Episode 78 LIVE： Congress Is Broken (feat. Rep. Andy Biggs) – Firebrand with Matt Gaetz
Summary
On today's show, we have a special guest, Mark Levin, who joins us live from the Rayburn House Office Building in Washington, D.C. to discuss all the latest in the House speaker race, including Andy Biggs, the Freedom Caucus, and more.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Matt Gaetz was one of the very few members in the entire Congress who bothered to stand
00:00:07.520
up against permanent Washington on behalf of his constituents.
00:00:10.540
Matt Gaetz right now, he's a problem for the Democratic Party.
00:00:13.680
And he could cause a lot of hiccups in passing applause.
00:00:16.680
So we're going to keep running those stories to get hurt again.
00:00:20.100
If you stand for the flag and kneel in prayer, if you want to build America up and not burn
00:00:25.980
her to the ground, then welcome, my fellow patriots.
00:00:37.600
I'm a canceled man in some corners of the Internet.
00:00:40.980
Many days, I'm a marked man in Congress, a wanted man by the deep state.
00:00:58.440
I would like to have your observations on this.
00:01:05.180
Andy Biggs is on TV all the time promoting himself as a conservative.
00:01:09.720
But a guy like that today parading around as Mr. Conservative, Mr. Conservative with the Freedom
00:01:16.860
Caucus, that he's going to bring conservatism to the House of Representatives.
00:01:20.880
He doesn't even fundamentally understand the Constitution.
00:01:26.940
Now, I've called out Andy Biggs and four others in the House of Representatives who are
00:01:32.360
trying to sabotage the election of a speaker in a what will be a Republican House where
00:01:39.000
the Republicans have maybe a four or five vote majority.
00:01:44.760
That means that these individuals can block the Republicans from choosing their speaker,
00:01:50.980
which means you could go to the floor of the House.
00:01:54.200
And there's already talk about this in the press where liberal Republicans, moderate Republicans
00:02:00.100
could join with Democrats and wind up choosing a speaker who's quite liberal.
00:02:18.980
And we understand Mark's got a lot of problems with us populist nationalists, but Mark's a
00:02:29.900
Well, it's interesting to see Mark Levin follow the flashy lures that are strung out by the
00:02:38.020
Like this notion that Fred Upton was going to be speaker.
00:02:40.740
Everybody wrote articles about that and got all worked up about it.
00:02:43.300
And then they went and asked Fred Upton, are you a candidate for speaker?
00:02:46.560
And he said, no, I'm taking my wife skiing that weekend.
00:02:49.460
So it just shows you kind of how harebrained some of those red herrings are.
00:02:56.300
Mark Levin was against Kevin McCarthy before he was for Kevin McCarthy, just like Mark Levin
00:03:02.560
was against Donald Trump before he was for Donald Trump.
00:03:08.200
Being against Andy Biggs might be just like the first Mark Levin step to being Andy Biggs
00:03:13.280
as campaign manager in the next election cycle.
00:03:16.500
Mark Levin said that Kevin McCarthy was a creature of the establishment and thus could
00:03:29.580
We are live broadcasting out of room 2021 of the Rayburn House Office Building on the
00:03:37.300
We have a lot of breaking news on the Hill this Monday.
00:03:40.920
We're going to get a key update regarding the growing effort to impeach Homeland Security
00:03:50.500
Our reaction to the latest dump of the Twitter files.
00:03:54.040
We've just got breaking news regarding the Democrats being unable to get the votes together
00:04:01.260
So we'll talk about what that means for the country and potentially an omnibus that would
00:04:06.500
steal Republicans coming into control of the House of the opportunity to have a big spending
00:04:11.920
But what everyone's talking about right now is the speaker's race because Kevin McCarthy
00:04:19.640
My colleague Andy Biggs, who has just been reelected to his fourth term, has announced that he is
00:04:27.080
I intend to vote for him and he joins us again on Firebrand now.
00:04:33.540
You know, when we hear these scenarios like, oh no, we could have a Democrat speaker if Andy
00:04:42.100
Do you think that, you know, that's something that ought to concern folks?
00:04:50.300
I think that's the McCarthy machine and the establishment machine working to try to scare
00:04:57.560
And the reality is that would require a bunch of Republicans to say, you know what, we're
00:05:08.660
There is nobody in the Republican conference who can be the speaker other than Kevin McCarthy.
00:05:14.900
I find that to be absolutely ludicrous and actually condescending.
00:05:19.420
You wrote a recent piece where you talked about your candidacy functioning as a mechanism
00:05:25.060
to break up the establishment, to bust up this D.C. cartel.
00:05:30.880
Talk to people in the country about the power centers that really exist in Washington.
00:05:35.340
You know, folks back home that want to be really engaged or informed, they may look at
00:05:39.280
the roll call votes and see, were you on one side or the other?
00:05:43.500
It's why you've called for a number of those votes to be taken publicly.
