Speaker 1: Not a lot of people traveling these days, especially by air,
Speaker 1: and when you do travel by air, it's not particularly comfortable.
Speaker 1: That is, unless you were on a private seven forty
Speaker 1: seven with the President of the United States. That's an
Speaker 1: experience that my co host just had. We will get
Speaker 1: into what the senator spoke about with the President. This
Speaker 1: is Verdict with Ted Cruz. Welcome back to Verdicts with
Speaker 1: Ted Cruz. I'm Michael Knowles, Senator. You know I often
Speaker 1: express envy and hurt that I'm not invited to your
Speaker 1: Senate Republican lunches, and I got to tell you the
Speaker 1: ride aboard Air Force One sounds like, well, I don't know, someday,
Speaker 1: I assume my invitation was lost in the mail. Please.
Speaker 1: It sounds like you had a crazy day yesterday. Take
Speaker 1: us through it. Well, we did, as you and I
Speaker 1: were supposed to film Verdict yesterday together in DC, and
Speaker 1: I'm embarrassed to admit that I canceled on you. I
Speaker 1: stood you up because, well, the President was coming to
Speaker 1: Texas and so he asked if I wanted to come
Speaker 1: along as he was heading to Midland and was highlighting
Speaker 1: energy production and America's energy independence and that's an issue
Speaker 1: I cared deeply about, and I'll pretty much always come
Speaker 1: along if someone's going to Texas. And so it was
Speaker 1: an interesting day though. So the way it started, I
Speaker 1: had to be at the White House about seven am yesterday,
Speaker 1: And for anyone that comes in contact with the President,
Speaker 1: they do a COVID test, so that's obligatory. Before you
Speaker 1: can get on, you go get tested. So I went
Speaker 1: into the White House, got tested yesterday morning. The folks
Speaker 1: here in the studio will be glad to know as
Speaker 1: of yesterday morning, I confirmed negative WET and got in
Speaker 1: the van to head to Andrews Air Force Base. And
Speaker 1: there were a couple of Texas members of Congress that
Speaker 1: we're flying with us. And suddenly we're sitting there and
Speaker 1: we hear, well, Louie Gomer's not coming. What do you mean,
Speaker 1: Louie Gomer's not coming. He was going to join us,
Speaker 1: He was going to be on the flight. Louie is hysterical,
Speaker 1: by the way, like anytime you spend time with Louie
Speaker 1: you will be holding your ribs laughing. So we're all like, well,
Speaker 1: why isn't Louie coming. Well, he was at the White
Speaker 1: House and he tested positive. So that's how the morning
Speaker 1: started with Louie had to turn around and leave and
Speaker 1: was not allowed on the plane because he just tested positive.
Speaker 1: So we take the van, we go jump on Air
Speaker 1: Force one. The President joins us, we take off while
Speaker 1: we're in the air, so we're headed to Midland, Texas.
Speaker 1: A whole bunch of Republican candidates for Congress who were
Speaker 1: running in various seats. They're not incumbents, they're running against Democrats,
Speaker 1: are in open seats. They were all meeting us in Midland,
Speaker 1: and the plan was that those Republican candidates they were
Speaker 1: going to invite on the plane and meet the President
Speaker 1: and do a photo op and they're all excited. Well,
Speaker 1: we find out mid air that one of those Republican
Speaker 1: candidates got named Wesley Hunt, who's running here in Houston
Speaker 1: in my home district. Great guy, he tested positive for COVID.
