[00:00:06] Includes everything but those horrible opposing views. The Kate Dalley Show starts now. Yes, in the Industrial Revolution we saw the creation of a new class of the urban proletariat and much of the political and social history of the last 200 years involved what to do with this class and the new problems and opportunities. Now we see the creation of a new massive class of useless people
[00:00:32] as of useless people as computers become better and better in more and more fields. There is a distinct possibility that computers will outperform us in most tasks and will make humans redundant. A lovely statement from Klaus Schwab's Klaus Schwab's guy. Anyway, um yeah I know I don't even
[00:01:01] ugh. How do you, what do you even say about that? Anyway, we're useless eaters. That's what we are, bottom feeders and and useless. So welcome back, Kate Dalley Show and of course Second Hour and I have a guest. I can't wait to hear from her. Mandy Guna Sekura is on with me. She is the former EPA Chief of Staff and I welcome you Mandy. How are you? I'm doing great and it's wonderful to be with you, Kate.
[00:01:29] Thank you. Um so I really appreciate you coming on. I I actually was really intrigued. I I wanted to hear from you because the this was basically the question and um you served in 2020 and then of course seven uh 2017 to 19 um you've been uh in this organization uh in the uh EPA and so was the Biden EPA a regulatory agency or a money laundering operation for the Democrat Party and I cannot wait to
[00:01:59] hear the answer on this one. I probably can guess but uh but please tell us some of the backdrop to this and what led to this question and then of course uh let's answer it. Yeah certainly so you know what we saw over the course of the Biden administration really was an extension of what started during the Obama administration and a lot of this has to do with the fact that the same people, the same appointees that served in Obama also came and served during the Biden administration.
[00:02:28] And what they did specifically at EPA I like to say that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is typically the tip of the spear for this Democrat approach to governing whereby they take an important agency that people are sympathetic to EPA which is protecting public health and the environment. That is the actual mission of the agency but they co-opt it and twist it and corrupt it for their own political purposes and they do this through two main ways. One way is through the power of regulations
[00:02:57] and oversight slash enforcement that's sort of their regulatory tool and the other piece is through this grant making process or as you ask the question uh what it essentially became and especially during the Biden administration is more of a money laundering operation whereby taxpayer dollars are sent to specific offices and at EPA during the Biden administration they created a whole new arm
[00:03:25] called the Environmental Justice Office. Now environmental justice is a policy consideration that had already been well ingrained in EPA regulations. There's actually an office that exists within the administrator's office giving you just a little snapshot of agency office structure and hierarchy and it was there so that as regulations come through which is what the agency does they could make considerations for how vulnerable communities may or may not be impacted by certain standards and
[00:03:54] regulations. That's the tangible role. What the Biden administration did is they took this idea this concept that again people are very emotional about and sympathetic towards they created a whole new office they put in a lot of people and then what they ended up doing is not investing in projects and ideas that actually helped vulnerable communities and I know some of those we can talk about successes during the
[00:04:19] Trump administration that they're trying to turn back on right now but they used that as as a guise really or a cover for what they were actually doing which was taking 20 billion dollars billion two times EPA's entire budget that Congress Democrats in charge on Capitol Hill had given EPA and they doled out those dollars to various groups that have very little to do with protecting public health or improving the environment and a lot to do with
[00:04:47] expanding the political reach and power of the Democratic left and so that's why and that's what I'm referencing and to answer your question specifically under the Biden administration one of the purpose of EPA was to truly take taxpayer dollars wash them under this guise of environmental justice and hand out billions of your
[00:05:10] money all of our money taxpayer dollars all of our money people sometimes say government money it's our money and give this to groups that are pushing political causes that fly in the face of the agency's actual mission and are inconsistent with a lot of people's basic beliefs of what should go towards governance credible EPA being a credible institution and implementing something along the lines of federalism
[00:05:39] you know the when the EPA got started it it honestly got going within like six months and it was 10,000 I think people all of a sudden and it was this huge entity and what are your feelings about the EPA as a conservative what are what are your feelings about the entire EPA the beginning of the EPA how it got started now what it's what what what what
[00:06:04] how would you describe that to somebody on on the fact that you talked about the families and I mean not the families but the um vulnerable what is the exact mission when conservatives are in the EPA I'm always conservative I'm always just wondering what is the then the mission role of EPA because EPA seems to be the environmental you know project so um for for for for people in government so what is it what what how would you classify it