00:05:46.660
But in terms of who really decides the agenda and the focus and the impact of this place,
00:05:54.920
where do you see that playing out and why is that wrong?
00:05:57.280
So where the power is centered is there's four people in Congress, two in the Senate,
00:06:02.480
two in the House, that really kind of control everything.
00:06:04.360
In fact, they call it, they have the audacity to call it a four corners bill.
00:06:07.900
That means that the minority leader in the House and the speaker and the majority leader
00:06:12.160
and minority leader in the Senate, they've agreed to it and they expect everybody else
00:06:19.660
So when they talk about a four corners agreement, I mean, it used to be in the Congress, I guess,
00:06:26.120
we're currently in, that you could get two of those corners without even leaving the state
00:06:32.300
Because you had Pelosi and McCarthy representing the House of Representatives, but really, I think,
00:06:39.060
coming from a place with a particular worldview.
00:06:40.940
So this notion of top-down leadership, that's one power center.
00:06:46.400
So then you also have two other power centers that that four corners place to.
00:06:51.960
It's the lobbyists, the K Street, the big moneyed interests, the special interests that
00:06:56.280
And a lot of them like big tech, you know, you just name it, any big major interest, big
00:07:02.980
And they're going to respond to that because it's big money, because both, if you're in
00:07:08.740
the four corners group, you got to raise a bunch of money.
00:07:13.660
The other one is, a lot of people don't talk about this, but it's big bureaucracy.
00:07:18.280
So you got big government married to big money, married to a tight controlled power.
00:07:25.040
And we used to call that type of thing fascism.
00:07:28.080
Well, and those big moneyed interests want the bureaucratic system to be as complicated
00:07:33.540
as possible, because if you've got the armies of lawyers and lobbyists and accountants and
00:07:39.060
consultants, you can attack that bureaucratic system and you can actually bend it to your
00:07:46.120
That's not giving everybody an opportunity to get ahead.
00:07:49.200
That is a system in Washington that is weaponized against the American people, often no matter which
00:07:56.900
But the McCarthy team has been out there pushing hard, this doomsday scenario where a Democrat
00:08:03.160
And there was a great piece in Politico, Rachel Bade, Eugene Daniels, Ryan Lizza, Politico
00:08:12.760
And it goes through a list of reasons why this will never happen.
00:08:16.420
The first of which, the most obvious, any strategy that would have a more moderate Republican
00:08:24.180
Republican elected would require every Democrat to vote for a Republican.
00:08:29.140
Now, you've got Democrats that don't even want to vote for other Democrats someday.
00:08:32.960
But Andy, how likely is it that every single Democrat, all 212 of them, would vote for any
00:08:43.320
Hakeem Jeffries is the Congressional Black Caucus's leader.
00:08:48.060
He is the guy that, for decades, that CBC has been trying to get someone in leadership.
00:08:55.040
And CBC is basically going to say, if you're going to take away our guy to vote for a Republican,
00:09:05.340
And if you think what the squad did was bad, or if you think holding out and trying to leverage
00:09:11.180
what votes we have on this is bad, you watch what happens if the Democrats reject Hakeem
00:09:19.100
You know, Andy Biggs is telling you, I'm telling you, there is no way that Hakeem Jeffries does
00:09:24.320
not have every vote of every Democrat on every ballot.
00:09:29.740
It's listed as the number one reason why some notion of a moderate Republican would never
00:09:36.240
The second reason that this piece identifies is that there is no negotiation or back channel
00:09:42.780
even happening right now between moderate Republicans and Democrats.
00:09:46.620
Now, we heard Don Bacon go out and say, well, we could reach across the aisle.
00:09:51.000
Have you seen any evidence that that's happened?
00:09:54.740
If there was evidence there'd be somebody besides Don Bacon saying how mad he is at us, there
00:10:01.000
would be people from the Democrats saying, oh, yeah, maybe so.
00:10:03.840
But just yesterday, even on CNN, you had a Democrat saying that, oh, well, it's not going to happen.
00:10:12.500
The Republicans, and they're not the moderate, they're the kind of more liberal Republicans
00:10:16.680
that are on the other side of the spectrum of you and I.
00:10:18.940
But what they are, they would have to basically manipulate a whole host, literally dozens and
00:10:26.600
dozens of Democrats and Republicans in order to make that happen.
00:10:31.140
There are no secrets in Washington, D.C., none at all.
00:10:35.660
And so if there was some actual coalition of multiple members working together, everyone
00:10:42.340
And by the way, every reporter would be dying to get the scoop on the next one.
00:10:46.820
And here you have Politico saying, we've searched everywhere and there's no real evidence this
00:10:53.400
That Don Bacon's statements are nothing more than a McCarthy op.
00:10:58.280
And I know Don Bacon, I like Don Bacon, we sit next to each other on the Armed Services
00:11:02.980
Committee, care a lot about national defense together.
