Values Voter Summit Interview With Congressman John Hostettler: What is the proper role of the government? What can states do to put the federal government back in its jurisdiction? The federal government is far too large, but what are the practical things we can do about it? Tune in now to find out!

Air Date: 10/31/2019

Guest: John Hostettler

On-air Personalities: David Barton, Rick Green, and Tim Barton

Listen:

Download: Click Here

Transcription note:  As a courtesy for our listeners’ enjoyment, we are providing a transcription of this podcast. Transcription will be released shortly. However, as this is transcribed from a live talk show, words and sentence structure were not altered to fit grammatical, written norms in order to preserve the integrity of the actual dialogue between the speakers. Additionally, names may be misspelled or we might use an asterisk to indicate a missing word because of the difficulty in understanding the speaker at times. We apologize in advance.

President Thomas Jefferson said, “€œI know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society, but the people themselves. And, if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power.”€

RICK:

Welcome to the intersection of faith and the culture. This is WallBuilders Live! Where we”€™re talking about today”€™s hottest topics on policy, faith, and the culture; always doing that from a biblical, historical, and constitutional perspective.

Always that same perspective, different location. We’re actually headed out to Washington D.C. and are going to be live at the Values Voter Summit where we had a chance to sit down with Congressman John Hostettler.

All of us will be talking about the proper role of government and what states can do to put the federal government back in its box. David, Tim, we’re always saying the federal government too big. But, what can we actually do about it and get it back down to its right size?

David Barton is here, America’s premier historian and the founder of WallBuilders. Also, Tim Barton, national speaker, pastor and president of WallBuilders, and my name is Rick Green, I’m a former Texas state legislator, national speaker, and author.

How to Shrink Big Government

I just throw that out to you guys. I mean, we definitely know it’s too big. But, what are the right ways to shrink it and get it back in its proper place?

DAVID:

Well, one thing you’ll find very hard to do is to take the offending party, which is the federal government, the party that has made itself a lot bigger than it’s supposed to be constitutionally. We talked before that the enumerated powers allow the federal government to do 17 things. The federal government says, “€œNo, we want to change that to about 2000.”€

So, it’s going to be really hard to expect them to put themselves back in the box that they escaped from. It’s just not likely. So, it really takes some outside groups.

Ken Ivory and Positive Changes in Utah

We’ve seen individuals like Ken Ivory, who is a state legislator in Utah who really championed trying to get the federal government back in his constitutional box. Utah has passed a great state law that’s called on them to take measurements of what it is to restore federalism. How do you do that?

So, they’re now teaching college courses on that. And, federalism something that the Founding Fathers covered in the Federalist Papers: the proper role between the states and the federal government. And, we’ve also seen a lot of the national legal groups banding together to say, “€œHey, we’ve got to get the federal government out of a lot of issues.”€

Texas Public Policy Foundation

And so, we’ve got issues even at the Supreme Court this year that deal with limiting the federal government, getting it back to the 10th Amendment. That is an issue that is growing in support. And, now we even see that Texas Public Policy Foundation”€”which even though it says “€œ”€™Texas,”€ they’re really a group that has influence all over the United States.

They’ve actually created a division now that is to work on getting the federal government back inside the box. Plus, of all people, they’ve hired John Hostettler, a former U.S. Congressman and very good friend, a great constitutionalist. They’ve hired him to be the voice to put that together.

So, it’s a really good movement that’s happening to try to get the federal government back inside that 10th-Amendment box where they should be.

RICK:

Well, we’re headed out to Values Voter Summit to talk to John Hostettler. We’ll be right back on WallBuilders Live!

Abraham Lincoln said, “€œWe the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts. Not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”€ This Precarious Moment Book

David:

This is David Barton. I want to let about a brand new book we have called This Precarious Moment: Six Urgent Steps That Will Save You, Your family, and Our Country. Jim Garlow and I have co-authored this book and we take six issues that are hot in the culture right now.

Issues that we’re dealing with, issues such as immigration, race relations, our relationship with Israel, the rising generation Millennials, and the absence of the church in the culture wars, and where American heritage is, our godly heritage. We look at all six of those issues right now that are under attack and we give you both Biblical and historical perspective on those issues that provide solutions on what each of us can do right now to make a difference.

