KLZ 560 AM DENVER'S CONSERVATIVE HOME STATION
Menu
In this episode, host Tony Perkins dives deep into the pressing issue of budget reconciliation as President Trump works to advance his agenda. Key discussions unfold around the House and Senate’s ongoing negotiations and the potential implications for taxpayers, featuring insights from Congressman Warren Davidson and others. The spotlight is also on domestic terrorism concerns as attacks against Tesla dealerships rise, prompting calls for FBI intervention.
SPEAKER 12 :
from the heart of our nation’s capital in Washington, D.C., bringing compelling interviews, insightful analysis, taking you beyond the headlines and soundbites into conversations with our nation’s leaders and newsmakers, all from a biblical worldview. Washington Watch with Tony Perkins starts now.
SPEAKER 05 :
The next job is budget reconciliation. That is number one on President Trump’s priority list now to get Congress to work together with him to pass that one big beautiful bill that we’ve been talking about.
SPEAKER 17 :
That was House Majority Leader Steve Scalise earlier today. Welcome to Washington Watch. Thanks for joining us. Here’s what’s coming up on this Tuesday edition. House and Senate Republicans are meeting to hash out differences on reconciliation, an essential part of President Trump’s policy agenda. We’ll get insights from Ohio Congressman Warren Davidson, a member of the House Financial Services Committee.
SPEAKER 16 :
They’re really terrorists when you think about it. They’re terrorists at a high level. And I think the people that are financing them, they could very well be people I know, people that you write about. But those people are in big trouble.
SPEAKER 17 :
So they better cut it out. That was President Trump yesterday at his cabinet meeting, speaking on the recent attacks targeting Tesla dealerships and owners. Lawmakers are calling on the FBI to investigate these acts as acts of domestic terrorism. Joining us later to discuss the response is Arizona Congressman and former Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Biggs. Plus, Congress is preparing to rein in activist judges, overreaching their authority as they seek to derail President Trump’s agenda.
SPEAKER 13 :
In the last 100 years, listen to this, 67% of the injunctions issued against a president were issued against one president alone, and that’s Donald J. Trump. So something unusual is happening, something that is out of the norm. It is a dangerous trend, and it violates equal justice under law, that critical principle. It violates our system itself.
SPEAKER 17 :
That was House Speaker Mike Johnson. We’ll explore the remedies later on this edition of Washington Watch. And remember Atlanta Fire Chief Kelvin Cochran? He was fired for conducting a Bible study that made a brief reference to human sexuality in marriage. Or Jacob Kersey, a young police officer in Georgia, terminated for posting scripture about marriage on his Facebook page. Well, now Georgia lawmakers are advancing a Religious Freedom Restoration Act that would protect the right of citizens to live out their biblical faith. We’ll hear from the bill’s author, Georgia State Senator Ed Stetzler, and Jacob Kersey, now a part of the FRC Action Team. Also, just a quick reminder, session six of our God and Government course is now out. This series combines biblical principles with historical insights to offer a practical approach to government. The latest episode covers the legislative and judicial branches and the power of the jury. You can find it exclusively on the StandFirm app. If you don’t have the StandFirm app, well, text the word COURSE to 67742. That’s COURSE to 67742. All right, the pressure is on for the Senate to take up a House-passed budget resolution which aims to satisfy many of President Trump’s agenda items. House GOP members are pushing their Senate colleagues to pass this resolution in full. But the Senate is saying that it will take some time, months maybe. to do so. The leadership of the two chambers are supposed to be meeting to discuss a way forward. So how will the timing of this affect the president’s agenda, in particular the tax cuts which are set to expire? Here to discuss this is Congressman Warren Davidson. He serves as a member of the House Financial Services Committee. He’s also a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee. He represents Ohio’s 8th Congressional District. Congressman Davidson, welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks for joining us. It’s always an honor. Thank you, Tony. So let’s talk about the House has done the heavy lifting here. It’s now up to the Senate. What are you hearing?
SPEAKER 03 :
Well, the Senate passed a bill actually first. Lindsey Graham, as a budget chairman, passed a bill that essentially anticipates a two-step process. And the House came after that and said, no, it’s going to be one big, beautiful bill, just like the president asked for. And now you hear some senators trying to slow walk this. Well, maybe we can get this done before August and taking away the sense of urgency. I think there are a lot of us that are concerned that we shouldn’t be talking about anything but staying on offense. There shouldn’t be any effort to slow down the president’s agenda or to slow the momentum that we’re building towards saving money for taxpayers. And so the discussions are ongoing right now, and I think Senator Thune and Speaker Johnson are going to set a different tone than that slow-walking verbalization that’s been taking place in the Senate.
SPEAKER 17 :
So let’s talk about some of the practical implications here. You mentioned one of them, saving money, because a part of this agenda is to scale back the size and scope of government. But we also, as some of that money is shifted around, we’re talking about border security, we’re talking about national security, but we’re also talking about this being the vehicle by which the Trump tax cuts, which he did in his first term, are extended. What’s the timeline for that?
