Explore the unfolding dynamics at the NATO Summit where an agreement on increased defense spending marks a significant turning point for Western alliances. Tony Perkins guides you through the implications of this strategic commitment, championed by U.S. influence under President Trump, and what this means for international relations and Western defense strategies. As tensions rise from the East, learn how the United States’ leadership is impacting the security blueprint of NATO and its European allies through expert insights from Congressman Keith Self and more. Domestically, the episode unmasks the political turbulence stirred by fresh impeachment motions and the revelations
SPEAKER 21 :
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 11 :
In a very historic milestone this week, the NATO allies committed to dramatically increase their defense spending to that 5% of GDP. It’s a monumental win for… the United States because we were carrying much more than our fair share. It was quite unfair, actually. But this is a big win for Europe and for, actually, Western civilization.
SPEAKER 15 :
That was President Donald Trump earlier today at the NATO Summit in the Netherlands. Welcome to this June 25th edition of Washington Watch. I’m your host, Tony Perkins. Thanks for tuning in. So coming up, NATO leaders have agreed to a massive increase in defense spending, once again underscoring the influence of President Trump on the alliance. We’ll unpack that and what that means with Texas Congressman Keith Self, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, in just a moment. And the administration is also pushing back on the media’s spin surrounding the leaked intelligence report on the impact of Operation Midnight Hammer.
SPEAKER 05 :
The instinct, the instinct of CNN, the instinct of The New York Times is to try to find a way to spin it for their own political reasons to try to hurt President Trump or our country. They don’t care what the troops think. They don’t care what the world thinks. They want to spin it to try to make him look bad based on a leak.
SPEAKER 15 :
That was Secretary of Defense Pete Hexeth. We’ll dig into the details with Victoria Coates, former Deputy National Security Advisor to President Trump in his first term. We’ll also check in on the health of the one big, beautiful bill, which may start looking a little bit more like Mr. Potato Head before the process is over.
SPEAKER 10 :
At the end of the day, this is a process whereby not everybody’s going to get what they want. And we have to get to 51 in the United States Senate. We’re looking forward to progressing on the bill this week, and hopefully when a push comes to shove and everybody has to say yes or no, we’ll get the number of votes that we need.
SPEAKER 15 :
That was Senate Republican Leader John Thune. We’ll get the latest from Kansas Senator Roger Marshall a little later this edition of Washington Watch. Meanwhile, Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell was on Capitol Hill yesterday explaining why the Fed hasn’t lowered interest rates.
SPEAKER 09 :
For the time being, we are well positioned to wait to learn more about the likely course of the economy before considering any adjustments to our policy stand. A significant majority of the committee, but also there’s a pretty significant minority that doesn’t agree, but a significant majority feels it will be appropriate to reduce rates later this year.
SPEAKER 15 :
Members of the committee also pressed him on debanking, a practice that’s been used to target conservatives. We’ll talk with Indiana Congressman Marlon Stutzman, who sits on that committee. And a quick reminder, your voice and your values, they matter now more than ever. For over 40 years, the Family Research Council has stood strong in our nation’s capital, defending faith, family, and freedom. And as we near the end of our fiscal year, your partnership can help us continue to advance our shared values. And thanks to a generous matching challenge, every gift that is given this week will be doubled. So to make your gift, give us a call. We have team members standing by to talk to you. 800-225-4008, 800-225-4008. Give them a call. Tell them hello. And join with us as we stand together for a voice to be a voice for truth. As mentioned earlier today, President Trump began his trip home after spending a little under 24 hours at The Hague for the 2025 NATO Summit. While he was there, he lauded the organization’s pledge to increase member nation defense spending, something President Trump has pushed for since at least 2017. And here to discuss this and more, Congressman Keith Self, who is a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee. He represents the 3rd Congressional District of Texas, and he joins us from the House floor as the House is actually voting on a measure as we speak. Congressman Self, thanks for stepping off the floor to talk to us.
SPEAKER 12 :
Thank you, Tony. Great to be here.
SPEAKER 15 :
All right. What are the biggest takeaways from this NATO summit?
SPEAKER 12 :
Well, the biggest takeaway, as you just mentioned, is the funding agreements. That is indeed monumental because as little as four or five years ago, we had single-digit countries that had even met their 2% commitment. Now they’ve gone to five. Well, some of them will take a while to get there. The commitment itself, with the exception of Spain, I understand, is truly monumental. This will change NATO. And now, with all of this additional money that should be coming in, We’ve got to get our defense industrial base geared up to produce the weapon systems, the ISR, the security equipment that we need to go with this funding increase.
SPEAKER 15 :
I mean, obviously, President Trump is responsible for this influence that the United States has brought to them, in part, I think, because of what just happened on the world stage that the president is willing to follow through with action to his words.
SPEAKER 12 :
Well, absolutely. And also the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Europe now realizes that they have existed under the U.S. umbrella, both nuclear and conventional. for decades now. And frankly, with that war on their doorstep, they understand they have got to step up because China is our pacing threat now. The U.S. must turn to China to a certain degree, not totally. And they realize they’ve now got to shoulder their own burden for their own defense because the world is becoming a dangerous place.