These are all problems that are solvable if we’ll get involved. So, you can grab the book This Precarious Moment and find out what you can do to make a difference. This Precarious Moment is available at WallBuilders.com.

Welcome Former Congressman John Hostettler

RICK:

Welcome back to WallBuilders Live! We’re at Values Voter Summit, live with former Congressman John Hostettler. Let me see if I can follow this right.

He was a Congressman in Indiana, now lives in D.C., and is working with the Texas Public Policy Foundation. That’s quite a triangle there I’m trying to draw.

SPEAKER: M1

If you involve Texas, it is now an international travel.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Indiana, D.C., and Texas: which one of these things doesn’t belong?

RICK:

You know what, though? We feel like you’re family now because you’re working for an organization that has “€œTexas”€ in the name. So, you”€™re right at home with David Barton and me.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Yes.

RICK:

Hey, man, appreciate you, brother. You”€™ve been a friend of WallBuilders for a long time. I just did a tour with you back in February. We did a tour and had a great time.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

That”€™s right.

RICK:

Excited about what you’re doing with TPPF. Tell us about this immigration project.

TPPF Immigration Project

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Well, Texas Public Policy Foundation is the largest state policy organization in the United States. And, even though it’s obviously on the southern border”€”has the largest stretch of southern border in the country”€”has not ventured into immigration or even border security much, because it’s perceived to be a federal issue. As a result of the new initiative that Texas Public Policy Foundation”€”I’ll call it TPPF”€”has taken on it”€™s states trust.

Now, the foundation is going to get involved in immigration. And, we’re starting off with border security. To remind people, whenever I was chairman of the subcommittee in the House of Representatives, the subcommittee’s name was the “€œSubcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims.”€

Immigration Reform and Control Act

While the two issues are obviously related, they’re not the same. And, simply put, since 1986 when Ronald Reagan signed into law the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, Americans have desired a secure border. But, we just haven’t gotten there.

So, we know that what we’ve got to do first is secure the border. If you don’t know who’s coming in and why they’re coming in, then everything you do on the interior”€”what we would refer to as “€œimmigration reform”€”€” generally is going to be for naught.

RICK:

Right, regardless of your position on immigration, how many in, and all that, if we don’t know who’s coming in, any system is really not going to work.

DAVID:

I guess unless you’re complete open immigration. Then, you don’t need a system or border security right.

RICK & JOHN:

Yeah, that’s true.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

And, that philosophy is prevalent here in Washington D.C. Unfortunately, in many areas across the country {believe} that there should be no borders.

RICK:

Can you point to a nation that’s done it and done that well?

Borderless Nations?

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Oh, no. Even countries or empires that have gone away into the dustbin of history, have been as a result, to a great extent, of open borders or effectively open borders. So, a country is not sovereign if it doesn’t have borders. And, we have to have borders.

And, even recently, like three or four months ago, the New York Times said there was a crisis on the border. So, when the New York Times and the Texas Public Policy Foundation are on the same page, you know that something is monumental that’s going on.

RICK:

I’m curious, John, as a side note on those folks that are open-borders advocates. These are people, of course, who have no doors on their home.

DAVID:

They’re not in Hollywood and don’t have gates around their estates. There are no fences or security.

RICK:

That’s right. People can come spend the night at their house any time. Right?

I would assume that’s the case, because they would be intellectually honest. They wouldn’t in any way”€”

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

I don’t know about the “€œhonest”€ part. But, I do question the “€œintellectual,”€ because what you once you once you bring this point, this very valid, obvious analogy to them, this puzzled look gets on their face and, “€œWell, of course not. Of course I want to secure my house.”€

“€œWhy do you do that?”€

“€œBecause I care and understand the danger outside the door without it locked.”€

RICK:

And, “€œI care about my kids, my family. We need to protect them.”€

We”€™ve Got to Do Something Soon

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

And, the direction we’re going and the perspective of how we run our family, making sure that the grocery stay in their fridge or whatever it is. But, it’s lost on them unfortunately. Yet, we can’t let the fact that it’s lost on these people stop us from doing the right thing, because if we let that philosophy prevail, then at some point it becomes too late.

