SATN Episode 359 with Bob Carlstrom

This is an automatically generated transcript. Please note that complete accuracy is not guaranteed.

Hello everyone, and welcome to another episode three fifty nine of stew and the Nutt. And here we are on April twenty fourth, already almost getting into May. Very glad to be joined tonight by mister Bob Carlstrom. Bob is from Prosperities for Us Foundation, actually from a lot of different places, as you'll hear, and want to welcome you.

Give me some of your evenings tonight, Bob, thank you for joining us here. Well, thank you very much for having having me. And hello everybody out there. My name again is Bob Carlstrom, and I've been in Washington most of my life.

I came here actually to make a difference, and that's what we're engaged in with our Prosperity for Us Foundation. But in terms of my history, I've done just about everything in Washington, in addition to building a couple of different companies, one in the industrial area and one in public public affairs and professional consulting. And I've really really enjoyed every job has moved, one has moved from one place to another automatically, things just happened. But I was very thrilled to be able to have worked in President Reagan's office and management budget and therein we worked on and our portfolio was really all the legislation that goes through the Congress and is reviewed by the administration.

And it was a great, great experience and certainly one you know, to meet President Reagan. I think what I am is indeed a blend of government politics as well as business. And when the Prosperity for Us Foundation was formed after I left what was called the Association of Mature American Citizens, where I built a national grassroots program with my team, David Biddolf, who is a businessman from Florida, contacted me and said, Bob, will you help me build this foundation, and he explained to me what the objectives of the foundation were, and they're extremely important and the focus there instead of so much the federal government, is really on the states and in terms of improving you know, the ability of American citizens in their respective states to impact their state and local governments, particularly on issues that are extremely important to them, such as property taxes. And with property taxes, you know, you almost have the tyranny of the unelected.

You often see appraisers come out and assess the value of your home so they can increase the taxes as a function of pressure, you know, from local government officials and state government officials to increase their revenues. And secondly, you also have situations where regulatory actions by local governments as well as some state governments impair and impede the use of your property or they cause take such actions that you lose the value of your real property and because you're unable to use it as you intended to. And so these kinds of things, you know, are significant and need to be addressed, and they're not Washington typically looks at federal issues, but it's in the States, which is the core unit of government in our republic, that these things need to be addressed. And consequently, you know, our mission is to work with the citizens of the States, and we are assembling a data system, if you will, of over one hundred and eighty million Americans to reach out to them and ask them to work towards establishing of constitutional amendments that will guarantee private their property rights and the ability the ability to actually sue when the property has been impacted by regulatory action.

And moreover, in terms of property taxes, is that in that any tax increase will and Colorado constitutes a good model for this is that any tax increase, including increase by fees, needs to be approved by a vote of the citizens of that state or that political jurisdiction. Those are the big issues on property that affect all Americans. Sadly, we hear too often that people's property tax rates have exceeded their mortgages in several states around the country. And one other part of the of our mission is to really also encourage citizens of the several states to establish a constitutional amendment so that so that taxes by the state and spending by the state is consistent, you know, with the particular economic indicators of the residents in the state.

Too much, too often in so many states they just run unaccounted for in terms of increasing taxes and spending, and this needs to be fully addressed. Indeed, even in Washington, the states should have the ability to recall their Washington representatives who are members of the party that is causing significant expenditures and have the ability under a state constitutional amendment to bar them from the next primary. And that sends a strong message for accountability to the taxpayers as well. So it's really a question of let's restore what our founders wanted, and let's restore the will of the people to have a greater role in decisions that are made by their state and local governments and indeed by the federal government.

Yeah, that's it, you got. I was writing down a few notes and questions here while you're talking and going through that and regional site, the Prosperity for US site, and so it sounds to me that it would be safe to say that that this organization is very much kind of Tenth Amendment focused, kind of back to the states, right if it's not, if it's not mandated that the government has to do it or the states can't, you're really pushing it back there, which obviously is a big you know, many in the libertarian side, that's their focus, right, smaller government, and in tenth Amendment, you know, if it's not on them, then it's on the states all the time. Would that be a safe analysis or safe assumption. Yes, so would.

I think that's a very good statement. And again we often have to remind state legislators sometimes that they're not the farm Club for Congress, but what they are have is a very important role in the legislature of the core unit of government. You know, in our republic because we are called the United States for a reason, you know, and the founders, you know, we're very clear about that. You know.

One of the one of the issues that we've also supported is a convention of states to sponsor a fiscal responsibility amendment. You know, when you have a federal government that has a thirty six point trillion dollar debt now, and when I've talked with members of Congress about that, they said, they so many of them said, we don't want to give up control. And I say to him, tell me about thirty six point five trillion dollars worth of debt is control, you know, and they go silent. I would also point out to you, in terms of state spending, the collectively the fifth over the fifty states have an access of six trillion dollars of debt, you know, that they have to address as well.

And so this really comes down to irresponsible spending and then imposing taxes, you know, is a method of financing for their irresponsibility and their spending. Governments have to do what we have done in business, and that is, in fact is really address and operate within their revenues a reasonable amount of debt. But certainly not what the debt they have now. For example, the federal debt, the debt to GDP is over one hundred percent and it should be down to forty thirty percent.

