Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Coburn: The Only Tool America Has That's Big Enough to Fix the Problem Is Article V

November 17, 2016
Lori Hanes

Writer

Earmarks were supposed to be a thing of the past, but a tone deaf GOP decided to vote today on bringing them back --- that is until the American people got wind of it.

"They were supposed to vote on bringing earmarks back today, but then you heard about it, and Paul Ryan said, Oh, well, we're not going to vote on that right now. Oh, that's good," Glenn said Thursday on his radio program.

Even after the unprecedented election of Donald Trump, establishment politicians failed to receive the message: The American people are fed up with big government and deal-making politicians. If they don't get the message, the only recourse left to the people is a Convention of States, brilliantly added as Article V in the U.S. Constitution.

Former Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn, who spearheaded the effort to stop earmarks and currently serves as a senior advisor to the Convention of States, talked with Glenn about tone deaf career politicians, completely out of step with the American people.

"It's laziness. It's careerism. It's elitism. And it's contemptuous. ...Even having a vote on it tells you that they're totally not connected with the American people and that they're connected with the next election," Sen. Coburn said.

Read below or watch the clip for answers to these questions:

• What step would actually make Congress start doing its job?

• Did November 8th give spinal transplants to career politicians in Washington?

• How many more states must come on board before Convention can take place?

• How many billions of dollars does Washington waste annually in duplication and fraud?

• What three areas only are addressed in a Convention of States?

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:

GLENN: Welcome. Former Oklahoma senator Tom Coburn to the Glenn Beck Program. How are you, sir?

TOM: Oh, I'm fine, Glenn.

GLENN: When you saw the G.O.P. yesterday starting to go and put earmarks back in as a way to direct pork barrel spending back into their districts, what went through your mind?

TOM: Oh, careerism. Career politicians. You know, it's important people understand how earmarks work: Earmarks work because the city wants something, which is really not in the enumerated powers of the federal government to do in the first place.

They hire a lobbyist, or somebody hires a lobbyist. They give to your campaign. And then they ask -- the city needs this. You'll look good at home. This has got to be a priority for you because you represent these people.

So it's -- it's the old idea that people are -- you know, as soon as you know you can buy -- you can get anything you want from the federal government, you lose your freedom. And so this arrogance of power that says I will supply what my district needs, rather than what's in the best interest of the country -- which is their oath -- has nothing to do with their local district, which is their oath, is the thing that will spell disaster for a country. And it has already.

You know, they -- the career politicians will tell you, we need this to get things through Congress. It greases the skids. You know, so you have to buy somebody's vote by giving them money to spend at home?

Number two is, if we eliminated all earmarks -- which we still haven't, even though they say they have -- if you eliminated all earmarks, actually Congress could start doing their job.

The other thing you hear from members of Congress is, "Well, the administration has the power to do this." No. All you have to do is put in your appropriation bills that they won't do any of this stuff without getting approval from Congress. But they won't do that.

So, you know, it's laziness. It's careerism. It's elitism. And it's contemptuous, in terms of what -- even having a vote on it tells you that they're totally not connected with the American people and that they're connected with the next election.

GLENN: Former US senator Dr. Tom Coburn.

Tom, when you're looking at what's happening now -- I heard Paul Ryan who was not for Donald Trump, now ecstatic -- he said yesterday that this is a new dawn in America. And the Republicans are -- are -- it's a new day for even the Republican Party.

And it sounded pretty excited. A lot of people are really excited. Is this something you would look on and say, "Man, it would be great to be in the Senate right now," or are you expecting more of the same? What do we expect -- what do you think is happening with the Republican Party?

TOM: Oh, I don't think much. I'm hopeful that the president-elect can give the leadership that causes people to make hard decisions, instead of easy ones for their reelection.

But I don't know that anything happened on the 8th of November to do spinal transplants in most of the career politicians in Washington.

You know, what -- what the earmarks vote is, is cowardice. It's about me. And not about our country. That's -- you know, and to me, it is so disappointing -- and, first of all, are they tone-deaf? Did they not hear what this election is all about? Draining the swamp?

GLENN: I don't think anybody did. I really don't. I don't think the media --

TOM: Well, that just tells you why we have to have a Convention of States to offer amendments to limit the scope, the power, and jurisdiction of the federal government.

