaker 2 (02:52):
And that's where I think people don't understand. You have
a lot of minds coming together. You have people who
want things for their state. What is that negotiation process like?
Because obviously you were on the fence, someone talked to
you and said, no, you've got to vote.
Speaker 1 (03:07):
How did they get you across the line.
Speaker 4 (03:10):
Well, again I always I always wanted to be a
yes because I didn't Again, I didn't want to increase
taxes to anybody, and that was the major component of
that bill.
Speaker 3 (03:19):
So I fought hard.
Speaker 4 (03:20):
To, for example, repeal the most damaging part of Obamacare.
Speaker 3 (03:26):
And Rick Scott had a great idea.
Speaker 4 (03:27):
Wasn't including the base bill, but it wouldn't have cossed
anybody the insurance. He just said, at some point in
the future, and there are optional dates with different scores,
you just stop and rolling single working age of able bodied,
childless adults in Obamacare, in the Medicaid expansion was what
they call it. The reason you wanted to stop doing
(03:49):
that is for normal medicaid, you know, designed for the
vulnerable disabled children.
Speaker 3 (03:55):
For every dollar estate puts into.
Speaker 4 (03:56):
That Medicaid, the federal government kicks in on average about
a dollars three three. But the medicaid expansion of the
Obamacare a portion that Democrats want to turn a bombcare
into single payer system.
Speaker 3 (04:07):
So the incentivize the states.
Speaker 4 (04:08):
For every dollar they spend on a single adult, we
kick in nine bucks. That has led to all kinds
of what I would consider legalize fraud, the stam, the
money laundering, provider taxes, provider fees, that's not healthcare, but
state's assess it on providers. They allow providers to charge
a lot more for Medicaid services than they do Medicare.
Speaker 2 (04:29):
I just saw this video last night of a man
who in California called his insurance company and said, Hey,
you didn't realize we had insurance. Our bill was six
hundred dollars. What is the bill now? And they said, oh,
the six hundred dollars is what people get if they
have a discount because they don't have insurance. Your bill
is going to be thirteen hundred dollars. And he was like,
wait a minute, what are you talking about.
Speaker 1 (04:51):
I pay more.
Speaker 2 (04:52):
I'm punished because I pay a premium every month and
I do have insurance. And I think that this is
an area where really a Democrats have not been pushed
back on here, and they have a really good party
line where they come out and they say, oh, these
poor people who have kids that are sick are going
to be taken off of health care.
Speaker 1 (05:10):
But it's not that.
Speaker 2 (05:12):
Why is it so hard to get the message across
that there is fraud, that there are people that are
taking from the system, and it's actually hurting the family
with the sick child because they're taking from a system
that it can only be so big.
Speaker 4 (05:25):
Well, no offense to the house, but the way they
structured their one point five trillion, they just kind of
pulled that number out of the air.
Speaker 3 (05:30):
Sounds like a lot. It's really not me in the moment.
Speaker 4 (05:32):
But then they assigned more than half of that cross
reduction to the E and c CO. They can only
touch Medicaid and so they weren't prepared for that. And
so immediately democrats are I say, oh, they're going to
cut your Medicaid and they're going to remove a disabled
children from their roles. And nothing could have been further
from the truth. But we just weren't prepared for it.
So we haven't explained this the way we really really
(05:55):
need to explain it. There's a great article came out
late in the process. A father of a seven year
old severely autistic child. God bless the family. They're taking
care of this kid at home. They wanted home healthcare,
but they're on a tenure waiting list because they're crowded
out by.
Speaker 3 (06:09):
The single working age adult.
Speaker 4 (06:12):
Because for example, states would rather service that person because
they're getting nine bucks for every one dollar they put
in providers. This is people need to understand this. So
for the exact same service, if you're in Medicare, that
would be one rate, but we're finding providers are getting
two or three times the rate for the same service
for a single working age adult under Medicaid. Again, another distortion.