RICK:

Yes.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

And, even when they find out that they were wrong, it will be too late for the rest of us. So, we’ve got to do something soon.

RICK:

Well, you started with securing the borders. Of course, David and I worked with TPPF effort for years. We see them as a solution-producing organization, right?

That’s what they do: come up with ideas that work or bring back ideas that have been proven to work in the past. Usually “€œthere’s nothing new under the sun,”€ right? Every solution that they propose, somewhere at some point in history, has worked well.

So, talk to us about solutions. How do you secure the border? Then, we’ll get to the immigration issue.

How Do You Secure the Border?

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Well, one of the issues that has arisen over the past few years is”€”once again to step back when I was chairman of the subcommittee many years ago”€” the “€œmagnet,”€ you would say, that brought most of the people to the southern border was a job, a better living, and the ability to send money back home. Most of these people weren’t what we would call “€œimmigrants.”€

They were migrants they’d come here and they would stay a while.

RICK:

Right.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Then, when they had acquired enough wealth, they could go back and buy a small farm, start a business, whatever it was. But, that was the magnet that we called the “€œjobs magnet.”€

Asylum is Today”€™s Magnet

Today the magnet is asylum. And, individuals know that if they set foot on U.S. soil, they can make an asylum claim. Then, that claim has to be adjudicated if there is a credible fear found of persecution, if they should return to their home country.

RICK:

Now, why is that the “€œnew”€ magnet. Did we create that magnet through policy in the last few years?

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

No, that magnet has been around in the United States for decades. It’s just that the smugglers, the cartels, are sophisticated.

RICK:

They figured it out.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Yes, and to be honest, there is this push out of, especially, the northern triangle countries like Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador where the culture and climate has become so violent, whether it’s gang violence or domestic violence, whatever it is. It’s pushing people out of those countries, especially women and children, pushing them north.

RICK:

Genuinely wanting to escape chaos and come to a better place.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Yes, and so many of them are coming to the southern border. Now, that’s not all of them; but, it’s a large portion of them. And, they’re attempting to claim asylum, a refuge, from this violence.

Well, that’s not what the– it’s for political purposes.

DAVID:

That”€™s not what it was for; that”€™s right. We’re talking about crime. They’ve got high crimes and a lot of corruption.

And, that’s not a cause for asylum. That’s a cause for reform in your government.

Asylum Cooperation Agreements

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

That’s exactly right. As an aside, that’s what the administration is attempting to do with what are called “€œAsylum Cooperation Agreements”€ that they’ve reached with El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. And, that is, part of those agreements say that instead of asylum claims being adjudicated the United States for individuals who have made it to the southern border of our country, they will be sent back to one of those three countries that also have an asylum system.

And, one of those three countries will provide the asylum process for them. So, that’s what these agreements are for.

RICK:

Based on your expertise and background, do you think that those steps are good? Are they steps in the right direction?

DAVID:

Are they enforceable? Or, will they be enforced?

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

They are being enforced at this time. They’re being challenged in the courts. And, who knows what’s gonna happen in the courts.

“€œInterim Final Rule”€

Unfortunately, a lot of us know what’s going to happen in the courts; it’s usually bad. But, there’s another instance called the “€œInterim Final Rule”€ that is another approach to this asylum issue. If an individual makes it to the southern border, claims asylum, and has not made an asylum claim in another safe country prior to that, then they will be turned back.

Now, that had a challenge in the San Francisco District Court and the Ninth Circuit. DAVID:

We actually won that one.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

That’s right. Yes, ultimately.

DAVID:

That’s one we had on Good News Friday. We couldn’t believe the Ninth Circus came out with a good ruling.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

That’s right. Did you say the “€œNinth Circus”€?

DAVID:

I did.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

That is not lost on us.

So, yes, that one is working. And, that is staying. Now, that is still in the legal stream, you might say, and it’s going to make its way to the Supreme Court.

But, given what this Supreme Court has said in the past on some other similarly related border and immigration issues, we feel pretty confident about it. So, the administration is working within the context of the law that is there now. But, ultimately, asylum policy has got to be reformed because judges are beginning to bend to this claim of asylum for violence.

