November 24, 2025 • 29 mins
Ryan breaks down the real data behind President Trump’s immigration agenda—cutting through the rhetoric to highlight measurable shifts in student visas, H-1B regulations, and large-scale deportation efforts. Congressman Brandon Gill joins the show to outline new legislation aimed at locking in Trump-era border security policies, accelerating the removal of criminal non-citizens, and strengthening cultural assimilation requirements for legal immigrants. The discussion dives into the economic cost of mass migration, the social strain on U.S. communities, and why voter ID laws remain central to safeguarding America’s election integrity. It's a Numbers Game is part of the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Podcast Network - new episodes debut every Monday & Thursday.
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 back to a Numbers game with Ryan Gerduski. Thank
you for joining me again today, Happy Monday afternoon or
whatever time and day you're listening, because podcast go forever.
I guess so. President Trump has been getting a bit
of hot water among his base, especially after a recent
appearance in the Laura Ingram Show where she pressed him
about the number of foreign Chinese students being admitted to
the US and support for bringing in h one b
(00:24):
visa users even as the tech sector fires thousands of Americans.
It's deflated part of his base who may feel like
he's backing away from his earlier promises. And I think
that it's important in this rhetoric to really break down
these issues and what's actually been happening in some numbers
behind it. So, first, on foreign student visas holders in America.
During the twenty twenty three twenty twenty four school year,
(00:46):
America had one point one million foreign students in the country. Now,
despite Trump's rhetoric on wanting to admit hundreds of thousands
of Chinese students, President Trump's administration has tightened the rules
around visas for foreign students, namely that their visas are
only as good as long as they're enrolled in school. Currently,
the visas actually allow students to stay in the country
(01:08):
longer than their duration of their time in school, so
they can stay for an extra year or two even
after they're done with college. He's also required now vetting
procedures to look at students' social media posts. You know,
it'd be good if we found out if there's a
student who's out there and said, I, you know, I
love Hitler or I love you know, I love al Qaeda,
that they probably shouldn't come into the country. And the
(01:28):
administration is weighing in another rule to restrict the end
of optional practical training known as the OPT program, which
allows for international students to work to the US for
up to twelve months or thirty six months if you're
a STEM field after graduation. This tightening around our student
visa system has led to a seventeen percent drop in
the current academic year, the largest drop in more than
(01:50):
a decade, aside from the COVID nineteen pandemic. According to
the Institute for International Education, overseas students make up about
six percent of the overall college popular in the US. Now,
the overall number hasn't declined by a lot. The drop
is most among new student applications, but the overall drop
hasn't happened in equal number of because people have been
(02:13):
able to stay for over a year. They're still in
the programs. As the Trump administration continues, as long as
it holds true to these reforms that it's done, the
number of foreign student visas will, sorry, foreign students will
drop over time. That's a break and rhetoric from what
the President has said. What the President's done has been
much closer to what he promised round the campaign. Now
(02:34):
let's talk about H one BS visas. The Presiden's administration
is set to publish a new rule at the end
of this month, increasing the price of a new H
one B application to one hundred thousand dollars per applicant.
In Trump's proclamation, Trump is pushing the Department of Labor
to enforce immigration laws and most importantly, set the prevailing
wages for H one b's basically so they don't compete
(02:57):
with American workers. Now, this happens regionally and locally, so
a Deloitte consultant in Philadelphia will make about sixty thousand
dollars per year, which is thirty four percent less than
the going rate in the area. It's done by areas,
not nationally. This will hopefully tighten the rules and make
it less desirable to hire foreigners over Americans. So once
(03:17):
again there's a break from what he said in recent interviews,
especially the Laura Ingram one, from what he's done. And
I don't know who's advising him to say this. It's
not something that I would tell the president if I
was advising him. Immigration remains one of the most important
issues facing our country changes our in my opinion, the
most important issue. It changes our country's economy, our culture,
(03:38):
and most importantly, our politics. Conservatives need to remember every
day that we make a choice. Our country decided to
invite a radical socialist who would fundamentally alter our country
and believe that we should be governed by international law,
and that man Zora Mandani is set to become the
mayor of our nation's largest city. Conservers have been saying afterwards,
(04:01):
I don't know why people who hate this country move here.
The question I am posing to my mostly conservative audience
is why do we let them in? That's what you
need to think about. This is a policy choice that
every previous administration has made to let people who want
to change US in. President Trump, for the most part,
has been very successful, especially on the issue of mass deportations.
(04:25):
According to a report from DHS, from back to September,
about four hundred thousand illegal aliens have been deported. This
is a higher rate than any other previous administration. Do
not believe the narrative about President Obama. It is not
true he was counting people turned away the border as
self deportation. Obviously, President Trump has secured the border, so
there are not people being turned away to be counted
(04:46):
interi re enforcement, which is what President Trump has mostly done.
He is the most successful president, and it's important to
remember that it's also working as a deterrent not only
for illegal aliens currently living here, but also for people
who would seek to come here. They're not making the journey.
According to a reason study from the Kaiser Family Foundations
of the New York Times they founded, the number of
(05:07):
illegal immigrants currently living in the US who would still
choose to move here illegally if given the opportunity from
when they came has dropped from seventy two percent in
twenty twenty three to fifty six percent in twenty twenty five.
I personally do not like President Trump's comments on H
one b's and foreign students. I believe that, you know,
(05:29):
it's very important to remember sometimes Trump speaks rhetorically and
other things are happening in the administration, both good and
bad on the part of conservatives. I think it's also
important to parse through the rhetoric though it's not all
just the last SoundBite. And on illegal immigration, there is
no question President Trump is the most successful president in
our lifetime. On legal immigration, it's a little harder to
(05:50):
parse through what's happening because the administration hasn't published all
their data yet for twenty twenty five, so we're kind
of just guessing a little bit based upon non nonprofits
and research organizations. But they have done certain things like
limit the number of asylum seekers dramatically. They are bringing
up lawsuits on birthright citizenship for illegal aliens, which acts
as a major major source of why people come here.
(06:12):
They can have a child and they get their chocolm
citizen and then sponsor them for citizens themselves. It's called
anchor baby citizenship and chain migration. They have yet to do, though,
what polling and what conservatives pulling, especially among Republicans, have
been asking which is real reduction based on legal immigration.
(06:32):
A study by the libertarian organization CATO in twenty twenty
one found that nine percent of Americans want no immigration
at all, which is something I'm not personally in favor of.
Forty five percent want a ninety percent reduction, and sixty
two percent want at least a fifty percent reduction in
illegal immigration. Remember, during the last year President Trump's time
(06:54):
in office, two point eight million people enter the US
and eight hundred thousand became citizens the right to vote
just as much as you and I, roughly the same
number of new Americans as the city of San Francisco.
