Speaker Johnson Joins Mornings With Maria Bartiromo on Fox Business

Joining me now is Louisiana Congressman and the Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson. Mr. Speaker, thanks so much for being here this morning. We so appreciate it. Hey, Maria. Great to be with you, as always. So you're pushing for a full year funding bill by Friday. What can you tell us? What's the status? Well, you know, the House passed the Homeland Security bill as one of the 12 appropriations bills a while back, and we're awaiting Senate action on that. I think there will be a vote on the House bill. I don't think the Democrats are going to help pass that. And so we are at an impasse. The White House, the administration, President Trump and his team have been working in good faith with Senate Democrats to try to work through this. And they've made some proposals to change some of the immigration enforcement and sort of calm the situation. But Chuck Schumer and Democrats have shown no willingness whatsoever to go along on any of these negotiations. I think, Maria, they are trying to put us into another government shutdown situation. It'd be partial, but it would affect those agencies that you just listed. And the thing they all have in common is these are the agencies whose job it is to keep America safe. And it makes no sense whatsoever to force us into this situation. They are being unreasonable. Well, it's also really political to me when you think about the fact that when you funded the majority of government just recently to avoid the last shutdown, your colleagues on the left agreed to fund it just till September. And that's right before the midterm elections. Was that by design? Well, when you look at the annual appropriations process, the end of the fiscal year is always the end of September. And so that's just the way that works. But it was a big achievement. I mean, we have been laser focused on trying to get Congress back to what we call regular order, you know, the way it's supposed to work. And the only way to be good stewards of taxpayers' dollars is to negotiate and debate and work through 12 separate appropriations bills instead of the big omnibus spending packages that everybody hates that for the last many years has been jammed upon Congress right before the Christmas break. We have broken that fever, and it's a big achievement. But we've got to continue on that stride to make sure that we're spending less money and making government work more efficiently and effectively for the people. What Democrats are doing in this process is they're putting hurdles in the way of that goal. And it hurts the American people. Remember, they forced upon us the longest shutdown in U.S. history last fall, 43 days, and did real harm to the economy and to the American people for no reason. It's all politics. And we're asking them to put that aside and do what's right for the American people. So already, President Trump and yourself have agreed to put mandatory body cameras on our agents. But let's go through some of the demands that the Democrats want. And can you speak to it a bit? They want a requirement for judicial warrants. They want no detention of U.S. citizens, and they want an end to roving patrols and independent oversight. Your thoughts? Well, this idea about the judicial warrants, just for one example, what they really want, what Democrats want, what they're working towards, is unimpeded illegal immigration. They want to continue the terrible policies of the Biden-Harris administration when they literally opened the border wide, and we brought in about 20 million illegal aliens into the country over that time period, many hardened criminals, dangerous persons. They don't want any of them deported. If you put a judicial warrant in the way, it will impede the entire process. It will add layers and layers of delay and an impossibility to apprehend and remove many people because we simply don't have the manpower, the time, the court systems to be able to do that. Under the current, the way the law works right now, the Immigration Customs Enforcement has the ability to issue a warrant of removal and to go and apprehend these people. The Democrats want to stop that. And if their policies were enacted, we would just have open borders. We'd have open, unimpeded immigration, and that is not what the American people voted for. And we're doing the right thing. The president is laser-focused on restoring law and order, and it will be one of the great achievements and part of his big legacy. Well, I mean, this brings me to the SAVE Act because we've got, you know, with the Pew Research Center saying 83 percent of Americans favor requiring all voters to show government issued photo ID to vote. The House is set to take up the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act or the SAVE Act today. And this bill would require proof of citizenship to register to vote and present ID to cast a ballot. Mr. Speaker, this legislation is highly likely to pass. You've done it before. But then you've got the Senate to deal with, and you need the 60 votes to overcome that filibuster and hold a final vote on the bill. So are we ever going to see the light of day and have the SAVE Act signed into law? I certainly hope so. We're going to do everything we can to make that happen and get it to the president's desk. As you know, it's a top priority of his and of ours. House