Speaker 1: So he was literally heading to meet Air Force one
Speaker 1: and he tests positive for COVID, and as a result,
Speaker 1: they said, well, okay, all of you candidates, none of
Speaker 1: you can go in and see the president now because
Speaker 1: of that. So it was a fairly surreal beginning to
Speaker 1: the day. And listen, it's an underscoring that this remains
Speaker 1: a dangerous disease and we need to continue to take
Speaker 1: serious steps to limit its spread. Right, if for no
Speaker 1: other reason, then you might miss your chance to go
Speaker 1: on Air Force One. So you got to make sure
Speaker 1: you behave responsibly and don't catch it well. It's one
Speaker 1: of the biggest reasons actually that you joined the president
Speaker 1: on a trip and I've done at this point a
Speaker 1: number of trips on Air Force One with the President
Speaker 1: is that you spend a lot of time with him,
Speaker 1: and so if there are issues going on, it is
Speaker 1: some of the most concentrated, intense time, and it's a
Speaker 1: stark difference. First four years I was in the Senate,
Speaker 1: Barack Obama was president that entire time. I went on
Speaker 1: Air Force One once. If you remember when when five
Speaker 1: Dallas police officers were murdered and there was a funeral
Speaker 1: for those police officers, Obama came down to speak at
Speaker 1: it and he invited me to come along. Actually, I
Speaker 1: sat next to Nancy Pelosi on Air Force One. We
Speaker 1: had it may have been the first time I had
Speaker 1: met Nancy. We had a very pleasant conversation, mostly about
Speaker 1: her grandkids, not about anything remotely related to politics. And
Speaker 1: the interesting thing about Obama's he wouldn't hang out with us.
Speaker 1: He briefly came back and talked with There were several
Speaker 1: folks that were coming down and that had been invited
Speaker 1: to guests, and he came back briefly and kind of said, Hi,
Speaker 1: how you doing okay? Great, and then went off went
Speaker 1: off to his office and we didn't see him the
Speaker 1: rest of the flight. Trump is totally different. Like Trump
Speaker 1: hangs out, he wants to like the office on Air
Speaker 1: Force One. It's it's exact actually like the movie. It's
Speaker 1: a cool desk with the seal and it's so there
Speaker 1: were the Texas House members and look or there Texas
Speaker 1: members of the US House who were there who were
Speaker 1: pretty excited, and so I was taking pictures of all
Speaker 1: of them. All right, go stand by the president, give
Speaker 1: me your phone, I'll take a picture. So I was
Speaker 1: the designated photograph, the photographer. But it's it's actually really
Speaker 1: valuable because you're sitting down with the president for significant
Speaker 1: time talking and right now there is a lot to
Speaker 1: talk about. So we had probably seven hours of he
Speaker 1: and I discussing, in particular the economic challenges in the
Speaker 1: country and the legislation moving moving through the Senate right now,
Speaker 1: and so it was it was a propitious time to
Speaker 1: be there with him. Well, without you know, asking you
Speaker 1: to violate any confidences or tell any tales at a school,
Speaker 1: I would like to know something about perhaps what you
Speaker 1: spoke about or what you're thinking about this economic relief
Speaker 1: bill that seems to be coming down the pike in
Speaker 1: the midst of all this kind of bad economic news. Well,
Speaker 1: let's take it in a couple of pieces, and I'll
Speaker 1: tell you what I think. I'm not going to share
Speaker 1: what the President said, and that's usually the line I
Speaker 1: try to follow, is what I said, I'm happy to relay.
Speaker 1: I'll leave it to others to share what they said.
Speaker 1: But but let me just get in my views, the
Speaker 1: Nancy Pelosi three trillion dollar bill that they passed a
Speaker 1: couple of months ago is an absolute monstrosity. It is
Speaker 1: three trillion dollars, even in government speak, is a crap
Speaker 1: ton of money. And it's a bill. Look, Pelosi wasn't
Speaker 1: intending to pass that in the law. It's it's a
Speaker 1: bill that is just a Democratic wish list. And she
Speaker 1: didn't talk to any Republican, she didn't talk to the Senate.
Speaker 1: It was a campaign document. They passed it so that
Speaker 1: Democrats could campaign on it in November. That's all it's about.
Speaker 1: Then we get to the Senate. Unfortunately, in the Senate
Speaker 1: this week, the Republican leader Mitch McConnell rolled out his
Speaker 1: own plan, and the so called Republican Leadership Plan is
Speaker 1: it's cheaper than the Democrats plans. Instead of three trillions,
Speaker 1: it's only one trillion. But it's it's fundamentally flawed, and
Speaker 1: so I have been very outspoken against it, very outspoken
Speaker 1: at our lunches that we do every day in the
Speaker 1: Republican Conference that you and I have talked about before,
Speaker 1: but I've been very outspoken publicly, and I was very
Speaker 1: clear with the President what I thought yesterday when we
Speaker 1: were together. I seem to recall, if some people haven't
Speaker 1: been following you your takes on this, you said that
Speaker 1: as the legislation currently stands, you're not just to know
Speaker 1: you're a hell no, yep, that that is exactly right
Speaker 1: on a couple of levels. First of all, let's talk
Speaker 1: the amount, like the one trillion, which is a ton
Speaker 1: of money, is clearly just an opening bid, and nobody's
Speaker 1: hiding the fact, Okay, we'll start at a trillion, but
Speaker 1: the plan is to get negotiate up to one and
Speaker 1: a half or two or two and a half, and
Speaker 1: we don't have it. There's no magic money tree in Washington.
