Rick Green [00:00:07] Welcome to the intersection of faith and culture. It's the Wallbuilders show where we take on the hot topics of the day from a biblical, historical, and constitutional perspective. It's good News Friday. Always look forward to this day of the week and I hear from folks all over the country, guys they love good News Friday and there they actually have been commenting on it. Well, we've noticed y'all can't seem to get there. We they we know there's a lot more to cover than you have time to do. So we enjoy Fridays. We haven't even been able to get to all the good news out of President Trump's speech on Tuesday night, let alone the things that have happened over the last month. So I don't know how you guys are going to pick and choose the day, but whatever you choose as the as the best good news to talk about, let's jump in. David Barton, first piece of good news today. 

David Barton [00:00:42] Well, let's go back to what happened after the state of the Union because we covered that. We talked about it the next day, went through a lot of stuff, but we didn't get through all the stuff. We mentioned the state of the Union address. And so for good News Friday, I'm going to take my part here for a bit and just cover things in the state of the Union address that he talked about that I think need to be highlighted. That are really key and I really didn't see much coverage of some of these. And I at least think they're good news. And I'll just start with one where he said, I have I have a rule in the administration that you cannot implement a new regulation unless you remove ten regulations off the books. And so 1 to 10. I like that ratio, man. You know, I've used the stat before. I got it from USA today, one of their factoids where they said if you would take the U.S. code, which includes all the regulations, if you take the U.S. code and read 700 pages a week, you could finish the U.S. code in 25,000 years. That's how long it would take you to read all the regulations we've got, which means any one of us can be arrested at any point in time for some violation of something that we don't even know about, because there are so many regulations written. And by the way, I was talking to a number of congressmen this week because I said that this week they're they're voting on a number of in the House. They had a whole bunch of votes to really disapprove regulations from the Department of Labor or disapprove. And these are all regulations that were put out under Biden. And they're voting to disapprove them. And it just struck me as a no. Whoa whoa whoa. And I just I just talk to some of these guys. Let me see if I get this right. If the agency puts out a rule, it has the effect of federal law unless you guys veto it. And I said it's just the House. It's a no. It's the House. And the Senate has to also disapprove the rule. And then the president has to sign. It's like passing a law to disapprove. So I said, so you guys, you have to go through several steps to get this thing done, has to be voted on by the elected officials. But in the agencies, they can pass a rule that has the impact of federal law. And it's not signed by the president, not done by the House or Senate. And you guys have to undo it with the force of law. They said, yeah, that's exactly. I said, all right. It's time for a lawsuit somewhere, because there's no way the Constitution. 

Tim Barton [00:02:56] Hey, and just to clarify, when you're saying they voted, disapprove it. Does that mean they are voting to remove it when they're disapproving of it. Is that remove that. So in essence, right, that they're taking that out of the equation or what is disapproving and actually do other than them saying we don't like this, does it actually remove it? 

David Barton [00:03:13] It is it is their term for vetoing the the federal rule that's put in there. So disapproving means we don't agree with it and therefore you can't implement it. And I was I was caught on that too. And I said what is disapproval. What does this do? I mean, what are you trying to stop. And disapproving the rule is the legal step for saying this cannot become federal law. If the House and Senate and the president all say that this rule can become federal law, it cannot become federal law and I said so that means it is going to become federal law unless all of you veto it? And they said that's exactly what it means. And so I was looking at the calendar of votes in the House yesterday and today and tomorrow. And they have this whole long list of things are going to vote on. But the problem is you've got the Senate and they can filibuster over there unless I can get 60 votes. So essentially, all of these rules that have been passed by the feds under Biden are going to become federal law and cannot be stopped by this administration unless you can get the Senate to go along with it, which means you have to get at least seven Democrats to go along with reversing what Biden did. And so the whole thing is wrong. And I said, all right, somebody's got to get this in front of the court because there is no way in God's green earth. If you read the Constitution, that anybody but the House and Senate can make a law. I mean, that's that's what it takes. So all of that to say, removing ten regulations for every one you put in is going to be a really big help in reestablishing some freedom and getting that back into, I guess I'm saying, into the hands of the people just getting the federal government out of our hair. And by the way, if we can get rid of those kind of regulations, it's estimated that it would save the people about $18,000 a year is what it costs for us to comply with federal regulations. 

