Senator Rand Paul, of Kentucky, joins to discuss the Big Beautiful Bill, and where his concerns lie: Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), the longtime Senator and conservative grassroots leader from Kentucky, told Breitbart News exclusively that he believes the Democrats are “adrift” as a party without an identity right now. But, he warns, Republicans could face major risks and consequences in the upcoming midterm elections if they too lose their identity. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
I'm Carol Markovich.
And I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently.
Normally is about real conversations.
Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
Join us every Tuesday and Thursday normally on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast.
What I told people, I was making a podcast about Benghazi.
Nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked why.
Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
From Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries, this is Fiasco Benghazi.
What difference at this point does it make?
Listen to Fiasco, Benghazi on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday.
We break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So down a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
Stay right here for our final news roundup and information overload.
All right, news roundup and information overload hour.
Toll free, let me give you our number.
It is 800-941 Sean.
If you want to be a part of the program, uh we welcome back to the show.
Uh Senator Rampola, Kentucky.
Uh, want to talk to him about a lot of different issues.
Uh the one big beautiful bill now that it is in the Senate and some of the changes that are being discussed and what it would take for him to support it.
Uh and number two, uh I'd like to talk to him.
Uh, did you see the Atlanta Feds prediction and estimate of GDP growth over the first two months of the second quarter is now a booming 4.6%.
Uh because the last time we were on, we talked a lot about your concern and and there should be concern about tariffs and getting some of these deals done, and I think there's going to be more to follow.
And uh I absolutely understand your your concern about that, but 4.6%.
If the second quarter comes in anywhere near that number, wouldn't you say that it that is a phenomenal success?
You know, I think it'd be great if we have growth over four percent.
Uh we'll wait and see what the numbers show.
A lot of things about the tariff aren't yet uh set in set in motion.
You know, uh most of the people who tell me they are gonna have to pay higher prices for the goods they sell say that their contract locked them in to not raising uh the price of the goods for a couple of months.
So many people who import things from overseas are saying that their costs will go up later on in the fall.
So there's going to be an adjustment to tariffs.
The tariffs were without question a tax.
When you tax something, you get less of it.
So you'll get less trade.
And it used to be that Republicans were for lower taxes, not higher taxes.
We thought that bringing more money into the government wasn't the goal.
Actually, the goal was leaving more money in the private sector.
Well, but uh yeah, yeah, you have to view this through the prism of the fact that, and you acknowledge this the last time you were on that America is getting ripped off, that the European Union is ripping us off, that our that Canada is ripping us off.
All these countries, you know, friend and foe alike, China totally ripping us off.
And, you know, the question is, does America at some point stand up for itself and say that enough is enough, and you know, America go through a little bit of pain, but demand that we have either free and fair trade or reciprocal tariffs.
Now, uh as a as a consequence of the president's strong physician, we also have had some incredible benefits.
I'll list them for you.
One ten trillion dollars in committed monies for manufacturing in America, including semiconductors, uh chips, and pharmaceuticals that will be made here.
I think those two issues are good for American national security.
We did have, you know, about on average twenty-five billion dollars that we'd never seen before in tariff money uh because the president has taken a stand that we're not going to be ripped off anymore.
I don't think you want America ripped off.
You know, I think it's important to to kind of unpack that when we talk about whether or not a country is ripped off.
Trade is mutually beneficial or basically doesn't occur.
So most trade that you think is between America and China is really Americans going and buying something at Walmart.
So when you go and you buy a TV at Walmart and say it's made in China, you only buy that TV if you think that uh it's beneficial to you.
So all transactions really are that are voluntary or mutually beneficial, you want the TV more than you want your six hundred dollars, and the person who made the TV wants your six hundred dollars more than the TV, and so you make a trade.
You can draw a circle around that and say, Oh my goodness, at the end of the year, a million people bought a TV at Walmart, and they were all individually happy.
But if you say that all the TVs came from China, we now have a trade deficit, and so people say, Well, we were ripped off.
But it's basically a No, it's not the trade deficit, it's the tariff uh differential.
In other words, that they prevent American goods from going into their country, which hurts our farmers, our manufacturers, uh, our ranchers and and other uh other industries, and I'm not even including intellectual property theft, and and we're giving free and free access to our markets at very low tariff rates.
You know, at some point don't we have to challenge the system and say, make it free and fair, or if you want tariffs, it's got to be reciprocal.
I mean, that that just seems fair that seems simply like fundamentally fair to me.