That kind of thing. So, you know, we have a major major challenge in our country and in every state. Is we need to wake up and understand you know, what has happened when we've essentially trusted those who have been elected to be good stewards of their tax dollars. Yeah.

Absolutely, And it's interesting because I was looking at you know, the key initiatives of the foundation, right costumes, cost rouge, physical responsibility amendments, state property tax limitation policies and by letteral free trade agreements. I mean, you from a long history of financial services background from you know, whether it be working in the government like in the OMB during the Reagan administration, or in private sector and different things nonprofit you worked with. So when I look at that and look at what you I mean is this when you talk about taking it down to the states and trying to get them to to have more you know, physically physical responsibility. Is it because it's just too hard to make that movement in the FED? Is it just is it battleship too big in the FED that to really make that change quick enough that it's just easier to start at the state levels since that's really how this country started.

Well, I think it's really important to start at the state level and to continue to support what they're trying to do in the Congress. But the states are the ones that really should guide guide this nation because you know, you correctly pointed out the Tenth Amendment that says all power is not reserved you know, for the federal government or reserved for the states. And when you read the Constitution, the federal government has a very limited set of responsibilities and all that remains after that, you know, what really resides with the state. Education, for example, is a state responsibility.

You know, it's not a federal responsibility. But the federal government has expanded to that, and they've done that in so many other areas, you know, and we saw with the last presidential administration, the binding administration efforts to really squash the states, you know, and make them essentially administrative entities you know, of the national government. And that is and that was a very very dangerous time for our country. And thank goodness, you know, the voter stepped out and said enough is enough.

Because what they were planning and what they were doing, and so much of it is never reported in the legacy media was very, very frightening. So this last election was very, very significant, and it's really important, you know, I think, with the voters to understand, you know, what what is there and to read and and learn about what's going on. And our mission, you know, is to really inform voters, you know, in each of the states relative to their states, what they can and should do so that their government doesn't doesn't run away with their tax dollars, impair their ability to use their property or continue to increase, you know what, the exorbitant depths that most of the most of the states have. Yeah, it just amazes me how much, how many people you have, just like this whole thing is happening now with DOGE and all the cost cutting, which is long overdue.

How many people act like especially those on the left, act like they're you know, taking money from the government that they've lost per perspective that the government does not create any money, They don't make money. They it is the people's money, uh, short of coming in from tariffs, right, the taxes are the government is funded by That is everyone's money. It's always it's amazed me over these last couple of months since this has been going under you know, underway that many are supporting the narrative and getting so upset and acting like, you know, terrible things are happening. It's just like if you loaned money to your you gave money to your kid while they're in college, you're very much concerned about what they're spending it on.

If you see them they are and they're not at the bookstore buying what they need to to be, you're going to be questioning them what they're spending their money on. And I mean, and the way our governments spend money, it's like a drunken college student. I mean, they've kind of you know, they they've been writing checks and like, oh mom and dad will cover it, you know, and exactly it's definitely been doing good. But remember the Danny DeVito movie, Other People's Money.

You know, that's the mindset that you have. You know, you know, government people, you know at the federal level and sadly I think in state local governments. You know, remember, the government is overhead on the economy. It doesn't create.

It survives off the economy. It pulls money out of the economy to fund its public services. You know, however defined you know, and in the federal level too, I frequently deal with people and say, you know, the the entity you know that you're so concerned about is can we get enough tax dollars for spending these programs. The thing that's so great about doze as they're taking a hard look at these things and saying, you don't need to do this, You don't need that.

Many people, some of these programs are obsolete. Yet they get perpetuated because as they build a long term political support base in their respective states. But many of them are irrelevant today. Look at the Appalachian Regional Commission, for example.

My goodness, when was that started in the thirties or forties or something like that. You know, what do they do? Why are they needed? And why do you need that? When the states have the ability, you know, as sovereign states to negotiate with other states on things like that. The government has a role in interstate commerce and waters and the waterways and things of this sort, and even in foreign affairs and national defense and for public safety. You know, where there's federal jurisdiction is appropriate, but there are limits to that, you know.

And sadly, you know, we found that on the left side of the left side of the aisle, many of them believe that the government is the one that a government solution is what's required. You know. There's a true lack of understanding about the economy and the free market economy and that the economy and business and consumer choice will will work through some of the issues that government people think they need to handle. And frankly, many of them are ignorant of the economy because they've never been in it.

You know, they've only lived off of tax dollars and appropriations and the political fights that go on to extract more. You know, it's a very crazy thing, you know when you think about all the taxes that you pay, and what that reflects is is the taxman looking at every kind of way that they can extract some of your money, you know, and you think of all the individual taxes you pay, well, that's crazy, you know. And when to tax your cigarettes, or tax your bearer, or tax your you know, luxury taxes on this and that, I mean, that's that's wrong. You know, there ought to be there ought to be some uniformity in that across the board.

