[rock music] Welcome to Oklahoma Memo. My name is Ryan Welton, the founder and curator of Oklahoma Memo, your daily local news recap that hits your email inbox now Monday through Saturday. Saturdays is sort of a, a reader, a collection of conversations we have that include this one that I have every week with national podcaster and journalist Grant Herms of the Make It Make Sense, uh, Make It Make Sense with Grant Herms podcast.
How are you doing, Grant? [chuckles] I'm good. I'm good. I know it's a mouthful- It's, well, it's-... Grant... it's a mouthful, and I'm dealing with a chest cold. I haven't gotten to take the Goody's, because believe it or not, Grant, my doctor is ChatGPT. I have been, I've been giving it- Yeah [laughs]... my sy- symptoms, and he- ChatGPT has been very conservative though, like, "Only take the guaifenesin," you know? So, I- I'll- Yeah. Yeah...
I'll mute myself as we're having a conversation so that nobody out there has to hear me cough. It, it's, it's been a busy week. It's been a chaotic week, and it's a Friday. It's a chaotic Friday, a freaky Friday. Yeah. Zoran Mandani is going to talk to the president. We know what's... We don't know what's gonna happen there.
Um, both the, the House and the Senate, the Senate via unanimous consent, uh, approved the disclosure of the Epstein files, and then of course, there was a, um, a very interesting, if not sort of perplexing message from some Democrats about what military members maybe ought to be doing. But maybe, maybe let's just start with the, uh, the most obvious thing, the Epstein files. What's gone on there? Yeah.
Yeah, so a- after the House passed this bill on Tuesday to release, to force the DOJ to release the Epstein files, uh, and it was one that the Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, did not want. He had, like, a five-point list that actually had more points than that of the things he wanted changed in this bill. He said that it didn't do enough to protect survivors and victims. He said it didn't do enough to protect the release of what's called CSAM, which is child sexual assault material.
Uh, he said that it didn't do enough to protect potentially innocent people in this from being embarrassed, which is interesting, 'cause that's sort of the whole point of why they want the list released.
Uh, the survivors want the list released, and w- that, that Americans want the list released is to figure out who is in there, and then let those people have their day, whether it's in court, a lot of these things are past the statute of limitations at this point, but also, like, the court of public opinion as well, for being associated with Jeffrey Epstein so closely for a lot of these people.
Uh, so that was interesting that Mike Johnson was looking to protect those kinds of people, despite still also calling for justice and transparency, uh, and then not wanting to jeopardize in- information that's being used in, in ongoing investigations and classified information.
All of his concerns were addressed in the actual bill, but he was hoping to get some sort of back-and-forth going with the Senate, but it was pretty clear that once this discharge petition passed, that it was gonna pass the House and the vote anyway. And so he just forced a vote.
He was expecting the Senate to amend this and send it back and have this thing back and forth, and then that sort of runs into the healthcare conversation that's gonna happen next month when, if the Senate Majority Leader John Thune holds to his word, he promised a vote on healthcare to Democratic senators to end the shutdown, and then that would then go to the House.
So you get these sort of two competing political footballs. Well, Tuesday night, just hours after the House nearly unanimously also passes this thing, by the way. It was a, an insane vote. I think once the writing's on the wall and it's a public vote, every Republican had decided that there was no point in going against the flow here.
If, if the president and the speaker of the House are gonna get bucked, you might as well, you know, ride that bronco too. So only one member of the Republican Party, uh, voted no. That was Clay Higgins from Louisiana. He said he had serious law enforcement concerns. Um, but he's the lone guy there. There were also five, uh, no votes. Like, they didn't vote. Um, I don't, don't know offhand right now who those people were.
But it was like a 98% approval to pass this thing in the House, um, which is a thing that you just never see for bills this contentious. I mean, th- that is reserved for renaming post offices or, you know, resolutions to honor, you know, Dog Week in America. Like, it's, it's just insane. Um, and of course, the one no vote is, like, the cat person or something. But, like, yeah.