You know, here you have the party that is in control, wanting to vote to restore one of the corrupt systems there ever was, that only really benefits the politician. Because for any earmark I might have gotten -- I had to give an earmark to 99 other senators, and I had to look the other way to be able to do that. And I never got an earmark once for Oklahoma or my district. I refused to do that. I refused to fall into that. So, you know, to me, it's the corruption of careerism. And when I'm talking about corruption, I'm talking about not upholding your oath to the US Constitution, to understand that there are enumerated powers for the federal government, and those powers are supposed to be limited. There's no reason for a member of Congress or a US Senator to be directing money to be spent in their state. What they should be doing is lessening the tax burden and let the states figure out where they want to spend the money.

GLENN: So you're looking at the Convention of States, and do you believe that the Trump presidency has made this more likely or less likely to happen?

TOM: Well, I don't know, Glenn. I don't think it's less likely because you just saw -- here's the greatest example in the world of why we need it. Here's -- the supposed fiscal conservatives now who want to reintroduce earmarks. So I don't know the answer to that. What I do know is that if, in fact, there's not big change over the next two years in the behavior in Washington and liberty is lost again and money is spent that we don't have that we're barring from future generations, the election two years from now is going to be very difficult for those in charge.

GLENN: Tom, you know, I look at the situation -- you had a story out of Australia today and 12 days ago out of India where Citibank is doing what India just did. And they're limiting cash. And they're getting rid of the, you know -- the 10-dollar bill in India.

Citibank announced yesterday or tomorrow that in Australia, many of their banks will be entirely cashless. And the world seems to be going to a cashless society because, quote, it's good for business and good for the banks and security. I -- I just have this fear, as we -- we start going down this road, all this stuff is going to collapse. And the people are not going to go for another bailout. The banks have already worked it out with the government to have a bail-in. Things can radically, radically change quickly.

Do you agree with that?

TOM: Well, I think they can. The question is, is how do you prevent that? And the way you prevent it is you start right now with the new president and a new Congress not spending money that you don't have on things that you don't need.

And so whether they manipulate whether we have a currency or not, that's a symptom of the underlying problem.

Right now, Glenn, the unfunded liabilities for America is $144 trillion. This grew about 4 trillion last year. That's a million dollars per taxpayer. That's $24 trillion more than the entire worth of the country.

So when people say there's no problem, we can borrow money -- you can borrow money as long as people are willing to loan it to you. But history shows us that both democracies and republics that borrow money at a rate greater than their GDP failed.

And so has every other republic before us failed? Yes. Will we fail? Yes.

If, in fact, we don't have real courageous, moral leadership --

GLENN: Well, we don't have that --

TOM: -- that says you don't spend the future's money.

GLENN: Well, we don't have that. We don't have that. So that's why the project of states is so important -- the Convention of States is so important. The Constitution gives us a way out.

I am a full-fledged backer of this. I can't -- I mean, I think this is the answer. There's a lot of Republicans at least here in Texas that say, "Oh, it's not bad enough to use, you know, Article V."

I don't know what they would be waiting for. But there's a lot of people that are -- you know, the -- the business-as-usual people don't want this to happen.

We are now in a situation where we're one state away from making this happen.

STU: There was a report -- maybe you know this fact, Senator, but we're one state away from having enough Republicans in control of legislatures that if they all passed it -- you could do it essentially without any Democrats stopping it.

TOM: Right. But it really is a bipartisan thing.

GLENN: Yes.

TOM: You know, we have a lot of Democrats supporting what we're doing.

GLENN: Right. And you have a lot of Republicans that are stick in the muds.

TOM: Well, but, again, that's what a grassroots movement is all about, is changing that.

GLENN: Right. Right. Right.

TOM: So here's the point: You have this example, right after Election November 8th, that the status quo, elite careerists in Washington all of a sudden want to bring back a tool of corruption. So they're tone-deaf. So the only thing -- the only tool America has that's big enough to fix the problem that we have is an Article V convention of amendments, where amendments are made that brings power back to the states, that limits the stupidity that's going on in Washington today.

Remember, every year, every year, $500 billion is thrown out the window in Washington. Total waste, total duplication (phonetic), total fraud. That's a half a trillion dollars a year.

GLENN: Jeez.

TOM: Had we had really strong members of Congress -- I don't care what party they're from -- that took their oath seriously, we wouldn't have that. We would have $500 billion more a year that we wouldn't be taxed for or we wouldn't be barring against for our kids.