The 1951 Convention After WWII

And, once again, we mentioned, as you said, David, that was never the intention of the 1951 Convention after World War Two. Those people saw what happened as people were fleeing the communist expansion into Eastern Europe, and the United States signed on to that convention and started this process of providing for asylum for individuals who were fleeing political dangers, as opposed to criminal, violent crime danger.

RICK:

But, John I got to stop you. For those people listening who are saying, “€œYeah, but why not for violence?”€

DAVID:

Well then, let’s create an immigration system for those in Chicago, New York City, and all the other because that’s violent crime.

Why don”€™t we take immigrants from Chicago to Texas border, because you got violent crime in Chicago?

RICK:

And, if you do allow it for violence, I would think those numbers would soar. We can’t handle it.

The OTMs Are Coming

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

You think of all the places in Asia, Africa and South America, that if you just make it to the Western Hemisphere”€”and this is happening. There are so many OTMs, other than Mexicans, that are making their way into the United States from Africa, from Asia, that are making the asylum claims.

RICK:

Those numbers are staggering because you typically think of”€”at least my perception was always that they were all from Mexico. But, not at all.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Right, true. No, over overwhelmingly, the Mexican economy is prospering relative to what it did about 10, 15, or 20 years ago. So, we’re not seeing that.

What we’re seeing is a preponderance of OTMs, other than Mexicans, who are making them their way to the southern border. And, many of them are claiming asylum.Over two-thirds of those claims ultimately get denied.

But, the issue is, in that process some of them are released into the interior. After 150 days they can apply for a license to go to work. And, after a month, they can get that license to work; then, they’re in the interior of the United States.

And, not surprisingly, they don’t show”€”

DAVID:

They don’t show up at their court dates. Imagine that.

RICK:

Now, that’s one of things I want to ask you about today, because when I read those headlines and see how many are being dumped into these cities all over the country, I think Wait a minute. I expected that to happen under Obama.

Why is that still happening under Trump? Is there just not a way to stop that yet?

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Well, the numbers are staggering: almost a million this year, apprehensions, at the border. So, it’s a numbers issue. It’s a resources issue.

Border Patrol Officers

DAVID:

Because we still have a very porous border, even with the million that are stopped there. JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Yes.

DAVID:

We’ve still got so many that are getting in who are not stopped. And, it is a personnel issue.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

That”€™s right. And, the reason being is that we have Border Patrol officers who are there to actually enforce the law, execute the law. But, they have this humanitarian issue that they’re dealing with. So, we have we have CPB officers literally going to the market, buying diapers, buying formula.

RICK:

With their own money.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Well, in some cases. And, they’re not watching the border because of this humanitarian situation at the border. So, you have that.

Then, you have, as I mentioned earlier, the courts that have stepped in and made it very difficult to execute the law.

RICK:

We have different things that are being proposed. What is TPPF suggesting? And, what is your argument for how to how to solve this, long term?

Long-Term Solutions

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Well, we have got to have asylum policy reform. We’ve got to make a wall of separation, if you will, between this idea of criminal violence and political persecution.

RICK:

And, that is Congress passing a law that says, “€œHey, we’re going to clear this up for you. We’ve seen some judicial decisions that have been going the wrong direction. So, this is what “€˜asylum”€™ means. These are the only cases”€””€

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

It would have to. If the president doesn’t start disregarding these unconstitutional incursions into the executive function; that’s maybe a discussion for another day.

DAVID:

That is a great separation-of-powers point, though. That’s right, there are limited”€”I mean, the Constitution is pretty clear on where the lines are drawn. And, the courts, as they have for a long time, decided they want to run everything.

So, you’re exactly right. The president has to stand up on some of that.

RICK:

Are you saying that immigration policy is not an Article 3? I thought the courts were supposed to make all decisions about”€”

DAVID:

Exactly, exactly,

RICK:

I don”€™t know where I got that. Must be from law school. That probably is what they are teaching these days.

I”€™m glad that you raised it. That is a whole other discussion.

Two-Thirds of the World Could Come

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Yes; but, to clarify in law, Congress needs to step in and make that wall of separation. And to your point earlier, if the United States wants to be unique in that it says, “€œWe will create our own unique refugee system, asylum system for violent crime,”€ then we’ll do that.