Speaker 1: It's not like there's some secret vault hidden in the
Speaker 1: Capitol nobody knows about. This is all money that we're
Speaker 1: either printing or borrowing from China, but it doesn't exist.
Speaker 1: We've already spent over three trillion dollars and so the
Speaker 1: amount is a problem. But actually my concern, Michael, is
Speaker 1: much bigger than the amount, and this is that this
Speaker 1: was the center of what I was arguing to the
Speaker 1: President yesterday. The focus of the bill, the objective of
Speaker 1: the bill is wrong. The objective of the bill is
Speaker 1: just shoveling cash. It's just spending trillions of dollars shoveling
Speaker 1: it into the economy, but none of it creates jobs.
Speaker 1: And so what I've been arguing to the other Republicans,
Speaker 1: what I've been arguing to President, our focus on this
Speaker 1: bill should be one thing. In particular, it should be
Speaker 1: creating jobs. We've got now fifty one million Americans who've
Speaker 1: lost their jobs because of this catastrophe that's hit this country.
Speaker 1: We've got to get them back to work. That is
Speaker 1: overwhelmingly the priorities. Get people back to work. And you know,
Speaker 1: you look at these first bills, the bills that we
Speaker 1: passed several months ago, in the height of the crisis.
Speaker 1: Those were overwhelmingly bipartisan. The big one, the Cares Act,
Speaker 1: ninety six to nothing. Every Democrat, every Republican voted yes.
Speaker 1: I voted yes. Bertie Sanders voted yes. That was not
Speaker 1: a stimulus bill. It wasn't designed to stimulate the economy.
Speaker 1: The press calls it a stimulus bill, but that's not
Speaker 1: what it was. It was a relief bill. It was
Speaker 1: designed to give emergency loans, short term loans to people
Speaker 1: at the very height of the crisis. Now our focus
Speaker 1: has got to be different. It's got to be getting
Speaker 1: people back to work. We need a recovery bill. Now,
Speaker 1: what does the recovery bill do? Our entire focus, I
Speaker 1: think should be cutting taxes and reducing regulations that are
Speaker 1: killing jobs, making it easier for small businesses to open.
Speaker 1: That's the issue. And by the way, the entire election
Speaker 1: in November turns on it. So the Democrats, what does
Speaker 1: Nancy Pelosi want. She wants all fifty one million people
Speaker 1: who've lost their jobs to stay unemployed, to stay at home,
Speaker 1: to not be working, to not have their kids in school,
Speaker 1: because she is gambling on that fifty one million people
Speaker 1: who are broken, unemployed and out of a job and
Speaker 1: pissed off are going to go in and vote to
Speaker 1: throw the bums out, and she's most interested in defeating
Speaker 1: Donald Trump. Well, the case I made to the President
Speaker 1: and to the other Republicans is we shouldn't be complicit
Speaker 1: in that objective. If the President wants to win in November,
Speaker 1: we need people going back to work, We need people
Speaker 1: earning a paycheck, We need people providing for their families again.
Speaker 1: And simply spending trillions for Nancy Pelosi's buddies ain't going
Speaker 1: to get the job done. You know, I remember early
Speaker 1: on when when there were those debates over the initial
Speaker 1: relief bill, you in particular pointed out that this language
Speaker 1: that the Democrats added in on the question of unemployment
Speaker 1: insurance was going to disincentivize people going back to work.