00:11:09.520
It is just an operation being run on behalf of the McCarthy coalition to try to scare those
00:11:16.020
of us who are trying to actually change Congress into accepting just kind of the next iteration
00:11:26.500
Am I too aggressive to call the Bacon thing just a McCarthy op?
00:11:33.620
You know, Matt, everything we're talking about, what you're going to bring up next, they all
00:11:40.840
The establishment doesn't matter what party it is.
00:11:48.640
And so you're going to see these rather macabre ops that are coming out there like, oh, we're
00:11:53.760
going to come together, you know, we're going to bring in...
00:12:03.100
And the next reason that Politico outlines is that in any sort of hypothetical deal, Democrats
00:12:09.360
would want something in return, and if Republicans were to surrender that, that would be the
00:12:14.820
death of those candidacies in any upcoming primary.
00:12:18.060
They say that it is a surefire recipe for a primary challenge to any centrist Republican.
00:12:23.800
Now, if you're a frontline Republican, a centrist Republican, you don't want to be challenged
00:12:28.620
in the primary because you likely already have a general election that is very costly and
00:12:35.980
And so the notion that centrist Republicans are going to go surrender away the powers of
00:12:41.580
the House of Representatives to Democrats and then have to explain that to primary voters
00:12:45.520
down the road defies like every feature of political physics.
00:12:52.340
So, and the final one is that Democrats, frankly, don't mind watching the GOP squirm.
00:13:00.120
And look, I wish that making the demands that we are making for a better Congress, a more
00:13:07.040
honest institution, a more transparent institution, I wish that didn't require discomfort in our
00:13:13.460
I wish that every single person held the views that you and I frequently hold about the need
00:13:19.340
But sometimes you have to meet, make even members of your own team a little uncomfortable.
00:13:25.000
And real leadership is not just always giving the rah-rah speech at halftime, right?
00:13:31.540
You know, we underperformed in the lead up to this election.
00:13:35.520
And sometimes we have to have that discomfort to say, you know what, maybe if we like embrace
00:13:40.080
better policies and have better leaders, more inspirational figures guiding our decision making, maybe we
00:13:46.000
won't need $12 to $15 million, you know, for every frontline seat that we have to go raise from
00:13:52.360
Maybe we'll just do what we said we would do for the people.
00:13:56.160
And, you know, I want to add one other thing here that I think is just important to say.
00:14:00.680
We were told when we were in the minority, oh, you can't have a change in leadership.
00:14:04.420
By the way, Kevin's been in leadership for 12 years.
00:14:06.640
So we were told you can't have a change in leadership because we're in the minority.
00:14:10.560
And then we were told when we were going to get, that we were going to get 20 to 40 seats and
00:14:13.980
we'd have this massive majority and we couldn't change the trajectory of Congress because Kevin
00:14:21.900
And now we're being told it's just too doggone close.
00:14:25.620
In other words, what they're saying is you can never change the direction of this Congress,
00:14:32.140
this congressional body because, well, it'd be uncomfortable, it'd be awful, it'd be awkward.
00:14:36.500
It'd be, and the reality is it's because they never want to lose the establishment.
00:14:44.600
And I'm grateful for you because that's what we're trying to do here is break down that
00:14:48.560
power structure so that people can actually, members of Congress can actually represent
00:14:54.600
And we can't even go down and amend the bills on the floor.
00:14:59.960
You have a $2 trillion deficit, excuse me, $2 trillion bill, and you can't go down and
00:15:07.640
It's out of control and except for those four people.
00:15:14.220
Several of our colleagues, seven of them, in fact, have prepared a memorandum regarding
00:15:19.620
the important requirements of leadership of anyone who would want to be Speaker of the
00:15:25.800
Those in the press have really categorized it as a sort of a, you know, message to McCarthy
00:15:32.140
that he doesn't have their vote in the absence of these things.
00:15:37.460
You know, what are the goals of the people who are trying to maybe shake up the leadership
00:15:45.780
And one of the first ones is to have 72 hours to read the bill text that is unwaivable.
00:15:52.620
Now, that just seems like something both parties should support, that every American would support.
00:15:57.960
And sometimes you're dealing with bills that are thousands of pages.
00:16:01.580
So really, 72 hours isn't enough for these complex bills.
00:16:05.480
But what kind of pushback have you gotten as we've presented this to even our Republican
00:16:11.280
I've been told that there's just no way that we're going to have to go.
00:16:16.140
And as a prime example, the bill that we just did, 4,408 pages with a 36-hour window
00:16:22.860
to look at it, a complex bill filled with all kinds of interesting things.
00:16:27.720
But I've been told that if that happens, we will stultify, we will stop the process of Congress.
00:16:46.940
The real reason is that they don't want us to have the chance to really see what the
00:16:51.560
operative effects are of the legislation, because then we would have stronger critique
00:16:55.940
of bills that don't always serve the interests of the folks who send us here to work for them.
00:17:01.000
I had a very powerful committee chairman tell me once, well, Gates, the reason we don't
00:17:05.400
give you guys the bills in advance is legislation's a lot like roadkill.