Uh, [chuckles] but that, that bill then goes to the, the Senate, and in this pretty unexpected move, the Senate passes this thing unanimously by a voice vote, which is also important, because voice vote means that it's not recorded who voted how. So it's just senators shout out "yay" or "nay," and the loudest group gets it. Um, and that was brought to the floor by Chuck Schumer, and it's interesting for a couple reasons that it was Schumer to do that.
The first one is Republicans control the Senate. That means they control what bills get on the calendar and what things get to the Hou- or get to the Senate floor, uh, to be heard and voted on. That means that Schumer had to basically work with Republican John Thune to make that thing happen in a matter of hours, which means John Thune let it happen, which is an interesting thing in itself.
Having Schumer do it helps Chuck Schumer, maybe in his mind, because Democrats are actively calling for him to leave leadership, if not American politics altogether right now. He is deeply unpopular. Uh, he's the most unpopular Democratic leader ever, if I remember right. I- for cer- certainly in the last 30 years. Uh, let's go with that. Um, so he maybe gets a little bump, tries to use that as some street cred.
It also gives Republicans who voted to release this, uh, and pass this bill some cover. Maybe a little less John Thune, because everyone knows that he let this thing happen. ButThere's no back and forth fight. So then this thing gets to the president's desk. We didn't know what he was going to do. He had the chance to veto it, which would have meant, you know, not passing this bill and then maybe forcing some sort of two-thirds override vote in the House. Really hard to do.
He couldn't just put it in a drawer and let it expire on its own because the bill would go into law after 10 days. That's how bills work. If the president doesn't sign them, if the session doesn't end, the congressional session doesn't end. And that wouldn't have happened in this amount of time, over 10 days. So the president then signs this bill to release the Epstein files to get the Department of Justice to do that. And they have 30 full days in order to make that happen.
We are talking about tens of thousands of documents, potentially more than 100,000 documents. And they're allowed to redact certain names to protect victim information. They're allowed to protect and not release CSAM. They are allowed to protect and redact classified information. But they have to, after the file's released within 15 days or about two weeks, they have to explain to Congress for every single one of those redactions or withheld pieces of information
why they did that and who was involved. And those things are confidential with Congress so that Congress knows what's going on. But there are just, it's just so much to do in so little amount of time. And on top of it, there are copies of the Epstein files out there that aren't just being held in the U.S., but like they're being held by the Epstein estate.
They're being held by other members of congressional committees who have the full scope of these things. They're being held by foreign countries. The U.K. certainly has them. That's why Prince Andrew gets caught up in this thing. So it's really interesting about what happens next with all of this. And we can break that down if you want, or we can talk about the politics of this too.
The thing that I have been seeing and maybe listeners and viewers have been seeing is that there's a lot of danger here for President Trump from an existential perspective in terms of his office. The notion that he might not be president by the end of 2026 feels like it is a viable prospect, whether you're rooting for that or not. You know, it's just that if he's in these files or if they slow walk it or redact or try to hide him, it's just it feels Nixonian. It really does.
And I think we've talked about before on your show here that the Nixon Watergate stuff took two and a half years to roll out or two years and change or whatever. But this feels a lot faster than that. And it was pretty clear this week that the president lost some of his grip on the Republican Party. Not entirely. They still need him. Excuse me.
During the midterms, he will be out and campaigning for people, maybe not as much as he would normally because he seems to be getting a little slower as he's getting older. But he still knows how to amp up a crowd. He's still popular when push comes to shove, especially in midterms when you have your most activated, most engaged voters.
They'll respond to the president, you know, in the way that they responded to him in every campaign he's ever run. But when it comes to the actual nitty gritty of working the government, this was a bad week for him. And the Epstein files showed that. I mean, full stop Republicans breaking with him. Marjorie Taylor Greene outwardly breaking with him, implying that the president might be a traitor on camera publicly in front of the United States Capitol.