And that's again a situation you know, where a government creed is really dipping into your pocketbook. And that's why we think the will of the people needs to be increased and recognized and recognized in state constitutions, not laws, statutory laws, because as majorities shift in state legislatures are the federal one, then you've got real problems because the reforms that you may have achieved will be lost, you know, if the other team takes control. Right, right, I mean you you mentioned how you know, things like the syntaxes of alcohol and tobacco and things like that. They're taking money, but they're really I mean more so than the government trying to take money.

I see that as more of the government trying to affect an outcome that they, by the constitution aren't allowed to do. Right. We see it with you know, when the government try to mandate back in the seventies and eighties, you know the highways speed limits, right, they said, oh, don't you know, you don't comply, you want to keep it at seventy five or eighty, We're going to take your dot funds. Right, The things that President Trump is doing now with Harvard and some of the schools and the state of Maine is the same thing that's done by every president and every administration.

And the fact that if they want to affect change, they just the one thing they can control is the perse strings, because per the Constitution, they'll control the purse strings to motivate you to see it their way, right, which is exactly what they do when they're like, we want to cut people down from drinking and smoking, we're just going to tax it to the n degree where that's how we're going to get the you know, that's how we're going to intrude on people's lives and make make them make a decision we want them to make. But one thing that stands out, because you know your guys, initiative is state property and you mentioned that earlier. Is this new initiative being driven driven by Governor DeSantis in Florida, right where I think the statement and I pay phrase, right, he made the fact of you know, why should you have to be you know, you bought a house and paid for it. Why are you having to keep renting your property from the state of Florida? Right, Yeah, he's wanting to cut property tax you bought it, which makes total sense.

And I think I don't think I think he's the private list you probably you would know, but he's probably the first politician with a voice loud enough that has ever said that out loud, that says, why are you having to pay property tax? You bought the property already, You paid the tax when you bought it. You should be done. That's right. And and he's absolutely right.

You know, the property tax, in one school of thought, which which I have and do agree with, should only be applied at the point of purchase, you know. And and and it ought to be capped also too. Uh. Any increase uh, you know, based on inflation, because some people can really get killed if it's if it's if inflation has been high, and so you need a cap within that like two point five percent worth suggesting and not anymore in terms of the increase.

I think what's important too. In terms of Florida. The Florida example is David Bidolf, who is the founder of the Prosperity for Us Foundation, actually was the champion for all those property tax laws that were enacted in Florida in the nineteen nineties and he motivated and marshaled the citizens of Florida to really demand that the Florida Constitution be amended so that these things could not be changed. And so Florida has been in a vanguard position in this area.

Colorado, also with Tabor, the Taxpayer Bill of Rights has also been a national leader, and that's been extremely successful and a model for the right of the voters to prove any tax increase. There have been efforts to circumvent by some of the government people the requirement that taxes be reviewed by calling them fees. Well, it's a distinction without a difference, and so there's always always that that has has to be addressed. But I think it's always important when we think of government, you know, is that they're preforiting a public service, and it should be very limited.

It should not be more than that they don't give you your rights. You get your rights because they're analienable and they're a gift of God in your life, and you know, and that was a fundamental, fundamental premise by our founders. Yeah. Absolutely, I want to I want to take a back second size making notes.

When you're talking earlier, you mentioned that mentioned the Department of Education, right is going to Yeah, I mean this was most people don't realize it was created by Jimmy Carter right. Different reasons why he created it, whether it's what he said or whatever. But I mean, this is one where and if I remember right, you would know better than me. But I think it was created out of an executive order.

Yeah, it was made by a reorganization plan, I think initially. Yeah, and so you know, a lot of people are upset that it was uh, you know is now as being dismantled by by President Trump. But it's you know, they when people started breaking it down, you know, and removing the union piece out of it and looking at you know, obviously there's a lot of fear bongering right away when it happened that you know, oh, no one's going to get free lunch and this and that. What it was like, No, that's handled by the Department of Agriculture, you know, and oh you can't handle this, No, that's you know, all these things.

And once people started ripping apart, who's responsible for what in these school systems? Locally, I think people realize I heard people I know that are on the left go, yeah, what does the Department of Education do Like it was this epiphany, this awakening of like, well, if they're not handling all these things, right, what do they actually do and provide for the states? You know, just the clearing house of who to send money to. I mean, it seems President Trump's plans were pretty good, like, you know, send it to the States and let them they're closer to the students and the pupils, and let them figure out. Yeah. I like your reference to Department of Education being a clearing house, and it's a very expensive clearinghouse with a high overhead rate, you know.

And it's also been highly prescriptive, you know, in terms of fostering you know, the the critical race theory among things, or the DEI thing, you know, which has been turned out to be very divisive. You know, what they've done in the whole transisue area in encouraging that, you know, in a league with you know, the you know, the teachers unions and the public employee unions. It's really been been awful what they've done. And they failed miserably.

As President Trump says, when you look at the e deemic scores that have occurred over the past few days, we're down, We're way down and as a result, it's a colossal failure. And again, you know, it's the province of the states. You know, when you have state universities, you have state departments of education, you have you have county county boards of education, and that kind of thing. That's where it should lie.