You know, we're the number one importer of goods in the world, but we're also the number two exporter of goods in the world.
So we do make a great deal off of trade, and I think my argument is that in each individual trade they have to be mutually beneficial.
If you draw a circle around them, you can show that we have a trade deficit.
The problem with fairness arguments, and they do make sense.
So when you tell me it's not fair that a certain country has a twenty percent tariff on ours and we don't have a tariff on that, it does it it does sort of resound and you say, Oh, well, my goodness, it doesn't sound fair.
But what if I told you that teachers it doesn't sound fair, but uh uh in reality it isn't fair.
Let me finish point.
So what if I tell you though that teachers making sixty thousand dollars a year and a rap star making six million dollars a year isn't fair because the teacher really is a more of a service to the country and we should pay a teacher more than a rap star.
But those are arguments from the left, and we usually don't accept fairness arguments because we let the market decide how much your value is worth, how much should uh you know uh a television personality make, how much an athlete make, how much should a teacher make and a fireman.
We don't go by sort of a TV personality does not make enough.
I no, I'm kidding.
Uh but but but uh uh I'm really having a hard time understanding this.
Why would China prevent our goods for example, why is Canada put massive uh tariffs or the European Union, for example.
They put a ten percent tariff on our automobiles going into Europe, and w we only put a two and a half percent tariff on theirs, and then they have a a 20% VAT tax, so that's a 30% increase in our sticker price, and we sell very few American cars in the European Union, and they sell a ton of cars in America.
As a result of the president's threat of tariffs, now BMW and Mercedes and and all these foreign countries are now gonna build their facilities here, and that'll create jobs for Americans, which I'm fine with, then those will not be subject to tariffs.
No, I think that's a good, and that's a uh a great result.
If we get to lower reciprocal tariffs, I think that's a great result.
If we wind up with greater tariffs, though, uh it'll be basically the effects of taxing something.
You'll have more revenue for the government but less revenue for the private marketplace.
And so people have to realize see, many people are for the tariffs say we're gonna just punish those foreigners, and those foreigners are gonna pay these.
Well, no American companies pay these.
I was with a company today that you know imports things from Southeast Asia and then sells them to Americans at 6,000 Americans work for the company.
And so the thing is is that uh the people who are punished by this are Americans.
If we punish Apple and say you can't pay make phones in China and you can't make them in India, you've got to make them in the US, it will mean higher prices here, and people have to decide or or these countries realize that they have taken advantage of it of us and we've allowed them to take advantage of us and they change their policies as a result, which I think ultimately is going to happen.
My understanding is we're close to a deal with India.
We had a deal with China.
Apparently they're violating it, so that has to be rectified.
Um I can imagine a tr a trade deal with the European Union probably forthcoming, a trade deal with Australia probably coming.
And but yet if the president didn't take a stand and say, wait a minute, you're treating our country unfairly, our manufacturers, our farmers, uh our our our ranchers unfairly, unfairly, and you need to allow access to our markets the way we're allowing access to yours.
I think we have a certain power, and as much as China, all these countries that I mentioned, they all need access to our markets.
They want our money.
In the midst of all this, though, you have Lindsey Graham offering up a bill to have 500% tariffs on India.
So if you have 500% tariffs, if people think, oh my goodness, tariffs are so great, why don't we do a 500% tariff on India until they quit buying oil from Russia?
Well, if that's I'm not gonna have a five hundred percent well, it's just not gonna happen.
You're talking about the this Putin sanction bill with eighty-two senators uh now signing on to?
You got eighty-two senators that are beguiled somehow into thinking that tariffs don't mean anything and tariffs are not a problem.
But the bill offers five hundred percent tariffs on anybody buying oil or gas from Russia directly or indirectly.
So high on that list is India.
I'm not positive what happens, but as a as a country, I would be somewhat offended by another country telling me I can't buy oil from from one country or another.
But it may not even be logistically possible, because India buys a lot of oil from Russia.
It may not le be logistically possible for them to decouple, but there is a chance that they also react to this in a nationalistic way and say, go take a hike, we're gonna buy oil from where we want.
But then what we're talking about is a trade war that would end up in a worldwide embargo.
Thirty-six countries buy oil and gas from Russia.
So there is a danger to thinking that tariffs are benign and tariff wars are benign.
Uh Lindsey Grant's bill is perhaps the most ill-conceived bill that's ever come before Congress.