Speaker 1: And it now seems that your prediction turned out to
Speaker 1: be true. There's a Cato Institute survey of this. It
Speaker 1: showed that two thirds of people who went on unemployment
Speaker 1: for the COVID lockdowns are making more money than they
Speaker 1: would have made had they remained at their jobs. And
Speaker 1: one third of people actually made two times or you know,
Speaker 1: two x their salary, which you know, wonderful for them.
Speaker 1: I don't think we begrudge anybody money, but that is
Speaker 1: a recipe to keep people out of work that would
Speaker 1: seem to have a political objective in an election year. Well,
Speaker 1: incentives matter, and the dumbest part of what Congress did
Speaker 1: already in this crisis was creating massive disincentives to work.
Speaker 1: And in particular, what Congress did is added six hundred
Speaker 1: dollars a week to the already existing unemployment conversation. So, look,
Speaker 1: we had an unemployment system. If you lost your job,
Speaker 1: you could file file for unemployment. That's designed to be
Speaker 1: to help you meet basic necessities, but it's designed to
Speaker 1: be substantially less than your job was. Because you want
Speaker 1: people who've lost their job to have strong incentives to
Speaker 1: go back to work. The best thing if someone's out
Speaker 1: of work has helped them get back to work. Adding
Speaker 1: six hundred dollars to unemployment, let me give you some
Speaker 1: math and I apologize to everyone in the podcast. There
Speaker 1: was supposed to be no math. They told me I
Speaker 1: couldn't sign up for this. Let me give you just
Speaker 1: a little bit. So. It used to be the maximum
Speaker 1: weekly unemployment check in Texas was five hundred and twenty
Speaker 1: one dollars a week. When Congress added six hundred dollars
Speaker 1: to that, that took it to eleven hundred and twenty
Speaker 1: one dollars a week, more than doubled it. That works
Speaker 1: out to about fifty eight thousand dollars a year, or
Speaker 1: about twenty eight dollars an hour. Now, think about it
Speaker 1: for a second. If you're if you're working waiting tables,
Speaker 1: if you're working in an hourly job, you ain't making
Speaker 1: twenty eight bucks an hour. And if suddenly the government
Speaker 1: pays you more to stay home than to go back
Speaker 1: to work, well naturally you're not going to go back
Speaker 1: to work. I mean, if you're paid more to do
Speaker 1: something else, you're going to follow the incentives. But that's
Speaker 1: terrible for you, and it's terrible for the economy, and
Speaker 1: it's why Nancy Pelosi wants to keep doing it, and
Speaker 1: the Republicans are falling in this trap that sixty eight
Speaker 1: percent of people nationally right now because of what Congress did,
Speaker 1: are receiving more ununemployment than their previous salary twenty percent,
Speaker 1: or receiving double their previous salary. If you're getting paid
Speaker 1: twice as much not to work as to work, what
Speaker 1: are you gonna do? I mean, that ain't complicated, and
Speaker 1: it's why Nancy Pelosi is all in on wanting to
Speaker 1: keep that going right until November third, right until the election.
Speaker 1: But Republicans shouldn't be complicit in that. And I talk
Speaker 1: to small business owners every single day that they're trying
Speaker 1: to reopen their businesses and they can't rehire their employees.
Speaker 1: They're calling their employees saying come back, and they're saying, understandably,
Speaker 1: why would we come back. We're getting paid more not
Speaker 1: to That is disastrous for getting the economy moving again
Speaker 1: and getting people back on their feet. Right. It's a
Speaker 1: pretty deceitful tactic. It would see them. I understand the
Speaker 1: political objectives the Democrats have, but you know, you're you're
Speaker 1: not getting what they seem to be proposing. You know,
Speaker 1: this has this underhanded aspect. I think that ties in
Speaker 1: pretty well with another underhanded display we saw from Democrats
Speaker 1: on Capitol Hill this week, which was the billbar testimony. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and let me actually stop you there and go back
Speaker 1: to the prior topic for a second, which is, let
Speaker 1: me tell you right now, what is pretty good in
Speaker 1: the in the Republican bill, okay, and what could be
Speaker 1: good in the Republican bill. So there are two elements
Speaker 1: that are mildly good in the Republican bill. Number one,
Speaker 1: it includes actually legislation that I've introduced that is for
Speaker 1: school choice, that creates federal tax credits for contributions to
Speaker 1: scholarship granting organizations for K through twelve education. That's really good,
Speaker 1: and it's really important, and it's really substantive, and it's transformational.
