Do you want to be in American start floating on this MLK day on seven hundred Wow, more than that, about nine thirty five feels kind of hollow to me here in Cincinnati anyway.
Maybe not the rest they came here, but here in Cinty. I'll explain why I'm momentarily first though TERRFF related stuff. Announcement just came out. Canada has cut tariffs on Chinese made electric vehicles, so kind of an end around there on the United States because the ongoing tariff war, and speaking of which, over the weekend, the President threatened tariffs on eight NATO allies unless the deal has reached for US to buy Greenland, which leaves a lot of US
scratching our head. And also the United States Supreme Court last week we're expected to they never tell you what they're going to rule on when, but last week or expecting a decision maybe on whether the Trump tariffs are legal. According to the Ice Supreme Court, they have kicked the can down the least till next time. We'll find out. It could be weeks away at this point, we're not sure.
But all this comes together as costs continue to just be stubborn with inflation and everything else in tariff's a part of that for sure. On that is Kyle Moran, our friend from Young Voices, welcome back, How you been.
I'm good, Thank you for having me.
Yeah, appreciate it. So the big issue here as we debate tariffs and if they're effective or not, is that the President invoked the Powers Act and designed for a national security crisis like wars or terrorism or seizing assets things like that, to impose trade tarffs on China. Is this a misuse of emergency powers because that's what the High Court is going to decide here.
Yeah, it basically is guaranteed to be some sort of abuse of overreach in terms of the emergency powers granted to him through that Act, because from day one when he rolled these out, he was already exempting very specific industries that are economically important because he knows the impact that tariff would have on those would be detrimental to the United States. But critically this shows that it's not
based on national security. When he's exempting cowper, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, all these other types of materials from the tariffs, then what is it What is he even tariffing a lot of it is a lot less important goods that we're importing, So therefore it's not based on national security, which he
himself has sort of admitted very at various times. He has gone on record as saying it's going to be used to pay down the national debt, to do now, to do these stimulus checks as a source of revenue rather than as a national security concern.
Yeah, and that is a concern too. It's just purely on a revenue standpoint. And so far we've had some indication that the conservative justices are even pushing back on this. Amy Cony Barrett and Justice Chief Justice Rod John Roberts said that the vehicle is in position of taxes on Americans and that has always been a core power of Congress. Those early indication certainly don't indicate how they're going to vote, because there's been time to I've thrown that out. They're
challenging it. But that if you're looking at the tea lives here, it doesn't bode well for this.
No, it doesn't, because like I was, like I said, so much of this has not even been like the oppositions criticizing the administration, but the administration undermining its own position. So it really does. It does get into some tricky legal battles for the administration to keep this standing. But I have, I do have to step back and think these powers were passed to be very limited in times
of in terms of actual concerns to national security. We have reached a point where Congress has ceded so much power to the executive. The point of passing that Act in nineteen seventy seven was never to institute broad sweeping powers for the executives to just simply impose and pull off and impose more care really nilly. That was not
what it was for. It's not what it is for now, and the country is not designed to be run by somebody who has essentially more and more unlimited power for four years before election.
If the Supreme Court rules against these terroriffs, does that then call in the re examination of the executive order power the part of the presidency and executive I mean, we saw Biden and the autopen do it with impunity, and Trump said, well, here, hold my diet coke, watch me make a bunch of executive orders. In Congress has absolutely no They're feckless, right, I mean, you can shut the government down for forty something days over god knows what.
They can't really pass any and come to conclusion other than releasing the Epstein files because it covers their asses. But does this change then how we how we maybe that the Congress actually is forced to do their job.
I'm not optimistic on that. I it will limit the executive in terms of being able to do this on again, off again charade, which has reached incredible levels where it's literally back in April and May, it was every day you would open the news, new tariff and then one of those tariffs was canceled, and then the next day more tariff. So that type of stuff would be much
harder for future executives. But to your point about Biden with the auto pen and all these things, Congress has essentially feeded, like I said, so much of its own power to the executive on a broad range of issues. The Supreme Court doesn't have the ability to step in and say Congress needs to do this. It can say that the President doesn't have the ability himself to do it, but it can't make Congress do its job. And certainly, as we have seeing, Congress can't make Congress do its
own job. So we are in an unfortunate position there, and I'm not gone through them that will see much of an improvement.