SPEAKER 03 :
Well, look, some of the Trump tax reform has already expired. A lot of those are business provisions like the ability to deduct research and development. You want companies making their investments in America, not holding that research and development dollars outside the United States. Same with capital expenditures and interest deductibility. That’s actively shaping our business climate today. And those have already expired. So we need to get that passed as soon as possible. But the individual provisions, if we don’t take action this year, nearly every American who pays taxes will see a tax increase. And that’s what’s at stake. We’re really continuation of policy on that. And then lastly, Donald Trump on tax policy made some promises like no tax on tips. And for us to do that, it takes a change in law. And so that’s kind of its own standalone bill that could probably pass as a bipartisan bill by itself. uh… because there are democrats who say they support no tax on tips as well but the things that are truly partisan ultimately need to go in the reconciliation bill and what has become partisan that used to be bipartisan is things like not wasting money uh… and even the government accountability office says over a hundred billion dollars in medicaid and medicare are going to improper payments so why would we see people defending improper payments why would we let another year go by when we fail to act. We should pass something to reform this immediately.
SPEAKER 17 :
Congressman, as you mentioned, the Senate passed a bill actually before the House, their own version of a budget resolution, but it was a two-step process. So if they move so quickly on that first bill, why would it take so long to move on the second one?
SPEAKER 03 :
Well, the consensus on the first bill is pretty much there. So that’s why it was easier. It wasn’t necessarily as ambitious on the savings on the one hand and on the other. It had spending attached to it. And that seems to be what the Senate likes is spending. And so we do need to. increase funding for border security, and we need to increase funding for defense in a way that’s laser-focused on America’s national security, whereas the previous administration was squandering all kinds of dollars on all sorts of other things. So those are part of Senator Graham’s approach. they’re anticipated to be part of the house approach as well uh… but we also set the stage to deal with tax reform the senate hasn’t yet gotten there and that’s part of why they want to slow walk it in the senate doesn’t have the same sense of urgency on tax reform in part because there are no blue state senators and we have colleagues in the republican conference in the house that make our majority that come from states like New York and New Jersey and California, where there is a sense of urgency to deal with the high state and local tax issues they’re confronting.
SPEAKER 17 :
Now, also, as you talk about the Senate bill increasing the spending for defense and border, the House also does that, but it’s offset by reductions, is it not?
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah, that’s the that’s the commitment that the House does is, you know, we set a higher goal for spending and we basically put a floor at one and a half trillion. And it’s like, great if we can save more. But it also puts the burden to say, hey, if we’re going to save money on tax reform for the American people, we still need revenue into the government. Let’s make sure that we keep the tax reform in line with the ability to deliver savings from ongoing government spending. They shouldn’t be completely decoupled. The Senate really, I think, has got a lot of momentum behind the idea that you’re going to treat the tax bill the same way you treat spending, which is continuation of policy doesn’t necessarily require a Congressional Budget Office score. And that’s the case for spending. But CBO wants to give the continuation of the current tax policy on income tax levels as an expense. And the reality is that would treat tax differently than spending. And I think a lot of people are for mutually assured destruction. If you wanna give them a score, then you gotta give both a score, or you just agree that we’re not gonna give either of them a score. And that really changes what’s possible with this bill.
SPEAKER 17 :
Now, this reconciliation is by way of reminder for our viewers and listeners that this is able to be accomplished without any democratic support, correct?
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah, and look, this isn’t like the only time it’s been done. Democrats did this with the American Rescue Plan and with the Inflation Reduction Act. It’s known as the Budget Reconciliation. And it’s historically created back in the 70s, Budget Control Act of 1974, to deal with mandatory spending, things like Social Security, Medicare, the Great Society programs, the Social Safety Net programs. We don’t have a fixed amount of food stamps. If you qualify, the food stamps are available, or SNAP, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. So those kinds of things are available. And you rarely do those because you don’t put them into regular appropriations. But you can also blend discretionary spending. And a lot of people want to keep those separate and say, no, no, you’ve got to do them separate. And that, to be fair, was the anticipated use of the Budget Control Act of 1974 But it’s not a theory. I mean, Democrats really did blend the two, both in American Rescue Plan and Inflation Reduction Act. And both the House and Senate bill do blend some level of discretionary and mandatory spending, like defense, like border. Or in the case of Democrats, the Green New Deal was heavily funded for climate change initiatives in the regular discretionary budget. So this kind of gets down into the weeds of what the American people are talking about in terms of how Congress operates versus what they expect. And I think with the momentum, people are saying, okay, you know, Doge and all this attention, we’re less worried about Elon Musk and, you know, the team of cyber people that they’ve put in place to find this stuff out than we are about the stuff we’re finding out. You’re like, you’re wasting our money on what? Let it go to the cause and not to the things that are out there. And we can deliver some savings for people. In the meantime, the Trump administration isn’t spending the money, but we want to be able to get after it and direct it towards things that we do need spending on.
SPEAKER 17 :
Right. Congressman, we just have two minutes left. I want to throw you a curveball. I want to change directions here. You’re also on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. A lot happening internationally right now. I mean, the world’s still kind of on fire as the Trump administration trying to put out the fires from the Biden administration. What do we need to be watching right now?