00:17:09.120
It gets picked after too much after about 48 hours in the sun.
00:17:12.360
And that is supposed to be the deliberative process that our fellow Americans deserve.
00:17:18.320
So know this, as Andy and I are fighting with the seven certainly who've signed this memo
00:17:24.100
and many others to try to open that up, there are people in this town who think that the
00:17:29.340
only way this town can work is if we don't really know the operative effects of the legislation
00:17:35.440
Another demand in this memorandum is single subject.
00:17:38.460
The requirement that every bill address a single subject and that the appropriations bills
00:17:44.040
be considered separately, not just as one up or down vote.
00:17:47.700
So you've got to vote for the troops and keeping our military funded right alongside funding some
00:17:58.700
So single subject would, I mean, even that's probably too broad because you can just kind of
00:18:06.300
But what that would do ostensibly would be the first step to letting us actually have control
00:18:12.180
so where you don't see, you know, this is the first thing that comes to mind is like,
00:18:17.200
let's say like a DACA amnesty bill in a National Defense Authorization Act.
00:18:23.140
It's where you wouldn't see something like a safe banking act, which is the marijuana banking
00:18:28.600
act, whether you're for it or against it, in the National Defense Authorization Act
00:18:32.260
has nothing to do with that. You would actually silo some of these votes so the American people
00:18:40.620
could see what we're voting on, members would see what we're voting on, and you would not have
00:18:45.460
this, the leverage that the leadership uses because they use this as leverage.
00:18:51.260
Yeah. I mean, if you want to know the nitty gritty, if you're watching and wondering, well,
00:18:55.120
why would you ever have to vote on water infrastructure at the same time as the defense
00:19:00.080
authorization? Why would you have to vote on an issue regarding the war powers in Yemen and the
00:19:06.480
farm bill? The reason is that as the leadership is trying to construct a way to 218 votes on
00:19:13.220
something, they realize that some of these ideas cannot get the votes on their own merit. And so they
00:19:19.960
have to hang ornaments onto the tree, hoping that that will become a payoff to get two or three votes
00:19:26.060
here, or an incentive to get four or five votes there. And so it's not worthy of the greatest
00:19:32.960
country on the planet Earth to sit there and legislate like you're building a Mr. Potato Head doll,
00:19:39.840
right? And that's ultimately what a lot of these bills look like, and it's one of the principal
00:19:43.880
demands being made. Conservative representation on committees is another demand in the memo.
00:19:49.960
Explain to people why this need is not currently being met.
00:19:54.900
It's not currently being met because, like on the appropriations committee, leadership does not
00:20:02.380
want to have people on there that are going to say, we're going to vote no on this because it's going
00:20:07.180
to bust our spending and increase our deficit, which will in turn increase the national debt.
00:20:12.040
They want to have control of the committees. So most conservatives are kind of funneled into
00:20:18.280
two or three committees. We have on natural resources, we're on judiciary, and we're on
00:20:26.700
oversight. But you're not going to find us on appropriations. You're not going to find too many
00:20:30.700
of us on house armed services. You're not going to find us on anything that the leadership wants to
00:20:36.320
have control of. And you're definitely not going to find us on rules committee in any kind of
00:20:41.100
significant ratio. The appropriate ratio would mean that the chairman or chairwoman is going to have
00:20:50.020
to deal with objections to the leadership bills. And they just simply don't want that.
00:20:56.520
Yeah. It's almost like if you want to be on the war committee, you've got to be for the wars.
00:21:00.580
If you want to be on the appropriations committee, you have to be for all of the appropriations.
00:21:05.200
If you want to be on the foreign affairs committee, you have to be for more foreign affairs. If you
00:21:10.680
want to be on the committees that oversee banking and insurance, you have to be captive to those
00:21:15.760
lobbying interests. And what we're saying is that, look, we've got a cross section of ideologies in
00:21:21.340
this conference. And I don't purport to say that every committee should just have folks that are in
00:21:27.640
the Freedom Caucus or Freedom Caucus aligned. I think that every committee needs to reflect the
00:21:32.880
ideological sort of bandwidth of our conference. That way, if there are issues with bills where
00:21:38.520
maybe, you know, there's something that the moderates will not vote for that you and I want,
00:21:43.100
I'd rather sort that out in committee working on those matters rather than have it come to the
00:21:48.200
floor and say, well, we don't have the votes for it, so we have to bootstrap some other crazy
00:21:51.880
legislation to do it to try to force it over the finish line. Well, that's what a committee is for.
00:21:56.920
The committee is for the hot debate, the push-me-pull-ya that's supposed to come in legislating.