For me, that was the moment really that I think that November 17th was the moment that you really saw the president's grip on this slip. Well, and a lot of the reaction to him bringing in the crown prince of Saudi Arabia. Oh, and then downplaying the fact that his own CIA during his first term said that the crown prince ordered the killing of Jamal Khashoggi, the Washington Post journalist, and the president basically shrugging that off.
And it's, that was its own, you know, moment of disgrace from the Oval Office. I don't know what else to call it. I mean, yeah. But it also in that moment, too,
was a place in which the president seemed very comfortable and what he would rather be doing, it appears to be as president this time around, which is dealing with authoritarians and dictators because he likes the way they operate and then using the office to do business deals because that's so much of what's surrounding the Saudi crown prince stuff is several projects happening in Riyadh, including a $63 billion remake of a specific town in Saudi Arabia that's going to be not Trump central, but like, you know, a billionaire playground.
Yes. So, but I will tell you that, you know, it's just, I again think of the term dictator chic. It's just, yeah. Yeah. So, but you got to the heart of the point here in that Congress, whether it be Marjorie Taylor Greene or certain individuals, have started to gain a spine, if you will, in the Republican Party. Mm-hmm. So as this is happening, Democrats decided to do something a little peculiar. They- Yeah, yeah... they created a PSA of sorts. What was that all about?
So this PSA is from six members of Congress, I believe it is five senators and one member of the House who are all veterans, including Mark Kelly, who was shot at while he was in service as an Air Force pilot.But what they're basically saying here is a reminder to, to service members and civil servants of the military that they are not required to follow illegal orders.
In fact, they, they have a duty under their oath to not follow illegal orders given by a superior commander, including the commander-in-chief, the president.
And like, like all these sort of political communications, the video itself is c- cringey. But, like, the, the weird thing is, is that while, yes, the message is important, and a reminder right now that, that military members, uh, do not have to follow illegal orders when it comes to things like being law enforcement, um, because that violates the Posse Comitatus Act,
it's, it's just weird that they chose this moment to release this video. This thing was clearly shot, and it was clearly done, and they could have held it because in this moment, in this week in which they got a win, for all intents and purposes, in getting, forcing the Epstein files to be released, forcing the president to then sign that bill, which was not a thing that people thought was gonna happen,
they then release this and give, give Republicans and the president and the administration something else to focus on, to sink their teeth into.
It's a really weird political choice because you've got the president then, uh, and, like, I, I sound like I'm outraged about the politics of what they're doing here, be- but the more outrageous thing was that the president then reposted on Truth Social a post from a dude with a crusader's cross in his profile picture, which is its own thing, but that said,
"Hang them. George Washington would." And then the president then pushed out on his own that it was seditious behavior, and then that sedition is punishable by death, and is essentially saying that these Democratic duly elected members of the Senate and House should be put to death for posting this video, which for starters, they're not saying which orders they think are illegal.
It is a reminder that in this moment, if you think an order is illegal, you do not have to follow it, and then there are processes within the military to, to address those concerns with officers and superiors. That's how this works. It goes up a chain. It's, it's like everything else in the military. They also aren't saying which, which orders they think are illegal, and not to mention it's all covered by the First Amendment.
So it, it was pretty stunning and shocking to hear a president say these things, or I said, or I should say read that the president said these things, that he was reposting an outright call to, to hang people. Um, and not that I want to align with a dude that's got a white supremacist imagery in his thing, but, like, George Washington did hang two people.
It was, he hung a, a would-be assassin or an attempted assassin and a conspirator with Benedict Arnold, but also he was a general. They'd just gotten out of a war. It's not remotely the same thing. Uh, it wasn't posting on Twitter. Um, it, it has been a, a shocking 48 hours to see just how many Republicans have rushed to Trump's side in this, to, to feel like they're on some solid footing again at the end of this week.