Yeah, well, I'm hoping anyway, uh, Cale Moran that if the if the Supreme Court rolls against him with tariffs, which we'll get in the repercussions of that in a second, but on a bigger scale, and that is limiting executive office powers and executive branch powers. That there's a roadblock there, and the other one is going to be Venezuela at some point, I imagine you know that's going to come to some sort of fruition here, but relative to the
ninety billion collected, that is another big problem there. The of course the money's coming back in, but it would there be a refund and how would that even work?
That is an excellent question because this is something on this scale that's never been attempted before. So if these are stripped down, there would have to be refunds. But depending on when this actually happens, depending on if the government has spent this money. Trump is already eyeing using those funds for these two thousand dollars stimulus checks, which wouldn't even be enough to cover those by the way,
but it would create a very unprecedented situation. We would have to see exactly how this plays out, But to answer your question, yes, they would have to be refunded well.
And the other element here is if we have a thirty eight trillion dollar deficit, why are we handing out two thousand dollars checks which seems like it was light years ago and I was proposed, but again, nothing ever dies. I think more than that though, the idea we're going to spend seven hundred billion on buying greenland. We got the money and the count for that one.
Exactly, which is part of the issue here. Again. We saw the impact back under the Biden administration incredibly big spending and money printing in twenty twenty one, which drove inflation up to nine percent, and we are still feeling the results of that. We're still feeling the impact of that for almost five years on now. So when the inflation goes up like that, it never comes down again. The inflation rate at which is increase may come down, but the prices that went up they're just there and
you're stuck with that. You will never see twenty nineteen prices for a lot of goods again. And that's the unfortunate reality of the money system that we have now, where we just print more and more, and almost certainly we would have to print a considerable amount of money
to make these two thousand dollars checks happen. And then on top of that, Trump hates the current Federal Reserve chairge your own Powell, who's not flallaced by any means, but he wants to replace them with somebody who's going to be even more dubbish and turn the money printers back on and just print print.
As someone who is I guess more libertarian than anything, and I just dis trust government top to bottom of my team, your team. Kind of nonsense. There's an hypocrisy test here, right, So how many Republicans who absolutely celebrate the tariffs and all this and the bombing of ships off Venezuela would they be outrage of a Democratic president of this sen I mean, look at this one. We talk about the Affordable Care Act, which is they're right,
it's subsidy. You're taking taxpayer money to give other people a break on their healthcare. Healthcare is to damn expensive. Let's do something the lower the cost of healthcare, as opposed to just giving aid to people and redistributing wealth. It doesn't work. It's too expensive, it's not a four. It doesn't make it affordable, it makes it less affordable. Subsidy does using that same logic, And I'm right about that.
Republicans should be talking about what we're doing here with Trump and be equally outraged that now we're going to take money that could go pay off the deficit and we're going to give people subsidies.
Yeah, and to your point, the healthcare situation is something the GOP has basically ignored for the last no course a decade minimum, and at this point it's reaching a breaking point where they just can't ignore it anymore. They tried to appeal and replace obamac here in twenty seventeen twenty eighteen, it went down in pretty famous ways, and the deal they wanted to pass is not a great deal to begin with. But ever since then, they just
haven't tried much of anything. And the only people talking about healthcare reform now are the progressive And that's a very dangerous situation because when people when people see that their health career costs are skyrocketing, which they are, uh and the only people even talking about it are going to be AOC and Bernie Sanders like that is how you wind up with people like Zar Mombami is mayor, even though he doesn't have direct control over health care.
People just hear these things from the left and resonate with it, and not illegitimately either because they they they cannot afford these crazy surge surges in these pranceses. So the got really needs to get going on healthcare.
The Democrats plan is, here's groupon we're going to get the lower cost on your healthcare. We're going to take someone else's money and give it to you. Okay, that's not a plan. That is just a band aid.
Is what that does?
It make things worse, not better in the long run. Look what the subsidies done to the college industry. You know, college is out of control because the substet it's the same thing. And then I look at the Republicans and it's been fifteen years. They have no answer on this. All I hear is well, eat better. Well, that's okay, eat better, but don't take tail and all okay, great, but I've got cancer now and I can't afford it. I'm going to take the subsidy. That's that's what we're faced with.