00:22:04.180
And then you could actually, then everybody else should say, well, we trust it because it's come
00:22:07.700
out of this committee. We know that they've fought hard over this thing, but that isn't the way it
00:22:11.740
happens today. The only thing I trust when a bill comes out of committee in Congress now
00:22:15.880
is that the lobbyists who lobby that committee are okay with the bill. Not that it's actually good
00:22:21.000
for my constituents. And so you have to think about the committees now as totally captive creatures
00:22:26.860
to the interests that lobby those committees. That's how you get on those committees. That's
00:22:31.480
how you fundraise off those committees. And what we're saying is if you had ideological diversity
00:22:35.620
and not just Freedom Caucus and Freedom Caucus aligned people, also folks from the more centrist
00:22:40.560
groups, then it would be about something more and something meaningful. Fran on Rumble says you also
00:22:47.680
have her vote for speaker. So I don't know which congressional district she represents,
00:22:51.540
but a lot of folks saying we need to fight hard, that these are valuable. And Star on Instagram
00:22:58.120
saying that the power needs to be with the people. And that's really what this drives at. The people
00:23:04.540
do feel like the government has been weaponized against them. And there is a organizational demand
00:23:09.740
about the House of Representatives in this memo our colleagues have signed for a church commission.
00:23:14.460
And, you know, you and I are on the Judiciary Committee. We're going to be focused a lot there
00:23:20.560
on the FBI and the national security apparatus being weaponized against people. But then on the Armed
00:23:26.880
Services Committee, I'm going to be looking at DOD and its weaponization against troops. And then on
00:23:31.400
oversight, you're going to be looking at these foreign entanglements of the Biden family and how that's
00:23:36.360
shaped China policy. And the argument in this memo is that all of those committees need to do that
00:23:42.080
work. But at the end of the day, this has to crystallize in a church commission style report. Do you agree
00:23:49.320
Yeah, yeah, I do. And I'll tell you why, because I do think the the committees have have the bandwidth to
00:23:54.760
handle certain things. But the church commission is church style commission would basically say things
00:23:59.600
like, okay, what we have found is this, this interlocking weaponization of the federal government. And
00:24:07.620
what we're going to do is we need to stop that. And they can provide prescriptions, they can subpoena
00:24:12.680
people, and they can give due process, unlike the phony January 6th committee. You're actually trying to
00:24:19.980
get to the root of the problem. You're trying to find out what has happened. You're trying to find it out in a
00:24:26.240
proper due process way. And it'll take a long time. But when you get to the bottom of it, you have to do that to
00:24:33.540
clear out the underbrush that's been going on. And we're finding out more and more with these Twitter
00:24:38.260
dumps that are coming out that Elon Musk is providing, you're going to find that most of what
00:24:43.040
we thought, what we were saying, and everybody said, Oh, you bunch of conspiracy theorists. It turns out that
00:24:50.080
Yeah, indeed. Well, for those of you watching the speakers race closely, there were 36 votes that Kevin
00:24:56.740
McCarthy did not capture when Republicans got together to make a speaker designation choice.
00:25:02.400
Of those 36, zero have come out publicly saying their mind has been changed, and now all of a sudden
00:25:09.800
they intend to vote for Kevin McCarthy. Zero of them. Five of us have come out to say that we really
00:25:15.800
can't envision a circumstance voting for Kevin McCarthy, given his recalcitrant to some of these
00:25:21.660
goals we have for the House of Representatives to be more transparent, open, and just available for
00:25:27.700
lawmakers to be able to serve the needs of our constituents. And now an additional seven,
00:25:33.840
including Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, Dan Bishop of North Carolina, Paul Gosar of Arizona,
00:25:39.400
Representative-elect Andy Ogles of Tennessee, Chip Roy of Texas, Andrew Clyde of Georgia,
00:25:44.340
and Representative-elect Eli Crane of Arizona, that these additional seven are coming out and saying,
00:25:50.620
this isn't about a person to us. This is about a series of policy goals. And the number one thing
00:25:58.460
that was listed is the motion to vacate. And the motion to vacate being really the enforcement
00:26:04.020
mechanism for these other goals. And I know this sounds like inside baseball, but I mean,
00:26:08.140
this is how power and who wields it is going to get crafted in Washington, D.C. So it's very important
00:26:13.280
for people to understand that, you know, for 200-ish years, a single member of the body could call for
00:26:21.100
a no-confidence vote, essentially, on the presiding officer. And it was rarely, if ever, used. I think
00:26:26.220
you could count on one hand the number of times it was used in over 100 years. And really, the goal
00:26:31.460
is to never use the motion to vacate, to never have to use the motion to vacate. And you know what?
