The Daily Signal - Sen. Steve Daines Explains What You Need to Know About Biden’s Far-Left Interior Secretary

Episode Date: March 19, 2021

His former congressional colleague will advance a far-left agenda as the new secretary of the interior, Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., says.  The Senate voted 51-40 Monday to confirm Rep. Deb Haaland, D-N.M., to lead the Interior Department under President Joe Biden. Haaland supports Biden’s decision to halt further construction of the Keystone XL pipeline.  Daines joins “The Daily Signal Podcast” to explain the policies we likely will see implemented at the Interior Department under Haaland’s leadership, and how Montana is fighting to save the Keystone XL pipeline.  We also cover these stories: The Senate votes 50-49 to confirm Xavier Becerra, President Biden’s controversial nominee, as secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell accuses House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of trying to overturn a state-certified election.  Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis says critical race theory will not be part of his state’s education system. Enjoy the show! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is the Daily Signal podcast for Friday, March 19th. I'm Rachel D'Ljudice. And I'm Virginia Allen. New Mexico representative, Deb Holland, has been confirmed as the new secretary of the Interior Department. Senator Steve Daines, Republican of Montana, says Holland will further a far-left agenda under Biden by advancing a radical environmental agenda. Danes joins the podcast to explain how he anticipates Holland's policies at the Interior Department will affect all Americans and how his state is fighting to defend the Keystone Pipeline. Don't forget, if you're enjoying this podcast, please be sure to leave a review or five-star rating on Apple Podcasts and encourage others to subscribe. Now onto our top news. The Senate has confirmed Javier Bicera, President Joe Biden's controversial nominee to be Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services,

50 to 49. One Republican, Maine Senator Susan Collins, voted for Bicera. Bissera will leave his position as Attorney General of California that he has held since 2001, where he became well known for attacking pro-life Americans, such as in suing the federal government in 2017 to reimpose a contraception mandate, which is still being fought by the little sisters of the poor. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has accused House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of trying to overturn a state-certified election. The House Administration Committee met Thursday to review the election results of Iowa's second congressional district. Republican Representative Marianette Miller Meeks won the district by only six votes, a narrow margin that was

confirmed after a ballot recount. Miller Meeks' Democrat opponent, Rita Hart, has challenged the results of the election, arguing that there are 22 ballots that were not counted. Upon Hart's request, the House is looking into the election. An action McConnell is calling hypocrisy on the part of House Democrats, per the Hill. The outcome was certified. That's the magic word, certified, that we heard over and over and over again in November and December.

There was the opportunity to present complaints in court. Sound familiar. But the defeated Democrat passed up the opportunity to go to court. The process played out in a way that every liberal in America spent November, December, in January insisting was beyond question. Ah, but there's a catch. This time, this time, Mr. President,

the Republican one and the Democrat lost. So Speaker Pelosi and Washington Democrats have set out trying to overturn the result from right here in Congress. Congresswoman Miller Meeks has been sworn in. She's here. She is working. But Democrat leadership,

is trying to use brute political power to kick her out and replace this congresswoman with a Democrat whom she defeated. You don't often see hypocrisy this blatant and this shameless so quickly. Pelosi defended her actions and criticized Republicans during an interview with ABC News on Sunday, saying for them to call anybody hypocritical about elections when two-thirds of them in the House voted against accepting the presidency of Joe Biden is, well, it's just who they are. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis says critical race theory will not be part of the state's education. Florida's civics curriculum will incorporate foundational concepts with the best materials and it will expressly exclude unsanctioned narratives like critical race theory and other

of substantiated theories. DeSantis said in remarks on Wednesday, Critical race theory for Heritage Foundation scholars Jonathan Butcher and Mike Gonzalez makes race the prism through which its proponents analyze all aspects of American life and underpins identity politics, which reimagines the U.S. as the nation driven by groups, each with specific claims on victimization. Senator Rand Paul and Dr. Anthony Fauci sparred Thursday during the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee hearing on COVID. 19. Paul questioned Fauci on his directive for individuals who have had the virus or have been vaccinated to continue wearing a mask per C-SPAN. No scientific studies have shown significant numbers of reinfections of patients previously infected or previously vaccinated. What specific studies do you cite to argue that the public should be wearing masks well into 2022? I'm not sure I understand the connection of what you're saying about masks and reinfection. We're talking about people

who have never been infected before. You're telling everybody to wear a mask, whether they've had an infection or a vaccine. What I'm saying is they have immunity and everybody agrees they have immunity. What studies do you have that people that have had the vaccine or have had the infection are spreading the infection? If we're not spreading the infection, isn't it just theater? No, it's not. You've had the vaccine and you're wearing two masks. Isn't that theater? Isn't that theater. No, here we go again with the theater. Let's get down to the facts. Okay, the studies that you quote from Crotty and CETA look at in vitro examination of memory immunity, which in their paper they specifically say this does not necessarily pertain to the actual protection.

