Speaker 1: The Armstrong and Getty Show. I got a bunch of
Speaker 1: stuff to talk about coming up. The anti racist stuff
Speaker 1: has really taken off even faster than I feared. Um,
Speaker 1: the conversations anti racism training in government and schools and
Speaker 1: everything across the country really back hard and fast since Tuesday.
Speaker 1: Critical race theory. It is insidious, it is the new racism.
Speaker 1: It will destroy the country. Are we sitting on the
Speaker 1: breaking news or could we go ahead and say it there? Yeah,
Speaker 1: the great Hank Aaron has passed, that true home run
Speaker 1: king has passed, and we'll pay loving tribute to him. Uh. Sorry,
Speaker 1: you don't consider no, No, I do not those tiny
Speaker 1: testicles and giantead There's no need to bring his raisins
Speaker 1: into this. I don't think. Oh my gosh, this is
Speaker 1: an embarrassing moment for the show. From that idiocy to uh.
Speaker 1: One of the smartest people we know, Alan Hea Chen,
Speaker 1: David and Diane Stephie fellow in American Public Policy Studies
Speaker 1: at the Uver Institution and host of the most excellent
Speaker 1: podcast Crossing Lines with lon Hea Chen Long He how
Speaker 1: are you, sir, I'm well, good morning, gentlemen. Uh, We're
Speaker 1: glad to have you with us. So the new president
Speaker 1: famously issuing seventeen edicts from on high, one of which
Speaker 1: you're just discussing earlier executive orders fundamentally changing law in
Speaker 1: the United States. How did we get to the point
Speaker 1: where we essentially have a king who writes edicts and
Speaker 1: it changes law. Yeah. I hate it, I really do.
Speaker 1: And I by the way, I hate it whether a
Speaker 1: Republican president does it or a Democratic president. I especially
Speaker 1: hate it when I see some of the stuff that
Speaker 1: was signed into into law via executive order by by
Speaker 1: President Biden a few days ago. I think really when
Speaker 1: it started was presidents felt the need to show that
Speaker 1: they were doing something. They felt the need to to
Speaker 1: be spurred to action, and they couldn't work with Congress.
Speaker 1: You know, Congress has been dysfunctional for many, many years,
Speaker 1: and so they thought, well, why don't I just go
Speaker 1: and do it myself. And so, starting at the very
Speaker 1: end of the George W. Bush administration, through Barack Obama's
Speaker 1: terms in office, through of course Trump's term in office,
Speaker 1: and now Biden's following this trend, you know, presidents just
Speaker 1: decide to kind of go rogue and do their own thing.
Speaker 1: There's actually really there's a really famous Saturday Night Live
Speaker 1: skating You guys haven't seen it, you should look it up. Uh.
Speaker 1: That came during the that the Obama administration when Obama
Speaker 1: used executive action to create the Dot up program. This
Speaker 1: program for you know, for the so called dreamers, and
Speaker 1: it's the spoof on the old Schoolhouse Rock video that
Speaker 1: many of us watched the children where they talked about
Speaker 1: how it bill becomes a law. But this spoof is
Speaker 1: basically about executive orders, and the gist of it is,
Speaker 1: you know, instead of all the processes that you learn
Speaker 1: about going to the House, going to the Senate, this
Speaker 1: piece of paper shows up and he says, I basically
Speaker 1: just happened. And that's essentially what executive action is. And
Speaker 1: it's really it's really pernicious because it's circumvents what what
Speaker 1: the founders intended, what our constitution intended, which is to
Speaker 1: have a branch of government, the Congress, that legislation makes laws,
Speaker 1: and another branch of government the executive that executes those laws.
Speaker 1: And executive action in many ways circumvent that constitutional design.
Speaker 1: So you can understand the um what pushes you as
Speaker 1: a president to want to do it? Why is Congress
Speaker 1: abandoned their duty. Why did they give up that power
Speaker 1: and feel free to throw And where are the courts
Speaker 1: in all this? Yeah? Well, the courts step in, you know,
Speaker 1: because what happens is the president gets sued over a
Speaker 1: lot of these executive actions, and so the courts have
Speaker 1: to step in and say what is and what isn't
Speaker 1: you know? The presidents are supposed to use executive orders
Speaker 1: in particular, there's also this other mechanism called presidential memoranda.
Speaker 1: It's basically the same idea. They're really supposed to take
Speaker 1: a piece of law that already exists and if there's
Speaker 1: some element of executing it that they want to do differently,
Speaker 1: that's what executive action is for. So sometimes the court
Speaker 1: step in and say, no, President can't do this too
Speaker 1: much authority, this is not constitutional. Uh. The reason why
Speaker 1: Congress doesn't do anything about it is because Congress is
Speaker 1: incapable many times, because it's so politically deadlocked. There's so
Speaker 1: much polarization within Congress that it's really hard to get
Speaker 1: them to do much of anything sometimes. And it's tough
Speaker 1: because we have big problems that we need them to
Speaker 1: deal with, and they just can't come together. To do it.