00:26:36.860
If the Democrats want to do it every single day, we can do the prayer, the pledge, and vote to keep our
00:26:42.080
speaker intact. But what it ensures is that when we agree to these rules, that there will be
00:26:47.760
accountability. Is that your vision for the motion to vacate? Yeah, yeah. I mean, the key word is
00:26:53.260
accountability, as you say. I mean, I know, I know where, I think I know where you are. I know where
00:26:58.300
I am. I, you know, when I look at Mr. McCarthy, I have a certain reticence, because I think he is,
00:27:04.940
he, he needs accountability, okay? I think he, he'd be willing to say, yeah, I'll give you
00:27:11.680
everything. But I'm not going to give you the motion to vacate. Now, why is the motion to vacate
00:27:15.980
important? Because when he violates these rules, or attempts to waive these rules, which we haven't
00:27:21.520
even talked about the waiver, that, that happens on every bill, they waive the rules of the House,
00:27:27.160
then we can, we can go to him and say, wait a second, you just waived these rules that you
00:27:32.460
negotiated to put in there, and we're going to hold you accountable. But if you can't hold him
00:27:37.540
accountable, I'm going to just predict right now. He's going to waive these rules as often
00:27:44.020
as the conference lets him. And by the way, the conference is going to probably let him do it a lot.
00:27:49.000
Our goal is to ensure that principled conservatives do not trade the cow for the magic beans. And this
00:27:57.540
entire negotiation, this entire process will be wholly fruitless if rules changes to the institution
00:28:05.700
are not undergirded with a motion to vacate that any one member can execute. It is the principal
00:28:13.340
enforcement mechanism. It is a total deal breaker. It seems not only for my seven colleagues who spoke
00:28:19.700
through, through their own words in the memo, but for many others who I've chatted with inside
00:28:24.680
conversations these last several weeks. And I mean, isn't the reason we need the motion to vacate,
00:28:30.860
because we don't trust Kevin McCarthy to deliver on any changes to the rules that he promises.
00:28:36.900
Yeah, no, that's, that is exactly right. And by the way, you had for literally 150 plus years
00:28:43.960
a motion to vacate, actually since the early 1800s. You know who changed it was Nancy Pelosi.
00:28:50.220
And we're not asking for anything that's historically outrageous. We're actually asking for what has been
00:28:56.540
the norm in the United States Congress. And there is an amazing red line reticence on the part of Kevin
00:29:03.260
because he doesn't want to be held accountable. He wants to be able to make these promises and say,
00:29:07.540
yeah, I'll do anything, anything you want. And then that's betting on the come. That's betting against
00:29:13.640
yourself. In my opinion, what I want to know is, is there a mechanism to hold you accountable?
00:29:20.240
I'm glad you mentioned that because you watch some of the coverage of all of this and folks are like,
00:29:24.540
well, the right wing conservatives are making crazy demands. And like what the crazy demand that
00:29:30.380
seems to be hanging up McCarthy the most is to return to something that we've had for, you know,
00:29:34.800
more than a century. And, you know, then he prefers to defend something more akin to the Pelosi rule.
00:29:41.960
I don't think that that makes us outrageous in our demands. But my plan is to vote for Andy Biggs.
00:29:47.380
Andy has been a presiding officer in the Arizona Senate where he led a majority that was how many seats?
00:29:53.040
Two seats. Two seat majority in the Senate and still got a lot of stuff done for conservatives.
00:29:58.200
And I think that the size of this majority dictates the type of leader we need. We need a leader with
00:30:03.680
broad trust and confidence across the various groups within the Republican majority. And just
00:30:09.860
the fact that we have to enforce these rules based on something other than trust shows you,
00:30:16.080
I think, all you need to know about the McCarthy candidacy and its ultimate destiny.
00:30:21.220
Andy, there is breaking news in the Congress now I want to get to. But first, you have a great
00:30:26.600
podcast. What's the Biggs idea? How can folks find your podcast? And how can folks follow you on
00:30:30.960
social media before we go to the government funding? You can go you can find me on Twitter
00:30:34.040
at RepAndy Biggs AZ. You can go to what's the Biggs idea on Apple and every other good your
00:30:45.420
neighborhood podcasting distribution center. You had a good conversation with Bob Gooder regarding
00:30:51.180
a lot of these issues that if you want to get deeper into some of the rationale and some of the
00:30:56.120
currents that are running through this leadership race, I strongly recommend that episode. So so
00:31:01.660
breaking today, Democrats were supposed to release their funding package. And we get this from Bloomberg
00:31:08.920
government. Democrats put off plan to release funding package. They are abandoning the release
00:31:15.140
of this bill. They are extending us to the 23rd of December. They don't have Republican support for
00:31:21.720
this omnibus spending legislation. Your thoughts? Yeah, so I saw Leahy was giving it a different spin
00:31:28.460
this morning when I was watching him. He was like, well, you know, I'm so confident we're going to put
00:31:32.920
it off. Well, that's exactly not what happens when you are confident you've got the vote. So they don't
00:31:38.340
have the votes. And this is a very good thing for us because we need the Senate to kill the omnibus
00:31:44.660
bill, which is this big, massive spending package we've been talking about. Because if that passes,
00:31:50.660
Matt, it's going to fund the government all the way through next September. And what that does is
00:31:55.720
that takes away 95% of the leverage that we will have against the Biden administration. And what most
00:32:00.900
people forget is we will be moving into the fall of 2023, which is the kickoff of the presidential
00:32:07.600
cycle. And this place will basically shut down. I hate to tell you American people, but this place
00:32:13.620
kind of shuts down for the presidential campaign. We'll just do one or two things along the way to make
00:32:19.040
it look like we're doing. I think that's performance art. But the reality is we have got to stop the
00:32:24.740
omnibus. And quite frankly, this is where Kevin McCarthy could show he has leadership chops. He's not doing
00:32:30.140
so. He needs to be out there talking about killing the omnibus bill, do a short-term spending bill so
00:32:37.080
that the Republicans can be in control of the budget come January. This is the swamp's play to
00:32:43.780
keep control of spending for as long as possible before Republicans have even the opportunity or the
00:32:50.180
platform or the vote to deliver on the promises we made on the campaign trail to rein in the spending.