Speaker 1: And as you know, I'm passionate about school choice. Now.
Speaker 1: The problem is the Democrats are passionately opposed because the
Speaker 1: teachers unions opposed choice. And my concern is the Republican
Speaker 1: negotiators will give that up at the table that it's
Speaker 1: in there, but it's not going to stay in there.
Speaker 1: That it's in there to be a bargaining chip to
Speaker 1: be given up. The second good elements right now is
Speaker 1: some liability protection. And there's no doubt it's a real
Speaker 1: problem right now for any small business, for any school,
Speaker 1: for any university that opens, they're going to be sued.
Speaker 1: All of them are going to be sued. Trial lawyers
Speaker 1: are going to descend upon them. Yeah, because if any
Speaker 1: customer gets sick, if any employee gets sick, immediately they're
Speaker 1: getting sued. So I very much agree with the objective
Speaker 1: of providing some reasonable liability protection so that people could open.
Speaker 1: It's not their faulty. It's not like the small businesses.
Speaker 1: It's not like the movie theater created this this coronavirus
Speaker 1: from Wuhan, China, and and it doesn't make sense for
Speaker 1: billions of dollars of damage judgments to make a bunch
Speaker 1: of plantiffs lawyers rich suing everybody. But the problem is
Speaker 1: those same plantiffs lawyers are, along with the teachers unions,
Speaker 1: the biggest owners to the Democrats. So they're going to
Speaker 1: fight to water that provision down. So those two provisions
Speaker 1: are right now pretty good, but my concern is they
Speaker 1: will be gutted. Here's what we ought to be doing instead.
Speaker 1: We ought to be engaged in pro growth policy. So,
Speaker 1: for example, instead of just shoveling cash out the door,
Speaker 1: one thing we could do is between now and the
Speaker 1: end of the year, suspend the payroll tax. That results
Speaker 1: in for you and for everyone, basically an immediate pay
Speaker 1: raise in your job because the payroll tax you pay
Speaker 1: out of your pocket. Suddenly your take home pay is higher.
Speaker 1: But that's an incentive for work. Suddenly your employer apportion
Speaker 1: payroll chat tax your employer pays. Suddenly the cost of
Speaker 1: employees of bringing back an employee has gone down for
Speaker 1: your employer. That is a pro growth incentive. That is
Speaker 1: a pro jobs incentive. That is all about helping encourage
Speaker 1: people to go back to work and work more. That's
Speaker 1: a very worthwhile thing to do. Another example of a
Speaker 1: very good thing to do. I've got legislation on health
Speaker 1: savings accounts. So health savings accounts are accounts where you
Speaker 1: can save in a tax advantage way for healthcare needs.
Speaker 1: The problem is, current law prohibits most people from having
Speaker 1: a health savings account. The only instance in which you're
Speaker 1: allowed to have a health savings account is if you
Speaker 1: have a high deductible health insurance plan, which most people
Speaker 1: don't have. I have legislation that says everyone can have
Speaker 1: a health savings plan. That just lets everyone have one.
Speaker 1: That is really important healthcare reform right now in terms
Speaker 1: of changing the system, driving down the cost of healthcare,
Speaker 1: making healthcare more affordable. And we're in the middle of
Speaker 1: a pandemic. People are understandably concerned with healthcare costs. This
Speaker 1: would be really meaningful reform. So this is something I
Speaker 1: urged the President, and I said, by the way, for
Speaker 1: the Republicans that want to shovel cash, look, we've got
Speaker 1: the checks of twelve hundred dollars sent out to everyone.
Speaker 1: My parents both received twelve hundred dollar checks. They don't
Speaker 1: need a twelve hundred dollar check. But Congress set on
Speaker 1: one the proposals to do it again. I said, listen,
Speaker 1: if you are really intent on throwing money out of
Speaker 1: a helicopter, how about taking the twelve hundred dollars and
Speaker 1: populating it in a health savings account for everyone, so
Speaker 1: that everyone can suddenly have a health savings account to
Speaker 1: meet healthcare costs. If you must spend the money, actually
Speaker 1: spend it in a way that does some positive, if good.
