All Episodes
Previous Next
April 20, 2022 - Doug Collins Podcast
56:29
Stabilizing a Nation
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey everybody, I don't know about you, but as you've watched out over the world, the war in Russia and Ukraine is not just isolated to Eastern Europe.
It's spread all over the world and you can see it in market instabilities, you can see it here.
People who do not think that that war is affecting you, all you gotta do is look at gas prices, you look at your food prices, you see the global change that has happened.
But you know something that's also affected investments as well, and I've said all along, Legacy Precious Metals is your navigator.
They're the ones that see you through to get to the next level.
The good news about this is even with market volatility, market instability, you've got options.
Gold prices are rising as investors turn to gold and gold presents a hedge against this inflation and protects you against the weakening dollar, which we are seeing.
Legacy Precious Metals is the only company I trust to deal with gold and silver and other precious metals.
You need this investment.
You need this as part of your portfolio to keep you buffered from what we're seeing in the world.
War and volatility in the market.
This is where you need to be.
Call Legacy Precious Metals today.
Be proactive about this.
Get on board with it.
Call them at 866-528-1903.
866-528-1903.
Or you can download their free investors guide at LegacyPMInvestments.com.
LegacyPMInvestments.com, your navigator in a volatile world of investments.
You want to listen to a podcast?
By who?
Georgia GOP Congressman Doug Collins.
How is it?
The greatest thing I have ever heard in my whole life.
I could not believe my ears.
In this house, wherever the rules are disregarded, chaos and mob rule.
It has been said today, where is bravery?
I'll tell you where bravery is found and courage is found.
It's found in this minority who has lived through the last year of nothing but rules being broken, people being put down, questions not being answered, and this majority say, be damned with anything else.
We're going to impeach and do whatever we want to do.
Why?
Because we won an election.
I guarantee you, one day you'll be back in the minority and it ain't gonna be that fun.
Hey everybody, glad to have you back today on the Doug Collins Podcast.
Going to jump back into the series that we've been doing, talking about the final address of the presidents and how they actually interact today.
And today's is one that's going to get really in-depth, not only for the content that it had then, but what it relates to today.
And that is the Gerald Ford Address from 1977. He was the several things that we're going to get into with Gerald Ford that may surprise you from his background, from the things that he went through in his time in not only the House of Representatives, But going back to even being a football player at the University of Michigan.
But what I need you to do is also as you're getting ready today is take this, download it, like it, share it.
If you have a comment on there, that helps.
Put comments wherever you get your podcast.
That helps us as we share this information with friends.
I know a lot of you are already sharing.
We want to continue to see that happen.
But you download, subscribe, share with your friends.
That helps us grow our podcast family here on the Doug Collins Podcast.
And we're glad that you're a part of it.
So let's dig in.
This was a speech that was given by Gerald Ford, President of the United States in 1977. It was January.
It was his State of the Union and I think he went ahead and took it as a State of the Union because Gerald Ford has an interesting perspective of being the only person ever to serve as President and Vice President both And never be elected to those offices.
He was a member of the House of Representatives when Spiro Agnew resigned from the Vice Presidency.
He was appointed by Richard Nixon to become Vice President.
After Richard Nixon resigned, he, taking again through the 25th Amendment, became President of the United States.
So he serves as the only person to have ever served as President of this country without actually being elected.
We've had some who have ascended to those roles, but if they actually served, if they served later, they were actually president.
But this was one in which he was actually appointed to the vice president's role, not elected to that vice president's role.
So in moving up, it makes an interesting anomaly in history.
But it also sort of fits Gerald Ford.
If you look into his background, you look into where he came from.
He's a Midwesterner, raised in Michigan, Grand Rapids.
Went to school at the University of Michigan, played football there, was a star football player.
In fact, won two national titles there, undefeated football teams at the University of Michigan.
After that, went to Yale Law School and then served in the United States Navy during World War II, came out and began his service in the United States House, where he served over 25 years before he was picked to be vice president and president.
And looking at this, he also served, and interestingly enough, on the Warren Commission.
The Warren Commission was the commission that was put forth by Lyndon Johnson at the time to look into President Kennedy's assassination and he also served in that role in looking into that but also later in the House of Representatives served as a minority leader For the Republicans in the United States House for about nine years before he became Vice President.
So an interesting background.
And a lot of people know, though, from my generation and others, they know Gerald Ford to be sort of an anomaly.
He was an interesting role in our time and our history, and I think will go down in...
History is that president who was bridging the gap.
He bridged the gap between Richard Nixon and the problems of Watergate, the scandals, just the Vietnam War ending, just so many things that were going on at the end of the Nixon administration that would influence his administration and also the bridge between what would then be the Carter administration.
He was really put in a no-win situation.
He spent over 30 months roughly as president and From the perspective of how he came in, how he had to deal with the issues that were confronting him, his job, frankly, became more of a caretaker role than anything else.
The country was in an economic situation which caused high inflation, high interest rates.
We were coming off of the oil embargo of 73, 74. This is all that was in his Not only foreign policy mix, but also domestic policy mix as well.
It's interesting to see the words and what he chose on his final State of the Union, as he called it, to the Congress to emphasize as he was moving forward in his life, but also in the country's life in this transition period.
Let's start...