Um, you know, you've got people like Stephen Miller, but more like members, other members of Congress, you know, calling it insurrectionist, uh, behavior because that's a word that they've been trying since January 6th to remove the im- you know, importance of. Um, the, people have been calling it seditious. They've been calling for these members to be tried or charged with sedition or, or something.
Um, none of those things would hold up in court, but the pomp and circumstance of bringing charges like that would be- Well, M- MAGA-... devastating... needs an enemy. Uh, it's, you, you, that is, uh, um... And, and that's, when I heard pe- Yeah... people compare the Trump campaign to the Mondale campaign, it was, okay, so Trump, we're gonna build a wall in Mexico. We're gonna make the Mexicans pay for it.
Mondale, we're going to make rent affordable. We're gonna make the billionaires pay for it. You know, the, the, the great- Mm-hmm... great, from a communications standpoint, movements in of, of our time need an opponent, and what the Democrats did in this case politically was basically put on a platter another opponent for the president. It's, in tennis they call this an unforced error. Yes, absolutely.
It, in a week in which they, they didn't just not make any missteps, they just let the other side make all the missteps and then got what they wanted i- in the end of this. And instead of riding that out for a full week through the weekend, which they could have dominated the news cycle, uh, they chose to do this thing instead, and I don't know where that's coming from.
I don't know who was directing these people t- to do that. I, again, the outrage here should not be on their political decision in this. It should be the fact that the president said that they should be put to death- But hun-... an implied execution. Like, I, I want to put that above the tier, but in, in our conversation we're talking about the politics of this. It's weird. Um,
but it, it also doesn't mean to me, I don't think, that the, the president regains some element of control, uh, on members of Congress, on the Republican Party writ large. He, that's still slipping. The, what happens with Epstein is still going to damage him with the party, if it hasn't already.
Um, and, uh, you know I were talking before we were rolling here that there's a, a really good piece this week in the outl- the conversation by a cultural anthropologist from Rutgers named Alex Hinton, who I'm hoping to get on my show maybe next week, maybe the week after.
Um, we'll see. But basically what he's writing about is that, is that while Trump fills all these, these needs and is sort of like a, the, the pillar for all these things that is MAGA, that makes up what MAGA is, Epstein is the dark shadow and underside of that. So if there's an us versus them in the way that you were just talking about that, like MAGA needs an enemyTrump is the us and Epstein is the them. The idea of, of what Epstein represents is the them.
And to have Trump and Epstein so closely aligned, in fact, maybe completely overlapping depending what we get from the Epstein files themselves, that could totally tear down what MAGA is because he's the, the hub at the center of all these spokes.
And I think right now, even with this military stuff and, like, it was sort of this... I, I think part of the Republican reaction to this military video from these senators and that, that congressman was like a giant angry sigh of relief that they had, uh, this week after such a bad week for Republicans, a place to, like, direct their ire.
Um, and maybe this thing wouldn't have blown up the way that it did had the Epstein vote not happened, uh, in, in the, in the same way. Um, I don't think those two are completely disconnected. So lost in all of this are the issues that affect Americans, Oklahomans. Numbers came out today, I don't know, you know, Bureau of Labor Statistics, inflation, I don't... I don't know what to trust at this point anymore.
Yeah. However, what we do know is that more and more when you ask Americans about prices rising, it's, it's, it's not about just inflation, it's just everything feels unaffordable. And affordability has become sort of a, a term that candidates in 2026 are gonna latch onto, both- Mm-hmm... because it's a real issue, but also it's a buzzword. So the, the numbers that came out this week, what, what can we put into... What can we read into them?
I mean, we can read into them that they're an extension of, of what led Democrats to win in that sort of mini midterm a few weeks ago. Um, Mamdani won in New York on the ideas of affordability specific to New York. Uh, Mikey Sherrill and, um, Spanberger both won their governor races on affordability, different for their states, Virginia and New Jersey. But it's going to be a central issue here, and I, I think when we talk about...