[00:06:31] yeah it is the mission itself is very important because you have to go back to how it came about the 1970s we were um you know on the still on the high winds of industrial success and understanding the impact of industrial activity on surrounding environments ecosystems and people that wasn't really in the common vernacular or well understood until much later and so we were we had all sorts of
[00:07:01] very serious pollution problems and so EPA really was this uh this agency that was created that combined a lot of different agencies at the time that were working on various projects it was designed to consolidate those efforts and then they also passed some key statutes that we still operate under today things like the clean air act which has been amended a couple times the clean water act um the the the first form of how we deal with chemicals in industrial applications
[00:07:31] and how we deal with legacy pollution um and on and on and on but most of those were passed during that time period and so the the purpose and mission of agency was born out of that and what what's happened though and the criticism from a conservative perspective
[00:07:47] is you know this is you know this is this is the adage that um president former president reagan put so aptly that regardless of how well intentioned an agency begins at some point it loses sight of that and just becomes about preservation of self
[00:08:01] right and that has certainly infected EPA in so many different ways it's become bloated uh it has become extremely unaccountable it's become duplicative and wasteful and then even worse it's been subject to these political influences where that very important mission can be manipulated to achieve political purposes for example the war on fossil fuels that president biden
[00:08:27] reinitiated reinitiated reinitiated reinitiated reinitiated reinitiated reaganuki where he was using regulatory tools to go after coal oil and natural gas energy sources that provide 80 percent of our daily energy needs just as one example yeah for sure how how many people were in the biden EPA that were carried over to are now EPA under Trump Well, the majority of the people, so there's two types of employees. There's the careers, as you call them, and the politicals.
[00:08:54] So the politicals are appointed by the incoming president and White House. And so all of the Biden White House appointees, they resigned. It's typical that on January 20th at noon, if you haven't already left, you submit your resignation, they're gone. But as far as the rest of the careers, the majority of them have, they have continued except for the few, well, actually quite many.
[00:09:21] I don't know the exact number, but a couple thousand certainly took the buyout that was offered. And then they're slowly but surely working through some of the offices, shutting down things that are affiliated and solely focused on DEI initiatives or implementing policies that are more cultural and have to do less with protecting public health and the environment. Are they scaling it down? Are we removing a lot of these jobs and removing the size of this organization? Yeah, certainly.
[00:09:50] And one of the key focuses of the administrator, Administrator Lee Zeldin and his team, they're hop-notch people, and they've been doing very serious work, is pulling back some of these unobligated funds. So $20 billion is one example.
[00:10:09] There's a $20 billion account that was set up outside of the agency to try and avoid basic scrutiny that typically occurs when a federal agency is awarding a grant. And I'm air-quoting grant, because again, back to the first part of our conversation, they weren't really grants. But they've been working really hard to bring back or claw back those dollars.
[00:10:33] And that's one approach to shrink the size and scope of the agency and these third-party groups that they fund that create all sorts of derivative problems that have nothing to do with protecting public health or the environment. And then also you've had the shutdown of that office, the environmental justice office that the Biden administration created out of whole cloth. It is gone, and the affiliated positions are gone.
[00:10:59] And they're slowly but surely working through each of the offices to make them more efficient and to get rid of either duplicative or wasteful positions that don't substantively assist in the completion of their respective missions. So in the air office, cleaning up the air, water office, cleaning up the water, and on down the line. Is this a role of DOGE? Or is this just the role of those put in by Trump? Yeah, certainly.
[00:11:27] And the Department of Government Efficiency, one of the best things it's doing is it's providing a clear picture. It's coming in, it's auditing budgets, costs, and operations. And I'll tell you, as a former chief of staff, I used to review these things. And I would often look at the people. You know, you're surrounded by all these purported experts. You've got 20 people in the room. And you ask a basic question like, okay, so what is our total budget? And no one can actually give it to you. And it was by design.
[00:11:55] It was by design to hide the ball and limit accountability and to avoid the ability of someone to come in and say, we're going to cut this by 30%. This is the starting point. This is the end point. And let's figure out how to actually implement it. That was all by design. So DOGE has come in, and they've organized this. They've shown a light to the public as well. So they're conveying this waste and fraud that is rampant to the American public. And then the people who are there, there are Department of Government Efficiency liaisons
[00:12:25] assigned to each of the agents. I believe each of the agencies. I know there's some at EPA. But I believe each of the agencies that are working closely with the president's cabinet official and his or her relative team. And that's important because DOGE itself doesn't have the legal authority to implement a lot of its regulations. Okay, we're going to come right back on that note. We'll come right back, Mandy, on that note for a few minutes. Be right back. That Kate Daly Show. We have a quick break. Stay with us. Be right back.