And the right of the parents, you know, to opt out a certain curricula, you know, they're in post there's arguments I think today or yesterday before the Supreme Court, you know about the Montgomery County, Maryland case where I live, where parents should have a right, you know, to to say that my child, you know, in third grade is not going to get sex education or whatever it is, and discuss gender confusion. It's those kinds of things, you know, that have been a function you know, the mindset that you need a federal Department of Education where they want to be really prescriptive in terms of, you know, ultimately what happens in your daily life and that those decisions belong to the citizens of the state to weigh in on them. And more importantly, the parents, you know, like you said, I remember when I was in high school, even though I wasn't already in high school, pretty much knew kind of how things worked. You know, they still reached out to my parents to get, you know, permission for me to be in health class my sons.

You know, now it's went lower, right, I think it's probably middle school when my sons are growing up that that you know, they asked us for permission. And those were the day and this wasn't that long ago, right, My youngest son's twenty three, you know, and uh, you know, these were the days back when you would go in for parent teacher conferences or whatever that parents were that teachers were adamant that parents are part of the solution. Right, It wasn't just dump your kids off. And they were like, hey, we need you involved.

And that's the reason they created all these ways to communicate with teachers and all these online tools so that parents are active in their kids education. And how quickly we went from that, which has always been that way, teachers have begged for parents to be more involved and be part of their kids' education and focused on it. How quickly we went from that to we don't even have to tell you that your kid is changing genders or have decided to or change their name. You have no right, you have no, I mean that was almost overnight, because up until that point, probably four or five years ago, six years ago, there was there, you know, there was no way a school was going to make a decision about a kid's a child's livelihood or anything like that without the parent being involved.

Well that's that's absolutely right. That's what the left, you know, really wants to superimpose government over over your personal life and over your children, you know, and displace you as a parent and limit your ability to raise your child because you entrust your child to teachers in the schools. And to me, that's just a horrible violince, you know, and it's very very socialistic, you know, if you will, where you want to displace the family and on such critical matters. Well, much of what you talked to, I mean you're talking a little bit ago about when some of these things were created that you know, the Appalachian Founding.

I mean, I think that was in the New Deal and a lot of that stuff. You know, everyone thought that was a great and I obviously had to pull us out of the depression, but I mean that was really, in my opinion, I could be wrong to me, that was the birth of this over entitlements. Right, that's that's it has turned our country into a socialistic, communistic type of country, right, because that's where the government will provide for you. And the more the government has and gotten American people, either by demographic or financial sector or whatever on their teat right, you don't want to let go the government's going to provide everything, right, which they've even tried to do is recently with all the illegals coming in, right, given them houtels and meals.

Right, we provided all you you you lose all you lose all visibility or identity of of being a citizen and not a subject. That's exactly right, That's exactly right. And and sadly that that was the that was the objective you know of the left, even a federal bill that was intended to uh for federal takeover of elections. And what they did is they they articulated very very strong requirements that state ballots had to adhere to, at least for federal election.

Well, the play there was to create it so complex that the states would essentially adopt what the federal what the what the lefts and the Democrats in Congress wanted it to and would there have thereby, you know, eviscerated the state's primary authority for the conduct of elections in their states because they would have imposed federal standards and requirements and how every state had to conduct its election. And that was another example, you know, of what they tried to do. And that's the kind of thing that we have to be alert to, you know, for the federal government. And it's also the you know, what we need to be alert to in terms of what our local governments are doing in our state governments are doing too, in terms of imposing taxes or taking regulatory actions that really impair our ability to use our property the way we want.

Yeah, you mentioned, you know how important it is to get this down to the states and that and I think, well, the one thing in demonstrated that was was the election of twenty twenty when the states, either rightfully or against their own constitutions or whatever, Pennsylvania and a number of them changed their laws and they're elected local representatives change laws to change the how that election was conducted in that state because obviously, you know, it's on the state level, right that's why the constitution is and they performed that, and those local elected reps that some people, you know, a good part of citizens don't never pay attention to They never voting down ballots, they never vote their local elections. Everyone always thinks it's all about the president. I think that was a demonstration, whether most people have picked up on it or not, of how important the state elections are. Yeah, that's very true.

And over the since the last twenty twenty election in the and what we saw in that and the way it was conducted. You know, even though the even though the audits that were done in the nine swing states have never seen it were reported out but never reported you know, to the public, would have probably have changed the outcome of that election. But many conservative groups now and including my prior incarnation with AMAC, which is a conservative alternative to ARP, we worked with many of the states to establish election integrity legislation, particularly you know, encouraging states to require a photo ID as well as proof of citizenship and that kind of thing that's got to happen. I would point out to you too.

You know that you know, with the flood of illegal aliens that have come in, whether it's twelve million or twenty, do you know that under immigration law, it is a felony to induce uh an alien to come to this country illegally. So when you think of the millions that were brought in that way and when the border was opened, that's a lot of felonies you know, on the prior administration and their henchmen. And hopefully you know, that will be be coming out and they'll address that. Now that's beyond you know, certainly what we're doing in the Prosperity for US foundation.