Back up a little bit, we talk about the numbers that are coming out. Bureau of Labor Statistics was delayed because of the shutdown, but the... Right now BLS is still pretty good. The president hasn't been able to install somebody that he really wants there. The, the guy that they put up had to withdraw, um,
for lots of reasons, including that he was photographed at January 6th, but, uh, as a, as a participant, not as, like, a bystander. He was in the crowd, um, like, in the mob. Uh, but BLS is still pretty good. Um, the trends seem to still follow what was happening.
The, the moments that, that those numbers start to change in ways that don't look expected and don't match other independent, uh, looks, things like the Fed, um, or, or, or some, like, maybe some foreign market stuff, although some of that stuff's kind of tricky. But the one that... The thing that I use the most often for these things is actually the, the consumer price index, uh, or the, the consumer confidence index I should say, um, how people feel about the economy right now.
Because under Biden we learned that that is way more important to how these things are gonna work, how people are gonna campaign, how people are gonna approach politics, um, both as voters and as politicians. Um, because if people don't feel like the economy is good, they're gonna punish the people in power for that. Now, right now the president is trying to say, much like the former president did as well, that the economy is doing well and those prices will get to you eventually.
That was mostly true under Joe Biden near the end of his term after we hit peak inflation at 9% in 2022. I'm not denying that at all. Uh, but inflation was coming down and the economy, the stock market overall was doing well. The stock market's not a great predictor of, of how, you know, we live our lives. Um, but right now prices are up for almost everything you buy across the board. A little to a lot depending on what it is.
I think the only thing that actually came down was egg prices, um, and that had more to do with an abating bird flu epidemic than anything else. Um, the idea of affordability as an issue is going to be really campaign specific, and I think what we're gonna get in 2026 might actually be a little more, uh, cracked and packed kind of campaigning.
It'll be a little less everything is national and maybe a little bit more like, "Hey, this is what it means for, you know, the race in, in CD1 up in Tulsa," or, "This is what it's gonna mean for CD4," or, "This is what it's gonna mean for, you know, me in Detroit versus somebody in Miami." Those will look different, but that's, that's how I think a lot of people in both parties are gonna approach affordability.
The idea also about affordability is really interesting because the president has declared affordability is dead, the prices are the best they've ever been, the economy is hotter than ever, all these things, but then continues to talk about affordability itself. And it seems that the White House can't quite circle its own square about how they wanna talk about this thing, and that has been really interesting to watch because we're getting pretty close to a real campaign season again.
I mean, that'll kick up after the first of the year, after the holidays are over. That'll really, you know, kick into high gear as we head to, to the primaries, which will be heated and which will be a lot about affordability. Uh, and then it'll certainly be a part of all the generals, uh, for Congress and Senate.
I also think affordability is gonna replace the idea of kitchen table issues, uh, which was always vague, you know, just sort of vague enough to be specific so that it means something to you.
So is affordability, I'm not gonna say that it's not either. But-Affordability hits way closer to home for what people think about. K- kitchen table issues, I always felt like made it sound like what we do as, as, as Americans with our families, uh, is sit down and talk about these issues as if they're separate, as if this is healthcare, this is my job, this is my taxes.
And not in the way that, that we all feel the cost of living, which is those things ebb and flow, and I'm gonna have to pull money from, you know, this account to this account, or I'm gonna have to float this bill this month because grocery's a little more expensive, and that'll have to carry over, or whatever those things, which is, which is what tens of millions of Americans have to do every week, every month.
And so affordability is gonna be a really, really interesting issue and, and campaign style to watch because it's gonna mean something different to every candidate and something different in every district. I thought of a, a, a new term. I'm gonna call it vibenomics. It's almost like vibe economics. Mm. It's the kitchen ta- I like that... it's not that we sit down and talk about housing, healthcare, childcare.
