Going Deep with Chad and JT - EP 399 - Sara Jacobs - U.S. Congresswoman

Episode Date: July 30, 2025

Today’s guest is Congresswoman Sara Jacobs. She is the youngest person ever elected to U.S. Congress from California. Representing San Diego’s 51st district, she joins us for a wide-ranging convo that starts with a lighthearted DRAFT of the "Most Charismatic Person" and quickly pivots into the real behind-the-scenes of Washington D.C. - We talk about wild moments in the Capitol to how policies really get made, Sara gives us an unfiltered look into what it's actually like serving in Congress. LET US KNOW WHO WON THE DRAFT IN THE COMMENTS!  #chadandjt #goingdeepwithchadandjt  We are live streaming a Fully unedited version of the pod on Twitch, if you want to chat with us while we're recording, follow here: https://www.twitch.tv/chadandjtgodeep Grab some dank merch here:https://shop.chadandjt.com/ Come see us on Tour! Get your tix - http://www.chadandjt.com TEXT OR CALL the hotline with your issue or question: 323-418-2019(Start with where you're from and name for best possible advice) Check out the reddit for some dank convo: https://www.reddit.com/r/ChadGoesDeep Here is the Total Draft Standings: (s/o HandA on reddit)Chad: 12 wins JT: 13 wins Strider: 14 wins Chris Parr: 12 winsBrad Fuller: 1 win (The Ultimate Champ)Joe Marrese: 1 winKevin Fard: 0 wins  Thanks to our Sponsors:Brotege: The Best Skincare products for bros - get started today for just 10$ Visit https://www.brotege.com/deep PRODUCTION & EDITS BY: Jake Rohret

Guys, welcome to the podcast. Before you do anything, make sure you like, subscribe, comment. Thank you for being on this new channel. We appreciate you being here. Guys, this podcast is brought to you by Brodage, the best new loge biz in the game for dudes. It's for bros, not pros.

Simple all-in-one loge. Makes it easy and simple for you to reduce those fine lines and start looking good. Use code DEEP at checkout and you can get to Try Brodaget for only 10 bucks. Let's start the show. ["Going Deep"] I'm going deep, I'm going deep, I'm going deep What's going on everybody?

Welcome to SoCal's most popular podcast, Going Deep with Chad JT. I'm here with my compadre, Jean Thomas. What up, Boom Clap Stokers. And we're here with the friggin' master of fun himself, Chris Parr. Hey, what's going on? And we're here with the with the friggin master of fun himself Chris Parr. Hey, what's going on? And we're here with representative Sarah Jacobs. Thank you for joining the podcast. Thanks for having me US Congressperson Yes, right. Yeah, and you're the youngest US Congressperson the youngest from California

I was one of the youngest well, I'm still one of the youngest but time has passed So yeah, I'm 36 now, but I got sworn in at 31 Wow, and you're repping San Diego, San Diego. That's right. And my brother was wondering is that more purple blue red? How does it fall? My district is more blue, but San Diego as a whole is like, you know a military community It's historically been one of the more conservative parts of California We actually were the last big city to have a Republican mayor. So, you know, it's a little bit less blue than LA, for instance.

All right, right on. All right, well, to get it started, to facilitate some comfort before we get into more political issues, we're gonna do a quick draft. We're gonna draft the most charismatic people in history. Great. We felt like this was in line with your forte.

Sounds good. Can't wait to use my history minor from college. Where'd you go to college? Columbia. Oh nice. What was your major? Political science. Cool.

All right, we'll talk about Columbia University later too. All right, on three, shoot. One, two, oh do you know how to shoot? Is it rock, paper, scissors? You forgot a one or a two. Oh, oh, okay. So behind your back and then. Okay, got it.

One, two, three, shoot. Okay, one, two, Oh, okay. So behind your back and then. Okay, got it. One, two, three, shoot. Okay. One, two, three, shoot. You're the last pick. Okay. So you'll do both your picks at the same time. Okay. Snake style.

All right. One, two, three, shoot. One, two, three, shoot. Sorry. One, two, three, shoot. Okay, third pick. Rock, paper, scissors, shoot. Whoa, I get the first? Yeah. Wow. Rock, paper, scissors, shoot. Whoa, I get first?

Yeah. Wow. All right, this guy, I mean, this guy is just the master of charm. Everyone says that whenever you walk into a room with him, he just makes you feel like the most, you know, he's the master of charisma. He makes you feel like the most important person

in the room. I gotta go with Bill Clinton, number one. Oh, nice. That's a good one. I mean, you know, that's what everyone says about him. They say he's the most charming guy you'll ever meet. And I believe it. You know him, right?

Because you advised Hillary on her 2016 campaign. Yeah, I worked on her 2016 presidential campaign as one of her foreign policy advisors. So I have met him a few times. And I can say the rumors are true. Everyone just melts when he's around. Right. Yeah you really feel like the most important and only person he's ever spoken to. And she had faith in his kind of abilities. I remember like she got into an argument she said with one

of her college professors because she was like Bill is gonna be president and he kind of scoffed and laughed and she jumped out of the car was like he will be president one day. Yeah that sounds right right. I mean, that sounds right. Yeah, she was very supportive of him. Yeah, very strong team. What is it about him that makes him so charismatic? Like, is there something he does specifically or just an energy?

It's an, I think it's an energy and like he has this crazy memory where like he remembers everything about you even like but he meets so many people yeah but he'll still remember everything about you and so you just feel really special. Wow. So like he does he have like a an assistant or something that's like whispering like like in the Devil Wears Prada how it's like this is the person. Okay so actually my chief of staff used to work for him and she did a lot of this work for him, but he actually genuinely remembers. That's the crazy thing. Like I'm not as good of a politician and I need people to often remind me, but like he genuinely remembers.

Wow. Yeah, I'd love to just be, that's one of my, I mean, he's, how old is he now? He's 78. He's younger than Trump. He's, wow, is he really? And I think he's younger than, yeah, obviously Biden too. That's one of my life goals is just to shake his hand and just feel that aura. Yeah. All right.

This is probably a goal we can help make happen. I mean, he'd be too old. You think he'd do that? I mean, he'd be so stoked. I'd be so stoked. He did like boy state, like the kind of equivalent of that out of Arkansas Did you ever do anything like that like a kind of camp for aspiring politicians? I did not no

I did not think I was I was not an aspiring politician. This was not my plan in life I was gonna be a diplomat. I worked at the State Department and the UN And then after Trump got elected move back home to San Diego and basically was told if I wanted there to be a young person Or a woman I had to run myself. So that's kind of how it happened. But this was not in the five-year plan. And who told you that? Emily's List, a group that like recruits women to run for office. I called them looking for a woman to try and help. I was 28 at the time and that's basically what they told me. And they said you got to be your own hero. Yeah.

That's cool. All right, Chris, you're up. No, it's you. Oh, sorry. Oh, right, that's you. All right, with the number two pick, I'm going with my favorite person to watch on camera in history, float like a butterfly, sting like a bee, Ali Boumaye, Muhammad Ali.

I feel bad when people try to play this guy on camera in a movie. You just cannot match the charisma. It just emanated from every part of him. It was his physical gifts. It was his beauty. It was his moral uprightness. He just he had it all. He was a man for all seasons. And yeah, I don't think anyone has ever commanded a room with more power than Muhammad Ali. Yeah, I don't think anyone has ever commanded a room with more power than Muhammad Ali.

Yeah, solid pick. Good pick. You guys boxing fans? Not really, but one of my colleagues actually, the ranking member on the Foreign Affairs Committee, Greg Meeks from New York, his dad boxed with Muhammad Ali. So he like grew up around the ring and like knows his family really well. Yeah. So that's great. I hear some boxing stories because I'm on the foreign affairs committee. I mean, some people even say Muhammad Ali invented rap. I remember that was a documentary that HBO did because he would come out there and he'd hit you with the rhymes. And then from there was born music. So I mean the guy is responsible for a lot of

culture and I think everybody who talks well in sports is trying to be him to a certain degree. I think that's right. Also like one of the first sports people to speak out against like war and get involved in politics. So I think maybe opened the door to others who we are now seeing doing that. Really put his nuts on the table. It was like I will give up my title. I will go to jail. The Viet Cong never oppressed me. I'm oppressed here back at home right now. Really put his nuts on the table. It was like I will give up my title, I will go to jail. The Viet Cong never oppressed me, oppressed here, back at home. And yeah, he really put his money where his mouth was. Yeah.

Which was, and then he was hard on other boxers. If other boxers didn't do it, he called him Uncle Tom's, he went after him. He was a competitor too. There was a dark energy to him as well, and I think that reinforced the other side. I think the dark energy is kind of a key component in charisma. Oh, interesting. I do, I think like dark energy is kind of a key component in charisma.

Oh, interesting. I do, I think like, you know, you gotta be horny. Well, you gotta be horny. You gotta feel like there's something powerful brewing underneath. Yeah. It's like Star Wars, right? You gotta know the dark side and the light side.

Yeah, yeah, Han Solo. There you go. He's a scoundrel, but he's a good guy. You rely on him. Do you think charisma is something you're born with or a learned skill? Or maybe both, but which? Yeah, that's an interesting question.

I think it's a little bit of both. I also think, and this is gonna make me seem like a real Southern California liberal, but I think it's something you're socialized into as well. I think charisma is a very gendered concept, right? It's very hard to think of a charismatic woman. You can sometimes, but in general, when you think of charisma,

you're usually thinking of a man. And so I think it's also something that like, a confidence that the world instills in you, which has to be instilled because there was something there. But also, yeah. Do you think that's a uniquely American thing? Because it seems like in other countries, we've had more success with getting a woman to the highest level of like

the government or the state. I mean, I think a little bit it's more American, right? Obviously, we haven't had a woman president yet and other countries have, but even still, like they've had one or two. Right, it's not the norm. Yeah. Okay. So who, well yeah, hopefully we get some gals picked coming up.

Might not come from us though. I'm also trying to think like, who's like the, what's like the most charismatic, not attractive person that I can think of. That's another good point. It has a lot to do with like, yeah. Good looks. Al Sharpton? Not traditionally handsome.

Very good. Yeah, that's a good one. I think he's like falling on some hard health, too. So I don't mean to take pot shots. Yeah. And now we've like made put all these like gender and things in your head right before your pick. I'm so sorry. Yeah, you did. It's really weird.

He's really letting go of the ladies. You know, if you pick a white dude, we're all going to be judging you. I'm going. You know, this is pick a white dude, we're all gonna be judging you. I'm going, you know what? This is just somebody that popped into my head first and maybe it's because I just find him personally very sexy. I'm gonna go Javier Bardem. Oh. What?

Okay. It's the voice. It's the voice for me. And I just love, Vicky Christina really did a number on me when I saw it where I was like man this guy This guy's really cool. Yeah, he's a great actor. Look at him. Yeah, maybe a bit early But you know, I was a little flustered by all the lead-up to this. So yeah I'm just gonna go with Javier Bardem Yeah, actually, I think we have really good diversity so far so far. Tony Morrison said Bill Clinton was the first black president. So.

That's true. Whoa. She did say that. Did you ask Bill about that? I did not. No. He was a big fan of Hurtin's though, right? Yeah. Yeah. Bill, what do you think about that? Yeah. It was great. All right, Sarah, you're up with two picks. I'm up. Okay. I am very surprised no one has said Barack Obama yet. So I'm going to go with Barack Obama.

I know it's like, you know, a boring pick, but very charismatic. I worked for him. So I feel like I have to say him. He's I think, you know, if you're going to be the first, you have to have a lot of Riz to do it. Right. Yeah. And he's similarly like, it's not the same as Bill Clinton, but if you're gonna be the first, you have to have a lot of Riz to do it, right? Yeah. And he's similarly like, it's not the same as Bill Clinton, but when you're in his presence, like you really feel it.

Yeah. It seems like it's a little bit less charming, but a little bit more like aspirational. Yeah. Yeah, exactly. You're like, yeah, I can do anything. And what for you, what was Barack's best charisma moment or best speaking moment? Oh, I was at the Apollo theater in the 2012 campaign when he sang Signed, Sealed, Delivered

on stage and that was pretty rad. Oh, wow. You know, it's tough to sing Stevie Wonder. That's a hard. Yeah. It's like E minor or something. So that was pretty cool. I was interning on his campaign at the time. And that was against Romney that time?