[00:13:07] This is the Kate Daly Show. The Kate Daly Show. KateDalyRadio.com. Over 27 million served. And let me just tell you, please go to the website and support the sponsors of the show. AllfamilyPharmacy.com forward slash Kate. CozyEarth.com. And use the code word Kate. There's just so many amazing products. MyPillow.com. Code word is Kate.
[00:13:37] Support all of that, please. And it keeps me on the air. And so I really appreciate it. KateDalyRadio.com. Also on X American News. On X every evening. You can watch it on video for free. And I love that. I've got Mandy Gunasekara. And she is the EPA former chief of staff and got a lot of questions, of course. But you were just talking about DOGE, Mandy. Yeah, certainly.
[00:14:05] And the biggest thing there is that the ability to implement their regulations, that legal authority lies at the agencies. Because agencies are creatures of statutory delegations of authority directly from Congress, which is also we could have a whole separate conversation about that. But nonetheless, it's really important that DOGE, for the work that they started, and there is a deadline on, for it to continue throughout the President Trump's administration.
[00:14:32] And so they've got to have buy-in from the cabinet officials at the various agencies that take actions pursuant to this delegated legal authority. So they have liaisons at the agencies. I know at EPA in particular, they're working very closely to not only provide the audits and that picture of what's going on, where the problems are, but the recommendations and giving those directly to the people who can legally implement them. And what about the shifting to the states, back to the states?
[00:15:03] Yeah, and I meant to say this earlier, but, you know, we just get off on conversations. But the concept, you know, there are certain things that arguably there is a federal role, or there is an innate federal role, defense and interstate commerce. But there are other issues that are innately state roles. These are things like environmental regulations and education. And that's because those are very specific and localized.
[00:15:31] So in a lot of the statutes that define EPA's authority and relative work, or they're supposed to, they have this concept of cooperative federalism, which really is alluding back to an original concept from our founders, this idea that we are a constitutional republic, whereby they had designed a structure where the majority of the power lies at the state level
[00:15:52] with a centralized federal entity to assist and provide support, but that most of the work of governing was going to be handled at the state level. And again, in my book, I get into a lot of reasons as to why that eroded over time, but specifically to environmental regulation, you think about, you know, if you're trying to control a pollutant that comes from a specific source, you have to take into account the local weather conditions, how the clouds form, the population, driving patterns.
[00:16:22] All of these things can influence the ability to effectively regulate and control various pollutants without creating such an onerous, unachievable standard that it suppresses another piece that's really important in environmental regulation, which is economic opportunity. And so the conservative approach to successful environmental regulation is a restoration of balance and prioritizing this concept of cooperative federalism,
[00:16:51] where really the states lead on a lot of these issues because they have that local knowledge, whether it's a lingering pollution issue or an immediate disaster, and they can be supported by the federal government that has immense resources and sometimes become necessary. And so that is actually how the perfect system from a conservative perspective could actually work to achieve this goal, this very noble and important goal to protect public health and the environment,
[00:17:19] but do so in a way that doesn't suppress local opportunity or create an agency subject to political manipulation. The book is called Y'all Fired, A Southern Bell's Guide to Restoring Federalism and Draining the Swamp. The people that go into the EPA, what led you into that career of the EPA? Why the EPA and not another branch of government?
[00:17:46] Well, I had been working right before President Trump got elected. I had been a counsel at the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, and I was the Republican Climate slash Clean Air Act girl. And so that experience, I worked on domestic policies as well as international issues like the Paris Climate Accord. So I was a natural fit for going into the agency that was charged with that but had been abused for political purposes
[00:18:14] to realign it so it was consistent with what the president had laid out. And really, you know, me ending up at the Senate EPW Committee, it harkens back to internships. For any young listeners, internships are the best way to figure out what you may be interested in and you can develop an affiliated expertise in. I just happen to intern during a time of cap and trade. Ah, gotcha. Okay. Kate Daly Show will be right back. Stay with me.
[00:18:57] The Kate Daly Show. Kate Daly Show. And glad you're listening on a Thursday. Tomorrow, Dr. Lee Merritt. And I just, please go get to the website. And there's so many wonderful products there, remineralizing your teeth and taking care of that and all kinds of amazing things there on the website. KateDalyRadio.com. Just hit the sponsors.
