dailysignal--2020-03-06--Matt Schlapp Wants You to Love America: ‘Feel Pride in What You’re Doing’

The Conservative Political Action Conference is the nation ’ s largest annual gathering of conservative activists , attracting thousands of people to the event , which takes place just outside of Washington , D.C. , every year .
Matt Schlapp , chairman of the American Conservative Union , which hosts CPAC , joins The Daily Signal Podcast to talk about the impact of this year ’ s gathering .
He also explains why it went with the “ America vs. Socialism ” theme this year and how CPAC plans to expand in the future .
Listen to today ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transcript below .
Rob Bluey : We are joined at The Daily Signal by Matt Schlapp .
He ’ s the chairman of the American Conservative Union , which hosts this great event , CPAC [ the Conservative Political Action Conference ] .
Matt , welcome .
Matt Schlapp : Great to be with you again , Rob .
Schlapp : What do you think ?
Bluey : It is truly energizing .
… This year [ there ’ s ] a lot of buzz .
You started off with the vice president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with President [ Donald ] Trump .
I mean , just jam-packed in between .
Schlapp : Since you ’ re the expert on social media , we did OK ?
Bluey : I ’ d say you ’ re generating quite a bit of buzz .
Bluey : Trending on Twitter and Facebook and every place .
Schlapp : That ’ s good .
That ’ s what we want .
Schlapp : You ’ re not going to take back a country , you ’ re not going to impact a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re doing .
Schlapp : And that ’ s one of the reasons why CPAC is important .
For whatever reason , it garners all this attention .
That ’ s why we love having people like you here and The Heritage Foundation and others , because this is an important moment for the movement .
Bluey : It certainly is .
Now , I want to ask you about this year ’ s theme , America vs. Socialism .
Bluey : What went into your thinking on that ?
Schlapp : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Bluey : Well , … you ’ re very prescient in your timing here , right ?
Rob : You couldn ’ t have planned it much better .
Schlapp : It ’ s true because we had to pick it weeks ago .
Schlapp : Our view is that we want CPAC to be about what ’ s going on in society .
What is actually unfolding on their television screens , in newspapers and magazines online .
And we thought , “ Well , boy , really what this country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , specifically , is facing is , are we a socialist party or are we just a central left party ?
But that ’ s a bigger question for America as people worry about what ’ s being taught in the public schools , this hatred of America .
America is a bad place , a secular society that doesn ’ t understand anymore that it ’ s God that gives us our rights .
Government doesn ’ t get ownership .
They don ’ t have title to our rights .
These @ @ @ @ @ @ @ threat .
We also picked America vs. Socialism because we didn ’ t want to just say “ Capitalism vs. Socialism , ” which I know several of our speakers have gone to , but to us it ’ s beyond economics .
The economics of socialism … it fails .
But there ’ s another question about socialism , which is our video , I think .
I hope you ’ ve seen it and hope you ’ re helping us push it around , but if you believe in socialist economics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the individuals— Schlapp : … to try to help the collective .
The individual loses out and what you really find out is more individuals face pain and misery and loss than are helped by the redistribution .
Even if it ’ s intended to help .
And under a free society , as you know , that ’ s exactly the opposite , which is your rights are respected , hopefully .
Schlapp : Which is a real question in America .
And it actually helps more people at the bottom end @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump , I think , did a beautiful job of explaining today .
Bluey : Yeah , no , it is so true .
And thank you , by the way , for the content that you do create .
I think it ’ s so important to educate the American people about these stark contrasts that we see .
… The thing that CPAC is really known for is the enthusiasm among the youth that come here every year .
What does it tell you that these polls … show that young @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can we do to change that ?
Schlapp : Let me explain something .
I wish AC was better than it actually is .
We do great things , but we actually don ’ t orchestrate all these students being here .
Fifty percent of the people , of the registrants , walking down these corridors are high school or college students , and it just happens .
They just get on their laptops or their phones and they sign up and they have to pay .
Schlapp : It ’ s not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ insane .
It really should be free because we should get more to come .
So they just sign up—every year it ’ s about 50 % , sometimes it ’ s more .
It ’ s a marketplace .
People have the right to decide whether they want to come or not .
And for whatever reason , students want to be at CPAC .
Now , why do conservatives all want to come together ?
I think God figured this out when he inspired the Ten Commandments and said , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Come together , have fellowship.
” I don ’ t view my politics as a church , but I actually think those involved in the conservative movement , we want to have our places , and The Heritage Foundation is big on this too , places where everyone can come together .
You want to learn , you want to just make friends , you want to know you ’ re not alone .
I mean , in the era of Trump , the kind of political persecution is just terrible .
Schlapp @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feel like you can be full-throated in what you believe .
Bluey : Yeah .
It ’ s so important to convene and have those face-to-face conversations , even in this digital age that we live in .
And CPAC really provides an opportunity to do that .
Not only are there great speakers on the main stage , but you also offer a lot of training workshops .
I spoke at one today about social media .
It is just incredible .
The questions that people have , the enthusiasm they have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that energy with them .
Schlapp : And we drive no attendance .
So people sign up for tickets .
We don ’ t market much .
It ’ s 10,000 people .
It ’ s every media conglomerate all over the world now because we did five CPACs overseas .
So in your breakout session , or in your training session , we didn ’ t really [ do marketing ] besides just [ going ] online or sending out the nominal emails .
It ’ s because Americans , especially conservatives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some might call themselves libertarians , some people are just MAGA and Trump .
But you put it all together and the common dynamic that I see is that they are on fire to save their country .
They are joyful .
They feel hope again .
They feel like the Republican Party has figured out that it needs to fight .
… We don ’ t want a party that just negotiates the terms of our surrender .
That ’ s no good .
We want a party that will fight .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That ’ s why we have the stars of the house on the stage because they ’ ve really renewed hope in this whole effort .
Bluey : That ’ s right .
They certainly have .
You mentioned the international events .
Tell us about— Schlapp : You ’ re going to come with us next year .
Schlapp : You really should .
Bluey : When I walked in , the first thing I saw was all of the CPAC events that are happening .
So tell us about that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do there .
Schlapp : Once again , I would love to say that we ’ re brilliant and that we thought about all this , but we actually had people who just started—we had [ a ] Japanese conservative [ that ] started a Japanese Conservative Union and they came to CPAC the first year I was chairman .
And I was like , “ What is this ?
” And then a few years went by , Jay Aeba was the chairman , he said , “ Hey , why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Japan ?
” Now we ’ ve had three .
That led to the first CPAC in South Korea this year .
That led to the first CPAC in Australia .
We had it in Sydney this year .
All of those countries are very worried about a resurge in China .
So this whole anti-communist concern , the question of socialism .
Communism is very alive in that region of the globe and … they ’ re desperate for a grassroots conservative movement in their country .
We were invited to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first Westerners to go stay with the protesters in Hong Kong .
I ’ ll never forget those moments .
Those people are brave .
They ’ re mostly children .
I call them children .
Some as young as 12 years old who have been in prison .
They ’ re missing , some have died .
The struggle over there … One of our speakers , Jimmy Lai , who is from Hong Kong , who ’ s a big media tycoon , they arrested him yesterday .
He was going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Brazil , we ’ re going to talk about it at the Reagan Dinner tonight .
We went and had our first CPAC in Brazil .
I think we have 25 other countries that are clamoring to have a CPAC in their country .
We have more demand than we know how to satisfy .
This is our … what would William F. Buckley say ?
Schlapp : What would Ronald Reagan say ?
None of us are perfect .
I ’ m sure there ’ d be things that they might @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But I think , if they saw the conservative movement today , I think they ’ d be shocked .
Bluey : I think that they ’ d be very proud of the growth and the expansion .
One final question for you .
You are somebody who brings a lot of energy in your TV appearances .
You don ’ t hold back in terms of debating these big ideas .
Tell our listeners what really motivates you every day to make sure that you ’ re carrying forward that conservative vision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s a really bad aspect of what ’ s going on in our culture .
What some people call the “ cancel culture.
” That there ’ s not a place for left and right to talk anymore .
And I ’ ve always had great friends on the left , and you know what most of those friends have done with me over the course of the last five years ?
They ’ ve unfriended me .
Schlapp : Nicole Wallace on MSNBC was a great friend and we got in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Michael Steele and she unfriended me on Twitter .
She basically said she didn ’ t want to be my friend anymore .
I still want to be her friend .
I want to be everyone ’ s friend , and I think we should be able to talk with each other .
But I ’ ll tell you one thing , I don ’ t want to take the crap anymore .
There ’ s nothing wrong with what you believe .
And there ’ s nothing wrong with what I believe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with us , fine .
I love America , because in America that ’ s protected .
What is not consistent with being an American is making people feel shamed for being Christian , for being pro the Constitution , for knowing and cherishing our history .
That must stop .
And these kids who are here , most of them are victims in this battle .
And it ’ s got to stop .
I tell all these people that aren ’ t students , “ Stop whispering .
Stop having your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wear it .
Wear it with pride .
Talk about these things with pride .
Come to CPAC .
Feel pride in what you ’ re doing.
” And I don ’ t think we should be shamed for it and it ’ s wrong .
And I know you agree with me .
Bluey : I certainly do .
Well , Matt Schlapp , thank you for standing up for America— Bluey : … and promoting conservative values .
We appreciate it .

