Jim Renacci

You got to think of it from this standpoint. The president doesn't have the authority to do that. And I saw that there's already been a court case thrown at him. And the authority is he's spending money that he's not allowed to spend without the approval of Congress. And those buyouts probably need to be approved by Congress. But in the end,

You got to think of it from this standpoint. The president doesn't have the authority to do that. And I saw that there's already been a court case thrown at him. And the authority is he's spending money that he's not allowed to spend without the approval of Congress. And those buyouts probably need to be approved by Congress. But in the end,

I think he's sitting back saying, Washington won't do this. Congress won't pass this. I'm going to test it. I'm going to keep doing these executive orders. And I'm going to move as quickly as I can. We'll see if Congress catches up. But it will also shake up, I hope, the voters to say, hey, wait a minute. This is probably something that should be done.

I think he's sitting back saying, Washington won't do this. Congress won't pass this. I'm going to test it. I'm going to keep doing these executive orders. And I'm going to move as quickly as I can. We'll see if Congress catches up. But it will also shake up, I hope, the voters to say, hey, wait a minute. This is probably something that should be done.

He didn't have the authority to do that either. That's a cost to the federal government. And you're right. These will be the same things. These will be lawsuits. And again, I see this as an awakening.

He didn't have the authority to do that either. That's a cost to the federal government. And you're right. These will be the same things. These will be lawsuits. And again, I see this as an awakening.

And it's going to be awakening for the American voter and the American taxpayer to say, wait a minute, maybe the president should have that authority or members of Congress, you need to start doing your job.

And it's going to be awakening for the American voter and the American taxpayer to say, wait a minute, maybe the president should have that authority or members of Congress, you need to start doing your job.

If you look at the drivers of our debt, what is really driving our debt, we bring in about $4.5 trillion a year into the treasury. We spend about $6 trillion a year. We spend about $4.5 trillion on Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and interest. So we're approximately at a break-even just paying for those programs. Then you have $1.5 million. or 1.5 trillion in deficit approximately every year.

If you look at the drivers of our debt, what is really driving our debt, we bring in about $4.5 trillion a year into the treasury. We spend about $6 trillion a year. We spend about $4.5 trillion on Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and interest. So we're approximately at a break-even just paying for those programs. Then you have $1.5 million. or 1.5 trillion in deficit approximately every year.

Half of that is the military. So when you really start saying, how do I get this budget in place and fix it? Number one, you got to start looking at the drivers and look, nobody that's an elected official wants to talk about that. But there is waste in Social Security. There is waste in Medicare. There is waste in Medicaid.

Half of that is the military. So when you really start saying, how do I get this budget in place and fix it? Number one, you got to start looking at the drivers and look, nobody that's an elected official wants to talk about that. But there is waste in Social Security. There is waste in Medicare. There is waste in Medicaid.

We need to look at all those programs because those are the biggest spending items. Now, this aid to other countries, I mean, it's about $40 billion a year on a $6.5 trillion spend. So it's... money that needs to be looked at, but it's not enough to fix the problems.

We need to look at all those programs because those are the biggest spending items. Now, this aid to other countries, I mean, it's about $40 billion a year on a $6.5 trillion spend. So it's... money that needs to be looked at, but it's not enough to fix the problems.

You know, you started by asking me if I was totally in power, the answer would be I require, there's two things we need to do in America and the United States to fix our federal system. We need to require a balanced budget, that would really shake things up. And then we need to require term limits because those that stick around, they stick around because they like to keep spending the money.

You know, you started by asking me if I was totally in power, the answer would be I require, there's two things we need to do in America and the United States to fix our federal system. We need to require a balanced budget, that would really shake things up. And then we need to require term limits because those that stick around, they stick around because they like to keep spending the money.

If everybody was termed out after so many years and you're required to balance a budget, we would fix all of these problems very quickly.

If everybody was termed out after so many years and you're required to balance a budget, we would fix all of these problems very quickly.