We added a city of San Francisco to our country
as far as new citizens go in just one year
through immigration. To put a bow on this, yes, I'm
(07:18):
not fan of what President Trump said, And Christy Nome
said something which I also don't even believe is true
by what the administration is doing, but she said they're
granting citizenship to even more people than Biden did. The
numbers that I've seen so far don't add up to that. All.
We'll find out at the end of the year. And
If it is, I'll scorch them for it. But I
don't believe that to be true. But I think that
when you go past the rhetoric into the accomplishments that
(07:41):
were really so heavily involved in the first half of
the year, that peoples forget. President Trump's doing the most
to combat illegal immigration, and that's worth celebrating. He's making
reforms to protect American workers. That's worth celebrating. And it's
not time to sit there and lose our hair just
because he says one or two comments that we may
not like. Boligans on Capitol Hill who haven't always been
(08:02):
great on immigration. I mean, let's face it, before Trump,
they were pretty horrible, have kind of changed their tomb.
There's not a lot of conversations around amnesty. There's not
a lot of conversations around loosening immigration rules. There's a few,
but not many because they're taking their notes from President Trump,
and hopefully those rising stars in the party will be
able to carry this mansil not only for the rest
of Trump's term but into the future after Trump leaves
(08:24):
the White House in twenty twenty nine. One of those stars,
who is just an absolute rock star on the issue
immigration who fights every day to protect America's borders and
to reduce immigration is Congress from Brandon gil He'll be
up next. Congress from Brandon. Gill is a freshman congress
from from Texas's twenty sixth district, quickly becoming one of
(08:44):
the strongest fighters for the Republican Party in the House,
especially on issues related to immigration. Thank you for being here, Congressman.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (08:52):
So you're one of the few Republicans in Congress of
an A plus rating from Numbers USA and other immigration groups.
A lot of people, especially not on conservatives, say that
you know, Trump's president, so what more could conservatives possibly
want out of the House on immigration? What are some
of your answers to that question.
Speaker 3 (09:09):
Yeah, and listen think I think that mass migration is
one of the biggest issues facing the United States and
Western civilization today. So one thing that the House should
be working on is codifying and making permanent some of
President Trump's policies towards illegal immigration. And we did some
of that in the big beautiful tax bill earlier this year.
You know, we provided funding for full completion of the
(09:31):
border wall, for full completion of river barriers on the
southern border. We provided billions of dollars to fund the
logistical infrastructure needed for mass deportations. More, we had funding
for ten thousand new ICE agents, more DHS agents. I mean,
that's the kind of stuff that we should be working on.
But you also have a variety of policies that the
(09:51):
Trump administration has implemented via executive order. One of them
is his Remain in Mexico policy. It was something that
he instituted first in his first administration. He brought it
back earlier this year. I have a bill that would
codify that, make that permanent, and so that you don't
have a Democrat who gets elected president who unleashes the
(10:12):
same kind of chaos on the country that Joe Biden did.
I mean, all Remain in Mexico does is. It simply
says if you're an alien and you're a waiting adjudication
of an asylum claim, you need to wait in a
safe third country, not in the United States. In other words,
you can't cross our borders and wait for five or
seven or eight years or longer for your asylum claims
(10:33):
to be processed, because that you know, a weight period
of that duration basically legalizes a mass invasion of the country.
So I think that that's one tangible thing that we
could be doing. Yeah, you know that bill. I looked
it up right before you came on. It has one
hundred and nine co sponsors, and I just wonder, why
are some of these good bills waiting so long to
be voted for in the House at least in sub committees,
(10:54):
let alone like on the House floor. Yeah, you know,
I think that that's a it's a longer term solution.
We had a hearing a bill mark up excuse me,
and Judiciary Committee just yesterday where we looked at a
variety of different bills, including one of my own, which
are sort of tangible things that we can do right
now that would change policy and give the administration more
flexibility on illegal immigration and deportations. This is something that's
(11:17):
a longer term fixed because you know, right now it
remain in Mexico is policy. So I'm hoping it's something
that we can get on the docket and move. You know,
whenever you have over one hundred co sponsors, including a
couple of Democrats. By the way, that's a bill that
I think is likely to pass the House floor. And
whenever you've got some bipartisanship. Whenever Democrats in the Senate
recognized that illegal immigration is in fact a problem, you
(11:40):
might be able to get it out of the Senate
as well. It's tough to say, but I think this
is something we should be moving. I've certainly been pushing
really hard to get this.
Speaker 1 (11:47):
Yeah, I'm the floor you brought up. So I mentioned
there was a subcommittee hearing yesterday and you had a
well congressman's Eric Leewall, who's very well known for having
an affair with a Chinese spy. He attacked you for
when you or other bills, which is an expedia removal
of criminal aliens. This has got to be an issue.
I haven't pulled it, but it's probably up there in
the eighty percentile range, right, and of course slam personal attacks.
(12:10):
It was nothing based on the merit of the actual bill,
which is obvious. Can you tell my audience about the
bill itself.
Speaker 3 (12:17):
Yeah, So what it does is it expands the categories
under which illegal aliens are eligible for what's called administrative removal.
An administrative removal is basically a fast track process to
deport criminal illegal aliens out of the country. So we're
just talking about some of the long wait times as
asylum claims or others or other different claims that illegal
(12:38):
aliens make are being processed. There are certain categories of
illegal aliens, for instance, violent felons, aggravated felons right now
that can be deported after they've been apprehended within a
few weeks. It could be even a couple of days,
depending on how fast this process goes. And that's called
administrative removal. And it's similar to what you see along
(12:59):
the southern border or where an illegal alien is caught
and they're basically just sent right back to where they
came from. But this tends to happen more in the
interior of the country. That's one of the key distinctions.
So what this bill does is it says that if
you're an illegal alien and you're convicted of any sexual assault,
any sexual crime at all, crimes against certain categories of people,
(13:20):
for instance, children, somebody over sixty five, any vulnerable group,
if you've committed a variety of violent felony assaults, then
you're going to be deported via administrative removal, or you're
eligible to be deported via administrative removal. So it just
expands those categories. And again, like you said, this is
something that eighty or ninety percent of the country would
(13:42):
agree with. I mean, if you're an illegal alien and
you're coming into our country and you're sex trafficking miners,
nobody wants you here. We want you out of our
country as soon as we possibly can. And that's what
this bill does.
Speaker 1 (13:53):
And it's crazy that crimes against the miners you would
think would automatically be in that category. Alrighty, it's not
what's somethin you would that be in in the House.
That's through the Judiciary Committit just rey rather yep. Okay,
So how if you're because this audience is in all
fifty states, how would somebody says, oh my god, Brandon,
that's a great bill. I want to be I want
(14:15):
to support your bill. Which are the congressman or which
are the leaders they sit there and send an email
to and say, please bring Brandon's bill up to a vote.
This seems so obvious.