It's in vitro. And what study can you point to that shows significant reinfection? There are no studies that show significant. Let me finish the response to your question, if you please. The other thing is that when you talk about reinfection and you don't keep in the concept of variance, that's an entirely different ballgame. That's a good reason for a mask. Fouchy went on to explain that he is still encouraging those who have been vaccinated to wear a mask because of the COVID-19 variants that have begun to appear in the United States. Now stay tuned for my conversation with Senator Steve Dane's Republican of Montana as we discuss the new secretary of the Department of Interior, Deb Holland, and what policies we should expect to see her promote in the coming months and years.

We're all guilty of it, spending too much time watching silly videos on the internet. But it's 2021. Maybe it's time for a change. At the Heritage Foundation, YouTube channel, you'll find videos that both entertain and educate, including virtual events featuring the biggest names in American politics, original explainers and documentaries, and heritage experts diving deep on topics like election integrity, China, and other threats to our democracy. All brought to you by the nation's most broadly supported Public Policy Research Institute. Start watching now at heritage.org. slash YouTube. And don't forget to subscribe and share. We are joined today by Senator Steve Daines of

Montana. Senator, thank you so much for being here. Glad to join you, Virginia. So, Senator, on Monday, the Senate confirmed Representative Deb Holland to serve as the Secretary of the Department of Interior under President Joe Biden. You voted no, not to approve Holland to this position. Why did you vote know. Well, Representative Holland has a very well-defined record as it relates to her positions on policy items that are very important to us, particularly out west. She's called for a ban on all pipelines, a ban on fracking, a ban on all fossil fuel infrastructure. She has really embraced the Green New Deal, hook line and sinker. And furthermore, She has even suggested that on issues like an endangered species, it's really important in a place like Montana, that we would keep some of these species that should be delisted, according to the science, like the grizzly bear, that they'd be listed in perpetuity as endangered.

So her positions are so far out of step with the mainstream folks in places like Montana. That's why I posed her nomination. So how will her priorities really impact the people of your state, the people of Montana, as she? She leads the Interior Department. Well, the Secretary of Interior has a significant influence on policy outcomes in our way of life in a place like Montana as relates to public lands. We want to see responsible management of our public lands. We want to protect our public lands or national parks, of course. We also want to make sure we can continue to utilize our public lands where it makes sense to environmentally and environmentally sound ways to develop our natural resources.

of oil, natural gas, and coal. And this is where I'm concerned that they're looking to lock all these lands up and not allow to continue to have really a balanced view of how we manage and become, maintain good stewardship of our public lands. So I think it would be helpful if we took just a moment to talk about where we have been at the Interior Department and then where it looks like we're going. What are the differences that we saw under President Trump at the Department of Interior and then how are those priorities now changing under President Biden?

Yeah. Well, we're seeing, sadly, alerts to the left, a significant alert to the left, unlike anything I've seen certainly in decades, as it relates to fundamental policies and philosophies in relation to managing our natural resources. They want to lock up our lands. They want to really destroy made-in-American energy. and when you look at some of these important questions of managing wildlife, we should be celebrating the recovery of species like the grizzly bear instead of what we're seeing from Representative Holland,

suggesting that we keep a bear like that on the dangerous species list forever. And really, that becomes leverage for environmental groups to launch lawsuits to stop timber projects and so forth. So it has a real significant rippling effect as related to the ability to manage natural resources. Keep in mind, the Trump administration, under Secretary Bernhardt and Secretary Zinke, made great strides in important preservation areas in a least of protecting a public lens, like the Great American Outdoors Act. That was a huge win for the Trump administration that protects our national parks and continues to invest in infrastructure for one of our great treasures, which certainly are national parks.

Well, I think, you know, right now so many Americans are thinking about our nation's energy future, and you mentioned energy and those national resources. And of course, we're all really concerned right now about the Keystone Pipeline. President Biden canceled the pipeline on his first day in office. Holland also opposes the pipeline. What impact will canceling the Keystone pipeline have on the American people? Yeah. Well, Virginia, my background before I came to Congress, I was a chemical engineer.