Tim Barton [00:05:02] And that's per individual. That's not $18,000 total. That's every person the equivalent of $18,000, and dad, let me back up, because as you were talking about the fact that to overcome a filibuster is what takes the 60 votes to get to cloture. That's what. That's why they can't get it done with just the 53 votes, 54 votes, whatever they might get on these issues. But we've seen them be able to get votes done with 51, 52, 53. Right. So why why is it different on something like this as opposed to some of the other things we've seen them do? Because certainly, I mean, the Senate gets to make their rules. And there's been a lot of talk about removing some of the filibuster, changing some of that operation. And then the there's been many times Republicans were scared of it because they said, well, if we do that, then, you know, when the Democrats get back in charge, then they can ram all these things through. We need to keep the filibuster. So? So what is the process by which you can get things done with 51, 52, 53 votes, as opposed to having to have that 60 to overcome the filibuster? 

David Barton [00:06:09] Yeah. And Tim you hit it exactly right. Those are the rules that the Senate has imposed on themselves. And I remember back, man, Rick help me. When was it that we had 60 Republican senators? That was back then. Or was that George W Bush where we had that? 

Rick Green [00:06:24] I don't remember ever having 60. Did we really? 

David Barton [00:06:26] Yes we did. And at that time we said, guys, this is a time to get rid of that silly rule. The Founding Fathers said the rule of the Constitution is that the majority prevail. Get rid of that supermajority. And they said, well, you know, there's going to be a time when we're going to be in the minority and we'll want that. So I said, no, no, no, no. If his Constitution said that takes a majority, leave it a majority. And so they didn't do it, and it takes 60 votes to get that rule changed. And so and I think I and let me back up on that, I think the way it is now, if they can get 51 votes on the rules package. They can change the rules package because the rules package is not subject to filibuster, and they have to do the every session so they could get 51 votes, which means they probably can't get Murkowski or Collins or those folks. If they could, they could change the rules. That to your question, if it's called, they have what's called reconciliation, which is really the budget process. And on the budget process, reconciliation, if you can get a majority, you can move economic stuff through if it is just the result of of budgeting. And that's why they were able to get the budget past couple weeks ago with majority votes. But they can't do that on non. And I'm not going to say budgetary. It really is just on reconciliation issues of what they call it. So that's kind of where the distinction is. 

Tim Barton [00:07:45] Well, and I do know that that's what they would say the distinction is, I also know they oftentimes find ways to attach things. Yeah. To get them done. And obviously I mean we're having this conversation. We're kind of like inside the weeds in what's going on? But the reason it's worth noting is because as as much as we should be celebrating positive things happening in the House, understanding that it can be a major challenge in the Senate to get some of this done. I think President Trump will be able to use his platform to bring attention to it. I think he's gonna be able to put some pressure on it and some of the situations as well. But there can be some creative solutions for some of this. And even as I say that there's almost like this bad taste in my mouth. We don't need creative solutions. We should do this the right way. But because of the way the game of politics has been played, and Republicans and Democrats have played so much of this game, it makes it a lot more challenging that even if you have 53 or 54 senators on your side, if somebody is working a filibuster, if you don't have 60 votes to end that filibuster, then you can't bring the closure, which brings it to a vote to actually work on getting that done. And so it certainly is a challenge, but there are some creative solutions to some of this that certainly can be implemented, which not the least of which you can tie some of the implementation of this to funding. And if you're able to say, hey, we're not funding any of this, then it can make it harder to implement in some of those areas. Not dissimilar to when President Trump was in, I think was Maine. And he was talking, I think, to the governor of Maine, and they were talking about no more boys competing in women's sports. And if you do, we're not going to find any educational things for your state. There are ways to attach some financial incentive or withhold finances for states that don't comply. And so it does seem like there could be. And this is where there could be some creative strategies and solutions that could be implemented. But certainly it'll take a lot of work to get that done. 

Rick Green [00:09:55] All right guys. So first piece of good news dealing with regulations and in a huge number. I think Tim and I were when we were watching the address to Congress the other night when he said that. I look back at Tim when I was at a picture academy, we've always said, okay, if you pass a bill, you got to get rid of two regulations for every new one. And Trump says ten. I mean, come on, five times what we've said all these years. Incredible. All right. So where are we going next, man? 