The Conservative Political Action Conference is the nation’s largest annual gathering of conservative activists, attracting thousands of people to the event, which takes place just outside of Washington, D.C., every year.
Matt Schlapp, chairman of the American Conservative Union, which hosts CPAC, joins The Daily Signal Podcast to talk about the impact of this year’s gathering. He also explains why it went with the “America vs. Socialism” theme this year and how CPAC plans to expand in the future.
Listen to today’s podcast episode or read the lightly edited transcript below.
Rob Bluey: We are joined at The Daily Signal by Matt Schlapp. He’s the chairman of the American Conservative Union, which hosts this great event, CPAC [the Conservative Political Action Conference]. Matt, welcome.
Matt Schlapp: Great to be with you again, Rob.
Bluey: Congratulations on another great CPAC.
Schlapp: What do you think?
Bluey: It is truly energizing. … This year [there’s] a lot of buzz. You started off with the vice president on the first day. You closed with President [Donald] Trump. I mean, just jam-packed in between.
Schlapp: Since you’re the expert on social media, we did OK?
Bluey: Oh, yeah.
Schlapp: OK, good.
Bluey: I’d say you’re generating quite a bit of buzz.
Schlapp: That’s good.
Bluey: Trending on Twitter and Facebook and every place.
Schlapp: That’s good. That’s what we want.
Bluey: Yeah.
Schlapp: You’re not going to take back a country, you’re not going to impact a society if no one reads what you’re doing.
Bluey: That’s right.
Schlapp: And that’s one of the reasons why CPAC is important. For whatever reason, it garners all this attention. That’s why we love having people like you here and The Heritage Foundation and others, because this is an important moment for the movement.
Bluey: It certainly is. Now, I want to ask you about this year’s theme, America vs. Socialism.
Schlapp: Yes.
Bluey: What went into your thinking on that?
Schlapp: Did you think it was too hardcore?
Bluey: Well, … you’re very prescient in your timing here, right?
Schlapp: That’s true.
Rob: You couldn’t have planned it much better.
Schlapp: It’s true because we had to pick it weeks ago.
Bluey: Yeah.
Schlapp: Our view is that we want CPAC to be about what’s going on in society. What is actually unfolding on their television screens, in newspapers and magazines online. And we thought, “Well, boy, really what this country is facing, what the Democratic Party, specifically, is facing is, are we a socialist party or are we just a central left party?
But that’s a bigger question for America as people worry about what’s being taught in the public schools, this hatred of America. America is a bad place, a secular society that doesn’t understand anymore that it’s God that gives us our rights. Government doesn’t get ownership. They don’t have title to our rights. These types of themes are very much at threat.
We also picked America vs. Socialism because we didn’t want to just say “Capitalism vs. Socialism,” which I know several of our speakers have gone to, but to us it’s beyond economics.
The economics of socialism … it fails. But there’s another question about socialism, which is our video, I think. I hope you’ve seen it and hope you’re helping us push it around, but if you believe in socialist economics, you trample on the rights of the individuals—
Bluey: That’s right.
Schlapp: … to try to help the collective. The individual loses out and what you really find out is more individuals face pain and misery and loss than are helped by the redistribution. Even if it’s intended to help. And under a free society, as you know, that’s exactly the opposite, which is your rights are respected, hopefully.
Bluey: That’s right.
Schlapp: Which is a real question in America. And it actually helps more people at the bottom end of the economic ladder, which Ivanka Trump, I think, did a beautiful job of explaining today.
Bluey: Yeah, no, it is so true. And thank you, by the way, for the content that you do create. I think it’s so important to educate the American people about these stark contrasts that we see.
… The thing that CPAC is really known for is the enthusiasm among the youth that come here every year. What does it tell you that these polls … show that young people gravitate toward socialism? And what can we do to change that?
Schlapp: Let me explain something. I wish AC was better than it actually is. We do great things, but we actually don’t orchestrate all these students being here.
Fifty percent of the people, of the registrants, walking down these corridors are high school or college students, and it just happens. They just get on their laptops or their phones and they sign up and they have to pay.
Bluey: That’s right, yeah.
Schlapp: It’s not even free, which is kind of insane. It really should be free because we should get more to come. So they just sign up—every year it’s about 50%, sometimes it’s more. It’s a marketplace. People have the right to decide whether they want to come or not. And for whatever reason, students want to be at CPAC.
Now, why do conservatives all want to come together? I think God figured this out when he inspired the Ten Commandments and said, “Hey, keep holy the Sabbath. Come together, have fellowship.”
I don’t view my politics as a church, but I actually think those involved in the conservative movement, we want to have our places, and The Heritage Foundation is big on this too, places where everyone can come together.
You want to learn, you want to just make friends, you want to know you’re not alone. I mean, in the era of Trump, the kind of political persecution is just terrible.
Bluey: It is.
Schlapp: And when you come here you feel like you can be full-throated in what you believe.
Bluey: Yeah. It’s so important to convene and have those face-to-face conversations, even in this digital age that we live in. And CPAC really provides an opportunity to do that.
Not only are there great speakers on the main stage, but you also offer a lot of training workshops. I spoke at one today about social media. It is just incredible. The questions that people have, the enthusiasm they have to want to leave CPAC and carry that energy with them.
Schlapp: And we drive no attendance. So people sign up for tickets. We don’t market much. It’s 10,000 people. It’s every media conglomerate all over the world now because we did five CPACs overseas.
So in your breakout session, or in your training session, we didn’t really [do marketing] besides just [going] online or sending out the nominal emails.
It’s because Americans, especially conservatives, some might call themselves nationalists, some might call themselves libertarians, some people are just MAGA and Trump. But you put it all together and the common dynamic that I see is that they are on fire to save their country.
They are joyful. They feel hope again. They feel like the Republican Party has figured out that it needs to fight. … We don’t want a party that just negotiates the terms of our surrender. That’s no good. We want a party that will fight. They feel like that’s happening. That’s why we have the stars of the house on the stage because they’ve really renewed hope in this whole effort.
Bluey: That’s right. They certainly have. You mentioned the international events. Tell us about—
Schlapp: You’re going to come with us next year.
Bluey: It is amazing.
Schlapp: You really should.
Bluey: When I walked in, the first thing I saw was all of the CPAC events that are happening. So tell us about that strategy and what you’re hoping to do there.
Schlapp: Once again, I would love to say that we’re brilliant and that we thought about all this, but we actually had people who just started—we had [a] Japanese conservative [that] started a Japanese Conservative Union and they came to CPAC the first year I was chairman. And I was like, “What is this?”
And then a few years went by, Jay Aeba was the chairman, he said, “Hey, why don’t we do a CPAC in Japan?” Now we’ve had three. That led to the first CPAC in South Korea this year. That led to the first CPAC in Australia. We had it in Sydney this year.
All of those countries are very worried about a resurge in China. So this whole anti-communist concern, the question of socialism. Communism is very alive in that region of the globe and … they’re desperate for a grassroots conservative movement in their country.
We were invited to go be with the protesters as the first Westerners to go stay with the protesters in Hong Kong. I’ll never forget those moments. Those people are brave. They’re mostly children. I call them children. Some as young as 12 years old who have been in prison. They’re missing, some have died. The struggle over there …
One of our speakers, Jimmy Lai, who is from Hong Kong, who’s a big media tycoon, they arrested him yesterday. He was going to come here to speak.
So, Brazil, we’re going to talk about it at the Reagan Dinner tonight. We went and had our first CPAC in Brazil. I think we have 25 other countries that are clamoring to have a CPAC in their country. We have more demand than we know how to satisfy. This is our … what would William F. Buckley say?
Bluey: Yeah.
Schlapp: What would Ronald Reagan say? None of us are perfect. I’m sure there’d be things that they might not like as much as others. But I think, if they saw the conservative movement today, I think they’d be shocked.
Bluey: I think that they’d be very proud of the growth and the expansion. One final question for you. You are somebody who brings a lot of energy in your TV appearances. You don’t hold back in terms of debating these big ideas. Tell our listeners what really motivates you every day to make sure that you’re carrying forward that conservative vision.
Schlapp: I think it’s a really bad aspect of what’s going on in our culture. What some people call the “cancel culture.” That there’s not a place for left and right to talk anymore. And I’ve always had great friends on the left, and you know what most of those friends have done with me over the course of the last five years? They’ve unfriended me.
Bluey: Wow.
Schlapp: Nicole Wallace on MSNBC was a great friend and we got in a squabble a couple of years ago with Michael Steele and she unfriended me on Twitter. She basically said she didn’t want to be my friend anymore. I still want to be her friend. I want to be everyone’s friend, and I think we should be able to talk with each other.
But I’ll tell you one thing, I don’t want to take the crap anymore. There’s nothing wrong with what you believe. And there’s nothing wrong with what I believe. If you don’t agree with us, fine. I love America, because in America that’s protected.
What is not consistent with being an American is making people feel shamed for being Christian, for being pro the Constitution, for knowing and cherishing our history. That must stop.
And these kids who are here, most of them are victims in this battle. And it’s got to stop.
I tell all these people that aren’t students, “Stop whispering. Stop having your MAGA hat hidden in your drawer. Wear it. Wear it with pride. Talk about these things with pride. Come to CPAC. Feel pride in what you’re doing.” And I don’t think we should be shamed for it and it’s wrong. And I know you agree with me.
Bluey: I certainly do. Well, Matt Schlapp, thank you for standing up for America—
Schlapp: Thank you, Rob.
Bluey: … and promoting conservative values. We appreciate it.
Schlapp: Thank you.