SPEAKER 15 :
Well, that’s a very good point, Congressman South, because they also understand that the Trump administration is not going to last forever, and they could be back into a posture where they have a Biden-type administration that is weak on the world stage and unwilling to help.
SPEAKER 12 :
That’s right. And the tyrants around the world are never going to be weak until they are defeated. Russia, China, North Korea, Iran— Until just recently, they were the modern axis of evil, axis of resistance. And Europe understands the world is changing, and they have to change now.
SPEAKER 15 :
I want to switch to domestic issues. Earlier, Representative Al Green of Texas introduced a resolution of impeachment calling for the impeachment of Donald Trump based upon what took place, as we were making reference to, in Iran. How was that met in the House?
SPEAKER 12 :
Well, it wasn’t met very well by either party. I’ve forgotten the exact number, but it was double-digit. They didn’t even make it to 100 Democrat votes. So they understand that they are a rudderless party now. They have no message. They have no leader. They are drifting. And the last thing they wanted to do was to stir up the hornet’s nest with impeachment. So, yes, the Republicans voted no, but I was shocked at the number of Democrats that did not support their colleague on the Democrat side.
SPEAKER 15 :
Yeah, that was a pretty lopsided. I think the vote was 344 to 79. And as you pointed out, the Democrats generally stick together. Continuing on kind of the national front, recent reports show an alarming number of Iranian sleeper cell agents illegally inside the United States. In fact, 11 were arrested over the weekend, some with ties to Hezbollah.
SPEAKER 12 :
Yeah, that is concerning. We know that close to a thousand known Iranians are loose in our nation. But those are the ones we know about. How many do we not know about? And the arrests that were made that you just referenced, they have criminal records, which is concerning. So it’s something that people just need to be aware of. I wouldn’t overreact. But yeah, that could potentially be a threat if Iran decides to activate them.
SPEAKER 15 :
One individual was arrested in Alabama. In fact, I think eight states. These weren’t all in one place. They were all across the country. Alabama had, he was arrested and he was carrying his Iranian army ID card where it revealed that he was a sniper between 2018 and 2021. He entered into the United States in October of 2024 on a K-1 visa for immigrants who were engaged to American citizens. How are we letting these individuals in?
SPEAKER 12 :
Well, frankly, that was the policy of the past administration. So it’s been going on for four years. And, you know, it was the policy. I mean, it was not by mistake, Tony. It was the policy to let people in, give them a piece of paper, release them into the United States. It was a political decision to do that. And I reemphasize, this was not a mistake. It was policy.
SPEAKER 15 :
I mean, to me, Congressman, that’s almost treasonous. I mean, these are individuals who hate this country, who are connected. I mean, these are people, it’s not suspected. It is known that they were connected to a foreign government that wants to annihilate the United States.
SPEAKER 12 :
Well, it might not have been known at the time because the vetting is so poor. People came across the border, the vetting was so poor. So your point is well taken. It might be treasonous to just allow our adversaries free reign into the United States. And we’re talking about Iranians, but we know there were many more military-age Chinese mayors. So this is a problem that goes well beyond the Iranians.
SPEAKER 15 :
It’s very disturbing when you know there are individuals that want to do harm to America that we had an administration that let them in. Now, we have an administration now that is going out and tracking these individuals down who, as you pointed out, have criminal records. Many of them, five of the 11 Iranians that were arrested over the weekend, have criminal records. And they’re finding them and they’re arresting them. So what a difference, night and day difference between administrations.
SPEAKER 12 :
Oh, I was in the border caucus just yesterday morning with the director of ICE, and he gave us some startling figures. They are having great success. I won’t go into the figures, but let me tell you, they are doing yeoman work in finding these people. So I just want to encourage people that ICE is doing a magnificent job. On the other hand, in Portland, for instance, People are ramming their cars into them as they leave their compound. They’re slashing their tires. So there is also Americans that are standing against ICE, but they’re doing a great job.
SPEAKER 15 :
So that brings me to the reconciliation bill, which has provisions for additional funding for the border. Give us the latest on how you feel the Senate version is going to be. I know it’s not finalized in the Senate, but what you’re hearing, how is that going to be received in the House?
SPEAKER 12 :
Well, I can tell you how it’s being received today. It’s not being received very well at all. There are multiple amendments and provisions that are being stripped out by the parliamentarian over in the Senate that are being changed. And I will tell you, I’ve heard from a wide range of people just today who are very upset at this, who are very upset, who have voiced strong opposition to it. So I have to tell you, If the Senate bill comes over that is radically and materially different than what the House sent to the Senate, I think we’re going to look at the possibility of having to do some work on it. And I don’t know what form that will take. And it is not being well received what we are being told.
SPEAKER 15 :
I’m going to go back to you said the parliamentarian is the parliamentarian taking out provisions that were in the House version.
SPEAKER 12 :
Yeah, this is the birdbath. She’s saying that they are not germane under the third rule, which is a rule that says if it doesn’t meet the rules of the parliamentarian, they take it out. It’s simply stripped out. She has that authority.
SPEAKER 15 :
About 45 seconds left, Congressman Self. What’s House Republican leadership saying about the timing of this? If it comes back, are you going to work through the weekend into next week?