(06:36):
So that's what we were trying to fix. Before we ever
came up with the number, before we ever assigned anything
for a committee, we should have been saying, Okay, here
are the goals, return to a reasonbook, pre pandemic alble spending,
and Senator Johnson has laid out different options, and.
Speaker 3 (06:50):
We really need to fix.
Speaker 4 (06:52):
The most damaging parts of Obamacare on Medicaid so that
disabled children aren't denied care, that we're not crowding out
disabled children, we're not spending money and making that a
program less sustainable. Again, we should have started that way,
but that's not how we did it.
Speaker 2 (07:10):
It's really hard for the American people to understand, and
I think that those of us in the media are
afraid that once we hit the midterms, this talking point
is going to take off and they're going to say, oh,
they'd rob these poor families. The Republicans are robbing these
poor families of healthcare. And you're in a swing state,
you know, I'm in Michigan. Gretchen Whitmer has already been
going after John James, going after Tom Barrett, going after
(07:33):
Bill Heisinger and saying they voted to take healthcare away
from kids.
Speaker 1 (07:38):
That is what they're going to keep saying.
Speaker 2 (07:40):
I feel like we need like a Preger You video
on this or something that we play everywhere, because I
think it's hard to understand.
Speaker 4 (07:46):
Well, they always say the best defense is good offense,
and we had no offense. It's it's just a sad fact.
That's where we're at.
Speaker 1 (07:52):
So, but how do we have an offense? Going into
the election?
Speaker 4 (07:56):
They're all back on their heels as a result. We're
already pregnant with this, right, It's like, okay, we've already
done it. They are going to tell the lies about it.
So why didn't we do what Rick Scott proposed, which
is just stop adding new enrollies to Medicaid.
Speaker 3 (08:09):
Expansion end it.
Speaker 4 (08:11):
That would have saved us like literally more than a
half a trillion dollars, But we couldn't get the votes
of the Senate didn't even have enough votes to bring
it up as an amendment, and of course leadership god Asthley,
President Trump did not want include into the base bill.
Speaker 3 (08:26):
And that was a huge disappointment to me.
Speaker 2 (08:28):
So you're saying, not enroll new people, but the old
people wouldn't be kicked off.
Speaker 1 (08:32):
But now the people okay, and by the.
Speaker 4 (08:35):
Way, states, why did offer medicaid to single adults? Fine,
but you're going to get reimbursed at the same rate
as we reimbursed for a disabled child.
Speaker 3 (08:44):
I mean, is that reasonable? Yes, But I don't think
this is that hard to explain.
Speaker 4 (08:48):
We never even tried to explain it, you know, once
it got in the Senates court, I tried to explain it,
but all the attention was on the House and they
were just, you know, kind of backed into the corner
taking the blows.
Speaker 3 (09:00):
Again. We can't keep doing that.
Speaker 4 (09:01):
So I guess what I'm hoping tutors will happen is
a few months down the road when people realize, oh,
my be disabled child, she sales medicaid.
Speaker 3 (09:10):
Oh the Democrats were lying. Now that's a big hope that.
Speaker 4 (09:14):
The Democrats or the media would actually cover that way,
but that will be the reality. Nobody's going to lose
Medicaid unless there's a work requirement. Now in a single
age or a single working age adult gets a job,
that's a good thing.
Speaker 2 (09:27):
So this president has been unique in the way that
he informs the public what he's doing, because he has
taken ads out on TV and said, here's what we're
doing with the border, here's what we're doing with security.
There's been a different way of informing the public because
of exactly what you're saying. The media is not going
to be friendly to Republicans. The media is certainly not
(09:48):
going to be friendly to President Trump. Do you think
that come midterms there's going to have to be an
explanation of what's happening with Medicare and Medicaid.
Speaker 4 (09:58):
There's going to have to be and again hoping we
will get a second by the Apple so that we
can really.
Speaker 1 (10:03):
What do you mean by that?