SPEAKER 03 :
Well, President Trump campaigned essentially no new wars. He did that in his first administration. He was pushing for peace, and he’s working towards that in Ukraine. Unfortunately, it seems like the two parties, the principal, Russia and Ukraine, who are at war with one another, have kind of walked away from some negotiations in Saudi Arabia. And it’s interesting that they’re holding these negotiations in Saudi Arabia because Iran is such a threat to the peace and stability in the Middle East, their proxies, the Houthis, their proxies, Hamas, their proxies, Hezbollah, are really the ones driving a lot of conflict and just the 10-7 massacre in Israel. So, so much goes back to Israel in terms of providing peace. So, it’s interesting that Saudi Arabia has placed themselves as a center for not just resolving the conflict in the broker a piece in Saudi Arabia.
SPEAKER 17 :
Very, very, very interesting as all this unfolds. Congressman Warren Davidson, always great to see you. Thanks so much for taking time to join us today. Yeah, thanks, Tony. God bless you and all your viewers. Thanks so much. I know, folks, it’s kind of in the weeds, but I think I want you to be informed and educated about what’s going on. This is going to be a detailed and lengthy process as we work through the reconciliation, but I also want you to know what’s happening internationally. So many issues. You’ve got to keep… You know, as we look at Scripture, as we’re reading what is going to be unfolding in the final days, I mean, we see a lot of that happening. So we need to keep our eye on what’s happening abroad. All right, don’t go away. When we come back, Congressman Andy Biggs joins us to talk about domestic terrorists. That’s next. Don’t go away.
SPEAKER 01 :
At Family Research Council, we believe religious freedom is a fundamental human right that all governments must protect. That’s why FRC President Tony Perkins went to Capitol Hill to testify on behalf of persecuted Christians in Nigeria. Islamist terror groups target Christians and other religious minorities in Nigeria with brutal violence. Representative Chris Smith, who chaired the hearing, said 55,000 people have been killed and 21,000 abducted in the last five years alone. The congressman also stressed that 89% of Christians in the world who are martyred are from Nigeria.
SPEAKER 11 :
Yet the government of Nigeria has failed to make progress against religiously motivated persecution of Christians despite religious freedom being enshrined as an essential human right in their constitution.
SPEAKER 01 :
Tony Perkins called for the United States to send an unmistakable message.
SPEAKER 17 :
This is systematic religious violence. Nigeria must be redesignated a country of particular concern. The Biden administration’s removal of this designation was a reckless mistake that emboldened the very terrorists who are slaughtering Christians.
SPEAKER 01 :
Redesignating Nigeria will enable the U.S. government to pressure Nigerian leaders to protect vulnerable Christians.
SPEAKER 17 :
These are not just numbers. These are fathers, their mothers, their children, their families.
SPEAKER 01 :
Bishop Wilfred Anagabe risked his life to speak out, sharing firsthand accounts of the danger faced in his church district in central Nigeria.
SPEAKER 02 :
We live in fear because at any point it can be our turn to be killed, but to remain silent is to die twice. So, I have chosen to speak.
SPEAKER 01 :
FRC is calling on President Trump to act now to promote religious freedom around the globe and speak up on behalf of Christians in Nigeria.
SPEAKER 07 :
Looking for a trusted source of news that shares your Christian values? Turn to The Washington Stand, your ultimate destination for informed, faith-centered reporting. Our dedicated team goes beyond the headlines, delivering stories that matter most to believers. From breaking events to cultural insights, we provide clear, compassionate coverage through a biblical lens. Discover news you can trust at The Washington Stand, where faith and facts meet every day.
SPEAKER 14 :
Download the new Stand Firm app for Apple and Android phones today and join a wonderful community of fellow believers. We’ve created a special place for you to access news from a biblical perspective, read and listen to daily devotionals, pray for current events, and more. Share the Stand Firm app with your friends, family, and church members, and stand firm everywhere you go.
SPEAKER 17 :
Welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks for joining us. All right, yesterday, the FBI, under the leadership of Director Kash Patel, launched a task force to address the nationwide crime wave against Tesla dealerships, vehicles, and charging stations. Since Tesla CEO Elon Musk started his doge purge of federal employees and wasteful spending, there have been numerous reports of activities like arson, vandalism, and gunshots. In his announcement of the task force, Director Patel went as far as calling the acts domestic terrorism. Well, Congress is weighing in as well, calling for FBI action. Joining me now to discuss this and more, Congressman Andy Biggs, a member of the House Judiciary Committee and the Committee House Oversight and Government Reform. He’s also on the Judiciary Committee as the chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government Surveillance. He represents the 5th Congressional District of Arizona. Chairman Biggs, welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks for joining us.
SPEAKER 18 :
Thanks, Tony. Good to be with you.
SPEAKER 17 :
So you sent a letter to Director Patel last week on this very issue. Your reaction to his launching of this task force?
SPEAKER 18 :
Well, I’m glad he’s doing it. It’s necessary. What we’re seeing is just incredible criminality. It actually rises to the level of domestic terrorism, and it’s spreading. It’s getting worse. You actually have members of Congress who foment this violence, and then they say, we’re not doing any of that stuff. You’ve got comedians, you’ve got television personalities all getting out there and fomenting this anti-Doge, anti-Elon, anti-Tesla sentiment, and it’s taking a lot of people in its wake.
