« The Weeds

Emergency Weeds


Dara, Sarah, and Matt explain the border security deal and Trump’s plan to bypass Congress.

Dara's article

Matt's article on non-legislative priorities

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Yeah. This is Marquez Brownie Acre, Amphibia hd, and this is Andrew Manga Nellie. We will introduce you to our podcast way, form the new sedition to the Vocs media podcast network, so I've spent over ten years, reviewing tech products and consumer electronics for millions of people on the incubation, to channel and now on the way forward. Ass Andrew and I use that experience to dig even deeper into latest tech for smartphones too. I max to electric cars. So if you're gadget lover or attack head or if you just want to figure out whether the latest gadget is worth your harder in cash, give us a lesson say can find way form the empty beefy podcast on your favorite Pakistan every Friday see over there I mean there's about the relate recur this podcast, as the president makes an emergency declaration or plans on emergency emergency Lou
hello, welcome to rather episode of the weeds. Only box, media, podcast networks, Matthew Iglesias here today with DARE Lynn and Sarah Cliff Jane, is in New Zealand. Thank you herself, meanwhile, the United National Emergency, There is a national emergency, so chick she may not even make it given these crises. But our resolution to you is to spend the whole day. King on the National merged and say I do want to talk about it, because I think there's a misconceptions about what this means, but better. Instead about substantive thing that happened, which is that an appropriations bill but signed taking government shut down off the table throughout the remainder of the fiscal year and it. What does not
the wall money, but there's like a lot of things that are in a year, yet I would put asterisks after night Wall the money. He doesn't have a thing that cause I'd like a bright. I mean just read it like it is allowed. You tell us what it does like, so I think we can say that it is insufficient enough for what Trump wanted that he felt the need to declare a national emergency to get more money like that is true, but the bill authorizes specifically one point three: seven: five billion dollars to build physical barriers along the- U S, Mexico Border, and it stipulates that none of that money can be used for anything. That is not a design that is currently on the border, so it couldn't be used for, like the prototype designs that the Trump administration had contracted out and had built in late twenties.
Dean early, twenty eighteen Democrats are pointing to doesn't going see. We specifically prohibited him from using the money to build a wall he s to build fencing instead. The reason that this is not like at this point in the ongoing semantic dispute over the wall. This is more misleading than it is clarifying. Is that when they were, asking for five billion dollars and then five point seven billion dollars in December. They were saying work. We would use this for Steel Ballard Fencing, which is exactly the same fitting Democrats are now authorizing and that's what they're not gonna be using you know whatever money they get out of this emergency declaration to build that they are. They ve said that their freeing up a total of eight billion dollars between authorize money and the I you know, I think, executive action money will see how much of that,
oh gets held up in court, but any money that they get through executive means, while in theory it's not gonna, have the restrictions on it that the appropriations bill had because Congress said this money were giving. You has to be spent particular ways. It didn't necessarily apply to whatever else there, freeing up buddy act as those are going to look like the exact same bear it. I want to back you up that because I feel, like the lefty activists have wound up spinning this as a less of a humiliating catastrophe that it really is right, like an like go back to October of twenty six to you, Donald Trump was running for president, and he was saying then that the existing border barriers were not sufficient right. So him Donald Trump was saying was that there were no border barriers, slug viewing trump
going down to the balance is a concession on trumps, Pat behalf too reality right now, Democrats being willing to fund the balance, is a failure of left activists, hope to hyper polarize the issue and push Democrats to a they had not held pre Trump, but like take with the numbers of money right like if Donald Trump had wanted. One point: three billion dollars worth of money to build existing border barrier prototypes. He couldn't just sign the fucking bill the past in December, like the whole premier, yet the shutdown was it. There was something in it. What about this proposal right? And it is true that trump by lowering his horizons, has come the scenario in which its not a defeat for Trump to accept it but like if Trump wanted to accept this. He couldn't just accept, like the exact
that, like Lord Ingram HAM and other people, were dumping on him for and that got him feeling sad and led to the shutdown like that's what he's taking yes, so I think that there are two different that there's the quantitative and qualitative stuff here rightly quantitatively. Yes, there's an Trump got rolled. Yes, he's freeing up more money now than he was asking for to begin with, but there is nothing that would have stopped him from doing exactly this on December twenty seconds Saying: ok, you guys didn't give me what I wanted. I don't think this is efficient. Art I believe he would have had a an easier legal time of it in so far as he wouldn't have. You know a six week long paper trail of well we'll see what Congress comes up with, but if they dont give you what did is certainly going to get
and guard against him qualitatively. You know the reason that I get so frustrated by the cement debate over the walls that there is never any like. There is no consensus and there's no progress. Donald Trump ran for president having no idea what the border is like Donald Trump means always still doesn't understand. With the border was like one of the things that Donald Trump, successfully learned in his first few months in office was that there was a very narrow lane of barriers that they could be built that would actually satisfying operational needs. Other people in the conservative movement do not appear to who carries much about that as they do about the visual of having a concrete wall of the message that that sends tension has never been resolved in a productive way. It has. Ever even really been hashed out, and so you get Donald Trump Simon
geniously understanding that he can't do anything other than steel bars and being susceptible to getting hit by the right for doing just that, like do in and you know I'd. I wrote this in my peace from today, which I guess I can- and I haven't excuse, wouldn't show notes that, like this fight has shown that build the wall as it is just like. That's never a fight, that's going to get resolved, it's never a fight that anyone's going to be able to declare victory or defeat on, because no two people are getting to any kind of agree on what counts as wall and what counts is trumps while I'm what counts is building up, but I mean on the theory that this thing that Trump is going to build is the wall, because I think this is important read if you go back to the you can have a bell me out here to senators had an amendment then? Yes,
sorry to me by the theory that Trump is building the wall. Now that Corker whole then, would have built the war What do corker? How is this was that this was a case of corner of it was an addition to the gang of eight immigration, but. And so this was a successful effort by moderate Democrats to get a bunch of Republicans bored with us. I mean. Why is a successful effort led by modern Republicans, Deanna Lebanon? We Benyamin, did you ever get you? Do you have to decide on these things like? Are we going to treat this as a poison peril, or are we going to take at right anyway? I guess we're going to swallow this, like big border thing it was like a lot of. It was basically like throwing the law of money at the border and giving a lot of leeway to DE age as amended
and the pitch was right. I mean like the the conceptual pitch with, as was that the physical security of the border is a really big deal and like we need to say yes to Republicans who are obsessed with us and in exchange they are going to say yes to Well, don't call it an amnesty. You write that, like our concern as Democrats is like, we dont want kids living in terror that their mom and dad or can be condemned from their home by ice agents. But what for publicans want is to not be living in terror, that unauthorized immigrants are streaming across the border and present flow rate and like that was a big compromise scan like I have been very frustrated ferment, Here that it didn't go through and like the frustration level increases when you see like the, super immigration hawk people like redefining the problem in terms that, like they rejected the solution to, I think that there are.