I think one of the interesting things that was for me that he started with was a focus on 1776 and 1976, the 200 year anniversary of our country.
The country went through an enormous birthday party, if you would, in 1976. It was the 200th anniversary of our country.
There was a lot of celebrations going on.
And what was interesting is he started his conversation in this speech saying that this was the first real State of the Union, the first presidential address of this stature of the next 100 years in our future.
For 200, now he's looking at the next 100 years.
And I think that was a good place for him to start.
He was coming out of a time in which our country...
At the mid-1970s, early 1970s, was probably as close to an existential crisis that we had seen in the 200 years of our country, coming off of Richard Nixon, who used the political office of president and the powers of the federal government to do things in an election and against enemies that Richard Nixon We're good
that stands till today, that we still see the hangover, if you would, of Watergate in many of the discussions and many of the attitudes that Americans have about government, some rightfully so, some that have been perpetrated by what they saw during the Watergate crisis, some that have been perpetrated by what they saw during the Watergate crisis, in which you had officials acting in their own interest, not the You had interests of politicians such as Nixon who used the tools of government to actually expand their power.
Why is that important?
Well, it's exactly what we have seen in the last 10 years, that there's a continuation, it seems, of this process.
We saw the politicization of the Department of Justice under the Obama administration that ended up in an investigation on a presidential candidate, Donald Trump, during his campaign with Hillary Clinton.
and this turned into what we now know as the, for the Russia hoax, the involvement of Donald Trump being accused of being in cahoots with the Russians, the sham impeachment, the Mueller investigation, but the sham impeachment, the Mueller investigation, but all of it tied back to the fact, if you look in the last few years, the same echoes of problems that we saw in Watergate actually began to show themselves in the determination with the intelligence
community and the Department the same echoes of problems that we saw in Watergate actually began to show themselves in the determination with the intelligence community and the Department of Justice, FBI, Comey, Strzok, McKay, Page, you've heard all these names before, but they were using the actual, you know, investigative Page, you've heard all these names before, but they were using the actual investigative powers and spying powers, if you would, of the federal government on a presidential candidate and then continue that process as we see into the White House.
James Comey even saying that they exploited the first part of the Trump administration's time in office because they knew that they could.
They weren't going to get the pushback that they might have gotten later in the administration when everybody was in place and everybody was moving forward.
So I think it's interesting Timing when Gerald Ford gives this address and he looks to that next hundred years because the time that he was sitting in he could have easily just sat still and just tried to to focus on the problems of the moment the problems of the day but instead in this last address he looks forward and he you know he even goes and comments in the speech itself That,
you know, he said that 100 years from now, there will be an elected president who will be giving this same address, this same kind of address, talking about the state of our nation.
And it's the Congress's and the President's responsibility and power to make sure that that happened.
I mean, just a little bit earlier, you had a president who actually resigned in disgrace.
You had a ascension to the presidency by a man who had never been elected.
You had a country that was torn into understanding why the government or how the government this could have allowed to happen when you had so much supposed checks and balances.
But you saw this with Ford.
Ford said, no, we're going to look forward to this, but we've got to keep up our...
You know, posture as far as being the country that is still the light and the shining freedom of the world.
That's why the 1776-1976 correlation of 200 year anniversary, 200 year birthday was so important and it gave the American a chance to remember why we existed as a country to start with.
So it was focused forward, but then he starts to delve into the political realities.
of many ways and he talks about the Constitution and the reliance on the Constitution one of the things that worked that he talked about working in the as he looked toward the future was it he said our Constitution works our great Republic is a government of laws not men here the people rule and it's an interesting concept here as we look at this because I hear many people today again as we have all throughout history and generations talking about we the people And the correlation that he draws here is that our framework is the
Constitution, that we're a nation of laws, and that those laws do generate themselves from people who elect representatives in a republic to represent their interests.
But it is very clear that this is a republic form of government.
This is not a pure majority rule.
This is a republic in which we elect people to represent our interests.
Not everybody getting everything that they want all the time and just simply because one group of people thinks that it ought to happen doesn't necessarily mean it should happen and that everything falls under the Constitution and the rule of law.
Ford understood this probably better than most presidents because he had just lived through the constitutional crisis of a president resigning.
A president who was facing criminal accusations, who was facing ethical problems.
He was facing a society that had turned on him and what he had done in his involvement in the Watergate scandal.
The cover up there was And the members of administration that were beginning to go to jail because of what they did.
So he went back to the one basis this country has, and that's the Constitution.
He went back to the basis of our country that makes us different in the sense that we're an elected republic who is governed by a nation of laws Not the whims of those who make the laws or serve the people of the laws or the people themselves.
Again, a very pragmatist approach that you would have expected from Gerald Ford, one who came from those backgrounds of the House of Representatives, his Midwestern roots.
He was always one that was grounded in where he came from and his purpose in life.
He goes on to talk about And this is an interesting part because he was in the minority in the House of Representatives basically his entire time in Congress.
He understood the role of the opposition and he talks about this that even though coming up that there were going to be a new You know, that the transition was going to take place.
It was going to be a smooth transition.
This was not like other parts of the world.
He did make this comment in the middle of this, that although there is a smooth transition of power, he says, the opposition party doesn't go underground, but goes on functioning vigorously in the Congress and in the country.