Speaker 1: Right next week, I'm going to introduce a bill that
Speaker 1: I'm calling the Recovery Act that is going to be
Speaker 1: a whole series of pro jobs, pro growth steps that
Speaker 1: if we're going to take our focus should be getting
Speaker 1: people back to work. And right now, the current so
Speaker 1: called Republican bill that is going to lose a lot
Speaker 1: of Republican votes if and when we vote on it
Speaker 1: is not focused on jobs. Pelosi wants jobs to go away.
Speaker 1: And right now, basically the Republican bill took the Nancy
Speaker 1: Pelosi bill, divided all the numbers by three, and proposed
Speaker 1: the same damn thing. We should have different ideas, ideas
Speaker 1: that work. And a final political point, So are there's
Speaker 1: some Republicans who are really scared. We got to do this.
Speaker 1: We just got to do it. It's an election. You
Speaker 1: got to spend money. Look in the battle to be
Speaker 1: Santa Clause, Republicans will always lose. If suddenly we pony
Speaker 1: up three trillion dollars, they'll go to four like like
Speaker 1: there's no limit. And frankly, show me the voter out
Speaker 1: there that's really looking for a bunch of cash that's
Speaker 1: actually going to vote for the president because of it.
Speaker 1: If you want someone to bankrupt the country and bankrupt
Speaker 1: your kids and grandkids in order to get more cash,
Speaker 1: right now, you're going to vote Democrats. Yeah, I think
Speaker 1: it's a null set. We should be the party of
Speaker 1: jobs and growth and prosperity and higher wages. Look at
Speaker 1: other proposal. I told the President, all right, at five,
Speaker 1: you want to spend money, waive the federal income tax
Speaker 1: for the next six months up to a certain amount.
Speaker 1: That again puts real money in people's pockets now, and
Speaker 1: unlike what's being proposed, it doesn't kill jobs. We should
Speaker 1: be creating jobs, not killing jobs. Well, I love this
Speaker 1: point you're making. You're you're never going to out democrat
Speaker 1: the democrats. You're never going to outliberal the liberals. There's
Speaker 1: a famous conservative book from many decades ago called a Choice,
Speaker 1: not an echo. You want you want to actually have
Speaker 1: a choice in your politicians when you go to the
Speaker 1: ballot box. And I got to tell you, as somebody
Speaker 1: who has an HSA, who uses an HSA, I love
Speaker 1: HSA's I think it is it's brilliant. It's shocking to
Speaker 1: me that they have not been more popular, they haven't
Speaker 1: been more encouraged over time. And I think a lot
Speaker 1: of that is a law prohibited. The reason they're not
Speaker 1: more popular is Congress. Unless you have a high deductible
Speaker 1: health insurance plan, it's legal for you to have an HSA.
Speaker 1: The poet I'm trying to make to the other Republicans, like,
Speaker 1: is there anything we want to accomplish that actually would
Speaker 1: be good and fix the problem. We shouldn't rush out
Speaker 1: like chicken little and say we must do something to
Speaker 1: do something. Let's do something that would work and help
Speaker 1: people get back to work. That's right. There a lot
Speaker 1: a lot of perverse incentives I noticed going on on
Speaker 1: the left side of the aisle on Capitol Hill. And
Speaker 1: I think nowhere was this clearer than when our former
Speaker 1: verdict guest, the Attorney General William Barr, was invited to
Speaker 1: testify on Capitol Hill. He was actually he accepted the
Speaker 1: invitation on the very day that you and I sat
Speaker 1: down with him at the Department of Justice. And so
Speaker 1: he finally goes to sit down for this hearing, and
Speaker 1: then it turned out that the Democrats and a House
Speaker 1: of Representatives didn't really want to hear a single word
Speaker 1: he had to say. It really was studying. When you
Speaker 1: and I were interviewing Bill Barr, you recall we nicknamed
Speaker 1: him Honey Badger, which wasn't planned that that was off
Speaker 1: the cuff. But if anyone didn't believe that nickname. You
Speaker 1: just had to watch the you know, the Liliputians trying
Speaker 1: to tie him down. I mean it was small and
Speaker 1: petty democrats relentlessly attacking him. And I love that Bar