Yeah, yeah. And you guys kind of kicked his butt. Yeah, yeah, we did. We did. In retrospect, I'm like, huh, Mitt Romney wasn't so bad. He would've been nice, yeah. But you know, at the time,

really felt like it was an existential threat. What, are there any politicians you've met where you weren't expecting them to be super charismatic and they kind of threw you off? Oh, that's a good question. Okay. So I'm not, I wouldn't say I wasn't expecting it, but I feel like a lot of people don't think of Hillary Clinton as charismatic. And like, I would agree often in public, she can come off as like very guarded. Mm-hmm. Probably because she's had so many arrows thrown at her that like she's learned to be-

She's rightly paranoid. Yeah, being very careful. But in real life, she's like one of the warmest people you will ever meet and just like so caring and warm and like not at all like what you see on TV. And so, yeah, I think that's, of the politicians I met, the biggest disparity between the public and private persona in a good way. There's many that are in a bad way.

That does seem to be one of the complicated things about Hillary Clinton is that even during Bill's presidency, the FBI was investigating them for illicit donations from China, but normally the FBI would bring the president in on that, but they kept him out of it. And it created a sort of paranoid dynamic between the two of them, which later was consequential

with James Comey and stuff. I didn't realize it was so rooted in like, like a generation of kind of mistrust. Yeah, I mean, I think the nineties were really the first time we saw this like toxic politics, like the start of toxic politics like we're seeing now. You think that was like Newt Gingrich or something when he came in? Yeah, Newt Gingrich, the start of Fox, like the radio stations, all of those like jock

talk radio stations and stuff. And I also think it was like the first time you had a first lady who like wasn't just a First lady right she'd had a career. She she hadn't changed her name She was a little more ambitious than some of the prior first women. I mean she was trying to get health care done Exactly, and I think that was just different for um can we get rid of the chat Jake? I? Think I think that was just different for people to like Under like see and so that changed things a lot.

Right. People felt like she was a little too big for her britches or something like that. Yeah. And then her health care plan that ended up not working and that hurt some of the other stuff that they were trying to get done on their agenda. Right. Because that was like their number one cause. That's right.

Yeah. Yeah. I mean, you know, one of the things that is so interesting to me is that in the 2016 campaign, a lot centered around the sort of single payer or not single payer question for healthcare, like Medicare for all or not. And that was basically what she was proposing in the 90s.

They called it Clintoncare. It got widely panned and so. But it was challenging, right? like it was a very interlocking system and it was gonna have like State guardrails that kind of were the marketplace for everybody. Yeah. Yeah It seemed like it was it'd be hard to get that everyone on board with it was the issue Yeah, I think it was I mean like most things in Washington It was designed to be a compromise plan that you could get everyone on, but instead it made everybody mad.

You know? Like, that's always the dilemma. It's almost like when you're competing, like arguing with yourself. Like, either you come up with the big grand plan that you know is gonna be hard to get buy-in for, but at least you've set the stakes and maybe moved the overton window

or what is seen possible. Or you try and come up with something that will be bipartisan and can get buy in. But then kind of no one is happy with it. Yeah. And so what do you attribute success with things like that? Is it just how much personal momentum you can get behind them or is it actually what's in the policy? I think it's a little bit of both. I think, you know, I think it's also like who is there shepherding it So like I think the ACA was able to pass because Nancy Pelosi was speaker of the house and she had a lot of juice She has a lot of juice. She's masterful about these kinds of things like she knows how to get legislation passed

Yeah, and she was not the speaker of the house in the 90s, obviously And so I think some of it is that. I think some of it is like the mood of the country at the time. Like they'd been doing a lot of work leading up to the 2009 of like we're gonna do something on health care so people were kind of like primed for it. And we had these big majorities so we were able to do it. But like remember then it had the backlash in 2010 and, you know, led to the tea party and all of these things. So I think change, big change is never easy. Yeah. And it does feel like you have to get the conversation out there. It takes us a while to digest it and to normalize it in our

like bodies and then we're ready for it maybe in a later term. Yeah, exactly. Or like we also don't design legislation in a way where people feel the benefits very quickly I think that's something we need to do a better job of because for the ACA like as soon as people actually got it now They don't want you to take it away But it took so long to get everything stood up and like it took a couple of like there was the website failure There was a lot of like big visible issues with it Totally and so like it was a couple of election cycles before people even really felt any difference in their lives. And once they felt it, then they were in favor of it.

And you see that now with like they want they're going to cut Medicaid and they want to have this work requirement. It's like, well, they're going to have to set up services to verify people's work requirements. And that's going to be a boondoggle. Yes, it is. It's actually I call it a paperwork, a red tape requirement. It's literally just more paperwork. It's very liberal in a way. They're creating like more bureaucracy to like make things happen. OK, I reject that more bureaucracy is liberal, but I hear you.

At least in traditional thinking. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So do you think it's easier to pass certain things just if they're like low salience issues? Like, do you not want to talk about something because then it hopefully doesn't get politicized? Oh, 100 percent. Like people ask me me like can how can you still get anything done in in Washington right now? And like the big super political issues we can't we're just fighting but like one level down

We can actually still do a lot. So like I'm This close to getting TRICARE, which is the military insurance, to cover IVF and all fertility. Oh wow. Because that's like just the one level down where it's not super political. And then we can still do big things. And it's something that I think a lot of people assume is probably already taking place.

Well, yeah. But it's not. But it's not, no. And it's also like, pro making babies feels more conservative, so it feels like it should, but then I guess also sometimes IVF they don't even get me started on this whole like you know they wanted to like do an award for people who have more babies and stuff so I'm I'm a 36 year old woman basically like all of my friends are deciding when and

if they're having babies right now. If it's possible. Yeah and like an award is not gonna be why it's gonna be like affordable child care and access to fertility treatments and all these And like an award is not gonna be why. It's gonna be like affordable childcare and access to fertility treatments and all these things. You'd think that would make all of those like kind of conservative coded, but it doesn't. Yeah, and we'll talk more about some of the other policies you're trying to push that would help with people trying to have kids.

But you're up right now with your next pick. Okay, my next pick. All right, this one, okay. This one might be controversial, but I stand by it. I'm gonna go with Jesus. Nice. Why would might be controversial, but I stand by it. I'm gonna go with Jesus. Nice. Why would that be controversial? Well, so I'm Jewish.

I saw him on the top of a lot of lists. Yeah, okay, yeah. So I'm Jewish. So I would say maybe if you truly believe Jesus was not human, maybe he doesn't belong on a charismatic human list. To me, like- He's on PEDs, he's God. Yeah, yeah, exactly.

But like, to me, like I think you have to have a lot of Riz to get a bunch of people to buy into a new religion. And so that's what it's like to have... And how upset do you get when politicians use Jesus to push their agenda, but they don't live that way in their personal life? Oh, it drives me crazy. I get really upset by it too. life. Oh, it drives me crazy.

I get really upset by it too. Yeah. Like, I'm Jewish, but I've read the New Testament. And like, to me, the New Testament is about like how you shouldn't be in favor of people who like are hoarding money and that you should be giving to the poor and you should be accepting everyone as they are and like all these things that all the people who like say Christian in their bio or like really harp on being Christian often

like are doing the exact opposite of. But they can be very nice, I don't mean to alienate everybody, Chris you're up. Oh, I have a question. If you were in a room with Bill Clinton and Jesus. Yeah. Whose aura do you think you'd be more? Jesus, Jesus, Yeah. Whose aura do you think you'd be more? Jesus? Jesus.

Yeah. Yeah. Do you think Bill would be deferential to Jesus? Yeah, I think so. But you had to think about it. I mean, he's like, he's from the south. He's like pretty. He's a man of faith. Yeah, he's a man of faith. Yeah. We should make a YouTube video on Jesus' Riz.

Because there's so many like charisma, have you seen those charisma YouTube videos? Oh yeah, yeah. Look at the way Chris Hemsworth uses touch and eye contact to portray confidence. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah. We did on, okay, sorry.

That's really funny. Chris, you're up, dude. I'm gonna go JFK. All right. Great picks. A solid one. Nice. I read his bio and his friend said, it moved like he was not part of like time with us.

Like he does like he was out of time. That's cool. Yeah. I just wanted to you know it's nice. I wanted to get a political figure felt nice. You know he's just. I mean he just had an aura about him. Everyone talked about it. Famously doing a debate with Nixon where apparently Nixon had a cold and everyone, if you pulled the people who watched it on TV and they're like, oh man, JFK dominated versus the people on radio. It was like

more evenly split because you know, he's just nice to look at. You want to hang out with them. I think that that's just kind of been, it kind of set the tone for what Bill was, you know, he's just nice to look at. You want to hang out with them. I think that that's just kind of been. It kind of set the tone for what Bill was, you know, where it's like. And then even like George W, where it's like, oh, man, it'd be cool to hang out with that guy. I don't know if the me not having been alive, I feel like it's associated with JFK before anyone else, and maybe it's because of television and all that. And so, yeah, just felt like

just a classic pick. No, he's the fucking man, dude. I mean, comes from this rich family, goes to Harvard. But then he goes to war. He drags one of his guys on his boat to an island to safety by his teeth while he's got a bad back. Then he comes home, and while he's recovering in the hospital, he writes a Pulitzer Prize winning book about like,

I mean, he could just do it all. He's smart, tough, good looking. And then he a famous affair, definitely helped with the aura, you know? Yeah, it's going to our horniness thing. Right, yeah. Do you think him dying early, it magnifies his mystique?

Yeah, it never hurts, unfortunately. It never hurts, it always helps. Always helps, yeah. I mean, because in some ways, I think Bill Clinton's aura has been diminished by time, and now there's a lot of revisionist history on his presidency. Some of it probably correct, and I think it's tough when you're still hanging in.

Although, I don't know, I feel like Barack Obama's gotten more popular in his post-presidency since the end of his presidency. No way. No? Oh no, I'm very disappointed in him. Oh, okay. I think it's one of those things where like,

I think with Bill, it's kind of like, there's ebbs and flows, you know? We're like, you know, Barak just seems more available to us now, which I think can hurt in the short term, but we'll see where it comes up because then it might swing back around, you know, in like five or 10 years, who knows? Yeah. and then it might swing back around, you know, in like five or 10 years, who knows? Yeah. All right, with my second pick, for most charismatic man of all time,

let me go to my notes, guys. Charismatic person. Person, I'm sorry, genuinely. Let me see. You know, not because I'm in support of their politics, I'm a intensely moderate person, but John Paul Sartre said this was the most complete man he ever saw.

I'm gonna go with Che Guevara. And I think a big part of charisma is, and I said this to Muhammad Ali, do you put your money where your mouth is? This guy had skin in the game. I think he could start a lot of revolutions and then they would fall apart because not all the people were made of the same stuff that he was. And then there's just there's moments where we're like, are you really charismatic? Like are you really that guy? And

right before they shot him, the last thing he said was, why are you so nervous? You're just about to kill a man. Like, I mean, he went out never flinching, so. I think not having a fear of death is crouche. Pretty captivating. Yeah, you need to look death in the eye and just say, sure. And another important thing, I'm being glib here, he looks great on a t-shirt.

He looks great on a t-shirt. Was a doctor by trade? And it's like, oh, so you like, you hear doctors, like, smart guy so you like, you hear doctors like, smart guy, could have probably had a very successful life, but you know, doing, being a doctor, could have made some money, had a comfortable existence. It was like, no, I'm gonna go to countries I'm not from

and try and overthrow governments because I'm a man of the people and I think that these are unjust institutions. It's pretty badass. Super sick, very, very sick. Great flow. Dude, it's for real, good call. Okay, now I got a pick,

and I'm not just pandering here. Okay. By picking a lady. I think she oozes charisma, captivated the world. The world was obsessed with her. She died tragically. I'm going with Princess Diana. That's a really good one.

That is a good pick. Dude, great, I think you're gonna take it, brother. Dude, thank you. That's really good. Yeah. Do you have a first second? I thought you were gonna say Marilyn Monroe, and I was like, I don't know.

But I think Diana was the, that's a great pick. So I, you know, Chachi P.T. has a bias too, because I was, who's the commercial caretaker, and it just did all dudes, I was like, give me some ladies. And Princess Diana, and I was who's the nearest carriage man and it just did all dudes. I was like, give me some ladies. Princess Diana, I was like, oh dude. It's a good one. Sorry to say I was using Chat GPT.

It's okay, at least you have minutes. Yeah, actually I talked to Chat GPT about this interview in the car ride. Oh, so did I. Yeah, you did. It was really helpful. Yeah, I was like, where's some, okay anyways. It's great for you to say that.

I think a lot of people are doing it. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, she's amazing. Yeah, I noticed yours, where's some, okay anyways. It's great for me to say that. I think a lot of people are doing it. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, she's amazing. Yeah, I noticed yours is very 90s coded. I love 90s. I'm a huge fan of the 90s. That wasn't intentional, but I think that's probably subconsciously,

it's my favorite decade. You just saw Creed this past weekend. I mean, they're early 2000s, but it's sort of similar. Just saw Creed, yeah. Have you seen Creed live? I have not, but I'm going to Backstreet Boys in a few weeks. Oh, you're at the Sphere?

I'm very excited. It looks amazing. I saw some videos. It looks awesome. I'm very excited. I haven't been, have you been to the Sphere yet? No, it'll be my first time at the Sphere. Wow.

Have you seen any music acts at political events that blew you away? Oh, at political events? Well, they're usually old, lame people. Not Kamala, she had Megan Thee Stallion doing hers. It's true, it's true, it's true. Some people think they veered too much in that direction. I was not invited to the Beyonce Houston thing,

although I guess she only spoke and didn't perform, so. That's very dignified. Yeah. Do you think that hurt Kamala, that Beyonce didn't perform? Yes. I think it did, they were pissed. They're like, oh, I think it hurt Kamala.

There was like a letdown. There was a huge letdown. They're like, you didn't deliver on your promise. And then the other side, then the right was like, can you believe Beyonce would just go for it? They don't care about the people. Yeah. I'm always like, so I make that mistake too where I'm not like checking my own side as

much as the others. I was like criticizing Trump for having like, or Tony Hinchcliffe for doing what I thought was an inappropriate joke. If you were like, Megan Thee Stallion was shaking her ass at Comma last night. I didn't see it. I was like, but I'm not crazy about it. Yeah, sure.

Yeah. I'm going to Lady Gaga tonight, so I'm very excited about that. Dude, I just rewatched the Stars one. She is phenomenal. She's amazing. I've seen her twice. She's so, have you seen her before in concert?

No, this is a whole thing because my mom, for her 60th birthday, She's amazing. I've seen her twice. Have you seen her before in concert? No. This is a whole thing because my mom for her 60th birthday wanted to go to a Lady Gaga concert in Vegas. My whole family went. I had to go to a wedding that night. I made my boyfriend come with me instead of go with my family to the Lady Gaga concert. So this is my apology tour.

What's your favorite Gaga song? Ooh. Favorite Gaga song. There's so many to choose from. I hope this doesn't get aggregated like the Burger King question from the Nelk interview. Okay. I think that my favorite Gaga song right now is probably Paparazzi. Oh, nice.

Do you like the fun dancey bangers? Probably, um, paparazzi. Oh, nice. Do you like the fun, dancy bangers? I like the fun, dancy bangers. I do. I was like debating between that or like, I'll always remember us this way from Star Wars.

It's so good, but it's also like really sad. Perfect on a drive to Vegas or something like that. Yeah. If you've got some country on the side of you. Yeah, there you go.

All right. Do you mind if we get into some more substantive stuff? Sure. All right, so first up, a lot of people are concerned about the federal debt. It's at like $30 trillion. It feels like it just keeps compounding. And now just paying interest on the debt

is one of our largest financial line items. As someone who's liberal, I wanna keep going with entitlement spending. I don't wanna to cut Medicaid. But when you see what's happening with our debt and with the long-term consequences that could be with losing Social Security in under a decade, what do you think is the economic argument for why we still need entitlement spending and how can we also curb the debt at the same time?

Yeah, it's a really good question. I think that a key part of it, well, I think there's a couple ways to think about the federal debt. So the first is like, if you ask any business owner, right, if they would take on a loan, take on debt in order to make an investment that they know will grow their business, nine out of 10 times, they'll say yes, right? Right. You needed to build infrastructure to have long-term plans. And so to me, the problem is not that we have debt, it's what are we using that debt for? Is it something that's actually gonna grow

our economy or not? And so if you actually look at what have been the major contributors to the deficit, it's been the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, it's been Trump tax cuts the first time. These new Trump tax cuts that are going to add four and a half trillion dollars to the deficit. And then some spending from the COVID pandemic, which I think, you know, many would argue we needed to like stabilize the economy. But we never reset from that. We've stayed at the post pandemic levels.

Uh, well, spending has gone down actually. As a result of the new bill or prior to that? Prior to that, like in the appropriations because some of those were supplemental appropriations. So the appropriations levels have gone down. Now the cutting with the new bill, but I hear you. But like also if you look at, so to me the question is not, do we have debt, is that a problem?

It's do we have the level of debt we can sustain and what are we spending that debt on? So like I would rather us be taking on debt if we're investing in something like childcare because we actually get $6, we save $6 for every $1 we invest in childcare, right? So like that's a really good ROI Hmm, but instead we're taking out this money to like fight these endless wars that don't actually grow our economy or I would argue

So you think things like Medicaid and childcare they can produce more GDP and they'll offset the cost Medicaid is another good example. So in preventative primary health care, right? We save twelve dollars for every $1 we invest in primary medicine. Because think about it, like, if you're sick and you go early and you can get like the one antibiotic, that's not that expensive. If you don't get that treated

because you don't have access to healthcare, eventually you're gonna end up in the emergency room. The emergency services are exponentially more expensive. Exponentially more expensive. And then we're paying, we're footing that bill anyway. So. But social security is a huge financial line item and it is predicted to be insolvent in like 2032.

Yeah. And we have to fix that. I think there is a pretty simple way to fix it actually, which is that many people don't know this, but you know, when you get your paycheck, you get a social security payroll tax taken out of it right? Yeah. That is only true up to your first $400,000. So people who make over $400,000. Shouldn't be getting social security anymore? No, I just think. Or should be taxed more. I just think every dollar you make

should be taxed the same. So whether you make $15 an hour as a janitor or whether you make $800,000 a year in income, you should all be paying the same percentage of payroll tax. But instead, the janitor actually ends up paying more percentage of payroll tax because at $400,000, you stop having to pay the social security payroll tax. And do you have any kind of estimate on how much money that would add to Social Security if we did tax those people? Yeah, there's estimates differ. I don't know the exact number, but many economists say that that would basically make Social Security solvent.

Okay, I'll look more into that. Yeah. And so like to me, it's one about like basic fairness, like why are we asking people making less money to pay more as a percentage into the system? But two, it just makes no sense to have this arbitrary cutoff. We have a payroll tax. Every dollar of payroll should be taxed.

And in general, you're OK with the debt as it is. I think the debt's too high right now. And I think it was very irresponsible for Republicans to add four and a half trillion dollars to the debt. I think a lot of fiscal conservatives were very disappointed. Yeah, because it was the opposite of what was kind of being promised during the campaign. Right. And what you what like economics will tell you to do, right, is that when the economy is good, you should try and close the deficit

so that when you need to spend money from the government, like in a pandemic or a recession, you then have the fiscal space to be able to do that. And instead, the economy was doing okay, and we added four and a half trillion dollars to the deficit. And a lot of people, and I'll argue with people online, they're like, but Kamala would have done worse.

And I'm like, well, she's not president. So we have to hold who's ever president accountable. It doesn't make sense to me to be in, when we criticize Lyndon B. Johnson, we're not like, oh, but Barry Goldwater would have done a worse job. It's like, we have to deal with what reality is. But to their point, do you think a liberal administration would have been more mindful

of how much debt they were adding to it and how would they have offset it just through higher tax, like bringing back that top principal tax on the rich to like, what was it at, like 40% rather than 37? Yeah. So look, I think actually Democrats tend to be much more responsible about the debt in part because we're so mindful of this like line of attack that we just tax and spend. So actually, the American Rescue Plan was unpaid for because it was a big emergency spending that was the big COVID response.

And I would argue that was the right thing to do. We were in an emergency. That's when you need government to step in. People were struggling. But the Inflation Reduction Act, completely paid for. Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill, completely paid for. And so I think it's actually like, if you actually look at what has happened with the debt, it's actually grown under Republican presidents and closed under Democratic presidents. Yeah, Clinton's the last dude who balanced it.

Yeah. And so I think that, I think part of this is a misconception of who's actually fiscally responsible. I think the other thing is that we really only look at the spending side as the irresponsible side. To me, it's incredibly irresponsible to decrease the amount of resources coming in in a way that we've already seen is not going to make the economy grow because we ran this experiment before.

It doesn't actually trickle down to everybody. And instead to like blame the people who need help from the government to get by instead of saying like, look, like my family is very wealthy. My grandfather started- Yeah, you're from the Qualcomm family, right? Yeah, my grandfather started Qualcomm, a Fortune 500 company. So you're the 15th wealthiest member of Congress.

I mean, sure. Those numbers are like, yeah, so variable. Depending on how your portfolio is doing relative. Right, is your portfolio down or something? No, it's just like- Probably in the 20s. It's like so funny, everyone like estimating my net worth. It's like very, it's a wide range.

So I shouldn't trust Google when I type in how wealthy is Jay-Z or something like that. Yeah, probably not. Probably not. But what my grandfather will say is that he was able to do that because of things that were only in place in America. He was the first in his family to go to college.

He graduated college and grad school debt free. He worked at a public university. And so like, it's he he feels like it's his responsibility and therefore our responsibility to make sure other families have that kind of opportunity. And so like to me, it only makes sense that if you've been successful, you weren't no one is successful just on their own, right? Like there are roads that take your product to market, there's intellectual property law and legal things that enable you, right? There's like all these things that America provides.

There's infrastructure and supply side support that allows people to kind of move up the ladder. Yes. And so you should give back if you've been able to be successful. And so to me, it only makes sense to ask people to pay their fair share. So to that, it feels like the Liberal Party is kind of having an existential moment. And Trump's approval ratings are holding. The Liberal or Democratic Party's approval ratings are in the toilet. And there feels like it's a fork in the road.

And there's the Mamdami, sorry if I said his name wrong, side that is more DSA and like, you know, rent freeze and I know it's just a pilot program of public grocery stores and then there's the kind of abundance side that's like, no, we need to like kind of usefully deregulate, have a strong state capacity, but really let people build and things like that. Do you find yourself leaning towards one side? OK, I'll be honest. I think it's so typical of the Democratic Party to make this arbitrary fight.

I don't actually think these things are necessarily intention. But they happen because it generates momentum, right? People need a kind of philosophy that feels aligned with their purpose. People love conflict and fights. Oh, so you think it's like a fake little battle just to juice some power?

No, I think people genuinely feel like. Sorry, I don't mean to put words on that. No, no, that's okay. No, I think, look, I think everyone's trying to look for what the way forward is for the Democratic Party. And instead of having like a real conversation, people are picking camps and putting titles on them, instead of recognizing that actually in many cases,

we're not saying different things. So like, I think that we need to address people's cost of living, right? That is the number one thing. I represent Southern California. Actually San Diego just beat LA as the most expensive place to live, and that is not what we meant when we said,

beat LA at the Padres games. Right? Like, we, this is, it's bad, right? It's unaffordable to live in most places right now. Like, I don't know anyone our age who owns a home that didn't have family help. No, it's really hard on people. And that's a problem.

But a lot of that's restrictive zoning and like CEQA and more of the kind of, it's not necessarily national politics that have put us in that position. Yeah, so what do you do now that you've like, you know, you're representing federally. So like, because a lot of I like, I agree with you, like the cost of living thing sucks. But like, what do you, how do you deal with that? like the cost of living thing sucks, but like, what do you, how do you deal with that? So I think, I think it's both right? Like to this point of like abundance or whatever, like I think we need to figure out how to get more housing built. And most of that, as you said, is at the state and local level. There are some things we can do at the federal level and we're

trying to do them. So for instance, I sit on the Armed Services Committee and one of the things I'm really trying to do is get the military to build more military housing on military bases. Now I know that for everywhere that doesn't necessarily fix the problem, but in San Diego, it would take a huge pressure off of our housing market to have the military house more of their service members

with the biggest military community in the country. We can do a lot around section housing vouchers, veterans. And so with the military contract that out. Yeah. OK, so the building would be and. I guess that's a big thing right now is how are we streamlining those bidding processes and how are we making sure we don't lose, you know, the money that's supposed to be going to the people just in the paperwork.

And like, there's a lot of reform we need to do there. Actually in this year's National Defense Authorization Act we did a huge reform effort around procurement and acquisition in DOD to try and get at some of that. Now the military housing contracts are different. I've actually have been quite critical of how DOD has typically done these privatized military housing contracts because they give these really long leases with basically no accountability. And so you both have these essentially landlords, right, who claim they're just landlords, but then are protected from any sort of real liability. And so it's kind of like they operate in this gray zone of like,

they don't, they're not treated like just a regular landlord when it comes to liability and all these other things, but then DOD is not actually holding them accountable. So we've been doing a lot of work for instance because we've had a number of kids fall out of windows in military housing recently. And it's horrible, like a couple of kids in San Diego have died recently because of this. And so we're trying to figure out,

like, how do we fix that, both like either putting more rules in place or changing the way these contracts exist so that either they are just like regular landlords or like we have more oversight over what they're doing. So there are things you can do from the federal government. Many of the solutions are at the state and local government, but I know you guys talk a lot about housing. So if you or any of your listeners have creative ideas on what we can be doing at the federal level, like send them to us because we are trying to figure out all

the creative ways from the federal level that we can get at this problem. But housing is not the only big expense people face. Child care is another huge one. And this is where the federal government has a huge role to play because child care is just a market that doesn't work. It's too expensive for families to get the care they need. And providers are not getting paid enough because of ratios, because of other things. It's not a market. The market doesn't work. Yeah, do you want to talk about

how you were gonna change the estate tax so that a percentage of that went to childcare? Yeah, I think to the point we're talking about about how we actually have plenty of resources in this country, we just need to figure out how we mobilize them and what we want to mobilize them on. I introduced a bill called the Legacy Act,

which will bring the estate tax back to what it would have been without the Republican bill. Yeah, Trump took it from what, like 10 million to 30 million? So that essentially means when you die, you're rich. You used to get taxed after $10 million on what you gave to your family, and he moved it to $30 million. You get free of tax.

That's right. So we brought it back down technically to 14 million because that would have been the 10 million plus inflation. Right. From 30 million to 14 million, and then said that for the estate tax revenue, 15% of that has to go towards affordable childcare. It would estimate, raise around $400 million a year,

which is not enough to fix the problem, but having a dedicated funding stream is also an important component of it. How do you, so you defined it in a certain way so that you're not just like subsidizing demand and making prices go higher. Cause that seems like that was a big problem with people going to college

and it being subsidized by the government was that universities just charged more. Totally. Yeah, we saw the same thing with housing and we saw the same thing with healthcare costs as well. Yeah, so what we also say, so this is part one of my big grand plan to fix American childcare.

So this is getting the dedicated funding stream to the way we do existing childcare funding right now, which is state block grants. But we did say that a percentage of that money going to the state has to be given to, at supply side grants. So given as grants to providers to open more slots so that we're both subsidizing demand

and subsidizing supply. You're not getting charged on the back end for it. Yeah. And then, but you know, if it were in my grand, beautiful plan and I'm working on a bill, so it's not quite ready yet, but we would have like a single universal federal childcare system.

I think probably it should be free like K-12, but, or, you know, a lot of people say 7% of their income. There's many different ways you can slice it. I saw that as the defining criterion, but then I wondered what's the process. So do they send in paperwork that verifies that it's more than their, it's 7% of their net income for childcare.

And then it felt a little bit confusing to me at that point. Well, right. So this is the problem, right? We're always in this dilemma of like, do you wanna target things to the people who need it most? But by doing that, you end up having more paperwork burden and the administrative burden of that gets harder.

Or do you make something universal and then I get help, which like I arguably don't need it, but then it's easier for everyone because no one has to fill out paperwork and it's just eligible for whoever wants to use it. And that's even without the conservative argument that you'd be incentivizing people to make less so that they would have child care covered. Well right and so like I went to public school. Like we think of when you think about public schools right you don't think like

oh we really hate that Bill Gates's kids would go to a public school. No you're like it's awesome that we have this public school that everyone can go to for free. I think that's how we need to think about zero to five as well, to me it makes no sense that that starts at five years old. Oh, that's interesting. Yeah, we have to normalize the idea that kids deserve care provided by the government from the beginning,

not just at five. It is weird, I mean, I'm dealing with it now, we're gonna have to pay for daycare and it's a lot of money. I have twins and then I was talking to my friend who was a five year old, he's like, well, they're in kindergarten so I don't pay anything. And then I was talking to my friend who was a five-year-old, he's like, well, they're in kindergarten, so I don't pay anything. I'm like, oh my god, I just got to make it three more years and I'm off the till a little bit. Right, which makes no sense also because zero to five is the most brain formation. And so

actually some of the most crucial here is to make sure that we're getting kids the care that they need. Sounds like a lot of money, though. I do hear where people are coming from. It sounds like a lot of money though. I do hear where people are coming from. It sounds like a lot of... I mean, I get it, I get it. And our faith in the government has been so eroded over our lifetime that we have a real hard time trusting them to make these things happen.

So would you, do you think you would do it through the government itself or would these, would you facilitate it so that private enterprise can make these things happen? Yeah, so we're still working on the specifics of how we would do this. But to me, there's a couple key principles that we would want.

So one is that we would want it to be universal, right? We would want anyone to be able to benefit from it. We can argue if that's 7% of your income or free. Those are things. What the threshold is to be different, yeah. And then I think it needs to be multimodal, right? So often when people talk about child care, they think about a child care center, but that's not actually necessarily where most people get their care. A lot of more of family, like a lot of families who are

lower income use family child care providers. So those are people who in their home, like watch three, four, five kids. They still have like requirements but it's often a more flexible and less expensive option for families. You have family, friend, and neighbor. You have parents who want to stay at home and watch their own kids, right? I think there needs to be a very high component of parent choice in this because this is such a personal choice you make about like in those early years, who's watching your kid and how.

Guys, we are on tour. We got some dates coming up. We've got, what do you got? My next one man show is August 15th at Jam in the Van in Culver City for in Los Angeles. Come check that out. We've got, when's our next comedy store show? Oh, Bros Before Joes, August 8th in the Belly Room.

The whole squad's gonna be sick. I'm doing a skin treatment actually before that, so my face will be very red. JT will be doing a skin treatment before that, so he's gonna look either really red or glowing or glow the next day. When's the next Comedy Store? I think September 2nd, but I'll clarify that.

Comedy Store Main Room September 2nd, and then we're gonna be in Tampa September 24th, Orlando September 25th, and then Danny Beach September 26th. Get your tickets at ChadAndJT.com. We only have so much time. I wanna make sure we cover everything. Right now it feels like the largest issue going on

in the world is the conflict in Israel and Palestine and the the brutality is Staggering obviously it's it's led to a increase in anti-semitism, which is horrible. But but But the primary issue is just the death that's going on. I know that's a tough spot for you guys where You know, you you're supported by J Street, which is different from AIPAC. They support a two state solution. It's not as supportive of the Netanyahu regime. Marjorie Taylor Greene put forth this bill to defund the missile systems. It felt maybe like that was more symbolic.

You voted against that though, which means while you're supporting a two state solution, you are still supporting financing going towards the Israeli government, so What do you think is the likely outcome there and do you think that you know who will remain in power and for how long? Yeah, well just to clarify my position a little bit like I'm the youngest Jewish member of Congress My family lives in Tel Aviv Actually one of my cousins moved to San Diego with her kids because she didn't want to be in a bomb shelter every night. And so this is deeply personal to me.

And what happened on October 7th was horrible. And what we're seeing in Gaza, not just right now, but for the past two years has been horrific. And so my position has been that we should not be sending offensive weapons to Israel that can be used in instances of civilian harm like we're seeing in Gaza. So I actually introduced a bill with my colleague Delia Ramirez called the Block the Bombs Act that would say for these weapons that we know they are using, that have caused the most civilian harm, they should require extra congressional review and we shouldn't be sending them. Now I think that's different than sending things like

Iron Dome interceptors, which are the missile defense system, because I don't think Israeli civilians, like just like I want to protect Palestinian civilians, I want to protect Israeli civilians. And to me, it's different to send like Iron Dome interceptors, things that are, you know, providing that cover to Israeli civilians than the offensive weapons that they're using in Gaza. So that's, that's my position. And what can, you know, we saw the hunger crisis getting to a almost unrecoverable level. It might already be there.

It's hard to say. What can Congress do to make sure Israel is being accountable with helping these people survive? Yeah, I mean, look, what's been happening in Gaza for the last two years is horrible, but it pales in comparison to what we are seeing right now. I mean, you're literally seeing kids with their bones sticking out of their bodies and like... And the stories you hear back that they're targeting people who are coming to the food

aid, you know, you see doctors saying they've never seen such targeted violence towards younger people. It's, it's hard to parcel out what's turned up, but the gestalt of it is as dark as it gets. Yeah, yeah. And look, I think that we have, we as the United States have very real leverage with the Israelis. And we've seen that when we use that leverage, they will change their behavior. Unfortunately, I don't think either President Biden or President Trump have been willing enough to use that leverage to actually get the Netanyahu government to change behavior and to address the humanitarian situation. Like we already have existing law that says that if you block provision of humanitarian aid, you are not eligible for US arms. But neither the Biden administration nor the Trump administration has been willing to enforce that existing law. And for the party, that was a huge wedge issue. I think it's a huge reason why Kamala lost.

I don't disagree with you. Like, of course, people now when we're saying like people are dying around the world because they're cutting USAID are like well How like okay, but you let kids die in Gaza like I understand where people are coming from like I Think it's incredibly important that we protect civilian life and we protect human rights Equally everywhere and that's true whether the person committing the atrocity is our ally or isn't So when we all in addition to like military aid, there's also a financial aid component, which like it's like Israel is not It's not like a poor country. So like would do you think we should stop giving financial aid? I mean in some of that financial aid is used to just buy American arms

So I think it was like 3.8 billion per year. But like, I think it's from my perspective, I don't think they need it. You know, why should America be giving financial aid just even disregarding the military aid question to Israel? I mean, I don't think they need economic assistance. I think like we should help with the Iron Dome and other missile defense. I don't think we should help with any of the offensive weapons or anything that goes to it and a lot of that money is actually as you said like money that they then just use

to buy US weapons so it's not quite categorized the same in the federal budget. I'm getting way too in the weeds right now. No, I think it's good. categorize the same in the federal budget. I'm getting way too in the weeds right now. To me, the principle is we have a ton of leverage when it comes to the Israeli government and their behavior. Why has leadership been so reluctant to use that leverage? I think because the very real rise of anti-Semitism has been weaponized in a very politically dangerous way where people feel like if they say anything against, have any very real criticisms of the government of Israel, they are at risk of being called anti-Semitic. And I think that's really, really dangerous.

Yeah, because it's completely different. It's completely different. I love all my Jewish friends. I have an issue with the state of Israel and with Netanyahu, who was the state of Israel had a problem with Netanyahu? I mean, he was on his way out. And when I see how long he's been in power, it's like, I know there was elections, but it feels authoritarian. Dope. I mean, yes, he has the same authoritarian tendencies as Trump. Like, even before October 7th, he was trying to do judicial reform and like got any checks on his power, right? Like he's Many argue perpetuating this war because he wants to stay out of jail

Because he has all these corruption charges against him. So like I think I think part of why people have been So wary of this though is that there is this very real rise in antiemitism. We have seen very real violence against the Jewish community and I think that's why it's so important that we as American Jews and especially Jewish leaders talk about the difference between the very real antisemitism we're seeing and the very valid criticisms of the governments of the policy of Israel and not conflate the two. Yeah, it's a hard thing for people to hear though because then they think that the speech is being prioritized over the violence and it speaks to a hierarchy of values and people that maybe doesn't reflect well on, isn't aligned with what liberal values are supposed to be,

if that makes sense. Totally hear that. values are supposed to be, if that makes sense. Totally hear that. All right. So speaking of that, you went to Columbia. They recently capitulated to the administration. And now it looks like Harvard is going to do the same. What do you think these universities and corporations should do when they get into these legal head-knocking

contests with the president? I mean, this is one of the things, again, where I think it's incredibly important that American Jews speak up, because a lot of what's being done to our higher education is being done in the name of fighting antisemitism, but it is not actually fighting antisemitism. And I talked to a lot of young Jews around the country.

It is not making our Jewish students feel or be any safer on campus. So, like, part of this is that we need to, like, call out constantly that weaponizing the fear of anti-Semitism, the very real rise in anti-Semitism, is not okay in order to do these things that are, like like actually not making us any safer. And like while in one hand the Trump administration is saying that he's cutting all these funds from these universities because of anti-Semitism, he actually gutted the Department of Education's

Office of Civil Rights, which is the entity that Jewish students or others can go to to allege instances of anti-Semitism and get them investigated and get them addressed. So like that's what we need to be investing in to actually address anti-Semitism. And my background before Congress was working in post-conflict transitions, post-coup countries. And what we know from those other countries is that it's really important that our institutions don't self-censor and don't capitulate because our institutions are what are going to be able to keep our country going and it's very concerning to me that we're seeing law firms and universities and others. Yeah, like the fact that we're in a capitalist democracy, we're seeing the limitations of how much strength they have

because if he turns off the faucet, they're insolvent and it's kind of over. I mean, I also think like, yeah, it's also kind of a collective action problem though right? Like they should all be linking up. Yeah. That's a good point. Hey JT have you ever caught yourself in the mirror and thought whoa when did that wrinkle show up? Did?

Totally. Or like when you suddenly realize you look more like your dad every day and like not the cool parts. Look your face is literally the first thing people see. And unfortunately, it's the first thing to betray you and your age once you're past 30. And that's why we love the bros at Brodage. Brodage have created the best all-in-one

anti-aging moisturizer for dudes. Right, it also has sunscreen built in, but not too much. Yeah, you don't want more than 15, then you're just slathering on molasses. Yeah, and it has retinol. JT, what is retinol again? Retinol is the only thing that's FDA approved and scientifically proven to reduce fine lines.

Right, like this cute dog on the packaging, Bresheets got it all. Retinol to reduce those fine lines, SPF 15 to keep your skin safe from sun damage, plus vitamins and minerals to keep your face feeling fresh all freaking day. It's a true all in one. And my favorite thing about Protege

is that it's fragrance free and non-greasy. It goes on super smooth and absorbs instantly. Doesn't leave any sticky white cast. You won't even notice you're wearing it, but the babes flocking towards your radiant visage will. But you might be wondering, wow, this sounds amazing, but it's probably really complicated. Well, that's where you're wrong, dudes.

Bro-J is the anti-routine skincare solution for bros. It couldn't be any easier. No training manual or multi-step regimen. Regimen necessary. Keep that. Regimen necessary. Just slap on some and go. Wait, dude, do I have to wash my face

before I use Brodaget? It's not required, but I recommend it. Thanks. And here's something special for our Going Deep listeners. Use code DEEP at checkout and you'll get to try Brodaget for only 10 bucks. 10 bucks to look younger, fresher, and basically just better?

It's a no-brainer, dudes. Try Bredeje. Support your face, the loche, and the show by using Bredeje. Let's get back to the show. So then speaking of that, you're working in post-coup worlds. And so what are your responsibilities towards the continent of Africa? So I'm the ranking Democrat on the Africa subcommittee of the Foreign Affairs Committee. Yeah, I saw and I'm like

This is a lot of countries. Yeah And it's like so you deal with all of that my immediate thought was like who do you talk to first? like who's like who are they're like power brokers that kind of like Dominate the scene and you kind of need to, I don't know, get them on board if you're really gonna try and do things? How does that work? Are there multiple or like you take it literally like country by country?

I mostly do things country by country although there are some like regional things. So for instance, we passed this bill, it's a law, the Global Fragility Act. And it's a way for us to learn theility Act, and it's a way for us to learn the lessons from Iraq and Afghanistan and do things differently. And there were a couple of priority countries within that. And so one of them was like the region of coastal West Africa, and then also Mozambique and Libya and Papua New Guinea and Haiti.

But so, you know, sometimes it's helpful to do things regionally like that. But most of the time we try and look at each country and make sure that like, you know, we're doing oversight of US policy. I will say like one of the things that has been really top of mind and I've really focused on in this role is the conflict in Sudan. It is now the world's largest displacement crisis. role is the conflict in Sudan. It is now the world's largest displacement crisis. 14 million people are at risk of famine. It's like truly horrific. And they have like a paramilitary group that just established their own government, right? Yeah, they have. So we're a similar age. I'm sure many people remember the Save Darfur movement when we were like in high

school and college. It's basically that same group. They used to be the Janjaweed, now they're the Rapid Support Forces, the RSF. They are this militia in the Darfur region that are fighting against the SAF, the Sudan's Armed Forces. Now, let's be clear, neither side in this is very good. It's two generals who are very just like fighting for their own power. And did they team up and previously and then split off to overthrow a previous government? Yeah. So, okay, we'll do like a quick history.

Well, a lot of this is ethnic too and religious, right? Like it's almost like there have been issues before where it's like kind of brown people against black people to there have been issues before where it's like kind of brown people against black people to generalize a little bit. But it is that. And like also like Muslims versus other religions. Yeah. Yeah. So Sudan is a very like complex country with lots of pieces. It had been led by a government for a long time that was like very Islamist, very hard. Right. They were originally the people who had Osama bin Laden before he went to Afghanistan, for instance, a number of years ago now, the people decided they didn't want to live

under this regime anymore, and they literally had a revolution. And it was like this. It was peaceful. It was everything you want civilian countries to do, right? Like they overthrew the government. And these two leaders came in and decided they were going to help with the transition to a civilian government. So it was the two of them, plus the civilian government supposed to do this transition.

Then they were unhappy that civilian government was taking too much power. So they couped the civilian government they were working with. Then it was the two of them working together. And then they got mad at each other. And now millions of people have died because they are like fighting over their egos. And what's the current United States policy towards Sudan? I mean. The I mean, the current policy is that we hear that it is something that the administration cares about,

but there is no assistant secretary for Africa confirmed yet. The Congress has mandated there be a special envoy for Sudan who actually works to address this conflict, and they have not appointed someone yet. And one of the things I think is most concerning is that this has now become kind of a regional proxy war. So many countries are supporting the SAF, the Sudanese Armed Forces, so Saudi, Egypt, others. Egypt, others, but the United Arab Emirates is the primary funder of the RSF. And we are the biggest weapons provider to the UAE.

And so because we have refused to stop sending weapons to the UAE, even though we know that they are funding and arming a genocide. And our State Department under both administrations have confirmed that arming a genocide. And like our State Department, under both administrations, have confirmed that it is a genocide. And yet we keep sending arms to the UAE. And so we negotiated a treaty with the DWC in Rwanda. Who is responsible for that if we don't have a special representative for Africa?

And why were we motivated to make a treaty there and not to be active in Sudan? Yeah, so um president trump has appointed his Tiffany Trump's father-in-law So I don't know what that makes him to president trump, but tiffany trump's father-in-law uh who is um has some business interests in Africa as um his special envoy for Africa. And so he basically has done some of these deals. He was part of this deal with DRC Rwanda. We also worked with other countries who

have been negotiating these for a long time, like the African Union, the Togolese have now taken it over. It was the Angolans who were leading that. Like Qatar is doing some of those negotiations. And many people say that a big part of why Trump and Boulos were so interested in getting a deal in this conflict in DRC and Rwanda is because they want a mineral deal from the DRC. It's Colton. It's part of our phones and stuff. Colton, Tin, Tantalum, Tungsten,

they have a lot of those. Now look, the conflict in Eastern DRC is horrible and we should be trying to bring it to an end and I've been working on this with the Biden administration with the Trump administration. But the financial center is like a triage above Sudan. That's exactly right. And then what do you think about what's going on

in South Africa with the purported prejudice towards the Afrikaners and the kind of, like the fourth largest party there sings that song that's like throw, like bring death to the Afrikaner. And obviously it's incredibly complicated because of apartheid, but it feels like something that is being super accentuated on like right leaning news publications and something that's being the opposite on left ones.

Where do you fall on how serious of an issue that is? From everything I can tell, it's not an issue at all. I mean, if you look at the pictures they were using to prove that the farms were being expropriated, those pictures were literally from the DRC. But you know what's funny? Trump is always messy with that stuff and always uses bogus information to make his point. But then I do feel like he has a good nose for issues. I just anecdotally know people who have left South Africa because they are worried about land seizures

and intentional electricity outages. But you feel strongly that it's not. Look, there's a lot of things wrong with the government of South Africa. Currently, there's a lot of things wrong with the government of South Africa. Currently, the party in coalition. So like the ANC has been running South Africa since Nelson Mandela. The the party they're in coalition with to run the government is the Democracy Alliance, the DA, which is the Afrikaner Party.

So they are literally in government right now. They have. Yeah, I saw they're only like 5% of the population and they have like 65% of the meaningful government jobs. Yeah, now, right, exactly. I might have those numbers wrong, by the way. But there was a disparity there. There was a huge disparity because even though apartheid ended, right,

that they haven't actually solved a lot of the underlying economic income inequality and disparities. Now, there's lots of other problems in South Africa, right? Like crime is very high. They're having electricity issues. The government there's lots of other problems. So Africa right like crime is very high They're having electricity issues. The government has a lot of corruption issues. Like that's all true. I Don't think that How African Africaners in South Africa are treated is worse than how? You know, like they should not be the only refugees that we are taking here Like there are many many people in many countries who are being treated way worth their kind of useful tools in a more

Racially driven divide. That's right What do you think about Burkina Faso and the leader there? Who's become kind of a folk hero to? People all over and he's issued the West There's they do AI songs where it's like R. Kelly singing about him and the locals think it's really, I'll play one of the songs. It's an absolute banger. Why, I'm not familiar.

So can somebody give me a rundown? Yeah, could you explain who this guy is and what you think the long-term story will be with him? Yeah, so the leader of Burkina Faso took over in a coup. I want to say a couple of years ago now. And he was like a junior military officer. And we've seen similar coups in Mali, in Niger, countries right around there. A big reason for these coups is that the population didn't feel like their governments were taking the counterterrorism threat seriously. There's a huge Al-Qaeda and the Islamic Maghreb presence there. JNM, now ISIS West Africa is there.

And so that kind of laid the groundwork. Plus, like these all three were former French colonies and the French are very heavy handed with their former colonies. And so there was a lot of like anti-French sentiment going on there that was also being fueled by Russian propaganda, but based on very real grievances, I would say. And so he took over Traore and, you know, has been really anti-West. And I think has, you know, captivated a lot of people's attention. The situation in Burkina Faso actually has not improved. And I, you know, I think he's not actually addressed the counterterrorism issue that people wanted.

People are not getting it, you know And it was a strong propaganda arm right now that's saying he's making things better, but maybe that hasn't turned into reality yet That's exactly right. And and you know, his government's committing a number of human rights abuses Do you think he will be able to lift the standard of living there? I Think if he actually wanted to potentially but instead he's like making deals with previously Wagner Group, Russia's Africa Corps, and really more focused on keeping himself in power. And he feels likely for a conspiracy from American people where I think if he does fall

out of power, people are going to think it was like the CIA. He feels very cut for that kind of narrative. I mean, all three of the leaders, and you share Burkina Faso and Molly, Molly's a little bit different now because they're sort of starting to be more open. He's surrounded by despots too, right? Yeah. But they all have this, a bit of a conspiratorial idea of like the French trying to take them over again or that the coastal West African countries that they border have a group called ECOWAS which is sort of the economic community of the West African states and you know ECOWAS tried to prevent some of these coups

and said that they would you know militarily intervene if there wasn't a transition and so that also I think that a little bit into this sort of Conspiratorial notion that everyone's out to get them right how when like a country turns over like that like the government gets replaced and like You know, maybe violent maybe not But how long do you does it take before you reach out and like an official capacity to be like, you know What's up? You want to talk and? You know see how we can work together? Yeah, so there's actually a part of US law, section 7008,

that says that the US cannot provide any assistance except specific humanitarian assistance to countries that have non-constitutional transfers of power, so coups, basically. And so the US government reaches out pretty immediately and says like, you are now subject to the 7008 provisions. We must stop like these assistance. And these are the things you have to do

in order to get this assistance turned back on. So we, you know, the US government tries to have those conversations and tries to help work on a transition back to democracy. Cool. Yeah, do you guys want to talk about, so you are you on the subcommittee for AI? Yeah, so there's a bipartisan task force on artificial intelligence. Yeah. And so recently in the big beautiful bill, they legislated that AI regulation could not take place at the state level, which I think the argument was, look, we all just want to be on the same page

with this. And also I think they were afraid that California might have too much influence in dictating what the policy was. How do you feel about that decision? And what do you think are some baseline regulations we need in place with AI? Yeah. So that provision got taken out. Oh, they did? In the end. Yeah. So, that provision got taken out. Oh, they did?

In the end. Yeah, there's some funding that will be susceptible to it, but the broadband was taken out. I was against that for a few reasons. One is that if I had faith that we were going to get a good federal regulatory system, then sure, fine. We can talk about whether it makes sense for the states to have their own. But in the absence of that, saying that the states can't do anything while the federal government isn't doing anything just means there'll be no, nothing.

And I don't think anyone- What do you mean by that? No, nothing? Like, if the federal, we've not passed anything real on AI in the federal government. Right. If we aren't able to get to something that will address AI

and we're saying the states can't either, there'll be no regulation on AI. Right. And the argument from the pro AI people is that if we regulate it now, we'll slow it down in all the familiar bureaucracy and we'll lose the tech race with China and then they'll have the ability to dictate how the world works.

Yeah. And I'm, I look, I'm, I'm not unsympathetic to that. Like I think that there's many people who want to overregulate it to the point where like we will not have any innovation. And then there's some people who think we don't want any regulation at all because that's the only way to get innovation. And I just don't think either of those dichotomies are true because if you if you look at like the internet, right, that the policy decisions in the 90s, I think many of us would argue that we wish they had put in a

few more regulations on how things happen so that all of the money in the internet did not go to these social media companies that are like the all the smartest minds talking about like how to sell you ads right like but then they would say that the smartest minds went there because it was deregulated and that's why we had such a intellectual flourishing that space. How would you even stop that I guess like Like even looking back, because it's so hard to know what to put in place now for the future, I mean, even looking back at the internet, what could we have done to kind of stop that

besides it feels like a lot of it's more like, not allowing phones in schools and it's like parenting decisions and things like that versus the government saying, it feels like a lot of the downstream effects have just been like we've we're kind of learning how to deal with these things and live with them versus the government telling us like before it even happened like oh we're going to do this and this. Well yes on that side of things but the way I think about it is that like companies make

decisions within an incentive framework that the government sets. And not setting a framework is still setting a framework. And so we could have passed a data privacy law that didn't make data a commodity or that had rules around how people could use data. And that would have changed the incentives companies had for what kinds of things they were investing in and what kinds of tools they were creating. And so to me, it's not about-

Creating a better target for these companies that will work for the betterment of all people. Exactly. To me, it's about how do we as government shape the rules of the road and the incentives within which companies are making investment decisions so that we have it more likely that we're going to get technologies that create the better society and not ones that, you know, many of us would say are like hurting society. And I think that's possible without hurting innovation because all it's doing is like shaping. So what are some of those ideas that could help shape it?

Yeah. So I'm looking at a lot of things around sort of both how we look at how these like big models, the frontier models, what kind of transparency we want from them, how do we ask, you know, how do we make sure that what they're doing is accessible and that you don't have this concentration where only like three or four people, three or four companies are going to be able to just like fully consolidate everything because it's so expensive to do this investment. So how do we make sure for instance that like research institutions, universities also have access to this kind of compute that you need for this. But then looking also downstream at like how these tools are being used and one of the

things, a bill I'm working on right now that I hope to introduce soon, that I think is like one of the baseline things we can do is that we already have existing law on things like employment fairness, housing fairness, right? But a lot of those things are now being done by AI and we don't have a way at the moment really to make sure that when AI is making those decisions, they're comporting with existing law. So I'll give you an example. So like the EEOC, the Equal Employment Opportunity Council, their job is to make sure fair employment

laws are upheld. So like prior to the advent of AI, right, You feel that you were discriminated against in hiring for a job. You can file a complaint with the EEOC, they investigate it, the company gets, either you end up getting hired or the company pays a fine or has to change the way they do hiring, et cetera, right? Now you have AI screening all of the resumes.

You often have AI doing like a lot of different components of the job thing. And so like, let's say you're a job applicant and you think that you were discriminated against because we know these AI tools, they're not actually neutral, right? Sometimes they pick like, I think there was one article that one of these like job tools saw that

the most successful employees were ones that had played on the lacrosse team at their college or something. Well that's like very- Right, they're susceptible to bias as well. Yes. And so now you would have to allege to the EEOC, they'd have to investigate it. These things often take like four to six years. By then, 10 new algorithms have come into place and nothing has really been fixed. So what my bill would do is it would give agencies like the EEOC tools, it's not a mandatory

preclearance, but it basically allows agencies to ask companies questions before deployment or during deployment, but before a harm has been alleged about anything they think could be safety or rights impacting in their existing law jurisdiction. So not any additional regulation, but at least making sure that like existing laws can be enforced. Is being coordinated with the new technology.

Yeah. Okay. Have you thought about any, cause I think this is an issue that's starting to come up about privacy laws around AI because with people, you know, let's say people using ChatGPT as a therapist and then they give a lot of private information to ChatGPT and then, but now, you know,

if there's like a lawsuit or something, people can use that. There's no kind of, what do you call it with the doctor? HIPAA. HIPAA, yeah. There's no kind of law preventing people from using that information against people in lawsuits and stuff like that. No, I think this is really problematic.

I actually introduced a bill on reproductive and sexual health data, so like period tracking apps, website searches, if you ask chat GPT how to get an abortion or how to treat chlamydia or whatever. Because I think a lot of people don't know that when it comes to commercial platforms, HIPAA doesn't apply. HIPAA only applies between you and your health care provider.

Yeah. And actually in many cases, HIPAA has a lot of holes in it now in the post-war era too because of, you know, clauses that say if something is illegal under state law, then they don't have to abide by HIPAA, et cetera, so I have a couple of bills that would fix that too. But what my bill would say is that for any commercial platform, any reproductive

or sexual health data, they can only collect and retain what they strictly need to provide the service you've asked of them. So a period tracking app couldn't also collect your location, for instance. They could not sell it or share it. You can ask for it to be deleted at any time and you're able to sue if you think your data has been misused. And I do think we need to have a much broader conversation about data and like,

who owns data? Who benefits from data? What rights you have to your own data? What happens to your data? Like when you put it into chat GPT, do you have any rights for it to be deleted? What are all of the rules right now? We're basically letting every company decide their own rules. Yeah, it even goes beyond AI. I remember I found out a year ago that if you sign up for an app in your car, some car companies sell that information to insurance companies. So they can tell you if your car knows you got into an accident, but you didn't tell your insurance company. Oh, interesting. And they can jack up your rates that way. Where I was like, I wear a health

tracker. I'm like, could they sell it to a life insurance company? 100%. They do. Oh, that's interesting. I got rejected for life insurance because I told my doctor I do drugs sometimes. And they pulled my medical files. No idea I was gonna be punished for my honesty. I'm pretty healthy. Yeah. With the job displacement that's gonna come from AI, a lot of the counter arguments you hear

is there's gonna be a lot of jobs in AI, but obviously we don't have a trained workforce for that. So how do you see us responsibly adjusting to this huge displacement? I've been thinking a lot about this because I think as the Republicans have like decimated the social safety net, as we're going to rebuild it, we should be rebuilding it with thinking and like keeping in mind what the world is going to look like,

which is this enabled world. So I think there's a few things. One is I think that there's ways that we can shape the incentives where companies are not incentivized to get rid of workers in the way they are now, because right now we tax labor at a much different rate than we tax capital or anything else. So we're looking into how do you try and reshape the incentives in the tax code for like having employers keep labor and have AI products that will augment labor instead of replace labor. Okay. So there's that piece, right? Like how do we actually shape the tool so that we're incentivizing not having as much

of a huge displacement, but there'll still be many things that are displaced. Is that going to work if it turns out that AI is better at the job? Is that actually going to be feasible? I think it depends on the job. So I think in some jobs, AI will just be better. But in some jobs, AI will actually just help increase the productivity of each individual human, and you still need a human there. So that's what I mean.

Like, so like, why? But like why? If that's the case, and I think that's like a more optimistic, and I tend to agree with that take, then like why do you need government to step in at all? Because wouldn't the market just figure that out? Well, here's the problem, is that I think there's gonna be some externalities to it.

Because what a lot of the AI is gonna replace is those like entry level white collar jobs. So you won't need a first year law associate anymore. You won't need a paralegal anymore, but you will still need the council who then can intake all the things that AI has done for them and turn it into a coherent argument and argue it in court. But if we're not training anyone

because there's no entry level jobs, we're gonna run out of the people who have the skills to actually be able to do what we need them to do. Yeah, that's an interesting argument. Yeah, like how do we give people the baseline knowledge so that those top level executive jobs that we do need humans for, you have the adequate understanding for it.

Right, like another example, right? Like most people probably aren't gonna write as much anymore, right, because chat GPT or Claude or whoever can write for you, but you still will edit, right? Because you make changes, whatever. But if you've never learned how to write, how can you edit? Yeah.

And so how do we make sure people still have the skills they need, even when AI are doing some of the baseline stuff, and I do think there's going to be a good number of jobs that do get displaced. I think there's going to be some jobs that are more resilient, many in the care economy, right? So like, I think it will be a long time if ever that people really will let a robot just watch their kids. Maybe a robot watch their kids with a human there. But have you seen those AI teddy bears that like will answer your kids when kids go why, why, why? They'll have an answer for all of that. Yeah, I mean, that's augmenting human labor.

And so how do we make sure I have a three and a half year old niece, so I understand she has a lot of questions. How do we make sure that those jobs, the care jobs that are going to be more resilient actually become good jobs? And then how do we address what's going to happen? What's likely to happen is that AI is also going to consolidate wealth because you're going to have a couple of these frontier models, hyperscalers, whatever you want to call them, who are making all these tools. At some point, the barrier to entry is gonna be quite high,

so you're gonna get a concentration, likely. And then you're gonna have less jobs, which is right now how you kind of distribute resources, is that people get resources by working. But if there are less jobs, and that productivity has now been fundamentally divorced from labor How do you make sure that you are both addressing this concentration? So that you can have new entrance into the market and you can have you know

More resources for people and that people have what they need and so that's where I think you need government to step in because A mark like the market on its own is just going to basically consolidate and you're going to have these like four or five hyper scalar frontier labs that have all the capital. No one's going to have or not as many people are going to have jobs. And so they're not going to be able to make money and you're going to need some way to like distribute resources. And so to that where you see like someone like Peter Thielen interviews and he's kind

of like this transhumanist and then he has, you know, he's a partner in Palantir, he supports JD Vance. What preventative measures can we put in place so we don't fall into just a tech oligarchy? It's a really important question because I think the two most likely scenarios of like an AI enabled world are either you get too much government or not enough government. So too much government would be like this tech oligarchy where everything is surveillance,

where you don't even get to decide if you wanna follow the speed limit or not. You're in a driverless car that will not go above the speed limit, right? Like there's all these things they can do. Or you're in a world where these companies control everything. Government doesn't actually matter anymore and you have no way of making sure things they can do, or you're in a world where these companies control everything.

Government doesn't actually matter anymore and you have no way of making sure that resources are distributed, that you have any sort of decision making because everything is so concentrated you have no government. And I think the key is how do we actually future proof our government so that we end up in the happy median where you have enough government to do things, not too much that it's authoritarian, but not too little that there's like nothing there to take care, like to do that decision making. And that's the job right now.

I haven't quite figured out what the answer is, but I think that's what we need to like think about doing. And are you okay with someone from Palantir, like the CTO being commissioned into the armed services? I think that we need to do a better job of getting people into the government in entry and higher levels. And I think it's important that we fix,

like the government software is a disaster. Like I was trying to make it- Yeah, I heard the systems are incredibly outdated. They're so outdated. Like I was trying to make it systems are incredibly outdated. They're so outdated. Like, during COVID, some they couldn't fix some of the unemployment insurance systems because they were coded in cobalt, which no one knows how to code anymore. I think like my dad coded in cobalt. Like, and so I do think we need to figure out how we fix

so it's a dangerous but necessary alliance. Well, if if if President Biden had brought someone like that to figure out how we fix the software. So it's a dangerous but necessary alliance. Well, if President Biden had brought someone like that into government, I would be less worried. What I'm worried about is that we have a government now that not only doesn't care about people's privacy, but actually we know that they are using their positions to enrich themselves.

And so I don't have faith that there will be the protections in place to make sure that this is what we need. Yeah, I feel the same way. But then I, you know, then I'll look at like Chuck Schumer's net worth over the course of his, you know, political career. And it just seems like sometimes like maybe this administration is just more brazen about it. I hear this a lot.

This is okay. So I spent a lot of time trying to figure out like how um, why we lost young people and actually like, I would love your takes on this is like, why don't people like the Democratic Party? I have strong feelings about this. I think a big part of it, like one thing I hear from young people all the time is like, well, you're all corrupt, at least they're honest about being corrupt. And like, it's not quite true.

Like, there are levels of corruption. There are levels of corruption. Yeah. And like, I don't know about Chuck Schumer's finances. I can tell you like a lot of like, these stories will pop up like, oh, Sarah Jacobs made $14 million yesterday. I'm like, that's news to me.

Like, sometimes just like the stock market goes up or down and you don't actually like make the money. It's just like in stock market goes up or down and you don't actually like make the money It's just like right in your net worth now But you look I think there is a huge problem with government corruption Whether that's individual people like using their jobs to make money whether that's Contracts whether that's all of the money that goes into politics like we've got to address this But this is a new level of, sorry, go ahead. This is a new level.

This is a new level. Like they're literally taking like unidentified meme coin donations. Right now, I'm not, I wasn't going to comment on that because it is like, it feels different. But that just might be my political affiliation. But I was going to say like a lot of, it seems like a lot of what you should do is if like

is you want to get money for your state, you want to bring jobs to your state, you want to do things that help your constituents. So isn't a lot of what somebody in Congress would have to do is try and take some federal money and somehow get it to their state. So it doesn't that the incentives already seem misaligned, but it also makes a lot of sense that like, yeah, you'd want to do something for the people who voted you in. So like, how do you balance that with like, you know, obviously you want to win government contracts for your state, even if it may not necessarily be the smartest place to do it. So I'm like a bad politician this way. I'm

deeply unparochial. Like I'm on the Armed Services Committee. San Diego is like one of the biggest defense contractors, one of the biggest military or the biggest military community in the country. And I'm like, oh, that ship shouldn't be built, great. It's okay that it's built in San Diego. Like we shouldn't build that ship, we shouldn't build it. But I can do that in part because San Diego has other jobs. And if you look at places like Alabama, Mississippi,

like often the shipyards are the only jobs there. And so part of what I think we need to do is recognize like there is a role for the government to play an industrial policy, right, into getting investment into places that wouldn't otherwise get private sector investment. That shouldn't be our defense budget. That shouldn't necessarily be our like government contracting budget. Like we should have an industrial policy and then we should have a defense budget that actually reflects our defense needs.

So that's kind of how I think about that. And speaking of the meme coin thing, I saw you voted against the genius act and the stable coin that was going to make it government backed, which people were saying would help with stability and a little bit more oversight. What was your issue there? Yeah, I struggled with that one a lot. Like I think there were some really good pieces of that bill that would have brought some more transparency and sometimes something is better than nothing. I ended up voting against it because I was worried about the

systemic risk it would cause where I didn't think there were enough protections where if you were a stable coin backed by the US dollar and all of a sudden someone, there was a run on your coin, people wanted dollars that that could then trickle down into the banking system. Like we saw with Silicon Valley Bank, like we saw in the cat. You saw potential for a run there.

Exactly. And so I didn't think there were enough protections against that broader systemic, Rick. Making sure that they actually had to keep enough. Holding enough assets that they could cover the loss. Yeah. Holding enough dollar assets, right? Not other things. Because right now, like there wasn't some people were saying that using in that bill, you could use another stable coin to be your asset reserve. Oh. Right. So like more restrictions on who could hold the assets

and what the assets could be. Yeah, that almost feels like the collateralized debt stuff when they were putting bad houses together, you were like, this is junk with junk a little bit. Exactly. And so that's what I was worried about. So I think we need something like that, but I was worried about the systemic risk issue.

All right, and then I guess last thing I wanna talk about was that energy feels like the big race right now with China too. And people say that's almost more important than the AI thing is like being supported by energy. So it's kind of the most important component. And China builds it like a six to one scale to us. The current admin is pushing that gas. People are bummed out about the tax incentives getting taken out for solar.

How do you see us keeping up in this energy race while also doing the liberal thing and looking out for the environment? Well, this is another thing I've been thinking about a lot, especially in regards to AI, because I also think what we're seeing is the US make these deals with the UAE, for instance, on AI because they have cheap energy,

but that has a lot of issues with it as well. And so I think that it makes no sense to get rid of the tax credits for wind and solar. That was so silly because first of all, that is our cheapest energy source right now. So like why would you be getting rid of the tax incentive for our cheapest energy source? And if you look at California during the day, we run on all solar. It's like 70% of our energy grid is running on that. Yeah. And like, look, there are, we still have challenges around batteries.

Like we've got to fix transmission. I think that there's new technologies that we need to be looking into. But if we had consistent policy around that stuff, because every president has switched back and forth on solar, if we had consistent policy, do you think the batteries would be in a place where they could take us through the night

and could take us through the winter? I think it's possible. No, I don't know. I was just being excited. Yeah, maybe, maybe. I mean, I'm all for all the innovation that we need. It's going to take innovation, but it's also going to take these factories and stuff aren't built overnight. So unless you have a tax incentive or something that's long term, you're just like not really doing anything real.

So like more coal plants aren't being built because Obama made coal regulations that people didn't like. More coal plants aren't being built because they're not a financially viable market anymore because it's cheaper. The coal subsidy seems so weird yeah because it's cheaper to build wind and solar and because I'm like I'm in favor of net gas it's like big for our country you know it's actually cleaner than a lot we have a ton of it yeah we're we're a net exporter of oil you know like we

the biggest it yeah yeah come on baby I mean we're dominating in that that it's like yeah why don't we just do all of the above kind of strategy? It made no sense to me. It's like taking away Michael Jordan's mid-range jumpers. Yeah. But also, it's funny because I just feel like, with a lot of, and I'm so curious,

like how much, I feel like they're described as like the groups a lot. Like how much does like a Sierra, what, like Sierra Club like influence democratic policy where it does feel like they're very degrowth, it's very zero sum thinking, and it's like, what do you do with stuff like that? Because I'm very much like abundance, like no, let's just have a bunch of energy and I'm not worried about AI dentists, data centers, because we'll just build enough energy to where it doesn't matter. i mean i think i think it's less that like the groups quote unquote have a lot of power. i mean

some of it is like a systemic issue that like members of congress we we have staff of 18 that includes our district and dc so like unless you're an expert on the issue you're voting on, you often will go to like whoever you trust on that issue. And so like that's where a lot of these groups power come in is that they tend to be like almost like the outside thing tank because we don't have enough internal capacity to actually be able to like do everything. So it's less explicit cajoling and it's more that they've just entrenched themselves as the information center

for these issues. Yeah. And they will score you on how you vote on certain things and help more or less with your reelection or something. But I think to me, again, and I feel like I maybe sound like so but like The answer is both like we do need to protect our environment a lot of the environmental protections were put in place because of what happened in the 50s and 60s and 70s that didn't Have enough protections and where a best is in your house a best is in your house

I mean LA clean air issues right like it was like a whole thing of smog that we just don't have anymore. Like it only shows up. Correct. Very rarely. These things are important. And we can also recognize that some of the things that have been done in the name of protecting our environment actually because they're inhibiting our ability to build more dense housing and all of these other things are actually in the long run hurting our environment.

So I do think we need to address this like permitting regulation issue, I think it's important. Like clearly it's too hard to build things here, but I don't think the answer is like get rid of all regulation. Like we still want people to have good paying jobs and we still don't want smog back in LA and San Diego. Right, so like it's a balance.

And I think what happened is that like, one side went totally on one side of the balance, the other side went totally on the other side of the balance. And so instead of like ping ponging back and forth, instead of like the actual solution, which is somewhere in between. Do you think, do you think anything regarding transmission lines will be passed of easing, permitting and things like that? I mean, there was a like Manchin-Borosso law or act that was proposed. I think there's a lot of conversations about what it could be. Frankly, they could probably do it without democratic votes for the most part, so they don't really need us to do it. But I think there could be, I think

definitely. I mean, I have this idea that maybe if we put AI regulation in with energy regulation, you can somehow have some grand bargain because like then the left will give a little bit on the environmental side on energy and the right will give a little bit on like their dislike of regulation and you'll somehow like get both and like because they're so intrinsically linked. It seems like they should be together, right? Yeah. Yeah. And so like, I don't know, maybe there's some grand bargain we can strike. I don't of regulation and you'll somehow like get both and like because they're so intrinsically linked. Yeah. Yeah.

And so like I don't know maybe there's some grand bargain we can strike. I don't think anything is impossible like we passed a bipartisan gun violence prevention law right? Like nothing's impossible. We just need to have the political will to do it. Do you have like a bestie on the other side of the aisle? Oh, do I have a bestie on the other side of the aisle? Stephanie Bison and I, we were freshmen together,

she represents Oklahoma. We get confused for each other a lot. And we were both on the Armed Services Command, they literally sat us in the wrong seats in our freshman year. So she's one of my really good friends on the other side of the aisle. I actually have a lot of-

It's called your freshman year, your first year in Congress? Oh yeah, no, Congress is college college or high school or middle school. So it's like yeah, it's called your freshman year Then you have your sophomore year your friends with who's on your floor and who's in the clubs that you're in caucuses It's literally called freshman orientation There's like no official assigned seating in the house floor. Did you play icebreaker games? Yes, we played icebreaker games. There's no official seating on the house floor, but like

there are, you know, like a lunchroom in high school. Like it is, it is high school. Have you seen a Hexest since you guys kind of tussled at the Armed Services Committee? I have not. Have you met Donald Trump before? I actually have not met Donald Trump before. So who's the highest ranking conservative that you regularly? I mean, I know Speaker Johnson quite well. We were on the Armed Services Committee together before he became speaker.

And how long have you known him? Well, five years since I've been in Congress. Do you see people change over the course of their tenure? Definitely. And not only change over the course of their tenure, like I would say of my Republicans friend like colleagues, half are as crazy as they seem on TV in real life and half know it's all bullshit and are putting on a show. And what about on your side? Well, we're less good at putting on the show, so it's hard to say.

I do remember one of Schumer's old aides said the hardest place to stand in DC is between Chuck Schumer and a camera. Yeah, but that's just that's authentic. Oh, okay. Yeah. He was meant to do, yeah. Do you feel like you need to be on social media more in this current environment? I have been joking lately that like my job is actually a social media influencer with

a side of legislating, which is not my favorite. But I look, but jokes aside, right, like people get their information differently now. And it used to be you could go on Amazon,BC or CNN or Fox and basically get most people or CBS or ABC. Right. But like people aren't, that's not how people are getting their information anymore. And so I do feel like it's really important for me to go where people are, which is podcasts, which is social media, and then also to like show up authentically.

Not like the chat GPT version of it. Charlie Kirk was talking about, he was like, liberals don't have the masculinity to do a three hour podcast. Like there's too much opportunity for mistakes there. I mean, I would argue it doesn't require masculinity, but I would agree with that wholeheartedly. I thought it was a really goofy way to describe it. But I understood what you meant. But I do think that Democrats as a whole have gotten to this point where we're so worried about offending anybody and saying the wrong thing that we say the same scripted lines

in this like weird syntax way that like no human actually speaks like. And then if we're like, why don't people trust us? It's like obviously, like we have to be a little more, like we have to be a little bit less risk averse and like be able to talk For three hours and maybe say something that's not exactly right, but like you know what they mean and give people the benefit of the doubt Yeah, it's almost like a lot of liberals are like a student So they don't want to look like a B minus student But if you have the courage to do that most people don't know the difference anyways, that's a cynical way to put it

Last thing Sorry, I keep saying last thing. That's okay. How do you feel about all this Epstein stuff? Okay, I will be very honest with you. I was not that interested in the Epstein files until they worked this hard to not release them. And now I'm like- It's very useful for you guys now because it feels like a super weak spot for them. And they've lost a lot of points in support from their base. Well, yeah, look, I think there's the political part of it And there's like the substance of it like do we all need to do more? I'm sorry. No, it's okay. Like do we all need to do more to stand up to like child predators? Absolutely. Yes Do we need to like believe women? Yes, like I would argue if we believe women we wouldn't

Know you care about kids because you're also working on a million different policies to support kids while they're kids Not just when they're in the most terrible of situations exactly But like to me I think about this like if my boyfriend didn't let me see his phone I would be like wait What are you hiding and then if he like left town for a month so that I could never see his phone I'd be like wait now he's really hiding something Even if I didn't think he was hiding anything before, that's kind of how I feel now. And for the record, not my boyfriend.

He's Palestinian by the way, right? He is, yeah. How does he feel about the conflict? Sorry, different thing. So are you worried about like the current communication with Jis Lane? Like do you think they're going to manufacture an outcome there that? I mean, yeah, I'm very concerned.

I mean, I think we should all be concerned that instead of meeting with the victims, they send the deputy at DOJ, who is also Trump's personal lawyer, to essentially witness tamper with Ghislaine Maxwell and probably offer her a pardon in exchange for her saying whatever they want her to say. Like that should be concerning to everybody. Like to me, I don't know what's in it. Probably there are Democrats in it too. Like they should be called out as well. Like let's be clear, what happened was bad and anyone who was part of it should be held accountable. But like the idea that the DOJ is now acting as Trump's personal lawyer is also very concerning.

Do you think they're seriously considering pardoning her if she gives information? Or if she doesn't give information. Right, so yeah, because basically she could have you know what a lot of people think is that Trump himself might be implicated in the files the Wall Street Journal or Washington Post one of them did the letter yeah the letter yeah I don't think he wrote that he doesn't write like that but that's take. Yeah, I did see it did not sound like a But it was it's entered it was entertaining at least

If he's not in it wouldn't you think he would want it released? Well, I guess I think he's skeevy for sure I got no doubts about that. Well, why didn't I guess if he is in it? Why didn't the Democrats release it? Yeah, that's a good point. I think it's a good question. My guess is there are some Democrats in there too. Which like, again, I think they should also be held accountable. Like this is not a party thing.

We're going on the record, she is not in favor of pedophilia, okay? Thank you. I think we all can agree that it's bad. Yeah, yeah, but like. That's what I think is so funny about this, is like about this is like you have people who are like, I want to clarify. I don't think having sex with children is good.

It's like, yeah, no, we got it. Yeah. But like, I also think there's, you know, there are valid concerns about like the victims and how public they want to be in all of these things. So like, I'm not minimizing all of that. Like our side wasn't the ones who made a big thing about releasing the EPSYD files. Like, Trump literally ran on releasing the EPSYD files.

And like- Yeah, they were the ones who had people walk out with binders that said EPSYD files. Like, we got them, and then they're like, there's nothing in them. Yeah, they weaponized it as an issue to get power, and now it's kinda coming back on them. So I'm just like, shouldn't you just vote

on releasing the EPSYian files like every single day so that you can say, hey, this person. Well, we literally tried to, and then they canceled Congress. Right, which was. So that just happened. Yeah. And that's the big story is that.

When would you normally break? Now. Now, so it was like a week early? And do you think that's why Republican leadership shut down Congress. Yeah. OK. And and so what were you guys asking for? A vote on releasing the files.

And what what are the files? I think that's a point of confusion for a lot of us. And so this is the other thing, like, I don't know. Right. Like another thing you could do if you were concerned about the victims, you could have just the Oversight Committee of Congress or whatever, read them, you know. And then just report, right? Right. Like, they're not doing any of that.

But I don't think that would satisfy the public either. Well, maybe not. But like, I'll be honest, like, I don't know what the files are. I don't even know if there are is like some list, right? Like, I haven't seen anything. Like, either way, right? Like, we just we've not. So who would know? The Department of Justice. And so that's Pam Bondi. And then would Cash Patel know?

I don't know the answer to that, actually. I imagine the FBI were involved initially, but that would probably have been before he got there. So I don't know if I mean, probably. But I don't know. Do you think this issue is going to remain kind of first and foremost in a lot of people's minds going forward? Here's why I think it's salient. We've been trying to tell people that like Trump lied to you.

Like, I understand why a lot of people voted for Trump, right? Like the status quo was shitty and they were like, well, at least this might be something better and. Change like at least different could be better and what we have now and like Democrats became the party of the status quo and like we should not have been defending the status quo the status quo was not working Yeah, no one's slow was the refrain. Yeah and so like I understand that but that's not what happened right like the

Trump's change has not been better right prices are going up more people are getting their health care taken away and this this is, I think, one of the clearest examples to his own base. But he's approving what ratings are holding. Like tariff, I think the economy held better than people thought it would. Tariff revenue is higher than people thought it would. Whether that's going to come out on the side of the consumer, I don't know if everyone's seeing it that way is what I mean. Well, I agree with you because it's like our framing of him betraying his base. And I think Epstein is the first concrete example that his base is seeing of him betraying his base. Right.

So just in talking to your colleagues, as soon as you're back in session, first order of business, is it voting on releasing the Epstein files? Yeah. So I think Democrats are going to keep introducing motions to release the Epstein files. There's also this process called a discharge petition, which is if leadership doesn't want to bring a bill to the floor,

you have to wait a certain amount of days. And then if you get 218 signatures, they have to call it to the floor. It's actually successful in doing a discharge petition with Anna Paulaluno from Florida on parental leave for members of Congress. There is a bill by Thomas Massey and Ro Khanna that will be ready.

Oh, across the aisle guys. Yeah, that will be ready in September to be discharged. So we'll probably collect signatures on that too. So it's not gonna go away. And yeah, cuz Massey's a Republican, right? Yeah, Kentucky. Yeah, and then so who do you think is gonna be the next president? I Don't know. I Don't know. But like I think that's okay because if we'd all been sitting here and like this time in 2005 I think probably none of us would have heard of Barack Obama before so like

There's a long time between now and the election. And there's something good to kind of being an unknown quantity for a while. Well and look I you know I hear a lot all the time about like Democrats don't have a leader, why don't we have a leader, what's our message, all of this right? And like okay we do need to work on the message and getting out there. But on the leader thing, like, we don't have a leader and that's okay. Because like, not one person is not going to come along and save us from what we're going through. And I actually think it's good that we have lots of people trying lots of different ways to communicate to lots of different people because like, what I what people like the people I appeal to might not be the same people that like Jasmine Crockett

appeals to or Andy Beshear appeals to and like that's okay because we need all of it. It's like we're playing zone defense not man to man, right? And so like it's okay that we have a lot of different people trying different things. To me like that is what's going to help us get out of this. Cool. Sweet. I think we covered a lot. Yeah, OK. Why do you guys think the Democratic Party can be doing differently?

What do we think they could be doing differently or better or like why we lost? I feel like I'm all like your generation. All my ideas are like from people that I read and they're just like more centrist liberals. So I'm usually like moderate. You know, how do you not have a primary where it's like people trying to like out left each other so that when it comes to the general They don't have you know, like really far left sound bites that are just played on a loop You know to the to for the general I think they need to have more Patriotism I think there's a lack of

Like, you know, if you fly a flag in LA, someone will call it tacky or like a symbol of imperialism, all stuff that's fair, but it's still your home and you have to believe in it. And there has to be something aspirational about it. And I think there was a kind of a cynicism around being an American that it's all bad and that it's all nasty and brutal and ugly. And I just don't see how that's gonna

make people want to be a part of it. So like being proud to be like I love doing the Pledge of Allegiance, I love doing the Starspring but I think that you got to make it kind of I don't know a little cool to be American. Yeah. Okay. I think they I think they alienated a lot of people with identity politics. I remember when we were coming up in comedy, it was like, oh, you're a white privileged guy. And it just like, I think that really, you know. Bothered you personally? Yeah. No, I played into it.

Yeah, no one smoothed it out. It was true. I played into it, but like, I think a lot of people there were just like, you know, I guess a lot of people just probably felt attacked and pushed to one way. And I also think with the upcoming AI, I think a lot of people are nervous about AI and job displacement, especially like all these white collar jobs, or you know, it's like, my brother is in finance, he's like all the people, like you were talking about, in those lower positions,

those jobs are gonna go away, and so like, I think, you know, hearing that one Democrat on Rogan, I just saw the clip where he's talking about we fight for the little man. I think a lot of people feel under threat right now, and kind of feel like they're becoming the little man and so I think offering that safety net to people because I think a lot of people, yeah,

just feel a lot of like their job is being threatened and their future is being threatened and then they can't, no one can buy a home. What's up? Uncertainty. Yeah, and it seems like the rising cost of living, and it's just we're coming to this head where it's like things,

there has to be some kind of massive change to account for what's gonna happen to people. And I think a lot of people, sorry I keep rambling, but I think a lot of people were just, I think a lot of people were just bitter about the boomers and stuff, or like when we were growing up, it's You know they could buy a house like go on vacation. It's like you need to make in California. You need to make probably you know The amount that you need to make to just be able to buy a house is like you would be just

Flourishing you gotta be a millionaire basically Yeah, like 20 years ago, 30 years ago, even things as simple as like going to Disneyland, it's like you get to pull out $10,000 to bring your family there. And that's what I think is, and I think that's what, like one of the things I was gonna say is like

blue states need to be run better. Like they need to be, they need to look like the amazing places that they are. And I feel like so much of the press is so negative. Like I'm out of town and like I talk about California or LA, like people think it's like a war zone and that California sucks. And like some of the things like are like downstream of real reasons that like California needs to work on.

So it's like blue states needs to need to have a better reputation nationwide. I don't know. And then I don't know if beyond that a better reputation nationwide, I don't know. And then I don't know if beyond that, I'm like, I don't know, like healthcare, dems are always good at, right? But nobody seems to trust them on the economy and I don't know how to fix that, you know? But that seems like a big one because it seems like

people really vote with their wallet, so. Yeah. Yeah, it's funny, can I come back to like tech guys talking about AI, they're like, it's gonna be great, we're all gonna be making our own movies and being in entertainment You know, it's like these tech lords have this like idealized vision for the future But it seems like it only really works for them Yeah, the world only belongs to them and they're dictating where we're going all of us. Yeah, and you're just like

I don't know. I'm not I'm optimistic about the future dictating where we're going, all of us. Yeah, and you're just like, I don't know, I'm optimistic about the future, but it does feel like everything's kind of coming to a head where it's, you know, you got the debt and then displacement, you know, it's like everyone's kind of on edge about what's gonna happen. There does need to be a message too about like where we'll go.

Yeah. Like if we don't have work, it's not just money, it's meaning too. It's how we orient a lot of our identity. You know, I think even Clinton, you know, he's been hugely criticized for NAFTA, but he had a good message around it. Like, look, we're going to educate people. We're going to have managerial positions. We're going to prepare the workforce for what this transition is going to be.

Now, whether that happened or not, it probably not, but there was a vision. There was a vision. There was a vision, and I think, I haven't heard anyone with a cohesive vision of what life's gonna look, other than Peter Thiel, and when you hear him talking about it, you're like, well, this is horrifying. So it seems like.

My cohesive vision of what life is gonna look like is that we are gonna have more time for things like caring for our family members. Those are gonna be things that we have time for, we value in society, and that's going to be actually really great. But how do you do that when statistically younger generations are spending less time with people? They're more isolated.

It seems like the data is pointing us into a more locked in version of life. Yeah. And I think we have to solve for that. But I think part of that is like right now, what we as society value is productivity, human productivity. And with AI, I think you're gonna see a divorce of productivity from human labor, right? You're gonna have more productivity increases

that are separate from labor. And so we're gonna have to reorient what society means. And to me, the positive version of that is like we can do more of the like caring the things that are like uniquely human music and dance and care for our family members. So hard to predict how AI will change things. Like it's like it's like I just don, I don't see how anybody can be like, now I think it's going here, so we need to do this and this. It just feels like it,

cause these things take so long to happen. But we gotta pick something. Right, yeah, maybe you need to pick something as like a message. And I'm not like, it feels like the only consistent democratic message right now is like, it's the billionaire's fault, which I don't think is sustainable.

Maybe it is, I don't know. No, that'll always work and it'd be true. It's the billionaire's fault, which I don't think is sustainable. Maybe it is Yeah, I mean I think like I think I Think a lot of like I think I like what you're saying though about how we'll have More time to care for our family. It does feel like we're separated right now And for me personally, it feels like I'm in such a rat race to like earn money like I if I go to see my family you know I just like I'm like no I need to make like a lot of money so I can do those things but I fear I'm gonna just gonna be in that on that endless treadmill so I think maybe AI can help

alleviate that a little bit yeah I don't know if that made sense there, but. No, that's the optimistic view on it. Yeah. That actually will provide abundance and we'll be able to. Yeah, hopefully. And then it becomes just about the distribution of all that. Exactly. Yeah.

Yeah, so hopefully, yeah, there's a populist running things who is kind of looking out for us. Yeah, hopefully. Or, you know, at least someone who understands that you can't have a bunch of starving people. Yeah, populist might have been the wrong word, hopefully. Or, you know, at least someone who understands that you can't have a bunch of starving people. Yeah, populism might have been the wrong word, sorry. Cool. Well, Sarah, thank you so much for coming on. Thanks for coming on.

It was a pleasure. Really appreciate you coming on and doing this. Yeah, thanks for having me. This was fun. You can find me on all the social medias at Rep Sarah Jacobs. No H on Sarah. So, R-E-P-S-A-R-A-J-A-C-O-B-S. Thanks so much. Yeah, thank you. And I like the In-N-Out theme sign. Oh, thanks. Oh, are we still recording?

What do you think about In-N-Out going to Tennessee? Oh, are they? Oh yeah, the heiress move the headquarters. Oh. She says California's not a place she can run a business. Listen, they were always more on the right wing. They got the Christian iconography on the bottom of the cup.

Yeah, they funded Prop 8, like, you know, not great, but the burgers are delicious. As long as you still have those. Yeah. Yeah, I don't really care about anything else as long as we still have the burgers. Sounds good. All right. Thanks, sir. Yeah, thank you. as long as we still have the burgers. Sounds good. All right. Thanks, everyone.

Yeah, thank you. I hear you, I touch you now, I break inside you Going deep Going deep I'm going deep, I'm going deep You're turning safety