And our vigilant press goes right on probing, publishing our faults and our follies, confirming the wisdom of the framers of the First Amendment.
What he was saying there is, is that there is a place for the opposition party.
As a lifelong member of that opposition party, the minority party in the House of Representatives, he understood that there was a place for this opposition.
In fact, that if the opposition simply gave in to the majority, We're good to go.
The effects of how the opposition acts in times of their minority with the majority being in control.
But he also goes on to discuss and says that the role of the press should be continued.
That may seem like a normal statement.
It was just a throw-off statement that you get from presidents in speeches, candidates all over the country, and it's a throw-off speech.
But let's remember here exactly the context in which this was being given.
Watergate was still very fresh on the minds of almost all Americans.
They had lived it through congressional hearings.
They had lived it through televised hearings.
They had lived it through reading of the reporting out of Washington Post and many other organizations over a period of several years.
It had become ingrained.
there were many in that process that wanted to actually you know begin again this hostility toward the press this investigative journalism that was coming out later made into a movie bob woodward carl bernstein all the president's men but the the reporting that was coming out and not just that but the pentagon papers there's a lot of things that was going on in the press
at that point it would have been interestingly enough easy for gerald ford to have dismissed the role of the press or to have called for a controlling or a tampering down of the presses reporting or investigation into the roles of government But instead, he brought it out as a function of our government that is actually positive.
He brought it out that said that the press's proper role is to do good reporting.
I think this is where we could take a lesson, the press from today could take a lesson, in saying that the press does have a role.
And I think coming out of Watergate, coming out of dealing with everything that was going on there, there was a way that the press brought that forward so that people could understand what was actually happening in Washington, D.C. Now, if you're in power in Washington, D.C., this was not something that you would want to contend with, especially with...
The environment in the country that was going on.
But Ford made a point, Gerald Ford made a point to say, no, the press needs to continue just as the opposition needs to continue as well.
The loyal opposition, as he called it, to Congress so that we could actually see not only the different ideas, but also to hold the majority in check.
I think if anything, he came through that understanding of what went on with Richard Nixon and seeing the scope and expanse of Watergate.
He understood that the checks and balances system of our Constitution was vitally important.
What is interesting to me out of this as we take lessons for today is number one, the press to maintain that status in our democracy, to maintain that status of holding accountable the government and making sure that good reporting is that reporting should come across and be a unbiased reporting and today sort of contrary to where we were then not completely but I think today now more than ever you're having press that feeds to a certain demographic or a certain
group you have it's interesting to me and I think early newspaper people and early reporters especially from you know 50, 60, 70 years ago when they would hear the fact that you have a conservative network, this is a liberal network, this is middle of the road, however you want to call it, that the news is being given with a slant or a bias.
People in our country need to understand that our press and our press needs to understand that their role in our society is dictated only by the truthfulness and honesty with the way that they present their job.
And if they're presented or they're perceived as being of choosing sides, as taking a role in the news that they're actually reporting on and becoming part of the news themselves, Then people will lose trust, and we're seeing that more and more every day.
And to where, as I've heard in just discussions that I have, whether it be on the podcast, people email me, or on the radio show, or when I do interviews, they say, how can you trust the press?
How can we get out information?
A lot of this stems back from the times of Watergate and the beginning of this modern investigative press that got you, if you would, press that some would have.
But again, If it is reported, Ford talks about this, if the opposition is there to lay out and hold in check the majority, the press is there to lay out objectively and truthfully the actions and the events of the day, then you have the checks and balances that are very much needed as we look ahead at this.
Remember, the Watergate Deeply imprinted the American psyche during this time and it was one in which the Americans could not believe what went on in their government.
They were shocked that it reached all the way to the president himself and that the president himself actually acted in this cover-up and it was again a political ploy at political enemies and it really brought out the pettiness that was going on in politics and can derive itself from politics, especially at the expense Of a country in which we had so many things going on at that point.
So Ford's looking ahead, looking at the role of the opposition, looking at the role of the press, and talking about the importance of our First Amendment was all rolled into what I believe was his discussion with the American people, that we all have a role to play, and that those at the highest level of government, those in the press, that we all have a role to play, and that those at the highest level of government, those in the press, and even the American people That's the same way it is today.
And my concern to you as we gather together and we talk about this on the podcast, is that this is a downplaying of role in America right now.
We see more people who don't trust the press, they don't trust politicians, they don't trust Washington, they don't trust their state legislature, And we've gotten this very unsettling part in our country in which the needs of the whole are being divided by those who do not see a future, who do not see a hope.
They only see what they are wanting.
And I think this is going to become more and more of a problem until we get back to the equilibrium that Ford spoke of here.
And that is truly about the role of the opposition, the role of the checks and balances as we move forward.
As we move out of that, he moves into the more practical parts of his speeches.
You know, look, Gerald Ford was very much of a pragmatist.
From a Republican perspective, he would be a moderate to liberal Republican in his day, as you look at that.
So he moves into the discussions on what he viewed as where we needed to go.
One of the things that he also talks about was, you know, the things that he was proud of.
I mean, and that was the issues from his Republican perspective of reducing taxes as well as spending.
It's interesting that he actually talked about that.
How many times do you hear today, you hear politicians and you hear members, especially of the Republican Party, say we want to cut taxes, but they again fall short on cutting of spending.