dailysignal--2020-03-06--‘Conspiracy Theory’: NYT’s 1619 Project Faces Scrutiny From Scholars, Historians

Over the course of this week , the New York Post has published a series of op-eds attacking the 1619 Project—the controversial and erroneous history of America from The New York Times ( see links to each op-ed below ) .
Today , the New York Post features an op-ed by David Bobb , president of the Bill of Rights Institute .
Bobb recently spoke to The Daily Signal about the 1619 Project .
An excerpt from his interview is below and the full transcript is available here .
David Bobb : I ’ ve read the 1619 Project [ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I was struck by one in particular .
It was what ’ s called erasure poetry , and it asks students to take the Declaration of Independence and to block out all of the sections so that the remaining words would be the poem that they wanted to create themselves .
Think of what that exercise treats and really trains the minds of our young people to say , that the Declaration is a document mainly to be obliterated .
The Declaration was the thing that gave Frederick Douglass the hope and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of rights and dignity .
The Founders were not perfect—no human being is—and I think the remarkable thing that we need to impress upon young people is not that we had , in the founding of the United States , an answer and a kind of determination of everyone ’ s rights in their fullness .
We didn ’ t .
But we did lay down the marker and we said that all human beings are created equal .
That was a marker that both indicted some of the Founders ’ own actions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by which Americans and future generations could look to and try to aspire to .
The 1619 Project gets none of that aspirational element .
I think when you look at Allen Guelzo and Jim McPherson and James Oakes and Gordon Wood and others that have come to criticize that , and then be utterly dismissed by the editors of that project as irrelevant .
“ Well , who anointed them as our preeminent historians ?
” That ’ s been some of the response .
I think the debate that ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s the kind of thing that I think students can actually enter into .
One of those people that I just mentioned , Allen Guelzo , is a contributor to the Bill of Rights Institute ’ s Comprehensive History of the United States , that we just debuted at the National Council for the Social Studies .
We believe in viewpoint diversity , and what I lament about some of our publications , including the 1619 Project , is there ’ s not even a pretense of viewpoint diversity .
It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and , unfortunately , it can amount to a conspiracy theory .
That is the thing that we see in Howard Zinn , where here ’ s history in a box , here ’ s the people who did all of the wrong and we ’ re going to blame them , and here ’ s the people that do all of the right and , in fact , that ’ s not the way that history works .
What you have to do , I think , is have an intellectually honest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ teenagers are capable of doing a lot , and if you treat them as curious and engaged interlocutors , oftentimes they rise to the occasion .
The thing that I find is that the teachers all across the country mainly do not engage in conspiracy mongering .
They ’ re mainly interested in trying to wrestle with these questions and put really important ideas in front of their students and then rely on those conversations to help propel those students into the fullness of citizenship .
More Critiques of the 1619 Project • @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rewrite History to Fit Its Biases by Cal Thomas • New York Times ’ ‘ 1619 Project ’ Has Key Error About Our Founding by Walter Williams • Here ’ s How Andrew Jackson Stood Up to Unaccountable ‘ Elites ’ by Jarrett Stepman • These Historians Challenge New York Times ’ Dubious 1619 Project by Jarrett Stepman • How MLK Channeled the Spirit of 1776 by Jarrett Stepman • Disputed New York Times ‘ 1619 Project ’ Already Shaping Schoolkids ’ Minds on Race by John Murawski • These Black Scholars and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Victimhood by Jarrett Stepman • NYT ’ s 1619 Project is dishonest attack on nation ’ s founding principles by Ryan P. Williams and Matthew J. Peterson • What the NYT ’ s 1619 Project aims to teach your kids by John Podhoretz • The 1619 Project ’ s outrageous , lying slander of Abe Lincoln by Allen Guelzo • NYT ’ s 1619 Project tries to rob black Americans of their stake in 1776 by Wilfred Reilly • 1619 Project is the absolute wrong way to teach kids about US slavery @ @ @

Over the course of this week, the New York Post has published a series of op-eds attacking the 1619 Project—the controversial and erroneous history of America from The New York Times (see links to each op-ed below). Today, the New York Post features an op-ed by David Bobb, president of the Bill of Rights Institute. Bobb recently spoke to The Daily Signal about the 1619 Project. An excerpt from his interview is below and the full transcript is available here.
David Bobb: I’ve read the 1619 Project [and] went through the lesson plans. I was struck by one in particular. It was what’s called erasure poetry, and it asks students to take the Declaration of Independence and to block out all of the sections so that the remaining words would be the poem that they wanted to create themselves.
Think of what that exercise treats and really trains the minds of our young people to say, that the Declaration is a document mainly to be obliterated.
The Declaration was the thing that gave Frederick Douglass the hope and realization that he was a person deserving of rights and dignity.
The Founders were not perfect—no human being is—and I think the remarkable thing that we need to impress upon young people is not that we had, in the founding of the United States, an answer and a kind of determination of everyone’s rights in their fullness. We didn’t. But we did lay down the marker and we said that all human beings are created equal.
That was a marker that both indicted some of the Founders’ own actions as slaveholders, and set a standard by which Americans and future generations could look to and try to aspire to. The 1619 Project gets none of that aspirational element.
I think when you look at Allen Guelzo and Jim McPherson and James Oakes and Gordon Wood and others that have come to criticize that, and then be utterly dismissed by the editors of that project as irrelevant. “Well, who anointed them as our preeminent historians?” That’s been some of the response.
I think the debate that’s ensued is a good one and that’s the kind of thing that I think students can actually enter into.
One of those people that I just mentioned, Allen Guelzo, is a contributor to the Bill of Rights Institute’s Comprehensive History of the United States, that we just debuted at the National Council for the Social Studies.
We believe in viewpoint diversity, and what I lament about some of our publications, including the 1619 Project, is there’s not even a pretense of viewpoint diversity. It’s just saying this is it, and, unfortunately, it can amount to a conspiracy theory.
That is the thing that we see in Howard Zinn, where here’s history in a box, here’s the people who did all of the wrong and we’re going to blame them, and here’s the people that do all of the right and, in fact, that’s not the way that history works.
What you have to do, I think, is have an intellectually honest conversation. What we found is that teenagers are capable of doing a lot, and if you treat them as curious and engaged interlocutors, oftentimes they rise to the occasion.
The thing that I find is that the teachers all across the country mainly do not engage in conspiracy mongering. They’re mainly interested in trying to wrestle with these questions and put really important ideas in front of their students and then rely on those conversations to help propel those students into the fullness of citizenship.
More Critiques of the 1619 Project
THE DAILY SIGNAL
NEW YORK POST


dailysignal--2020-03-06--Chuck Schumer’s Despicable Attack on the Supreme Court

“ If , then , the courts of justice are to be considered as the bulwarks of a limited Constitution against legislative encroachments , this consideration will afford a strong argument for the permanent tenure of judicial offices , ” argued Alexander Hamilton in Federalist No .
78 .
If we ever needed a pristine example of why justices are bestowed lifetime appointments and shielded from the vagaries of the electorate and the intimidation tactics of unethical politicians , Sen. Chuck Schumer has now provided us with one .
While speaking to pro-abortion protesters Wednesday in front of the Supreme @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s no other way to put it—two sitting justices with repercussions if they ruled to uphold a Louisiana law requiring abortion providers to gain admitting privileges to hospitals before offering their services to women : It ’ s conceivable that Schumer—who , like the rest of his party , doesn ’ t have the slightest interest in protecting babies who ’ ve survive botched abortions—can ’ t think of any good reason for hospital-admitting privileges .
But treating as an “ undue burden ” any laws that require abortion clinics to provide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an example of the Democrats ’ extremism on the issue .
Threatening justices over the case is hysterical .
Moreover , the New York Democrat ’ s thuggish attack on Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch is a transparent attempt to intimidate justices .
And wow—a sitting senator threatening an independent judiciary .
Surely the champions of norms and decency will be horrified by this development .
When President Donald Trump , rather absurdly , demanded that Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg recuse themselves from “ Trump-related ” Supreme Court cases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Notorious RBG is openly partisan and anti-Trump—it was a major national story .
In this case , I suspect we ’ re going to hear a lot about a general “ coarsening ” of discourse .
Whatever the case , this is an unprecedented attack on Supreme Court justice .
And by unprecedented , I mean that you won ’ t be able to unearth an instance in modern history of a member of Congress threatening a justice—by name , no less—for ruling against his wishes .
Which is why , I imagine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need to release this statement : Sometimes , in highly charged debates over public policy , the moment gets the better of a person .
It ’ s happened to all of us .
Yet , rather than walking back his statement , Schumer compounded the ugly behavior by smearing the chief justice as a partisan ideologue , as well .
“ For Justice Roberts to follow the right wing ’ s deliberate misinterpretation of what Sen. Schumer said , while remaining silent when President Trump attacked Justices Sotomayor and Ginsburg last week @ @ @ @ @ @ @ call balls and strikes , ” Schumer spokesman Justin Goodman said in a statement to USA Today .
The senator meant only that there would be a “ political price Republicans will pay for putting them on the court , ” Goodman added .
First of all , is Schumer really arguing that being critical of justices is tantamount to threatening them ?
If that ’ s the case , why , during President Barack Obama ’ s State of the Union address in 2010 , did Schumer stand and clap for Obama @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Court justices who had upheld the First Amendment in Citizens United ?
It seems clear that Obama was attempting to manipulate the court , as well , but at least he had the decency not to sound like some wannabe Mafioso .
By accusing Roberts of misrepresenting his comments for partisan reasons , Schumer ( via his spokesman ) is obviously trying to influence the chief justice , as well .
But he ’ s lying .
Schumer ’ s initial statement specifically and unequivocally named two justices—one of whom he and his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ defame .
He was not calling out the Republicans who put Gorsuch and Kavanaugh on the court .
Schumer doesn ’ t have the power to follow through on any threats , thankfully .
His attack , like many less obvious ones , is just part of the left ’ s concerted effort to delegitimize the court , denigrate its justices , and undermine the legality of its decisions .
This isn ’ t surprising ; the Constitution—and the jurists who are inclined to uphold it—is the biggest impediment to the progressive agenda @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this .