Speaker 3 (14:25):
Well, this is one that I think has a pretty
high probability of getting to the House floor. The committee
process is the first step to getting something to the floor,
and that's where if anybody wants to add an amendment
to the bill, or they want to change something, they
can do that during this bill markup and committee. Now
that it's through that it's up to the Majority Leader
and the Speaker to bring it to the floor. But
(14:45):
anybody can ask your congressman to push for this bill.
We've got about a dozen co sponsors roughly on it
right now. I think we could get a lot more.
And this is a bill that should easily sail through
the House without any problem at all.
Speaker 2 (14:58):
But tell your local congressman.
Speaker 1 (15:01):
Now, you know you're a freshman, so this is your
first term, but you've known you've been filling politics as
long as I have. And we've known each other a
long time. And there was always this idea that Congressional
Republicans were not really on board with Trump's agenda and
that they were kind of going along until then get
rid of them and move in your year. How much
do you think the Republicans have really gotten on his
(15:22):
side on immigration, because obviously we don't talk about amnesty
anymore like we used to. We don't talk about a
lot of things like we used to, so it's been
some change. But how much do you think Republicans are
really where Trump's campaign has been around mass deportation, about restrictionism,
about other things like that. Well, certainly on the illegal
immigration front, I think you see broad deference to what
(15:44):
the president is doing because you know, this term is
different than the first term, and the big difference is
the interregnum during which Biden I just drove our country
off of a cliff. You know, you're talking about ten
million plus illegal aliens that came into the country, murderers, rapist,
gang bangers, I mean, some.
Speaker 2 (16:01):
Of the worst of the worst.
Speaker 3 (16:03):
And you saw communities across the country just be absolutely ravaged,
not just from the crime, but from the strain on
our social services, housing, education, hospitals. I mean, you see
it across the board, and I think the American people
really saw that. They're the ones who bore the brun
of this. So right now, I think that it's you know,
if you're a Republican and you are opposed to deportations,
(16:26):
that's a very politically difficult place to be. And I
think most Republicans recognize this, and they recognize that there
was a problem, a serious problem with illegal immigration during
the Biden administration, and that's given the president, I think
a little bit more leeway to implement mass deportations, which,
by the way, as you know, is something that most
Americans support very much. So now there's some more work
(16:49):
we can do on the legal immigration front. I think
that that's going to be something we can get done.
It's you know, of course it's a more contentious issue,
but that's going to be the next step.
Speaker 1 (17:00):
Yeah. I think part of that, and you speak to
a lot, is the fact that immigration affects other things
like housing, right, we always bring this up. How do
you another prison population, all the rest of it. How
do you sit there and try to gauge immigration as
a more holistic issue, saying this is not just about
pure GDP or an extra Mexican food truck or whatever
(17:22):
in your district. How do you sit there and say
this is about your housing and your education and the
budgets and all and your local community. How do conservatives
sit there and engage on those issues as a full thing.
Speaker 3 (17:34):
Well, I think one thing is that congressmen hear from
their districts, and it's not just from the constituents, but
you hear from local hospitals who are saying we've got
longer wait times right now, because we've got to treat
illegal aliens who aren't paying us for medical services, which
of course means everybody else pays more. You hear from
your constituents that they're having to wait in hospitals for
much longer than they should be, and you go, you know,
(17:56):
you go to any public facility and half the people
don't speak English. Is a clear and obvious problem that
congressmen can see, that that their constituents can see and
let them know about. But you know, the reality is,
I mean, there's a huge economic burden of illegal immigration
in the country. We're thirty eight trillion dollars in debt
right now, we're running two trillion dollar annual deficits, and
(18:19):
whenever you have illegal immigration, that's estimated to cost about
one hundred and eighty billion dollars a year from the state, local,
and federal level. I mean, that's a huge drain on
our resources. And it's just a fact. And you know
that that's not something that you can debate. It's just there.
We all know that that is true. And as we're
talking about impacting the debt, is we're talking about, you know,
(18:41):
creating a more cohesive society.
Speaker 2 (18:43):
I think that's something that congressmen recognize.
Speaker 1 (18:46):
And I think that a big part of for conservatives,
and this is mostly a conservative audience, but there we
were constantly said, you have to be compassionate, you have
to be compassion every compassion And then I think for
a lot of people their eyes opened up last earlier
this month, and a man who did not believe in
our constitution and not believe in our in our republic
(19:06):
the way it is, was elected the mayor of New
York City and he was legally immigrated here, and a
lot of Republicans say, why did he want to come
to it? Why did this kid want to come to
a place they hate? And I always say, why did
we let them in?
Speaker 3 (19:18):
That's exactly right. I mean Zora and Mamdani's presence in
the United States, his parents' presence in the United States,
is a damning indictment of our legal immigration system. You know,
the purpose of legal immigration should be for us to
ask who who will benefit us by coming into our country.
If you're going to come into our country, you need
to come in on our terms and you need to
(19:39):
benefit us. And historically, prior to prior to the nineteen sixties,
there were a few just kind of analytical criteria used
to determine that. One of them was that you can't
come into the United States and be a public burden.
So you we cannot open up our borders and allow
somebody to legally immigrate into the United States and immediately
get on the dole and be on food stare to
(20:00):
get free housing and everything else. That is for American citizens.
And you can debate the extent of those programs and
that's separate, but they're not for illegal aliens. But the
second criteria was cultural assimilation. Whenever somebody immigrates into the
United States, we expect them to adopt our culture and
our customs in the American way of life. And that's
(20:21):
just simply not happening.
Speaker 2 (20:22):
You know.
Speaker 3 (20:23):
You gave the example of New York. You know, New
York's the city that is, it's thirty eight percent roughly
for and born, and walk down any street in New
York and you find out really quickly that most of
those people are not assimilating. You know, you hear a
hundred different languages spoken, and Democrats like to brag about
that and say that this is a great thing. You know,
the reality is most Americans want to be able to
(20:45):
communicate with their neighbor. They want to be able to
live in a community or a neighborhood where they can
walk their dog and not have to hear a hundred
different languages. They want to be able to say hi
to their neighborhood and to their neighbors and actually live
in a real community. I mean, you can't do that
with mass migration.
Speaker 1 (21:00):
What you're getting at is that there's a linkage, and
this has been studied across many different cultures and countries,
is between social trust and mass immigration. Every math recreation,
immigration increases, social trust is depleted. And social trust is
what societies are built on for little things of can
I leave my car, my door unlocked, my car whatever
to all the way to can I trust them my
(21:21):
neighbors voting in my interests? Because when when you have
mass immigration, I want to expense for one second, is
that you don't only distrust people who look differently on you,
you distress people who look the same as you. Trust
decreases across the board. So yeah, it's super important. And
one thing that Europe does that I don't know why
we don't do, is when they look at the cost
of immigration, they look at nation of origin into both
(21:42):
the first and second generation. I just think it'd be
an interesting concept for Congress to take on as far
as a look at you know, immigration is not like
a bag of oranges. There's super successful ones, there's not
successful ones. You don't have to bring everybody in. And
I just think that that's a really important caveat to it.