And, once again, the American public will be faced with the idea that probably two-thirds of the world’s population would”€”

RICK:

Would fit that definition.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Yes. And, that would obviously never fly, especially electorally. So, that could happen. The point is that Congress has got to come in on asylum.

Another thing that we’re working on is talking about states being collaborators with the federal government on immigration. It’s interesting, I was chair of the subcommittee for four years. And, we’ve done a paper, Texas Public Policy and a really good analyst Eliot {Raya}, have done a paper on the Australian and Canadian system.

And, I didn’t know this when I was chairman of the doggone subcommittee. But, in Canada, Quebec decides who immigrates into Quebec.

DAVID:

That’s right.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Only Quebec

RICK:

Really?

The Canadian System

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Now, with the exception of a background check and a medical screening, Canada does not decide who immigrates to Quebec. Quebec does.

DAVID:

That’s right.

RICK:

Really?

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

So, just think about this. Canada, and to a certain extent Australia, is getting federalism better than we are in the United States. And so, we’re looking at this idea of states being collaborators because”€”

RICK:

Now, how do you prevent them from”€”say California has a really open policy. Once they come in there, then that person comes to Texas.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Well, that’s a great question. We haven’t gotten that far yet in our research and what we”€™d do there. But, there is the precedent just north of the border and with our friends in Australia, that states in Australia’s states and territories and Canada”€™s provinces and territories that have their own need.

RICK:

More of a local more of a local definition”€”

DAVID:

But, that was part of the early thing. When you immigrated to America, you didn’t immigrate to America. You were going to live in Baltimore, Miami, or somewhere; and, those states wanted to have a voice about who came and lived in their state.

RICK:

Really?

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

That’s right.

DAVID:

That was the early vision.

Work on Both Issues

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

That’s right.

RICK:

So, you guys are working on both issues: secure the border and what is the actual immigration policy going to be?

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

That’s right.

RICK;

And, who comes, how many, how do we grow that.

JOHN HOSTETTLER

Yes. And, who decides that.

RICK;

Who decides that.

Religious Asylum

DAVID:

The interesting”€”and, I don’t know where this going. But, I’ve seen that so much had been done under a religious asylum requests. People come in from religious persecution, particularly out of the Middle East.

And, I saw that under Trump, the numbers have dropped significantly. Then, I also saw that this year 73 percent of those being accepted have been Christians, as opposed to Muslims about equal. And, if you look at ISIS and what’s going in Turkey and everything else, it’s hard to argue that Muslims are in greater religious asylum danger than Christians were.

Yet, we just weren”€™t taking any.

RICK;

Now we are.

DAVID:

We are now. And so, the number of Christians has gone up . Helping run an organization that deals with persecuted Christians, we’ve only been able to get one persecuted Christian into the United States; but, we sent to Australia all the time.

They take persecuted Christians, as does Canada and other places. Interesting you mentioned those two countries, because that’s where we send persecuted Christians right now. We just can’t get them in the United States.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

That’s very interesting. That’s something we’ll have to look into.

The Border Security Coalition

RICK:

John, you’ve got a pretty interesting coalition coming together here. So, Heritage Foundation, Freedom Works, Citizens For Self-Governance. You’ve got Ken Blackwell, Jim Dement. I mean, there’s a lot of people coming together on this.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Right, and this is the Border Security Coalition that I’ve signed on to these this statement of principles regarding asylum policy reform, border security, and immigration policy; that those, in general, should be in the interest of the American people, as opposed to the interests of a foreign”€”

RICK:

The general world.

DAVID:

That”€™s great.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Right. Exactly.

RICK:

Imagine that. America first, I like that.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

That’s right. That’s kind of why they got together in 1787, when they planned this whole thing out..

RICK:

Imagine that. So, how do people follow this coalition and the things that you’re doing? Is there an easy website to go to for this?

Helpful Websites

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

You can go to StatesTrust.com. The idea that we’re going to try to reinvigorate the idea of putting trust in the states.

RICK:

Imagine that..

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Or Texaspolicy.com. You can go get there either way.

RICK:

TexasPolicy.com or StatesTrust.com.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Yes.

RICK:

Former Congressman John Hostettler, great to have you, brother. Thanks for letting us steal you for a few minutes. Have a great conference.

