It's great.
What does the Republican congressional delegation in Wisconsin think about changing tariffs,
federal spending cuts, and tough new immigration orders?
We ask 7th Congressional District U.S. Representative Tom Tiffany,
who joins us from Minacron Congressman.
Thanks very much for being here.
Good to join you today, Frederica.
So you have long called out China for unfair trade practices.
President Trump had imposed a 145 percent tariff on China.
What's your reaction to the President now talking about pulling back from that?
You know, I think he came out with really broad-based tariffs initially,
and now is the part where there is negotiation going on.
And so we will see where this all leads.
All I know is that I just introduced a bill about a week ago
in regards to the World Trade Organization.
I think we should have a vote in Congress,
whether we should continue to belong to one of these multinational organizations,
like the World Health Organization.
In this case, the World Trade Organization.
So I don't think it served America's interests.
I think it served the interests of China.
And as we've seen Main Streets across Wisconsin and America get hollowed out,
part of that is because we've given up making things here in America.
We've got to bring some of that manufacturing back here to the United States.
As to tariffs, how hard is it to keep up with them moving around so much?
Yeah, there's a lot of moving parts that's been going on.
If my understanding is about 60 to 75 countries that are in active negotiations,
and so while the elephant in the room is China,
there's so many other countries that there are active negotiations that are going on.
Here's my hope at the end, Frederica, when the dust settles,
is that we're going to see lower tariffs across the table around the world
as a result of this negotiation.
I think the threat of higher tariffs may be able to get some countries to say,
okay, maybe we're better off with a lower tariff regime,
because ultimately that would be the best for the world.
How long do you think it will take for the dust to settle,
given the repercussions that we've seen?
Yeah, I don't have any prediction there,
but you would hope over the next couple months that with these active negotiations going on
that we're going to see some good things happen.
I can tell you, there's a couple things really germane to Wisconsin that I'm watching closely.
One, China has used ginseng in the ginseng farmers as a political football.
I'm really hoping our trade representative,
and I've passed this message on to them that, for example, ginseng,
tell China to stop using that as a political weapon.
Because those ginseng farmers are right now facing some really unpredictable
and difficult markets.
Yeah, there's no doubt about it.
China has done this before.
They did it in the Trump's first administration,
and I also point out Canada.
Canada has dairy tariffs that are over 200% at times.
I mean, that has a real harmful effect to America,
especially America's dairy land.
What kind of feedback have you been getting from your constituents about
Elon Musk's doge cuts to federal programs and personnel,
everything from the USDA to the VA, social security,
even the CDC now unable to help Milwaukee with its lead crisis?
I would say both on the issue of tariffs and doge,
the Department of Government accountability,
that it leads to uncertainty,
and we all prefer to have stability in our lives,
especially when it comes to our finances.
But it's important what is going on to have some fiscal responsibility.
Congress has not done its job over the last 30 years,
really making sure how these expenditures that are going out,
that they're going out appropriately.
Now, we finally got into the point with $36 trillion in debt.
If somebody has to do something about it,
into the credit of the Trump administration,
they are saying, we're going to identify this stuff,
and now you Congress got to decide if you're going to engage
in some fiscal responsibility.
What about Congress's role to kind of get a grasp
of what has happened with doge and these kinds of cuts?
We're watching very closely what they're identifying,
because ultimately, doge does not make the decision.
It's the executive branch or Congress that makes the decision
in regards to this, and they should help guide some of the things
that are out there that we can deal with.
I mean, I'll give you two really quick examples
that are one small, one large.
$5600 to water eight plants in a Department of Defense facility.
$5600 to water eight plants.
That's crazy.
$200 billion in duplicate payments that went out via the Medicaid program
to insurers.
Those type of things really need rigorous review,
so there's ways large and small.
We need to do a better job in Congress
of going through these line items, line by line.
If the doge cuts don't offset enough spending,
how will the GOP budget get the spending cuts needed
to prevent Donald Trump's 2017 tax cuts from deepening the deficit?
Things we did in the House, and in particular,
those of us that are members of the Freedom Caucus,
we wanted to couple additional tax reductions to deficit reduction.
So to a certain extent, we will not get additional tax savings
or tax reductions unless we find those spending reductions.
And I think it was appropriate to couple those two things
to a certain extent.
So as to spending reductions, would you vote for a budget
that had cuts to Medicaid?
Only if they're done appropriately.
I just identified for you $200 billion in duplicate payments
that went out over the course of a number of years,
a few years back to insurers that were involved
with the Medicaid program.
That should not be happening.
The other thing that I've been a strong advocate for
is for work requirements.
If you are able-bodied and you can work
and you're taking Medicaid, in other words,
you're accepting getting your healthcare from your fellow taxpayers
when you could have your own job,
I believe work requirements should be put in place.
And I think that's one place that we could say billions of dollars
with the Medicaid program.
So what's your comment on the universities of Wisconsin
already losing millions in research funds
with a threat of tens of millions of dollars more?
Well, make the case.
Make the case because, I mean, for example,
the Bureau of Indian Affairs, their facility up in my district
in Ashland was on the chopping block to close that facility.
They made their case and the administration restored it.