But again, it's all part of what kind of burdens are being imposed, you know, on the on the citizens of the several states. And it's significant, you know, and that's why again, you know, when you get into spending and controlling taxing and spending, it really needs to you really need a constitutional belt or collar, you know, to constrain the state governments and the local units of government in their activities. Yeah, yeah, it's uh you mentioned. Yeah, I mean you come from, you know, obviously a deep and strong financial background.

So I'm curious on your opinion, you know something President Trump was just talking about that, and I believe I could be wrong by a year or two, but somewhere around nineteen forty is when we first started imposing income tax that prior to that, tariffs paid for everything, and tariffs on goods coming in as the world's biggest consumer as the United States is, you know that that covered all the cost of government. And around nineteen forty or so forty one, probably coming out of the Great the Big New Deal and all the things that were done for you know, getting out of the Great Depression, they started taxing people. But you know, and this goes back to what you were talking about earlier, government has gotten so big that I know has expressed interest in getting back to that and would like to get back where we don't have income tax. And I know he's got you know, Doge and all that going in and trying to cut and they're offering buyouts and early retirements to try to shrink government.

But it seems like government is still to this day way too large to be funded by tariffs. Do you think your opinion? Could do you think we could get back to that? Could we possibly get to either lowering income tax substantially or eliminating it through our power of purchase if you would? Yeah, I think. You know, I'm not so sure how much the tariffs will actually actually help, because it's only about I think in valus goods that are about eleven percent, you know, of of what consumers purchase as a number I saw on that. But what I would like to see, you know, particularly you know, many states are now canceling out their state income tax, and it's and that's a good thing, and those states thrive because because then people have more money to spend, you know, in terms of the sales tax and things like that.

So the government actually gets more revenues when you reduce the direct taxes on them with respect to you know, the national tax. I'm not sure we'll ever get rid of the income tax, but certainly would like to. In my view, and a number of us share this view, is a flat tax, same rate for everybody, period, you know, no other thing. You take your gross this percentage, fifteen percent, whatever it is, that's what you pay, you know, and then the government you know, has to has to abide by the revenues, you know, And that goes back to the tex Aber model in Colorado.

But also what people have been trying to do with Article five and the Convention of States to have a Fiscal Responsibility amendment, say this is it unless there's extegen circumstances like a national emergency or a war or something like that. But the government really needs to have its belt tight, and they have to have you know what I've called a constitutional collar around them, both at the federal level and at the state level, so that they so that the runaway spending and the runaway taxation stops. Yeah, they need to live within their means, something that we something that is expected of all of us. We teach our kids as they go out into the world.

Right, Okay, you only get this much each money, Well, you have this much coming in. You can only have so much going out. Right. The government again acts like a spoiled brat in college and they have mommy and daddy's credit card, except you know, the daddy in this case is the US taxpayer, and spend a lot more going out than coming in.

And I think that's why so many people, and I think that's why President Trump one of many reasons, but why many he was so was voted elected the first time and definitely has so much popularity as people are sick and tired of seeing how politicians run the government where they're all expected to maintain a higher standard, and you know, they know that businessman's going to run it like a business and understands the basic concepts of finance, and you know, managing inflows and outflows, you know. Yep, yeah, And you talked earlier about the tariffs briefly. You know, President wants free and fair trade. It's got to be fair trade, you know.

And whether or not you can sustain these broad tariffs or whether or not it actually you know, turns into individual negotiations on it. Because remember too, under the Constitution, which is the supreme law the land, it provides the treaties themselves, you know, once approved, also become the law of the land. And through the years that the purity of that interpretation has changed, you know, with the enactment of intervening statutes in that and so we've seen in the past few days, in the past few weeks actually a lot of litigation as to whether or not the President's has going too far. It's a very complex area, and ultimately I think that you know, the Supreme Court is going to have to address it as to what is the appropriate way to deal with that, because you know, so one argument is that Congress has delegated trade authority to the trade laws to the authority the president to impose tariffs, but there's a question as to whether or not Congress can actually do that, or whether or not the treaties really need to be redone so that they provide for resolution of things.

But that's a very complicated thing and there's more to come on that. But I think also, you know, with respect to you know, spending in taxes. And I have to share with you what what was such a startling thing for me years ago when I was meeting with the Carter White House, maybe before you were born, but I was meeting with the Carter White House, okay, and they were going to impose more taxes on the wealthy, you know, tax the rich thing. And I said, you know, you've got to understand that the higher end people are investing to significant degree and create in businesses that create jobs.

And they said to me, I'll never forget this. And you see it fundamentally carrying through and all kinds of appropriations and tax bills, you know, hearkening back to where they keep looking where they can you know, get in your pockets. They said, Bob, we let you make the money you make, and if we need more of it, it's ours to take. So when you look at tax bills, remember that because you know, that's a mindset.