I've said it. It should be eight years for members of Congress. It should be two six-year terms for Senate. We should put those term limits in place, and we should require them to balance the budget. It will be an amazing change for our country.

I've said it. It should be eight years for members of Congress. It should be two six-year terms for Senate. We should put those term limits in place, and we should require them to balance the budget. It will be an amazing change for our country.

But let me tell you the real problems with Social Security that nobody really pays attention to. Number one, the program was designed 45 years ago, assuming that people would die at age 65. That doesn't happen. So they're slowly moving the age limit up.

But let me tell you the real problems with Social Security that nobody really pays attention to. Number one, the program was designed 45 years ago, assuming that people would die at age 65. That doesn't happen. So they're slowly moving the age limit up.

But we're also taking all the funds that are going into this impressed fund, which, by the way, Congress is not allowed to touch, and we're only investing it in Treasury bills. Now, think about that. a treasury bill is averaging about one or 2% a year, and that's the only place you're allowed to put social security funds into.

But we're also taking all the funds that are going into this impressed fund, which, by the way, Congress is not allowed to touch, and we're only investing it in Treasury bills. Now, think about that. a treasury bill is averaging about one or 2% a year, and that's the only place you're allowed to put social security funds into.

Anything that doesn't relate to a requirement to benefit the United States government and taxpayers, in my mind, is an egregious situation. Whether you're buying condoms for, you know, one country or, you know, all these things that we're hearing, they're all egregious. Because in the end, what we really want to have is we want to, that entity was formed in 1991.

Anything that doesn't relate to a requirement to benefit the United States government and taxpayers, in my mind, is an egregious situation. Whether you're buying condoms for, you know, one country or, you know, all these things that we're hearing, they're all egregious. Because in the end, what we really want to have is we want to, that entity was formed in 1991.

You gotta go back to President Bush where he wanted to allow social security trust fund to invest in the stock market. Well, if you would invest in the stock market back when President Bush, George W. was in office, We've averaged about a 10% or 12% return all those years versus about a 2% return. Inflation has averaged about 3.5%. So our return is not even keeping up with inflation.

You gotta go back to President Bush where he wanted to allow social security trust fund to invest in the stock market. Well, if you would invest in the stock market back when President Bush, George W. was in office, We've averaged about a 10% or 12% return all those years versus about a 2% return. Inflation has averaged about 3.5%. So our return is not even keeping up with inflation.

So that's one issue. But there's also other changes have been added to Social Security. Your spouse, either spouse, may never have worked or put money into Social Security. Yeah, the wife can collect or the husband can collect 50%. of whatever that person, the one spouse put in. So figure that number.

So that's one issue. But there's also other changes have been added to Social Security. Your spouse, either spouse, may never have worked or put money into Social Security. Yeah, the wife can collect or the husband can collect 50%. of whatever that person, the one spouse put in. So figure that number.

We're not even keeping up to make up for the one spouse, and yet the other spouse who may have never put a dime in can collect 50%. There are problems inside the system that need to be changed more than just raising and retiring age. That should be done too. But I just named off three things that could make the system solvent if they were just looked at.

We're not even keeping up to make up for the one spouse, and yet the other spouse who may have never put a dime in can collect 50%. There are problems inside the system that need to be changed more than just raising and retiring age. That should be done too. But I just named off three things that could make the system solvent if they were just looked at.

I was going to say, remember, President Trump has said he doesn't want to touch Medicare and Medicaid or Social Security. But let me give you another thing for your listeners to really think about. Medicare, the reason Medicare, we put in, the average couple puts in about $150,000 in their lifetime. They take out about $340,000. These are numbers you can find in the statistics.

I was going to say, remember, President Trump has said he doesn't want to touch Medicare and Medicaid or Social Security. But let me give you another thing for your listeners to really think about. Medicare, the reason Medicare, we put in, the average couple puts in about $150,000 in their lifetime. They take out about $340,000. These are numbers you can find in the statistics.