You have given the good faith policy red on the argument for corker of any. Indeed, I think that the their argument on on that bill, which was a close cousin, still the argument that people who then got cold feet on comprehensive immigration reform used was wasn't that border security is a problem he D fixed at first, but rather Americans worried about the security of the border, is a political issue and we need to assuage their fear before we can do anything. You know on the double side on immigration, if you do that in a big compromise, comprehensive bill. You can design it as the twenty thirteen bill was designed, so that ok, we're simultaneously throwing a bunch of money at the border and authorized
down the road a legalization programme were setting both of these things in motion at the same time, so that nobody can say well, you haven't done enough yet, but we're saying that we're securing the border first, the inner Rubio, our human sub, currently was we couldn't. Even we shouldn't have even set anything in motion. You have to get people to a place of confidence in the federal government to secure the border before you can even have a political conversation about anything else on policy, the problem that is dead- and I mean this is something that Donald Trump has never really understood and might only now beginning to understand. You can't control peoples or you can activate it. But you can't tell them it's time to stop worrying now and guarantee that they're going to believe you and so Wild Donald Trump took advantage of this.
Massive information gap and his lack of caution that other republican politicians had, because he wasn't concerned about what was going to and if you won the election and had to actually be responsible for securing the border there, now it is and where they have to figure out at what point? Can you actually declare victory at what point you know our, u responds ego. Is it a you break it, you bought it or like you. Inherited this broken thing and you're gonna get blamed. If you don't fix it, I only get not yeah. It's is shifting the debate, but although Democrats have also move substantially to left on border security since court Urban, but like it's also a legitimate political problem that tromp is not getting out of anytime soon. I think today is his best attempt to do that right, like by saying we,
The deal I'm to clearing the emergency, like it seems in your certain. This emergency money is going to be tied up in the courts for quite some time and you a lot of that, will have to do with the way executive action works and some things I still at some point in the US, and I want to talk the role of men Mcconnell here and yet his decision to suddenly be a big fan of executive action, but that fell Toledo watching trumps, before we came in here. Among the myriad things he discussed there, it felt like his best attempt to say, like you, don't have to be scared anymore that, like the wall, is getting belts Ito, I am going to build the nets died off the ground. Was this. He dies the Irene like if you're bringing in our relatives of people killed by unauthorized immigrants, holding pictures of the murder victims and that's your way to say you don't have to be scared anymore. I have question the me and he's gonna be the one who's going to fix it like I see it
trying to end the fear in the idea like I am. In building the wall like I am the one who is making sure that these you situations of the angel mother. Those are going to be a thing of the past, but I agree that a tricky thing to control Rob, highlighting and also casting yourself as the person who is going to make this you no longer the reality and eight ino when Trump try to prove it to you know getting people to chant finish the ones that have filled a wall. It doesn't work great lake, He is not nearly as easy to explain to people that you are constructing some replacement, fencing and you have a plaque You know along the two mile section in El Central Kehl, California, saying that this is the first segment of president trumps border wall, like it's not easy to persuade me that is. It is persuade them that there's nothing on the border. What so I also now hardened judges want people coming into the? U S and killing now for illegal purposes. I guess I'm not gonna do more work around us, Ankara and it's gonna.