SPEAKER 12 :
Well, if they hold to the 72-hour rule, we will get the text. And I don’t know when the Senate’s going to hold their voterama. We simply haven’t been told. But if we get the text before the weekend and they hold to the 72-hour rule, we’re probably looking at Monday if the Senate has held their vote and they have a bill to send us. That’s, I think, the plan that’s emerging is perhaps a Monday vote.
SPEAKER 15 :
All right. We’ll have to leave it there. Congressman Keith Self, always great to talk with you. Thanks for joining us today.
SPEAKER 12 :
Thank you so much, Tony.
SPEAKER 15 :
All right. When we come back, we’re going to do an assessment of some of the intel that’s coming out of the Iranian situation. So don’t go away.
SPEAKER 17 :
Hi, everyone. This is Pastor Jay Johnston, National Prayer Director with the Family Research Council. I want to invite you to join our 21-day Family Bible Challenge as we read through the book of Matthew. This is an opportunity for you and for your family to come together for 15 minutes a day to read God’s Word together. Deuteronomy 6 says, these commandments that I give you today are to be on your hearts. Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up. Seek the Word of God. Obey the Word of God. Share the Word of God so that you and others might know the joy of walking with God now and for all eternity. As your family gathers to read the Bible, invite the Holy Spirit to work in your life to spiritually transform each one of you. Ask the Lord to show you creative ways for you to connect with your family to read God’s Word together. I pray that however God uses this challenge in your life and those that you join together with will be a blessing to you and strengthen you as you read the Gospel of Matthew together. Visit FRC.org slash Family Bible Challenge for more information.
SPEAKER 22 :
In a time when Washington seems clouded by compromise, a bold group of lawmakers are standing firm in defense of the values which our nation was built upon. At FRC Actions 100% Awards, 171 members of Congress were honored for voting 100% in line with policies that promote faith, family, and freedom.
SPEAKER 13 :
Faith and family made our country, it’s the foundation that made our country not only great, but good.
SPEAKER 04 :
The values that make America, faith, family, hard work, personal responsibility. I mean, that to me is the heart of FRC and grateful for everything that they do.
SPEAKER 06 :
It’s very important for us to have organizations such as FRC. First of all, I think it keeps us grounded, in addition to which the issues that you champion are issues that we should all be championing.
SPEAKER 19 :
FRC is very, very good at honing in on those things that really affect Christians’ lives. Also, working with members of Congress, too, to make sure that those values are instilled in the legislation that we create.
SPEAKER 16 :
Having the Family Research Council to guide us is critically important to being able to do the right thing consistently.
SPEAKER 22 :
These lawmakers have drawn the line, not just in policy, but in principle. This is more than politics. This is conviction in action. Visit frcaction.org for more information on how you too can make a difference.
SPEAKER 15 :
Welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks for tuning in. All right. Earlier today during a press conference at the NATO summit, President Trump reiterated how very, very successful the U.S. strike against Iranian nuclear facilities were, describing them as obliteration. Now, his remarks were made as news reports from like New York Times, NBC, MSNBC and CNN are claiming that the extent of this damage is exaggerated. Well, I actually spoke with my own sources within the Israeli government earlier today, and President Trump’s description is closer to the reality than that of the legacy media. Here to discuss this, Victoria Coates, former deputy national security advisor to President Donald Trump, and she presently serves as the vice president of the Heritage Foundation, Catherine and Shelby Davis Institute at the National Security for National Security and Foreign Policy. Victoria, welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks for joining us.
SPEAKER 08 :
Great to be with you, Tony.
SPEAKER 15 :
So let’s just start with this leaked Intel report, which is just one of many reports of assessments of the success of the attack that would filter its way to the White House. Am I correct?
SPEAKER 08 :
Oh, this is actually really one of the more shameful episodes and an undistinguished track record by the legacy media. So this is a preliminary report. And I remember when we used to get these things, we would immediately say, this is almost certainly wrong. You know, this is the best we have right now. This is the first report. And so if you ever watch a news show, the first report of a disaster is almost always wrong. And that’s why they’re labeled low confidence, because the people assessing the situation aren’t convinced that they’re correct about it. And this was provided to Congress, which was immediately leaked. And for everyone who says the president should consult with Congress, I agree with that in principle. But in reality, everything you share with the Congress immediately leaks like this. And it goes straight to CNN and Natasha Bertram. And it then turns into Trump is lying. They’d rather be wrong, Tony, than give the president credit.
SPEAKER 15 :
Yeah, it’s really such a shame that, you know, as a nation, we can’t come together to, number one, wait to get the facts to see what our military did in terms of diminishing the capabilities of an enemy who has declared they want to kill us. They want to wipe us and Israel off the map. From all accounts, in my conversations with those inside the Israeli government, the operation was quite significant. It was successful. There’s still some remaining concerns as they have to filter through more of the data. And, of course, they have some folks on the ground. But what are you basically hearing from the results of the weekend attack on these nuclear facilities?
SPEAKER 08 :
What I’m hearing is that it was systematic damage, not surface damage, that it goes all the way down in. And I’m sorry, it’s hard for me to see dropping 14 bunker busters on anything and having it survive. And the notion that it could just be topical is, I mean, it’s just sort of laughable on the surface. And then we just had CIA Director Ratcliffe come out in the last hour and make an official statement saying this is false, this is not what I am hearing, this is not the intelligence that the agency is collecting. So we have a preponderance of actual experts. A cabinet-confirmed secretary, the director of the CIA, comes out on the record and says something, as opposed to an anonymous leak. And that’s what we have to believe. And it’s just it’s ridiculous that this happened in the first place. Very, very unfortunate. And I think I think the president’s completely correct in his assessment of the situation.
