Ep 258 | Rep. Ro Khanna & Glenn Beck Debate Deportations, Tax Cuts & Trump | The Glenn Beck Podcast

loves a challenge.

It's why she lifts heavy weights

and likes complicated recipes.

But for booking her trip to Paris, Olivia chose the easy way with Expedia.

She bundled her flight with a hotel to save more.

Of course, she still climbed all 674 steps to the top of the Eiffel Tower.

You were made to take the easy route.

We were made to easily package your trip.

Expedia, made to travel.

Flight-inclusive packages are at all

And now, a Blaze Media Podcast.

Hello, America.

You know, we've been fighting every single day.

We push back against the lies, the censorship, the nonsense of the mainstream media that they're trying to feed you.

We work tirelessly to bring you the unfiltered truth because you deserve it.

But to keep this fight going, we need you.

Right now, would you take a moment and rate and review the Glenn Beck podcast?

Give us five stars and leave a comment because every single review helps us break through big tech's algorithm to reach more Americans who need to hear the truth.

This isn't a podcast.

This is a movement and you're part of it, a big part of it.

So if you believe in what we're doing, you want more people to wake up, help us push this podcast to the top.

Rate, review, share.

Together, we'll make a difference.

And thanks for standing with us.

Now let's get to work.

My next guest is a Democratic representative from California.

Supports Medicare for all, abortion, increasing the the federal minimum wage, was a

co-sponsor of the Transgender Bill of Rights.

What are we going to talk about?

Well, he also supports American manufacturing.

He says it's time to end the cancel culture.

He has publicly supported some of President Trump's ideas, believes that America is, at our core, a good country filled with good people.

I don't want to find necessarily common ground, and I don't want a gotcha interview.

I would rather spend our time looking at the big picture and what's coming, especially because the area that he represents is Silicon Valley.

That will be

the place where a lot of this change is going to happen first.

So, we welcome to the podcast, Congressman Ro Kana.

Cono ju las crucientes and

delicious trosos de grandola, nues y fruta fruta.

Queste todos vana disfrutado.

Honey punchos de votes for all.

Today, para saber más.

Congressman, welcome.

Glad to have you.

Thank you.

Now,

I love talking to people that

disagree with me,

especially if we can find places where we agree.

And there's plenty of places that

we can agree.

But I have to start with this.

We wanted to have you on the show.

We've called your office several times to have you on the show.

And one of them, the last one, I think, was on the stock trading bill.

And it didn't happen.

And then we were surprised last week when your office called us and said you wanted to be on and we love it.

But it wouldn't have anything to do with you possibly running for president, would it?

Not at all.

Not at all.

You've got a lot of followers.

And look, at the end of the day, we're all Team America.

We have differences of opinion, but this country has gone down a place of greater and greater division.

And I do hope that the next generation, whether that's J.D.

Vance, Rubio, myself, others, that we find some way of turning that around, of finding some common ground on a few key things, building manufacturing in this country, making sure that we're turning around hollow towns, Lorraine, Johnstown, Youngstown, places that haven't had a fair shot, making sure we're dealing more with the stagnant economy and wages, making sure we stay ahead of China.

I mean, we're all in this to make sure America leads the 21st century.

So

I would say

at this point, usually,

well, yeah, but do you believe in the Bill of Rights?

I know you do.

So

let me ask you this way.

We could get together with J.D.

Vance and you and everybody else that believe in the Bill of Rights.

But when you set off to say as a politician, we're very divided, but we can find our way towards X, Y, and Z.

I don't think we find our way back to each other if we don't return to our basic principles, which have nothing to do with politics.

All men are created equal, endowed by their creator with rights, life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, governments instituted among men, and government are to protect those rights.

And just to reiterate, here are the Bill of Rights.

Right now, there's a lot of people, and I think it's in some on both sides that don't agree with any of that.

Look, I agree with you that our common defining moment as a nation is the Constitution.

and the Bill of Rights as interpreted through the Declaration of Independence.

The biggest blessing I had as as a son of immigrants born in Philadelphia in our bicentenary is I got to go to a school that taught American history and gave me a reverence for this country.

My parents said, Ro, you won the lottery.

They didn't talk a lot about my rights.

They talked about my responsibilities.

They said, go learn about this country's history.