I know, it's it's absolute madness. And the talking points that they use for some of it is are legitimate. So when they were talking about not wanting any illegal immigrants to be on government subside healthcare, this is a legitimate concern. But that is not addressing the issue that millions of American suits and are seeing their healthcare costs go up more than double, sometimes triple over the last several years. Myself, I have seen mine go up more
than in doubles over the last four years. So this is this is unsustainable, and nobody on the right is even talking about it, let alone at proposing real plans on it. Yeah.
Yeah, and it was supposed to make America great again, and I think healthcare is certainly a cornerstone of that, and to some degree, people like Marjorie Taylor Greener are accurate on that one too. Let's focus on this kind of stuff. You've had fifteen years to come up with a plan, and there's no plan at this point. It's nothing but platitudes, is what I'm getting. He is a comic go ahead.
People on the right have been attacking her over this, and I'm thinking to myself, this is this is madness. I find it incredible. I'm raising Marjorie Taylor Green of all people, but she is absolutely right about this, and I respect her for her courage and standing up to people who are otherwise just burying their heads in the stands and suspending all is well, it's not, and I respect the fact that she's addressing it.
He is a common ran political analyst and young voice, a senior contributor, and talking about tariffs now before the Supreme Court and they will decide whether not these are illegal or not. If it's a no go. We got to talk about refunding money to these countries. But you know, at the same time, you look at getting China to the table to kind of negotiate, look at some of the deals done with other countries. Would it be tough for the Supreme Court done do all that.
Well? In terms of executive the president negotiating with foreign countries, he certainly has pretty broad powers there. But the issue is that he is currently arguing that the tariffs are for national security and in no small part using that as leverage. But the issue is that he has also made so many other statements as well as other people in his administration making other statements that directly undermine that argument, because on one day the case what we made that
we need tariff to protect American industry. The next day it will be that tariffs I needed as a temporary measure to get other countries to lower their tariffs on up. And then the day after that it will be that we need tariffs to generate revenues that we can pay off our debt. Yeah. Yeah, So nobody, the administration's position on this changes on the daily and it's going to be a very challenging hill for the administration to climb, given how all over the places has been.
Yeah, it's almost like corporate America in a way. Is that you know, we live quarter to quarter. We don't care about tomorrow. We just care about the bottom line today, and we might cut our nose off to spite our face, but damn it, we got to do that right now. And it's now that's permeated to politics to agree. If you think about it, is if this is allowed, you want and you know, Republicans will celebrate this big win
by the Supreme Court and the tariffs can stand. The present can do that, Okay, great, but I want of the same people will be yelling and angry about this in the future next year or five years or eight whenever, and at some point a Democrat will be back in charge and maybe they go, hey, you know what, climate change is an economic emergency. We're going to impost carbon tariffs exactly.
And that's why this whole system was set up not to be just as a way we're currently experiencing it, because we are. If you have a country in which you have radical changes of national policy every four years, you're going to go through these wild whiplashes of moving to the right for one administration moving to the west, and the other administration. And this will happen to some extent no matter what the system is, because the executive
does have some power. But it was never designed to be this wild swing between Biden comes into office and because he's president, he can do all of these far left things and open the border and at least ten million illegal immigrants, which nobody voted for. Nobody voted in twenty twenty to open the ordering the ten million people into the country. That was not part of the campaign. It just happened with no input from the American electorate.
But despite widespread opposition to it. It just continued for three and a half years before he even really tried to address it. Then Trump comes in. Nobody voted. I do not seriously believe that anyone really voted for such high parents on other countries. People may, as he did talk about it during the campaign to his credit on that, but I really don't think that this is much of
a huge point that people ended up voting on. So these massive swings are just detrimental to the stability of our country.
Yeah, there are checks and balances and we need them and this will this definitely will decide. It is a huge case before the court. He is a calmran with the young voices. Thanks again, Kyle, great stuff, appreciate it.
Thank you very much for having me cool.
Yeah, Canada just announcing they're going to cut tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles, so it kind of cuts America out a little bit. A little bit anyway, and Trump's as we wait for the court to decide the thing. I think we started this conversation back in November. If I'm not mistaken, he threatened tariff's on eight NATO allies unless we get a deal over Greenland, and so it goes. Got to get a news update down this a MLK day back with that topic actually and why it means
a little less this year here in Cincinnati. Maybe a lot less anyway, Explain next seven hundred ww