Tim Barton [00:10:17] Well, along many things that he highlighted. One of the things he said that was very funny, addressing the border when he said, you know, President Biden was saying we have to have legislation to solve this border problem, and we need Congress to act. And and President Trump makes a quip, well, it turns out all you needed was a different president, right? You need a new president. We solve this problem. And one of the things that is worth noting is that in February, border crossings were at an all time low, and I think it was 8000 for the month. And and under President Biden, it was it was over that every single day, not for the month, every single day it was over that. And when you have 8000 for the month, just absolutely incredible what President Trump has been able to do on the border. And then, of course, the positive things that also stem from that. And these are connected to the speech to things. Everything from the Laken Riley Act. You know, kind of go down the list where now you can criminalize, you can deport, you can whatever needs to be done to solve the problem of some of these really violent criminals that have come to America. And as he identified President Trump not pulling any punches on this. Sad, right? This was the Democrats, Joe Biden's open border policy that allowed all these bad people to come in. Well, he's not wrong. And one of the things that I think a lot of Americans have gotten used to is politicians being more political and not always telling the truth. And President Trump usually is like the inverse of that. He's not very political, and he's definitely more likely to tell you what he thinks. And that's certainly what happened during his state of the Union. I think it's an inaugural minute ago. And what state of the Union we're talking about, his state of the Union speech, the Congress just earlier this week. And just the positive things that we are already seeing related to the border is so encouraging. And it's one of these issues that the majority of the American people are behind. They support what he's doing, especially on this illegal immigration issue, and we can take a lot of time. I've got several articles on this, but I would say that was one of the really easy ones to look at. And guys, we haven't even come to the idea that he teased earlier this week about working to remove the Department of Education, really getting that going. So many more things we definitely can talk about, but the fact that the border crossings are at an all time low is so encouraging that we are finally, once again having borders. And you have to have borders to have a nation. And so by securing our borders, to the extent he has, it's helping protect our sovereignty to a much greater degree. 

Rick Green [00:13:09] And that's one of those we, you know, we had to pinch ourselves to, to believe that it was happening as bad as it was happening when it was happening. Is this real? I mean, our is our, you know, our own president, our own administration actually sabotaging our nation this bad. And so we pinched ourselves to wonder, are we really awake or is this a nightmare? And now we're pitching ourselves to going, okay, is this a dream? I mean, it is so fast that he's turned it around and just remarkable. And I think, David, you said it either on yesterday's program or the day before about, you know, his line with regard to everybody said it had to be a law. No, you just need a new president. I mean, it was so quick, the change. And I think people are, you know, they're already feeling the positive side of that. One quick break, guys. We got more good news when we return. Stay with us. You're listening to the Wallbuilders show. 

Rick Green [00:15:01] Welcome back to the WallBuilders Show. It's good news Friday. A lot to catch up on. Still, just from the president's speech, which was really just guys, a list of the things already being done. So in other words, we're not saying the good news is the speech itself, even though it was amazing to like you said, Tim, the fact that he's so candid that he's saying the things that people are actually thinking that most politicians wouldn't have been willing to say before. So even that in and of itself is good news. But all the items that y'all are listening, it's really it's not just speech, man. It's not just rhetoric. These are policies he's actually put in place. David, what you got next, man? 

David Barton [00:15:30] Well, this was one that it has not yet put in place, but I'm looking forward to it being put in place. He said he is going to balance the federal budget. Now, question for you guys. When was the last time Congress balance the federal budget for a single year? They made sure that the income was balanced with the outgo. How long has it been? 

Rick Green [00:15:54] Didn't Clinton and Gingrich somehow strike some agreement that did or not? Did it just reduce it? 

Tim Barton [00:15:59] I was thinking the same thing, Rick. I was thinking it was under Clinton, which a lot of people now look back at Bill Clinton and think he was this incredible economic president. But the reality was there was a super majority of Republicans in the House and the Senate. And so the good things that were, by and large, happening were under Republican leadership. But Bill Clinton was a good enough politician that he was taking credit for all the good things happening. 

Rick Green [00:16:21] Yeah, that he was poor before they got the or he was against doing those things before they got the majority, and they had such momentum coming in that they were kind of like Trump right now. Right. With this momentum to do real change. That freshman group in 94, I mean, Republicans hadn't had it. What, David, 40 years or 50 years or something. They've been a long time. Yeah. 

David Barton [00:16:39] First time in 40 years. 