We should get into that later. If so, how much more can read so once upon a time Khan ah said he didn't think Trump should declare a national emergency and we purpose billions of unauthorized dollar. I was actually a little confused where he took that stands at the time he did. But He came around to the idea that, rather than having a government shut down that made Republicans unpopular, it would be better for trumped to do this is I think, Mitch colonel has become increasingly mystifying geared to me over the past few weeks. There is a nice eater long profile him in the New York Times a few weeks ago that you know so as to be illegal. What is Mitch Mcconnell want? I came away from it like he wants to makes deals and hold this carcass together. I think I'm way with a great sense of what he actually values, but we know one of the things He has spent a lot of time on it in his tenure as such, majority leader is really play
bring back on the Obama administration on executive action, saying you do you do not have the authority to do the things that you want to do without you know us Congress who control the purse strings, giving you that option and you're. Just things such a reversal of that position, like the Senate, has been party to lawsuits term, suing the Obama administration over their use of executive power because as a key sent ten Chan, in the latter half of the Obama administration, where you had President Obama, in the White House you, Congress, SAM, controlled by Republicans interest, you know, base to get anything done. Executive action becomes a key point of tension between the two, and even I made I don't know why you took that position. The beginning either are like. It seems that it could have saved a lot of trouble. Just do so. Maybe he does. It really have dislike staunch belief on executive action that is deciding to forego. Oh now, but I don't know, maybe
Father shut down was more winterbourne. They never get to this point. It is a gun that there is a more confusing decision about why you know he's in this situation. A month or two after that. I think it is worth thinking about. You know the emergency declaration as one element of this ongoing funding fight that is now in a way being resolved with Trump signing. Presumably, the funding bill that Congress is worked out and Lake Mcconnell took a different approach to this fight than he has two previous things where Congress has to do something or Congress is trying to do something, but trumps approval is necessary, like in general Mitch. Mcconnell has said I am going Let the White House tell me what they want and then I'm going to try to make that happen. You know pudding sometimes putting more effort in than other times but lake
you know much Mcconnell has been generally pretty reluctant to get out ahead of the White House or have his caucus get out ahead of the White House on policy, because if you can't predict what Donald Trump Gonna go for and you take a vote, that's a pretty tough vote and then the president comes out and says, this bill was terrible. What were these republicans thinking you ve now made your cock is vulnerable to primary challenges. Like it's a you know, it's a cautious mechanism that makes sense if you're key goal is protecting your incumbents. That's not what happened disco around when the government reopened in late January, like congressional the congressional conferees really took the lead. Richard Shelby was really forging ahead. Talking to Democrats getting a deal, done, the White House wasn't really active in that process is so Mcconnell was simultaneously sticking his neck out on that and taking the risk that the president wasn't going to sign the deal answered,
neck out on the national emergencies like yeah I get. I also have questions about why you would do that, given that you know he kind of was heading to a collision course with himself. He may have overstated the power that he had with the president. He may have been acting in the hope that the president was going to take a more active role in the negotiations and then, if you didn't get what he wanted from their just suck it up, but yeah Ronald made it clear he wanted. Neither are shut down, nor national emergency Trump said pick one and Mcconnell book. And I think it is- delirious. Did you know a president who is supposed to be a negotiator but who hasn't been able to negotiate as well a paper bag generally has now. No one is air down with much Mcconnell. Who is supposed to be this great tacticians? I mean The weird thing about the wall in this right is it. Is it occupies this sort of negative space where it's so central to trumps politics you so invested in it? You won't sign bills that don't have it there's a national emergency
but also like nobody is acting like this is something that they really want. Right, like nobody does know like give and take over, there sits in any way meaning fall right, and many of you think about the concept of repressing military construction funds to go about a walk right, and you mentioned some different planet in which, like Donald Trump hit upon, I see three billion dollar military construction scheme that he wanted to get money for, unlike Nancy Policy, to think it was a good idea, like you wouldn't be the end of the world right like he would I have to give her three billion dollars for some dumb construction project in San Francisco, and then I think we all would go home right leg. It's it's like slaves, baffling I mean it's, it's not baffling is. Dare will tell you it's because, like this is actually about competing visions of what it means to be an American, but he is a very challenging to translate the sky and his sentiments into a
create legislate. Oh, my gosh, it's impossible gray met dry, and so it's like the more you get in to like the appropriate measures are set. Round a table like linked more completely nonsensical. Everything becomes because its, eg. You know you have liked better work like sitting there in a city that, like has all, but also a long tradition of integration with the Mexican sitting across the border and he's like saying: oh passes, crate, because, where welcoming community and it's true who, unlike the exact nature of construction projects, dozen quite addressed that right, it's like like Donald Trump, is trying to say an end. It was. You know in the election right I mean, I think I've heard from a lot of people work and democratic party politics in Northern rural areas that can a swan toward Trump and they say that, like people, came to feel like, like girl.
People in white community is came to feel that Democrats had like turned against their kinds of communities and, like now, only cared about communities like I'll pass. Yes, no, eight right! That's the argument and, like you, can you not geek ink hash that out re lake it it's a gift all on one level. You really can't turn that kind of expressive politics and up into busy on another level. You can that's what results in people really want there to be a concrete wall, where it's just that it is so far divorced from any immediate policy reality that people who are closer to the ground or actively pushing back on. But you know it's, it does, on the other hand, create some interesting space for because the fight it is happening at such an abstract and symbolic level, like so details of immigration policy. The temperature goes down on them a little, and while there was a little bit of fighting over, you know some
immigration stuff. In this funding package, there's some small tinkering around the edges stuff. That is really interesting. The Democrats and Republicans were able to agree to did you know, does in some ways limit lake there can, we think of the railway and then and then we will get those details, a guy you like. Basically anyone listening to this right now, I'm willing to bet that you are you're dealing with stress, maybe there's a of it like an overwhelming amount, or maybe it's more like a low but steady, drumbeat background stress. Remember how you are experiencing stress. It's likely fucking. Mood you energy in so many other areas of your life, you feel, like stress, is starting to take over straining relationships and shorten your temper. It's probably tend to unload and better health is perfect, for that better help is customized online therapy that offers videophone and even live chat sessions which therapists she wrote see anyone on camera. If you don't want you it's much more affordable than in person therapy in stark communicating with a therapist none. Forty