But overall, I think Trump has done an amazing job
when it comes to illeg immigration, best in our lifetime,
(22:03):
and I just hope that Congress are willing to step
up and increase that and doesn't revert to Maria Salazar's
of the world when everything is all said and done, Congress,
one last question for you, what when it comes to immigration,
do you think that you know, in this argument, in
this upcoming election, rather a lot of people, immigration has
declined as an importance of an issue because we solve
(22:25):
the border crisis. I mean, that's the problem with sometimes success.
What do you fear if Democrats get in control of
the House again, what they could do to kind of back,
you know, take a step back to what Trump's accomplished well.
Speaker 3 (22:38):
On the immigration front. I think that it's going to be,
you know, the same kind of Hell we sell under
Joe Biden. You know, Democrats know that mass migration politically
benefits them at the expensive Republicans. And this is not
a right wing conspiracy theory. This is coming directly from
Democratic leaders who have talked about for decades that demographic
changes in the United States will benefit them. I mean
(23:00):
there's a book written about it. You know, in the
early two thousands.
Speaker 1 (23:03):
It was up the permanent majority by a guy of
riot Mixed area, Yeah.
Speaker 3 (23:08):
Exactly, and the Emerging Democratic Majority is another one. I mean,
this is like their manual for you know, sort of
systematically rigging elections by importing voters. And it has to
do both with illegal aliens voting, but it also has
to do with legal aliens who tend to vote Democrat.
But it also has to do with illegal aliens who
are impacting congressional apportionment. So whenever the census takes the
(23:32):
poll of how many people live in each state, that
impacts congressional apportionment, and that's based on the number of
people in a state, not the number of American citizens.
So you see blue states like New York and California
get more congressional representation at the expense of red states.
I mean, it really is a cynical plan to systematically
rig elections for Democrats. That's what worries me long term,
(23:55):
and I think Democrats know that that's part of their playbook.
And all they have to do is we open the
borders under a new Democrat administration to continue playing that out.
Of course, you're going to see them stopping deportations, but
I think you could very easily see them just open
the gates up again.
Speaker 1 (24:11):
They in a big, beautiful bill. I don't know this
did they How long do they do the ice funding for?
Is it just one year?
Speaker 3 (24:18):
You know, we provided about two hundred billion dollars in
funding for border security, and that was the wall, river barriers, everything.
We were mentioning we're going to have to re up
that at some point for the ice. This will last us,
I believe for a couple of years. I mean it's
a substantial amount of money. No, I know, it just
they could pull their deportations. Need to last more than
(24:39):
just the next two years.
Speaker 1 (24:40):
Yeah, absolutely, Well in Congressman, where I could people go
to follow what you put out there and your Twitter
and on your website and stuff.
Speaker 3 (24:47):
We're all over social media on Twitter at Rep brand
and Gil also on Instagram, you can see a lot
of the committee work that I'm that I'm doing.
Speaker 2 (24:55):
You can keep up with me there as well.
Speaker 1 (24:57):
Yeah, Brandon's Brandon is one of the few congressmen and
to manage to go viral every almost every time he
gets into a committee with an MPR exec or somebody else.
So it's worth just checking out for entertainment purposes and
you learn a few things. So Congresson, thank you so
much for coming here.
Speaker 2 (25:10):
Hey, thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (25:11):
Hey, we'll be right back after this. Now it's time
for Asking Me Anything. If you want to be part
of the Ask Me Anything segment. Emily Ryan at Numbers
Game podcast dot com. That's Ryan at numbers Plural Game
podcast dot com. Look forward to these emails. This one
comes from Joseph Pryor. He says, what are the real
tradeoffs of voter ID Could it be used to suppress
(25:33):
certain voting blocks? In the current day, There have been
a number of from case of illegals registered to vote,
like in the Iowa superintendent and ID checking in some
states that are laxed enough that these seems obviously they
have voted. It seems more likely that lacks ID laws
facilitate fraud by insiders than by mass participations by illegal aliens.
The purported to low fraud numbers don't seem credible your thoughts, Okay,
(25:56):
usually in where it has taken place. In most places
country where it's proven voter fraud, right, large voter frauds,
it doesn't typically happen among illegal immigration. Now, not that
illegals never vote, they do, right, especially where it's been investigated,
there have been cases of illegal aliens voting. What the
what has been more likely happened Like there was a
(26:17):
race in Connecticut recently and I don't know the Iowa
superintendent race specifically, but traditionally, especially like in Chicago and
New York, places that were famous for voter fraud, what
would happen is they would wait till the end of
the day and they would probably get people in the
projects places where in certain urban communities they would have
the voting booth inside the physical building that people lived
(26:38):
in and either have people vote for them or have
dead people vote. This is like the old Chicago math
that they would sit there and say but it was
specifically in urban centers because they could delay the release,
They could sit there and have the last place to reporting,
and it would happen in local elections. Illinois was very
famous for it. It's not typically illegal immigration in large numbers,
(26:59):
but it's not like it never happened. So stronger voting
laws are really welcome with that. I don't know the
Iowa case. I'm going to look it up. Iowa does
has voter ID law, but it is not photographic vote
or ID law. It's non photo ID law. So I
don't love that. I know that people could say, what
if someone has an accident, whether it is figured or
plastic surgery. I'm not sure that argument would necessarily hold up.
(27:21):
In twenty nineteen, there was a study from Berry College
that was published in the Atlantic Economic Journal, and I
found that between two thousand and four to twenty fourteen,
nine states pass voter ID laws, and they found no
connection to decrease voter turnout, especially among Black Americans. There
was slight decrease turnout among Latinos that may be illegal immigrants,
but who knows. So the idea that voter ID, you know,
(27:44):
deterrestable to voting, that is a nonsensic argument. It is
not true whatsoever. It has never been true. You need
ID to do everything from buy alcohol, to buy a
lotto ticket to you know your everyday life. This is
completely a lie. Everyone knows it. In October twenty twenty four,
Gallup asked Americans if they support voter ID issue laws.
Only fifteen percent said that they suppose that they oppose
(28:08):
both voter ID and proof of citizenship to go vote.
Eighty four percent and eighty three percent of Americans support
and measures both of them, respectively. When asked specifically on
the on party ID, I can tell you right now,
ninety six percent of Republicans, eighty four percent of Independence,
and sixty six percent of Democrats supported people proving that
(28:28):
they were citizens to go vote. Ninety eight percent of Republicans,
eighty four percent of Independence, and sixty seven percent of
Democrats supported voter ID laws. So it's just fifteen percent
either work for the media or politicians. I guess because
Americans overwhelmingly support voter ID laws and it's been proven
time and time again in poll after poll. So voter
idea is good, it works, people should support it, and
(28:49):
LAWSOE pass to enforce it. That's this episode. I appreciate
everyone listening. Please like and subscribe on the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, wherever you get your podcasts and you know,
check out OH or YouTube, you hit the subscribe button
and make sure you get all of our videos. So
I really appreciate you all. Thank you, and I will
see you guys on Thursday.