So the only tool we have is an Article V Convention of States. And the American people have to know that here's the greatest example you can see. Here's the tone-deafness, the elitism, the careerism. We want to enhance our own personal power by using earmarks to look good at home, to collect money for campaigns, to enhance our future as a career politician.

I mean, listen, Mitch McConnell, first thing he said after the president-elect said about term limits -- he said, "We're not bringing term limits up." No, he's not going to bring term limits up. He's been there 30 years. Why would he bring term limits up? And he's part of the problem

GLENN: And so the people that say -- well, especially now, the Democrats are freaking out, and they would love to open up the Constitution. What -- what do you --

TOM: Well, they don't have the power to do that. An Article V Convention by law and Supreme Court precedent, has only the power to discuss what's in its application.

So Convention of States has an application for the financial aspects of the federal government; i.e., a balanced budget amendment, using generally accepted accounting principles. Number two, term limits on members of Congress and appointed members of the government. And number three, limiting the scope, power, and jurisdiction of the federal government. So there's only three areas. So you can't open it up. And it's not a constitutional convention. It's a convention for amendments to the Constitution that we have.

GLENN: Right. But we couldn't do what -- let's say what they did in the last Progressive Era. And I'm not suggesting anybody wants to do this. But you couldn't come in and say, "I want prohibition."

TOM: No, you couldn't do any of that because it doesn't have anything to do -- you can only have a meeting by precedent, by history, and by common sense, what is listed in your application. And all the applications have to match. So there's no -- there's no risk whatsoever, zero, nada, of a, quote, runaway convention. And there never has been one.

PAT: I don't think you make that point --

TOM: But that's what people against us always use, oh, well, we'll probably lose some of our rights -- well, that's the elitist power-hungry group that wants to continue things the way it is that have us bankrupt as a nation. You know, look at median family income. Median family income dropped $7,000 under this president.

GLENN: Wow.

TOM: That means 50 percent of the people are making $7,000 in real dollars less a year than they were before he became president.

GLENN: My gosh.

PAT: But it's also a lot of frightened conservatives, Senator because they are worried -- which is why you can't make the application point enough -- because they're worried that they're going to try to, you know, eliminate the Second Amendment. Or --

TOM: Well, here's the thing they ought to worry about, we have a runaway federal government right now. Why don't you worry about that?

PAT: Yeah.

(laughter)

TOM: And the people that are promoting the fear, they lack courage. There is no --

PAT: Uh-huh.

TOM: There is no fear in doing the right thing.

PAT: Yeah.

TOM: There's a lot of fear hunkering down saying, "Oh, I'm afraid. I'm afraid. I'm afraid." And consequently, we go down the tubes.

So you get a choice. You can either stand up and fight for your liberty and fight for your rights and fight for a limited federal government like was intended, or you can continue let the federal government control 70 percent of everything in our economy and in our states.

GLENN: I can't -- I can't recommend highly enough that you get involved with the Convention of States Project. I think this is the answer. This is the way to give the power back to the people. This is what we've been looking for. And time is of the essence. And we're making great progress. If -- we sure need you on the battlefront here in Texas.

If people want to get involved, Tom, how do they do it?

TOM: They go to ConventionofStates.com. They can find out -- they can volunteer there. They can find out -- they can ask any question they want. It's already been answered on that website.

We address all these things that people are worried about and talk about why those can't happen. And they allow you to hook up with somebody locally in both your county, your district, your voting district, your congressional district, or your state House district or your state Senate district. And then become involved so you can actually influence your legislator to vote for this.

GLENN: Tom, thank you very much. Tom Coburn, former senator.

TOM: You're welcome. God bless you, Glenn.

GLENN: God bless you. Have a good Thanksgiving, sir.

It is -- it's critical. You really want to drain the swamp? They're not going to do it in Washington. They will do it this way. ConventionofStates.com.

Featured Image: Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) questions witnesses about military equipment given to local law enforcement departments by the federal government during a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing about at the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill September 9, 2014 in Washington, DC. In the wake of the Ferguson, MO, police response to peaceful protests, senators on the committee were critical of the federal grant programs that allow local and state law enforcement agencies to buy armored vehicles, assult rifles, body armor and other military equipment. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

RFK Jr.’s war on Big Pharma: Uncovering the truth behind rising autism and ADHD

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

Our children are sick, and Big Pharma claims to be the cure, but is RFK Jr. closer to proving they are the disease?