hours a mud, distress using its unbiased feedback. You be pretty surprise when you can gain for it see if it's for you, the weeds, sponsored by better help and listeners get ten percent off the first month, better help dot com such weeds, that's, b, e t, T, R, HD, L, a p d come slash weeds. This episode is brought to you by Fender Foot ball is back and the best bet you can make is downloading the fan dual sports book up. It doesn't matter if new to gambling or an old pro fan, dual has something for everyone and as an official, sports betting partner of the NFL. You know, you're, better, safe, there's also never been a better time to use fan do because right now, you'll get up to one thousand dollars back, if your first, but doesn't when you can even too the small wager into a big payday with the same game parlay that just sign up with a promo code
Spotify place, your first bet risk free on fan. Dual sports book download fan dual today: twenty one and present in Pennsylvania first online real money wager only refund. Who does not withdrawal side credit that expires in fourteen days. Restrictions apply, see terms at sports booked out, fan, dual dotcom gambling problem call one eight hundred gambler. So there you you're telling I was still. Retailers is there's a lot like moving parts. Immigration policy appropriations bill is a good vehicle for a kind of fats and around with them. So what happened right so, you know in the same way that Democrats put limitations on the one point: three: seven, five billion dollars for the barrier in they put patients on the money that they appropriated to you no ice and customs and border protection for various things, and you have, for example, there's under current policy when a kid who comes to the? U S without a
or guardian with them. You know Hs. His job is to find the closest relative living in the United States to sponsor them to Minos to host them, while the kids case is going through the courts so under current policy that process of finding the sponsor includes a fingerprint and background check that is then sent to ice and ice in a has the capacity to and in some cases has arrested the sponsor, because the sponsors and unauthorized immigrant in the U S which they would have been able to do. If the sponsor hadn't been like you, hadn't stepped up to take care of lake, their nephew or whatever the bill that Congress has passed, prevents ice from using any of the money that has appropriated to go after sponsors. You know just because their sponsors of unclean, just because there on authorised,
events like there are some you know. Obviously, if there are serious felonies involved but lake, it does put an end to this practice that have expanded over the last year, so it really is kind of tinkering around the edges kind of stuff. I think that there had been about eighty people who had been arrested, not all of them solely on immigration violations in the lake first four months that this policy was in effect and it's been reduced from its original scope as originally and also apply to everybody in the household of the sponsor. But there are things like that. Where Democrats, who are really interesting, robust oversight of immigration enforcement, have kind of identified these problems and republican appropriate. As you know, the executive branch was not super thrilled with that provision, to say the least. Conservatives we're not super thrilled with that provision that there is a lot of frustration among immigration or so
Just about this thing is essentially, you know providing amnesty to tuck de facto embassy, two tons of people, it's it's encouraging child trafficking by Republicans in Congress were not apparently terribly concerned that this was gonna, be the thing that was gonna blow back on them because it so divorced from the super the politics of you now is there a wall. Do you feel safe? I mean, I think, it's interesting to see how something like that ripples out, because it gives a derelict. We're talking about a universe of eighty or so people who have been arrested, but I think there's also a claim, it creates right, like someone would not want to step forward to be a sponsor because they are worried about you being one of those eighty people and you have slightly sea, like the number of kids still in Asia? Just got three skyrocketed through. I fall in part because people were getting held for longer and I think that's an interesting question about like these smaller pause. He changes that are kind of totally we're shadowed by the Wall stuff is, you know you couldn't
them happening and not much changing simply because people don't know about it. You could have people who would step forward to be a sponsor, but, like they ve heard in the past, this policy, was bad. You know no one really talking about this policy change, and maybe they are not we listeners- and they have not heard about this part of the bell so changes, but I think that's an interesting question when you have these kind of big rolled up bills like this wine there's one thing to change something on paper, is quite another to make people aware of that change, to have their behaviors change as a result of it, and you know, I think, that's an interesting, open question of you. But that we have talked a lot in the show. You know about the climate four undocumented workers in the? U S like how they are making decisions about pursuing public benefits about stepping forward to be a sponsor and I don't know if you know how exactly this kind of information gets communicated to them, or you know you're, on the one hand, were making these positive changes. On the other hand, you know of trump having these contrary having these,
conferences with angels and don't worry about this wall like it. So Does it seem like a great climate to step forward? You know two eyes and identify yourself. Even if you know, there's has been this tweak maiden the law saying you know, they're not going to use this new money too to deport you. Yes, I mean Lake, the question of how to rebuild trust in institutions or how to build trust in some institutions when other institutions are trying to deport you is you know if there are any vocation out there leg. I would lie to figure out how to talk about this. I do not know. Donald Trump doesn't create a lot of opportunities for it. You know generally, I ve sense tends to be that it's really hard to persuade people that the government is an out to get them to and that you know this administration in particular, we saw this in our during some of the when they first announced adding the citizenship questioned the census, like the fact that there were pretty strong legal safeguards in place, that people's information wasn't going to get sent to ice from the Census bureau. Like
yes, it's true, but it's also not something anyone he's going to believe. If you say I think this is more about congressional Democrats sending a message to ice than about a message to unauthorized immigrants. Right I mean this is the sort of ground owned level reality of like abolish. Ices hashtag is, is I like no you're out there, you doing stuff, like federal employees, all the time, what they're doing things to do in their jobs right- and this is I like putting on notice that, like envelope pushing tactics that get alot of articles written about them and stuff like that, like our constituents are going to expect us to come back to Washington and make you stop doing that? And we Well, in fact, do that and that, like Richard, shall be in all these other Republicans like they don't actually care you are not going to protect you and Donald Trump is a moron and