Speaker 4 (10:04):
Another reconciliation bill that is that will allow for example,
you know, one of the reason I voted yes is
because we're going to set up this call it, you know,
budget Efficiency Review Panel or whatever you want to call it,
but where we're going to set up a house Senate
and Executive Branch effort to go line by line, program
(10:25):
by program through the entire federal budget. Except for social
creating Medicare we won't touch, we won't examine those, but
go through and expose it very doze like from a
standpoint of you can't defend this. And again, when you've
gone from four point four trillion dollars in twenty nineteen
to over seven trillion dollars this year fifty eight percent increase,
and have twenty six hundred programs in the federal government,
(10:47):
did you know that twenty six hundred. I've got to
believe there are hundreds of billions of dollars and hundreds
of programs that if you just eliminate them, nobody would know,
Nobody who'd notice except for the grifters who are sucking
on the waist froud abuse in pork, and of course
the news media, who are the communication all over the
Democrat Party. They catch one of it, they'll blow it
(11:08):
into some story that's just not true.
Speaker 1 (11:11):
Let's take a quick commercial break. We'll continue next on
a Tutor Dixon podcast.
Speaker 2 (11:18):
So you have been sort of told there's an opportunity
for this second bite, and the part of the reason
that you voted for this is that you've made the
comment I.
Speaker 1 (11:27):
Want to be involved, highly involved in that process.
Speaker 2 (11:30):
And I think that's something that I had somebody say
to me the other day, Gosh, our senators are never working,
And I said, really, because I believe that they were
there all night, every night, all of last week. And
then I saw our congressman right up until the holiday
spending all night negotiating. So I really take exception to that.
(11:50):
But I think that there is there this perception that
it's like, Oh, we're all just hanging out and then
we vote and we leave you. I want you to
talk about what it means to be highly involved in
the process.
Speaker 1 (12:02):
You just went through the discussions that.
Speaker 2 (12:04):
You'll have, But tell us when you say that, what
kinds of work is it behind the scenes too? And
can you negotiate it all with Democrats on this stuff?
Is there any reasonable Democrat left in Washington DC?
Speaker 3 (12:19):
Now?
Speaker 4 (12:19):
When it comes reducing spending, we'll get no help whatsoever.
I mean, they're complaining about the deskt now, but they're
the ones that in four years the average desk at
one point nine trillion. W again, prior the pandemic the
average was six hundred and sixty billion. So, by the way,
when they had the similar situation, they were using budget reconciliation,
they could have increased taxes on anybody.
Speaker 3 (12:38):
They didn't.
Speaker 4 (12:38):
They could have repealed the Tax Cutting Jobs Act. All
we did is we just extended it. We didn't cut taxes,
you know, we didn't. You know, obviously the promises of
President Trump made and a few other tax credits, which
honestly I would have done, but nobody wanted to increase taxes,
including Democrats. So again no, there are no Democrats to
help us out there. But specifically in terms of what
(12:58):
I did with budget reconcilation, it really started over the
holidays Christmas holidays where I came up with the concept
of a pre pandemic level spending. Did my research, came
up with Clinton in ninety eight, Obama twenty fourteen, Trump
twenty nineteen, laid out those options, wrote a.
Speaker 3 (13:14):
Column in the Wall Street Journal.
Speaker 4 (13:16):
They published it that gained that traction, followed up with
two other columns, one proposing a bunch of review panel,
and then finally I wrote I wrote it myself, a
thirty page report laying out all the options in terms
of all the scenarios of growth and spending reductions. I mean,
what it's going to take to ballast a budget and
(13:38):
economic growth just won't do it.
Speaker 3 (13:39):
I mean, you can have a three percent growth and
that kind of flattens the curve, but.