It wouldn't it so isn't it certainly better than the policy of two hundred plus billion taxpayer dollars and a proxy war of America between uh Ukraine and Vladimir Putin?
I mean, uh ostensibly we became the proxy.
Yeah, no, I'm I'm not for funding the war in Ukraine and have voted against and opposed to all of that, but I'm certainly not for having a worldwide embargo for people who do trade with with Russia.
So I don't think that's a good way to end the war, but I think it's a good way to have an economic catastrophe above and beyond any.
But let me ask you.
Well, I mean, they're getting reduced rates.
Uh they're paying about seven seventy cents on the dollar for oil and gas from Russia in in the European Union, Western European nations.
Aren't they funding the war machine of Vladimir Putin by allowing him to profit?
Just like, for example, when Joe Biden turned a blind eye to the sanctions with Iran, didn't that didn't that enrich them to the point where they can foment terror in the entire region?
I think we can have opinions about what's in our national interest in other countries can, but if we think we can force the entire world to do as we say and to not deal with Russia, I don't know.
I think it's a naive notion and it's uh it's a kind of this idea that you know that George Bush was for.
We're gonna make the world safe for democracy gonna go everywhere and tell everyone what to do.
No, I don't want to I don't want to change countries.
I don't I don't even want to push regime change.
However, I don't think Iran could ever have a nuclear weapon.
And I don't I you know I look at in the sense I look at Vladimir Putin as a murdering dictator thug that never should have amassed troops on the border with Ukraine and and military equipment the way he did in Joe Biden's a sit idly by and let them do it and then you know basically use American money to fight that war.
But the question is whether or not we would embrace a worldwide embargo of thirty-six countries, including many members of the EU, India, and others who buy oil and gas from Russia, and what a disaster this would be for the world.
I mean, I think that this really is the most ill-conceived bill I've ever seen come before Congress.
It would lead to a disaster.
Well, then how do you put pressure on Vladimir Putin to end the indiscriminate killing of men, women, and children?
Because like you, I don't support American involvement in Europe.
This is a European problem.
This is not an American problem, but you know, when you see, you know, I I mean, there comes a point where America, American involvement, we saw this in World War II, you know, became a necessity, you know, to be back the forces of of Nazism and fascism and Imperial Japan.
We were forced into that.
You know, one of the countries that buys oil and gas is Israel.
So we're gonna have a 500% tariff on Israel in the midst of uh, you know, the uh uh unending crisis that they have with their enemies surrounded.
No, we're gonna we're gonna tell all these countries to buy their oil and gas from us.
That's what I would do.
Well, the thing is is you know, I guess that sounds pretty imperialistic to me that we're going to make the decisions for the whole world where they can buy their oil and gas.
Israel's already made a decision.
Israel imports 13 looks like million barrels uh a year from Russia, but Germany does, Egypt does, India does, Thailand does, Italy, Poland, Colombia, and it's like aren't they funding his war machine?
Well, yeah, I know, but the thing is you're right.
Yeah, we have an opinion, we don't like it.
We can tell them that.
But a 500% tariff in double every 90 days is a recipe for complete you think it you think there's been some chaos when six point six trillion dollars is lost in the stock market on liberation day on the threat of tariffs with all these countries.
Most of those tariffs weren't 500%.
They were anywhere between 20, 30 percent, and 150 percent.
We're done with a but would you would would you deny the 10 trillion and committed investment was a result of Donald Trump showing some strength and a willingness to go where no one no other person went before, or the fact that the the Atlanta Fed is predicting four point six percent GDP growth.
That's their estimate for the second quarter is a result of all this.
That all the the fear-mongering about terrorists didn't pan out.
Now there's many good things.
I think the story's not yet not yet finished.
I think we're just getting started.
I agree with you.
I agree.
I think you know, there's still there's and my hope is they get deal after deal after deal, and then we move on with freer and fairer trade.
I'm on free trader.
Our purpose isn't to simply say that the president's not doing anything well.
I'm a huge supporter of the president's cabinet.
I've voted for the nominations, uh, been a supporter of the tax cut.
I was part of getting the tax cuts through in 2017.
Would like to be able to do that.
No, you agree.
You were you're we we agree on a lot of things, and and I don't want involvement in foreign conflicts either.
Um, but I do want the killing to stop.
I mean, we saw the onslaught that killed innocent men, women women and children.
And frankly, I was glad the Ukrainians took out all those those, you know, the 42 bombers of uh you of Russia.
I think they have every right to defend themselves at this point, but it should be European money, not American.