Go learn every word in the English language that you can, because being strong in English means being strong in America.

And I have the deepest love for this country.

I understand what it's like for people in other parts of the world, how people would give anything to come to the United States of America.

That's got to be our common ground.

That's what makes us an exceptional nation.

But that is also how we have rule of law over rule of men,

et cetera, et cetera.

I mean, I will,

you know, I said to the president, I've talked to the president several times and disagreed with him strongly on a few things.

And, you know, one of the things that I've said on the air is anybody on the right that is is talking about making sure he could have a third term, I'm not with you.

That you change the Constitution, and that's fine, but you're not going to be able to.

But change the Constitution.

We cannot make exceptions.

Will you say the same thing about the Democrats?

Oh, yeah, I would say Obama shouldn't have a third term, but I don't mean necessarily just about that.

I mean, we don't.

Look, look, I agree with you.

I had joked around in Bucks County yesterday or two days ago that Donald Trump's not running for a third term.

I don't know if he realizes it or not.

There are a lot of people like

you.

But yes, I think there's certain things we should agree on in the Constitution, but let me push you, and you can certainly push me.

What about the view of due process?

The First Amendment, the 14th Amendment, say that due process should be for every person.

in America.

It doesn't say citizen.

That's how the framers drafted it.

That's how the drafters of the 14th Amendment drafted it.

J.D.

Vance has said, no, we should have a separate, different standard, lesser standard of due process if you're not a citizen.

My view, and that I think the Supreme Court will have this view, is that that's not what the Constitution says.

I mean, what would you say on something like that?

So I would love to have a discussion about that.

I mean, a real discussion

because I don't think that

the Constitution is clear.

Exactly what you said, the Supreme Court.

I don't like that,

but I don't, because I think we're in a different situation, but you don't change the Constitution for different situations, which would bring me to, if you want to have due process there, would you agree with me that there should be due process on red flag laws, that there should be due process on civil asset forfeiture,

that we need to have due process on everything.

The government just can't take things from you without due process.

Absolutely.

I would never say that someone should have their guns taken away without having a due process in a court of law.

And so you can't just say, you know, Rokana thinks that you've committed domestic violence and now let's take away your guns.

You've got to go through a court proceeding.

You've got to have due process.

Absolutely.

And civil asset forfeiture is the same on that.

Same thing with civil asset forfeiture.

In fact, on civil asset forfeiture, they're actually

progressive Democrats like me and libertarians of the Freedom Caucus often align saying that the government shouldn't come in and be able to

take things from citizens without due process.

I believe

that's the essence of who we are as a people: that you have inalienable rights endowed by God,

and that that's who makes American citizens.

How do you solve?

Because

laws without common sense become a cage.

But

common sense, you know, without laws is,

you know, is chaos.

So

how do you balance this?

Because we are, I don't know, I'd love to hear you talk about this.

We are at a place with our republic that if we don't make big

moves

to restore

the principles that brought us to the table and restore financial sanity, et cetera, et cetera,

we're going to fall apart.

I mean, we're in the seven cycles of the end of

empires.

We're in the seventh stage.

So

how would you put this back together when you know that we have four years of await for anybody that needs to be deported?

And you had a president and quite honestly, a party that allowed millions of people to come in here,

disrupt American lives, American cities.

How do we balance this?

How do we solve this problem

and not just completely overwhelm the system as Cloward and Piven would tell you they would be happy about?

Back with Mornis.

Second, right now, the average American is still finding it difficult to pay expenses every month.

In most cases, there is nothing left over to cover any of the extras.

Most aren't getting a big raise.

And with expenses being up so high, it can be very hard to manage without grabbing for credit cards listen if you are a homeowner and you're frustrated with that endless cycle that only produces more debt i want you to take 10 minutes today and call american financing if you're constantly carrying a credit card balance each and every month with an interest rate in the 20s or even 30s american financing can show you how to put your hard-earned equity to work and get you out of debt their salary-based mortgage consultants are saving their customers an average of $800 a month.

That could be you.

You could get started today.

You may not have next month's mortgage payment if you start today.

That would help.

No upfront fees.

It costs you nothing to find out how much you could be saving every month.

Call American Financing.org.

I'm sorry,.net.

AmericanFinancing.net.

The number is 800-906-2440.

AmericanFinancing.net.