SPEAKER 15 :
Victoria, let’s talk about going forward here. the Iranian regime was looking for an off-ramp. They got it in this ceasefire. It’s fragile, but I think they’re wanting to hold on to power. We’ve seen reports that I got that they were able to rebuild a lot of their missile fuel production sites that were destroyed last October with the help of China. They were able to rebuild those. So we know that it’s not going to be a static situation. What is the best way forward in securing a sense of managed peace in the Middle East?
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, I think it’s the threat that we might come back. And the president made that very clear, the Israelis have as well, that they are not going to just walk away from this situation. And now the Iranians know what we’re capable of doing, particularly in conjunction with our Israeli allies. The combination is completely overwhelming to them. They have no defenses. They’re completely exposed. And so if the message to them is you leave this stuff untouched or we’re coming back, do you want to see those B-2s? Not that you can see them. But do you want those B2s to visit you again? I mean, the answer is probably no. So, OK, then we can see what you’re up to. And if you start moving this fuel around, if you start rebuilding these facilities, we’re going to have to come back.
SPEAKER 15 :
So is it going to be good or are you going to see the B2s? What about regime change? I know this is something the administration doesn’t want to talk about, but I know that in Israel they would feel much more comfortable if there were a different form of government in Iran.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, the president did talk about it. I mean, he had that Truth Social post over the weekend, I guess, in which he said, you know, if they can’t make their country great, why wouldn’t there be regime change? But my understanding is he thinks that’s a question for the Iranian people. And both he and Prime Minister Netanyahu have spoken very highly of the Iranian people. You know, there are some things we can do. I thought Elon Musk turning on Starlink, that needs a little bit of help in an encrypted sense to really, really assist the people of Iran. That’s the kind of thing we can do that isn’t 200,000 American boots on the ground. Yeah, absolutely. Really a game changer.
SPEAKER 15 :
Absolutely. I mean, I would not advocate for that. But prior to the Obama administration, it was a priority to see a regime change in Iran, even within our own government.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, I mean, there is a reason for that. I mean, for 50 years, as you know as well as anybody, they’ve been chanting death to America. Interestingly, on CNN, they now think that’s okay. They’ve had two separate commentators that I’ve seen in the last week say, yeah, they chant… death to America, but afterwards they came up to me and said they love American culture and whatnot when they were last in Iran. Honestly, that’s your talking point? Is it okay to say death to America?
SPEAKER 15 :
Well, just wait until one of these sleeper cells strike something here in the United States, and then let’s put the microphone in the face of one of these CNN commentators to see what they have to say.
SPEAKER 08 :
A hundred percent. But I think there is not really much to be gained from trying to reform this government. It’s simply too entrenched. It’s too hostile. So my preference would be for the Iranian people to choose a different form of government. And since they also have a mark out on me, I will not shed a tear.
SPEAKER 15 :
Just 20 seconds left. Have they ever been at a point in recent years where they’re more vulnerable to a change?
SPEAKER 08 :
This is the most vulnerable and they are at the most risk. And so we’ll just have to watch this very closely. And I just say to your audience, watch the provinces. Don’t watch Tehran. That’s where it will happen.
SPEAKER 15 :
Victoria Coates, always appreciate your insight. Thanks for joining us.
SPEAKER 08 :
Thank you, Tony.
SPEAKER 15 :
All right. Up next, Senator Roger Marshall of Kansas joins us to talk about what’s happening in the Senate with the reconciliation bill. So don’t go away.
SPEAKER 14 :
The Center for Biblical Worldview’s all-day workshops delves into the formation of a worldview, what it is, how it’s formed, when it’s formed, what that means to them personally and their churches and communities.
SPEAKER 20 :
My hope for people when they come to these worldview workshops is that they will come away better equipped to engage the people and the ideas that they’re living with and around. And our goal is to give people more confidence in the gospel and the fact that what God said to us actually is true, actually is the path to happiness and human flourishing for all of us, but also more confidence in their ability to have these conversations and help lead other people to the truth.
SPEAKER 02 :
for Bible-believing Christians to know what God’s Word says on these issues and to learn how they can apply it to their lives. And we believe that the more Christians that we equip, that’s how we’ll change the nation.
SPEAKER 01 :
Hey, fam, listen, Pastor Sammy here at Lighthouse Church, and I cannot tell you how equipping, how empowering, how… incredibly educating this conference has been. And so I just want to encourage anybody that either has not been part of or is thinking about hosting this event, certainly to pastors, leaders, even CEOs for that matter. This conference is lights out. Stand behind it myself. I can’t commend it enough. We’re going to be talking about this for some time to come.
SPEAKER 23 :
The culture is kind of squeezing in on us as God’s people, forcing those of us with biblical views to change those views or to suppress those views. It’s forcing us to engage with issues that we’ve never had to engage with. And so what this teaches us is what those issues are, what the Bible says about those issues, and then how we can critically engage our culture on these things in a way that is committed to biblical principles.