[00:19:25] And I just, I have Mandy Gunasekera on. She was the former EPA chief of staff. And, you know, I was at an event in D.C. and I met somebody from the EPA and I was talking to them. And they loved their pet project. It had something to do with climate change. I can't remember what it was, but Trump had gotten in. And I think there are people that feel that when Trump goes in,
[00:19:51] that now we're going to have a lot of conservative views that would say we don't believe in the human-caused climate change. And, of course, I don't. And then you have, so I think ideally we'd like to think that there are many, many people. Can you kind of give us like a bird's eye view of that since you served as EPA chief of staff?
[00:20:13] How many individuals there are honestly and truly pretty conservative or constitutionally minded within the EPA on their views, do you think? Well, on the career side, very little. I mean, it was, you know, what you're supposed to do if you're a career is you work for Republicans and Democrats. And so you follow the political direction. And when I was there in the first go-round in Trump 45, there was a handful.
[00:20:41] There was only a handful of careers that would actually serve out that role where they would follow the political direction reflective of the president's vision. That was voted on by the people, the majority of the people that sent him to the White House. And so, unfortunately, at EPA, that's a select few of folks.
[00:21:02] Really, the only people who that are going to be in the agency right now that have a conservative mind are going to be the political appointees with a few very, very rare exceptions. So it's really important, going back to the structural changes in the Department of Government Efficiency. Now is the opportunity for the politicals to use the power that they have via the president.
[00:21:24] Everyone serves and works at the pleasure of the president to use that to reshape these agencies to restore accountability and ensure that they can continue their work and their expenditures and operations can continue to be audited from how much money is being spent. What are these dollars actually going towards? And is it achieving its relative purpose? Does the head of the EPA do that? I mean, is the head of the EPA supposed to do that when they're in office? To kind of act like a doge?
[00:21:54] Yeah. Well, it's interesting. There's inspector generals at every agency. And, you know, I would argue that inspector general offices are unconstitutional on its face. But setting that argument aside, you know, there are these offices that Congress created at each of the agencies. And their mission is supposed to be to root out waste, fraud and abuse. And they've been around for decades.
[00:22:19] So, you know, the incoming administrator is supposed to have an ally that can present to him or her. Here's the state of play. Here's where there's waste, fraud and abuse that you may want to take a look at and make affiliated policy and structural changes. But that just hasn't been the case for a variety of reasons. So it is within the administrator's power.
[00:22:40] And the difference under President Trump is he is prioritized because he understands he's been the recipient of an out-of-control, unaccountable agency or agencies, I should say, abusing their authority to go after him as an individual for political reasons. He understands the danger that that brings not just to him but to anyone who has a conservative mind and supports the America First vision.
[00:23:04] So because that is a priority, we have people like the administrator who are going in and actually effectuating these policy changes that are long overdue. But, yeah, it is a part of their role. They just haven't been or have been unwilling for a variety of reasons in previous administrations to actually do anything about the fact that bureaucracies have been on an unchecked path of growth since their beginning. Yeah. So we're 17,000 employees now. So last question. I know you've got to go.
[00:23:33] But I was just wondering, are we now unloading, I mean, thousands and thousands and thousands of regulations that have been placed? Are we unloading all of those? Are these leaving now? Yeah, absolutely. They're in process. And so it will take time. So I always urge patience. But, you know, the executive orders that the president signed on day one, that was night and day from the first administration.
[00:24:00] You know, they were ready to go this go-round with a strategic plan and they knew how to implement it, something that took us a lot more time, probably a few months, to get organized and underway the first go-round. So this go-round, the president's executive orders, what he's directed at the agencies, the regulations to review. And for every one regulation, they have to get 10 off the books. It was a two-for-one in the first administration.
[00:24:26] So a lot of these regulations are in the process of being either rewritten or being rescinded completely. And that will take time, but it is underway. And it will provide significant relief because money impacted stakeholders, mostly businesses and industrial operators, that they don't have to send to Washington, D.C. to comply with ineffective regulations.
[00:24:50] They can invest back into their business or hire new people or get the latest and greatest technology, which is a great thing across the board, especially for EPA's mission, where you balance environmental protection with economic opportunity in a responsible way. Thanks, Mandy. Really appreciate you coming on. Thank you. I know you got to go. All right. So I'll take your calls. 888-673-1450.
[00:25:14] It always fascinates me because after meeting with this gentleman from the EPA, it was interesting because he had this idea that, and we were just talking casually, but it was his pet project. And it had to do with climate. I can't remember what it was. And I don't think he had cared whether or not it was constitutional, obviously, or whether or not he should be doing it.