This podcast is supported by Progressive, a leader in RV Insurance.

RVs are for sharing adventures with family, friends, and even your pets.

So if you bring your cats and dogs along for the ride, you'll want Progressive RV Insurance.

They protect your cats and dogs like family by offering up to $1,000 in optional coverage for vet bills in case of an RV accident, making it a great companion for the responsible pet owner who loves to travel.

See Progressive's other benefits and more when you quote RV Insurance at progressive.com today.

Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates, pet injuries, and additional coverage and subject to policy terms.

Well, look, I'm not going to defend the border situation that we should not have had 8 million, whatever the number is, whatever it is,

without

a process.

I say American people are pretty fair about it.

Someone said it's like a knock-knock joke.

You say knock-knock, who's there?

The American people just want to know who's there, who's at the border, just like you would

on coming to someone's house and

make sure that people are vetted before they come in.

That seems to be very reasonable, a place we can agree.

But I also believe that people here, now that they're here,

if they're paying taxes, and we may just, you and I may disagree with this, if they're paying taxes, if they're working hard

and that they've been here, that there should be some path to at least legalization.

I say citizenship, but why not legalization?

Look, the reality is, Glenn, tell me if you think I'm wrong.

There are maybe 12 million undocumented folks here.

How many people at the end of Donald Trump's term who are undocumented do you expect will still be in the United States?

My guess is there'll be 11.5 million.

Yeah, I believe there will be 10 plus at least.

11 million.

What are we going to do?

And he's the person who's been the most, oh, let's have mass deportation.

Why don't we have some solution of folks that are here?

Well, I think that's what, I mean, I think that's what he's trying.

I think that's what he's trying to do.

You know, you may not appreciate the way he's doing it, and we can disagree with that.

But he is trying to restore order to a complete.

I mean, it's interesting to me that the Supreme Court did not have any problem with any of the abuses that were going on with the state's rights and and honestly the drug trafficking the the children that have been trafficked the women who have been raped on the border because it was chaos it was absolutely open and but wait wait wait and nobody seemed to have a problem with it and now when you try to correct it now everybody wants to get legalistic and and i appreciate that because i stand on the constitution but it's convenient how do we fix it and not swamp our nation?

And I mean, with legal swamp.

But I think, look, I think one of the reasons, the two reasons I think Donald Trump was re-elected, I mean, he would know more.

He's the one who won, so you can ask him.

My view is it was on inflation and it was on the border.

And I think he had

a lot of people who wanted him to

tighten up the border, make sure folks aren't coming across

without papers.

But But he did more than that.

He started this process of deporting folks.

Now, I also think most people, including me, would say if you're convicted of a violent crime, you should be deported.

They just want to make sure that the person who's deported is actually convicted.

And Carl Rohm was on TV saying if you just brought a Brego back, gave him a trial, showed whether he was guilty, and then deported him, he'd have a lot more credibility.

And so I guess my view on Trump is, okay, if you want to fix the border, why not have some process of people who are here in an undocumented way that respects their rights?

Because you'd have a lot more credibility and

a lot less division from the American people.

So do you know who the president was that deported more people than any other president?

Barack Obama?

I don't know.

I know he had high deportation.

Bill Clinton.

Bill Clinton was way beyond anybody else.

Then it becomes, I believe, number two is Barack Obama.

Donald Trump is

in last place.

Why is there a problem now?

Well, I think the problem is not on the numbers, it's the process, right?

I mean,

it's Vance coming out there explicitly saying, and Vance is a really, really smart guy.

I mean, I'm not, but he's explicitly saying in his Twitter post, we don't need to have due process at the same standard because the previous president let in all these people who are undocumented.

And you can't say, okay, now that

they've been let in, that you don't have due process.

But, you know, as you pointed out, the Constitution doesn't make exceptions, and this is what makes us a great country.

It is that you could have someone who's an unsympathetic character, but in America, you get justice and you get a process.

And I really think that this is what's eroding some of

the trust because my party had no trust, very little trust on immigration.

But people ultimately in this country are very fair.

They want a process.

And

that's, I think, where a lot of the concern is.

You said, and

I really want to understand this.

You said, what's saddest to me about the rise of President Trump is it reflects the deep disdain that many Americans have for politicians and politics.