You know that they can reach for this and reach for that, you know, and you know, to fund their individual things without regard, you know, to the impact on you and your family. And uh, it's hard to fathom that people actually think that, but you only have to look at how the tax code has grown and been complicated. The federal tax code and other tax codes were originally established to, as you pointed out earlier, to manipulate behavior. You know, we tax booze a lot higher than we tax other things, or we tax guns higher because we don't want you to have guns or whatever, or a tax tobacco because we don't want you to have that choice.

You know, was standing you know, the health issues about that. So it's that kind of mindset. It's not just a federal one, but it's one you know in the states as well, particularly when you look at states like California, you know, on what they're doing out there where the government is king, you know, and the people are serfs, and it's that kind of that kind of situation you know that you see prevalent in California, sit in New York too. You see it in Illinois, you know, some of the most egregious leftist states, and you know in those so we have to counter that in the states, and that's where the people have to step up, you know, and we the people step in and say stop.

And we did that in the Trump election, you know, cleaning out the election laws to a certain degree. We didn't have the degree of fraud that we had in the prior election. And that needs to continue. So it's free in fair elections.

Yeah, that's you. You named a couple of them. Get Maryland in there, you could throw That's why why so many people left California, New York, Illinois, and for southern states and states like Texas and Florida and other places, because you know, they don't want that over. It's amazing because every one of these people that have grown up in this country that took you know, went through the school system and took American history and world and all these you know, all the social studies classes we all studied, you know, Sam Adams and Benjamin Franklin and everything that happened in Boston, all of that was in this country was born out of people not dealing with that anymore.

I mean, they literally are repeating. You know, people don't read Thomas Paine. They don't do that kind of stuff. Is what you talked about is exactly what we rebelled against from England, right, which is you know it's yours now it's mine.

Right. That's where we have the articles we had, the Bill of Rights we have, That's why the Constitution has the things that talks about, like the Article four and things like that. Right, we just can't come in and take this and that. But you see the government doing it and maybe doing it ever so slightly where people have become numb to it.

Right, we have eminent domain right, which is seems to remember when I first heard about that, and I was like, that's got to be a crazy one off, maybe for national security or something. I see local governments do it all the time, like no, we're taking your property because we need to build the road through here. Or they take it for economic development sometimes in some situations. You know, I think you're in your comments about civics, so many, so many school public school systems now don't teach civics.

They don't teach history, they don't teach the principles of the Constitution, you know, and that's deliberate, you know. So you know, when you have an ignorant population that really does not understand the greatness of this country and the principles upon which it's based, you lose it, you know. And so that's by design, you know, of the left, so that people, uh, you know, if they're not taught it, they don't have a basis in it, and eventually they go on through and they don't have a clue you know, in terms of what the government does. But they just inspied by it like sheep.

It's it's what happens when you tear down statues. This is what happens when you try to raise history. Right. There's a reason why Germany still has Bill has docaut Right.

You go to Germany, you go to southern Germany, you walk through docout, you walk through the buildings, you see the ovens, you see also because he wants to make sure no one ever forgets what happened. Right, And if you we look and I know this sound may sound extreme to some, but if we look again back to you know, the Boston Tea Party and and and everything that happened the American Revolution, how it is created, and we say, you know, wow, look at all these years later that they have forgotten everything, and that we're back repeating all that. You're going to get rid of enough of the past terrible history of this country when it comes to slavery. It is not beyond the possibility that this country could find its way back into that somehow again, because the generations will pass and there will be no recollection of it, and there'll be nothing taught about it, right, and the American people will just at whatever who is there at that time will just become well as a general consensus, will not know what ever happened.

That's that we have by doing that. Yeah, exactly, exactly right now. It's really important, you know that, you know, and you know, I came to Washington from Detroit because I wanted to make a difference. And I think, you know, in terms of all of our listeners and viewers too.

You know, you can make a difference. You know, all politics is local, and you start in your community, you know, be a voice for reason. You know, don't defer to the left because they want to control your schools and whatever else is going on there. You know, encourage private sector development of services too.

Many governments are engaged in services that the economy and private business can provide. You know, all of these things that are where they expand public services beyond the point. You know, in Myke County, you know, the county controls the liquor sales, which is ridiculous, you know, but you know it's another example, and this is Montgomery County, Maryland, again where where they shouldn't be in that business at all. You know, that is a business you know, for for the private sector.

You know, so much of that can be done in states that have that situation or any situation like that. It ought to it ought to be looked at. And again, you know, when you put it into the private sector and people you know pay for it becomes part of the local economy, then the state and the local governments actually do better on revenues because it stimulates their economy and creates more jobs. The government doesn't create jobs, you know at all.

It just really uh and that's a that's a myth, you know. Overhead, Like you said, you know, I come from a low side of the consulting world. In the consulting world, you're either making the company money or you're costing the money. Right, you're not building to a customer.

If you're overhead or you're just on the bench, as we say, then you're costing the company money. There's only one of two things. And the government does not make money, right, it costs short tariffs. There's because if we're making it from other countries sometimes unfortunately it's coming off consumers.

But I mean, the government doesn't make money. They just cost money. And it has grown to a side. I mean, what how many tens of thousands took the first initial early buyos that was offered, right, and what a deal? Seven eight months of pay? You don't have to come back in the office.