“If, then, the courts of justice are to be considered as the bulwarks of a limited Constitution against legislative encroachments, this consideration will afford a strong argument for the permanent tenure of judicial offices,” argued Alexander Hamilton in Federalist No. 78.
If we ever needed a pristine example of why justices are bestowed lifetime appointments and shielded from the vagaries of the electorate and the intimidation tactics of unethical politicians, Sen. Chuck Schumer has now provided us with one.
While speaking to pro-abortion protesters Wednesday in front of the Supreme Court, the Senate minority leader threatened—there’s no other way to put it—two sitting justices with repercussions if they ruled to uphold a Louisiana law requiring abortion providers to gain admitting privileges to hospitals before offering their services to women:
I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.
It’s conceivable that Schumer—who, like the rest of his party, doesn’t have the slightest interest in protecting babies who’ve survive botched abortions—can’t think of any good reason for hospital-admitting privileges. But treating as an “undue burden” any laws that require abortion clinics to provide basic medical facilities for women is just an example of the Democrats’ extremism on the issue. Threatening justices over the case is hysterical.
Moreover, the New York Democrat’s thuggish attack on Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch is a transparent attempt to intimidate justices. And wow—a sitting senator threatening an independent judiciary.
Surely the champions of norms and decency will be horrified by this development. When President Donald Trump, rather absurdly, demanded that Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg recuse themselves from “Trump-related” Supreme Court cases because of their partisan positions—and, yes Notorious RBG is openly partisan and anti-Trump—it was a major national story.
In this case, I suspect we’re going to hear a lot about a general “coarsening” of discourse.
Whatever the case, this is an unprecedented attack on Supreme Court justice. And by unprecedented, I mean that you won’t be able to unearth an instance in modern history of a member of Congress threatening a justice—by name, no less—for ruling against his wishes.
Which is why, I imagine, Chief Justice John Roberts felt the need to release this statement:
Justices know that criticism comes with the territory, but threatening statements of this sort from the highest levels of government are not only inappropriate, they are dangerous. All Members of the Court will continue to do their job, without fear or favor, from whatever quarter.
Sometimes, in highly charged debates over public policy, the moment gets the better of a person. It’s happened to all of us. Yet, rather than walking back his statement, Schumer compounded the ugly behavior by smearing the chief justice as a partisan ideologue, as well.
“For Justice Roberts to follow the right wing’s deliberate misinterpretation of what Sen. Schumer said, while remaining silent when President Trump attacked Justices Sotomayor and Ginsburg last week, shows Justice Roberts does not just call balls and strikes,” Schumer spokesman Justin Goodman said in a statement to USA Today.
The senator meant only that there would be a “political price Republicans will pay for putting them on the court,” Goodman added.
First of all, is Schumer really arguing that being critical of justices is tantamount to threatening them? If that’s the case, why, during President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address in 2010, did Schumer stand and clap for Obama’s norm-breaking attack on the Supreme Court justices who had upheld the First Amendment in Citizens United?
It seems clear that Obama was attempting to manipulate the court, as well, but at least he had the decency not to sound like some wannabe Mafioso.
By accusing Roberts of misrepresenting his comments for partisan reasons, Schumer (via his spokesman) is obviously trying to influence the chief justice, as well. But he’s lying. Schumer’s initial statement specifically and unequivocally named two justices—one of whom he and his colleagues had already attempted to humiliate and defame. He was not calling out the Republicans who put Gorsuch and Kavanaugh on the court.
Schumer doesn’t have the power to follow through on any threats, thankfully. His attack, like many less obvious ones, is just part of the left’s concerted effort to delegitimize the court, denigrate its justices, and undermine the legality of its decisions.
This isn’t surprising; the Constitution—and the jurists who are inclined to uphold it—is the biggest impediment to the progressive agenda. So expect a lot more of this.
COPYRIGHT 2020 CREATORS.COM


dailysignal--2020-03-08--Trump Taps Mark Meadows, Conservative Stalwart, to Be Next Chief of Staff

A conservative congressman known for his anti-establishment approach will be President Donald Trump ’ s new chief of staff .
Trump announced Friday he had picked Rep. Mark Meadows , R-N.C. , tweeting , “ I have long known and worked with Mark , and the relationship is a very good one.
” Meadows will replace Mick Mulvaney , who has been acting chief of staff since January 2019 .
Mulvaney , a former congressman , was also the director for the Office of Management and Budget .
He will now become the special envoy to Northern Ireland .
Meadows @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2012 , was a co-founder in 2015 of the House Freedom Caucus , a group of a few dozen conservative lawmakers who had a notable impact on policy when Republicans controlled the House .
In 2016 , Meadows became the second chairman of the House Freedom Caucus , succeeding Rep. Jim Jordan , R-Ohio .
Meadows played an instrumental role in former House Speaker John Boehner ’ s decision to resign .
In 2015 , shortly after he filed a motion to vacate the chair , a rarely-used maneuver that could have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the North Carolina congressman told The Daily Signal , “ It is a critical time for our leadership to listen to the American people.
” “ “ It ’ s very easy to say you are willing to pay any cost .
It ’ s a very different thing to actually be willing to go through and lay it all on the line .
… I am willing to stand up and say this is what the people back home want , this is what they ’ re asking for , even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Washington D.C , ” he also said .
After Boehner stepped down in September of 2015 , Meadows told The Daily Signal , “ If this is the first step in allowing Capitol Hill and Washington , D.C. , to listen to the American people , [ then ] we can look at this as a giant step forward.
” Meadows ’ GOP House colleagues , including current House Freedom Caucus chairman Rep. Andy Biggs , R-Ariz. , and Republican Study Committee chairman Rep. Mike Johnson , R-La.
, celebrated the news @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Heritage Foundation President Kay C. James praised Meadows as “ a strong leader , principled conservative , and excellent choice to serve as President Donald Trump ’ s chief of staff.
” “ In this new role at the White House , he will be in a position to advance the president ’ s agenda and promote conservative policy ideas , ” James said in a statement , adding : Meadows will be Trump ’ s fourth chief of staff .
In addition to Mulvaney , Reince Priebus , former chairman of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a retired general and former Secretary of Homeland Security , also served as chiefs of staff for Trump .

A conservative congressman known for his anti-establishment approach will be President Donald Trump’s new chief of staff.
Trump announced Friday he had picked Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., tweeting, “I have long known and worked with Mark, and the relationship is a very good one.”
I am pleased to announce that Congressman Mark Meadows will become White House Chief of Staff. I have long known and worked with Mark, and the relationship is a very good one…. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 7, 2020
….I want to thank Acting Chief Mick Mulvaney for having served the Administration so well. He will become the United States Special Envoy for Northern Ireland. Thank you! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 7, 2020
Meadows will replace Mick Mulvaney, who has been acting chief of staff since January 2019. Mulvaney, a former South Carolina congressman, was also the director of the Office of Management and Budget.
He now will become special envoy to Northern Ireland, Trump said.
Meadows, who was first elected to Congress in 2012, was a co-founder in 2015 of the House Freedom Caucus, a group of a few dozen conservative lawmakers who had a notable impact on policy when Republicans controlled the House. In 2016, Meadows became the second chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, succeeding Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio.
Meadows played an instrumental role in former House Speaker John Boehner’s decision to resign. In 2015, shortly after he filed a motion to vacate the chair, a rarely-used maneuver that could have resulted in a vote that ousted Boehner, the North Carolina congressman told The Daily Signal, “It is a critical time for our leadership to listen to the American people.”
“It’s very easy to say you are willing to pay any cost. It’s a very different thing to actually be willing to go through and lay it all on the line. … I am willing to stand up and say, ‘This is what the people back home want, this is what they’re asking for,’ even if it makes it difficult on me in Washington D.C.,” he also said.
After Boehner stepped down in September 2015, Meadows told The Daily Signal, “If this is the first step in allowing Capitol Hill and Washington, D.C., to listen to the American people, [then] we can look at this as a giant step forward.”
Meadows’ GOP House colleagues, including current House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., and Republican Study Committee Chairman Mike Johnson, R-La., celebrated the news of his new role on Twitter:
Congratulations to my good friend @RepMarkMeadows for being named the new White House Chief of Staff! And congratulations to former Rep. Mick Mulvaney for a job well done!https://t.co/tR8SvtEjI2 — Rep. Mike Johnson (@RepMikeJohnson) March 7, 2020
Congrats to @RepMarkMeadows on his appointment as President @realDonaldTrump’s Chief of Staff.
Mark has been a good friend, a great American, and an important leader for our country. I wish him well in his new role. — Rep Andy Biggs (@RepAndyBiggsAZ) March 7, 2020
Mark Meadows is smart, loyal, and a true patriot. He’s a good man and my best friend!
Couldn’t have picked anyone better for the job. https://t.co/d9Z5TgJgGf — Rep. Jim Jordan (@Jim_Jordan) March 7, 2020
.@MarkMeadows has been a strong advocate for the president and the America First agenda from the start. Congrats, Mark! — Kevin McCarthy (@GOPLeader) March 7, 2020
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and top Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway also praised Meadows:
I have tremendous confidence @MarkMeadows will serve President Trump well as his new Chief of Staff.
Mark has shown the ability to navigate the many cross-currents in Congress and has strong relationships across the aisle. — Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) March 7, 2020
Hail to the Chiefs
Big thanks to Mick Mulvaney for his leadership in the West Wing & at OMB. Mick worked hard and without ego
Welcome to Mark Meadows, a friend & fellow traveler in the conservative movement of many years who will continue to support the President & his agenda — Kellyanne Conway (@KellyannePolls) March 7, 2020
Heritage Foundation President Kay C. James praised Meadows as “a strong leader, principled conservative, and excellent choice to serve as President Donald Trump’s chief of staff.”
.@RepMarkMeadows is a strong leader, principled conservative, and excellent choice to serve as @realDonaldTrump’s chief of staff. In this new role at the @WhiteHouse, he will be in a position to advance the president’s agenda and promote conservative policy ideas. — Kay C. James (@KayColesJames) March 7, 2020
“In this new role at the White House, he will be in a position to advance the president’s agenda and promote conservative policy ideas,” James said in a statement, adding:
Throughout his tenure in the House, Congressman Meadows represented his district honorably and became one of the most visible conservative lawmakers on Capitol Hill. His leadership of the House Freedom Caucus elevated conservative ideas and defenders of liberty.
Meadows will be Trump’s fourth chief of staff, in addition to Mulvaney; Reince Priebus, former chairman of the Republican National Committee; and John Kelly, a retired general and former secretary of homeland security.