Listen, do you got a few more seconds or do you have to run?
Uh I got a few more seconds.
All right, quick break.
We'll come back more with Rand Paul on the other side.
800-941 Sean is our number.
Hey there.
I'm Mary Catherine Hammond.
And I'm Carol Markowitz.
We've been in political media for a long time.
Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
That's why we started normally a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass.
You're our kind of people.
Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen.
What I told people, I was making a podcast about Benghazi.
Nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked why.
It's almost a dirty word.
One that connotes conspiracy theory.
Will we ever get the truth about the Benghazi massacre?
Bad faith, political warfare, and frankly, bullshit.
We kill the ambassador just to cover something up.
You put two and two together.
Was it an overblown distraction or a sinister conspiracy?
Benghazi is a rosetta stone for everything that's been going on for the last 20 years.
I'm Leon Mayfock.
From Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries, this is Fiasco Benghazi.
What difference at this point does it make?
Yeah, that's right.
Locker up.
Listen to Fiasco, Benghazi on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So download Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
All right, we continue now and shift gears with Kentucky Senator Ram Falls with us.
You know, there's a lot we agree on.
I don't want American in these long-drawn-out foreign conflicts, but I don't want America being ripped off.
I think the president is negotiating, and I I've known this guy for 30 years.
I know how I think I have a pretty good understanding about how his mind works.
I think we have already reaped a lot of benefits.
And I'm hoping the result is freer and fair trade at the end of the day.
Let me move on to the issue of the reconciliation bill, the one big beautiful bill.
You have been pretty outspoken about it and about the House version, which was not easy to come by.
And I don't want you to think by any means I think it's perfect because I know it's not.
And I know you've got a lot of minefields that you've got to navigate here, especially over.
You have some Republican senators concerned about Medicaid provisions in the House passed bill.
You know, Josh Halley, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, they're, you know, Republicans from states with large rural populations are concerned about losing benefits.
I know the SNAP issue is a big issue of Charles Grassley's uh clean energy tax credits is a big one, whether or not we're actually cutting enough out of this bill, and then you've got to get it by the this one person, the Senate parliamentarian, and make sure that it passes the bird rule without getting too complicated in the Senate if you want to have uh i if you want to overcome cloture,
which needs sixty votes for passage, reconciliation is a is a means to do it.
It's how Obamacare was passed, the inflation reduction act was passed, but there are very rigid, you know, arcane rules in the Senate that have to be approved by one person, quote the Senate parliamentarian.
So, and they they must all have to do with spending, and I know it sounds complicated because it is, and it's unnecessarily so, but uh Rand Paul is with us.
I really want your thoughts on this and and what would get Rand Paul to a yes on this one big beautiful bill, knowing that you're not going to get everything you want, nobody's gonna get everything they want here because of that those rules.
Well, I think you're right, and the main thrust of the bill is to make the tax cuts that I've supported and voted for from 2017 to make a lot of them permanent, to add in some new tax cuts.
I am always been in favor of letting the money remain in the hands of those who earned it, you know, try to keep it in the private marketplace, keep government small and not increase taxes.
So that I'm four.
There is some spending cuts.
I wish there were more, but even though they're imperfect and I won't get everything I want in the spending cuts, I will support uh what spending cuts.
The deal killer for me and the heartburn and the heartache comes from increasing the debt ceiling five trillion dollars.
And I've told the president this, but I've also told the leadership for months and months now.
I won't support raising the debt ceiling five trillion because once I'm gone, once there is no me uh or anybody else like me supporting uh where where where are you going?
You're a young man.
Well, no, what I'm seeing, uh what I'm saying is is that once there are no more conservatives left, if everybody votes to raise the debt ceiling five trillion, the conservative movement's gone.
It's it's done for.
See, in the past, this has always been a democrat process.
We've never ever raised the debt ceiling without all the Democrats and the big government Republicans voting for it.
Conservatives have never voted to raise a debt ceiling ever.
This will be the first time that the conservative movement gets behind raising the debt ceiling.
To me, it means that from now on the debt will be owned by the the Republicans.
It will no longer be a wedge issue where we say the big spenders, you know, we have some bad ones on our side, we got the Democrats, but now it's going to be passed by the Republicans, and it'll be five trillion.
The deficit this year is going to be two point two trillion, and in March, most of the Republicans, not me, but they all in fairness though, the the deficit this year is really Biden and Harris's economy.
You would agree with that.