SPEAKER 17 :
Now, you know, you can call this violence, but you’ve been very clear about this and Kash Patel making references as domestic terrorism. What makes it domestic terrorism?
SPEAKER 18 :
Well, domestic terrorism is defined very clearly. It’s when you violate any federal or state law, and you’re doing it to either impact a politician or an elected official, or even if you’re attacking it, basically… community or a group of people you’re trying to influence them by intimidating them uh through your your activities and so what we have here is there’s there’s vandalism they’re doxing people they’re coming out uh i saw a video recently a guy literally pulls his car over in the middle of a highway to stop a car and go up and berate the person so These types of threatening and intimidating acts violate state law, and then they’re being done to what? To intimidate the public, to change public policy, to impact people. That’s pretty classical according to the definition of domestic terrorism.
SPEAKER 17 :
I’m wondering if the Southern Poverty Law Center has identified any of this activity as domestic terrorism.
SPEAKER 18 :
Well, you and I are both smiling at that, Tony, because we both know that the SPLC is so totally woke and leftist that they would welcome almost. I don’t know what their position is, but they’re certainly not saying anything about this. As far as I can tell, I haven’t found anything where they’re condemning this. And it’s kind of like what Senator Mike Lee said. Can’t we get a single Democrat to condemn this kind of violence instead of encouraging it? And, you know, look for March 29th. That’s when one of my colleagues has called for taking down Tesla and Elon Musk.
SPEAKER 17 :
Yeah. Let me ask you about that. Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett fanning the flames for this violence, but she insists she’s she’s promoting nonviolence. I mean, are they not aiding and abetting terrorism? I mean, isn’t that criminal activity?
SPEAKER 18 :
Yeah, but here’s the thing, Tony. The domestic terrorism statute, it actually was really clear. There’s no aiding and abetting there. If you are actually inciting this kind of violence, you yourself are violating the domestic terrorism statute. So I think if you are doing that and a court were to find that you were doing it, you would have this criminal culpability. So I think Pam Bondi, the attorney general, when she said that, that Representative Crockett really probably needed to watch very carefully what she’s saying. I think that was a very open and transparent warning that you’re very close to crossing the line if you haven’t already crossed the line.
SPEAKER 17 :
I mean, could you foresee the Department of Justice taking action against one of your colleagues that’s inciting terrorism?
SPEAKER 18 :
Yeah, I guess I could. I mean, if you have somebody who is actually inciting terrorism and encouraging this kind of conduct, then you violate the law. Because the free speech of Americans only runs into boundaries when you are inciting violence and causing that kind of trouble. I mean, if you’re threatening, intimidating, by words, if you have someone to say, I’m going to kill you, or go out and burn down a Tesla, or if you don’t sell your car, I’m going to come at you, Guess what? That language in and of itself is not protected speech by any state statute that I know of because the Uniform Criminal Code, which has been adopted by almost every state, would prohibit that. And no court is going to protect that speech either.
SPEAKER 17 :
So let’s talk about other cases that are non-Tesla related that the FBI should be looking into that may cross into this area of domestic terrorism. Are we seeing other things that the left is doing?
SPEAKER 18 :
Yeah, but right now their focus is almost exclusively on anything related to Elon Musk. So they’ve made threats on his life. But one of the other things that you’ve got is when you have some of these town halls, that they’re in person, we can’t do them in my district because of the threats. I don’t worry about my own personal safety so much, but I do worry about the safety of those who are coming because they truly want to participate in a town hall. But with the threats being made towards my staff, my family, and these people, they really cross the line. and i know that this to the fact because tony when i first got elected we actually were doing life town halls and we had to have We had to have undercover police next to my family. We had the whole back of the arena, for instance, was filled with sheriffs and down front because there were so many threats to me, my family, and the public. And that’s when we said, look, you know what? I could stand up and smile, but that’s great. But what about these people that are coming because they were berating people who simply wanted to get up and ask a question?
SPEAKER 17 :
Right. Alarming. Andy Biggs, always great to see you. Thanks for joining us. My pleasure, Tony. Thank you. All right, Congressman Andy Biggs of Arizona. All right, more Washington Watch on the other side of the break, so don’t go away. We’ll be right back after this.
SPEAKER 08 :
Everything we do begins as an idea. Before there can be acts of courage, there must be the belief that some things are worth sacrificing for. Before there can be marriage, there is the idea that man should not be alone. Before there was freedom, there was the idea that individuals are created equal. It’s true that all ideas have consequences, but we’re less aware that all consequences are the fruit of ideas. Before there was murder, there was hate. Before there was a Holocaust, there was the belief by some people that other people are undesirable. Our beliefs determine our behavior, and our beliefs about life’s biggest questions determine our worldview. Where did I come from? Who decides what is right and wrong? What happens when I die? Our answers to these questions explain why people see the world so differently. Debates about abortion are really disagreements about where life gets its value. Debates over sexuality and gender and marriage are really disagreements about whether the rules are made by us or for us. What we think of as political debates are often much more than that. They are disagreements about the purpose of our lives and the source of truth. As Christians, our goal must be to think biblically about everything. Our goal is to help you see beyond red and blue, left and right, to see the battle of ideas at the root of it all. Our goal is to equip Christians with a biblical worldview and help them advance and defend the faith in their families, communities, and the public square. Cultural renewal doesn’t begin with campaigns and elections. It begins with individuals turning from lies to truth. But that won’t happen if people can’t recognize a lie and don’t believe truth exists. We want to help you see the spiritual war behind the political war, the truth claims behind the press release, and the forest and the trees.