I was on the Budget Committee. But where does most of the spending occur? It occurs in the last 100 days of the individual's life. So when you bring that up, you cause a whole other issue. But it's something we need to look at. If the majority of spending is in the last 100 days of somebody's life, how do we change it so that

I was on the Budget Committee. But where does most of the spending occur? It occurs in the last 100 days of the individual's life. So when you bring that up, you cause a whole other issue. But it's something we need to look at. If the majority of spending is in the last 100 days of somebody's life, how do we change it so that

You know, right now we're spending twice as much as we're putting in in Medicare. It's another program. And the driver of that is that last 100 days. Another touching subject, something nobody wants to talk about, but it's an issue we need to at least address.

You know, right now we're spending twice as much as we're putting in in Medicare. It's another program. And the driver of that is that last 100 days. Another touching subject, something nobody wants to talk about, but it's an issue we need to at least address.

And the goal really was to make sure that other countries around the world realized that the United States was a friend. Because if we remember, back then we had a Cold War and we had Russia doing the exact same thing. So that was the purpose. Now the purpose of the organization still should be doing some of that.

And the goal really was to make sure that other countries around the world realized that the United States was a friend. Because if we remember, back then we had a Cold War and we had Russia doing the exact same thing. So that was the purpose. Now the purpose of the organization still should be doing some of that.

And remember, China today is the enemy that is doing a little bit of that around the world, too. So anything that relates to making sure that other countries realize that the United States is a, you know, as far as I'm concerned, is, you know, we're trying to build our relationship. That's a positive thing.

And remember, China today is the enemy that is doing a little bit of that around the world, too. So anything that relates to making sure that other countries realize that the United States is a, you know, as far as I'm concerned, is, you know, we're trying to build our relationship. That's a positive thing.

It's one of the reasons I left Congress. I was so frustrated. Here I'm a successful businessman. You've got to look at your expenditures. We weren't doing it. Congress has no oversight on these agencies. Congress has not – doing a budget on an annual basis. Congress is not doing all of their spending reviews. All of this is a normal job of the United States Congress.

It's one of the reasons I left Congress. I was so frustrated. Here I'm a successful businessman. You've got to look at your expenditures. We weren't doing it. Congress has no oversight on these agencies. Congress has not – doing a budget on an annual basis. Congress is not doing all of their spending reviews. All of this is a normal job of the United States Congress.

We have appropriations bills that are supposed to be passed. We have budgets that are supposed to be passed. Most of your listeners don't realize we haven't done that probably for 25 to 30 years, if you go back to where we've really done both.

We have appropriations bills that are supposed to be passed. We have budgets that are supposed to be passed. Most of your listeners don't realize we haven't done that probably for 25 to 30 years, if you go back to where we've really done both.

They do hold the purse strings. But what they should be doing is they should be passing a budget, and then they should be passing appropriations bills. Their appropriations bills would say, USAID, you only have this much money, and this is what it's supposed to be spent for. We're not doing that. Congress isn't doing that.

They do hold the purse strings. But what they should be doing is they should be passing a budget, and then they should be passing appropriations bills. Their appropriations bills would say, USAID, you only have this much money, and this is what it's supposed to be spent for. We're not doing that. Congress isn't doing that.

And at the same time, we should be passing a budget that says, hey, USAID, what are you doing? And let's zero base this out and determine what you should be doing. Those are the real inner workies of Washington that aren't getting accomplished and aren't getting completed.

And at the same time, we should be passing a budget that says, hey, USAID, what are you doing? And let's zero base this out and determine what you should be doing. Those are the real inner workies of Washington that aren't getting accomplished and aren't getting completed.

Yeah, well, look, it's one of the reasons when I was there, we couldn't get a budget passed when we tried to cut costs. And that's why we get the CRs. I don't know if your listeners understand what a CR is, but it's just a continuing resolution. And that's the real problem in Washington. You can't, like, and I was a member of Congress, but you can't blame, you can't.