Ford knew all too well that it was the spending and the problems coming out of Washington, D.C. It was causing the other problem he had in his administration, and that was inflation.
And then inflation was growing at such a rate that it was actually taking more and more money out of people's paychecks, more and more money from From energy costs, food costs, unemployment was a problem.
This was a definite issue that he would deal with, but he also dealt with it from the two-pronged attack that the economy and the government, the taxes and spending were both issues of this.
He also had something in here that is, I think today, if conservatives want to find, again, a message that resonates in an understanding of why, and I think we've seen this in Virginia with parents, we've seen this in the election in New Jersey, and this idea that government is becoming aloof from the people.
He says one of the things that he wanted to continue, and he says, common sense told me to stick to a steady course that we were on, and one of the things of that, he said, to return local decisions to local officials.
And provide long-range sufficiency in energy and national security needs.
Now, again, he also says, and this is interesting as we're in the middle of an election year, so be careful of all those who are running for office who are willing to promise you anything, it seems like, to get elected.
He said, I resisted the immense pressures of an election year to open the floodgates of federal money and the temptation to promise more than I could deliver.
Again, this is...
You know, so much of Gerald Ford.
Gerald Ford looked at his job and, you know, he pardoned Nixon.
That was a huge deal in the very first few weeks of his administration.
It also set him probably on a course to not be reelected.
And because people did not understand his reasoning and his reasoning was that he didn't want to put the country through any more difficulties, that Nixon had already been removed from office and that was a punishment.
In essence enough, and he pardoned him.
He also dealt with those who had avoided the draft and veterans who went to Canada and other places to avoid the American draft.
So there were a lot of decisions that his desire was to get back to what he perceived as normalcy.
And in looking at that, one of the things he said that was interesting that should, I think, be brought out more by conservatives today is this returning local decisions to local officials.
Why would this not be something we want to grab onto today?
Ford talked about this now over 50 years ago.
And it still seems that even Republicans and Democrats seem to, again, continually move around to saying, let's tweak the role of federal government.
Let's tweak these areas of problems that we find on the federal level.
And if we fix it here, then that'll just trickle down, so to speak, to the locals.
And instead, Ford was very much of an advocate of getting out of the government control process in Washington, D.C. to as much as he would in of directed spending and things that were coming out of Washington as far as regulations.
But what he would do was, is he actually was talking about block grants, sending the monies.
If you're going to send the money to a state or locality, then send it in a block grant.
And allow the states to manage that, to be accountable for that money that the federal government is sending them.
At that point, you can then say and allow the locals to say, okay, here's how best this money can be spent.
Really reiterating the fact that money spent in rural North Georgia probably is different than the way money would be spent in urban New York City.
But when you have a one-size-fits-all policy, when you have a one-size-governance policy, which Ford, I think, here is speaking out against, he's saying, look, he said, we don't have all the answers in Washington, D.C. In fact, we believe, and what he was encouraging was his Congress to look at the issues and to then empower local officials and even state officials to say, what and how can you best solve the problems in your area?
And that was what he sort of laid out here in saying, returning it to local officials.
Can you imagine right now if conservatives would start embracing the ideas that are not just being heard in the halls of power of Congress, but we're seeing it in the voting booth.
We saw it last year in Virginia.
We've seen it in local elections, in school board elections across the country from San Francisco to Texas to New York, where people coming out of this pandemic and in the pandemic are very frustrated with how education was being run, how school boards were making decisions concerning masking, where people coming out of this pandemic and in the pandemic are very frustrated with how education was being run, how school boards were making decisions All of this became a point.
And when people started showing up, parents started showing up to meetings, they were basically rebuffed.
They were told in many ways it was not their problem and given the impression of why would you question our ideas?
We're the professionals, you're not.
And frankly, this is one of the best examples of we the people that we can find is that the people decided, no, that we're the ones who elected you.
We're the ones that, these are our children that you're talking about, and that you'll be a part of, will be a part of that decision-making process.
It may not be on the board itself, but we're going to give our input, and that when times for election come up, if we feel that you've not done a good job, then we're going to vote you out.
We saw that in recalls in California of a school board in San Francisco.
So this thought of local control, all been around, Gerald Ford chooses to bring it out in his last speech before Congress, and I think in a very sensible way.
Again, it was into the bigger picture of Gerald Ford looking at how he came into office, the issues that were surrounding it, and realizing that if If we're this messed up in Washington, D.C., then maybe what we need to do is start looking to more of a local control, more of a local balance of how we can involve people in the decision-making process.
So again, as we move through this, you see this probability come up more and more.
He talks about his accomplishments, talks about China.
It's interesting that in the mid-70s, China is only talked about in the terms of we're reaching out, we're seeing that potential.
Again, if you go back and look at history, China, although very dominant in our society today, China in the mid-70s was a very much backwards third world world.
It was even worse than you could imagine with its people.
It had no money, it had no resources, and was just beginning to realize that they could not sustain the way they were going by simply being isolated from the world.
And so he does mention China here in the mention of talking about Africa and other places, but it's interesting to note that China was not on the radar as we would see here.
Then we get to one that I'm going to spend a few minutes on, and that is in the speech.
He continues this theme of looking at the balance of power, how power is allocated, who has the power in Washington, D.C., the role of the minority, the role of the majority.