I know, I know, I know. People go twenty years and get enforced out or riffed from a company. They're not going to get eight months of pay. You know, you get three if you better.

Yeah, if you're a sea level maybe you'll get you know, you'll probably have a severance package that was built into your to your contract. But if you're not at a sea level, you're you're lucky if you get that much less eight months. Yeah, well that's right, and that's again you know where you're where your money is being spent. You know your money is being spent to support illegal aliens, to put them up in expensive hotels.

Your money is being spent, you know, very badly and h and wastefully. And that's the good thing about and what they're doing there is they're really looking hard at that. And to the extent you know that we can re estab you know, good strong business principles, the principles of doing business in a government agency. Hopefully that would create a long term discipline, you know, against the growth that they have.

Because one thing too that I that I learned, you know, when I when I was in the government, is that many people, even though they may make a certain amount of money, it's always how can I expand my power and influence, you know. And and they're unelected, you know, and that's you know, there's the tyranny of the unelected. We've seen it at the federal level all the time, and we see it at the local level, you know, particularly as I mentioned earlier, in the appraisals to increase your property tax and mine were significant. I'll tell you a story.

I went and I appealed my property tax assessment earlier home I had because it was four thousand dollars higher than my neighbors of forty percent. Hire, I'm sorry, and I appealed it. I went to the county and they literally laughed at me. And I had all the data.

So I went to the state and the guy tells me, I'm sorry, I made the trip up here, Bob, but there's nothing I can do. So you know, it's that kind of thing where you really need to pay attention to what your local government is doing, what your state government is doing, and engage and engage and encourage others to engage, because once you engage, then they hear from you. That changes the political equation for elected officials. And again, you know, that's why we believe in the Prosperity for Us Foundation mission is at the grass roots with the citizens that we will make a long term difference if we are able to get these things accomplished, that will ensure sure, you know, long term prosperity and economic opportunity for Americans.

Yeah, yeah, it's you know, we were talking a second ago about how just history could repeat itself or has and how some things have done where they don't repeat themselves, and right now we're seeing this repeating of how England treated the American colonies. You know, there's a reason why I think we keep hearing more and more. It used to be just the far extreme, maybe right conspiracy theorist whatever, would say things like taxes, theft and that kind of stuff. That is becoming a mainstream, commonplace statement.

And I think, you know, the government needs to be careful. Luckily, you know, President Trump is in there, and and but had he not been, it probably the chance of the American Revolution repeating itself, I think is a real thing. I think a lot of people were really worried about, you know, an uprising in a civil war that the American people have had enough because just like founding fathers, you can only get pushed around so much and taken advantage of till people finally, you know, stand up for themselves exactly. So hopefully they make no well hopefully you know, we got another after President Trump has done hopefully another eight years solid of conservative principles in the White House to keep this rolling.

But you know, we don't want that was a bad part of our history too, just like slavery. We don't want that to have repeat itself, you know, And. We need to learn You're right, we need to learn from our history, you know, and your comments about efforts to revise our history are wrong because you know, people at the time did what they thought was right, you know, depending whether they're in the north or the South and those kinds of things. It was a different time.

But we've learned from that through the years. You know. Politics has often been called the science of muddling through, you know, and it is that, you know, And and one of the things that you learned too, is there's not just a right way and a wrong way. There are multiple legitimate interests that have to come together to try to find the golden mean of agreement, you know, and you know, and that's the process that has to occur.

Uh and uh. And efforts by one side to dominate the other, particularly on the left trying to dominate the other Conservatives is such a threat to our country. And that begins again very much at the local level and the engagement of the American people and their communities and what goes around. Yeah.

Absolutely, Hey, we got a few minutes left. We kept here for a while, But I do want to ask about sure amac. Oh, so you talked about amac you were you were there for a while. Yeah, yeah, so you were you were, were the president of it and the mature American citizens you talked about it was the conservative the conservative alternative to AAR.

I did not realize ARP had a political leaning one way or another. I mean, I'm not old enough. No, yeah, yeah, yeah yeah. AMAC.

I was president of AMAC Action, which was the affiliate of AMAC for public affairs engagement, and we built from the two point two million members in AMAC. We were able to I had a great team, uh, to have eight hundred thousand of the AMAC members engage in public affairs activities and make their voices known to elected officials. AARP, Well, they're not very public in terms of what they've done. They were extremely instrumental in the passage of Obamacare, you know, which you know, was an effort to to take us to you know, a total public health system like the UK is and you know, and I would say, many of the problems that we have today, you know, in our healthcare system and having to wait a long time and you know, where we didn't have to beforre for certain procedures and things like that is a direct function of their efforts to do that.

When they talked about the single pair system, the single pair system was essentially a federal government payer system. Were insurance companies that pay set rates and things like that. It's nonsense, that's absolute socialism, you know, and that's why people from other countries come here for that. Uh.

They've they've also been, you know, not supportive of election integrity legislation. They've been not supportive of dealing with prescription drug middle middlemen, you know, because you know, those operate as cartels, you know, for for the for the those are called PBM's Physician Benefit to UH management organizations another one group that handles hospital purchases. They control those prices, they control the supply of them, they control who makes them so that they can sell them, you know. And those are cartels within the healthcare system.