Yeah, well, look, it's one of the reasons when I was there, we couldn't get a budget passed when we tried to cut costs. And that's why we get the CRs. I don't know if your listeners understand what a CR is, but it's just a continuing resolution. And that's the real problem in Washington. You can't, like, and I was a member of Congress, but you can't blame, you can't.

blame President Biden, you can't blame Bush, you can't blame if you're not doing your job. You've got to blame Congress for not doing enough oversight. Now, here's why I give President Trump a whole lot of credit. He probably doesn't have the authority to do some of the things he's doing, And that's what the Democrats are complaining about. They're saying, he doesn't have this authority.

blame President Biden, you can't blame Bush, you can't blame if you're not doing your job. You've got to blame Congress for not doing enough oversight. Now, here's why I give President Trump a whole lot of credit. He probably doesn't have the authority to do some of the things he's doing, And that's what the Democrats are complaining about. They're saying, he doesn't have this authority.

He can't cut this cost. And it's probably true, and there'll be lawsuits about it. But I think he learned from 2017 to 2020 that if he doesn't do this, Congress won't do it.

He can't cut this cost. And it's probably true, and there'll be lawsuits about it. But I think he learned from 2017 to 2020 that if he doesn't do this, Congress won't do it.

No, it doesn't. And look, it might not even be a line item. They may say, we're going to spend $20 million in Africa. We're going to spend $10 million in this country. They should at least be doing that. And then Congress should be looking at what they're spending it on. And that should be the oversight. So that's a twofold thing that should be done by Congress.

No, it doesn't. And look, it might not even be a line item. They may say, we're going to spend $20 million in Africa. We're going to spend $10 million in this country. They should at least be doing that. And then Congress should be looking at what they're spending it on. And that should be the oversight. So that's a twofold thing that should be done by Congress.

Remember, that's also the number one goal of Congress, oversight. And we're not doing enough of that. So I really do blame Congress for a lot of this. If we pass budgets that said, in total, we're going to spend X amount of dollars for aid to other countries. And then in the appropriations bills, you say, we're going to allocate $50 million or $50 billion, or whatever the number is, to USAID.

Remember, that's also the number one goal of Congress, oversight. And we're not doing enough of that. So I really do blame Congress for a lot of this. If we pass budgets that said, in total, we're going to spend X amount of dollars for aid to other countries. And then in the appropriations bills, you say, we're going to allocate $50 million or $50 billion, or whatever the number is, to USAID.

But we want you doing X, Y, and Z. then you approve all that, and then you come back and you do oversight over what USAID is doing, that's the job of Congress.

But we want you doing X, Y, and Z. then you approve all that, and then you come back and you do oversight over what USAID is doing, that's the job of Congress.

They do think we have to have an agency that's under control of the State Department, and that should be a division of the Secretary of State's office. These are expenditures, again, to promote the United States around the world and the influence of the United States versus China, versus Russia, That's the whole goal of USAIP. But we've gotten away from that and there's no oversight.

They do think we have to have an agency that's under control of the State Department, and that should be a division of the Secretary of State's office. These are expenditures, again, to promote the United States around the world and the influence of the United States versus China, versus Russia, That's the whole goal of USAIP. But we've gotten away from that and there's no oversight.

So I think if you take that organization and you put it under the Secretary of State, which is what we have now, that's what President Trump has done. And then you ask, you know, the Secretary of State to monitor, oversee those expenditures. But you also have to have Congress to agree to spend them. See, that's the key. And I know people get mad at this, but

So I think if you take that organization and you put it under the Secretary of State, which is what we have now, that's what President Trump has done. And then you ask, you know, the Secretary of State to monitor, oversee those expenditures. But you also have to have Congress to agree to spend them. See, that's the key. And I know people get mad at this, but

In Washington, it's Congress's job to authorize and approve expenditures. They have the power of the purse. The president does not have the power of the purse. And what we have now is a president saying, hey, you're not doing your job. I'm going to take some of that power away and I'm going to just cut it.