SPEAKER 17 :
Welcome back to Washington Watch. Earlier today, House Speaker Mike Johnson gave context to the growing concern of judicial overreach.
SPEAKER 13 :
Last 100 years, listen to this, 67% of the injunctions issued against a president were issued against one president alone, and that’s Donald J. Trump. So something unusual is happening, something that is out of the norm. It is a dangerous trend, and it violates equal justice under law, that critical principle. It violates our system itself.
SPEAKER 17 :
So what’s happening? And we talked a little bit about this yesterday, but it’s quite significant. So you have those that are going after executive actions by the Trump administration that are doing what’s called venue shopping. They’re looking for a favorable judge in some part of the country to take their case to, to try to stop the executive order. We just saw another one come out on the transgender in the military. But what generally happens is that a judge will issue an injunction for the parties that are standing before them. So if it’s your case, they issue an injunction so that this executive order does not affect you or affect those that live within the region or the jurisdiction of that court. But what we’re seeing now, we’re seeing these nationwide injunctions, so that a federal judge in a particular district is making a decision for the entire country, basically serving as their own president, taking actions that affect national security, our defense, even foreign policy. Joining me now to talk more about this is our Friday host and former Congressman Jody Heiss. Jody, welcome to Washington Watch. Thanks for joining us.
SPEAKER 04 :
Great to be with you, Tony, as always.
SPEAKER 17 :
It is. And many of your colleagues, both on the House and the Senate side, are introducing bills that would address this issue. But this seems like a moment in time where we may actually see something get done on this. This is not a new issue, but it seems to have reached a critical point.
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, and that is the point. We have watched what many have referred to as judicial activism literally for decades take place, but it is ratcheted up several notches at this point to where it is interfering with an administration, with a mandate given by the American people, and it’s all seemingly for no other reason other than political interference, trying to stop the agenda of this current administration. And so, you know, I mean, what do you want to call this? Judicial terrorism? I mean, this is absolute interference from the judicial branch, at least as far as I’m concerned, into the agenda mandate of this administration.
SPEAKER 17 :
And this is something, as I made reference to, that has been growing over time, where it’s obviously they’re triggered by this president and wanting to stop his agenda. But the courts have been playing this for quite some time, taking on the role that is not theirs.
SPEAKER 04 :
That’s exactly right. And I think we’re at the point, and I’m personally glad to hear at least some discussion about potentially impeaching some of these judges. This will continue until someone puts a stop to it. And at some point, judges need to understand that they are not elected individuals. They are not there to be legislators. They are there to abide by the law. And to uphold the Constitution and the rule of law, but they are not in a position to put forth legislation from the bench and from their positions and until someone is reprimanded for getting out of line in that. I’m afraid this type of thing happens. So obviously, when you’re dealing with impeachment, that is a huge, huge things, nothing to be taken lightly. But where there are judges that are out rightly going outside their judicial jurisdiction and legislating from the bench, they need to be corrected and perhaps impeachment has finally seen a time to move forward.
SPEAKER 17 :
Now, this cuts both ways, because there was some of this during the Biden administration where people went to favorable jurisdictions to try to get injunctions. Now, oftentimes those conservative justices, they confined their decisions to their own jurisdiction. They did not do the overreach, although I think there may have been one or two. Do you think Democrats will support this? Are they so fixated on stopping Donald Trump that they don’t want to see a remedy to a problem that sometimes cuts both ways?
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, I think that’s exactly what we’ll see from the Democrats. They have one seemingly it looks like they have one platform. bullet point, and that is hate Trump, stop Trump. That’s all they’re for. So I would not see them at this point in any shape, form, or fashion taking any action to rein in the judiciary. I think they will be thrilled for it to continue so long as it is stopping the agenda of the current administration.
SPEAKER 17 :
So you think that Trump derangement syndrome will keep them from voting for constraints on the courts?
SPEAKER 04 :
You think? Yeah, I absolutely think that.
SPEAKER 17 :
All right. Jody Heiss, thanks so much for joining us. Always great to see you. Great to see you, Tony.
SPEAKER 04 :
Thanks.
SPEAKER 17 :
All right. Well, another issue to pray about. You know, the courts, they’re important. We have the checks and balances, but they’ve got to stay within their lanes. And clearly we see some of the courts crossing over. getting into the lanes of others. All right, coming up, we’re going to talk about an effort by Georgia lawmakers to protect religious freedom in the Peach State. This is important. They’re one of only two states in the South that do not have protections for religious freedom, known as the RFRA, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. We’re going to talk about that next, so don’t go away.