00:32:55.400
I mean, the principal mandate that Republicans have after the midterm election in the House of
00:33:01.240
Representatives is to curtail inflation. And we won the argument that the driving factor of inflation
00:33:07.080
wasn't Vladimir Putin. It wasn't some global economic condition. It was government spending.
00:33:12.180
That's right. And so here we are trying to present that fight to even have the opportunity to battle on
00:33:18.100
it. And the cards are being dealt from under the deck, just away from us with Republicans in the Senate
00:33:23.980
who are retiring and just want their earmarks and pork to bring them to their district and Republicans
00:33:29.240
in the House who might prefer to not have the fight and might be all too willing to allow the
00:33:35.360
lobbyists in the swamp to win. So we are fighting against this omnibus spending legislation for that
00:33:41.180
reason. Democrats don't seem to have the vote. How does it end, Andy? It's going to end. We're going to do
00:33:47.180
a short-term spending and then they're going to come through with the omnibus. I have bad news. I think
00:33:52.040
that the senators will cave, Republican senators will cave and give it away. Our people elected
00:33:59.340
us to fight. And if the first opportunity we have to kill a massive spending bill, we don't take that
00:34:05.800
opportunity, then it will be demoralizing to the people that were expecting more of us.
00:34:12.260
Exactly. Exactly right. And I just want to just comment on that. The fight is in the Senate,
00:34:16.080
but a lot of people forget we have a voice in the House even though the fight's in the Senate.
00:34:24.220
That is what leadership chops would do. There should be a letter that we've all signed to
00:34:28.560
Mitch McConnell. There should be a press conference on the steps of the House. There should be a meeting
00:34:34.760
called between the appropriate chairs in the House and in the Senate. There should be continuing pressure
00:34:41.200
put on the senators by the House leadership team, but they're MIA right now. Very disappointing and
00:34:48.820
hopefully not a sign of things to come. You are leading the fight on this effort to impeach
00:34:53.600
Ali Mayorkas. And I want to get to that because you've got big news coming later in the week. The
00:34:58.040
movement is growing. You are assembling more and more Republicans. What are people seeing in the
00:35:04.100
Congress now that are bringing more and more folks to this impeach Mayorkas effort?
00:35:09.020
Well, we still have an uphill climb with some of our colleagues, but the reality is you just look
00:35:14.400
at the border. Just look at the sheer numbers and then we can talk about the more granular effects.
00:35:23.020
So on the border, 73,000 plus known gotaways in November. 205,000 roughly encounters. Unknown
00:35:33.300
gotaways estimated to be somewhere between 75,000 and 100,000. Think about that.
00:35:38.200
Roughly 300,000 to 350,000 people illegally entered our country. Title 42 is going away. That will jump
00:35:46.860
it up to about 18,000 people a day coming into this country. The violence that is erupting. We had a
00:35:53.960
CBP agent killed last week. The drugs that are coming, record amounts, but we still get the same
00:35:59.980
percentage. So you might be interdicting more, but you're still only getting 7% of what we estimate
00:36:06.820
totally coming in. The fentanyl deaths, the opioid crisis, the human and sex trafficking is permeating
00:36:13.080
the country. And right now, if you could get CBP intelligence to go on the record, they would tell
00:36:19.920
you there is not a community in this country that does not have a Mexican cartel presence in this
00:36:25.860
country. And all the time, you've got Alejandro Mayorkas saying, we're not going to remove people,
00:36:32.160
the 1.25 million people who've been ordered to leave the country, we're not going to remove them.
00:36:37.660
There's no plan to remove them. There's no plan to remove them. Instead, in fact, what they're
00:36:41.260
talking about is amnesty, to bring more people, to grant amnesty. And every time they ring that
00:36:46.880
amnesty bell, it just churns up those caravans. Exactly right. So when is the press conference
00:36:52.820
that you're leading on the impeach Mayorkas effort? How can folks follow? The press conference,
00:36:57.740
oh, Matt, you asked me these specific questions. The press conference is this week, I want to say
00:37:02.080
it's tomorrow afternoon. Okay. It'll be- Are you streaming? How can folks follow?