In Washington, it's Congress's job to authorize and approve expenditures. They have the power of the purse. The president does not have the power of the purse. And what we have now is a president saying, hey, you're not doing your job. I'm going to take some of that power away and I'm going to just cut it.

And you're going to have to do your oversight and all those things, especially when it comes to USAID. But look, we could talk about every agency without a budget, without appropriation bills, any stream of spending and no oversight.

And you're going to have to do your oversight and all those things, especially when it comes to USAID. But look, we could talk about every agency without a budget, without appropriation bills, any stream of spending and no oversight.

Well, I would tell you this. In 2017, the president tried to cut spending in USAID, and I think it's the budget office came back and ruled that it was not proper for him to do that. It was the impounding act. Impalement, control out. They said back then, President Trump, you can't do this. This is authorized by Congress. You're not allowed to do this.

Well, I would tell you this. In 2017, the president tried to cut spending in USAID, and I think it's the budget office came back and ruled that it was not proper for him to do that. It was the impounding act. Impalement, control out. They said back then, President Trump, you can't do this. This is authorized by Congress. You're not allowed to do this.

Now, Trump, President Trump oversees those agencies, so he should have some authority to oversee what they're spending. This organization was set up back in 1961, authorized by Congress to be an independent agency, which might be a problem, which means we might have to change that. So I think we've got to look at all of these things, because here's the problem at Washington.

Now, Trump, President Trump oversees those agencies, so he should have some authority to oversee what they're spending. This organization was set up back in 1961, authorized by Congress to be an independent agency, which might be a problem, which means we might have to change that. So I think we've got to look at all of these things, because here's the problem at Washington.

What was good in 1961 might not be necessary in 2025. And I think we're running into some of that now.

What was good in 1961 might not be necessary in 2025. And I think we're running into some of that now.

at the time, President Kennedy, was trying to show that he wasn't the person directing the funds, and there was an independent agency authorized by Congress to direct the funds. Again, could have been the right thing to do back then.

at the time, President Kennedy, was trying to show that he wasn't the person directing the funds, and there was an independent agency authorized by Congress to direct the funds. Again, could have been the right thing to do back then.

When you talk about Congress authorizing organizations, they do that all the time. They authorize the organization to oversee banks. They separated it. Congress has no authority over it. That was a law passed. And all they have to do is fund it. Chavious organization out there.

When you talk about Congress authorizing organizations, they do that all the time. They authorize the organization to oversee banks. They separated it. Congress has no authority over it. That was a law passed. And all they have to do is fund it. Chavious organization out there.

building buildings, paying for buildings, renovating buildings, overseeing our financial systems after the 2007 collapse, and yet there's no oversight or accountability. So that organization is also set up as a separate, distinct organization that can't be controlled by Congress. Now it can be stopped. It can be eliminated.

building buildings, paying for buildings, renovating buildings, overseeing our financial systems after the 2007 collapse, and yet there's no oversight or accountability. So that organization is also set up as a separate, distinct organization that can't be controlled by Congress. Now it can be stopped. It can be eliminated.

When it comes out, President Trump did this, look, I think he's just so fed up with the inability for Congress to do things. He is doing things quickly. He's moving very fast. I think he pauses after. This is probably one of those he probably needed to pause before he did everything he did, but again, I'm sure he is so frustrated and he wants to move the needle, he doesn't have a lot of time.

When it comes out, President Trump did this, look, I think he's just so fed up with the inability for Congress to do things. He is doing things quickly. He's moving very fast. I think he pauses after. This is probably one of those he probably needed to pause before he did everything he did, but again, I'm sure he is so frustrated and he wants to move the needle, he doesn't have a lot of time.