Rick Green [00:16:40] Yeah. So they were motivated to get things done and it was being very bold. So that would be my guess was during that time frame. 

David Barton [00:16:45] Well you guys hit the second half of what goes with this. But the last balanced budget was in 2001. So it's been 23 years since Congress has balanced a budget. Now, the bigger part of balancing the budget is going back to the appropriations bills, and the appropriations bills is what makes the federal budget. There are 12 appropriation bills that have to be submitted every year as part of the budget. And you have the one for agriculture, you had the one for commerce, and just you have the one for defense. You have the one for now. There's 12 different bills, two other different major committees in Congress, and they have to come up with the budget for the next year. When's the last time all 12 committees got their budget proposed on time and out in time for for Congress to act on it? 

Rick Green [00:17:33] 17 no, I don't know. Yes. Does it start with a 17 or an 18? 

Tim Barton [00:17:39] I was literally thinking before my lifetime. That's. Yeah, that's exactly how I feel. I don't know that I've ever heard of it happening on time. Even I mean, even getting done would be a big deal, but getting it done on time, I don't recollect ever hearing that in my lifetime. It certainly could have happened. I just, I would think it's been a while. 

David Barton [00:18:02] Well, this is where the last time was what you guys were talking about with Clinton and and Gingrich's 1996. So 1996 is the last time that all that Congress actually did this job and got all 12 bills out. And this is significant stuff if you can get those bills out because imagine is since then we haven't had a balanced budget and we haven't got the work done. They've been having continuing resolutions, funding Congress for years and years and years because they haven't been able to pass a budget. They haven't done the budget work. So all these kids who talk about continue resolutions, they've been keeping the government going on continuing resolutions, and they're required by law to produce a budget every year. And so by by federal law, Congress itself is not doing its own job that it passed, and that is producing a budget. And that's because you're now in the situation of, well, you have so much polarization and so much. You just can't get people. You can't even get Republicans come to the same table on so many things. And that's why passing the budget was so remarkable. When it happened a couple of weeks ago, we talked about then what a miracle that it was to get the New York Republicans with the Freedom Caucus, to get all of them to vote on something. And that just doesn't happen often. But you actually have to go back to the appropriations process as part of the budget. So with Trump saying we're going to get a balanced budget, and, you know, right now I've got enough confidence that he's going to find a way to get that done because he's been able to do so many things. He said he was going to do that. I didn't think he could do that. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that we can actually get a balanced budget and stop going in debt, but that means the appropriations process. I'm looking forward to how much change that really represents. 

Tim Barton [00:19:46] Well, guys, this is interesting because my thought is that even though I feel like Trump can really do a lot, I just doubt Congress. We have some really good friends there, And I think there's some incredible godly people that are there, and there are some people that are highly motivated to do this, but recognizing that you have to get a lot of support and people behind it, that my my problem is not not trusting Trump is not trusting Congress and some of this. But the reason I bring this up is, you know, when we look back on a guy like Ronald Reagan and Ronald Reagan gets celebrated as this incredible leader is incredible president, and he never had Republican leadership of the House and Senate that he got to work with. So this is really a question for you guys who probably remember much more of this. What was Reagan able to do to pressure some of these positive changes that happened under his leadership when Democrats don't want to control? And I'm asking because if President Trump now is going to have to do this and get Congress to be on his page, and we're skeptical that some of these members of Congress are going to do the right thing from the Republican side, much less on the Democrat side. Was it that under Reagan it wasn't as polarized of an America as it is now? And you think it can be more challenging for Trump now than it was for Reagan back then because of just the political dynamics being different? Or do you think it's something that's similar enough that that Trump's leadership, that Trump's strong personality can help Congress do the right thing on this? 