For years, neurological disorders in our children have been on the rise. One in nine children in the U.S. has been diagnosed with ADHD, and between 2016 and 2022, more than one million kids were told they suffer from the disorder. Similarly, autism diagnoses have increased by 175 percent over the past decade. RFK Jr. pledged to investigate the rising rates of neurological disorders as Secretary of Health and Human Services, and this week, he announced a major initiative.

Earlier this week, RFK Jr. announced that the HHS has embarked on a massive testing and research effort to uncover the root causes of autism and the sharp spike in recent diagnoses. The HHS Secretary vowed that the results will be available by September of this year, leaving many skeptical about the study's rigor. Conversely, some speculate that the HHS may have unpublished studies revealing critical insights into these disorders, just waiting to see the light of day.

Glenn brought up a recent article by the Daily Wire referencing a New York Times piece in which experts questioned the legitimacy of ADHD diagnoses. Glenn agreed and suggested that people are just wired differently; they learn, work, and study differently, and the cookie-cutter, one-size-fits-all school system simply fails to accommodate everyone.

New York Times' ADHD Admission

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Earlier this week, the New York Times published an article that made a shocking admission: there are no concrete biological markers for ADHD. The clinical definition of ADHD is no longer supported by the evidence, and there are no physical, genetic, or chemical identifiers for the disorder, nor is there any real way to test for it. The paper also admitted that people diagnosed with ADHD would suddenly find that they no longer had any symptoms after a change of environment, profession, or field of study. This suggests that "ADHD" might simply be a matter of interests and skills, not a chronic brain sickness.

The most horrifying implication of this admission is that millions of people, including children, have been prescribed heavy mind-altering drugs for years for a disorder that lacks real evidence of its very existence. These drugs are serious business and include products such as Adderall, Ritalin, and Desoxyn. All of these drugs are considered "Schedule II," which is a drug classification that puts them on the same level as cocaine, PCP, and fentanyl. Notably, Desoxyn is chemically identical to methamphetamine, differing only in its production in regulated laboratories rather than illegal settings.

Worse yet, studies show that these medications, like Desoxyn, often provide no long-term benefits. Testing demonstrated that in the short term, there were some positive effects, but after 36 months, there was no discernible difference in symptoms between people who were medicated and those who were not. For decades, we have been giving our children hardcore drugs with no evidence of them working or even that the disorder exists.

RFK Jr's Autism Study

Alex Wong / Staff | Getty Images

Autism rates are on the rise, and RFK Jr. is going to get to the bottom of it. In the year 2000, approximately one in 150 children was diagnosed with autism, but only 20 years later, the rate had increased to one in 36. While some claim that this is simply due to more accurate testing, RFK Jr. doesn't buy it and is determined to discover what is the underlying cause. He is an outspoken critic of vaccines, asserting that the true scope of their side effects has been buried by greed and corruption to sell more vaccines.

RFK Jr. doesn't plan on stopping at vaccines. Similar to ADHD, RFK Jr. suspects other environmental factors could increase of autism or exacerbate symptoms. Factors like diet, water quality, air pollution, and parenting approaches are all under investigation. It's time to bring clarity to the neurological disorders that plague our nation, cut through the corruption, and reveal the healing truth.

Neurological Intervention

WIN MCNAMEE / Contributor | Getty Images

Big Pharma has been all too happy to sit back and watch as the rate of neurological disorders climbs, adding to the ever-growing list of permanent patients who are led to believe that their only choice is to shell out endless money for treatments, prescriptions, and doctor visits. Rather than encouraging lifestyle changes to improve our well-being, they push ongoing medication and costly treatments.

All RFK Jr. is doing is asking questions, and yet the backlash from the "experts" is so immense that one can't help but wonder what they could be hiding. Both Glenn and RFK Jr. have their suspicions of Big Pharma, and the upcoming HHS study might be one of the most important steps to making America healthy again.

Why do planes keep crashing?

STR / Contributor | Getty Images

Last week, two more serious air travel incidents occurred, adding to the mounting number of aviation disasters this year. Is flying safe?

Over the past year, the number of aviation disasters that have been blasted across the media has been steadily rising, with February alone having a half dozen incidents. It begs the question: Is air travel becoming more dangerous? Or has the media just increased its coverage of a "normal" amount of crashes?