And and and of course AARP you know was was really you know, sitting on the sidelines and that. So they've not been helpful that we think from the standpoint of really serving you know, the healthcare UH and retirement issues you know that that Americans have. Uh, they've been more in keeping with the left, you know, and and the and the and the Democrats that are more liberal rather than you know, in playing that political game subliminally and but you. Know, it provides some of the same services and products.

That AMAC has all the benefits, you know, and you know, and they're conservative. They have a great magazine you know, that comes out six times a year. There's lots of information on their websites and uh, and they offer a lot of specials from time to time. They offer insurance, health insurance, life insurance, Medicare, Medicare advantage.

They're very big in that. So you can really, uh, you can really deal with them, and and I think that's far preferable as conservatives to you know, funding the liberal agenda of a ar P. Yeah, awesome. Hey, one last thing, I know you're you're on the board of directors of the Second Genesis Foundation, and I I am.

I was reading about that and can you just go a little bit into what Second Genesis does, because I was reading its site and the mission it has, which is phenomenal and it's so badly needed in today's. We had actually started I have been the chairman, the second chairman of that four years ago. We actually had residential care centers for drug and alcohol addicted people, dependent people, and we found we found that it became very difficult for us to sustain it because you know, where we had federal money, they're asking us to do a through G, but the only paying for a through C. And so we we had to outplace our patients that we had and liquidate the assets that we had the form of the foundation.

And with that foundation, we helped incubate and support very promising or needed drug treatment and prevention programs, largely in the in the Washington d C, del Marva, Washington, Maryland, in Virginia, in West Virginia, and particularly where there are ones that for example, there's there's one in West Virginia called Lily's and I think President Trump had recognized it in his first term where a home was set up for women who were pregnant but also drug dependent and they got they got medical care, you know, all the way through through their balance of their pregnancy and the birth. And so we many many women you know, that have had drug problems have also had children, and so we tend to see what we can do to support those kinds of programs, but also programs that are that really have in place an active curriculum, if you will, and training program to help people recover and and live a life of abstinence and be sober for the rest of their lives. And that takes a long time. And so it's been it's been great joy.

We've been invited from time to time to graduates, you know, of different kinds of residential programs you know, around the area, and it makes a difference. You know, if you can make a difference in in one person's life, it's going to make a difference in all those people around them too, are affected by. By the. Of the dependent problems that they have.

So it's been very, very rewarding. And you know, we've managed our money well. We've been able to we've invested it well so that we've been able to, uh still sustain our original principle, but fund all these programs off the dividends and interests that we've received. So it's because we're business guys at heart, and so we apply business principles.

Right, that's all. I mean. That's another example of of doing things locally at the community level, rather than depending on the government to do it or provide it or whatever. It just is.

Yeah, it works, it works. It works. That's awesome. You or you've got your hands in the lot.

So I don't know how you were hour tonight because I was just you you have been. Yeah, they they started early, but I'm delighted to be able to talk with you and your and your viewers. So we covered a lot. Was there anything you would like to leave our viewers and listeners with that We didn't any topics or any just you know, any any words of wisdom and that you'd like to leave them with before we let you go and give you back the rest of your night.

Well again, to repeat myself, all politics begins at home and begins in your community. And it's so important that people really engage, learn about the issues, read about them, you know, go to the websites you know, particularly, don't rely on just legacy media. You know. Typically you know, some of the legacy media you know want you to know the news the way they want you to know the news rather than the way it is, you know.

And so, and it's really important at the local level that you look at different sources and coverage of the same kinds of matters to get a better question and reach out to your councilman or councilpersons, or your state legislators or mayor and let them know and get answers from them and hold them, hold them accountable, and get good answers from them, and not just bland, you know, broad vague kinds of answers, but engage. And that's what we're about in terms of the Prosperity for US Foundation is we all have a stake in the continuing health and freedom of this country and it all begins with us at home. Awesome, Well, thank you so much sir. Again, thank you Bob for your time tonight.

So glad we had you on and thank you every thanks, yeah, and thanks you pleas would be with you. Yeah, it was great. Hopefully you enjoyed this for me and I hope for many others. I hope everyone enjoyed it.

Thank you for tuning in or watching this after the fact, and thank you all of our sponsors. We want to give as much time to Bob on this, so we don't want even mention him. You can read you can read him at the end. But again, thank you so much, sir.

Hope you have a wonderful evening. And oh and I would say one other thing, go to the Prosperity for US dot Foundation website. Yep, we've been rolling out at the bottom so we'll definitely. Oh you have oh good, okay, terrific.

Okay, yeah, we put up a rob put up AMAX website. You put that up. Yeah we uh, we definitely are showing that out all right. I want to make sure my mom she was watching listen.

She checks out AMAC has a good alternative to AARP. So yeah, well it's expensive. It's what fourteen dollars a year? Right, oh my lord? So but again, thank you so much. You have to everyone else.

Thank you. Tune in next week here on stew and then Thank you.