President Trump's got four more years and probably only two more years, because we all know that two years into a current president term, they usually lose members of the House and members of the Senate. I'm not saying that's going to happen here, but I think if you look at history, it's going to. So, this president has two years and he can't wait. And for that, you have to applaud him.

President Trump's got four more years and probably only two more years, because we all know that two years into a current president term, they usually lose members of the House and members of the Senate. I'm not saying that's going to happen here, but I think if you look at history, it's going to. So, this president has two years and he can't wait. And for that, you have to applaud him.

Now, there will be a tremendous amount of lawsuits, and there will be a tremendous amount of pushback. But in the end, this is a wake-up for the United States Congress.

Now, there will be a tremendous amount of lawsuits, and there will be a tremendous amount of pushback. But in the end, this is a wake-up for the United States Congress.

The American people are frustrated as well. And we keep putting people back in Washington doing the same thing over and over again. And if nothing else, I think this will be a wake-up call to the voters that says, look, if these guys or women are not going to do their job, we got to replace them with people that will. And I think that will be the best thing that happens out of all this.

The American people are frustrated as well. And we keep putting people back in Washington doing the same thing over and over again. And if nothing else, I think this will be a wake-up call to the voters that says, look, if these guys or women are not going to do their job, we got to replace them with people that will. And I think that will be the best thing that happens out of all this.

You got to think of it from this standpoint. The president doesn't have the authority to do that. And I saw that there's already been a court case thrown at him. And the authority is he's spending money that he's not allowed to spend without the approval of Congress. And those buyouts probably need to be approved by Congress. But in the end,

I think he's sitting back saying, Washington won't do this. Congress won't pass this. I'm going to test it. I'm going to keep doing these executive orders. And I'm going to move as quickly as I can. We'll see if Congress catches up. But it will also shake up, I hope, the voters to say, hey, wait a minute. This is probably something that should be done.

He didn't have the authority to do that either. That's a cost to the federal government. And you're right. These will be the same things. These will be lawsuits. And again, I see this as an awakening.

And it's going to be awakening for the American voter and the American taxpayer to say, wait a minute, maybe the president should have that authority or members of Congress, you need to start doing your job.

If you look at the drivers of our debt, what is really driving our debt, we bring in about $4.5 trillion a year into the treasury. We spend about $6 trillion a year. We spend about $4.5 trillion on Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and interest. So we're approximately at a break-even just paying for those programs. Then you have $1.5 million. or 1.5 trillion in deficit approximately every year.

Half of that is the military. So when you really start saying, how do I get this budget in place and fix it? Number one, you got to start looking at the drivers and look, nobody that's an elected official wants to talk about that. But there is waste in Social Security. There is waste in Medicare. There is waste in Medicaid.

We need to look at all those programs because those are the biggest spending items. Now, this aid to other countries, I mean, it's about $40 billion a year on a $6.5 trillion spend. So it's... money that needs to be looked at, but it's not enough to fix the problems.

You know, you started by asking me if I was totally in power, the answer would be I require, there's two things we need to do in America and the United States to fix our federal system. We need to require a balanced budget, that would really shake things up. And then we need to require term limits because those that stick around, they stick around because they like to keep spending the money.

If everybody was termed out after so many years and you're required to balance a budget, we would fix all of these problems very quickly.

I've said it. It should be eight years for members of Congress. It should be two six-year terms for Senate. We should put those term limits in place, and we should require them to balance the budget. It will be an amazing change for our country.

But let me tell you the real problems with Social Security that nobody really pays attention to. Number one, the program was designed 45 years ago, assuming that people would die at age 65. That doesn't happen. So they're slowly moving the age limit up.

But we're also taking all the funds that are going into this impressed fund, which, by the way, Congress is not allowed to touch, and we're only investing it in Treasury bills. Now, think about that. a treasury bill is averaging about one or 2% a year, and that's the only place you're allowed to put social security funds into.