you know, and so, like you guys, should like watch your shit, whenever there have in Missouri, but do No, I don't know how margin there is going to be easier to say no to find sponsors who are willing to separately when this definitely will have some impact, especially because, if it's a choice between stepping up and still, maybe risking deportation, but, like you can be told in good confidence that it's not gonna, get sent ice or letting your nephew or cousin or what or like oftentimes your child who you have been separated from because you emigrated to the? U S and they didn't now they're coming too to meet you like leaving them in the custody of the government like you're still gonna. Take that ask where I'd having these pretty strong incentives to actually like update your information about gas agro situation, deeply The about this, you know that it's just worth flagging is like how it dynamics change when you get out of the partisan deciding mode and into the by partisan legislating mode like. If you
Pay attention to american politics. You ve, probably heard that like come on Harris is like a leading twenty twenty contender and an important United States senator and like she no on this. Are you ve probably heard that mark meadows is an influential republican leader, the Freedom caucus like he voted? No, you probably heard of Alexandria Cassio Cortez. She voted now right, and so you might start thing it's like Wade like, body in the all star game right, but like that's, how Congress works when it comes to bipartisan legislating. Like these deals, are made by a bunch of senators who, like you, don't hear a lot about how s your children need a lower exactly right and they passed like overwhelmingly like with the votes and like every single person in a slightly vulnerable seat, takes advantage of any
kind of bipartisan deal to be, I get in on the deal because then you get a voting score. That shows your immoderate that you cross the island and work for separate and this these things like sail through words. It would be a huge deal right. You could not pass a GEO P healthcare bill that mark meadows do not vote for right, you'd be like were blown up all the freedom caucuses, an on board right, but no bipartisan deal just becomes pure position taken right, like there's a million things in it we members of Congress is going to look at this and be like there's things in it. I like there's things in it. I dont like and huge decide as like got Cuba Guardian, like leap of faith. I either want b and anti establishment troublemaker who votes no like ABC unmarked meadows, are you like? Am I go along get along team player whose size ideals, and then you have the I'm running for president and I'm my taken a stand red and in every way
free to take those stands? We, as everyone knows, the bill is gonna pass so like chicken Nancy aren't there screaming at you, like. You have heard for the bill because, like they don't care, my vote is a very different than like two thousand nine, like Nancy Pelosi. Yelling at her car, you have to support their literally will not point. You said: you'd have completely different mode of legislating body. Do what you want like it's far yet like it's I mean you can go, and if we assume that somebody pointed out that the margin on the bill in the house was such that, if every Republican had voted against it. It would have narrowly failed. You know, Nancy policies. Office has probably knew that in advance. They probably done that whip count, they probably figured they could lose ex members, and either correctly knew that there weren't that many people who were going to be voting against it or they sent some messages like ok, you can. You can't vote against this and those were agreed to accordingly, like
not just that its members making these decisions, its members, making these decisions in a discussion with leadership about how important a marginal really what exactly so like it's, it's a free vote right and what actually interesting is like what the negotiators deemed important. When their when they're they're making the sort of deal on the ground level and the whole emergency declaration takes place in the context of, like evidently republican negotiators, not thinking that the marginal edition of steel slats is a very important thing because actually brought the headline number down from the previous compromise is right. Because the whole thing was taking place in this like air of unreality were like Trump was gonna, be, this declaration is like. Nobody knows how much money will actually go through once everything is litigated, but it's, like Republicans, had certain things that they held the line on more or less like this detention.
Beds and other stuff they were willing to give ground on and the wall itself was one of the things they were willing to give ground on we're detention beds thing which, like nobody, has ever heard of with apparently somebody met you're trying to kill me. You know what I mean but like this was what public members of Congress. Rather, could let congressional Democrats showed up and they will I work in a sneak this thing in that's gonna limit. The detention beds are above the Mercosur countries like no right. Am I saying what a wise man I just think it is always an interesting test of like what did Richard shall be his colleagues actually think was important and like the wall, no, the detention beds, evidently until a couple of years ago, what Congress to Us- it would mandate that the governments have a certain number of detention beds available at any given time at the inner they could be filled or not that they had to have a capacity of at least thirty four thousand beds at any given time. That
the detention floor fell out. Lucille variable Alaric who's. The now head of the appropriation subcommittee for Homeland Security has had that in her sites for a while and got it out and twenty sixteen and from? where it was even more of a traditional appropriations like were giving you this much money. That means you can have an average of this many beds. Lake Torino try to save them, budget. I totally did not stay within that budget ice leg. You know that the time of the ten more people and then either birds brought money from elsewhere, engage s or asked Congress or supplemental funding. So Democrats come into this negotiation saying. Not only do we want to fund fewer detention beds than we funded last time, but we want, put a statutory maximum of how many people can be in detention who were arrested by ice within the? U S like people who are were already living here, who you know our
authorized immigrants as opposed to people who are apprehended coming into the Eu S. Where, then, you know being detained while their deportation Kayser Asylum cases are being processed ass. If they were saying no, can I have only sixteen point: five thousand people who are being detained at any given time who have been arrested, case. It is like a policy area than kicking around for a while that is kind of came out of nowhere Emmi, like I'm sure there have been a few hill staffers who have had this as a what? If we try to this idea for a while The light from the white Paper like that, you and I know honey is heard about. Where did you get a bit like a last minute yam? right and I'm. Furthermore, it's like it's a weird mix of statutory and appropriate authority. Right, like you, can't say the standard way. The UK, this is none of these funds shall be spent to direct wisely. You can't say none of these funds should be spent to detain the sixteen thousand five hundred and first person, so it was, as we heard, lake adding a statutory thing to it. So
the national shares this, as the Asian comes out against at the White House, really pulls out. Some stops to say this is going to force us to release criminals, because while there are some requirements for like, if you have a certain criminal history, the government ass to detain you that doesn't apply to all criminal charges are convictions, and so a lot of the people who are currently in ice attention have some kind of criminal charge or conviction in their past. The demonstration has made this assessment is made the assertion that they are threats to public safety because of that criminal history, and so they're saying you know if you, if you make us, detain fewer people or detained for Europe we ve arrested in the interior of some of the people were gonna release are gonna, be put em but criminals, the! U know made a big deal out of it and did get Democrats to back down and the law. Goals at which detention is funded, mean there. Actually gonna have Stanley more budget to work with than they did in la belle that passed last year. If you add too, the amount of data transfer authority-