And, you know, this is something that I have seen that Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic leadership have no use for the minority, although they have stayed in the minority most of their time in Washington, D.C., and have understood that the only way they were able to get things done is through that opposition force and the tools that the House and Senate procedures allow them to have to make an impact on legislation that comes from the majority.
They've wiped that out.
They don't tend to...
They've curtailed minority rights.
It's going to be interesting to see how they react to that when they go back to the minority come this fall.
But again, it goes on into this role of government, the checks and balances, and how Congress and the presidency works.
Now again, this was at a crisis moment coming out of a crisis time.
He makes this comment and he says that The exclusive right to declare war and a duty to advise and consent on the part of the Senate, the power of the purse on the part of the House, are ample authority for the legislative branch that should be jealously guarded.
But because we have become too careless in these powers, in the past does not justify congressional intrusion into, interesting he should talk about here, of obstruction over the proper use of the presidential responsibility now and in the future.
Let's unpack what he just said there.
There's more to this and he goes on talking about Commander-in-Chief.
This is the War Powers Act is in this time frame.
And again, Congress coming out of the Nixon administration wanting to assert its authority and its power beyond The traditional means of the checks and balances.
I think that most in Congress felt that coming out of Watergate, through the hearings, through what was not provided to Congress, the power of the chief executive, the president, had grown to a point to which members of Congress were now saying, we need to get back in.
in, we need to step up our authority and pass laws or pass the different things that would actually bring the presidency back under control.
I don't think Ford had a problem with true checks and balances.
What Ford's talking about here, though, is that you can't all of a sudden go from giving away this power to then exceeding your power and getting into the way of the executive.
A balance of power between the executive, legislative, and judicial has always got to be a balanced power.
And when that balanced power is ever thrown off, whether it be the executive, judicial, or the legislative branches, then government doesn't function as it should.
Now, I'm gonna make the argument here that I believe this is the biggest concern that I see in Washington, D.C. right now.
This is the biggest problem we have in the fact that Congress has abdicated much of its responsibility.
They don't do so overtly.
I've been a member of that body and a proud member of that body.
But what I did see was is that we would come up with ideas and that we would then acknowledge the execution of this policies to the executive branch in which we gave very wide latitude.
Over the years, this has grown more and more, especially in areas of environmental protection and spending and housing, especially social programs.
These have all been expanded, not under the authority of Congress passing laws or passing the regulations, but passing the broad, overreaching arch concepts to these bills and then allowing the executive branch to then administer those, expand upon those through overreaching arch concepts to these bills and then allowing the executive branch It is interesting that Ford would talk about this in this term.
And Ford talking about this in this term, that he...
I would believe, and stated so, that the House has the power of the purse.
While I was in the United States House of Representatives, it was always amazing to me how so many of my colleagues would want to talk about they didn't like this, they didn't like that, whether it be funding for war or in the Middle East or whether it was for social programs or for expanding social programs.
That members of Congress seem to forget that it was us who actually funded these programs.
It actually started in the House.
If you want to shut down, and I'll just use the example here, if you wanted to shut down the involvement of the United States in a foreign conflict, then you know how you do it?
You shut the money off.
Now, you members of Congress may not want to do that because then the consequences of that decision fall entirely upon the House and the Senate, if they were to pass this, to go to the President and then the President be forced to sign it or not sign it.
This is the understanding of these roles.
Again, you may be saying, well, if the president vetoes, then what's the issue?
Well, if you've not watched lately, the House and the Senate, especially if they're together on funding issues, can draw the government basically to a close.
I mean, if something is so important that you feel like it should not be happening, as a member of the House of Representatives in particular, where all funding measures start, you start with the power of the purse.
I don't care where you are, if you're in a family, you're in a government, you're in a business, it all comes down to what you can afford, what you can't afford, and who allocates the money.
So my question to us today is just what is these roles and have we gotten out of balance?
I would say that Ford in his time, although protecting executive power, but advocating for the Congress to have its legislative power, I think the role of the executive was overblown then and is still overblown today.
And the problem we have is that Congress defers to whoever is in the White House.
If it be their own party, then they're more deferential to the executive, they're more deferential to the needs of the executive, or the wants, if you would, of the executive, than they are if they're in opposition parties.
The problem here is that overrides the very essence of Congress.
Congress is not designed to be the voice of the executive.
It is designed to be an independent branch of our government in which the elected officials take the needs of their districts or their states and then craft policies for the entire United States.
And that policy crafting, that legislative binding, is then what binds the executive to carry out those orders.
And the Constitution under the judicial, in our judiciary, is bound to abide by the laws that are passed.
You hear this all the time coming out of the Supreme Court.
You hear it in other courts.
If Congress wanted to change this, Congress could.
If they want to leave this the same, then we as the judiciary are not going to change the law for Congress.
They have to do that job.
It's really, really frustrating today.
And as much as we do on this podcast, as many guests as I have on this podcast, and people who come in and talk about This role of government issue is probably one of the biggest problems that we have.
And it's also one of the most obvious, but it is also going to be one of the most difficult.
Because when we look at this problem, it is going to take Republicans and Democrats in Congress realizing that they have to make decisions and cannot simply pass legislation that they think feels good or acts good.