It's how is the family feeling? What is the tension like? What is the stress? What is the weight of mom and dad, mom, mom, dad, whatever the situation is. Right. What is the vibe economically? And that's different for everybody. I mean, people who are- Yeah... uh, uh, below the ALICE Threshold, the middle class and lower, they're going to feel a different type of pressure than middle class folks are who are trying to aspire to upper middle class.
It's going to be how we feel about it. That's gonna be really hard to chase down for candidates. Yes, it absolutely is. Uh, and it... I, I will say vibe session was a real thing under Biden, like a, a, a vibes recession. So you're not far off with, like, vibe- vibe economics or vibenomics, uh, there at all.
I think it'll be hard for, for candidates to nail down, partly because it's amorphous and it's, it's vague, but also partly because people aren't really great at always knowing those things either. We just feel the weight of it. And then if you're a Republican specifically, it'll be really hard because the idea of lowering prices on day one is exactly the thing that the president campaigned on.
It's exactly what he said he was gonna do, which was, was... It won't be vibenomics. It'll be straight up lowering prices, hardcore economics, and that's just not a thing. But the president continues to say that the economy is good. The president continues to say that, that prices are down and are falling, and people aren't seeing that. And so if you're a Republican, you're fighting against that coming from the White House as well, from a president who, you know, is-
isn't yet technically a lame duck president, but after the midterms will be entering his final two years of being able to be president. And that kind of is when you enter lame duck territory. Yeah. And, uh, if those elected officials, if congresspeople, if people in the House and Senate are seeing the writing on the wall that he's losing his grip on MAGA itself, he may in fact be a lame duck already.
I think so too. There was some really recent polling from Marist this week that I, I think a- as of last night or this morning, um, I, I can't remember which, when I saw it. Um, but basically what it said is that the, the Democrats have never looked so good on a general ballot, uh, as they have this week for the midterms.
And if things don't improve with the economy, if things don't improve with how people see the president and the whi- and the administration handling, uh, things like immigration and how they're approaching handling crime, um, people are gonna continue to move towards Democrats. Um, some of that will fade. Some of that is, is a, a holdover because 60% of Americans blame Republicans or Trump for the shutdown. But it, it will be a difficult thing for, for Republicans to overcome. And
if, if the blue wave in 2026 is bigger than it was in 2018, that might be it for Trump. That might be when... And depending on what happens with the Epstein files, um, if, if all those things kind of build to a critical mass, that could be a Nixonian moment in the way that you were talking about before with- Right. Because I, my, my thought is, is that- Yes...
why would he even want to? Just knowing Trump's personality, this would be like being in season 19 and 20 of The Apprentice with the ratings going down. He's like, "I'm out." Right. "Find, find a new host." Well, because he can't lose, because there's also that. Because then you get into the ego personality part of, of who Donald Trump is in that he, uh, losses are never losses.
Uh, they're always spun into wins, and if he can't do that, they never happened. And you cannot say that I was never president, and I wasn't asked to resign. Like, y- like, that's just not a, a thing you'll overcome. So ... And, and if that's done at the request of his own party or the, you know, urging of his own party. So I think that's, that's a potential thing.
If the president becomes a real liability, not just for himself or for the administration's mission, but for Republicans as a whole and the health of the party, that might be a real thing. We saw some of that after January 6th and after he was voted out in 2020. You saw a lot of people being like, "I'm washing my hands of that, and we're done with that." Lindsey Graham was one of them, um, who's now, you know, whole hog back on the train. But that's a real possibility here.
And as, again, Trump continues to show some signs of some decline, whether it's, it's just time and age and the pace of the office, um, catching up with him or whether he's actually declining, uh, those things are also liabilities. So w- we'll see what happens here. It's gonna be a pretty eventful next few months, for sure the next 30 days. I-There's also some things to consider too that could help the president.
Uh, they, the Gaza peace deal that was just approved by the UN is good for him. When... That'll be a thing that he'll be able to campaign on Republicans for. If this new deal with Ukraine goes through, although it doesn't seem like it. The, uh, for listeners who don't know, the president and the White House put forward a deal to end the war in Ukraine that would cede quite a bit of land to Russia. Um, but that is a thing that Ukraine said they will not accept. Uh, so we'll see what happens.