but they have, they can probably get up to detaining as many people as the President wants to for currently at forty nine thousand in theory, if they want stay within budget, they would have to keep an average of forty five thousand. So, like you know, if you talk to Democrats, say well by the end of the year, it will be back to forty thousand five hundred, which is where it was. You know, in twenty eighteen and if you'd have to Republicans, they say well, the president can just transfer money to the test and we could get up to fifty two thousand or even fifty, eight thousand, if we really want to have also I'm curious. Dare, with this deal, passing like what happened Next, in this space, like you have Trump saying like he has his wall money relegates tied up in court for a little while of the government like funded, at least through the end of September, like what is your best guess, unlike where the issues your cover, I ll do they just kind of receipt into the background like where I live in of care and are not like you do at the top of minor league. Where does this all go? I mean annexed,
I dont know what happens with the border while fate, because the border I mean, that's, always been a question of what is Donald Trump satisfied with, and we don't have an answer to that. I think it's gonna be really interesting to see what you know a stuff like the h h s in a sponsor provision in this bill is a reflection of what happens when you have a party that is willing to do Thus, oversight, rightly this is something that came up. We knew that we know that people were being arrested, who were sponsors because of a question that got astern and oversight. Hearing last year, and some follow up on that from talk a pan whose really been doing great work on this from the San Francisco Chronicle, but lake that kind of thing where you know Democrats really- and this is both the progressive king of the party- that you know I Didn'T- want any increase to funding in funding and some of the not necessarily moderates, but lake people in them
stream of the Democratic Party, who think that there is a humanitarian crisis by are willing to spend a little more money TED. You know improve conditions at that Necessary Lake. There are a lot of people who are interested in asking some tough questions of public officials, and maybe those led to learning more information about. What's going on and me that leads to you know the next budget bill, how having a little more of this kind of policy stuff. Like that's the best case scenario, the worst case scenario is that we have a good Julian and one hearings over family separation with everybody asking. How could you do this? How could you do this and nothing new or nothing. That's happening right now actually gets tired out. Let's take a break let's talk about the emergency, this episode is Are you by own up? Every bank says they ve got great mortgage rates so
Why are people paying billions of dollars and extra interest every year, because it's too hard to know what a great deal looks like for? You are unique scenario owner makes it easy to get the personalized data to help you make a smarter home financing decision. Learn when a great looks like for your mortgage, so you never ever pay bills. Your profile today, at owner dotcom, equal housing, opportunity, M L, s idea number one. Four five await o five people, often ask me of prosecuting the mob, is like the movies. Well, there is violence he cracks disguised over their head and pop. Just like a melancholy. There are heads, so wasn't just permission to take em apple permission to take out his own Natalie but after taking down over one hundred mobsters, I can tell you this. The the thing is much more interesting.
Barely holding former mob prosecutor and host of the new podcast up against a mom up against the mob. The bail on the world's most secretive criminal organization, La Cosa, Nostra, we'll talk to profit, Peters, former mobsters, an undercover agents and Ike Hollywood. All these stories are true new episodes dry. Every Wednesday starting September, eighth, listen and follow up hence the mob on Apple podcast Spotify or your favorite podcast app. I want to say, like something I ve been doing kicking around and social media ever since this happened was like well, I've trumped. Does this like the next democratic present
while declared that guns are real national emergency and then we'll do gotta know like good gun stuff, it's important to be clear, like what truth is doing here is kind of crazy, very likely illegal and around back, add, but it's not like just totally made up out of nowhere right. This is not the equivalent of the president just says: oh, it's actual national emergency. I'm suspending the constitution, and now, whatever is going to happen right like why's that are passed by Congress for good reason. Typically of word some level of flexibility in what you actually do. Unlike one form of flexibility, is that you and declare that there is an emergency? And then you can re purpose, certain kinds of funds to do certain kinds of others, things are the classic Obama emergency was at one point. He said there was a swine flu emergency and he
if did some of the judge s money around to do something flew related rather than something not related to the flu and Congo scan right. If you genuinely had like robe Dictator President Congress, can just ass, a resolution saying no, it isn t the merchants right and then it goes away so again as with little we everything Trump has done right, wherever troubling or authoritarian. You find it too listen, there's any problem at all. Is it the Republican Party is squarely back right, there's enough here at all? That, like the president, can just go. Do it's like the president with the backing of the Senate Republican? Majority can invoke specific statutory authorities that here as well. Let him reprogram to be specific sources of money, one is theirs: federal, drug interdiction, money and he's gonna, say We need this. Wallace detracts from coming in and the others
the military construction find any, I must say that this qualifies said national defence of urgency, and it's been going to subsequently be mitigated What would the White House shorter put out this morning is that I don't know if they believe this or not, but we're trying to say, I think, to reassure tromp that they have a strategy to win this image. And that strategy has like three parts right and it's dont build the wall in California in New Mexico, because the state governments impulse You just to build the emergency while in Texas and then in Texas, get the Texas State government to pass a law that would bar democratic, controlled city in county governments very Rube Goldberg, let's like a law making their brilliant Nation. Of how much lake in Texas is a really good example of this lake. A lot of state governance has been. How do we stop progressed
localities from doing between her legs. If this is the function of state governments being largely controlled by Republicans and city governments being largely controlled by Democrats, there's a lot of lace, purely defensive policymaking. Right now. I think it's fair to say that actually couple years ago in Texas, this would not have flown in the Texas state. Legislature because actually moderate republican faction in the Texas House of Representatives with sort of governing in a coalition with Democrats and were keeping off the agenda certain kinds of light, far right red meat type bills, but that arrangement is all fallen apart, and so I like This was White House senior administration officials were asserting that the text, the state legislature- would do this rather than actual Texas legislators, as they like.