They're going to have to spell out what they want and can't use it as political fodder In the next election if it doesn't get carried out the way the intent was.
And this is going to come especially in the areas of finances and money in our country.
If we do not come together, we're going to talk about this in a minute because Ford gets into this issue of spending, as it seems like all presidents do, in their final days in office and how those choices are made.
But But I wanted to foot stomp this.
I want to spend some time here because I hear this all the time.
Well, if we just win back the House or win back the Senate, then everything will be fine.
Will it?
Or will you have the Congress passing rules, laws that don't address the real problems?
And we're going to talk about that in spending, but my question comes back in, is in the area of foreign policy.
There are things that you can limit and things that you can allow.
Through legislation that bind the administrations, the administrations may not like it, but if it's and so you have to then weigh the cost of do I want to bind a person of my own party in the White House or do I want to punish a person who is in the opposite party in the White House that may then lead to my party being in control of the executive.
If we're always fighting about control of the executive, In the legislative branch, which it seems like we have had for the last few years.
Remember, Nancy Pelosi once elected speaker, spent 2019 and much of 2020 trying to impeach Donald Trump and to go after Donald Trump because of the concern about losing the White House in 2016 when he first went and then wanting to win it back in 2020. She spent most of her political capital in doing just that.
If that is the role of Congress, then we've got a warped view of what Congress ought to look like.
Congress ought to be about passing laws that affect our country, affect our economic well-being, our energy well-being, our defense, those things like that, that then give clear guidance to the executive on how to carry it out.
If the executive doesn't carry it out, then you have the power of the purse, you've got the courts, and that is the checks and balances that our founding fathers actually wrote into it.
This is not a passing glance, I believe, that Ford wrote into this speech, because Ford's coming off, again, one of the, as I've said before, one of those existential crises to our government in which foundations of trust in the American people were broken, they were gone, that nobody trusted the federal government, and it was a lot, as Ford says here, he says, if the Congress would do their job, the executive would do their job, then the foundational purposes are back in place.
So again, I've talked about it every once in a while, but I want to bring it back up.
If you're out there and you're frustrated with the federal government, if you're frustrated with laws and things that you see going on, you've got only one place to go back and start, and that is in the legislative process.
And if the members of Congress, whether they're going to be on different parties, the same parties, whoever has the majority, whoever has the minority, if they are not working to the betterment of the country as a whole and doing their role, Then you're going to get a chief executive that's going to move more and more and more into power, consolidation of power.
And my concern is over the past 20 years, again, this has been more and more consolidated in which agencies will actually become the ones who run the federal government and not the balance of power that was laid out in the Constitution.
So that's why you're going to see You've got more issues with the intelligence community.
You have more issues with the Department of Justice, specifically the FBI, spying on people, looking into lies, not being honest with the courts.
These are the kind of things that only Congress through legislation can put into effect because once it is into law, Then, by the design, the judicial branch upholds those, and they're very quick to say, look, if there's no congressional intent here, then the executive is probably going to get deference.
So Congress needs to be much more efficient in this.
So, again, interestingly enough, coming out of a crisis in which the executive over...
We see Ford addressing that saying, Congress, you've got to be...
And as somebody coming from the House, Gerald Ford as well, I think that was an interesting statement for him to make, saying, look, the balance of power has to be found in the three branches of government, not just in one.
One of the things that we're dealing with right now is this issue of energy independence.
Now, you think it's bad right now.
We were in a state of energy independence under the Trump administration.
We have went backwards from almost day one with Joe Biden's war on energy.
Let me just rephrase that.
He seems to be okay with going and begging the rest of the world to give us oil or to make more oil available so we can have lower prices for political gain, but he is Determined to go to war with the American energy market and that's caused high gas prices.
Then you throw on top the Russia-Ukraine war.
You throw on these and this inflation process is getting worse.
We're starting to see inflation numbers that are going back to just a few years after the Ford administration in the height of the 70s when inflation and consumer price index and these numbers were going up X and and a lot of it had to do with energy prices.
He goes on in his speech to say That he wanted to tackle and achieve.
He said, Bluntly, I must remind you that we have not made satisfactory progress toward achieving energy independence.
Energy is absolutely vital to the defense of our country, to the strength of our economy, and to the quality of our lives.
He said that two years ago, I proposed to Congress the first comprehensive national energy program, a specific and coordinated set of measures that would end our vulnerability to embargo blockade or arbitrary price increases.
Let's stop right here.
Remember, one of the things right now, Joe Biden and Jen Psaki from the press table every day is saying this is Putin's gas price increase.
This is Putin's inflation.
No, it's not.
It is exacerbated by the actions of Putin and the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
But these numbers were going up beforehand.
Why?
Because of what we'll talk about in a second is the increased federal spending.
And the increasing of government involvement.
Now what Ford was talking about here, which everybody could relate to, was the oil embargo of 73-74 from the Middle East, in which we have long gas lines here.
As someone who is just old enough to remember this, I can remember lines being Long lines, I can remember on the TV at night, the news programs talking about the rationing of gas, if you were odd days, even days, when you could actually buy gas.
I remember this all very clearly, and it made a sense of dependency and fear in a lot of people because if we had to depend on foreign sources that much for our oil and gas, then we were going to be in trouble.