If you look at the data, it suggests that flying has been—and remains—safe. The number of accidents and fatalities has been steadily decreasing year over year and remains a small percentage of total flights. In 2024, out of the approximate 16 million flights recorded by the Federal Aviation Administration in the U.S. every year, there were 1,150 accidents resulting in 304 fatalities, meaning that the average flight in America has a 0.007% chance of an accident. In addition, the National Transportation Safety Board records a decrease in both fatal and non-fatal aviation accidents when compared to 2024. By this time last year, there were already 399 crashes and accidents, while this year has only clocked in 271.

That being said, Sean Duffy, Trump's new transportation secretary, admitted that America's air traffic control system needs an overhaul. Duffy pointed toward dated air traffic control equipment, overregulation, and radical DEI as the culprits behind many recent aviation accidents.

But what do the crashes suggest? We've gathered details about the major aviation accidents this year so you can decide for yourself why planes keep crashing:

American Airlines Blackhawk collision over D.C.

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

In one of the deadliest U.S. aviation accidents in the last decade, an American Airlines plane collided with a Black Hawk helicopter over the Potomac River in Washington, D.C. The American Airlines flight was approaching Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport carrying 60 passengers and four crew when it collided midair with the Army helicopter, crewed by three, killing all 67 people involved.

The exact cause behind the mid-air collision is still under investigation, but it is believed that the Black Hawk was up too high and outside of its designated flight path. A report from the New York Times suggests that the air control tower at the Ronald Regan Washington Airport has suffered years of understaffing, which seems to be a result of DEI hiring practices. Investigators are piecing through the wreckage, and the exact cause of the crash is still unknown.

Medevac explosion in Philadelphia

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

On the night of Friday, March 31st, a medevac plane with six people on board crashed into a Philadelphia neighborhood, killing everyone on board, along with one man on the ground. The small jet departed from Northeast Philadelphia Airport at 6 pm, and according to the FAA, it crashed less than a minute later after reaching an elevation of 1,650 feet. The ensuing explosion cast a massive fireball into the sky and wounded 19 people on the ground, killing one.

The six people on board the jet were Mexican nationals, including a mother and her sick daughter who was receiving treatment from Shriners Children’s Hospital in northeast Philadelphia. As of now, there is no official cause of the crash, but much of the plane has been recovered, and the incident is being investigated.

Alaskan flight disappearance outside of Nome

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

At approximately 3:16 pm, on Thursday, February 6th, a small commuter plane working for Bering Air, carrying 10 passengers, took off from the town of Unalakeet, Alaska, destined for the nearby town of Nome. After a few hours, Nome lost contact with the small plane as weather conditions worsened. The following day, the Coast Guard discovered the remains of the plane, all 10 occupants were dead.

The wreckage of the aircraft, along with the remains of the passengers and crew, have been recovered and are under investigation. While there has been no official explanation given for the crash, the poor weather is believed to be a major contributing factor.

Small jet collision in Scottsdale

Gabe Ginsberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The pilot of a small jet died after the aircraft crashed into a larger plane in Scottsdale, Arizona, on Monday, February 10th. The owner of the jet that crashed was Vince Neil, the frontman of the heavy metal band Mötley Crüe, but Neil was not on board at the time of the accident. The jet had just landed in Scottsdale, where it appeared to veer out of control and smash into a parked Gulfstream at high speed. The plane was carrying four people: two pilots and two passengers. One of the pilots was killed, and the other three were seriously injured. There was only one person aboard the Gulfstream at the time of the crash, they suffered injuries but refused treatment.

It is believed that the landing gear failed upon landing, which caused the jet to skitter out of control and smash into the parked plane.

Delta crash in Toronto

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

On Monday, February 17th, a Delta aircraft flipped while landing and slid upside down across the runway while ablaze at Toronto Pearson International Airport. Fortunately, all 80 people aboard survived, and only three people suffered critical (though not life-threatening) injuries. First responders were quickly on the scene, extinguishing the fires and assisting the grateful survivors out of the wreckage.

The crash is believed to have been caused in part by the extreme weather in Toronto, which included a powerful crosswind and potential ice on the runway. It is also suspected that the landing gear failed to deploy properly, causing the plane to flip in the severe wind.