Anything that doesn't relate to a requirement to benefit the United States government and taxpayers, in my mind, is an egregious situation. Whether you're buying condoms for, you know, one country or, you know, all these things that we're hearing, they're all egregious. Because in the end, what we really want to have is we want to, that entity was formed in 1991.

You gotta go back to President Bush where he wanted to allow social security trust fund to invest in the stock market. Well, if you would invest in the stock market back when President Bush, George W. was in office, We've averaged about a 10% or 12% return all those years versus about a 2% return. Inflation has averaged about 3.5%. So our return is not even keeping up with inflation.

So that's one issue. But there's also other changes have been added to Social Security. Your spouse, either spouse, may never have worked or put money into Social Security. Yeah, the wife can collect or the husband can collect 50%. of whatever that person, the one spouse put in. So figure that number.

We're not even keeping up to make up for the one spouse, and yet the other spouse who may have never put a dime in can collect 50%. There are problems inside the system that need to be changed more than just raising and retiring age. That should be done too. But I just named off three things that could make the system solvent if they were just looked at.

I was going to say, remember, President Trump has said he doesn't want to touch Medicare and Medicaid or Social Security. But let me give you another thing for your listeners to really think about. Medicare, the reason Medicare, we put in, the average couple puts in about $150,000 in their lifetime. They take out about $340,000. These are numbers you can find in the statistics.

I was on the Budget Committee. But where does most of the spending occur? It occurs in the last 100 days of the individual's life. So when you bring that up, you cause a whole other issue. But it's something we need to look at. If the majority of spending is in the last 100 days of somebody's life, how do we change it so that

You know, right now we're spending twice as much as we're putting in in Medicare. It's another program. And the driver of that is that last 100 days. Another touching subject, something nobody wants to talk about, but it's an issue we need to at least address.

And the goal really was to make sure that other countries around the world realized that the United States was a friend. Because if we remember, back then we had a Cold War and we had Russia doing the exact same thing. So that was the purpose. Now the purpose of the organization still should be doing some of that.

And remember, China today is the enemy that is doing a little bit of that around the world, too. So anything that relates to making sure that other countries realize that the United States is a, you know, as far as I'm concerned, is, you know, we're trying to build our relationship. That's a positive thing.

It's one of the reasons I left Congress. I was so frustrated. Here I'm a successful businessman. You've got to look at your expenditures. We weren't doing it. Congress has no oversight on these agencies. Congress has not – doing a budget on an annual basis. Congress is not doing all of their spending reviews. All of this is a normal job of the United States Congress.

We have appropriations bills that are supposed to be passed. We have budgets that are supposed to be passed. Most of your listeners don't realize we haven't done that probably for 25 to 30 years, if you go back to where we've really done both.

They do hold the purse strings. But what they should be doing is they should be passing a budget, and then they should be passing appropriations bills. Their appropriations bills would say, USAID, you only have this much money, and this is what it's supposed to be spent for. We're not doing that. Congress isn't doing that.

And at the same time, we should be passing a budget that says, hey, USAID, what are you doing? And let's zero base this out and determine what you should be doing. Those are the real inner workies of Washington that aren't getting accomplished and aren't getting completed.

Yeah, well, look, it's one of the reasons when I was there, we couldn't get a budget passed when we tried to cut costs. And that's why we get the CRs. I don't know if your listeners understand what a CR is, but it's just a continuing resolution. And that's the real problem in Washington. You can't, like, and I was a member of Congress, but you can't blame, you can't.

blame President Biden, you can't blame Bush, you can't blame if you're not doing your job. You've got to blame Congress for not doing enough oversight. Now, here's why I give President Trump a whole lot of credit. He probably doesn't have the authority to do some of the things he's doing, And that's what the Democrats are complaining about. They're saying, he doesn't have this authority.

He can't cut this cost. And it's probably true, and there'll be lawsuits about it. But I think he learned from 2017 to 2020 that if he doesn't do this, Congress won't do it.