Speaker 4 (13:42):
It literally would take about a three percent average growth,
which we haven't had since the last century. And we've
been averaging about two one percent two point two one
percent since the year two thousand and about a fifteen
percent reduction in spending, and nobody's even coming close to,
by the way, that would be right in the midpoint
of my five point five to six point five trillion
dollar pre pandemic baseline.
Speaker 3 (14:04):
So it's very doable. Again, just go back to where
did it all go?
Speaker 1 (14:08):
I mean, I don't understand.
Speaker 2 (14:09):
I get that we had to have increased spending during
the pandemic.
Speaker 1 (14:13):
There were programs that went into place.
Speaker 2 (14:15):
Why why didn't those all just disappear now that we
were back to did.
Speaker 4 (14:19):
But Democrats won the presidency the House of the Senate,
and they used budget reconciliation to pass massive you know,
they did a COVID relief, but then they did the
Inflation Reduction Act, which was or wellly named laying all
these and as you task credits and just all new
spending programs that against Once Ronald Reagan say that the
(14:40):
closest thing to eternal life on earth is the government
program So again government rattless in one direction. We get
no help from the media in terms of this is
why we're trying to reduce spending to a reasonable pre
pandemic level. I mean what the media should have been
doing is which Austin is time about, was eminently reasonable.
Speaker 3 (14:59):
WED spent too little under Clinton.
Speaker 4 (15:01):
He's taking the one point seven and increasing it to
five point five based on population growth, inflation, leaving associalcating medicaid,
our Medicare, and.
Speaker 3 (15:09):
Interest to law. I mean, this is a reasonable proposal.
Why aren't you on board? Mister Democrats?
Speaker 1 (15:13):
Senator we ever one of those guys. Where is Clinton?
Speaker 2 (15:17):
I mean, he wants to come out and occasionally talk
to people when they're running for office, But where is
the leadership in the Democrat party saying we cannot continue spending?
And is this a situation where the American people are
now just used to it? So it's okay because nobody
is outside of you.
Speaker 1 (15:33):
There are very.
Speaker 2 (15:34):
Few people that are pulling the alarm and saying this
is going to be catastrophic.
Speaker 4 (15:40):
Well, I can tell you my thirty page report was
largely ignored by my colleagues in the American public.
Speaker 3 (15:45):
Okay, and again I laid on all the options.
Speaker 4 (15:47):
I could tell he's ignored because I was hearing questions
being posed inside the conference going, well, if you would
have read my report, you already have the answer on
that one. So I think in Washington, DC, people really
don't like numbers. I mean, this is a budget process.
Were well, the only thing you ever heard was one
point five trillion and sounds like a lot. But compared
to the two point one trillion we increase in just
one year versus one point five trillion over ten years,
(16:11):
I mean, the spending increases order magnitude worse than the
spending reduction. Or we heard the only numbers account to
eighteen and fifty one, you know, the number of most
people had to get and in the end that those
were the relevant numbers.
Speaker 2 (16:27):
So how does this all play out in states like Wisconsin?
I mean, I know in Michigan, I just told you
what's going to happen in Michigan. I think that makes
it challenging come the midterm, because, like you said, the
information didn't go out ahead of time to make sure
that the American public knew.
Speaker 1 (16:42):
And I think you know, when we talk about.
Speaker 2 (16:44):
Things like this, it's not even a situation where you
have to go into red states and have these conversations.
But there are some key swing states that need to
have some offense because we are going to go into
a very tough race in Michigan, and I spect you'll
have very tough races in Wisconsin. So what do you
see playing how do you see this playing out in
(17:04):
twenty six Well.
Speaker 4 (17:06):
First of all, Democrats can have to find somebody that
got kicked off.
Speaker 3 (17:08):
The medicaid rules, and they won't be able to that.
Speaker 4 (17:11):
They'll be able to maybe find a single adult who
had to get a job and now is getting insurance
to their job. That's actually a good thing, that's a
good news story. So again, hopefully that the lives would
be revealed. Yeah, we certainly should promote the fact that
we didn't increase your taxes. You know, had it not
been for us, your taxes would have gone up by
you know, however many dollars or what percent we had
(17:33):
to fund border security because by an open of the border.