Speaker 1: is completely not concerned. I don't know that I've ever
Speaker 1: seen anyone drink coffee in a more dismissive way. There's
Speaker 1: something about the coffee cup that just said you are
Speaker 1: an utter buffoon. And the part that was really ridiculous
Speaker 1: is you'd have a Democrat go given a histrionic speech
Speaker 1: and then they'd declare, I reclaim my time. You reclaim
Speaker 1: my time, which basically means shut up. I'm scared of
Speaker 1: your answer. I don't want you to answer me, and
Speaker 1: I'll look really dumb if you do. And they did
Speaker 1: it over and over again, reclaiming their time, reclaiming their time,
Speaker 1: and it ultimately was an expression of fear. And I'll
Speaker 1: tell you, Michael, I actually had a conversation about House
Speaker 1: democrats reclaiming their time a couple of days before Bill
Speaker 1: bar testified. And let me tell you why. So next
Speaker 1: week I'm chairing a hearing in the Senate on riots,
Speaker 1: on violence, on antifa, on the organized terrorists who are
Speaker 1: burning and attacking our cities. And first witness we're going
Speaker 1: to have is Ken Cuccinelli. Ken is the Deputy Secretary
Speaker 1: of Homeland Security. Ken is the former Attorney General of Virginia.
Speaker 1: He is a rock rib conservative. Ken is a good
Speaker 1: friend and right now Ken is leading the efforts to
Speaker 1: secure the border, but he's also fighting for the federal
Speaker 1: law enforcement officers of the Democrats are you know, Nancy
Speaker 1: Pelosi's calling them Nazi stormtroopers, which is grotesque. So when
Speaker 1: Ken and I are talking on the phone and I'm
Speaker 1: telling them, Hey, Ken, I really want you to come
Speaker 1: to this hearing we're chairing, he said, listen. One thing
Speaker 1: that he said I really don't like when I testify
Speaker 1: at the house is they'll attack you. And then the
Speaker 1: Democrats will say, I reclaim my time. So they attack
Speaker 1: you and they don't give you a chance to respond.
Speaker 1: And this is before the bar hearing, by the way.
Speaker 1: And I laughed and I said, I said, well, Ken,
Speaker 1: let me tell you this. In any hearing I chair,
Speaker 1: the Democrats are going to attack you. That's that's for sure.
Speaker 1: They're going to come after your hard because they've decided
Speaker 1: to demogogue every police officer in America. But I can
Speaker 1: promise you, if I'm chairing the hearing, You're damn well
Speaker 1: going to get a full chance to respond each and
Speaker 1: every attack headed your way. We have that conversation kenn
Speaker 1: Is coming to the hearing, and then like a day
Speaker 1: or two later, Bill bar goes through this this ridiculous
Speaker 1: charade where they are terrified of his answers and quote
Speaker 1: reclaim their time. If the words I reclaim my time
Speaker 1: ever come out of my mouth other than quoting them,
Speaker 1: throw something at me, Michael that they simply will. I
Speaker 1: ain't going to say that, Senator, You've been spending too
Speaker 1: much time with the Democrats. You must get come back
Speaker 1: to yourself. You know, I don't think I had read
Speaker 1: anywhere that Ken Cuccinelli is going to be testifying. Is
Speaker 1: that this is that is that is breaking news where
Speaker 1: we were going to announce that next week, but I
Speaker 1: just announced it with you, terrific. I very much look
Speaker 1: forward to hearing that because obviously I think this issue
Speaker 1: of the mobs, the organized violence, ANTIFA has been at
Speaker 1: the top of a lot of people's minds. Yeah, so
Speaker 1: I look forward to seeing that, and I look forward
Speaker 1: also to not having just echoes of reclaim my time,
Speaker 1: take up all the time that we could actually be
Speaker 1: hearing from someone who has so much to say on this.
Speaker 1: One last question before we let you go, Senator, This
Speaker 1: is from Kira. I think a lot of people are
Speaker 1: wondering this these days, if they're living in urban centers
Speaker 1: in America. Is there any hope for sane people in
Speaker 1: New York City? Or should we flee? What about New
Speaker 1: York in general? What is what is the future? Not
Speaker 1: just maybe of New York, but of all the cities.