No, it doesn't. And look, it might not even be a line item. They may say, we're going to spend $20 million in Africa. We're going to spend $10 million in this country. They should at least be doing that. And then Congress should be looking at what they're spending it on. And that should be the oversight. So that's a twofold thing that should be done by Congress.

Remember, that's also the number one goal of Congress, oversight. And we're not doing enough of that. So I really do blame Congress for a lot of this. If we pass budgets that said, in total, we're going to spend X amount of dollars for aid to other countries. And then in the appropriations bills, you say, we're going to allocate $50 million or $50 billion, or whatever the number is, to USAID.

But we want you doing X, Y, and Z. then you approve all that, and then you come back and you do oversight over what USAID is doing, that's the job of Congress.

They do think we have to have an agency that's under control of the State Department, and that should be a division of the Secretary of State's office. These are expenditures, again, to promote the United States around the world and the influence of the United States versus China, versus Russia, That's the whole goal of USAIP. But we've gotten away from that and there's no oversight.

So I think if you take that organization and you put it under the Secretary of State, which is what we have now, that's what President Trump has done. And then you ask, you know, the Secretary of State to monitor, oversee those expenditures. But you also have to have Congress to agree to spend them. See, that's the key. And I know people get mad at this, but

In Washington, it's Congress's job to authorize and approve expenditures. They have the power of the purse. The president does not have the power of the purse. And what we have now is a president saying, hey, you're not doing your job. I'm going to take some of that power away and I'm going to just cut it.

And you're going to have to do your oversight and all those things, especially when it comes to USAID. But look, we could talk about every agency without a budget, without appropriation bills, any stream of spending and no oversight.

Well, I would tell you this. In 2017, the president tried to cut spending in USAID, and I think it's the budget office came back and ruled that it was not proper for him to do that. It was the impounding act. Impalement, control out. They said back then, President Trump, you can't do this. This is authorized by Congress. You're not allowed to do this.

Now, Trump, President Trump oversees those agencies, so he should have some authority to oversee what they're spending. This organization was set up back in 1961, authorized by Congress to be an independent agency, which might be a problem, which means we might have to change that. So I think we've got to look at all of these things, because here's the problem at Washington.

What was good in 1961 might not be necessary in 2025. And I think we're running into some of that now.

at the time, President Kennedy, was trying to show that he wasn't the person directing the funds, and there was an independent agency authorized by Congress to direct the funds. Again, could have been the right thing to do back then.

When you talk about Congress authorizing organizations, they do that all the time. They authorize the organization to oversee banks. They separated it. Congress has no authority over it. That was a law passed. And all they have to do is fund it. Chavious organization out there.

building buildings, paying for buildings, renovating buildings, overseeing our financial systems after the 2007 collapse, and yet there's no oversight or accountability. So that organization is also set up as a separate, distinct organization that can't be controlled by Congress. Now it can be stopped. It can be eliminated.

When it comes out, President Trump did this, look, I think he's just so fed up with the inability for Congress to do things. He is doing things quickly. He's moving very fast. I think he pauses after. This is probably one of those he probably needed to pause before he did everything he did, but again, I'm sure he is so frustrated and he wants to move the needle, he doesn't have a lot of time.

President Trump's got four more years and probably only two more years, because we all know that two years into a current president term, they usually lose members of the House and members of the Senate. I'm not saying that's going to happen here, but I think if you look at history, it's going to. So, this president has two years and he can't wait. And for that, you have to applaud him.

Now, there will be a tremendous amount of lawsuits, and there will be a tremendous amount of pushback. But in the end, this is a wake-up for the United States Congress.

The American people are frustrated as well. And we keep putting people back in Washington doing the same thing over and over again. And if nothing else, I think this will be a wake-up call to the voters that says, look, if these guys or women are not going to do their job, we got to replace them with people that will. And I think that will be the best thing that happens out of all this.