Small plane collision north of Tucson

aviation-images.com / Contributor | Getty Images

On Wednesday, February 19th, yet another small plane crash occurred in the skies above Arizona. Two small aircraft collided midair near Tusosn, Arizona at Marana Regional Airport. There were two people in each of the small planes, two of which from the same aircraft died, while the other two managed to walk away with little injury.

Marana Regional Airport is an uncontrolled field, which means there is no active air traffic control present on site. Instead, pilots rely on communication with each other through a "Common Traffic Advisory Frequency" (CTAF) to safely take off and land.

Hudson helicopter crash

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

A helicopter tour out of New York City took a tragic turn on Thursday, April 10th, when the Bell 206 broke apart mid-flight and plunged into the Hudson River. All six people aboard perished in the crash, which included the pilot and a tourist family of five.

New York Helicopter Tours, the operator of the flight, announced it would cease operations following the accident. The decision comes amid scrutiny of the company’s safety record, which includes a prior emergency water landing and another incident where a helicopter was forced to land shortly after takeoff due to mechanical issues. The cause of the crash remains under investigation.

Upstate New York family tragedy

Billie Weiss/Boston Red Sox / Contributor | Getty Images

Days after the tragic Hudson crash, a small private plane carrying an NCAA athlete crashed in upstate New York, killing all six passengers. On Saturday, April 12, 2025, Karenna Groff, a former MIT soccer player and 2022 Woman of the Year, was aboard her father's Mitsubishi MU-2B with her parents, boyfriend, brother, and his partner when the plane went down in a muddy field in Copake, New York.

The aircraft was reportedly in good condition, and Michael Groff, Karenna's father, was an experienced pilot. While the official cause of the crash has not been determined, low visibility at the time of the incident is suspected to have been a contributing factor.

The recent string of aviation incidents underscores a troubling trend in air travel safety, raising urgent questions about the systems and policies governing the industry. While data suggests flying remains statistically safe, the alarming frequency of crashes, near misses, and systemic issues like outdated technology and questionable hiring practices cannot be ignored. BlazeTV's own Stu Burguiere did a deep dive into the recent crashes in the Blaze Originals documentary, Countdown to the Next Aviation Disaster, uncovering the truth behind the FAA’s shift toward DEI hiring and its impact on aviation safety. Featuring exclusive interviews with former air traffic controllers, lawyers, and Robert Poole—the inventor of TSA PreCheck—this documentary exposes how the Biden-Harris administration’s policies, under Pete Buttigieg’s leadership, have contributed to making air travel more dangerous than ever.

Did Democrats just betray fair elections? The SAVE Act controversy explained

DOMINIC GWINN / Contributor | Getty Images

One of President Trump’s key campaign promises, the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, faces fierce opposition from Democrats in the Senate.

The SAVE Act recently passed Congress for the second time and is now headed to the Senate. This voter security bill mandates proof of U.S. citizenship for all federal elections. It garnered unanimous Republican support in Congress but was backed by only four Democrats, consistent with last year’s Senate rejection of the bill.

Glenn has repeatedly emphasized the urgency of securing our elections, warning that without reform in the next four years, free and fair elections may become a thing of the past. However, the SAVE Act faces significant hurdles. Republicans lack the Senate votes to overcome a filibuster, meaning the bill’s fate hinges on bipartisan support—something Democrats have been reluctant to offer.

So, what exactly does the SAVE Act do? Why are Democrats opposing it? And how can you help ensure its passage?

What the SAVE Act Entails

Stefan Zaklin / Stringer | Getty Images

The SAVE Act is straightforward: it requires voters to provide proof of U.S. citizenship before casting a ballot in federal elections. This measure responds to reports of voter fraud, including allegations of noncitizens, such as illegal immigrants, voting in past presidential elections. Acceptable forms of identification include a REAL ID, U.S. passport, military ID, birth certificate, or other specified documents.

Additionally, the bill mandates that states remove noncitizens from voter rolls and lists of eligible voters. It also establishes criminal penalties for officials who fail to comply with these new guidelines.

Democrats’ Opposition to the SAVE Act

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Democrats have strongly criticized the SAVE Act, arguing it discriminates against women, transgender individuals, and minorities. They claim that people who have changed their names—such as women after marriage or transgender individuals—may struggle to vote if their current ID doesn’t match their birth certificate. However, the bill allows multiple forms of identification beyond birth certificates, meaning affected individuals can use updated IDs like a REAL ID or passport.