Welcome back to a Numbers game with Ryan Gerduski. Thank
you for joining me again today, Happy Monday afternoon or
whatever time and day you're listening, because podcast go forever.
I guess so. President Trump has been getting a bit
of hot water among his base, especially after a recent
appearance in the Laura Ingram Show where she pressed him
about the number of foreign Chinese students being admitted to
the US and support for bringing in h one b
(00:24):
visa users even as the tech sector fires thousands of Americans.
It's deflated part of his base who may feel like
he's backing away from his earlier promises. And I think
that it's important in this rhetoric to really break down
these issues and what's actually been happening in some numbers
behind it. So, first, on foreign student visas holders in America.
During the twenty twenty three twenty twenty four school year,
(00:46):
America had one point one million foreign students in the country. Now,
despite Trump's rhetoric on wanting to admit hundreds of thousands
of Chinese students, President Trump's administration has tightened the rules
around visas for foreign students, namely that their visas are
only as good as long as they're enrolled in school. Currently,
the visas actually allow students to stay in the country
(01:08):
longer than their duration of their time in school, so
they can stay for an extra year or two even
after they're done with college. He's also required now vetting
procedures to look at students' social media posts. You know,
it'd be good if we found out if there's a
student who's out there and said, I, you know, I
love Hitler or I love you know, I love al Qaeda,
that they probably shouldn't come into the country. And the
(01:28):
administration is weighing in another rule to restrict the end
of optional practical training known as the OPT program, which
allows for international students to work to the US for
up to twelve months or thirty six months if you're
a STEM field after graduation. This tightening around our student
visa system has led to a seventeen percent drop in
the current academic year, the largest drop in more than
(01:50):
a decade, aside from the COVID nineteen pandemic. According to
the Institute for International Education, overseas students make up about
six percent of the overall college popular in the US. Now,
the overall number hasn't declined by a lot. The drop
is most among new student applications, but the overall drop
hasn't happened in equal number of because people have been
(02:13):
able to stay for over a year. They're still in
the programs. As the Trump administration continues, as long as
it holds true to these reforms that it's done, the
number of foreign student visas will, sorry, foreign students will
drop over time. That's a break and rhetoric from what
the President has said. What the President's done has been
much closer to what he promised round the campaign. Now
(02:34):
let's talk about H one BS visas. The Presiden's administration
is set to publish a new rule at the end
of this month, increasing the price of a new H
one B application to one hundred thousand dollars per applicant.
In Trump's proclamation, Trump is pushing the Department of Labor
to enforce immigration laws and most importantly, set the prevailing
wages for H one b's basically so they don't compete
(02:57):
with American workers. Now, this happens regionally and locally, so
a Deloitte consultant in Philadelphia will make about sixty thousand
dollars per year, which is thirty four percent less than
the going rate in the area. It's done by areas,
not nationally. This will hopefully tighten the rules and make
it less desirable to hire foreigners over Americans. So once
(03:17):
again there's a break from what he said in recent interviews,
especially the Laura Ingram one, from what he's done. And
I don't know who's advising him to say this. It's
not something that I would tell the president if I
was advising him. Immigration remains one of the most important
issues facing our country changes our in my opinion, the
most important issue. It changes our country's economy, our culture,
(03:38):
and most importantly, our politics. Conservatives need to remember every
day that we make a choice. Our country decided to
invite a radical socialist who would fundamentally alter our country
and believe that we should be governed by international law,
and that man Zora Mandani is set to become the
mayor of our nation's largest city. Conservers have been saying afterwards,
(04:01):
I don't know why people who hate this country move here.
The question I am posing to my mostly conservative audience
is why do we let them in? That's what you
need to think about. This is a policy choice that
every previous administration has made to let people who want
to change US in. President Trump, for the most part,
has been very successful, especially on the issue of mass deportations.
(04:25):
According to a report from DHS, from back to September,
about four hundred thousand illegal aliens have been deported. This
is a higher rate than any other previous administration. Do
not believe the narrative about President Obama. It is not
true he was counting people turned away the border as
self deportation. Obviously, President Trump has secured the border, so
there are not people being turned away to be counted
(04:46):
interi re enforcement, which is what President Trump has mostly done.
He is the most successful president, and it's important to
remember that it's also working as a deterrent not only
for illegal aliens currently living here, but also for people
who would seek to come here. They're not making the journey.
According to a reason study from the Kaiser Family Foundations
of the New York Times they founded, the number of
(05:07):
illegal immigrants currently living in the US who would still
choose to move here illegally if given the opportunity from
when they came has dropped from seventy two percent in
twenty twenty three to fifty six percent in twenty twenty five.
I personally do not like President Trump's comments on H
one b's and foreign students. I believe that, you know,
(05:29):
it's very important to remember sometimes Trump speaks rhetorically and
other things are happening in the administration, both good and
bad on the part of conservatives. I think it's also
important to parse through the rhetoric though it's not all
just the last SoundBite. And on illegal immigration, there is
no question President Trump is the most successful president in
our lifetime. On legal immigration, it's a little harder to
(05:50):
parse through what's happening because the administration hasn't published all
their data yet for twenty twenty five, so we're kind
of just guessing a little bit based upon non nonprofits
and research organizations. But they have done certain things like
limit the number of asylum seekers dramatically. They are bringing
up lawsuits on birthright citizenship for illegal aliens, which acts
as a major major source of why people come here.
(06:12):
They can have a child and they get their chocolm
citizen and then sponsor them for citizens themselves. It's called
anchor baby citizenship and chain migration. They have yet to do, though,
what polling and what conservatives pulling, especially among Republicans, have
been asking which is real reduction based on legal immigration.
(06:32):
A study by the libertarian organization CATO in twenty twenty
one found that nine percent of Americans want no immigration
at all, which is something I'm not personally in favor of.
Forty five percent want a ninety percent reduction, and sixty
two percent want at least a fifty percent reduction in
illegal immigration. Remember, during the last year President Trump's time
(06:54):
in office, two point eight million people enter the US
and eight hundred thousand became citizens the right to vote
just as much as you and I, roughly the same
number of new Americans as the city of San Francisco.
We added a city of San Francisco to our country
as far as new citizens go in just one year
through immigration. To put a bow on this, yes, I'm
(07:18):
not fan of what President Trump said, And Christy Nome
said something which I also don't even believe is true
by what the administration is doing, but she said they're
granting citizenship to even more people than Biden did. The
numbers that I've seen so far don't add up to that. All.