dailysignal--2020-03-12--Trump Hits Democrats’ Coronavirus Bill as Stuffed With Unrelated ‘Goodies’

President Donald Trump said Thursday that he doesn ’ t support House Democrats ’ coronavirus bill in its current form because it addresses too many matters that have nothing to do with the disease .
While the bill addresses testing and masks to respond to the coronavirus , it also expands unemployment insurance and food stamps , requires the Social Security Administration to provide paid sick leave , and mandates that employers give paid permanent sick leave to their employees .
A reporter asked Trump at the White House if he supports the legislation .
“ No , because there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do with things we are talking about , ” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office as he sat with Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadker .
“ It ’ s not a way for them to get some of the goodies that they haven ’ t been able to get for the last 25 years , ” the president said of House Democrats .
As of Thursday afternoon , there were 36 deaths in the U.S. from the new coronavirus disease , called COVID-19 , with a total of 1,215 diagnosed cases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Columbia , according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention .
On Wednesday Trump delivered prime-time address to the nation , in which he announced a ban on travel to the U.S. from most European countries and proposed a payroll tax cut and assistance for industries hit hard by the virus .
The president previously restricted travel from China , where the virus originated .
“ The Families First Coronavirus Response Act is focused directly on providing support for America ’ s families , who must be our first priority in this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , D-Calif. , said in a public statement .
The spread of the coronavirus has prompted calls for more government action .
The Democrats ’ bill includes free coronavirus testing , paid emergency leave for up to 14 days , and more protections for health care workers who might come in contact with infected people .
“ We can not fight coronavirus effectively unless everyone in our country who needs to be tested knows they can get their test free of charge , ” Pelosi said .
“ We can not slow the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the terrible choice between staying home to avoid spreading illness and the paycheck their family can ’ t afford to lose.
” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy , R-Calif. , contended that the Democrats are playing politics , but said Congress should remain in session until it gets the bill right .
During the Oval Office session , Trump elaborated on why he excluded the United Kingdom from the ban on travel from Europe .
“ One of the reasons [ is ] the U.K. basically has got the border … it has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are doing a very good job , ” Trump said .
“ They don ’ t have very much infection at this point , and hopefully they keep it that way.
” Trump said life and death issues guide his decisions in dealing with coronavirus : The president said the stock market is stronger now than when he came into office and predicted it will bounce back .
“ Whether it affects the stock market or not [ is ] very important , but it ’ s not important compared to life and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Frankly , the people that are professionals praised the decision .
It ’ s something I had to do .
I think you ’ ll see the end result is very good because of it , but it will take a period of time.
” Trump said he is “ not concerned ” about reports that a member of a Brazilian delegation who tested positive for COVID-19 had contact with him last weekend at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach , Florida .
“ Exposures from the case are being assessed , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , adding : Kelvin Droegemeier , director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy , announced Thursday that he held a conference call with government science officials from Australia , Brazil , Canada , Germany , India , Italy , Japan , New Zealand , Singapore , South Korea , and Britain on how to tackle the pandemic .
He said the officials talked about sharing more data , how artificial intelligence can be used , and data-sharing repositories .
In the Oval Office session with reporters , Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the United States are an option .
“ It ’ s a possibility if somebody gets out of control , if an area gets too hot , ” Trump said .
“ You see what they are doing in New Rochelle , which is good frankly , but it ’ s not enforced .
It ’ s not very strong .
But people know they are being watched .
It ’ s a hot spot.
” A reporter asked the Irish and American leaders if they shook hands .
They replied that they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their own palms together in greeting , which was “ sort of a weird feeling , ” Trump said .
The president said that in India and Japan , where he has visited , shaking hands is less customary .
“ They were ahead of the curve , ” he said .
Trump acknowledged his reputation as a bit of a germaphobe before entering politics .
“ I was never a big hand-shaker as you probably have heard , but once you become a politician , shaking hands is very normal , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ followed by saying , “ It almost feels like you ’ re being rude , but we just can ’ t afford to think like that for the next few weeks .
”

President Donald Trump said Thursday that he doesn’t support House Democrats’ coronavirus relief bill in its current form because it includes too many “goodies” that have nothing to do with the disease.
Although the bill addresses providing testing and masks to respond to the coronavirus, it also expands unemployment insurance and food stamps, requires the Social Security Administration to provide paid sick leave, and mandates that employers give paid permanent sick leave to their employees.
A reporter asked Trump at the White House if he supports the legislation.
“No, because there are things in there that have nothing to do with things we are talking about,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office as he sat with Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar.
“It’s not a way for them to get some of the goodies that they haven’t been able to get for the last 25 years,” the president said of House Democrats.
As of Thursday afternoon, there were 36 deaths in the U.S. from the new coronavirus disease, called COVID-19, with a total of 1,215 diagnosed cases across 42 states and the District of Columbia, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Trump delivered a prime-time address to the nation Wednesday night in which he announced a ban on travel to the U.S. from most European countries and proposed a payroll tax cut and assistance for industries and employees hit hard by the virus.
The president previously restricted travel from China, where the virus originated.
“The Families First Coronavirus Response Act is focused directly on providing support for America’s families, who must be our first priority in this emergency,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said in a public statement.
The spread of the coronavirus has prompted calls for more government action. The Democrats’ bill includes free coronavirus testing, paid emergency leave for up to 14 days, and more protections for health care workers who might come in contact with infected people.
“We cannot fight coronavirus effectively unless everyone in our country who needs to be tested knows they can get their test free of charge,” Pelosi said. “We cannot slow the coronavirus outbreak when workers are stuck with the terrible choice between staying home to avoid spreading illness and the paycheck their family can’t afford to lose.”
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., contended that the Democrats are playing politics, but said Congress should remain in session until it gets the bill right.
During the Oval Office session, Trump elaborated on why he excluded the United Kingdom from the ban on travel from Europe.
“One of the reasons [is] the U.K. basically has got the border … it has got very strong borders, and they are doing a very good job,” Trump said. “They don’t have very much infection at this point, and hopefully they keep it that way.”
Trump said life and death issues guide his decisions in dealing with the coronavirus:
The question is how many people will die? I don’t want people dying. That’s what I’m all about. I made a very tough decision last night [with the European travel ban] and a very tough decision a long time ago with respect to China. I don’t want people dying, and that’s why I made these decisions.
The president said the stock market is stronger now than when he came into office and predicted it will bounce back.
“Whether it affects the stock market or not [is] very important, but it’s not important compared to life and death,” Trump said. “Frankly, the people that are professionals praised the decision. It’s something I had to do. I think you’ll see the end result is very good because of it, but it will take a period of time.”
Trump said he is “not concerned” about reports that a member of a Brazilian delegation who tested positive for COVID-19 had contact with him last weekend at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida.
White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham issued a statement later, however.
“Exposures from the case are being assessed, which will dictate next steps,” Grisham said, adding:
Both the president and vice president had almost no interactions with the individual who tested positive and do not require being tested at this time. As stated before, the White House Medical Unit and the United States Secret Service [have] been working closely with various agencies to ensure every precaution is taken to keep the first and second families and all White House staff healthy.
Kelvin Droegemeier, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, announced Thursday that he held a conference call with government science officials from Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea, and Britain on how to tackle the pandemic.
He said the officials talked about sharing more data, how artificial intelligence can be used, and data-sharing repositories.
In the Oval Office session with reporters, Trump was asked if larger quarantine zones in the United States are an option.
“It’s a possibility if somebody gets a little bit out of control, if an area gets too hot,” Trump said. “You see what they are doing in New Rochelle, which is good frankly, but it’s not enforced. It’s not very strong. But people know they are being watched. It’s a hot spot.”
A reporter asked the Irish and American leaders if they shook hands.
They replied that they hadn’t, and instead placed their own palms together in greeting, which was “sort of a weird feeling,” Trump said.
The president said that in India and Japan, where he has visited, shaking hands is less customary.
“They were ahead of the curve,” he said.
Trump acknowledged his reputation as a bit of a germaphobe before entering politics.
“I was never a big hand-shaker as you probably have heard, but once you become a politician, shaking hands is very normal,” he said.
The Irish prime minister followed by saying, “It almost feels like you’re being rude, but we just can’t afford to think like that for the next few weeks.”