Now, what was interesting is here, he says, He wanted to change this so we would not be dependent and that we could supply a significant amount of our free energy supply to the world by 1985. He said, of every major energy proposal I submitted two years ago, only half become law.
In 1973, notice this number, he said, we were dependent upon foreign oil for 30% 36% of our needs today, we are 40% and we'll pay out over what seems like a low number now, $34 billion in foreign oil this year.
Such a vulnerability at present or in the future is intolerable and must be ended.
If there was never a call from history to Joe Biden and his administration, this should be it.
Right now, we should have an all-in energy approach.
President Ford at the time, he said expanding nuclear energy, looking for energy independence and alternative energies, providing government incentives to grow our energy supply.
It was an all-in energy approach.
He understood it from a significance of national defense and national security and economic security that we have to have a broad-based spectrum.
Now, we're rich in natural gas.
We're rich in coal.
We're rich in a lot of other resources that we could be expending upon, such as nuclear.
And we do have wind and we do have solar.
The question is why are we picking winners and losers?
Why in this idea of the climate change ideology that is out there that we must abandon other even cleaner sources of energy because we just don't like where they come from, whether they be nuclear or otherwise.
This is something that Ford, you know, having real experiences of what would happen if the Middle East cut our oil spill off, now we're experiencing again.
We have entered this, you know, where gases went up over $1, $1.50, almost $2 a gallon in a short amount of time.
It started last year when Joe Biden shut down pipelines, started making harder for exploration here in the United States.
We see this happening.
We see a war in the Middle East.
Europe right now that had energy implications to it from Russia.
So again, as you look ahead to it, my question is why are we not in on all in?
Why can we not look to history?
That's one of the reasons I do these speeches is to look back at what history has said to us and what we can do about it today.
And as we look at this, these are the areas of concern.
He goes on to talk about spending.
And he makes an important part in the spending.
As he moves away from energy and says, look, you've got to get this under control.
Americans can't continue to live with this cloud of foreign oil and foreign energy dependence to cloud our economic conditions and to cloud our business environment.
He moves into spending.
ending and he says this it can be only be tough and temporarily uh when he talks about expansion of government intrusion into individuals lives but believe me there is much more to be done and you and i know it it can only be done by tough and temporal temporarily painful surgery by congress as prepared as the president to face up to this very real political problem what is that political It's the spending.
He understood that the spending from the federal government was causing not only inflation that they were seeing at that time, but it was also causing the The budgets and the deficits, again, something that's brought up in every speech we talk about.
But he makes a very important point there.
If we're actually going to solve problems, I'm gonna guarantee you there are gonna be a lot of people who are unhappy about it.
We're not in a position now for easy answers.
If you want a balanced budget, you're gonna have to require the federal government cutting back spending.
Let me repeat that.
And he understood this here.
He said it's going to be a painful and temporary in which both Congress and the President have to take the political risk here.
Why is it a political risk?
Because people are not going to see services that they've either become accustomed to or like cut out.
They're not going to be used to having the federal government not stepping in everywhere, not only domestically, but the world.
The realization that what we take in is what we need to spend, not just simply taxing a certain group of people, whether it be businesses or elites, simply because we want more money and we believe in a more equitable distribution of that wealth.
That's not America.
America was founded on free market for capitalist principles and the government is not supposed to be putting its thumb on the scale of winners and losers.
And if you're gonna get into this, if you're gonna get into a government that is efficient and lean, then you need to really start making improvements in this area.
Ford brought this out.
He said it's gonna be painful, it's gonna be temporary, but you're gonna have to go to explain to voters why this is important.
Remember, when we have eight to 10 agencies in the federal government spread on three or four departments that deal in low-income housing, when you have multiple agencies who deal in different issues, the duplication enough It's something to begin to talk about.
But unless we actually then talk about the real drivers, which is Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, you're never going to get this under control.
And unless Congress actually steps up, the President steps up, and there's a real concerted effort to make these changes, this will never happen.
And we've got to address this.
If we don't, then our country, we're going down a path, and that is today terms, that is not sustainable.
That's the hardest thing for people to remember because, again, I've been to very conservative rallies where I actually saw somebody with a sign that says, keep your hands off my Social Security.
Keep your hands off my Medicare.
Don't change my Medicare.
My Medicaid.
Folks, We cannot sustain the growth in those programs in the way they are.
There are going to have to be ways to make sure that those who are currently dependent upon it, those who are getting ready to be dependent on it, are taken care of while we then retool how we deal with younger generations who will not have the benefit of these programs without massive federal debt, without massive economic considerations.
These things have to be considered.
But I'm going to tell you, it takes a President and a Congress to do this.
Congress will never step out if the president can play it politically and the president will never step out and try to help this if Congress plays it off politically.
Both parties, both sides have to come together to see how this goes and actually take the political risk and the political fallout to make our country stronger and better.
In closing, Ford again reiterated the checks and balances that are so important.
And again, you have to see this from his time frame in the fallout of Nixon, the fallout of Vietnam, the fallout of a disconcerted populace who didn't trust the government anymore.
He had to bring it back to the constitutional foundations of checks and balances.
But then he left one thing, and I'm going to leave it and finish here today.
And that was, he said, and he's talking about being in the house.
He stood there 28 years ago coming in as a freshman.
He still saw people there that he had served with.
And he says this, it was here we waged many, many lively battle.