David Barton [00:21:22] Yeah, I think he has at an almost impossible job in with his personality, because when you go back to to what you asked before, Tim, about Reagan and what was happening, I remember talking to Tom Delay, who was the majority leader of the House. He was a whip before that great friend, good brother. And Tom said that when he was first elected to Congress as a freshman, he said there were 73 Democrats that would vote with the Republicans on virtually everything. They recall the Blue Dog Democrats that were conservative. They were fiscally conservative. They thought that they were pro-life. They were just there were good guys and Tim Unlimited that just ten, 12 years ago when Mike McIntyre went out as Democrat congressman from North Carolina, that essentially was the last conservative congressman that the Democrat congressman in Congress. And now you're at a point where there is such a philosophical divide, such a and an ability. I mean, I go back to the state of undress. I mentioned it the next day, but simple protocol says that on the state of the Union, when the president walks in, everybody stands and respect for the office. You may not like the job. You stand a respect for the office. You may not stand for the rest of the night on anything he says. But you stand when the president comes in. And not a single Democrat stood when he walked in the room. They have no respect for that office because it's become a personality. And in the same way, they're supposed to have a bipartisan group escort Trump down the middle aisles, he comes into the House. Democrats, Republicans, Democrats refuse to even be seen with him walking on the same aisle, coming to the house and that is that. I don't know. Perhaps there's a time in history when it happened, but I do not know of a time in modern history when it's become so hatefully polarized as what it is right now, which makes it just really tough for him to get any of that stuff done. And I think you've raised a great point, Tim. I have confidence in Trump doing that. Do we have confidence in Congress doing that? We'll say we need a bigger majority than what we got right now for sure. 

Rick Green [00:23:26] Yeah. I'm wondering if just if in some weird way, the polarization plays to our favor because they're more willing to press the gas and just go almost the way that Trump dismissed the Democrats the other night. Whereas, you know, where I've never seen a president do that in our lifetime that I remember. They've always still tried to to have the olive branch, still tried to get them on board, and almost because of that, played too soft to get everything that they really wanted. And, and I, you know, Tim, I was thinking about your question. You go back to Reagan. His big goals were restore patriotism, rebuild the military, cut taxes and reduce spending, actually cut the swamp. He wanted to do that. And he had David Stockman. And, you know, they had their he was kind of Reagan's Elon Musk, you know, and and he lamented when it was all over that he couldn't he couldn't get any of the spending to be to be cut. He couldn't stop any of the bureaucracy. They weren't able to slash any of the bureaucracy, even though the tax cuts doubled the revenue of the federal government, the spending tripled. And that's where the deficits came from. And so he hit a brick wall there. And I think, though, it was because it was a Democrat Congress. You tip O'Neill and you had most of the time he had Democrats in control that he was dealing with where I mean, I don't know, guys, I think there's a chance that the appetite is there, that they don't have to play the game. They normally have to play where we're afraid we're going to lose the American people if we don't play nice. I think, man Trump just let everybody know Tuesday night he didn't care about playing nice. He's going to do what he was brought in here to do. So that might actually end up playing to our favor to actually get it done, even with a slim majority. 

Tim Barton [00:24:59] Well, I think it's also possibly very different with DOGE, right? When you have so much exposure, where there is so much waste, where there's been so much fraud, and then you have so many voices out there that are highlighting some of what's going on. I think there's a lot more of a pressure mechanism that is there to encourage and incentivize some of this to happen. You know, when Elon Musk just recently went on Joe Rogan and he was talking about I'm finding so much and I'm scared to bring it all to the surface because I fear for my life legitimately. I think they'll kill me if I expose how much wrong there is. But I think it's more and more that it gets out. The American people are going to see it and recognize we don't want this, and they're going to be able to put pressure. And even though a lot of those politicians are not motivated to do this, they are motivated to keep their position of power. And that might be the incentive needed to help get some of those votes. 

Rick Green [00:25:54] Well, I know I'm I'm accused of being a, you know, cockeyed optimist. Sometimes they call me maybe a little too optimistic sometimes. So maybe I'm only seeing the bright side. But, you know, it is going to be a knock down drag out. It's going to be tough. 

David Barton [00:26:06] But what was that? Was that a head nod to the musical Oklahoma! Is that what I just heard? The cockeyed optimist? 

Rick Green [00:26:12] Is that where it comes from? 

David Barton [00:26:13] Yeah, that that's part of the song 

Rick Green [00:26:16] See? I'm so bad about that. I'll use these phrases or idioms or whatever, and I don't know where they cover. If I remember you teaching me, half the stuff I was saying was coming from the Bible, I didn't even remember it was coming from the Bible, all the idioms and everything else. So. So Oklahoma, I'm not going to sing Oklahoma because we still want to have listeners next week. Thank you. Thanks for listening, folks. You've been listening to Good News Friday on the Wallbuilders show. Lots of great programing for you next week as well. If you missed any of this week or the last few weeks, then be sure to go to Wallbuilders.show. Thanks again for listening to the WallBuilders Show