They think we roll out poll-tested policies for votes.

They think we spend too much time raising money and catering to wealthy donors.

And they think we prioritize procedure over action.

I mean,

I think we have to, I wrote this down.

I think we have to cut this at 40 minutes because you are going for a vote on the procedures, procedural rules for the rest of the week.

So, I mean,

it is true.

All those things are true, but

Americans have grown weary of both any politician saying one thing and doing the other, treating them with disdain

in many cases.

You know, you just, you open, I'm not saying you, but a lot of politicians just openly lie.

They'll say one thing and they'll turn the, the, you know, turn around and do the exact opposite.

And

that is also part of what we're supposed to do in America.

You know, George Washington said,

you know, government is like fire.

If you're in control of it, it's great.

If you lose control of it, it'll burn everything to the ground.

So we should be, in a healthy way, suspicious or on guard and holding all of our politicians accountable.

Agree?

Totally agree.

And that skepticism is healthy.

I get concerned if there are town halls and people weren't asking hard questions, weren't criticizing

their politicians.

But I think there's a difference between skepticism and what's happened now, which is just a loss of trust, a sense that people aren't in it for the country, aren't in it for the public good.

And part of what's happened is, look, if you were living in one of these factory towns, a community like Western Pennsylvania, right?

Western Pennsylvania built America.

It was part of what won us our freedom.

They produced more steel.

than Japan and Germany combined.

Before my parents even came to this country, there were people scaling the cliffs of Normandy, producing the steel, that won us our freedom.

And then they have watched for 50 years being hollowed out.

Steel going from 50% of America's production.

Now China makes 50%.

They're at 4%.

And no one came in those communities and said, here's what we're going to do to have economic development, to have an economic future for these communities.

And you know what?

My district's net worth is $14 trillion.

NVIDIA, Apple, Google.

And people are looking at it saying, look, we're the ones who fought the wars we're the ones who built the steel we're the ones who built this country why did you abandon us the governing class and i i really think that was the the anger in part that trump uh identified and and and and but i disagree with his solutions that david brooks says he asks all the right questions has the wrong answers but i do think if the democratic party wants to get back i'm not i'm not saying everyone, but we just we come from

I would say let's have a Marshall Plan for America.

Let's argue argue with donald trump on who's going to be better at building new factories in these places getting new economic opportunity in these places getting the young kids in these places to have technology jobs that are going to as well as other jobs that to have a future so would you would you then agree with the president that uh because he said he's cutting all the red tape and he is going to let these companies build power plants, nuclear power plants, cleanest power of all time, as long as they're regulated and they're built right, especially now with the new power plants.

They're the safest form of energy ever devised by man.

And

he's focused on AI, which if we don't win in the AI race, which requires all of this power,

you're not going to be rebuilding anything.

He is trying to onshore jobs.

bring AI.

What part of that do you disagree with?

I'm for nuclear power.

I'm one of the Democrats who supported nuclear power.

But his plan is to, I mean, it may be different than yours, but his plan is let's reshore jobs, let's bring them back,

let's create power, and let's win the AI race because that will determine what all jobs really are going to be in the future.

We must command that.

Do you disagree with those goals?

I don't disagree with the goals, and I think it has to be broader than winning the AI race.

I'd like to see modern steel manufacturing here, modern aluminum, modern ship-like.

Where I disagree with him is two things on AI.

And I've been going back and forth with David Sachs today on Twitter in a respectful way.

I've met David for a long time.

But, you know, his point is, okay, we did this deal with UAE and Abu Dhabi because otherwise the Chinese would get in there.

But, you know, you know, in Western Pennsylvania, Homer City, which has a natural gas plant, by the way, that was going to get shut down.

They want to build, be the

AI center, and it's a $10 billion plan.

And I would like the American president to first focus on building the largest AI centers in places like Pennsylvania, Ohio,

other parts of the country.

How about we announce the

United States first, and then we do the Abu Dhabi stuff.

Right.

I think he's doing both.

You know, and I know that the man can walk and chew gum.

He's, he seems to be able to juggle a thousand things, and he is doing that.

And I agree with you.

We have to bring steel, but this is an argument that I've had with a lot of conservatives.

They say we got to keep the budget increasing for defense.

Why?

When

in three years,

AI may say,

because I think aircraft carriers are the horses of World War I,

everything is going to change.