Republicans have been working hard for years now to ensure the integrity of American elections because it is essential to maintain a constitutional republic. We passed the SAVE Act in the last Congress and in this Congress. And the SAVE Act just simply says you have to have proof of citizenship if you're going to register to vote in federal elections, in American elections. What a concept. Well, now we're going to pass the SAVE America Act. So it has that same provision of citizenship proof. Now you also have to have a valid photo ID to vote. What a concept. As you said, in some polls, it's a 90-10 issue. Even 70 percent of Democrats agree that that is reasonable and necessary. But the Democrats in the Senate are trying to hold it up. And I'm hopeful that leader Thune and our Senate Republicans can get it done and get it to the president's desk when we send it over. I mean, is there any reason to believe that the only reason they are rejecting this is because they want illegals to vote? I mean, you're right. Democrats, moderate Democrats, colleagues of yours in the Senate have said they agree with you. I spoke with John Fetterman on Sunday. Watch this. What I don't understand, Senator, is why it is so difficult to get the SAVE Act into the portfolio and onto the floor. What's wrong with having an ID to vote? Chuck Schumer last week said if the SAVE Act even attempts to get to the Senate, it is dead on arrival. Why? You know, me as a Democrat, I do not believe that it's unreasonable to show ID just to vote. So it's not a radical idea for regular Americans to show your ID to vote. And it's absolutely those things are not Jim Crow or anything. Of course, that's part of an awful, awful legacy of our nation for so long ago. Is there any other way to view the fact that Democrat leadership refused to have ID to vote? Is there any other way to read it other than they want illegals to vote? I mean, can I can you read it any other way? Well, I mean, for me, the SAVE Act is not going to pass because of the filibuster, because they would need at least seven or eight Democratic votes to pass that. But I will say this as a Democrat. I do not believe it's it's radical or extreme to just produce ID to vote overall. Mr. Speaker, what answers do you get when you speak with your colleagues on the left about this? They don't have any logical answer. You've drawn the obvious conclusion they want illegals to vote. That's why they opened the border wide for four years under Biden and Harris and allowed in all these dangerous people. It was a means to an end. The end is maintaining their own power. Their policies are so unpopular. They're they're refuted and repudiated at the ballot boxes over and over. And so they feel like they've got to allow they've got to cheat. Frankly, that's it. They've got to allow illegals to participate in elections so that they can continue to win. We've got to stop that. And we have an obligation and a duty to do it under the Constitution. It is existing federal law that only American citizens can decide American elections. And we've got to make sure that we can enforce that law. And that's what this is all about. So it's a very important battle for the future of the country. And we are not going to let up on it. That's unbelievable, Mr. Speaker. So they can't get the support that they want to stay in power from American citizens. So they want illegals to come in and vote. Let me move on because the House rejected a bid to block legislative challenges to President Trump's tariffs, a move that could allow Democrats to try to overturn U.S. tariffs on Canada. Lawmakers voted to 17 to 214 to derail the plan to bar tariff challenges through July 31 with three Republicans joining 214 Democrats in opposition. What went on there, sir? Well, this is life with a with a razor thin majority as we have. And sometimes this happens. We had three defections, three Republicans out of 218 that decided to vote with the Democrats last night. I think it's a big mistake. I don't think we need to go down the road of trying to limit the president's power while he is in the midst of negotiating America first trade agreements with nations around the world. I was I was so encouraged to hear in the earlier segment a bit ago, you had Jameson Greer on talking about just the late just in the last 10 days, all the extraordinary new trade agreements we've done. The tariffs has been a tool that the president has used very effectively to level the playing field and put America back on top. And I think it's wrong for Congress to step in the middle of that. Also, remember, this this is pending at the U.S. Supreme Court. There's a big case pending that we've all talked about so much. And and that that decision could come down on any day and the court will make a decision on this as well. So I just think we need to pause Congress's consideration of this and and not get in the way of the president and what he's trying to achieve, because it's done great for the economy. All boats are rising. You know, you talk about it every morning. This is we're ushering in a new golden era and the president's trade policies and his strategy is a big part of what has brought that about. So we need to allow it to continue. We're expecting that Supreme Court decision perhaps this month around February 20th. What if that decision goes against the president's emergency tariff use? Well, I hope it won't. I