Won some, lost some, but always remained friendly.
Ladies and gentlemen, if we're ever going to achieve the goals of this country, if we're ever going to achieve and getting back to a budget that is balanced or a budget that is economically feasible, if we're ever going to make a strong projection of power to the world, if we're ever going to become energy independent again, Then we're going to have to come together, have battles, have fights, let the best ideas win, and at the end of the day, remain friendly about it.
We cannot take political adversarial issues and then make them in which one side is evil, the other side is good, the other side is evil, and the other side is good, in which we find no common ground.
The American people do not live their life that way.
We do not live our life that way.
And if we're going to actually find solutions, just as Gerald Ford said, he said, you're going to have to have these battles.
They can be lively.
They can be intense.
But at the end of the day, it's about helping the American people move forward in the greatest country that we've been given under a constitutional Folks, there's a lot of lessons here.
And the lessons have to start not only in the voter, but also has to permeate through Congress, through the Senate.
To the House, to the Senate, and to the Presidency to realize that if we the people actually want our power heard and our interest taken up for, then we have to understand that these in Washington, understand that we expect them to get things done, not just simply run for election every two years, but actually find a way to get things done, to move the ball down the court, because As Ford started this speech off saying it was the first speech for the first 300 years of our country.
We're getting into that middle of it now.
We're about halfway through it.
Are we listening to the echoes and the warnings from Gerald Ford in this message?
I think we've actually went backwards.
I think you actually are concerned.
I see an executive that is growing more.
I see a Congress that is becoming more paralyzed in its own weight of indecision, and the American people are just beginning to get frustrated.
When that happens, it's a very disturbing pattern in which people don't believe in the system in which we've been given.
And I think we've got to continue to fight back that.
How do you do that?
With understanding the checks and balances, understanding a president and a congress who will find ways to work together and find ways to be energy independent, to find ways of making sure our government is working in its most efficient form while still giving power back to the local and states to actually find solutions for their people.
So, Gerald Ford, an interesting president, never elected.
A man who was made fun of unmercifully on late night television, Saturday Night Live, for falling down, stumbling down.
He was attempted to be assassinated a couple of times.
He made it all through it.
His final speech gives us a warning that we can live in today, and that is that we must be involved in what's going on in our country.
And our country leaders must listen to the voices of our founders to realize that we must get things done if we're ever to continue this democracy that we can get.
So we've got a lot to do.
Thanks for being a part of it today.
We'll catch you on the next Doug Collins podcast.
Hey everybody, it's Doug Collins.
I can't wait to tell you about a new partner here on the Doug Collins Podcast, Healthy Cell.
HealthyCell.com.
You can go to their website.
They are reimagining the way that we take vitamins.
I mean, look, you don't still listen.
You know, for the most part, record players are for the vintage side.
You look at it for old time.
You don't listen for the crispest, clearest.
There's things out there that you get right now that have updated in the future.
And we're still taking vitamins like we did back in the 1930s.
This new technology, this new product from Healthy Cell is a micro gel that takes your vitamins, puts them in a gel form.
You can take it straight out of the pack.
You can mix it in water or your favorite food, but it gets into your system so much quicker.
165% better absorption through this micro gel technology.
And believe me, the more you get in the nutrients into your body, the better you're gonna be.
They have a full product line.
I take these Medigel packets.
They are amazing.
We have been on them now for a little over a month and I can tell the biggest difference.
I've taken vitamins most of my adult life and the way these work is just something that I don't think that you can find anywhere else.
Again, it's HealthyCell.com.
You can go forward slash Collins or use Collins in the promo code to get a 20% discount.
You don't want to miss this.
Please go check out their website.
HealthyCell.com Microgel for these vitamins that are the best thing out there right now to keep you healthy and listening to the Doug Collins Podcast.
Hey everybody, I just want to talk about sleep.
You know why I want to talk about sleep?
It's because I just got out from underneath my MyPillow bed sheets and MyPillow that I keep under my head every night because I like to sleep on my side.
I like to sleep on my back.
I move at night and MyPillow is just the best thing that goes under my head.
It keeps me getting restful sleep.
The sheets are amazing.
It's just what you need.
Everybody understands you need seven hours of sleep.
Why not sleep in some of the best products out there?
And Mike and the folks at MyPillow are great folks to do this with.
And you can go to MyPillow.com or you can call them at 800-564-8475.
You'd code word Collins.
C-O-L-L-I-N-S. You won't want to miss this.
If you have not got these Giza Bed sheets.
You need them.
They're amazing.
They're soft.
They don't wear out.
You need those to get that sleep against your body at night and provide that cooling, just soothing nature that lets you get the most sleep.
But you know, they're not just about bed sheets and pillows.
They also have the MySlippers.
Amazing.
I've talked to you about it before.
I don't wear slippers, but I do wear MySlippers.
They're amazingly comfortable.
You can wear them outside.
You can wear them inside.
Great products.
You've got towels.
You've got all kinds of stuff.
Go to MyPillow.com.
It's spring cleaning time.
It's spring time to get out there and try and buy new things.
Replace some of your old stuff.
You'll want to replace your towels.
Get some other products for your bedroom.
All at MyPillow.com.
MyPillow.com or call 800-564-8475.
Use the promo code Collins.
▲
Export Selection