Why not?

focus for the next three years, finish the jobs you've already got in line, but let's focus on AI and creating, like you said, the steel plants, et cetera, et cetera, to be able to build anew in a different way, because everything is about to change.

And you know that being from Silicon Valley.

You know that.

I love that because I think that this new AI and technology is going to allow us to reindustrialize this country.

Yes.

Bring these new jobs in the communities that were hollowed out to help us lead against China, but also bring us together as a country.

Imagine the technology from the coast.

I know the conservatives are a lot of criticisms of California, but imagine some of the robotics and AI from the coast working with the industrial might, the know-how, the hard work of places in the South and in the Midwest.

And I call it economic patriotism.

It's how we rebuild this country.

And I also agree with you on the defense budget.

I mean, not to be partisan, but they're adding $150 billion to defense.

It's over a trillion-dollar budget.

And I'm with you.

You know, we ought to make it more emerging technology, more focus on drones.

I'm with you.

I think what we're doing with the Defense Department.

Look,

I believe the biggest problem that we have, the one that is breathing down, well, it's a lot of things.

I mean, our disconnect from one another is going to kill us.

But another thing that's going to kill us is our debt.

And I'm sorry, but everybody's got to take a haircut on this.

We've got to find ways.

to cut down and increasing the budget of the Defense Department is exactly the wrong direction.

I want to see them cut into the Defense Department, but I want to see them cut is I want to see them cut everywhere.

How big of a problem is our debt in your book?

That's a huge problem.

We're sitting on $36 trillion of debt, but everyone's to blame, right?

I mean, you know,

I want to cut defense.

So I've known Elon 15 years.

When he first went into government, I said, Elon, with SpaceX, you disrupted the NASA and Defense Department.

Help focus on defense and and how we get more for the money we're spending.

My view, and we may probably disagree with USAID and the purpose of it and value of it, but we certainly agree on the facts that it's less than 1% of the budget.

And there may be other reasons to cut it, but it's certainly not going to do anything on the national debt.

You want to get to the debt,

defense is 56%, and that was untouched by Doge.

The total cuts of Doge, you get $86 billion.

It wasn't close to the $1 trillion or

$2 trillion.

trillion.

And the Republican budget, I mean, Chip Roy, this is why he's still not sold.

You have a $36 trillion debt.

Biden's budget would have added $24 trillion to that if it had continued.

And the Republican current budget would add $28 trillion to that.

So how do we solve this?

Because if you, because there are people like Chip Roy who are out there who actually believe this and know that, look, this is a ticking time bomb.

We don't have many years left.

And if there's a large disruption,

it may collapse it at that time.

We must take care of this debt, but nobody seems to want to.

They all campaign on it.

They all say it.

But once they get to Washington, they all

turn the other way.

I shouldn't say all.

The majority turn the other way.

So what do we do?

How do we fix that?

Well, look, I have a progressive approach to balancing the deficit.

You may not agree with that, but I think it starts with taxing billionaires more in my district.

I think it means eliminating the Social Security cap.

Right now, over $250,000, you don't pay Social Security tax.

I think we'd have to pay that.

I would get rid of the step-up in basis that you have.

You know, if you make, put $10,000 in Facebook site, it goes to $100,000, then you pass it to your kids.

You don't have to pay capital gains tax on that.

I would have a tax on stock buybacks.

I would cut defense budget.

But I can send you a budget that has appropriate increase in tax, some of the cuts in defense,

and some actually making government more effective and efficient without hurting services.

That would get you on a path towards a more balanced budget.

So, well, we have to cut.

I mean, it's only a matter of time before everybody understands.

We have to cut

something from everywhere, including services.

But we should do it

as compassionately as we possibly can.

Let me go back to the budget.

You said, let's pass a budget.

I would love Congress to pass a budget.

The last budget we passed was in 2008.

It's so irresponsible.

One of the things that I'm pushing for is

Congress to take their power back.

No American, either left or right, should be afraid of the next president of the United States.

And you've got

half the country freaking out if it's this person, and the other half freaking out if it's this person.

That shows there's too much power in the administration.

Why won't Congress take their power back?

Glenn, you're absolutely right.

I mean,

the reality is the Federalist Papers, which you've read, assumed that people would have ambition in Congress.