May wasn't not happen, but I wouldn't put it pass them either. As there were saying it's become pretty common like Tennessee. Like a law that, like you, can't have a mass transit project in Nashville or something like that. There's a lot of state preemption of city, minimum wage law as a taxes, so another one that we have a lot of these on how we had the lake. You know, four The reason this is immediately gotten forgot has gotten forgotten remiss remembered as Democrats pushing gender neutral bathrooms, but late there and gender neutral bathrooms became a national issue or you know, an issue of national focus was because these state government of North line I passed a law did superseded. Local harden that would have supported them. Five years ago, we zoom out a little better kind of tells us something about like the current methods of like policymaking and like an how long it made in a lot of the fights that we're going to see play out like over things happening,
surely aren't going out in Congress. Eight more like this fight over the wall but actually play out and like Texas in Texas Legislature that my play out in the Supreme Court that I think one of the things you're seeing in an era of divided governor. Do you dont really see these big by partisan, feels at a more is that you see a lot more litigation and a lot more laws being figure out and places it don't involve legislators as in uniting the Obama administration. They made pretty liberal use their executive power at the of their time in office. A with you know the view that they were not they are getting down to the Republican Congress in their public in Congress pushed back really aggressively on that. But I think there's only becomes a more frequent part of american policy making. Not you know something: that is just a one off, but in the net symptomatic about how things are working right it is not doing a little bit of a difference is that you know the Obama administration was dealing with a conservative dominated judiciary.
So they were, they were trying to thread the need all between in what they wanted to do and doing so that wouldn't get tossed out of court from is also dealing with it our fifth dominate judiciary, so he has a greater scope of life the two, but is also not a hundred percent clear that this specific action, like is in fact calculated to up in court. It seems like this a bit of a like triple game: World on the one hand, people are trying to convince Trump that this will hold up in court. So there was like this. This Texas gimmick is interesting but like, I'm not a constitutional lawyer like don't don't like skull me too much of this and that we want, but, like I feel, add some federal court somewhere well be found. That agree is that, like the House of Representatives has standing,
whoever there's that some Texas landowner, whose getting old emanated Lamy, announced it that here that the ninth circuit was going to rule again sit still it I mean that's exactly right, read like IE eight eat just like if the ninth circuit rules that Nancy Pelosi has and to sue, puts the temporary restraining order. Then the Supreme Court has to address it like this idea that you could prevent the court's ruling on this seems not true to me than then it becomes a question for John Robards, where I feel like half of the Republicans are saying? No, this fine I'll stand up in court and half of the governments are saying. No. This is fine. It won't stand up before it ends gets. It is not totally clear who wants to win, also, which part of it might stand up in court. Read like, I think you get him vision, a scenario in which they say like. Look yes like this is a valid drug interdiction. Ski like. It is true, factually that a non zero quantity of drugs is smuggled across unwalled sections of the border right
There is a policy disagreement over whether building a larger fences, a good way to introduce drugs it is a way to interact drugs, but then seeing this military construction thing that like no. This is not a military projects like the military doesn't staff the border, like that's nothing about this as a military project, except in so far as Trump is trying to find a slush fund to do it right like so. I don't like a lot of different things can happen and I've seen a lot of people a certain things very confidently, and I don't really know why it's Weren't. You remember when talking about any court battle that judges ten. Want to rule on the nearest grounds possible and that judges really don't want to get into like political or empirical questions like this appeal, court is not going to be issuing a ruling saying this is an emergency or this. Is not an emergency they're gonna be sticking pretty closely to is the authority being evoked here legitimate for the purposes it's been used for it
Maybe that's going to require peeking behind once called the four corners of the declaration to lake see if the emergency, Israel, but problems like if they can avoid that probably well. I think the other thing to bear in mind. Is that it's not just a question of what the end point is going to be. But when, if we're talking about you know a very quick order being issued against the administration like a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction and the administration tries to Lake get that stay to try the inner tries to escalate it up the chain. Really cool We John robbers, isn't just just gonna, have to decide whether he's gonna side with the administration on this generates, and you know who ever else in the conservative majority is a little bit squeaky about explaining that your power they're going to have to decide whether it is important enough to them too, issue, a stay of a lower courts order, which is a pretty high threshold in order to get Trump Start building the wall while the case works through the courts like it's a NATO. Is this
weeks long a month, long a year's long legal battle. We don't know that yet, just because it's gonna get held up in court doesn't mean that it's not going to be able to go. Forward in some way during that court battle? Right I mean, I think it seems Clear that some water projects are going. In other words, we are just like that would have been true anyway rarely, this whole wall Fight had never happened. It would nonetheless have been the case that, like there would be things happening at the border with stuff being built that Donald Trump could easily have characterized as the building of the wall. And, conversely, like there's no way like some whole giant project as can be completed within the scope of them. From the term. And then you get not as a congressional matter or a legal politics battle, but just like you know what it, what it is, I think, it's important. You know what Sarah said read like these
I'm administration turned to a lot of executive discretionary actions in its second term and It would be probably useful for twenty twenty presidential candidates to talk more about this, because this has become an important part of like the way we president. Now. Yes, and is something that reasonable people disagree. And that presidents have a tendency to often their code. Artisans and Congress are not enthusiastic about the idea of aggressive use of executive authority, but when the present really wants to do it can sort of wind up bullying into saying yes, and so I get actually really really matters right, like you could say, I'm going to install postal banking supporters on the: U S, p s border governors and they are going to assert that such and such statute gives them the authority to start a public banking option. And, unlike that, may or may not hold up in court, but it