SPEAKER 26 :
Visit FRC.org slash worldview for more information.
SPEAKER 15 :
Welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks so much for tuning in. Republican senators are inching closer to the July 4th deadline to pass the big, beautiful reconciliation bill. And they’ve made great strides in advancing the bill. But. they’re hitting some roadblocks along the way. And as we heard earlier, the House is not sounding too receptive to what they’re hearing from the Senate side. Joining us to talk about this, U.S. Senator Roger Marshall of Kansas. He’s a member of four Senate committees, including the Finance Committee and the Budget Committee. Senator Marshall, welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks for joining us.
SPEAKER 26 :
Tony, great to be with you. And I’m setting the over-under for Sunday at 10 a.m. for the Senate to get their job done. And so far, about half the senators are taking the over and half the under. Then we’ll send it to the House. So don’t give up on us yet.
SPEAKER 15 :
All right. So you think you’re going to have it done by Sunday?
SPEAKER 26 :
I do. I do. I think we do. Look, we’re going to prevent the largest tax increase in American history. We’re going to secure the border, take care of our military. How about a Golden Dome? And we saw what was happening in Israel and Iran. Great to have a Golden Dome. And by the way, one big winner in this, and you and I may have talked about this before. I think it’s been three years since the Dobbs decision. We’re going to defund Planned Parenthood. This will be the biggest win for your pro-life listeners since the Dobbs decision. So I’m very proud of the work we’ve done on this bill.
SPEAKER 15 :
That has been something, you know, I’ve been here for 22 years. That’s something we’ve been working on during Republican administrations to try to get done for many years. And in fact, I recall working with Mike Pence, when he was a congressman from Indiana working to defund Planned Parenthood. And we’ve never been able to get it across the line. So this is historic. And we’re talking last year, $700 million that they received from taxpayers. So this is quite significant. But there were some provisions that the parliamentarian ruled that 12 parts of the bill must be removed or amended, this going through what’s called the birdbath. What are the big changes that are being proposed by the parliamentarian?
SPEAKER 26 :
Well, Tony, I think, first of all, we’re not done yet. I think sometimes she rejects them, and then we go back and we’re able to tweak them again. I think SNAP was one of the big ones. She didn’t like some process. I don’t know how we ever gave the parliamentarian so much power in Congress, but I don’t want to give misinformation, and I’m still waiting to see it in writing as well. So hang in there with me, and I promise to come back and talk.
SPEAKER 15 :
Well, we had a member of the House on, Keith Self from Texas, on earlier. The House is getting a little antsy with some of the changes they’re hearing. I know you’re a conservative member of the Senate. Do you think conservatives in the House are going to be okay with what the Senate produces?
SPEAKER 26 :
Look, I think there are so many benefits to this bill that we have to do it. Tony, I kind of talked about this will be the largest tax increase in American history. This is worth $1,000 a month to hardworking, middle-income Americans. I think that alone is a reason to do it, funding for four years at the border. It’s not perfect, okay? I was hoping to get over $2 trillion of cuts, and this is what the conservatives like me and you are concerned about, the $37 trillion debt. We’re not near enough. I do think that this bill basically freezes spending. I think that the opportunity for growth is immense. But we’ve had multiple talks with the White House. Look, we need to come back a second and third bite of the apple for more cuts in spending. We have rescission bills that we need to work on. So Rome was not built in a day. We’re not going to fix the budget issue in a day. And by the way, I got a new budget bill that we’re releasing as well to improve that process. So it’s an uphill battle, but I think that the benefits of this bill outweigh any risk.
SPEAKER 15 :
Yeah. I agree with you, Senator. I mean, look, the process of making legislation is consensus. Now, we have a unique opportunity with reconciliation only having to get to 51 in the Senate. That’s obviously very significant. But, you know, we’re not going to get to perfect. It’s not going to happen. Not in a legislative body where you have to reach consensus. So I think this is a move in the right direction. Not perfect. There’s some things in the bill I don’t like. There’s some things I really like in it. But That’s a part of the give and take. And I know a lot of people don’t like that. They don’t but they don’t understand the legislative process. And I would say this bill is moving in the right direction. Does it get us all the way? No, it doesn’t. But as you said, it is a step in the right direction. I do want to before I go to international issues, I want to ask you one final question on this because you’re a doctor, a medical doctor. What’s your take on the current state of Medicaid and that’s in the bill?
SPEAKER 26 :
Look, I’m proud of the work we’re doing in Medicaid. We’re increasing the spending on Medicaid faster than the rate of inflation. We’re gonna increase spending $200 billion a year. We’re gonna strengthen Medicaid. We’re gonna preserve it for those who need it the most. So we’re gonna preserve it for senior citizens, for people with disabilities, for children. And I think we’re going to kind of come behind this with a little grant money for some rural hospitals and community health centers as well. Tony, you know this, but Medicaid does not guarantee access to care. A third of doctors don’t accept it. At least another third delay access. I mean, I’m, as you said, a practicing OBGYN. I had a patient. She needs to see a neurologist. She needs to see a neurosurgeon, a cardiologist. It would take six or nine months to get a Medicaid patient into those specialties. So Medicaid’s not the answer. I think there’s better solutions out there, and I’m working on this Make America Healthy Again situation, and I think giving bigger grants to community health centers, addressing primary care, addressing the nutrition issues, that’s the path to victory for health care for this country.