don't expect that it will. But if if there is an adverse opinion, then we'll all have to deal with it accordingly. You know, I think the Supreme Court I used to be a constitutional law litigator, argued cases in the federal courts, appellate courts. The Supreme Court is typically what they will do is is have a limited opinion, limited in scope, answer just the limited question before them regarding the National Emergencies Act and and then leave it to Congress and the White House and the rest to sort it out after that. So if if it's an adverse opinion, I hope it's a limited one and that we can all work through it because America's back. You know, we're the greatest nation in the history of the world. We're the strongest nation. We have now fixed that disparity in trade because we have a commander in chief who's bold enough to call it out. And and he has. And his bold action is what's gotten us back in a good position on the economy. Inflation did not go through the roof, as everybody, you know, said and expected that it would because of the tariffs. We are we are moving up. The economic growth numbers are off the charts. Literally, the CBO was saying just several months ago that they were expecting a one point eight percent economic growth rate. And in the fourth quarter of last year, it was over five percent. And we're expecting more going forward. I love what Scott Besson said, our treasury secretary, a couple of weeks ago. He said twenty twenty five was setting the table and twenty twenty six is going to be the feast and the banquet in the economy. And that's exactly what's going to happen. And right now people are filling out their taxes. They're realizing they're going to have bigger refunds and owe less to the federal government because of Republican policies. We're going to continue that going forward. Well, you've got a great story to tell, but you've got this razor thin majority, Mr. Speaker. We are about what, 20 days to the first twenty twenty six midterm primary at this point. The president is about to give his State of the Union address at your invitation on February 24th. Can these policies and the president communicating them in the State of the Union be enough to to move the needle coming up in these midterms, get you to stay in power and and perhaps increase the number of Republican seats? What are you expecting, Maria? I expect to win. We I believe we are going to win the midterms and grow this majority. So our job's a little bit easier. And the reason I'm so confident in that is we have an extraordinary record to run on, as we've been discussing in our our candidates, our incumbents and the extraordinary candidates we've recruited around the country to flip blue seats to red have an amazing story to tell. And we've got to make sure that everybody understands all the good feeling, the more opportunity, liberty and security that they're experiencing, the better economic conditions, the more job opportunities and increased wages and more money in their pocket and no tax on tips and overtime, less taxes on seniors. We've got to make sure that everybody understands that is because of Republican policies. And that's our challenge, our task as we go forward into this midterm election year. This one's for all the marbles. And I think people understand the stakes are so high and they're going to be with us and they're going to vote to continue all this good work. Mr. Speaker, President Trump was on Fox yesterday. He spoke with Larry Kudlow. It seemed to me during the interview that he ruled out another reconciliation package at the end of the year. Is that off the table? It's not off the table. I understand what he was saying there. His point was when he was talking with Larry is that we got so much done in the working families tax cut, the big, beautiful bill. It's a large chunk of the America first agenda. We got it all done in one giant piece of legislation. And he was suggesting in that way that we may not need another reconciliation bill. I'm not yet there. And he and I'll be talking about that again today. I'll be back at the White House because I'm still bullish on that. And I think it's something we can do. It won't be as you know, we call the last one, the big, beautiful bill, the last reconciliation package. This one won't be as big, but it could be just as beautiful. So I'm not giving up hope on it yet. What do you want to put in that potential bill? Well, we've got a lot of priorities that were left on the cutting room floor during the last reconciliation bill. Things that we can do to continue to bring down the cost of living, you know, make health care more accessible. And I think we need to do something on this big fraud problem that we're seeing around the country in the blue states. I think what's happened in Minnesota is just the tip of the iceberg. We're now there's no audits going on in California. I think some of these blue state governors and cities have just wasted and abused taxpayer dollars. And we might need to bring some legislation forward to do that. We're not going to get any Democrats to help us. So in a reconciliation bill, all you need is just our majority Republican votes. And I think we may need to use that vehicle to get that done. Of course, Mr. Speaker, it's always a pleasure. Thanks so much for being here this morning. Thank you. Good to see you. Mike Johnson this morning. Stay with us. We'll be right back.