SPEAKER 09 :
What is God’s role in government? What does the separation of church and state really mean? And how does morality shape a nation? President John Adams said our Constitution was made only for moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. Join Family Research Council for God and Government, a powerful 13-part series that equips you with biblical truth to engage in today’s most pressing debates. From the Ten Commandments in Classrooms to the Immigration Crisis of America, we’ll uncover the foundations of our nation’s history and why it’s relevant for today. Defend God’s plan for government because faith and freedom were never meant to be separate. New episodes available each Monday. To view the series on the Stand Firm app, text COURSE to 67742.
SPEAKER 08 :
The world is hurting, streets are filled with crime, families are broken, sin is celebrated, and God is mocked. Everywhere we look, the wages of our sin are on full display. As Christians, we know that surrender to God’s will is the solution to our biggest problems, but not everyone agrees. Even in church, we hear people say the most important thing is to be tolerant, that we shouldn’t impose a morality on other people, and that loving our neighbor means celebrating what they do. But you can’t do that. It’s not that you don’t love your neighbor. You do. But you care about God’s opinion more than your neighbor’s opinion, and this makes you different. In fact, sometimes it makes you feel alone, like you’re the only one. But there is good news. You are not alone, not even close. Research has found that there are 59 million American adults who are a lot like you. There are millions of people around the country who are born again, deeply committed to practicing their faith, and believe the Bible is the reliable Word of God. But that’s not all. They’re also engaged in our government. They’re voters. They’re more likely to be involved in their community, and they’re making a difference in elections. The problem is that a lot of them feel alone, too. We want to change that. FRC wants to connect these 59 million Americans to speak the truth together, no matter the cost. If you want to learn more about this group and what it means to be a spiritually active, governance-engaged conservative, or if you want to find out if you are one of these sage cons yourself, go to frc.org slash sagecon and take the quiz to find out. The world is hurting, and we have the solution. We can’t do it alone, but we can do it if we work together. That’s what we’re working toward every day. Join us. Go to FRC.org slash S-A-G-E-C-O-N, SageCon, to learn more. That’s S-A-G-E-C-O-N, SageCon, to learn more.
SPEAKER 17 :
Welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks so much for joining us. The website, TonyPerkins.com. Better yet, download the Stand Firm app. Go to the App Store and get the Stand Firm app. Our word for today comes from Ezekiel chapter 9. Now the glory of the God of Israel had gone up from the cherubim on which it rested to the threshold of the house. And he called to the man clothed in linen who had the writing case at his waist and And the Lord said to him, pass through the city, through Jerusalem, and put a mark on the foreheads of men who sigh and groan over all the abominations that are committed in it. And to the others, he said in my hearing, pass through the city after him and strike. Your eyes shall not spare and you shall show no pity. So who was spared? It was those who sighed and cried over the abominations that were taking place. They were grieved over the nation’s sins. Let me ask you a question. Would you have the mark? Are you grieving? Do you cry out to God over the state of our nation? Their sorrow was not because they had been wronged or their standards were offended, but because what was happening was offensive to God. Let us stand for what honors God. To find out more about our journey through the Bible, text BIBLE to 67742. Well, the last day of the legislative session for Georgia’s General Assembly is April the 4th. And among the bills that Republican lawmakers are trying to pass is Senate Bill 36, the Georgia Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which protects religious freedom, the ability. This is what religious freedom is. It’s the ability to live your life according to your biblical beliefs. The legislation passed the Senate along party lines earlier this month, but obstacles remain. Surprisingly, Georgia and North Carolina are the only two southern states that do not have religious freedom restoration acts in place. Well, joining me now to discuss this is the author of the bill, Georgia State Senator Ed Stetzler. Senator, welcome to Washington Watch. Thanks so much for joining us. Tony, great being with you this afternoon. Now, you drafted this bill, according to what I understand, with the support of the governor’s office. Can you tell us kind of what was behind this, other than the fact that Georgia is one of the few states, one of two only southern states that does not have such a law? What was the driving factor behind this?
SPEAKER 06 :
You know, Tony, for generations, judges in Georgia have been very kind to people of faith. You know, there’s this sense that because there have not been these big explosions, these big problems around us, that everything’s okay. What folks don’t realize, though, is because of that, the legislature has never enacted by statute into law the basic religious protections that all citizens honestly think they have. I mean, the First Amendment of the United States Constitution was shown in 1997 to not apply to folks at the state level unless states enact state-level religious protections. And that’s what we’re looking to do. Again, 39 states around the nation have done this or have these protections in place. And we can no longer assume that for the generations to come, judges will just give deference to folks of faith. We need to have these laws. We need to have these protections put firmly into law.
SPEAKER 17 :
Well, Senator Setzler, you’ve seen that there in Georgia. I recall not too long ago, fire chief in Atlanta, Kelvin Cochran, who did a Bible study for his church, and he was fired because they didn’t like the fact that it made reference to human sexuality and marriage between a man and a woman. I mean, would someone like that be protected under this law?