We'll find out at the end of the year. And
If it is, I'll scorch them for it. But I
don't believe that to be true. But I think that
when you go past the rhetoric into the accomplishments that
(07:41):
were really so heavily involved in the first half of
the year, that peoples forget. President Trump's doing the most
to combat illegal immigration, and that's worth celebrating. He's making
reforms to protect American workers. That's worth celebrating. And it's
not time to sit there and lose our hair just
because he says one or two comments that we may
not like. Boligans on Capitol Hill who haven't always been
(08:02):
great on immigration. I mean, let's face it, before Trump,
they were pretty horrible, have kind of changed their tomb.
There's not a lot of conversations around amnesty. There's not
a lot of conversations around loosening immigration rules. There's a few,
but not many because they're taking their notes from President Trump,
and hopefully those rising stars in the party will be
able to carry this mansil not only for the rest
of Trump's term but into the future after Trump leaves
(08:24):
the White House in twenty twenty nine. One of those stars,
who is just an absolute rock star on the issue
immigration who fights every day to protect America's borders and
to reduce immigration is Congress from Brandon gil He'll be
up next. Congress from Brandon. Gill is a freshman congress
from from Texas's twenty sixth district, quickly becoming one of
(08:44):
the strongest fighters for the Republican Party in the House,
especially on issues related to immigration. Thank you for being here, Congressman.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (08:52):
So you're one of the few Republicans in Congress of
an A plus rating from Numbers USA and other immigration groups.
A lot of people, especially not on conservatives, say that
you know, Trump's president, so what more could conservatives possibly
want out of the House on immigration? What are some
of your answers to that question.
Speaker 3 (09:09):
Yeah, and listen think I think that mass migration is
one of the biggest issues facing the United States and
Western civilization today. So one thing that the House should
be working on is codifying and making permanent some of
President Trump's policies towards illegal immigration. And we did some
of that in the big beautiful tax bill earlier this year.
You know, we provided funding for full completion of the
(09:31):
border wall, for full completion of river barriers on the
southern border. We provided billions of dollars to fund the
logistical infrastructure needed for mass deportations. More, we had funding
for ten thousand new ICE agents, more DHS agents. I mean,
that's the kind of stuff that we should be working on.
But you also have a variety of policies that the
(09:51):
Trump administration has implemented via executive order. One of them
is his Remain in Mexico policy. It was something that
he instituted first in his first administration. He brought it
back earlier this year. I have a bill that would
codify that, make that permanent, and so that you don't
have a Democrat who gets elected president who unleashes the
(10:12):
same kind of chaos on the country that Joe Biden did.
I mean, all Remain in Mexico does is. It simply
says if you're an alien and you're a waiting adjudication
of an asylum claim, you need to wait in a
safe third country, not in the United States. In other words,
you can't cross our borders and wait for five or
seven or eight years or longer for your asylum claims
(10:33):
to be processed, because that you know, a weight period
of that duration basically legalizes a mass invasion of the country.
So I think that that's one tangible thing that we
could be doing. Yeah, you know that bill. I looked
it up right before you came on. It has one
hundred and nine co sponsors, and I just wonder, why
are some of these good bills waiting so long to
be voted for in the House at least in sub committees,
(10:54):
let alone like on the House floor. Yeah, you know,
I think that that's a it's a longer term solution.
We had a hearing a bill mark up excuse me,
and Judiciary Committee just yesterday where we looked at a
variety of different bills, including one of my own, which
are sort of tangible things that we can do right
now that would change policy and give the administration more
flexibility on illegal immigration and deportations. This is something that's
(11:17):
a longer term fixed because you know, right now it
remain in Mexico is policy. So I'm hoping it's something
that we can get on the docket and move. You know,
whenever you have over one hundred co sponsors, including a
couple of Democrats. By the way, that's a bill that
I think is likely to pass the House floor. And
whenever you've got some bipartisanship. Whenever Democrats in the Senate
recognized that illegal immigration is in fact a problem, you
(11:40):
might be able to get it out of the Senate
as well. It's tough to say, but I think this
is something we should be moving. I've certainly been pushing
really hard to get this.
Speaker 1 (11:47):
Yeah, I'm the floor you brought up. So I mentioned
there was a subcommittee hearing yesterday and you had a
well congressman's Eric Leewall, who's very well known for having
an affair with a Chinese spy. He attacked you for
when you or other bills, which is an expedia removal
of criminal aliens. This has got to be an issue.
I haven't pulled it, but it's probably up there in
the eighty percentile range, right, and of course slam personal attacks.
(12:10):
It was nothing based on the merit of the actual bill,
which is obvious. Can you tell my audience about the
bill itself.
Speaker 3 (12:17):
Yeah, So what it does is it expands the categories
under which illegal aliens are eligible for what's called administrative removal.
An administrative removal is basically a fast track process to
deport criminal illegal aliens out of the country. So we're
just talking about some of the long wait times as
asylum claims or others or other different claims that illegal
(12:38):
aliens make are being processed. There are certain categories of
illegal aliens, for instance, violent felons, aggravated felons right now
that can be deported after they've been apprehended within a
few weeks. It could be even a couple of days,
depending on how fast this process goes. And that's called
administrative removal. And it's similar to what you see along
(12:59):
the southern border or where an illegal alien is caught
and they're basically just sent right back to where they
came from. But this tends to happen more in the
interior of the country. That's one of the key distinctions.
So what this bill does is it says that if
you're an illegal alien and you're convicted of any sexual assault,
any sexual crime at all, crimes against certain categories of people,
(13:20):
for instance, children, somebody over sixty five, any vulnerable group,
if you've committed a variety of violent felony assaults, then
you're going to be deported via administrative removal, or you're
eligible to be deported via administrative removal. So it just
expands those categories. And again, like you said, this is
something that eighty or ninety percent of the country would
(13:42):
agree with. I mean, if you're an illegal alien and
you're coming into our country and you're sex trafficking miners,
nobody wants you here. We want you out of our
country as soon as we possibly can. And that's what
this bill does.
Speaker 1 (13:53):
And it's crazy that crimes against the miners you would
think would automatically be in that category. Alrighty, it's not
what's somethin you would that be in in the House.
That's through the Judiciary Committit just rey rather yep. Okay,
So how if you're because this audience is in all
fifty states, how would somebody says, oh my god, Brandon,
that's a great bill. I want to be I want
(14:15):
to support your bill. Which are the congressman or which
are the leaders they sit there and send an email
to and say, please bring Brandon's bill up to a vote.
This seems so obvious.
Speaker 3 (14:25):
Well, this is one that I think has a pretty
high probability of getting to the House floor. The committee
process is the first step to getting something to the floor,
and that's where if anybody wants to add an amendment
to the bill, or they want to change something, they
can do that during this bill markup and committee. Now
that it's through that it's up to the Majority Leader
and the Speaker to bring it to the floor. But
(14:45):
anybody can ask your congressman to push for this bill.