Speaker 1: Do we all have to flee down to Texas? All right?
Speaker 1: So let me take New York. Actually listen. I'm an
Speaker 1: optimist by nature. I believe in America. I believe in freedom.
Speaker 1: I even believe in New York. And I'll point I
Speaker 1: often point to history as foreshadowing of the future. I'll
Speaker 1: confess I think things are going to get worse in
Speaker 1: New York in the short term. I think the malignant
Speaker 1: politics there. I think radicals like de Blasio when they're
Speaker 1: proposing cutting a billion dollars from the NYPD and AOC
Speaker 1: is saying not enough, basically burn it to the ground.
Speaker 1: That's not quite what she said, but she said, defunded
Speaker 1: and abolish it, which is the same thing. In the
Speaker 1: short term, New York is going to head to some dark,
Speaker 1: dark days and it's but New York went through this
Speaker 1: in the sixties and seven, and we saw rampant crime
Speaker 1: in New York. New York was facing bankruptcy. I mean,
Speaker 1: the policies of the far left, they don't work, and
Speaker 1: every time they're implemented, particularly in the extreme, they are
Speaker 1: a disaster. So what's the good news is that when
Speaker 1: people see the disaster, they often open up their eyes
Speaker 1: and say, hey, this doesn't make any sense, let's change it.
Speaker 1: And New York had a renaissance. Why do they have
Speaker 1: a renaissance? Remember Rudy Giuliani when he was elected and
Speaker 1: not Rudy. Rudy today is a very different person than
Speaker 1: Mayor Rudy was when he was first elected. But New
Speaker 1: Yorkers were sick and tired. They were sick and tired
Speaker 1: of the crime, they were sick and tired of the violence,
Speaker 1: they were sick and tired of the shambles the city
Speaker 1: had had gone through. And Rudy got elected. Remember the
Speaker 1: broken windows theory, which is, let's let's when you go
Speaker 1: into a neighborhood and you see shattered windows, you see graffiti,
Speaker 1: and you see row. That makes all of the rest
Speaker 1: of violent crime more likely. And so go repair the windows,
Speaker 1: Go clean up the graffiti, Go stop the squeegee guys
Speaker 1: who used to just dump crap on your car in
Speaker 1: the streets, and it actually stops the rest of violent
Speaker 1: crime too. So de Blasio and the radicals have forgotten
Speaker 1: those lessons. I think they will go through a dark period,
Speaker 1: and many of our cities may go through a dark period.
Speaker 1: But when the failures of radical left policies become evident,
Speaker 1: I think people will turn back to them and say, hey,
Speaker 1: we want a New York City where you can walk
Speaker 1: in Central Park again and be safe. We want a
Speaker 1: New York city where you can open a business and survive.
Speaker 1: There are many things about New York that are extraordinary,
Speaker 1: that are wonderful that it has been. The statue of
Speaker 1: liberty invites the whole world. We've seen immigrants from across
Speaker 1: the globe come to New York to make it. But
Speaker 1: the policies of the socialists can destroy all of that.
Speaker 1: But we'll come out of it. That's why I think
Speaker 1: a lot of the moving trucks are heading down to
Speaker 1: your state, Senator, and you know I'm a New Yorker
Speaker 1: and I live in Los Angeles. Both my cities have
Speaker 1: me wanting to fly straight down to where you are.
Speaker 1: Probably not a board Air Force one. I haven't gotten
Speaker 1: that invitation yet, but maybe I'll fly commercial and see
Speaker 1: you there. Hey, Southwest one, you can sit in NYC.
Speaker 1: That's true. That's I got some drink tickets too. We
Speaker 1: will have to pause it there until next time. Thank you, Senator.
Speaker 1: I'm Michael Knowles. This is Verdict with Ted Cruz. This
Speaker 1: episode of Verdict with Ted Cruz is being brought to
Speaker 1: you by Jobs, Freedom and Security Pack, a political action
Speaker 1: committee dedicated to supporting conservative causes, organizations, and candidates across
Speaker 1: the country. In twenty twenty two, Jobs Freedom and Security
Speaker 1: Pack plans to donate to conservative candidates running for Congress
Speaker 1: and help the Republican Party across the nation.