I've studied a lot of science. I like to look at data and make sure data drives. good decisions. It's particularly the thing about policy outcomes here in Washington, D.C. There is no sound, rational, scientific basis for President Biden who canceled the Keystone Pipeline, other than, I think it was virtue signaling for really the more extreme environmental parts of the Democratic Party. What it will do to Montana, first of all, it will cut about $80 million of tax revenue. every year for the state of Montana in some of my impoverished county. So it's a tremendous source of tax revenues.

Second is it's actually the most environmentally sound way to transport oil. Because that oil is going to be transported one way or the other. A pipeline has the least amount of carbon emissions compared to rail or truck. And so it doesn't make any scientific reasons here to cancel it. In fact, it will actually increase 3 million tons of CO2 emissions per year because he canceled it. And so what he's done here is he's really sided with far-left environmentalist groups and the radical Green New Deal instead of just common sense energy policy here that we need.

By the way, the loss of jobs is significant, as well as continue to develop, you know, made in America natural resources. Nobody wants to go back to the 70s when we were dependent on the Middle East for oil. Those were dark days. and the future is so much brighter because of American energy innovation. So does Holland have a response for these arguments that actually the Keystone Pipeline is one of the most environmentally friendly ways to transport oil? I mean, it's hard to understand if the data in the science is actually showing,

know that this is a better option. Why is it then that there's this really, really strong and firm kind of swift turn away from it, it gets away from it, arguing that, no, it actually will harm the environment when it looks like the science is saying something different. You know, Virginia, there is no response to that. The data is very compelling. And the need for energy infrastructure across our country is so important. And it's kind of ironic. When you hear from President Biden and my colleagues across the aisle, they are all pro-infrastructure, well, pipelines are a really important part of our infrastructure in this nation.

And again, it's the most environmentally sound way and efficient way to transport liquids and gases. So it's puzzling, but I think it tells you, Virginia, that it's not really based on the science. This is based on an ideology that's going to neglect the science and the data and to drive this, keep everything in the ground philosophy of the left. Well, Montana's attorney general has announced that he's going to take legal action. against the Biden administration to really try to defend construction of the Keystone Pipeline. And I know that you're supporting that effort to do so. Do you think that it's possible that that construction could continue and this battle could be won to continue construction on the Keystone Pipeline?

Well, sadly, Virginia, literally the pipeline was being put in the ground. It's stacked in large pre-staging yards across eastern Montana. as the project was was underway. And it was shocking when so many families received pink slips for their employment as resolved of President Biden's executive order that he signed on the day he was sworn in office January 20th. So we're going to look at all remedies. I'm proud of my Attorney General Austin Penunson there in Montana, who's aggressively leading the charge on the courts.

We also have a legislative action as well. to try to continue to stir up bipartisan support to get the Keystone pipeline running. And remember, it's just we're talking about the border crossing. That's the leverage that President Biden had in the executive borders. We're talking about that fraction of an inch crossing the U.S. Canadian border. That is why you could stop it. Otherwise, all the environmental impact statements were completed. The construction was well on its way.

It was because of that international border crossing. that's the leverage that Biden had to stop it. Well, and I know that the impact goes beyond even just those working right there on that pipeline. And you've talked about how it will impact small business owners in your state. What have you heard from those individuals? Well, eastern Montana is part of our state that has had a lot of struggles with their economies. We've got places in Montana where the economies are booming. But out in eastern part of our state, it's tough.

We see declining populations in these rural communities. They're starving for tax revenues and jobs. And this is one of the unfortunate outcomes. The irony here is the Democrats pride themselves in being the party of the working class person. Well, that's no longer the case. It's really the center rights, it's Republicans, it's conservative thought that is really on the side of the working person, of allowing us to develop our natural resource responsibly, keeping energy prices low, keeping job creation high,

and reducing our dependence on the Middle East and the rest of the world for our energy, that puts us in a very sound position economically and a sound position from a national security viewpoint. And I just, I think so many Americans are just really puzzled and are concerned around where the Biden administration is headed as related to energy policy. Yeah, you mentioned that reliance on other countries, including Middle Eastern countries for our energy resources.