SPEAKER 15 :
And if we don’t do something to address the rapid expansion, it’s not going to be there for those who need it most.
SPEAKER 26 :
It’s that simple. We’ve increased Medicaid funding 50% of the last five years. And as I think about that spending, 90% of it is going towards chronic illnesses, heart disease, hypertension, diabetes, depression. Depression is now one of the top incidence numbers, but also just an expense for it as well for the prescription drugs. So we need to address this chronic disease epidemic if we want to address the cost of health care.
SPEAKER 15 :
Well, after running through all that, I’m a little bit depressed myself. Senator, we’re out of time. Thanks for joining us. Always great to see you, my friend. Thanks, Tony. Well, we didn’t get to the international issues, but we will next time. All right. Don’t go away. Marlon Stutzman from Indiana joins us next.
SPEAKER 07 :
Family Research Council is committed to advancing faith, family, and freedom from the East Coast to the West. So FRC is going to Southern California for this year’s Pray, Vote, Stand Summit, October 17th and 18th at Calvary Chapel, Chino Hills. Join us for this powerful gathering of Christians desiring cultural renewal and spiritual revival. The Pray, Vote, Stand Summit brings together Christian leaders, issue experts, and government officials for a time of prayer, inspiration, and action. Together, we will seek God’s guidance for our nation and engage in meaningful discussions on the intersection of faith, government, and culture. If the spiritual foundations and the cultural walls of our nation are to be rebuilt, we all have a role to play. May we each find our place on the wall as we build for biblical truth. Register now at PrayVoteStand.org. That’s PrayVoteStand.org.
SPEAKER 18 :
Jennifer, it’s so exciting to be here with you today talking about our new book, Embracing God’s Design. Who is actually going to benefit from reading this book in your view?
SPEAKER 25 :
There’s so many different audiences that can benefit. The first one are counselors themselves, because we have some material in there where we really address the gender dysphoria diagnosis and what is wrong with it. We have information for people who are wanting to go back to embracing God’s design for their life.
SPEAKER 18 :
This is really magical to have the therapist and the individual who suffered come together and write about why this is happening and why we’re seeing this.
SPEAKER 25 :
And we brought all of that experience to the table. We want to see people walking in the fullness of who God has called them to be and not a false identity.
SPEAKER 23 :
Order today at embracethedesign.com.
SPEAKER 22 :
How should Christians think about the thorny issues shaping our culture? How should Christians address deceitful ideas like transgenderism, critical theory, or assisted suicide? How can Christians navigate raising children in a broken culture, the war on gender roles, or rebuilding our once great nation? Outstanding is a podcast from The Washington Stand dedicated to these critical conversations. Outstanding seeks to tear down what our corrupt culture lifts up with an aim to take every thought and every idea captive to the obedience of Christ. Whether policies or partisan politics, whether conflict in America or conflict abroad, join us and our guests as we examine the headlines through the lens of Scripture and explore how Christians can faithfully exalt Christ in all of life. Follow Outstanding on your favorite podcast app and look for new episodes each week.
SPEAKER 15 :
Welcome back to Washington Watch. All right, for over 40 years, as I mentioned earlier, Family Research Council has been standing strong in our nation’s capital, defending faith, family, and freedom. And part of that is Washington Watch and our Washington Stand, our news and commentary from a biblical perspective. And we do that not because we get any government funding. We’re able to do it because of folks like you. And we’re coming to the end of our fiscal year, which is June the 30th. And your partnership helps us continue to advance these shared values. And thanks to a generous matching challenge, every gift that is given this week will be doubled. And we’ve got folks standing by. to take your phone call. You can call them 800-225-4008. In fact, I think they’re a little lonely, so give them a call. 800-225-4008. That’s 800-225-4008. So stand with us, and together, let’s be a voice for truth. Well, our word for today comes from Matthew chapter 22, where the Pharisees attempt to trap Jesus with a politically charged question about taxes. Tell us, therefore, what do you think? Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar or not? It was a carefully crafted dilemma. If Jesus said yes, he risked alienating the Jewish people who viewed Roman taxation as oppressive and unjust, giving the Pharisees a reason to stir public outrage. If he said no, the Herodians who supported Roman rule would accuse him of sedition. But Jesus, with divine wisdom, answered, In a single sentence, he transcended their trap and gave us a framework for dual citizenship, faithful engagement in earthly responsibilities while living under the greater authority of God’s kingdom. We are to return to the civil government what is due, but we must never neglect what belongs to God, which includes even Caesar’s realm. For the earth is the Lord’s and all its fullness. For more on our journey through the Bible, text BIBLE to 67742. Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell testified yesterday and today before the House and Senate committees that oversee the Fed, Federal Reserve. And while these testimonies are typically dry affairs, there was more attention than usual on the hearings after President Trump’s numerous messages and public demands for the chairman to lower interest rates. Did the chairman offer a good explanation as to why he and his colleagues decided that the interest rate should remain where it’s at? Here to talk about that is Congressman Marlon Stutzman, a member of the House Financial Services Committee, where the chairman testified yesterday. He represents the third congressional district of Indiana. Representative Stutzman, welcome back to Washington Watch. Good to see you.