JOHN HOSTETTLER:

Thank you, Rick and David. Good to be with you.

RICK:

Stay with us. We’ll be right back with David and Tim Barton.

America’s Hidden History

DAVID:

Hi, this is David Barton.

TIM:

And, this is Tim Barton, and we want to let about a series that’s happening right now on TBN on Thursday night. TBN is the Trinity Broadcasting Network. Every Thursday night, there’s a series that we’ve filmed called America’s Hidden History.

And, this season is called “€œAmerica’s Hidden Heroes.”€ The reason is, we highlight heroes from American history. For years we’ve been focusing on the forgotten history and heros of the nation.

And now, we have a TV show just highlighting some of those heroes.

DAVID:

These are inspiring stories about some of the greatest people maybe you’ve never heard about. We go on location to the sites and show you where the events happened. It’s the stories of folks like Bronco Charlie, Stagecoach Mary, Jedediah Smith, Robert Smalls, and so many inspiring folks.

TIM:

Now, this happens every Thursday night, and the time is gonna be different based on where you live. Either way, we think this is something that will so encourage and inspire you in learning some of these great stories from America’s Hidden History.

Questions of Power

Thomas Jefferson said, “€œIn questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”€

RICK:

We’re back home with WallBuilders Live! Thanks for staying with us. Well, we’re back in studio.

Now, that interview that you just heard with John Hostettler, former congressman from Indiana, was done out at the Values Voter Summit in Washington D.C. just a couple of weeks ago. David, Tim, we had the chance to visit with a lot of great folks. We are going to have more interviews next week and the week after, from that time at in D.C.

But, what an interesting conversation to start thinking about how to get the immigration piece fixed in the correct way and actually get the states involved in that, in what we used to see as only a federal issue. I say “€œused to;”€ recently, we’ve seen it as only a federal issue. But, in fact, states do have a voice in this.

A State”€™s Issue

TIM:

Yeah, and, guys, that’s one of the things that we’ve talked about on this program before. In fact, Dad, in one of the books that you’ve done recently, This Precarious Moment, there’s a section on immigration. And, this is even highlighted, some of that history, and footnoted so people can go back and see the original sources and where this came from.

But, it’s something that we have pointed out for many years as part of the broken system: anytime you remove the people the local level where it’s impacting them, the federal government does a pretty poor job.

They do poorly in many things. We could go through the Department of Education and how that’s been a failure. But, the further away you get from the people directly impacted, generally, the worse it’s going to be when you have the federal government running it.

Certainly, when you take states out of the equation, as was identified the interview, and you have people living in these states who are going to be here for so many months due to so much of the bureaucracy. Then, when they are supposed to show up for court dates, they don”€™t. And, they’re lost in the states.

Well, the federal government is not in those states to navigate and help solve those problems. But, if this was a state issue, it would be much more interesting. And, Rick, I thought it was a very, very good point: What happens if it becomes a state issue and then California says, “€œEverybody’s okay.”€

Then, they get California driver’s licenses and move out of California into other states. That now is another interesting problem. But, this is one of the great things in federalism.

When power does go back to the states, the states have the authority. Obviously, in Texas people are moving in from other states. We have the authority, then, to do maybe some background checks or different ideas and thoughts.

Values Voter Summit Interview

So, certainly this would be a little complicated. It’ll be interesting going back to the states and having the states and resolve it, because there would be conflicts among the states. But, at least it’s a conflict in a location where it’s supposed to be, where the power that belongs the states, not something the federal government has usurped from the states.

RICK:

What a great topic for our Foundations of Freedom Thursday and a special guest for us, former Congressman John Hostettler. Tomorrow we’re going to have our Good News Friday program with Jenna Ellis Reeves.

Next week Matt Staver, Eric Metaxas, Richard Harris, Todd Starnes, will all join us. It’s a star-studded lineup. You don’t want to miss all those great interviews.

Check it out at WallBuildersLive.com. We appreciate you listening today to WallBuilders Live!

Liberties and Freedom Are Worth Defending

Samuel Adams said, “€œThe liberties of our Country and the freedom of our civil Constitution are worth defending against hazards. And, it is our duty to defend them against all attacks.”€