Do you think we'll see any movement towards energy independence under Holland's leadership? Well, I don't. If anything, it's moving in the wrong direction. It's moving backwards. You don't have to go too far to look in the history books or have firsthand memories what happened back in the 1970s when the Arab countries ganged up and attacked Israel. that was the war of Yom Kippur in 73, and we saw oil prices quadruple for a short period of time. And the shock of the sudden increase in oil prices to our economy results in hyperinflation. And then we saw the high interest rates of late 70s, early 80s. And I think we forgot how bad it was back then and how good we have it now,

this age of prosperity, stability and energy prices. when there's disruptions in the Middle East of, you know, the Iranians, they've launched missiles at times at oil tankers. The global oil prices, you know, they go up a couple dollars a barrel for a couple days and they come right back to where they were. In other words, we have really separate ourselves from the dependency of the Middle East for energy. And that is a profound change in national security for our nation and economic security.

and we cannot go back towards. We need to continue to move forwards. And in regards to China, I know that you've spoken about, you know, our reliance on China's critical mineral resources and how that ultimately, you know, is not in the best interest of Americans. What concerns you about America's reliance on China right now in that regard?

Yeah, well, just as we think of the parallels of the 1970s and OPEC and the Arab countries have control, the world's oil supply then production. What we're seeing today is now China is becoming almost the OPEC, if you will, of critical minerals. And the United States relies on China for 30 key critical minerals. By the way, some of this can be mine in my home state of Montana. Others can be mine in other places around the country. But when you let these extreme environmental groups have this keep it

in the ground mentality, not just for oil, natural gas, and coal, but now also for minerals to stop mining projects. I mean, we've got an example of, this isn't critical minerals. We've got, you know, copper mines. We're trying to get permitted in northwest Montana. It's been decades, decades of lawsuits and permit applications just to get a copper mine approved. And so this poses a real challenge for our country going forward here because as we shift towards more electric vehicles and so forth and in so forth, solar power, we need these critical minerals. And literally, China has leveraged not over the United States because we have not been responsibly developing our production here in the United States.

And when it comes to that environmental argument, how does America compare to countries like China as far as, you know, the care that we take in the midst of, you know, pursuing things like mining minerals in the ground in order to make sure that, you know, we're doing so responsive. in a way that does protect and preserve our planet? Well, you think about contrasting the way that we mine in the United States, the way that we develop our oil, gas, and coal, natural resource in the United States to the rest of the world. We have the soundest environmental practices.

We also have the best labor practices. And so if we don't develop those national resources, other countries will. And that's really at the expense of the environment. We are global stewards of the environment. And so for every additional ounce of ore that's produced in countries outside the United States, that actually creates more harm because we do it the right way in the United States. And also in terms of labor practice like Nigeria, compared the labor practice between the United States and African countries. We do a much better job of protecting this the rights of the workers. And so there's really a strong moral argument and environmental argument to developing our resource here in America where we do it the right way.

If you had the opportunity to sit down with Representative Holland and talk about the next four years and the priorities for the Interior Department, what would you want to say to her? Well, and I had a chance. So we met over a Zoom call prior to her hearing in front of the Energy Committee. But a couple of things. The word I would ask for her to consider and recommend her is balance. Let's have an all-the-above approach as it relates to energy. Let's ensure that when we think about, for example, federal leasing moratoriums on oil, gas and coal, let's keep in mind that that would actually increase global emissions by five and a half percent. because, by the way, the United States has been a leader in reducing CO2 emissions.

We've seen the most significant reductions in CO2 emissions related to energy of any country in the world. And so the more that we develop American resources, the better off the planet is. And so I just will hope that she would bring a balanced view to that. And we can have it both ways. On one hand, we continue to protect our environments, protect our national parks, protect our public lands. but by responsibly developing our natural resources, we also are protecting kind of the global resources here that we are asked to steward.

So I think the important, again, the operative board there will be bring a balanced view to that job, and then we'll keep moving forward here. And actually, it's not either or we can do it both and in terms of protecting the environment and developing our natural resources, creating jobs and protecting our economy. Excellent. Senator, thank you so much to your time today. We truly appreciate it. Thanks, Virginia.

And that'll do it for today's episode. Thanks for listening to The Daily Signal Podcast. You can find the Daily Signal podcast on Google Play, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and IHeart Radio. Please be sure to leave with a review and a five-star rating on Apple Podcasts and encourage others to subscribe. Thanks again for listening and we'll be back with you all on Monday. brought to you by more than half a million members of the Heritage Foundation. It is executive produced by Kate Trinko and Rachel Del Judas, sound designed by Lauren Evans, Mark Geinney, and John Pop. For more information, visit DailySignal.com.