SPEAKER 03 :
Thanks, Tony. Always good to be with you.
SPEAKER 15 :
Did you get a good explanation yesterday as to why the interest rates have not come down?
SPEAKER 03 :
Well, you know what, I don’t know if Chairman Powell is an attorney, but he gave an answer like an attorney, I guess. Didn’t give a really clear answer. You know, the Fed does have a dual mandate. Their focus is supposed to be keeping inflation around the 2 percent mark and then also full employment. Well, we have both of those. And inflation has been held in check and is actually coming down. And also employment is fairly strong. And that was why I asked him the question about housing. The housing market is about as flat as we’ve seen since the recession almost 15 years ago. And there really was no good answer about why keeping the interest rates where they’re at now be other than the fact that He’s kind of muzzled because he’s got to take all sectors into consideration, including agriculture, manufacturing, and then, of course, the housing market. But my belief is that we really are holding Americans. They’re stuck in this economy because of the interest rates. And my hope is, is that he would take not only our thoughts, but also the president’s and vice president’s thoughts into consideration, because we’re hearing from our constituents that they’re really stuck in a spot where it’s not easy to move from one house to another.
SPEAKER 15 :
So the role of this monetary policy of when you have a hot economy, interest rates are when inflation is going up, you raise interest rates to cool things off. If you keep it too long, you have the potential of stalling out the economy. And as you’ve pointed out, housing sales are going down. Construction is down because the cost of borrowing money is pretty high.
SPEAKER 03 :
It is. In fact, you know, the one sector that actually is doing well, if any, is that’s the multifamily housing, you know, apartment complexes. Those are being built because people are able to charge rent because simply, you know, folks aren’t able to buy. In fact, the average age for young individuals to buy a house used to be around the 28-year-old mark, and now it’s around the 35 to 38-year-old mark. So Young people just aren’t in a spot to be able to buy.
SPEAKER 15 :
And that’s not a good thing because home ownership has a profound. There’s two things that impact people’s thinking and their citizenship engagement. Number one is when they have children. Number two is when they buy a house. They become more fiscally conservative when they buy a house and become a homeowner. And they become more socially conservative when they have children.
SPEAKER 03 :
that’s exactly right and you know it is it’s just that ownership piece that makes us all behave differently because you know we’re not gonna let the the grass grow out front because you know we don’t want to be the that house on the the block we want to make sure we keep our house up because it holds its value on you know it that was always something that my parents encouraged us kids to do was to add to buy a house so that way you’re in the market of course you know timing is always can be tricky But as you said, holding these interest rates flat has really held the housing market in this country flat. And I think there’s so many bright spots under the Trump economy that things are ready to take off, but a lot of folks just aren’t selling their house because it’s not easy to go from that 3% mortgage rate that they have, which they may end up in a 6% mortgage rate and double.
SPEAKER 15 :
So it’s really a throttle on the economy, especially as we get these tax cuts that could grow the economy even more. I mean, to extend these tax cuts, at least give people certainty of what’s ahead, that could fuel the economy. But high interest rates will be a throttle on that. There’s one other aspect of that interest rate I want to ask you about, because the United States government pays interest on the money it borrows. And so that high interest rate affects the U.S. government.
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah, that’s exactly right. And that’s a great point, Tony. Another good reason, and that would be good for our economy and good for the federal budget, is keeping those interest rates down. Because right now, the federal budget, we’re paying on our national debt, which is around $36 trillion, almost $37 trillion, we’re paying interest to the tune of $1 trillion a year. That’s a trillion dollars a year that’s not going to our military. That’s a trillion dollars a year that’s not going to pay down this debt. And so if those interest rates would be lower, that would also be a savings. I know that the Treasury Secretary Scott Besant talks about this frequently, that if interest rates were at a modest spot, then it would make a big difference. The one thing, too, that, you know, the Fed is not supposed to be political, and this This is what really bothered me and a lot of others, is that the Fed actually lowered the interest rate right before the election in 2024. And I’ve generally said, hey, they’re a steady hand at the wheel. But that really made me think twice about their political lens, because by lowering that interest rate right before the election, it felt like they were trying to give the economy a boost for Kamala. So again, I’m sure they’ve got a different answer on that. But the timing is everything when they do this.
SPEAKER 15 :
You know, Marlon, I’ve been around for a while and I’ve not seen any entity in D.C. that’s not political. Some acknowledge it and some don’t, but they’re all political. Speaking of that, one final question on the Federal Reserve. It announced earlier this week that it was directing its supervisors to no longer consider reputational risk when examining banks. Explain that, because that goes back to what we saw during the Biden administration of debanking conservatives.
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah. And, you know, this is a it’s a it’s a move. It’s a good move. Now, banks can still look at reputational risk. Now, for example, and we see this always on the conservative side, Tony, we hardly ever see banks that decide not to bank a particular industry or. on the left. But it’s the gun owner shops that have a difficult time getting banks to bank them. There’s also the, of course, fossil fuels and the energy sector. You’ve got this whole ESG that was running around for some time, and it is still there. But environmental, social governance, it’s government’s way of controlling the economy on that social level. because they don’t like fossil fuels, or they don’t like the Second Amendment, and they don’t support Americans’ ability to own a gun to not only defend themselves, but it’s our constitutional right. So this is a good move to make sure that we as citizens are protected. Now, you know, we need to keep track of those banks that do do this, and I think the private sector, the free market can help monitor that as well.