Speaker 3 (17:37):
So again, I.
Speaker 4 (17:38):
Think the American people are highly appreciative of the things
that they know only President Trump would do. So he's
doing things that had to be done that only he
would do, and I think an awful lot of Americans
do appreciate that, which is why his approval ratings still
remain pretty high.
Speaker 2 (17:52):
Well, that's what I was going to say. His approval
rating is high. And then over fourth of July we're
hearing all of these conversations about patriotism that to me
was a stunning number. When you see patriotism for Republicans
at ninety percent or higher and patriotism for Democrats at
twenty five percent or lower, that to me, the Democrats
(18:12):
have a bigger problem than they're willing to admit, I
think so.
Speaker 4 (18:15):
And just the the ideological policies they've been pushing, I
mean boys and girls, locker rooms and bathrooms and competing
in sports and putting our girls and women at danger again,
just the open borders, I mean, just all this insane
policy that they support that the American people don't. So no,
they're they're they're pretty well captured by the radical leftists
(18:37):
and their ranks, and that's going to be difficult for
them to overcome. Again, They've got the news media on
their side, which is an enormous advantage. But now we've
got alternate media, we've got podcasters, and more and more
people are getting the news this way, less and less
through the mainstream media. Is you know, the time shifting
from standpoint of what messages and what reality is getting
out there.
Speaker 2 (18:58):
I think those of us in alternative meeting are watching
this and we're kind of balancing what the mainstream media
is doing with the truth and getting the information out there.
But also there is a concern about the midterms. There's
a lot of people out there that are saying, oh,
they always go to the other side. I think that
this is a case where we have a real opportunity
(19:19):
to stop that from happening. Because the president is so
popular and because his policies have been so popular, it's
hard to argue against keeping the country safe and.
Speaker 1 (19:28):
Closing the border.
Speaker 2 (19:29):
There are really no countries that allowed this to happen
at the rate that it's happened, And even in the
European countries where we see mass immigration, they are now
we see warnings all the time from them saying don't
do this, it actually didn't work out so well. But
there is still a past that we have to deal
with with Joe Biden, and there's been discussions of investigating
(19:49):
what happened the auto pen all of the decisions that
were made that seem to have not been made by him.
What do you make about his doctor pleading the fifth
and saying that he won't come and speak to a
congressional hearing about about President Biden when he was in office.
To me, that's very scary to think that he's not
willing to even come and testify to what he told
(20:12):
the public back then.
Speaker 3 (20:13):
Well, I think it speaks vioence.
Speaker 4 (20:15):
But I think you also have to respect the doctor
patient relationship as well, So he'd probably be the last
person I would be doing compulsory measures to force some testify.
But we are requesting and we've done our first interview
with people, these cabinet members, that type of thing.
Speaker 3 (20:32):
So we're doing a serious investigation in this. We're not holding.
Speaker 4 (20:35):
Here is We're just doing interviews to see what we
can find out. I think the American people have a
right to know this is this is serious business. I
think we also need to have future cabinet members and
future vice presidents understanding this. If something is happening here,
they also be held accountable. They have a constitution. They
swore on oath the Constitution at the twenty fifth Amendment
for a reason, and if it needs to be invoked,
(20:57):
they have the responsibility to invoke it.
Speaker 2 (20:59):
Well, it's interesting that she was willing to come out
and take his position when the rest of the party said, yes,
it's okay now for you to come out and step in.
But at the time when it was really critical and
he was making these decisions, she stayed quiet. And I'm
talking about Vice President Harris. Going into twenty eight, we're
going to see these same characters coming back up. I
(21:20):
think that what you're talking about with this massive spending.
To me, the scariest part is we talked about Clinton,
we talked about Obama. We don't even really talk about
Biden because nobody believes that he was making these decisions.