Um, but if, you know, the president gets to a place where they c- he can end the war in Ukraine after four years, that's a big victory for him. Uh, a- and then, you know, who else knows what happens after that? But I don't know if those things would be strong enough to, to overcome prices, to overcome the Epstein files, and to overcome what clearly seems to be at this moment, um, him moving into a m- much more figurehead status of the party instead of the actual person driving the bus.
Policy's important to a lot of people, but being able to afford your own life, uh, is always going to, uh, outweigh that. I, I could see the Republican Party as a whole say, "Let's have a grand farewell. Let's send you off." Mm-hmm. "Let's let JD be president for a couple of years," maybe even before the midterms to give them a little, uh... W- in football we call it, like, a, a new coach bounce.
You get a little new coach lift. Um- Yeah... into the election and into to 2028. I mean, that is a lot of what if there. But I wanted to ask you about one other thing, because we're talking about healthcare a little bit before, and affordability. Hmm. I have been hearing, have you been hearing this, that they may just go ahead and extend ACA for a couple more years. Yeah. Yeah. That, that's also what I'm hearing.
Um, the, the big problem with that is that the Republicans... Or the b- I shouldn't say the big problem with that. The big reason that that might happen is that the Republicans don't have a plan. They don't have a set plan for what they wanna do with, with their healthcare policy. There are a few floating out there right now, one from Senator Bill Cassidy from Louisiana, one from Senator Rick Scott from Florida, which it's worth noting that Rick Scott
basically defrauded his own health insurance company before he was a senator. That's how he kinda made all of his money. And so, like, uh, like, defrauded is a strong word 'cause it's a legal term, but, like, it was a massive grift, and he was accused of stealing a bunch of money. Uh, so, like, I don't know if he's the guy you wanna trust on making a new healthcare policy. But, uh, Bill Cassidy is a doctor, but that also doesn't make him a health administrator.
But they don't have a unified idea of what this would be. And when you hear people like Dr. Oz talk about what the administration might be putting forward, it's also not clear, and it doesn't quite make a bunch of sense. It doesn't seem that different from the ACA. It actually seems like it could drive prices up more. So they don't have anything to put forward. There is no replace after the repeal, which has been a decade-long issue for the Republican Party.
Uh, it was, it was the major failing of, of Trump's first term, was that he couldn't get Obamacare repealed, but largely because people like John McCain, who was the final no vote, were like, "There's nothing to replace this with." And, and that's the thing about government subsidies and government programs. It's really hard to take something away from people once you've given it to them, because oftentimes, not always, but oftentimes, they improve people's lives.
Oftentimes when they get through, especially when something like healthcare or when it's something like SNAP or something l- you know, TANF or one of those things, people don't wanna lose their health insurance, and causing them to lose their health insurance harms them.
And a lot of members of Congress and senators who are from red states kind of realize that their people, their constituents, their voters, their friends, neighbors, and families even need those subsidies to, in some cases, literally survive. So there is a good chance that those subsidies, without a bargaining chip Republicans can use, might just be extended until maybe next year, along with, like, all the other military housing and, and SNAP benefits that they already passed to end the shutdown.
And that gives Republicans a full year ahead of the midterms to devise a healthcare plan that they can all agree on, and then you run on that, and that's your affordability. Um, but in, you know, in the meantime, healthcare prices are gonna go haywire for all of us, regardless of whether they, they pass extending these subsidies or not, because companies, hospitals, health insurance exchange markets, they don't operate on a day-to-day basis. They operate in, in multi-quarter l- outlooks.
And so you're gonna see a change in your health insurance premium, whether you're on the ACA marketplace or whether you're insured by your employer or private insurance or self-insured or whatever. You're gonna see changes, likely increases, um, maybe small, maybe really big, no matter what. So, um, it's going to be an exciting new year. I think we should have, like, a predictions episode coming up here.