They thought we'd have to cry who would give up their place

to the president.

And yet it happens on both sides.

When a Democratic president comes in, Democrats

are too deferential.

And in this case, I think it's happened to an extreme where the Republicans are going along with Trump.

To the credit of some, Don Bacon, Chip Roy, others, they're saying, no, we need to.

You know, Mike Lee, I don't know as well, but I guess.

The Reigns Act.

He's pushing the Reigns Act.

Please take your your power back.

But, you know, on matters of war and peace, on matters of budgets, a matter of terrorists.

By the way, for the Democrats on my side, we're really upset with Musk's cuts that I agree are

too much power and one that hasn't been authorized.

You know why we haven't been able to clearly sue him?

Because we're on these continuing resolutions.

And so it's not clear what Congress has authorized.

So we are the ones who created this ambiguity that he and Doge has exploited.

If we had actual budgets with line items, it'd be much easier for the courts.

So

this is a deeper problem.

Yes, I think you and I probably disagree on this.

I think Trump is excessive in his abuse of it, but it is a deeper problem that Congress has been giving power to the president, more and more power.

And that's not what this country was supposed to be at its founding.

More with Rokana in just a second.

First, so many people are living with everyday pain.

They're just stuck with it.

It is what it is, but it doesn't have to be.

Let me tell you about Jenny from Texas and her Relief Factor story.

Jenny was out for a walk when she was unfortunately hit by a car.

Nothing she tried for her lower back pain would reduce it at all.

Then she heard about Relief Factor and she's like, why not?

Give it a shot.

Well, Relief Factor worked beautifully for her.

She said her pain decreased, her range of motion increased, and to say she's grateful is really an understatement.

If you're living with aches and pain, see how Relief Factor, the daily drug-free supplement, could help you live and feel better every day.

Give their three-week quick start a try, only $19.95.

In a few weeks or even days, feel the difference Relief Factor can make.

You don't have to be stuck living with pain.

ReliefFactor.com.

That's relief factor.com or 1-800-4 RELIEF.

Attention, all small biz owners.

At the UPS store, you can count on us to handle your packages with care.

With our certified packing experts, your packages are properly packed and protected.

And with our pack and ship guarantee, when we pack it and ship it, we guarantee it.

Because your items arrive safe or you'll be reimbursed.

Visit the upsstore.com/slash guarantee for full details.

Most locations are independently owned.

Product services, pricing, and hours of operation may vary.

See Center for Details.

The UPS store.

Be unstoppable.

Come into your local store today.

Any president, both presidents, the last two, the last one and this one, have abused their power.

They've gone beyond the scope of what is normal in America.

And it happened with the president before that and the president before that.

If Congress allows the administrative state to just make rules any way they want, oh, it's up to the secretary to make that, then this is the system you get.

You have no check on the administrative power because you've destroyed the checks and balances system.

The check on administrative power was Congress, but you've given all that power to the president.

You've got to take it back.

I agree that Congress needs to be the check.

But

right now, on the oversight committee, I mean, they're not doing anything.

There's no oversight.

I had said Elon's upset.

I mean, I said he should come and subpoena and testify to Congress.

How can you have all these cuts that you're doing and not tell Congress and the American people what you're doing?

So my view is

how could you spend all this money as Congress?

How could you just give them all this money without anybody knowing what they're doing?

Look at the things that they have found that you're like, wait a minute, we were doing what?

So that goes both ways.

The country is out of control is the point, I think.

I will give you that the Congress needs to assert its power more, that the Congress needs to have strong oversight.

You know, you and I disagree.

I think the administrative state in many places has played a constructive role.

I mean, that was the architecture of the progressive era, the FDR, in terms of clean water, clean air, safe food.

There are a lot of people.

We all want that.

We all want that.

But Congress, I think, has to have an assertive oversight role and not just a perfunctory role,

which is what has allowed presidents way too much power on war and peace,

way too much power to do what they want in terms of these agencies and disconnects from the American public.

Yeah, I'm concerned just as much about the agencies doing what they want without the presidential

seal of approval.

They get to make the laws and should be in Congress anyway.

You were instrumental.

I mean, you worked hard and it was kind of your architecture on the Inflation Reduction Act.

A, how much inflation did it reduce?