SPEAKER 06 :
Well, you know, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act really focuses primarily on folks that come into contact with government. If you’re a private employee, it wouldn’t have quite as an impact. But there are circumstances. Again, in Chief Cochran’s circumstance, he was an employee of the city of Atlanta. Other circumstances in which, you know, governments, laws and policies trample on the rights of people of faith. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act is not an exemption, it’s not a guarantee, but it does provide a very, very important balancing test that as judges weigh the duties of government against the religious rights of people, that the religious rights of people are given the due weight and emphasis that they deserve. that our founders intended for them to have. And candidly, most citizens already think they have. But when they get into the weeds and realize these protections are not in place, overwhelmingly citizens believe that the balancing test that RFRA provides is fair and can be applied broadly in Canada. There’s many blue states that have this. It’s not only in others. It’s something that’s important to have no matter what your background is.
SPEAKER 17 :
And I think it is important to point out that this is not a blank check to do whatever you want to do. It is simply protecting those fundamental First Amendment freedoms, in particular religious freedom. As you said, there’s a federal RFRA Act, but the states have to have their own to protect from state action. So give us the status of this, Senator. Where does this bill stand in the process and what’s needed to get it across the line?
SPEAKER 06 :
We were delighted that Governor Brian Kemp worked with us as legislators to craft a bill that matches the federal language. The same protections we have from the federal government need to be enacted by state legislatures to protect you from cities, counties, school boards, public universities. Governor Brian Kemp’s team was very helpful. They drafted the language with us. That’s the bill we passed, passed through the Senate committee, passed the state senate. And I have confidence the House is going to act on it and protect the integrity of Governor Brian Kemp’s language. It’s just in the process. There’s some back and forth in making that happen, and we’re right in the throes of getting those details right.
SPEAKER 17 :
I understand that there was a hearing last week in committee, I think in the House side, and there was some efforts to amend it. It hasn’t advanced. So what’s the next step and how can our listeners and viewers in Georgia weigh in on this?
SPEAKER 06 :
Well, first of all, I think they need to thank their legislators. We’ve got legislative leaders in the House that care about this issue. Sometimes as you’re working through the details, in spite of having 16 powerful speakers on behalf of this from all faith backgrounds, from all ethnic backgrounds, people of color, people of all backgrounds and faiths came and spoke on behalf of this. Sometimes things get a little bit confused in committee. What I’m confident we will see, though, Tony, and what I think folks would encourage their legislators to do is don’t get sidetracked by sort of deceptive good ideas. You know, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act has 32 years of proven history. The bill we’re passing or seeking to pass mirrors that language exactly. To not be distracted by any diversions, but let’s stay with proven language that has the support of our governor. that has the support of our Senate, and I think our House leadership, again, is gonna strongly support this. We’ve gotta get the details right, and we’re taking the time to do that, and I would like to thank leaders really at every level for being a part of that.
SPEAKER 17 :
So the message would be for our viewers and listeners in Georgia to contact their representatives to thank them for supporting religious freedom, first off, but to support Senate Bill 36 as it passed the Senate, that they would adopt that same language in the House. Is that the message?
SPEAKER 06 :
Yes, sir. Reach out to them kindly. This is not something to be ugly about. Reach out to them kindly and remind them that people of faith from all backgrounds will support them. This is being made controversial by the radical left. This is policy that supports everyone and that people of faith will stand behind their elected officials if they take the right step and act wisely and boldly in passing the federal language that Governor Brian Kemp supports.
SPEAKER 17 :
Right. And just to make a footnote here on that original federal language that passed in the 90s that Chuck Schumer and the Democrats were a large part of this. This was a bipartisan bill. In fact, I think just a couple of votes against it back then, religious freedom was not controversial. Before I let you go, Senator, House bill that the Republicans are trying to pass addresses the issue of biological males in female sports. The Senate has its version, Senate Bill 1. Can you give us a quick read on that?
SPEAKER 06 :
I think there’s strong support in both chambers that biological males won’t be able to compete in girls’ sports, won’t be able to be in girls’ locker rooms at the high school and college level. The courage we’ve seen Riley Gaines show nationwide over the last couple of years has been noteworthy to people. The circumstance in which Riley Gaines had to compete against males and stand 18 inches from a fully undressed male in a locker room actually happened here in Georgia at Georgia Tech during the NCAA championships back in 2023. It’s not a theoretical issue to us. It’s real. It’s something that people in Georgia, I think, across the spectrum can get behind.
SPEAKER 17 :
Well, Senator, I thank you for joining us today. I appreciate your leadership on such important issues as religious freedom and the ability to live our lives according to our faith. So thanks for joining us. Thank you, Tony, very much. Well, as he talked about, this is not theoretical. These are real issues. Well, I thought it’d be helpful to understand the impact that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act would have on the citizens of Georgia, as Senator Stetzler laid out. Now, I can cite two real-life examples, as I mentioned, the one of former Atlanta Fire Chief Kelvin Cochran, who was fired for writing a Bible study devotional for men at his church. Totally unrelated to his job. But the city of Atlanta found out about it, and those on the city council who were afraid of the homosexual lobby fired him. Now, with the aid of ADF, he did win a lawsuit, but it took years and his career was ended. Then more recently, there was a Georgia police officer, Jacob Kersey, who posted scripture about marriage on his personal Facebook page. He was suspended, told he could not make such statements in the future if he wanted to be a police officer. He said he wanted to remain true to Scripture. However, he is now operations coordinator for FRC Action, and he joins me now in studio. Jacob, thanks for joining us.