That's an example of make the case of why that research
is so important and I think you will see this administration
be very open to restoring that.
The other thing that I would mention is,
there was a specific example in UW Madison
where 55% of a grant went for indirect costs.
When you look at the leading research grantees
like the Gates Foundation, Johnson, others like that,
they put a cap of 15% on indirect costs.
I think something like that similarly should be done
at the federal level with these federal grants.
Because we want good research done.
UW Madison does great research,
Worf does great research,
but the taxpayers should have some accountability
for those dollars going on.
The UW Madison says in terms of those indirect costs
and the reduction of money that would go toward those,
potentially, if that's in court right now,
would really hamper the research because it goes to things
like building labs and maintaining labs
and the infrastructure that's needed to do the research.
Just having spoken.
Yeah, I would just say if they think it's vital,
they should make the case because this administration
will listen as the example I gave to you in regards
to the BIA facility in Ashland.
And there's other examples going on around the country.
Make the case of why that money should be funded
and I think the administration will listen very closely
to the case they want to make.
Meanwhile, as to the UW,
some 40 international students have had their visas revoked,
officials with the university say that it doesn't appear
that that had anything to do with any kind of political activity
on the part of those international students.
Do you support those removals and revocations?
You know, I would want to see the specific examples
because I have not dug into these Frederica
to see what their background is,
but it's clear that there's been students around the country
that have abused the privilege of being here in this country.
And that is what it is to get a green card
to come into this country.
It is a privilege to be here.
It is not a right.
And so I think there should be a certain code of conduct
that they should comply to.
And if they're doing things that are undermining
the United States of America,
as we've seen in a couple examples where, for example,
there's been intellectual property theft,
or if there has been violent anti-Semitic actions taken,
it's a privilege to be here.
You don't have a right to be here in the United States.
Certainly that's true.
We know the one most recent case that was before a judge,
the international student, had a speeding ticket.
And that was reportedly the basis for the revocation of their visa.
And it's difficult to kind of get in there
and get the specifics on each case.
But on immigration, you've been super critical of Governor Evers
for his guidance that he has given to state agencies
around what to do in the event of ICE agents
kind of showing up at a state building.
He suggests that people should notify a staff attorney,
not give out paper files or computer access,
not answer questions, or allow ICE officers access
to non-public areas.
So why so critical?
Governor is encouraging state employees to break federal law.
And as the leader of the state of Wisconsin,
you should never, never do something like that
where you're encouraging people to break federal law.
I mean, if you want to see something done differently,
then advocate for doing something differently.
But don't tell state employees that they should break the law.
How is it breaking the law?
Um...
...dility and interdict that person.
And so they, if there has been a deportation notice
that has been put out, it's ICE's job to remove that person.
And that is what should be happening,
is that the person should be removed.
And Governor Evers is basically saying, no,
you're not going, you are going to impede ICE
from being able to do their job.
That is in defiance of federal law.
You're on the Judiciary Committee,
and many Republicans, including President Trump,
have openly decried activist liberal judges
in maligning their rulings over executive orders
and other things.
Does this fray the separation of powers?
No, it is our responsibility as the Judiciary Committee
to make sure that we are doing proper oversight,
not just over the administration,
like the Department of Justice and the FBI,
but also the judicial branch.
We write bills all the time that affect the judicial branch.
So I think it's appropriate,
but what's really disconcerting at this point is you have
a lot of activist judges that are out there
issuing nationwide injunctions for what are narrow cases
that affect just a few people.
I believe they're getting outside of their lane,
they're overreaching the bounds of where they should be
and carrying out their job as the Judiciary.
All right, Congressman, Tom Tiffany, we leave it there.
Thanks so much.
Good to join you, Frederica.
Thank you for your indulgence in answering all my questions.
No, there are terrific questions, Frederica.
And by the way, I had a brief flash on my screen
for about five seconds that said I had an unstable connection.
Did it hold?
It froze, but we didn't stop,
and we picked up your answer to my question.
I mean, I can confer with Marissa,
but I think that's right,
that we can just kind of slice that out.
Thank you.
How about if I made this request?
If it's an important part of the segment,
if Frederica could just, if you want to say,
this is what the Congressman said,
we had a brief glitch in the video.
Is that okay?
I do know that the answer that we got after the froze resolved
was really good, right?
And so that's why I was like going, okay, we're fine.
But I can certainly re-ask it.
So, you know, if you think, I thought the answer was succinct
and to the point, and so if you just want to run with that,
Fred, it's just fine with me.
Okay, all right.
Marissa, how are you feeling about that?
And, you know, we do that all the time.
I'm sitting here going, okay, this is the question I asked.
Oops, he froze.
Oh, look, it's picked up again and, oh, that works.
You know, so all these things.
Going through my head at the moment.
Yeah, so Marissa, you have my sign off on this
to do it in the way that we just discussed.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Appreciate that.
Well, you enjoy the weekend up there in Manacoa.
We're going to.
We're going to.
It's been a good week off after Easter here.
I bet.
Good.
All right.
Well, again, nice to speak with you again.
Thanks, Fred Rito.
Thank you, Marissa.
Yeah.