And B,

Joe Biden came out and said, wish we would have named it that because it was a Green New Deal, which was.

So I don't want to take too much credit for it.

I'm proud of the Inflation Reduction Act, but I had much more of a role in the Chips and Science Act.

I did play some role in the Inflation Reduction Act with being part of the conversations to convince Manchin to support it.

But I don't want to exaggerate my role just out of honesty.

But here's why I think it's a good thing.

Two parts.

One, it has a lot of tax credits for wind, for solar, for geothermal.

I don't understand

why are we debating this, right?

I mean, the point is, I'm for nuclear.

Spain.

But why not have all of the above?

You know, it's...

Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.

If you're saying all of above, I am with you.

In fact, that's what Donald Trump is saying as well,

trying to rebalance, make sure that we're not destroying everything we have and become Spain with the blackouts.

These tax credits, right?

We have tax credits, tax subsidies that we're giving the oil and gas industry that we have since 1916, accelerating.

Shouldn't.

Shouldn't.

I agree with you there.

But why not with this new industry where it's just three to four, five cents a kilowatt hour, cheaper right now than nuclear, though I'm for nuclear?

Why wouldn't we want to lead in this over China?

And by the way, the places that are leading are Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama.

These are a lot of southern states that have a lot of

the biggest investments in battery and solar.

So to me, you know, I don't want China China leading in this new

technology.

So

here's the thing that I come back to.

There are those who want to reduce the human population or reduce our energy to the point to where it's, you know, the dark ages,

you know,

and

I'm all for new kinds of energy.

I'm at my ranch now, which is completely off the grid.

It's all solar.

I mean, the windmill fell down and we didn't notice that it even fell down.

So we're not doing that.

But

it is green as much as we possibly can be green.

We do have generators from time to time that have to kick on.

And it is 100% unreliable.

And

I have spent over a million dollars over the last 10 years trying to make green energy reliable for the use that I would use for, you know, I have to do broadcasts.

So I'm pulling more juice out.

That is not ready.

I mean, maybe you can do it for a small house, but this is not ready for the government and I mean, sorry, for the

industry of the United States.

But no one is saying that we can be 100% renewable and we need better battery technology.

We need that type of battery technology, not just for the grids, but that could be in your house so that you can capture it and use it or in your ranch.

But that's what, in my view, the IRA was doing.

It was trying to facilitate these new technologies.

Now, if you say, can we just just do all in solar, wind, geothermal, I mean, that'd be unrealistic.

But my view is let's build as much of that as we can.

I'm with you on that, but that's not where many people on the left in your own party are.

They are for destroying oil and natural gas, which we were told was, we had to go on destroying any possibility of nuclear energy.

We have to have all of it.

With AI coming online in the next five years, it requires 99%

of all of the energy that we're currently producing.

You want to talk about being behind China.

China's building every kind of power plant you can imagine under the sun.

Every week, they're opening a new one.

I haven't seen a new one open.

We could do it right here, Glenn.

I mean, because you've been very thoughtful.

I didn't know you had so many solar and wind at your ranch.

Why don't we say, look, we're going to need some of the natural gas in Western Pennsylvania and Homer City to build the AI data center there.

We're going to need nuclear, but we also shouldn't get rid, in my view, of the IRA tax credits because we're going to need the solar, battery, wind production, and America should be this energy leader

in the world.

So, help me out on something because

this is a view that I hold that I despise, but it's the only answer I can come up with.

And that is UBI.

With AI coming

and the displacement of jobs that is coming.

I mean, we're going to find new jobs.

We're going to have to retrain, et cetera.

But there is going to be a massive turnover of jobs, and that will lead to all kinds of problems.

And

we've got to talk about something like UBI, but not from the government.

I think it should come from these companies that have used all of my information, all of your information, all of everybody's information

to gain this power that they will now have over the world and the wealth.

Do you agree?

I'm for the idea of a tax on people's data and a dividend, but it's probably not going to, when you look and do the math, it's probably not more than $500 or $1,000 individually.

I'm only going to...

So, but

where are we going to get the

Do you agree that some sort of universal basic income or something like that is going to have to come into play?

I think it's important as people are transitioning or if they're out of work, but I don't think we can, this country is too proud.

They don't want all the production, all the wealth generation to be in Silicon Valley and people.

So, how do we?