Speaker 1: I mean, look at how long it took to figure
Speaker 1: out what we were going to do to solve some
Speaker 1: of the economic issues around coronavirus and around the shutdowns.
Speaker 1: And even then they didn't really solve them. They just
Speaker 1: kind of came together and spent more money. It's very
Speaker 1: frustrating to people, But really it's because of Congress's inability
Speaker 1: to do the people's work that presidents, I think, feel like, okay,
Speaker 1: well I'll just step in and I'll do something that's
Speaker 1: extra constitutional. I was kind of hoping our remember when
Speaker 1: Barack Obama was, you know, using his pen and phone
Speaker 1: that you know, various pundits were saying, well, he'll learn
Speaker 1: that these things can be overturned and the next election
Speaker 1: and presidents will learn. But I don't think presidents are
Speaker 1: going to learn any lesson. I mean, you've got a
Speaker 1: chance to do to have what you want done immediately. Um,
Speaker 1: Congress isn't really interested in doing it, and you know
Speaker 1: you've got four to eight years. So I don't think
Speaker 1: presidents are going to learn any lesson about this. No,
Speaker 1: of course not. And the courts are slow, right, it
Speaker 1: doesn't it sometimes that the courts will issue some kind
Speaker 1: of immediate injunction. You may remember during the whole debate
Speaker 1: over the so called Muslim ban at the start of
Speaker 1: the Trump administration, the court did step in and and
Speaker 1: and grant injunctive relief. So they stepped in the way
Speaker 1: of that going into place very quickly. But for the
Speaker 1: most part, courts are slow. It takes time for cases
Speaker 1: to make their way through the judicial system, and so
Speaker 1: presidents just say well why not, you know, and until
Speaker 1: people step up and say I don't vote, or step
Speaker 1: and say look, this is not something that we find acceptable. Yes,
Speaker 1: we like it when presidents go out and they do
Speaker 1: what they say they're going to do, but we don't
Speaker 1: like it when they do things that, frankly are beyond
Speaker 1: the scope of the constitution. That's the only time when
Speaker 1: when presidents and when the executive branch is gonna start
Speaker 1: listening and say, okay, well maybe business is the best
Speaker 1: way to get things done here' The thing I'll say, guys,
Speaker 1: is that the problem with executive action is it's so
Speaker 1: easily undone by the next administration. I mean you're seeing
Speaker 1: that already. Yeah, it's amazing. There's there are things that
Speaker 1: that Trump did that on day one, Biden can say no,
Speaker 1: we're not gonna do it that way anymore, and then
Speaker 1: there's no durability of policy. So we end up, you know,
Speaker 1: jerking back and forth between these extremes. It's not good
Speaker 1: for the country and it's just not good for where
Speaker 1: we're all headed. Lon h Chen with the Hoover Institution,
Speaker 1: host of the podcast Crossing Lines with lineha Chan is
Speaker 1: on the line, Uh, that has just uh sucked every
Speaker 1: little bit of hope out of me here. I don't
Speaker 1: know if that was your because as you were talking,
Speaker 1: I was thinking about, Okay, now, how do we rectify that?
Speaker 1: How do we the bipartisan or Congress. I mean, for instance,
Speaker 1: you would think both Republicans and Democrats would resent it
Speaker 1: when a guy on a day completely guts immigration policy
Speaker 1: and reform. I mean, it just changes it fundamentally. You'd
Speaker 1: think Congress would think, hey, that's our jobs, come on,
Speaker 1: but I don't know, they're just too busy fundraising and
Speaker 1: running for re election again. Yeah, well, I think that's
Speaker 1: part of it. And there's a shirts and skins mentality
Speaker 1: to you know. I think when the when the Republicans
Speaker 1: had Trump in office, they were they were not as
Speaker 1: fond of speaking up against executive action, you know, because
Speaker 1: they probably agreed with it. And now in a bunch
Speaker 1: of Democrats won't step up and say we disagree with
Speaker 1: what Bid is doing because they, you know, like what
Speaker 1: he's doing. But all of these members of Congress, every
Speaker 1: time a president exerts executive action in the way that
Speaker 1: we saw Obama do it, the way we saw Trump
Speaker 1: do it, the way we're seeing Biden do it. Every
Speaker 1: time they do that, they are diminishing the power of
Speaker 1: the Congress just a little bit more, and they are
Speaker 1: they're chipping away at what the Congress should be doing,
Speaker 1: which is writing laws and needs to do their job.
Speaker 1: These guys to step up, they need to in some cases.
Speaker 1: Guess they gotta work together, and they've got to come
Speaker 1: up with solutions that can actually pass. Democrats and Republicans together.
Speaker 1: That's what makes it so hard. But if they don't
Speaker 1: do it, guess what Presidents are gonna keep doing what
Speaker 1: they're doing. It's like, you know, it's like a small child.
Speaker 1: If you don't tell a small child, no, don't do that,
Speaker 1: you're gonna get hurt. Or no, they don't do that.