dailysignal--2020-03-13--Government Collaboration ‘Unparalleled,’ New Senator Says of Coronavirus Fight

Sen. Kelly Loeffler is the first woman from Georgia ever to vote in the U.S. Senate .
Loeffler , who took the oath of office Jan. 6 , was appointed to fill the vacancy caused by the resignation of fellow Republican Johnny Isakson .
She joins The Daily Signal Podcast to talk about transitioning from the private sector , what she is most passionate about , and her perspective on how President Donald Trump has confronted the coronavirus .
We also cover these stories : • Trump , speaking of the ban on travel from Europe , says : “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ night.
” • The Senate will stay in session next week , despite a scheduled recess , to give lawmakers more time to address COVID-19 .
• California asks that all mass gatherings be postponed or canceled for the rest of March .
The Daily Signal Podcast is available on Ricochet , Apple Podcasts , Pippa , Google Play , or Stitcher .
All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts .
If you like what you hear , please leave a review .
You can also leave us a message at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protected ] .
Enjoy the show !
Rachel del Guidice : I ’ m joined today on The Daily Signal Podcast by Sen. Kelly Loeffler of Georgia .
Sen. Loeffler , thank you so much for being with us today .
Sen. Kelly Loeffler : It ’ s great to be here .
Thanks for having me .
Del Guidice : Well , thank you so much for being with us .
You were recently appointed to the Senate to fill the vacancy that Sen. [ Johnny ] Isakson left .
What has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ private sector into the public sector ?
Loeffler : That ’ s right .
I joined two months ago .
This weekend was my two-month anniversary .
It ’ s really been a whirlwind , but in a positive way .
I ’ ve been able to jump in and use my experience in getting results to already start working on positive legislation for Georgia , and also , contribute to some of the conservative work that I wanted to get done up here and it ’ s just been two months .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a little bit about your work in the private sector and how that has influenced you as a senator ?
Loeffler : In December , I was still working in the private sector leading a small startup , fintech company after about a 28-year career .
I stepped out of the private sector to public service .
The benefit of having that track record , if you will , of private sector experiences , I ’ ve been a job-seeker and I ’ ve been a job-creator .
So not only have I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but I ’ ve signed the front of a paycheck .
I know what it means to make a budget , to deliver on commitments , to meet the expectations of stakeholders , shareholders , and others such as employees to make sure that you ’ re delivering for them .
I think I bring a lot of outsider perspective to Washington and I think that ’ s helpful … particularly in matters of economic , national security , and other stabilizing factors that give us a strong economic environment .
Del Gudice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the heels of the impeachment trial .
Can you tell us what that was like ?
Loeffler : Impeachment started about within a week of me being sworn in and it was truly a moment in history .
I felt it was my duty as a judge and juror in impeachment to take very careful notes , to listen , but also to advance through that process quickly so we could get back to the work of the American people .
I thought that this process was important to have it play out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reached an acquittal , in my view , because it did not meet the standard of impeachment and there was no evidence .
So we moved on quickly and got back to working for the American people .
Del Guidice : Well , on that subject , you ’ re a co-sponsor of the Bipartisan Congressional Budget Reform Act .
Can you tell us about this legislation and why it ’ s important ?
Loeffler : So , look , I came out of the private sector .
I am very accustomed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And what happens in the private sector is typically you set a budget and you ’ re asked to not meet it but outperform it .
So I think it ’ s commonsense legislation that says we in government need to be accountable for the costs that we ’ re asking taxpayers to cover and we need to also be accountable for the results .
This is one of my priorities , … to make sure that we are focused on delivering those results in a cost-effective manner for taxpayers and that we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to address the deficit , because this comes on the back of future generations .
Del Guidice : Something else you ’ ve mentioned you ’ re passionate about is health care .
Can you talk a little bit about that ?
And if there ’ s one thing in the health care legislation [ that you ’ re ] excited about or want to talk about , what would that be ?
Loeffler : There ’ s many things I ’ m excited about in health care because there ’ s a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I go around our state and talk to folks across the country , it doesn ’ t matter what industry they ’ re in—whether they ’ re a small business , a large business , farming , a family—health care is at the top of the list of issues that they care about and that they think needs to improve .
One of the recent bills that I ’ m sponsoring is to bring more access , more innovation to health care in rural communities .
So where you have this move toward @ @ @ @ @ @ @ providers in rural communities .
So I want to make sure that those communities are supported .
I also think we just need to continue to look at [ how ] Obamacare has driven costs way too high .
It ’ s not working .
I think preexisting condition coverage is critical , but the costs skyrocketing has impacted too many working families .
I ’ m hearing of farmers having to send their wives to go get a job so that their employer-provided health insurance can serve the needs of the family @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the private market .
And that ’ s a really tough situation .
Del Guidice : You ’ ve also done some work on immigration reform .
Looking at that area of policy , is there something there , a particular policy or something else , that you ’ re working on that you want to talk about ?
Loeffler : I recently co-sponsored a bill to stop green-lighting driver ’ s licenses for illegal immigrants .
This is important because we should not be providing federal funding to state and local @ @ @ @ @ @ @ federal immigration law .
I think money talks and when you follow the law , then you can receive the funding .
But we have to fix the crisis at the border .
We have to address our immigration , enforce the law there , and then we can start talking about other factors around how to address this immigration issue .
Del Guidice : Thank you for sharing that .
Something else your team has highlighted … that you ’ ve talked about is school safety .
Looking at that issue , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also what are you wanting to work on to address that topic of policy ?
Loeffler : Certainly , I think school safety is critical .
I grew up in public schools .
I can ’ t imagine having to have some of the concerns that we have today .
So I ’ ve been very supportive of law enforcement , making sure that … not just law enforcement but our public education system will have the resources they need .
I think we ’ re at a starting point .
We haven @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I think that there ’ s more to come .
Del Guidice : Something else that you ’ ve talked about a lot is you ’ re very pro-life .
That ’ s something that you ’ re very convicted about , which is a beautiful thing .
What kind of legislation are you looking at working on in this arena when it comes to the life issue ?
Loeffler : I recently introduced an informed consent , so “ Woman ’ s Right to Know ” legislation with [ Sen. ] Marsha @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make sure that an abortion procedure is covered by the same informed consent that goes along with other medical procedures as a commonsense piece of legislation that also helps patients know that there are other options , lets them know the health risks .
That ’ s in addition to four or five other pieces of pro-life legislation , including the 20-week Pain-Capable [ Unborn Child Protection Act ] introduced by [ Sen. ] Lindsey Graham as well as the Born-Alive [ Abortion Survivors Protection Act ] .
Unfortunately , neither of those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support them .
Del Guidice : You mentioned how neither of those passed , and … I think it was only three Democrat senators that voted for both of those pieces of legislation .
Did you have any reflections walking away from that vote on some pieces of legislation that a lot of people say shouldn ’ t be controversial ?
Loeffler : Yeah , I mean , certainly .
Again , it ’ s commonsense to say that if a baby is born after a botched abortion and the baby is born @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to keep that infant alive .
It ’ s just unimaginable that an infant could be delivered and then not cared for .
So , to me , it ’ s not an abortion issue as much as it ’ s a life issue .
This is life that is before us and we ’ re snuffing that life out .
And I don ’ t understand the enthusiasm .
I can ’ t wrap my head around it .
Del Guidice : You ’ re one of the leading conservative women in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about your thoughts , if you ’ d like to see more conservative women in politics ?
And how do you think that could be encouraged ?
Loeffler : It ’ s a great question and I think as I ’ ve gone through my career , I mean , I ’ ve broken glass ceilings in business , in sports , and now working in the Senate .
I ’ m the first woman from Georgia to vote in the Senate ever , to cast a vote .
… I said this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strong , successful woman is a liberal and you don ’ t have to be shrill to be strong .
I think having a range of styles for women and letting them know that they have to have a voice [ is important ] .
You may not know everything about public policy and you do not need to because as a citizen of the United States , you know all you need to do to get involved .
So I hope me being involved will encourage other women to step forward , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our country in different ways .
I ’ m just honored to be here .
I think increasingly this needs to not be as much of a gender issue as just saying , “ Look , no matter what , we have people from all walks of life that are working for our country to support it.
” And that ’ s what I think I bring as a political outsider .
I ’ m bringing a perspective not just as a woman , but as a businesswoman .
I began my life @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve lived the American dream , and I want to just bring that to others across our country .
Del Guidice : Thank you so much for sharing that .
We did cover a lot of ground , and as we wrap up , I just wanted to ask if there ’ s anything else in particular that you want to talk about , something you ’ re passionate [ about ] that you ’ re working on right now that is in the forefront of your mind that you want to leave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since it ’ s a timely topic , I ’ ll just mention my work with my colleagues and the administration on coronavirus .
I want to , first of all , commend President [ Donald ] Trump and this administration for their tireless work .
I ’ ve seen it firsthand .
I traveled to the CDC [ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ] last week with the president and my colleague , Sen. David Perdue .
The work the CDC does , NIH [ the National Institutes of Health ] @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Human Services—we can be very proud as a country that while this virus did not start here , we are clearly going to be the country that solves for it , whether it ’ s diagnostics , treatment , [ or ] vaccines .
This is something that ’ s really unprecedented in terms of our lifetimes , but the level of sophistication in our medical community , the collaboration at the highest levels of government from state and local up to the president is unparalleled .
So I think we will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ starting from a strong base .
We just have to pull together to make sure that we minimize the health and economic impacts in the best way that we can .
Del Guidice : Well , Sen. Loeffler , thank you so much for joining us today on The Daily Signal Podcast .
Loeffler : Thanks .
It was great to be here .