D- oh, yeah, I think that'd be a lot of fun. We'll, we'll, uh, get some buckets and, and just talk about what our predictions are for the next year. What is going on in the make it makes, um, Make It Make Sense with Grant Harms world? What, what have you got going on? So I am, today I'm putting out a brand-new piece.
Um, I don't know if you heard about this, but yesterday the Washington Post broke some news that the US Coast Guard is changing its language around hate symbols and how they're approaching hate- Swastikas... abuse speech. Swastikas, yes. Yes. They are no longer considered hate symbols. They are considered potentially divisive as a category. Now, that goes out. DHS, which oversees the Coast Guard during peacetime, uh, even though it is a military branch, says, like, "This is a lie."
The admiral of the Coast Guard s- puts out a new memo late last night that says, "We still consider them hate symbols," but the policy no longer includes the words hate incident. Instead, it flattens out all of those things into regular harassment, and that changes how officers and superiors in the Coast GuardHave to approach these things and these investigations.
And so I'm working on a piece about that because it's a long, uh, that's coming out later this afternoon. Um, I'm putting it to DHS about, about why they changed this policy. Uh, are they worried about the concerns that this could lessen the impact of hate on service members in, in the Coast Guard? Are there other parts of DHS in which they've done this too?
Uh, and in that end, there's been a lot of accusations that DHS have been engaging in white supremacist and Nazi ideology and l- using those language and dog whistles in their posts and policies, and this would seem to track with that, so were they concerned about that? We'll see if I get an answer. They got a deadline for five hours from now since we're talking, so we'll see. But that's coming out, and then I have also got a brand-new newsletter that will be dropping very soon.
I don't wanna give away too many details about that yet, but it's a good time to sign up for the Make It Make Sense Substack. I, I s- I saw the logo. It looked lovely. I, I really like- Yeah. Yeah. [laughs] And, and it really, it's gonna touch on the thing that you're so great at, which is making it make sense. Um, so, um, that's awesome. You've got a Substack too. Uh, so and- Mm-hmm...
and the easiest way for people to find you is through, I figured it out, is Mims News Pod. Yes. Mims, M-I-M-S. Uh, all, it's all one word, always, Mims News Pod. Uh, you can find me on everywhere you get your podcasts, on YouTube there if you wanna watch the shows. Uh, it's the easiest way to find the Substack and all the socials.
Uh, and my name is always linked to those things too, so you can follow me on there 'cause I'm putting up kinda constant videos as things drop during the week because you know the life, Ryan. This is how [laughs] percent of this works. And in a week of that has been, I have been, like, in front of my camera on my phone almost constantly. Uh, do you have a big Thanksgiving planned?
I don't have a big Thanksgiving planned. Um, my wife is, she is such a hard to brag- I, I know who she's going to be. Yeah. She's gonna be at Macy's. Yeah. She is. She is a, a cheerleading coach at the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade, so I tend to solo Thanksgiving every year. Uh, and so I haven't decided what I'm gonna do yet. I might go to a friend's house.
I might, I might, uh, be in the kitchen on my own a little bit because I do love to cook and, um- Cooking videos... I'll be taking a break. Yeah. I, I'ma tell you- Definitely... every year with m- I love the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade. I love New York City. I've been to Macy's many, many times. Uh, but I always mention to my wife, I know th- one of the, the people coaching the, the cheerleaders down there. So it's, uh, I've, I've always enjoyed that.
Uh, yeah, we're just, I'm just gonna eat a lot of food, watch a lot of football, and, uh- Yeah... you know, just pay attention to the news. Well, I hope you have a g- great Thanksgiving. Yeah. I'm gonna put the show notes for everything Make It Make Sense with Grant Herms in this and on the YouTube. And until next time, folks, sign up for Oklahoma Memo. Go to oklahomamemo.com, and we'll talk to you next week. [upbeat music]