SPEAKER 15 :
Thanks for having me on again, Tony. Appreciate it.
SPEAKER 17 :
So let’s talk a little bit about this Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Had that been in place when you were a police officer in Georgia, you would have had greater leverage in… defending your position to speak freely out of your biblical beliefs. I assume that you are encouraged to see that Georgia is now taking this step to protect people of faith.
SPEAKER 15 :
Yeah, when it happened to me, when my police department placed me on administrative leave after leading me to believe I had been fired because of my off-duty Facebook post, which paraphrased Ephesians 5, I began looking for options like, well, am I protected here? Because I would think the first event would apply, religious liberty, freedom of speech, and I realized Georgia didn’t have RFRA. People at the time were telling me that, well, other states have this, but Georgia does not have it. So you don’t have all the same protections as other states that have a Religious Freedom Restoration Act. So already I was concerned and disheartened that my home state of Georgia, that I love so much, did not have this in place. So I was limited on my options. And also it gave the police department, if the police department knew that Georgia had a referendum in place, they probably wouldn’t have taken the adverse actions against me that they took. And so when I saw the news that Georgia, the legislators there were introducing this, I was excited, thrilled, and I’m hopeful that there are protections put in place, clean protections through this RFRA in the governor’s original language that would protect future employees like myself, like Kelvin Cochran, Chief Cochran there in Atlanta from having these adverse reactions or being fired because of their faith.
SPEAKER 17 :
So let me ask you about that, because I mean, I’m glad it’s there. I’m glad we have a federal statute. I’m thankful that over half the states have these. Many states have them. But you knew that when you were given the option, you were suspended and you were told, if I’m not mistaken, that you could return if you agreed that in the future you would post no such things again on your personal Facebook page. Is that correct?
SPEAKER 15 :
Yes. They told me I could quote scripture verbatim, but I could not offer any commentary, any sermon, any explanation of what Ephesians chapter 5 meant.
SPEAKER 17 :
Which is an expression of what biblical beliefs are. Essentially, check your faith at the door when you come to work. So you knew that, but yet you decided that you were going to take a stand for truth and not compromise in order to keep your position as a police officer.
SPEAKER 15 :
Yes, they essentially told me, you know, you can resign, or if you want to come back, you need to sign this paper that you understand and you agree to what we’ve talked about in these meetings, and that is that you will only post Scripture verbatim. And off-duty comments that state what Scripture means, even if it’s not on social media, we could fire you for that. Remember, you’re still in your probationary period. So they gave me an ultimatum. You come back and you say anything else someone considers offensive again, we’ll fire you, or you can just go ahead and resign now. And I didn’t want to play political games with the police department when I was supposed to be protecting and serving that community. So I made a very difficult decision to resign.
SPEAKER 17 :
Those are difficult. I know exactly what that is like. And increasingly, there are men and women of faith that are faced with that choice. Even if you have RFRAs in place, as Senator Settler was making the point, is that it’s not a carte blanche. It’s a defense that you use in court. But we have to know what we believe. And when Jesus said, if you want to be to my disciple, you need to deny yourself, take up your cross, and follow me. And sometimes that means laying down our dreams and our aspirations of what we want to do.
SPEAKER 15 :
Yeah, Jesus said, if you deny me before men, I will deny you before the Father. And so when I was called into the room before my command staff and they wanted me to remove a post that talks about God’s design for marriage and how it is a reflection of Christ and his love for the church, I just couldn’t do it, knowing that if I deny him then, he could deny me before the Father. So at the end of the day, it’s more important for Christians to stand for their faith and stand for Christ above anything. But I’m certainly glad to see that here in America, we do have protections in place RFRAs like this.
SPEAKER 17 :
And we can also, I think, agree that God is faithful. When we follow him, he does not forsake us. Amen. Well, Jacob, thank you for joining us today, providing a little color commentary to the importance of laws like the RFRA being introduced in Georgia.
SPEAKER 15 :
Yeah, thanks for having me on, Tony.
SPEAKER 17 :
Appreciate it. All right. Jacob Kersey, who is a part of the FRC Action Team, the sister organization of FRC. And so I do want to encourage you, if you live in Georgia, to weigh in on the Senate bill, Senate Bill 36. Encourage your House members to support the original language that passed the Senate and is being entertained in the House. And pray for its success there in Georgia, if you don’t live in Georgia. And for all of us, we need to be bold in living out our faith, not intimidated by the those who would criticize our faith, or those who would want to silence us. We cannot shrink back into the shadows. We need to stand boldly and speak the truth of God, no matter what. And I leave you, once again, with the encouraging words the Apostle Paul found in Ephesians 6, where he says just that. You’ve done everything you can do when you’ve prayed, when you’ve prepared, and when you’ve taken your stand. By all means, keep standing.
SPEAKER 12 :
Washington Watch with Tony Perkins is brought to you by Family Research Council and is entirely listener supported. Portions of the show discussing candidates are brought to you by Family Research Council Action. For more information on anything you heard today or to find out how you can partner with us in our ongoing efforts to promote faith, family and freedom, visit TonyPerkins.com.