We've got about a dozen co sponsors roughly on it
right now. I think we could get a lot more.
And this is a bill that should easily sail through
the House without any problem at all.
Speaker 2 (14:58):
But tell your local congressman.
Speaker 1 (15:01):
Now, you know you're a freshman, so this is your
first term, but you've known you've been filling politics as
long as I have. And we've known each other a
long time. And there was always this idea that Congressional
Republicans were not really on board with Trump's agenda and
that they were kind of going along until then get
rid of them and move in your year. How much
do you think the Republicans have really gotten on his
(15:22):
side on immigration, because obviously we don't talk about amnesty
anymore like we used to. We don't talk about a
lot of things like we used to, so it's been
some change. But how much do you think Republicans are
really where Trump's campaign has been around mass deportation, about restrictionism,
about other things like that. Well, certainly on the illegal
immigration front, I think you see broad deference to what
(15:44):
the president is doing because you know, this term is
different than the first term, and the big difference is
the interregnum during which Biden I just drove our country
off of a cliff. You know, you're talking about ten
million plus illegal aliens that came into the country, murderers, rapist,
gang bangers, I mean, some.
Speaker 2 (16:01):
Of the worst of the worst.
Speaker 3 (16:03):
And you saw communities across the country just be absolutely ravaged,
not just from the crime, but from the strain on
our social services, housing, education, hospitals. I mean, you see
it across the board, and I think the American people
really saw that. They're the ones who bore the brun
of this. So right now, I think that it's you know,
if you're a Republican and you are opposed to deportations,
(16:26):
that's a very politically difficult place to be. And I
think most Republicans recognize this, and they recognize that there
was a problem, a serious problem with illegal immigration during
the Biden administration, and that's given the president, I think
a little bit more leeway to implement mass deportations, which,
by the way, as you know, is something that most
Americans support very much. So now there's some more work
(16:49):
we can do on the legal immigration front. I think
that that's going to be something we can get done.
It's you know, of course it's a more contentious issue,
but that's going to be the next step.
Speaker 1 (17:00):
Yeah. I think part of that, and you speak to
a lot, is the fact that immigration affects other things
like housing, right, we always bring this up. How do
you another prison population, all the rest of it. How
do you sit there and try to gauge immigration as
a more holistic issue, saying this is not just about
pure GDP or an extra Mexican food truck or whatever
(17:22):
in your district. How do you sit there and say
this is about your housing and your education and the
budgets and all and your local community. How do conservatives
sit there and engage on those issues as a full thing.
Speaker 3 (17:34):
Well, I think one thing is that congressmen hear from
their districts, and it's not just from the constituents, but
you hear from local hospitals who are saying we've got
longer wait times right now, because we've got to treat
illegal aliens who aren't paying us for medical services, which
of course means everybody else pays more. You hear from
your constituents that they're having to wait in hospitals for
much longer than they should be, and you go, you know,
(17:56):
you go to any public facility and half the people
don't speak English. Is a clear and obvious problem that
congressmen can see, that that their constituents can see and
let them know about. But you know, the reality is,
I mean, there's a huge economic burden of illegal immigration
in the country. We're thirty eight trillion dollars in debt
right now, we're running two trillion dollar annual deficits, and
(18:19):
whenever you have illegal immigration, that's estimated to cost about
one hundred and eighty billion dollars a year from the state, local,
and federal level. I mean, that's a huge drain on
our resources. And it's just a fact. And you know
that that's not something that you can debate. It's just there.
We all know that that is true. And as we're
talking about impacting the debt, is we're talking about, you know,
(18:41):
creating a more cohesive society.
Speaker 2 (18:43):
I think that's something that congressmen recognize.
Speaker 1 (18:46):
And I think that a big part of for conservatives,
and this is mostly a conservative audience, but there we
were constantly said, you have to be compassionate, you have
to be compassion every compassion And then I think for
a lot of people their eyes opened up last earlier
this month, and a man who did not believe in
our constitution and not believe in our in our republic
(19:06):
the way it is, was elected the mayor of New
York City and he was legally immigrated here, and a
lot of Republicans say, why did he want to come
to it? Why did this kid want to come to
a place they hate? And I always say, why did
we let them in?
Speaker 3 (19:18):
That's exactly right. I mean Zora and Mamdani's presence in
the United States, his parents' presence in the United States,
is a damning indictment of our legal immigration system. You know,
the purpose of legal immigration should be for us to
ask who who will benefit us by coming into our country.
If you're going to come into our country, you need
to come in on our terms and you need to
(19:39):
benefit us. And historically, prior to prior to the nineteen sixties,
there were a few just kind of analytical criteria used
to determine that. One of them was that you can't
come into the United States and be a public burden.
So you we cannot open up our borders and allow
somebody to legally immigrate into the United States and immediately
get on the dole and be on food stare to
(20:00):
get free housing and everything else. That is for American citizens.
And you can debate the extent of those programs and
that's separate, but they're not for illegal aliens. But the
second criteria was cultural assimilation. Whenever somebody immigrates into the
United States, we expect them to adopt our culture and
our customs in the American way of life. And that's
(20:21):
just simply not happening.
Speaker 2 (20:22):
You know.
Speaker 3 (20:23):
You gave the example of New York. You know, New
York's the city that is, it's thirty eight percent roughly
for and born, and walk down any street in New
York and you find out really quickly that most of
those people are not assimilating. You know, you hear a
hundred different languages spoken, and Democrats like to brag about
that and say that this is a great thing. You know,
the reality is most Americans want to be able to
(20:45):
communicate with their neighbor. They want to be able to
live in a community or a neighborhood where they can
walk their dog and not have to hear a hundred
different languages. They want to be able to say hi
to their neighborhood and to their neighbors and actually live
in a real community. I mean, you can't do that
with mass migration.
Speaker 1 (21:00):
What you're getting at is that there's a linkage, and
this has been studied across many different cultures and countries,
is between social trust and mass immigration. Every math recreation,
immigration increases, social trust is depleted. And social trust is
what societies are built on for little things of can
I leave my car, my door unlocked, my car whatever
to all the way to can I trust them my
(21:21):
neighbors voting in my interests? Because when when you have
mass immigration, I want to expense for one second, is
that you don't only distrust people who look differently on you,
you distress people who look the same as you. Trust
decreases across the board. So yeah, it's super important. And
one thing that Europe does that I don't know why
we don't do, is when they look at the cost
of immigration, they look at nation of origin into both
(21:42):
the first and second generation. I just think it'd be
an interesting concept for Congress to take on as far
as a look at you know, immigration is not like
a bag of oranges. There's super successful ones, there's not
successful ones. You don't have to bring everybody in. And
I just think that that's a really important caveat to it.