Speaker 1: It's not good for you. They're gonna keep doing it
Speaker 1: until they can get you know, they they keep getting
Speaker 1: away with it. So that's the problem we have. Your
Speaker 1: Congress is like a bunch of small children. I have
Speaker 1: noticed that with the child think yes, indeed without my kids.
Speaker 1: My final question, any thoughts in general about the upcoming
Speaker 1: alleged impeachment that everybody hasn't heard a thousand times before. Um.
Speaker 1: The one thing I keep hearing, by the way, from
Speaker 1: Republicans and Democrats on this is they just wanted over with.
Speaker 1: I don't know anybody who wants to spend a long
Speaker 1: time talking about or thinking about this. You know, Donald
Speaker 1: Trump is the former president. Now for those who didn't
Speaker 1: like him, there will be plenty of ways to quote
Speaker 1: hold him accountable. For those who do like him, they
Speaker 1: can keep figuring out how to get his misses and
Speaker 1: to follow him through whatever media channels he sets up.
Speaker 1: I just don't think that there's an appetite at this point.
Speaker 1: You know, we we we have big problems as the country.
Speaker 1: We really do that we've got to get to and
Speaker 1: now we're going to spend whatever two weeks, three weeks,
Speaker 1: whatever it is talking about a former president. I just
Speaker 1: don't think the appetite is there amongst most Americans. No,
Speaker 1: it feels so people watching they just want to move on.
Speaker 1: It feels so irrelevant now and it's just Friday, two
Speaker 1: days later, three days later. Wait, wait until you know,
Speaker 1: a month later, and there will be a number of events,
Speaker 1: you know, domestically and around the globe that have our attention,
Speaker 1: and I just I just can't imagine that anybody's going
Speaker 1: to be interested in at that point. And we will
Speaker 1: move on to those matters. The next conversation we have
Speaker 1: with Lanha Chen I Hope Lani of the Hoover Institution
Speaker 1: and crossing lines with Lanha Chen. Look it up, subscribe
Speaker 1: to it, Lani. It's always great to talk. Thank you,
Speaker 1: Thank you guys on a good weekend. You too. One
Speaker 1: thing I thought about bringing up with him just because
Speaker 1: I heard an interesting podcast conversation about it. Um at
Speaker 1: the risk of too much politics, because I'm trying to
Speaker 1: spend less time talking and thinking and reading about it
Speaker 1: because I think it's healthy. But um, You've got a
Speaker 1: big chunk of the Republican Party that is very very
Speaker 1: Trumpey Trump still has a very high approval rating in
Speaker 1: the Republican Party. Then you got, you know, like the
Speaker 1: Mitt Romney um Lynn Cheney wing. I don't know how
Speaker 1: many of those people are. And Trump talked about forming
Speaker 1: a new party, but there's some belief now that there's
Speaker 1: a bit of a game of chicken of how about
Speaker 1: you form a new party? Mitt Romney and Lynn Chaney.
Speaker 1: You're not happy with the way the Trump version of Republicans.
Speaker 1: How about you form a new party? We're this party
Speaker 1: and both sides feeling that way. You know, Mitt Romney
Speaker 1: Lynn Chaney crowd thinking you, yeah, go form your Patriot
Speaker 1: party around Donald Trump, and the Donald Trump crowds thinking
Speaker 1: not about you go form a new party because both
Speaker 1: parties over the years have gone out of their way
Speaker 1: to put into place a bunch of rules, laws, whatever
Speaker 1: they are, to make it very difficult for a third
Speaker 1: party to ever get a lot of traction. Democrats and
Speaker 1: Republicans work together on this. Yeah, there's great institutional advantage
Speaker 1: to actually being the Republican party. Um, there's all kinds
Speaker 1: of you know, money and uh, an opportunity for being
Speaker 1: on the ballot. Stuff that's just so much easier. An
Speaker 1: enormous infrastructure, Yeah, enormous infrastructure, and so you can see
Speaker 1: why why if there are in numbers way more trumpets
Speaker 1: then there are not. And I think that's it's definitely
Speaker 1: the case in the House based on the vote last
Speaker 1: week as we sit and speak today, Yes, that's true.
Speaker 1: Then that then you can see why they'd say, hey,
Speaker 1: well you go farm your own party. Good luck with that, yea, yeah,
Speaker 1: And I think that game of Chicken is going to
Speaker 1: be interesting to follow over the next however long well,
Speaker 1: at the risk of lightning striking me, and I'd have
Speaker 1: it coming honestly. Two will be a major milestone in
Speaker 1: that question. Who has the reins, who has that support.
Speaker 1: Although there's a tendency in among the jabbering classes of
Speaker 1: which we are apart um to make ground grand pronouncements
Speaker 1: of the way things are going to be going forward,
Speaker 1: when honestly, always, always, always, the fact that the Clintons
Speaker 1: remained on the scene as long as they did, semi
Speaker 1: relevant or or clinging bitterly to relevance was an outlier.
Speaker 1: It's extremely rare these days. So what the political landscape
Speaker 1: looks like in two years, four years place nobody knows.
Speaker 1: Nobody has any idea