[00:25:39] He just wanted to make sure that he could do it because it was his income, and that was where the care ended. Like, it was just like, well, that's my income. You know, this is my pet project, and this is all I care about, and I want to see it through. And I just remember walking away from that meeting, and I was thinking, wow.
[00:25:58] I mean, you've got a lot of people in agencies that are not constitutionally sound as far as not the fact that we actually have the EPA. What did we do before the EPA? See? We were okay. We were all right. And so it always amazes me that we have these very, very interesting things that start.
[00:26:25] And the EPA actually was started on a lie, to tell you the truth. It was started on a lie. The lie was that they had an oil spill in Santa Barbara. I think it was in the mid-60s, like 64. I can't remember the exact date. But they had this oil spill. And instead of just cleaning it up and maybe this company had to go to court or something,
[00:26:51] they decided to take the opportunity, very opportunistic, to contrive the EPA. And it was ready to go already. They just needed an excuse, a reason. And then the EPA got launched. It got launched with, like, close to 6,000 people, grew to 10,000 people right away. And then all of a sudden we had this EPA organization receiving billions of dollars, starting with over a billion. And now, of course, you know, the budget's enormous in the billions.
[00:27:19] And we had this agency that is not supported by the Constitution. And, but there are people that obviously think that it has to be there. Otherwise, you know, the vulnerable or we won't be able to save people or save farms. Or, yeah, I don't know what they think. I think it's amazing that we're in a place that when we're in office, when you think of
[00:27:48] the right being in office, right? Why are we not ousting the whole entire thing? And we actually, Mandy and I talked about that on the break. And she said, well, you know, self-preservation, you're not going to want to get rid of your own job. That is very true. That is at the heart of it. And she agreed. She was like, yeah, I mean, none of us want to, you know, be without the job. So I think that that enters into the equation a lot more than we think it does. And to justify the EPA, it's, well, this work that they're doing.
[00:28:15] Well, the problem is, is that not only is it not constitutional, okay? The founders never envisioned an EPA, is that it is a mechanism of control. And we should be, I would imagine, categorically against that in any way, shape or form, especially with the human-caused climate change garbily cook that we get shoved in our face all the time. That is part of their duties. All right. Be right back. I'll take your calls when I come back. Open phone lines. Be right back. Kate Daly Show. KateDalyRadio.com.
[00:28:54] This is the Kate Daly Show. I'm playing star again. There I go. Turn the page. All right. Welcome back. Kate Daly Show. Yes, I'm going to take your calls. 888-673-1450. 888-673-1450. If you're listening in the afternoon. I know you probably have a lot of comments on the EPA.
[00:29:19] It's just always amazing to me because when people are elected to office, they go in and it's like, I'm just, why do we not abolish it? Like, why do we not abolish the EPA? Why do we even grow it on our side of the aisle? Why is that, right? If we're going to talk sides. You know I hate the sides. But I just, I have to talk sides in this way because I think it's kind of easy to see the answer. I'm being a little facetious, right?
[00:29:49] And we don't get rid of anything. And I know we talk a good game on our right, but we don't actually get rid of it. It actually grows. And I'm hoping that not only could we condense it, not only can we get rid of the regulations. There are many other ways to solve the matters that they think they have to solve in the EPA.
[00:30:15] Um, but it's just amazing to me that, that these, that they feel like there's this, this whole designation around it in order to deal with the environment. I just don't, I can't even imagine that getting going how they sold that to us in the seventies. But remember we had the crying Indian, remember the crying Indian commercials and everyone was ruining everything. And literally everybody thought in America that somebody else, this is always how it works.
[00:30:42] Somebody else was trashing the lakes and trashing the streams and trash it. And we're just throwing the trash out, just throwing it out every window, you know, and that's not the case. That's not the case that did not happen, but they wanted to portray it happening so that they could say our environment is under attack. And so the whole EPA be so amazing to get people in there that would actually reduce it to nothing
[00:31:06] because I tell me something that it's actually done that the States can't do themselves. Okay. Um, tell me something that it's done. That's actually benefited mankind. That's what I, that's, that, that's the question on the table. Please, please do tell us, you know, it's, it's amazing to me. Uh, hi caller. Welcome to the show. Go right ahead. Hi Kate. Hi. Interesting show. Thanks. Both hours pertaining to the 10th amendment. Hmm.