It's actually both, because in March the Republicans voted to continue the Biden spending level.
So I voted no in March, but the Republicans all voted yes, most of them, and they continued the Biden spending levels through the end of the year.
So the first six months belonged to Biden, the second six months would belong to the Republicans.
And come the end of September 30th, the Biden spending levels, which became the Republican spending levels halfway through the year, will end up with a $2.2 trillion deficit that the Republicans who voted for this are now responsible for.
But what's even more are you factoring in this?
Let's go back to the Reagan years, because I think we both are admirers of Reagan, the Reagan tax cuts.
And these tax cuts are way bigger than the Reagan tax cuts.
This will be the largest tax cut in American history.
It resulted in a doubling of revenues to the federal government, and it resulted in the creation of 21 million new jobs.
And it resulted in the longest period of peacetime economic growth up in history up until that point.
And we saw with the first Trump turn, the tax cuts, again, putting aside COVID and the debt deficits that took place as a result of that.
Take those years, extrapolate out those years, 2020, 2021.
And if you extrapolate that out, I mean, we had incredible massive growth, but you're right about spending.
Now, isn't this about reducing baseline budgeting or eliminating baseline budgeting and reducing the rate of growth of government?
Like, for example, every every new dollar that Reagan brought in, he doubled revenues.
Congress spent a dollar twenty five at the time.
Didn't seem like a lot.
The deficit, you know, we're talking about five hundred million to over a billion dollars, I mean, chump change compared to what we spend today.
But don't you think that if the economy's going to have an infusion of $10 trillion in investment, lower tax cuts, more Americans working, work fare versus you know free benefits, that there's going to be massive cost savings associated with that and an increase in revenues that hopefully can compensate and bring us to a balanced budget?
Because that's what I'm hoping for.
You're exactly right about the Reagan years.
During the Reagan years, taxes were cut significantly and revenue rose.
When you let people keep more of their money and they paid a lower rate, they worked harder and more revenue came in.
But the debt went up dramatically under Reagan because they they weren't able to control spending, and it was a bipartisan problem.
It's the exact same problem we face now.
I'm both the tax cuts.
I think the CBO's wrong.
I think they will bring in more revenue.
But the spending has gone on without any lessening.
And so in March of this year, the Republicans all voted to continue the Biden spending level.
They get a continuous.
You're talking about the CR the pest.
Yeah, well, they continued the same spending levels.
Well, what what was the option if you didn't if you didn't continue to fund the government?
And I'm uh I'm I'm not one that fears government shutdowns, but at some point they would would have you would have needed a resolution.
The same option as we always have.
Somebody needs to have the courage to stand up and say we're not gonna do it, and that the deficit's gonna consume the country and we have to reduce spending.
But they didn't do that.
They voted for the Biden spending level, so now the debt belongs to the Republicans.
But if they vote for the debt ceiling to go up five trillion, it means that not only will the deficit be two point two trillion this year, they're anticipating two point eight trillion for next year.
So they're borrowing five trillion dollars, and we've never ever borrowed this much.
And every time we've set a limit, we always reach it.
So if you set a limit that high, it just means that you know the roller coaster, you know, the the descent into this debt, it continues a pace, and uh I'm worried about it.
I'm looking at the bond market, I'm looking at interest rates.
We used to pay 1.7% on average for the U.S. debt.
Now it's 3.5.
But that hasn't figured in the late the latest interest rates.
When they get uh figured into all the treasury bills, if we're paying it five percent, if it goes from three point five to five, it's gonna devastate the whole entire government's going to be up.
But but but don't you blame uh uh uh uh Fed Chair Powell, you know, the the what has been there, inflation is running at at 2.1% right now, okay?
And the the Fed's target is two percent.
The Atlanta Fed has just put out an estimate yesterday.
The GDP growth over the first two months of the second quarter is now four point six percent.
Um if you look at other indicators, consumer confidence is up to a four-year high.
Uh employment is now, you know, uh growing dramatically.
Now we're gonna have massive amounts of uh increases in revenue, I believe, because the president opening up energy in this country to become energy dominant.
I think that will help.
The $10 trillion that I refer to, I think that will help.
The tax cuts, I believe that will help.
Uh I also believe the Republican Party now will becomes the party of working men and women, and the Democrats are the party of you know, woke coastal elites.
Uh job openings, by the way, showed a m another unexpected increase in April.
It's always unexpected when it's Trump.