This is something we all pitch to me. It's not is on laughable that you could do that If, if you ve strongly believe in it like you give it a shot rattling, maybe you win, maybe you lose and a commitment to doing that. Tell you a lot more about policy outcomes than whether or not somebody has co sponsored some kind of hypothetical postal banking bill that by is never going to happen, and this lake is these. Two people in the big spaces, where there were Obama era, controversies like climate reg. Jane an immigration enforcement but, like those aren't special those just happen to have been areas of focus in those particular years like the: U S, car who is full of provisions that have some ambiguity to them, and the present the United States and his legal team can try to come up with stuff to do
Matt, I believe you're saying that there is a very good argued article on box, dot com that people should read about that. I don't even some day I mean I. I wrote a little about this. Well, I'm gonna go! I'm I'm working on reporting out a progressive laundry list of these kinds of things but he's just something like I haven't heard authorities like allude you like It's been a certain amount of like climate change, is a true national emergency, and am I guess I agree with you and then like huddle with your lawyers and like innocence, if exceeds what is the national right like an embarrassing. I clear thing like when we do reporting on policy. It's like how does that policy work? How much will it cost I kind of like? Where with the baby vanderdyke. How does the money go out? Yes, the questions I think reporters in policy folks are less use to asking is like well how
get it an actor exits, almost considered like a little off topic. Well, we'll get an office and then we'll figure out our agenda and annoyed bring into Congress and, like you know, very schoolhouse rock ask, but I think you're right mad. It becomes increasingly imports and part of the agenda, if you're gonna assume you know, you're gonna have to do this in a non schoolhouse rock way than you kind of to think about like will. What are those alternative channels those other ways you can do it, but I think it is a discussion you, people are not currently use too have a radio. It's not on my as opposed your borders, acknowledged my regular list of questions, and I think it's a question like Orkney gets padded down is like to see and away like a well. You know. First, we actually have to like flesh out the policy. Firstly iterate, the Bell Buddy, I think you're right and it gives an increasingly important consideration to how effective can you be in your governing is like. What are you going to do if this is something that is not going to move
this isn't a fascinating his leg. I, as somebody on a b that you know where actual policy has been made by the executive branch in a very aggressive, illustrative ministrations, but the debate You know in campaigns is always stone legislative leg. It see. No sign dangerously there's no discussion of how do we get this past and there is very little interest in doing administrative first like thinking about administrative policy first rate, and that means that there is always As you know, ongoing fight among its inner, especially the democratic coalition. In what is that Hi is legislative priority relic assume you can do one or two big bills session. What are those bills? Gonna be who's. Gonna go left out in the cold and while to a certain extent, you do have to do. Try unlike administrative policymaking as well, because you know you can only Only so many you know, and be lawyers and Elsie folks who can review things. There is less of one
You can't do it. You can do more than one or two big regulations, a congress. So you know I would love to see. I mean I, I see more people thinking about in our avenues and more explicit way. I'd also like to say a word. You know candidates, and this is a total pipe dream ignored like here is a thing I'd really like to do, but I dont think the president has the power to do that leg. I think it's very tempting to kind of Joe down this road of great. Now we have these new powers that have been unlocked for us and I want to know I mean you know bomb. I didn't act on immigration for a while, because he personally was convinced that he didn't have the legal authority to do it like. It would be good to know why Elizabeth WAR and looks at and goes gee. I don't think the legal support is there Here I mean I just want to say that, like this big in some ways, less novel about this than I think people sometimes believe right that like. If you look at Sdr and the great depression, there was a lot of legit
mission there, but like the single most important thing he did to promote economic recovery was to take the United States off the gold standard enter basically change how the monetary system worked right way. He did that red, like monetary economics, have been a subject of perennial controversy in american politics and he hit upon the idea of seizing on a broad war, one law which allowed the president to basically like control the important export of goods as a wartime measure Congress just happen to have not war, peeled this law, and so he used it to issue an executive order, barring the import and export of gold right, and in fact de metal. Icing? U S! Currency way! it was a huge abuse of authority. You could ride like all kinds of fussy takes like that was obviously not the purpose of the trading with the enemy act.
Like saved like many millions of people from endless suffering, unlike arguably saved american democracy, for the long right and like the Emancipation proclamation was an aggressive use of executive. Pretty by linking administration that didn't have congressional support for its anti slavery initiatives. Am I glad you know like those pretty good right and we don't when we look back on the long sweep of things actually treat His ideas as like, as dubiously as I think it's become convention, for journalists to like which really dubious about aggressive use of executive authority by the Trump Administration is that I cannot think of a single example of the Trump Administration doing something. That is a good idea. It was a lie about it right but like it would be much better
two aggressively use executive authority to solve big national problems than to just like not solve them, because you want Washington Post editorial page till. I agree that you are doing things the right way. Like this site, but you wins on the board. I think it is a good idea, but that means like thinking creatively about the actual legal powers right, the: U S, constitution, but a very unusual number of veto points. In your way there was no big discussion in Canada, about like, can Trudeau His policy initiative approved by parliament, was like nope. He won the election and all that approved, and then they just like kick around for next couple years, taking q photos and having scandals, and of America's like butter, and so it's like you gotta you gonna come up with. Some some way to get stuff dine and I think, like playing like fantasy senator like we ve done. A lot in this campaign is, is not so enlightening
happy President's there. Have you I didn't day with that very Jack, Sony and model of the presidency, or one might even say, Trumpery, and I prefer to think of it as the Lincoln is about bottle is uneven. Alas, what do you think you think it is in the way three smokers who is your favorite president, who did a lot of deferring to Congress some great ones? Let's hear for Garfield, it's going amazing now I so thank thanks, said value for listening thanks to our sponsors. Of course, thanks to our producers, Jeffrey Gold, these will return on accessible, affordable broadband hubs com. These reach toward their american dream for students, lectures on a Chavez means rising above the poverty line and becoming valedictorian of international high school at Langley Park, and thanks to access from eighteen t, it can help these
dreams turning turn into reality. That's my eighteen tease me two billion dollar three year commitment to help close the digital divide to more Americans, have a chance to succeed, to learn more HTTP, dot, com, slash connecting communities.
Transcript generated on 2021-09-11.