00:37:07.140
Yes, it will be live streamed. You can go to my website, bigs.house.gov, and see the live stream
00:37:12.780
there. It will be live streamed by one of the networks. I can't tell you which one because I
00:37:17.220
can't recall. I'm just leading it. That's all, Matt. Very well. Well, I'm glad you're leading the
00:37:23.500
effort because I do believe that impeachment is the proper tool when people are violating their
00:37:28.920
duty on purpose. I'm not for political impeachment. I'm not for reflexive impeachment. I'm not for
00:37:35.060
impeachment because people use bad judgment. But this is not an issue of bad judgment.
00:37:39.480
They're doing this on purpose. Everybody has talked about the shakeup in the Senate,
00:37:44.580
driven by the Arizona delegation. I heard on one of the Sunday shows someone say, well, you know,
00:37:49.540
Kyrsten Sinema for a long time has said she's friendly with Andy Biggs, that they actually
00:37:54.000
have a working relationship. So, I mean, this evolution of Kyrsten Sinema from, you know,
00:37:58.640
almost Green Party activist to now not associating with the Democratic Party is quite the evolution,
00:38:05.340
and it seems you've had a front row seat to it. Well, you know, she and I served together for a
00:38:09.860
long time in the Arizona legislature. I will just say this about Kyrsten. I was sitting next to her on
00:38:14.440
the plane going home, Matt. So, the flight was actually 520. So, about six hours we're sitting
00:38:19.980
there. We're just talking back and forth periodically, you know, about life and everything
00:38:23.780
else because we're friends. She didn't tell me this was going to happen. I get off the plane and I'm
00:38:28.260
walking to my car and I'm like, what? But it's, the reality is she is, she is, she's going to vote
00:38:37.640
with the Democrats most likely. She's, but she's not going to caucus with them. She is an independent
00:38:43.620
minded person. Her mantra, and we have the same mantra, quite frankly, it's just we're on the
00:38:52.100
other side. It goes like this. If you've got a good idea and a good policy that I think works for
00:38:56.660
the country that's constitutional, I'll get on it. And she's kind of that way, but she leans to the
00:39:03.720
left far more than you. Yeah, I wonder whether or not this was an act of true disassociation or
00:39:09.260
whether she just looked at polling that showed she was going to lose a Democratic primary to Ruben
00:39:13.000
Gallego. And by her declaring that she's an independent now, the Democrats are presented
00:39:19.180
with this choice of whether or not to field a candidate against her. And if she punches through
00:39:22.700
to a general election, she's, she's obviously a stronger general election candidate than she is a
00:39:26.860
primary candidate, right? Yeah, no, that's, that's, that's right. So the Democrats in Arizona censured
00:39:31.760
her, they're ticked off at her because of the filibuster issue because she, and she, by the way,
00:39:35.780
she's held that for 20 years. We've known each other 20 years. She's had the same position.
00:39:39.060
So that wasn't a political expedience. That was a deeply held belief. Oh yeah. Yeah. So the next
00:39:45.320
thing happens is if, if so, so Ruben will probably be the Democrat candidate. He's licking his chops
00:39:50.980
because now he doesn't have a primary probably. Yeah, but good luck for him getting, getting through
00:39:55.920
a general if Sinema's in there. Yeah. So Sinema, Sinema will be in there because all she has to do in
00:40:00.720
Arizona is you have to just get signatures. So you don't have a, an election at all. And then you're
00:40:05.540
going to have a Republican. Maybe it's Blake Masters again. I don't know who it'll be. So
00:40:09.980
it's going to be a real, uh, Hobson choice there in some ways, because for Republicans, uh, we like
00:40:18.540
Kyrsten Sinema because she's, she's open, she's transparent. She, she, she votes a lot of ways,
00:40:24.600
but, and certainly the chamber of commerce loves Kyrsten Sinema in Arizona. So how does that shake out?
00:40:32.540
I don't know. Everything weird in politics has some association with Arizona these days. You guys
00:40:38.520
were like a sleepy Western state for so long where, where people, you know, went to like escape the
00:40:44.320
army from chasing them down. But now everything going on in Arizona is, uh, is at the top of,
00:40:51.880
uh, the political headline. Andy, thanks for joining me. Thanks for running for speaker.
00:40:55.760
Thanks for being in the fight. And you know, I, I'm grateful for this discussion because as we have
00:41:00.900
reporters hound us all week, we can point to the goals of this movement, the objectives that are
00:41:06.820
not rooted in any personality conflict, but that are truly rooted in an opportunity, a once in a
00:41:13.040
lifetime opportunity to change the way the house of representatives works. And if we accomplish that
00:41:17.200
probably won't even matter who the speaker is because we'll have an open, honest place to serve
00:41:22.000
and our constituents will be all the better for it. What's the bigs ideas, the podcast,
00:41:25.960
follow him at rep Andy bigs, right? At rep, Andy bigs, AZ rep, Andy bigs, AZ. Thanks for joining