The argument that minorities are disproportionately harmed is slightly more substantiated. A recent survey showed that 93 percent of voting-age Black Americans, 94 percent of voting-age Hispanics, and 95 percent of voting-age Native Americans have valid photo IDs, compared to 97% of voting-age whites and 98 percent of voting-age Asians. However, in 2024, only about 58 percent of the voting-age population cast ballots—a trend that has been consistent for decades. There’s little evidence that Americans are prevented from voting due to a lack of ID. Instead of opposing the bill, a more constructive approach would be to assist the small percentage of Americans without IDs in obtaining proper documentation.

How You Can Make a Difference

Melissa Sue Gerrits / Stringer | Getty Images

The stakes couldn’t be higher—free and fair elections are the cornerstone of our democracy. Conservatives must rally to ensure the SAVE Act becomes law. Contact your Senators to express your support for the bill and highlight its importance in safeguarding electoral integrity. Grassroots efforts, such as sharing accurate information about the SAVE Act on social media or discussing it with friends and family, can amplify its visibility. Local advocacy groups may also offer opportunities to organize or participate in campaigns that pressure lawmakers to act. Every voice counts, and collective action could tip the scales in favor of this critical legislation.

Glenn unveils CIA’s grim Dire Wolf conspiracy

"Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should."

-Ian Malcolm, Jurassic Park

The monstrous Dire Wolf, extinct for 10,000 years, has returned. This larger, ancient wolf species—popularized by HBO’s Game of Thrones—was resurrected by Colossal Laboratories, a Dallas-based bioscience company. Colossal utilized both preserved ancient Dire Wolf DNA and modern gray wolf DNA combined with some clever gene-crafting and a healthy pinch of hubris to create three approximations of the ancient canine.

While the wolves posed for a photoshoot alongside Game of Thrones props and its creator, Colossal’s broader plans remain unclear. However, what Glenn recently uncovered about the company is far more monstrous than the wolves will ever be. Glenn revealed that the CIA, through a nonprofit group known as In-Q-Tel, is funding Colossal's endeavors to bring back all sorts of extinct beasts. With the recently released JFK Files exposing the CIA’s unchecked power, Glenn warns of the dangerous potential behind this genetic manipulation—and the rogue agency’s possible motives.

Here are the top three most horrifying uses the CIA could have for this technology:

Dual-Use Technology

Xinhua News Agency / Contributor | Getty Images

Colossal and other biotech firms advertise a variety of "civilian" uses for bioengineered beasts, including research subjects, exotic zoos, and even climate restoration. As dubious as those uses are, Glenn revealed that the CIA could be cooking up something much worse. Gene-editing tools like CRISPR are inherently dual-purpose and easily adaptable for military use. As one of Colossal’s major investors, the CIA gains prime access to cutting-edge biotech, likely eyeing its potential for warfare.

Frankenstein’s Spy Lab

Like AI, one can only guess at the maximum capabilities of this gene-editing technology. On air, Glenn speculated about bioengineered resilient organisms, animals with tweaked senses designed for espionage or combat in areas inaccessible to drones or humans. Playing God to create new weapons of war sounds right up the CIA's alley.

Even worse than man-made mutant mutts, Glenn pointed out that these augmentations are by no means limited to animals. We could see (or rather, hear unverified rumors of) the rise of the next generation of super soldier projects. Human experimentation is not outside of the CIA's scope (think MKUltra), and genetically or chemically augmented humans have been a pipe dream for many a clandestine organization for decades. Is there anything more horrifying than an agency with as little oversight as the CIA in control of something as powerful and potentially devastating as gene-augmentation?

Eco-Warfare Unleashed

MARCELO MANERA / Contributor | Getty Images

Why attack a single target when you could attack an entire ecosystem instead?

Anyone who has had to deal with the destructive effects of fire ants knows how dangerous an invasive species can be to the human, plant, and animal inhabitants of any given region. Now imagine genetically engineered Dire Wolves or Woolly Mammoths unleashed by the CIA to cripple an enemy’s agriculture or environment. Such a weapon could inflict irreparable damage from a distance. Even the mere threat of eco-warfare might serve as a deterrent, though its unpredictability could reshape the world in ways we can’t control or repair.