Sen. Kelly Loeffler is the first woman from Georgia ever to vote in the U.S. Senate. Loeffler, who took the oath of office Jan. 6, was appointed to fill the vacancy caused by the resignation of fellow Republican Johnny Isakson. She joins The Daily Signal Podcast to talk about transitioning from the private sector, what she is most passionate about, and her perspective on how President Donald Trump has confronted the coronavirus.
We also cover these stories:
Trump, speaking of the ban on travel from Europe, says: “I made a very tough decision last night.”
The Senate will stay in session next week, despite a scheduled recess, to give lawmakers more time to address COVID-19.
California asks that all mass gatherings be postponed or canceled for the rest of March.
The Daily Signal Podcast is available on Ricochet, Apple Podcasts, Pippa, Google Play, or Stitcher. All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts. If you like what you hear, please leave a review. You can also leave us a message at 202-608-6205 or write us at letters@dailysignal.com. Enjoy the show!
Rachel del Guidice: I’m joined today on The Daily Signal Podcast by Sen. Kelly Loeffler of Georgia. Sen. Loeffler, thank you so much for being with us today.
Sen. Kelly Loeffler: It’s great to be here. Thanks for having me.
Del Guidice: Well, thank you so much for being with us. You were recently appointed to the Senate to fill the vacancy that Sen. [Johnny] Isakson left. What has it been like to go from the private sector into the public sector?
Loeffler: That’s right. I joined two months ago. This weekend was my two-month anniversary.
It’s really been a whirlwind, but in a positive way. I’ve been able to jump in and use my experience in getting results to already start working on positive legislation for Georgia, and also, contribute to some of the conservative work that I wanted to get done up here and it’s just been two months.
Del Guidice: Can you tell me a little bit about your work in the private sector and how that has influenced you as a senator?
Loeffler: In December, I was still working in the private sector leading a small startup, fintech company after about a 28-year career. I stepped out of the private sector to public service.
The benefit of having that track record, if you will, of private sector experiences, I’ve been a job-seeker and I’ve been a job-creator. So not only have I signed the back of a paycheck, but I’ve signed the front of a paycheck.
I know what it means to make a budget, to deliver on commitments, to meet the expectations of stakeholders, shareholders, and others such as employees to make sure that you’re delivering for them.
I think I bring a lot of outsider perspective to Washington and I think that’s helpful … particularly in matters of economic, national security, and other stabilizing factors that give us a strong economic environment.
Del Gudice: You came into the Senate on the heels of the impeachment trial. Can you tell us what that was like?
Loeffler: Impeachment started about within a week of me being sworn in and it was truly a moment in history.
I felt it was my duty as a judge and juror in impeachment to take very careful notes, to listen, but also to advance through that process quickly so we could get back to the work of the American people.
I thought that this process was important to have it play out. It was also important that we reached an acquittal, in my view, because it did not meet the standard of impeachment and there was no evidence. So we moved on quickly and got back to working for the American people.
Del Guidice: Well, on that subject, you’re a co-sponsor of the Bipartisan Congressional Budget Reform Act. Can you tell us about this legislation and why it’s important?
Loeffler: So, look, I came out of the private sector. I am very accustomed to having to meet an annual budget. And what happens in the private sector is typically you set a budget and you’re asked to not meet it but outperform it.
So I think it’s commonsense legislation that says we in government need to be accountable for the costs that we’re asking taxpayers to cover and we need to also be accountable for the results.
This is one of my priorities, … to make sure that we are focused on delivering those results in a cost-effective manner for taxpayers and that we get our budget under control and start to address the deficit, because this comes on the back of future generations.
Del Guidice: Something else you’ve mentioned you’re passionate about is health care. Can you talk a little bit about that? And if there’s one thing in the health care legislation [that you’re] excited about or want to talk about, what would that be?
Loeffler: There’s many things I’m excited about in health care because there’s a lot of potential for improvement.
As I go around our state and talk to folks across the country, it doesn’t matter what industry they’re in—whether they’re a small business, a large business, farming, a family—health care is at the top of the list of issues that they care about and that they think needs to improve.
One of the recent bills that I’m sponsoring is to bring more access, more innovation to health care in rural communities. So where you have this move toward urbanization, you’re losing care providers in rural communities. So I want to make sure that those communities are supported.
I also think we just need to continue to look at [how] Obamacare has driven costs way too high. It’s not working. I think preexisting condition coverage is critical, but the costs skyrocketing has impacted too many working families.
I’m hearing of farmers having to send their wives to go get a job so that their employer-provided health insurance can serve the needs of the family because they can no longer afford insurance in the private market. And that’s a really tough situation.
Del Guidice: You’ve also done some work on immigration reform. Looking at that area of policy, is there something there, a particular policy or something else, that you’re working on that you want to talk about?
Loeffler: I recently co-sponsored a bill to stop green-lighting driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants. This is important because we should not be providing federal funding to state and local governments that don’t adhere to federal immigration law.
I think money talks and when you follow the law, then you can receive the funding.
But we have to fix the crisis at the border. We have to address our immigration, enforce the law there, and then we can start talking about other factors around how to address this immigration issue.
Del Guidice: Thank you for sharing that. Something else your team has highlighted … that you’ve talked about is school safety. Looking at that issue, what are you hearing from Georgians and also what are you wanting to work on to address that topic of policy?
Loeffler: Certainly, I think school safety is critical. I grew up in public schools. I can’t imagine having to have some of the concerns that we have today.
So I’ve been very supportive of law enforcement, making sure that … not just law enforcement but our public education system will have the resources they need.
I think we’re at a starting point. We haven’t solved for it, but I think that there’s more to come.
Del Guidice: Something else that you’ve talked about a lot is you’re very pro-life. That’s something that you’re very convicted about, which is a beautiful thing. What kind of legislation are you looking at working on in this arena when it comes to the life issue?
Loeffler: I recently introduced an informed consent, so “Woman’s Right to Know” legislation with [Sen.] Marsha Blackburn.
The idea is just to make sure that an abortion procedure is covered by the same informed consent that goes along with other medical procedures as a commonsense piece of legislation that also helps patients know that there are other options, lets them know the health risks.
That’s in addition to four or five other pieces of pro-life legislation, including the 20-week Pain-Capable [Unborn Child Protection Act] introduced by [Sen.] Lindsey Graham as well as the Born-Alive [Abortion Survivors Protection Act]. Unfortunately, neither of those passed, but I was proud to support them.
Del Guidice: You mentioned how neither of those passed, and … I think it was only three Democrat senators that voted for both of those pieces of legislation. Did you have any reflections walking away from that vote on some pieces of legislation that a lot of people say shouldn’t be controversial?
Loeffler: Yeah, I mean, certainly. Again, it’s commonsense to say that if a baby is born after a botched abortion and the baby is born alive, every effort should be made to keep that infant alive. It’s just unimaginable that an infant could be delivered and then not cared for.
So, to me, it’s not an abortion issue as much as it’s a life issue. This is life that is before us and we’re snuffing that life out. And I don’t understand the enthusiasm. I can’t wrap my head around it.
Del Guidice: You’re one of the leading conservative women in the Senate and I’m curious about your thoughts, if you’d like to see more conservative women in politics? And how do you think that could be encouraged?
Loeffler: It’s a great question and I think as I’ve gone through my career, I mean, I’ve broken glass ceilings in business, in sports, and now working in the Senate. I’m the first woman from Georgia to vote in the Senate ever, to cast a vote. …
I said this when I was appointed, not every strong, successful woman is a liberal and you don’t have to be shrill to be strong. I think having a range of styles for women and letting them know that they have to have a voice [is important].
You may not know everything about public policy and you do not need to because as a citizen of the United States, you know all you need to do to get involved.
So I hope me being involved will encourage other women to step forward, serve their communities, their states, our country in different ways. I’m just honored to be here.
I think increasingly this needs to not be as much of a gender issue as just saying, “Look, no matter what, we have people from all walks of life that are working for our country to support it.”
And that’s what I think I bring as a political outsider. I’m bringing a perspective not just as a woman, but as a businesswoman. I began my life on a family farm. I’ve lived the American dream, and I want to just bring that to others across our country.
Del Guidice: Thank you so much for sharing that. We did cover a lot of ground, and as we wrap up, I just wanted to ask if there’s anything else in particular that you want to talk about, something you’re passionate [about] that you’re working on right now that is in the forefront of your mind that you want to leave listeners with?
Loeffler: Well, since it’s a timely topic, I’ll just mention my work with my colleagues and the administration on coronavirus.
I want to, first of all, commend President [Donald] Trump and this administration for their tireless work. I’ve seen it firsthand. I traveled to the CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] last week with the president and my colleague, Sen. David Perdue.
The work the CDC does, NIH [the National Institutes of Health], [the Department of] Health and Human Services—we can be very proud as a country that while this virus did not start here, we are clearly going to be the country that solves for it, whether it’s diagnostics, treatment, [or] vaccines.
This is something that’s really unprecedented in terms of our lifetimes, but the level of sophistication in our medical community, the collaboration at the highest levels of government from state and local up to the president is unparalleled.
So I think we will get through this and the economy is starting from a strong base. We just have to pull together to make sure that we minimize the health and economic impacts in the best way that we can.
Del Guidice: Well, Sen. Loeffler, thank you so much for joining us today on The Daily Signal Podcast.
Loeffler: Thanks. It was great to be here.