When you factor in all of that, and I agree in principle with you, I don't I I would I would have adopted the Penny Plan, Connie Max Penny plan in your plan years ago.
But they didn't do it.
And I would actually think about bringing some maybe call it the nickel plan at this point, but um, but we also have extenuating circumstances.
We have to secure our borders.
We've we've got to expel illegal immigrants.
We've got we need the next generation of weaponry because we're behind.
We don't even have hypersonics, but China and Russia do.
Um so I'm worried about all those factors as well.
There's a lot going on here and a lot to consider.
I think the cautionary tale is that you know they they went to sell ten year bonds this last week, and there were many less offers for the bonds than there have been in recent times, and the interest they had to pay is, and this is the market determining it, not not foul.
The market determined they had to pay over five percent for 10-year bonds.
And so as those interest rates rise, it means that people are getting skittish and investors are getting skittish uh about buying American debt.
I don't want our country to, you know, go into insolvency.
I don't want the country, and we could wake up one day and this happens.
It it it might happen gradually, but it might happen in a week or in six months.
You can have dramatic upheavals where people lose confidence.
And I think when both parties are blindly spending money, no one's willing to touch the entitlement.
We've taken Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security off of uh off of the table, there is a great deal of concern that we get to a point and there's going to be a catastrophe, and there has to be somebody out there, you know, you know, some kind of canary in the coal mine saying, we've got a real problem and somebody's got to do something about spending.
Listen, I I'm in favor of all of it, and and I I was actually sad to see Elon Musk, and I'm sad to see what he went through because it's it's not a small thing that he he was able to identify over two hundred billion dollars in waste fraud abuse and corruption.
And I'd like to see that doge mission continue in in every aspect and every crevice and corner of the federal government.
And I'd like to like you to return to constitutional order.
Uh my take is is if the House and Senate can go into conference and come out with a bill, that's a good start considering the tax cuts that are the largest in history and all the things that we've discussed.
But then I think the next level is a return to constitutional order, and that means putting forward budgets and getting them done by September 30th for the next fiscal year October first, and that's where I'd like to see maybe the process of definitely reducing rates of increase and eliminating baseline budgeting and more doge cuts across the board in every department.
I I think there's a long way we can go.
I think there's still a ton of waste fraud and abuse.
Well, I've told the president I'm supportive of the tax cuts.
I can support the bill if we separate out the debt ceiling from the bill.
So they need my vote.
I'm very much available.
I've supported the president's cabinet, I've supported the president's nomination.
So I was probably his biggest defender on the fake impeachment, the partisan impeachment.
So it doesn't mean we're gonna agree on everything, but on this, you know, I can't be true to the things that I've run for and the things that uh, you know, we say we're gonna represent, and that is the deficit uh is too large, and we have to do something about it.
And so I just have to be honest that I I'm very worried about uh not not being more having more significant spending cuts and about borrowing so much.
I I just think there's gotta be uh a way to limit it.
I mean, back in the day, didn't you support the Penny Plan?
Yep.
Yeah, I mean, you were one, it was uh you were in the Senate, and Connie Mack was in the House, right?
Yeah, and I've uh had it for almost a decade now.
It actually is the sixpenny plan because the COVID spending went up so much that they uh, you know, it now takes a six percent cut to get to balance in five years.
But it only works if you look at all the entitlements.
See, we've the current plan has taken all the entitlements off the table.
Even the Medicaid so-called reforms may or may not say what they say they're gonna say, but we're really not gonna have significant Medicaid savings.
And the Medicaid spending is exploded.
Uh, Senator, we appreciate the extra time.
Thank you, sir.
Uh, we appreciate it.
Ramfall.
800 941 Sean is our number.
All right, that's gonna wrap things up for today.
Hannity tonight, 9 Eastern on the Fox News Channel, James Comer.
Massive investigations.
What did they know?
When did they know it?
Who was really in charge?
Who used the auto pen?
Also, New Kingrich, Greg Jarrett, Steve Moore on the incredible economic news.
Matt Towery on polling, Clay Travis in our other news of the day segments.
Set your DVR tonight.
Hannity 9 Eastern on Fox.
We'll see you then back here tomorrow.
Thank you for making this show possible.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
Now I'm Carol Markovich.
And I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently.
Normally is about real conversations.
Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
When I told people, I was making a podcast about Benghazi.
Nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked why.
Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
From Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries, this is Fiasco Benghazi.
What difference at this point does it make?
Listen to Fiasco Benghazi on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So down a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