[00:31:36] I'm going to have to take the 10th on that. This document starts with we, the people, and it ends with we, the people. Bingo. Thank you. Can I bounce back to the other day real quick? Sure. Yeah. I was flying commercially between Atlanta and Denver and a passenger developed a medical emergency. Mm-hmm. And the pilot brought us down to Arkansas. Okay. To land. Mm-hmm.
[00:32:03] And I'm looking down the aisle and it's about a 45 degree angle. Mm-hmm. And everyone and everything was losing a lot of weight that day. Mm. Mm-hmm. Okay. All right. Well, thanks. Appreciate that. You bet. Yeah. Okay. Um, all right. So let me just go back to the EPA for two seconds. Um, they manage air quality. They protect, which we don't have good air quality. That's for sure. Um, out there.
[00:32:32] But anyway, but that's because of the government. So, uh, protecting water equality, managing hazardous waste, addressing climate change, protecting human health. Don't we already have an agency for that? Okay. Um, conducting research. I don't know on, on what, uh, providing technical assistance. And then of course, collaborating with other organizations. That's literally one of their roles to collaborate with the other organizations that constitutionally
[00:33:01] probably shouldn't exist because the states, the states can handle, um, their own states. And so the fact that we do have a federal EPA is quite alarming actually. And that it's 17,000 people, another alarming stat. That, that is hard for us. I think to, to grasp that we have so much government that is unconstitutional, but somehow we've, we, we've come to accept. It's very weird.
[00:33:31] Hi caller. I know I'm trying. I'm trying. All right. Hi caller. Welcome to the show. Go right ahead. Yeah. One of the most important things is to look at legal arguments she made and it's a complete lie. Uh, it's people like Mandy that are destroying liberty in our country and are violating rights of millions of Americans every day. The lie is that statute law created and made it legal. The founding fathers, every fourth grade was required to know a hundred years ago that any statute law, it's a lesser law of the constitution, had does not exist.
[00:34:01] It is null and void as Jefferson said, meaning it has no force of law. It's considered non-existent. So the law, the Congress decree to the EPA is non-existent. And she said, well, their mission is to protect the environment and public health. Where in the constitution is enumerated power to the federal government to protect that? And she was, she was horrible everywhere. She talked about corporate, cooperative federalism. There is no sub concept of cooperative federalism. The state are sovereign.
[00:34:31] They have all powers and the, uh, except for individual rights, some individual rights. And, and the federal government has very enumerated listed powers, few and defined as, uh, James Madison called them in the federalist papers. So she is, uh, uh, supporting Marxism everywhere. Totalitarianism. It's just in degree. You're absolutely right. EPA has no authority to exist.
[00:34:55] So she talks about Biden's, uh, 20 billion, uh, illegal use of money for the EPA. What about all the other money of the EPA? That's just as illegal under the Supreme. Thanks for the call. Thanks for the call caller. Um, look, uh, there's it's, it's, um, I know that through history, we've had a problem in putting feet to the fire in, in, in really addressing as these things come up as the EPA
[00:35:25] or, you know, arose. Did we fight it at the time? Not really. Both sides wanted it. This is why I always say uniparty. It's a uniparty because they both wanted the EPA. Let's be real. And, um, I appreciate Mandy coming on. I, I always want to hear from people in government. I always want to hear, um, you know, the, the justification for more government, less government. She talked about, um, wanting to get rid of regulations, but I, I truly am not noticing
[00:35:54] that no matter who is at the helm in government over the last 20 years, if you really address it, I'm not quite sure we're going to see huge reductions in the regulations like we should have seen, like we should have expected, like we should have fought for. And also the removal of unconstitutional agencies that arise. There's always the reason, you know, they, they, there's always got to be a reason and then the opportunity to install more government.
[00:36:20] And so the government's only grown by the way, 42, all the way down to local government, 42, over 42 million people work for the government in a what? About 160 million working adults in America, 42 million have government status jobs in some form. I would say that's a really big section of society. Don't you, um, we've got to stop this.
[00:36:48] We have got to have some common sense and, and figure this out and make sure that we are well aware that government is supposed to have a very, very small and limited role no matter what. I so appreciate you, uh, tuning in today. And, um, as we talk about limited government and the constitution and all the things that are not talked about in talk radio. And it makes me sad because these things need to be talked about all the time, all the time.
[00:37:16] We should always be learning and growing and understanding, be faithful and fearless. Um, and then of course I'll be back tomorrow with Dr. Lee Merritt on our Friday show. So go to katedalyradio.com support the show. Need your help. I really appreciate you. Thank you.