But overall, I think Trump has done an amazing job
when it comes to illeg immigration, best in our lifetime,
(22:03):
and I just hope that Congress are willing to step
up and increase that and doesn't revert to Maria Salazar's
of the world when everything is all said and done, Congress,
one last question for you, what when it comes to immigration,
do you think that you know, in this argument, in
this upcoming election, rather a lot of people, immigration has
declined as an importance of an issue because we solve
(22:25):
the border crisis. I mean, that's the problem with sometimes success.
What do you fear if Democrats get in control of
the House again, what they could do to kind of back,
you know, take a step back to what Trump's accomplished well.
Speaker 3 (22:38):
On the immigration front. I think that it's going to be,
you know, the same kind of Hell we sell under
Joe Biden. You know, Democrats know that mass migration politically
benefits them at the expensive Republicans. And this is not
a right wing conspiracy theory. This is coming directly from
Democratic leaders who have talked about for decades that demographic
changes in the United States will benefit them. I mean
(23:00):
there's a book written about it. You know, in the
early two thousands.
Speaker 1 (23:03):
It was up the permanent majority by a guy of
riot Mixed area, Yeah.
Speaker 3 (23:08):
Exactly, and the Emerging Democratic Majority is another one. I mean,
this is like their manual for you know, sort of
systematically rigging elections by importing voters. And it has to
do both with illegal aliens voting, but it also has
to do with legal aliens who tend to vote Democrat.
But it also has to do with illegal aliens who
are impacting congressional apportionment. So whenever the census takes the
(23:32):
poll of how many people live in each state, that
impacts congressional apportionment, and that's based on the number of
people in a state, not the number of American citizens.
So you see blue states like New York and California
get more congressional representation at the expense of red states.
I mean, it really is a cynical plan to systematically
rig elections for Democrats. That's what worries me long term,
(23:55):
and I think Democrats know that that's part of their playbook.
And all they have to do is we open the
borders under a new Democrat administration to continue playing that out.
Of course, you're going to see them stopping deportations, but
I think you could very easily see them just open
the gates up again.
Speaker 1 (24:11):
They in a big, beautiful bill. I don't know this
did they How long do they do the ice funding for?
Is it just one year?
Speaker 3 (24:18):
You know, we provided about two hundred billion dollars in
funding for border security, and that was the wall, river barriers, everything.
We were mentioning we're going to have to re up
that at some point for the ice. This will last us,
I believe for a couple of years. I mean it's
a substantial amount of money. No, I know, it just
they could pull their deportations. Need to last more than
(24:39):
just the next two years.
Speaker 1 (24:40):
Yeah, absolutely, Well in Congressman, where I could people go
to follow what you put out there and your Twitter
and on your website and stuff.
Speaker 3 (24:47):
We're all over social media on Twitter at Rep brand
and Gil also on Instagram, you can see a lot
of the committee work that I'm that I'm doing.
Speaker 2 (24:55):
You can keep up with me there as well.
Speaker 1 (24:57):
Yeah, Brandon's Brandon is one of the few congressmen and
to manage to go viral every almost every time he
gets into a committee with an MPR exec or somebody else.
So it's worth just checking out for entertainment purposes and
you learn a few things. So Congresson, thank you so
much for coming here.
Speaker 2 (25:10):
Hey, thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (25:11):
Hey, we'll be right back after this. Now it's time
for Asking Me Anything. If you want to be part
of the Ask Me Anything segment. Emily Ryan at Numbers
Game podcast dot com. That's Ryan at numbers Plural Game
podcast dot com. Look forward to these emails. This one
comes from Joseph Pryor. He says, what are the real
tradeoffs of voter ID Could it be used to suppress
(25:33):
certain voting blocks? In the current day, There have been
a number of from case of illegals registered to vote,
like in the Iowa superintendent and ID checking in some
states that are laxed enough that these seems obviously they
have voted. It seems more likely that lacks ID laws
facilitate fraud by insiders than by mass participations by illegal aliens.
The purported to low fraud numbers don't seem credible your thoughts, Okay,
(25:56):
usually in where it has taken place. In most places
country where it's proven voter fraud, right, large voter frauds,
it doesn't typically happen among illegal immigration. Now, not that
illegals never vote, they do, right, especially where it's been investigated,
there have been cases of illegal aliens voting. What the
what has been more likely happened Like there was a
(26:17):
race in Connecticut recently and I don't know the Iowa
superintendent race specifically, but traditionally, especially like in Chicago and
New York, places that were famous for voter fraud, what
would happen is they would wait till the end of
the day and they would probably get people in the
projects places where in certain urban communities they would have
the voting booth inside the physical building that people lived
(26:38):
in and either have people vote for them or have
dead people vote. This is like the old Chicago math
that they would sit there and say but it was
specifically in urban centers because they could delay the release,
They could sit there and have the last place to reporting,
and it would happen in local elections. Illinois was very
famous for it. It's not typically illegal immigration in large numbers,
(26:59):
but it's not like it never happened. So stronger voting
laws are really welcome with that. I don't know the
Iowa case. I'm going to look it up. Iowa does
has voter ID law, but it is not photographic vote
or ID law. It's non photo ID law. So I
don't love that. I know that people could say, what
if someone has an accident, whether it is figured or
plastic surgery. I'm not sure that argument would necessarily hold up.
(27:21):
In twenty nineteen, there was a study from Berry College
that was published in the Atlantic Economic Journal, and I
found that between two thousand and four to twenty fourteen,
nine states pass voter ID laws, and they found no
connection to decrease voter turnout, especially among Black Americans. There
was slight decrease turnout among Latinos that may be illegal immigrants,
but who knows. So the idea that voter ID, you know,
(27:44):
deterrestable to voting, that is a nonsensic argument. It is
not true whatsoever. It has never been true. You need
ID to do everything from buy alcohol, to buy a
lotto ticket to you know your everyday life. This is
completely a lie. Everyone knows it. In October twenty twenty four,
Gallup asked Americans if they support voter ID issue laws.
Only fifteen percent said that they suppose that they oppose
(28:08):
both voter ID and proof of citizenship to go vote.
Eighty four percent and eighty three percent of Americans support
and measures both of them, respectively. When asked specifically on
the on party ID, I can tell you right now,
ninety six percent of Republicans, eighty four percent of Independence,
and sixty six percent of Democrats supported people proving that
(28:28):
they were citizens to go vote. Ninety eight percent of Republicans,
eighty four percent of Independence, and sixty seven percent of
Democrats supported voter ID laws. So it's just fifteen percent
either work for the media or politicians. I guess because
Americans overwhelmingly support voter ID laws and it's been proven
time and time again in poll after poll. So voter
idea is good, it works, people should support it, and
(28:49):
LAWSOE pass to enforce it. That's this episode. I appreciate
everyone listening. Please like and subscribe on the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, wherever you get your podcasts and you know,
check out OH or YouTube, you hit the subscribe button
and make sure you get all of our videos. So
I really appreciate you all. Thank you, and I will
see you guys on Thursday.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.