dailysignal--2020-03-26--Trump Compares $2.2 Trillion Coronavirus Aid Bill With FDR’s New Deal in Size, Scope

President Donald Trump on Wednesday expressed optimism about the prospects for passage of an emergency coronavirus relief bill to bridge the nation ’ s temporary economic shutdown , as the Senate moved closer to agreement .
“ Together , this $ 2.2 trillion legislative package is bigger than anything I believe ever passed in Congress , ” Trump told reporters , comparing the massive bill with President Franklin Roosevelt ’ s New Deal programs of the 1930s and 1940s .
“ Perhaps , relatively speaking , if you go back and look during the FDR New Deal days , there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ [ for inflation ] , it was bigger , ” the president said .
“ But this is certainly , in terms of dollars , far and away the biggest ever , ever done .
That ’ s a tremendous thing , because a lot of this money goes to jobs , jobs , jobs and families , families , families.
” Just before midnight , the Senate approved the bill in a unanimous vote of 96-0 after days of deadlock and fierce negotiations between Republicans and Democrats that yielded biting public statements @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House , for what Speaker Nancy Pelosi , D-Calif. , has said will be a voice vote , likely Friday , in part because it ’ s not clear how many House members would return to Washington .
The bill includes $ 350 billion in loans for businesses for job retention purposes as the nation hunkers down during the spread of the contagious new coronavirus , which causes the disease COVID-19 .
The package has an additional $ 300 billion in direct cash payments , or $ 3,400 for the typical family of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year , and up to $ 250 billion in expanded unemployment benefits .
Four Republican senators , however , expressed concern that unemployment insurance paying out $ 600 per week—more than many low-wage jobs pay—would be a disincentive to work .
Those GOP senators were Tim Scott and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina , Rick Scott of Florida , and Ben Sasse of Nebraska .
The four senators who missed the vote also are all Republicans , who hold 53 seats in the chamber : Rand Paul of Kentucky , who has tested @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mike Lee and Mitt Romney , who isolated themselves after contact with Paul ; and John Thune of South Dakota , who said he felt ill. “ We want to have enhanced unemployment insurance , ” Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin told reporters .
“ This is the only way we could ensure the states could get money out quickly , in a fair way .
So , we used $ 600 across the board .
I don ’ t think it will create incentives [ not to work ] .
Most Americans , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ keep their jobs.
” Trump is seeking to jump-start and reopen the economy as quickly as possible , but his coronavirus task force is attemping to balance economic and medical concerns .
One reporter asked the president whether he was making political calculations regarding his hopes of reopening the economy by Easter Sunday , which is April 12 .
“ I think there are certain people that would like [ the economy ] not to open so quickly , ” Trump replied , saying there are “ certain people who would like it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him politically .
“ I think it is very clear that there are people in your profession that write fake news .
You do , ” Trump told the reporter , then pointed at another reporter and said , “ She does.
” “ Nobody has done the job that we ’ ve done , ” the president added , indicating Vice President Mike Pence and the top public health officials flanking him .
“ And it ’ s lucky that you have this group here right now for this problem , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country left.
” As of noon Wednesday , the U.S. had 54,453 confirmed cases of COVID-19 and a total of 737 deaths , according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention .
After it appeared that Republicans and Democrats had reached a compromise on a stimulus bill over the weekend , Pelosi put forward a proposal that includes numerous subsidies for the wind and solar energy industries and other liberal causes .
The compromise package that headed for Senate passage after 11 p.m. included $ 25 million for the Kennedy Center , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
When asked about that , Trump said he supported it .
“ I approved that .
It was $ 35 million , and we actually took off $ 10 million .
I ’ m a fan of that , although I haven ’ t spent time there because I ’ m far too busy , ” Trump said , adding : I ’ d love to go there for evenings , but I ’ m too busy doing things , because that ’ s more important for me .
The Kennedy Center @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there .
It ’ s essentially closed , and they do need some funding .
And I said , ‘ Look , that was a Democrat request .
That was not my request.
’ But you ’ ve got to give them something .
It ’ s something that they wanted .
It works that way .
Democrats have treated us fairly .
I really believe that we had a very good back-and-forth .
Trump said he spoke “ a number of times ” with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer , D-N.Y. , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” This report has been updated since publication to include the Senate ’ s passage of the coronavirus relief bill .

President Donald Trump on Wednesday expressed optimism about the prospects for passage of an emergency coronavirus relief bill to bridge the nation’s temporary economic shutdown, as the Senate moved closer to agreement.
“Together, this $2.2 trillion legislative package is bigger than anything I believe ever passed in Congress,” Trump told reporters, comparing the massive bill to President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal programs of the 1930s and 1940s.
“Perhaps, relatively speaking, if you go back and look during the FDR New Deal days, there was something that if you time-value it [for inflation], it was bigger,” the president said. “But this is certainly, in terms of dollars, far and away the biggest ever, ever done. That’s a tremendous thing, because a lot of this money goes to jobs, jobs, jobs and families, families, families.”
Just before midnight, the Senate approved the bill in a unanimous vote of 96-0 after days of deadlock and fierce negotiations between Republicans and Democrats that yielded biting public statements.
The package now moves to the House, for what Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has said will be a voice vote, likely Friday, in part because it’s not clear how many House members would return to Washington.
The bill includes $350 billion in loans for businesses for job retention purposes as the nation hunkers down during the spread of the contagious new coronavirus, which causes the disease COVID-19.
The package has an additional $300 billion in direct cash payments, or $3,400 for the typical family of four earning less than $99,000 per year, and up to $250 billion in expanded unemployment benefits.
Four Republican senators, however, expressed concern that unemployment insurance paying out $600 per week—more than many low-wage jobs pay—would be a disincentive to work. Those GOP senators were Tim Scott and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Rick Scott of Florida, and Ben Sasse of Nebraska.
The four senators who missed the vote also are all Republicans, who hold 53 seats in the chamber: Rand Paul of Kentucky, who has tested positive for COVID-19; Utah’s Mike Lee and Mitt Romney, who isolated themselves after contact with Paul; and John Thune of South Dakota, who said he felt ill.
“We want to have enhanced unemployment insurance,” Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin told reporters. “This is the only way we could ensure the states could get money out quickly, in a fair way. So, we used $600 across the board. I don’t think it will create incentives [not to work]. Most Americans, what they want, they want to keep their jobs.”
Trump is seeking to jump-start and reopen the economy as quickly as possible, but his coronavirus task force is attemping to balance economic and medical concerns.
One reporter asked the president whether he was making political calculations regarding his hopes of reopening the economy by Easter Sunday, which is April 12.
“I think there are certain people that would like [the economy] not to open so quickly,” Trump replied, saying there are “certain people who would like it to do financially poorly” to hurt him politically.
“I think it is very clear that there are people in your profession that write fake news. You do,” Trump told the reporter, then pointed at another reporter and said, “She does.”
“Nobody has done the job that we’ve done,” the president added, indicating Vice President Mike Pence and the top public health officials flanking him. “And it’s lucky that you have this group here right now for this problem, or you wouldn’t even have a country left.”
As of noon Wednesday, the U.S. had 54,453 confirmed cases of COVID-19 and a total of 737 deaths, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
After it appeared that Republicans and Democrats had reached a compromise on a stimulus bill over the weekend, Pelosi put forward a proposal that includes numerous subsidies for the wind and solar energy industries and other liberal causes.
The compromise package that headed for Senate passage after 11 p.m. included $25 million for the Kennedy Center, a huge performing arts venue in Washington. When asked about that, Trump said he supported it.
“I approved that. It was $35 million, and we actually took off $10 million. I’m a fan of that, although I haven’t spent time there because I’m far too busy,” Trump said, adding:
I’d love to go there for evenings, but I’m too busy doing things, because that’s more important for me. The Kennedy Center has suffered greatly because nobody can go there. It’s essentially closed, and they do need some funding. And I said, ‘Look, that was a Democrat request. That was not my request.’ But you’ve got to give them something. It’s something that they wanted. It works that way. Democrats have treated us fairly. I really believe that we had a very good back-and-forth.
Trump said he spoke “a number of times” with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and that Democrats “had requests also.”
That’s not a good sound bite, but that’s the way life works. With that being said, the Kennedy Center, they do a beautiful job. … This thing has been devastating to it.
This report has been updated since publication to include the Senate’s passage of the coronavirus relief bill.