SPEAKER 15 :
agree that it’s a good move. But I ask you, is it a move that they’re making out of fear that the Trump administration, by executive order, might lean in on this issue?
SPEAKER 03 :
Well, you know what? I hope so. And if President Trump still does the executive order, I’d be fine with that as well, because I think that’s what, you know, we’re all tired of in America is this woke agenda that has been forced on us by Washington, D.C. and, of course, accelerated by by the Biden administration. You know, we’re still dealing with the ramifications of that. But, you know, these agencies, boy, like you said, they are political. They’re deeply entrenched. I had dinner one time with Justice Scalia, and he said, guys, don’t, fool yourselves that we think that the Supreme Court justices aren’t political. They are. They all go to the same cocktail parties together and they like to talk politics. So even in our institutions that are supposed to be nonpartisan, nonpolitical, they are. And so hopefully this is a sign that they’re watching Trump’s lead and that Trump will lean onto these issues if he has to.
SPEAKER 15 :
Marlon Stetsman, always great to see you, my friend. Thanks for joining us today.
SPEAKER 03 :
Thank you, Tony. Great to see you.
SPEAKER 15 :
Congressman Marlon Sussman of Indiana, one of the fighters for the good things on Capitol Hill. All right. I want to go a little bit deeper into this issue of reputational risk, as this is something that the left was pushing and using this as a tool to to debank. conservative organizations. It happened to us, all right? We were able to push back, but it happened to us. It happened to other conservative organizations. So I’m going to bring in Chris Gasek, Senior Fellow for Regulatory Affairs here at the Family Research Council, to help us unpack this a little bit further. In the meantime, as Chris is coming in, I still want to encourage you to give us a call, 800- 225-4008. If you’d like to partner with the Family Research Council, our team’s standing by to take your call. Chris, welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks for joining us. Good to see you, Tony. All right. So we were just talking with Congressman Marlon Stutzman about this. This is a good move, as we said, but maybe the Fed trying to avoid more of the Trump administration engaging and forcing them to correct some of their political positions that they’ve had in the past.
SPEAKER 24 :
I think this is a really good point that you made and I think his answer was very good as well. I mean, what seems to be happening right now is at the state level and at the federal level, the banks and the federal agencies are trying to pull back and trying to sort of you know, make us forget about the bad stuff that they did. And the Wall Street Journal had a big article yesterday about this, talking about these major banks going to, especially to Texas and Oklahoma, try and get those state regulators to, you know, be more lenient on them. Go ahead. I’m
SPEAKER 15 :
So these regulators, these are the people that show up at the local bank and they say, I want to look at your books and I want to see what you’re doing and how you’re doing business. And so they they have a lot of influence with these banks. And if they’re putting this category of reputational risk, meaning you’re doing business with a conservative organization that could cause reputational risk to your entity, which could cause you to go under. then that’s the door that they’re using, correct?
SPEAKER 24 :
Well, exactly. And these are the bank examiners in particular, right, as part of the regulators. And it’s funny, you know, when you start to read something like this and the government and life is so complicated, there are all of these, you know, different pressure points in all forms, in all areas of life. And so one of these areas is the bank examiners. And the bank examiners have a lot of power, apparently, because we have someone on staff here whose family was in small banking in rural Texas. And essentially, over time, they were put out of business by the cost of the regulators. and the examiners that they had to pay for as being part of a rural bank. So what I think the Congress could do and other people who were involved in this is try to find out what exactly were they – what were the Fed regulators? In other words, what were they asking about all of these different categories about guns? and churches.
SPEAKER 15 :
But it even goes to the United Nations. The United Nations leaning in on this on environmental issues and the Fed kind of adopting that U.N. platform to go to a local bank. And you talked about Texas and Oklahoma, and that’s even unfolding even now as we speak, is they’re revisiting this, where if you’re involved in fossil fuels, then you’re a risk. And so the bank is just kind of discouraged to loan capital to those types of businesses.
SPEAKER 24 :
Well, right. And in the Wall Street Journal piece, they talked about two of the major banks and that they had pulled out of this essentially this umbrella group for, you know, the environmental, you know, sort of, you know, ESG. Right. There’s this, you know, kind of moniker for good behavior in terms of the environment. And the United Nations Environmental Program, FI, so there’s a subgroup about it regarding finance. I’d never heard of this. And it was so, you know, well defined that they were trying to dictate how banks could could interact with their customers. So the tentacles of all of these globalist and environmental, all of these institutions are almost hard to imagine. And that’s what we’re seeing in the pullback here. And I think an executive order by the Trump administration might really be a good thing.
SPEAKER 15 :
All of this, trying to expose all this and clean it up while we have the opportunity is critical going forward. Chris Gasek, thanks so much for jumping in and sharing some more insights on this. You’re welcome. All right, folks, thank you for joining us as well. And we’ve got folks are going to stand by the phone to take your call 800-225-4008 to partner with us. All right. Out of time for today. Until next time. Keep standing.
SPEAKER 21 :
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.