Do you think that the party itself, whoever was making
decisions in the Democrat Party while Joe Biden was in office,
was just completely irresponsible when it came to spending, or
(21:43):
do you think it was.
Speaker 1 (21:44):
True grifting and there was true corruption behind the scenes.
Speaker 3 (21:49):
I think it's a combination.
Speaker 4 (21:50):
But no, let's face the Democrats are the party big government,
and they'll do anything they can to grow it because
they realize as government grows, their power increases, the freedom
of all all of us recedes. That's that's what they want.
I mean, I don't understand it. I think that the
essential ingredient to America's freedom. It's what you know we've
(22:11):
all used to dream, inspired build and creates this mind
level country. It's about freedom and the last thing we
got to be doing is willingly giving away our freedom.
But that's what far too many of Americans are doing.
But no, Democrats love government. They love to spend. They
could care less, and you know they're just whistling by
the graveyard.
Speaker 3 (22:28):
We've been getting away with it for years.
Speaker 4 (22:31):
I would have thought we would have a debt bubble
burst prior to this. By the way, we've seen a
chronic debt crisis now for decades. It's called the devaluation
of the dollar, you know, with along those pre pandemic
clubs of spending. I also just calculated what a dollar
was worth in nineteen ninety eight. It's not with fifty
one cents a twenty fourteen dollars worth seventy four cents
and twenty nineteen dollars worth eighty cents. That's that's the
(22:53):
silent tax of inflation, the devaluation of the dollar, the
robbing of anybody with an asset. That's what big government
has done. That's what Desk is spending is done. Literally,
it's immoral. It's what we're doing to mill income Americans
and particularly our young people.
Speaker 1 (23:09):
That has been our frustration on the state level.
Speaker 2 (23:11):
I think what you said just now is really that's
the ad that people need to hear. The bigger the
government gets, who's paying for that? We're paying for that
every time there's a new program. And I mean I
look over at LA and San Francisco and their homelessness
programs are in the hundreds of millions of dollars, and
yet homelessness keeps growing. If you grow in a portion
(23:35):
of government and they don't, they don't actually come up
with a solution, then perhaps you need to get rid
of that arm of government. But once it's there, it's
so hard to get rid of. And I just appreciate
that you are staying. I know that you had originally
said that you would only serve two terms, and it
sounds like you will run again.
Speaker 1 (23:52):
And I think it's so crucial.
Speaker 2 (23:53):
To have people who are thinking about these things and
thinking about the future and thinking about reducing the power
that government has, and it's rare.
Speaker 1 (24:01):
So I appreciate what you do in Washington for us.
Speaker 4 (24:04):
Well, I appreciate that, and I already did run for
my third term. Hopefully I can get this all fixed.
Speaker 1 (24:08):
And go the fourth term.
Speaker 3 (24:11):
Let's get it all fixed.
Speaker 4 (24:13):
Let's put this on a this country and path of
the fiscal sustainability. That's that's my goal here over the
next three and a half years.
Speaker 1 (24:19):
Well, we appreciate it.
Speaker 2 (24:20):
Like I said, I hear sometimes people saying, oh, they're
not working hard enough, and I'm out there as your
champion saying, no, you guys don't understand.
Speaker 1 (24:27):
This is not a an eight hour a day job.
Speaker 2 (24:30):
They're working twenty four hours when they're there, and when
they're back home, they're out there campaigning and talking to
people and taking meetings with folks on the ground. It
is a twenty four hour job. And Senator Ron Johnson,
we appreciate.
Speaker 3 (24:41):
You well, thanks for having on every day.
Speaker 2 (24:43):
Thanks you too, and thank you all for joining us
on the Tutor Dixon Podcast. You can get this podcast
wherever you get your podcasts, or you can watch it
on Rumble and YouTube at tutor Dixon.
Speaker 1 (24:53):
Join us next time and have a blessing.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
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
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.