Because I agree with that, but how do we stop?

We're setting up a system where there could be four people that have 90% of the wealth because they control AI.

So,

how do we stop that?

Well, I think we've got to,

first of all,

democratize AI.

Let me be very concrete.

If we're going to have new factories that are AI robotics, instead of 4,500 people, maybe they have 500 people because they're still going to need precision machinists.

Correct.

They're going to need quality control.

Why aren't those 500 people who are working there, why don't they get some stock?

I mean, why is it that just the CEO should get the stock and the capital owners should get the stock?

With the increased productivity, those workers should be building as well.

So, I think workers need to have some equity and ownership in a model where AI is going to have productivity.

I think we need to have massive new industry, new factories coming up with these increased productivity.

So, you go to a place like Johnstown and you're honest.

Okay, the new steel plant there is not going to have 4,500 people.

It's going to have 700 people.

But you know what?

They're still going to need restaurants.

When you go to a restaurant,

I really don't want a robot serving me, just like I hate the fact when I'm on cvs and i got a

struggle with a checkout counter and you know and the ai is not going to replace you glenn they don't have your sense of humor or i mean i i don't i don't think we could have a glenn beck bot yet in terms of so i think there's a lot of people that follow you that would be very would is right in that camp we cannot have one we should not have one

you know so i think there's there's there's creativity there's care uh but the cliche is that ai is not going to take your job but people who know AI may.

And that's why I do think one of the things really important is to have tech academies.

Look, there's something more important than learning tech, and that is learning about the Constitution, American history, and

how to be good writers in English and readers in English.

But the second most important thing for kids today is to have some understanding of technology so that when they become an electrician, a plumber, a nurse, a doctor,

that they know the machines,

how to prompt them.

You still need for AI, someone to prompt the AI, someone to ask the question, someone to know the business.

And I think those are the types of jobs we want young people to have in the modern factory.

So, what I think this country is desperate for is to say, look, we understand where the future is going.

Don't just tell us we're not going to have work or opportunity.

We want to build economic growth.

And I agree.

absolutely agree with that.

I have been saying this for 15 years.

We must talk about what's coming our way with AI, because once it arrives, it's too late to talk about.

We need to plan.

And, you know, if we treat this like we treated your iPhone or social media, we're doomed.

We can't take this casually and just go, well, I'll just see what happens.

But on the other hand, with you.

With you in government,

how would you legislate

against or to control AI?

I mean, it's going to be moving so fast by the time you'd get it through Congress, it's already mutated.

Well, I'd say two things.

I think there are two issues.

One is the kind of killer robots.

AI is a threat.

I'm not dismissing that, but I think the bigger threat of AI is it's going to be like globalization.

It's going to lead to the concentration of wealth generation in certain communities in places like Silicon Valley.

It's going to hollow out the working and middle class.

The way to deal with that is to first figure out that workers have a say in how this technology is going to be adopted, workers get ownership, that we're actually deploying the technology to create economic prosperity across the country with a concerted effort with government and the private sector, a Marshall Plan for America, where we're saying, here's our economic vision for every community in this country.

On the regulation, I don't think politicians are going to be able to do it.

I mean, if you see the questioning in Congress, I said Congress is the only body that could make Mark Zuckerberg look sympathetic.

He came

like, go get him.

And then you have these congresspeople, Bill Courtney's being like, Mark, you know, who makes the iPhone, Apple or Google?

And they're like, God help us.

You know, and we need a AI regulatory body, like we have a nuclear body with scientists, technologists, experts to be able to do it.

Okay, I got votes coming up, Glenn.

I know.

I want to thank you

for having the conversation.

Love to have you back.

Thank you very much.

You know, we need more conversations like this in this country.

I agree.

You know, we're honest differences, but a common commitment to the Constitution.

Anybody who says don't talk to the other side is dangerous.

If I can't ask you how you got there, I can't make any growth.

And I'm also then just declaring that I'm smarter than you, and I'm not.

Well, we have to have these conversations.

Who knows?

But look, I appreciate that you did this with civility, thoughtfulness, stuck to your principles.

I just think the country would be a better place that we could have more country.

Thank you, Congressman.

Appreciate it.

Just a reminder: I'd love you to rate and subscribe to the podcast and pass this on to a friend so it can be discovered by other people.