'Do You Consider That Stupid Stuff?': John Kennedy Presses Top Trump Nominee About 'Stupid' Spending

[0:00] Mr. Duncan, every now and then I see an article that says something like government, federal government spends $25 million to study whether a man can breastfeed or the federal government spends $50 million to try to teach a neighborhood squirrel to code. [0:36] And I think, how did that stuff get in there? I sit on the Appropriations Committee. We're supposed to put together a budget. Sometimes we do. This year we probably won't because my friend and colleague, Senator Schumer, wants to shut down the government to create chaos, to try to get the Graham Plattner wing of his party to love him. But I digress. That stuff's not in the budget when we vote on a budget. Where's it come from? [1:17] Well, Senator, I appreciate the question and you've been a champion on these issues and I would note your work on the rescissions process highlighting some of these outrageous spinning we've seen in the past. [1:29] So, I think this is why our updates to 2CFR, which governs grant making across the federal enterprise, is so critical. [1:38] Yeah, tell the American people what that is. [1:40] Absolutely. Appreciate the opportunity. [1:42] Like you're talking to a 10th grader. [1:43] Appreciate the opportunity to. [1:45] So, fundamentally, some of the most important things are to ensure that grants are not going to divisive DEI ideologies. [1:53] They're not going to support illegal immigration. [1:56] They're not going to support radical gender ideologies. [1:59] Those are pretty fundamental. [2:00] And stupid stuff, right? [2:02] And stupid stuff generally, yes, sir. [2:03] I think the arbiter of ensuring that things do not go to stupid stuff, as you put it, is ultimately a political appointee, one of the president's people that is associated with the administration, appointed by the president, comes in and does a final issuance review before grant dollars go out. [2:20] That's fundamentally about accountability. [2:22] It's not intended to usurp peer review or anything like that. [2:27] It's about making sure that someone... [2:28] All right, let me stop you for a second, Mr. Duncan, because we're going to run out of time. [2:32] Congress never sees this kind of spending porn, does it, until after the fact. [2:38] Is that correct? [2:39] Senator, that's correct. [2:40] It's not in our budget. [2:41] Is that correct? [2:42] Senator, that is correct. [2:43] But somebody in the administrative state decides that they ought to spend $25 million to study whether a man can breastfeed, right? [2:54] Yes, sir. [2:56] Now, that's what I mean by stupid stuff. [2:58] Do you consider that stupid stuff? [3:00] Absolutely, yes, sir. [3:01] And what you're going to do at OMB is try to stop the stupid stuff, try to find out who made that grant and say, no, no, no, no, no, we're not going to spend money on this. [3:13] And by the way, if you do it again, you're fired. [3:16] Is that right? [3:17] That's what you guys are going to do? [3:18] Yes, sir. [3:19] It's about time. [3:20] Thank you. [3:20] All right, let me ask you one other question. [3:23] When moms and dads lie down to sleep at night and can't, right now, at this point in time, what's the first thing they're worried about? [3:35] I would imagine it would be the ability to support their families. [3:42] Yes. [3:44] Cost of living. [3:48] Part of that's inflation. [3:54] Look, I don't, I mean, I remember inflation is very sticky. [3:59] I remember when it started, it got up 9%. [4:01] You know, President Trump didn't father this child, but he's got to raise it. [4:08] Cost of living. [4:09] Thank you for being straightforward. [4:11] Now, have you ever gone to a, let me preface this by saying, I've got two doctors, brothers who are doctors, so I love health care providers. [4:21] But have you ever gone to a health care provider and then you get a bill saying you owe us $1,400 and you go, what the hell? [4:30] Has that ever happened to you? [4:32] Yes, sir. [4:32] It actually has. [4:32] It's happened to a lot of Americans because the way many of our hospital, our health care providers bill, makes no sense. [4:45] And so they turn it over to a collection agency and the collection agency says, look, we might, you pay this $1,400. [4:53] We can't explain, we won't explain to you how it got here. [4:57] If we did, we'd have to drown you in the Pacific. [5:00] But if you don't pay it, we're going to turn it into the credit rating agencies and ruin your credit. [5:07] Now, why don't, if we want to help the American people, why don't we, at least for a period of time, say health care debt is not going to be reported to the rating agencies. [5:22] It's not, we're not saying you don't have to pay it, we're not saying it's not due, we're not saying you can't be sued. [5:31] But this debt's being reported to rating agencies when people can't pay it and then their credit gets ruined and it makes it even harder for them to live. [5:41] That's a swell idea, isn't it? [5:44] Senator, I think the administration has been very committed to price transparency and ensuring that folks aren't able to do this. [5:48] Yeah, but what about that idea? [5:50] I'm happy to take that back and determine the administration's position on that matter. [5:54] How about advocating for it? [5:56] I'm happy to work with you on this matter, absolutely. [5:59] Okay, I'm sorry I went way over, I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman.