America's Money Answers Man Jordan Goodman

This is Iowa Talking Points, the candidates, produced by Studio 5 at Mud Advertising and Totally Iowa Media, where you hear from candidates in the November 2026 general election.

Now, Iowa Talking Points, the candidates.

From Studio 5 at Mud and Cedar Falls, here is Jeff Stein.

Hello and welcome.

There will be a new U.S.

Senator representing Iowa in Washington come January of 2027.

It's an open seat due to the retirement of incumbent Senator Joni Ernst after two terms.

When you go to vote in the November General Election, you'll find three candidates on the ballot.

One of them joins us here today.

She is the Republican nominee for U.S.

Senate.

Current Iowa Congresswoman Ashley Hinson, AshleyHinson.com is the website.

Congresswoman, thanks so much for the time.

Jeff, great to be back with you.

So you have served three terms in the U.S.

House.

Why make the run for Senate?

Well, first of all, let me say thank you to Joni.

I think she's done an amazing job as our U.S.

Senator and helped work alongside me in Congress to get some.

amazing tax relief for Iowans, support our veterans, support our farmers.

But I'm ready to step up and represent the entire state.

I've prided myself on how I've run my congressional office.

focused on telling Iowan stories and good constituent service.

And so I know I'm ready to do that statewide.

And I'm running because there's more to do.

I'm a minivan driving mom.

I want to focus on Iowa family issues, Iowa farm issues, supporting our veterans and making life more affordable for everyone.

And so that's why I'm stepping up to do this job.

And I think it's an incredibly important time in our country to have good public servants working in Washington.

Some of us have complained about nothing's getting done in Washington.

sort of thing, but I think the numbers, the data actually shows the number of bills passed out of the U.S.

House.

This session rivals anything in the past.

The house has been very busy.

I can tell you that, you know, even though I know several of the weeks of session have been released back to us to go back to work in our districts, we have gotten a lot of things done, whether that's housing reform so that we can make life more affordable by stopping institutional investors from buying houses.

We've gotten appropriations passed earlier this year.

Finally, we got one of those packages passed so we could make good investments.

I brought back over the course of my time in Congress, 140 plus million dollars to make

investments in healthcare, affordable housing, and other infrastructure projects.

So I'm very pleased with what we've been able to accomplish, not to mention the tax relief we passed last year to provide that certainty to Iowa families.

You know, you look at where we are right now in our country, and I know there's more work to do to make life more affordable, but imagine if you had tax and spend Democrats like Josh Turrick in the U.S.

Senate right now.

I mean, he is talking about a 50% corporate tax rate.

that would be disastrous for Iowa agriculture.

More than 99% of our family farms are set up as corporations.

So he's out of touch.

When he is showing up to work, he skipped 58% of his votes at the state capitol this year, and he's wrong the rest of the time when he's voting.

When we're talking about the reconciliation package signed on Independence Day last year, it's had a variety of names.

Middle-class tax cut, big, beautiful bill, et cetera.

There was a lot within it.

The problem for some people is they may have seen a little change in their taxes to the good.

Refunds went way up.

They don't then realize that had that not passed, what would have been the case as we went to file this year?

Right, so the number is four trillion dollars and for the average family, that would be about seven weeks worth of groceries that they would be paying more in taxes.

So every single Democrat last year voted against the working family's tax cut is what we call it, but you talk about targeting that relief right to the middle class.

It is no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, no tax on social security.

80% of our seniors are not paying tax.

on Social Security anymore.

And so that means relief right to the bottom line.

I think about the people who this has impacted.

I got a text actually from one of my former coworkers at the TV station from years ago, and he said to me, okay, well, Ashley, we'll see if this bill actually did anything.

And last year, he owed $1,700.

This year, he got $1,250 back for his family.

And that's a real shot in the arm for a family of four.

So when we talk about what we prevented, plus

the certainty that we provided for our small businesses, the Main Street tax certainty, not to mention the Trump accounts so that our young people can have money to save.

I think about the families that that's gonna be helping.

And again, we're laser focused on continuing to provide more relief for the middle class and drive prices down.

And as you suggested, businesses had a big benefit in terms of being able to securely invest and deduct that cost in the year.

in which it was incurred, which is a sea change for a business that is a little tight on cash flow.

Right.

So you look at a business deciding whether or not they're going to make a capital expenditure or not.

Do we need that extra building?

Can we afford to build that extra building?

They now have the certainty so they know that they can plan for taxation.

If they're going to make that investment, they can either write it off or figure it out with their tax structure.

So I think that's incredibly important.

A farmer needing to buy that extra piece of equipment, they know they can do it now.

So that's why you're seeing huge investments in manufacturing in the United States.

Big one coming to Iowa, hopefully very, very soon.

But having that certainty in tax is really, really important.

And you talk about small business tax relief, the 199A deduction.

That's for people that are set up as an S corp.

I think millions and millions of Americans claim that deduction.

And it is exactly what we want people to do.

They're investing in their businesses.

They're creating jobs.

They're powering our economy.

businesses or the engine of Iowa's economy.

There are some on the political left who talk about cutting health care in this country as part of those bills.

Frankly, when I have asked for specifics, I'm not sure I've been given any.

So what's the rebuttal when someone says, well, the Republicans went through and gutted health care for Iowans?

Well, I would say they didn't take part in the roundtable.

I was at earlier today where we looked at what the Rural Transformation Fund that I supported is doing for rural health care.

I just was in Protovin talking about their fire station that I helped secure an investment in.

But as part of that roundtable, we had folks from local health entities.

Howard.

County was able to use that Rural Health Transformation Fund money to recruit a PA and a nurse midwife.

So you're talking about people who are going to help provide rural health care right in eastern Iowa.

That is a direct investment that I supported.

Josh Turrick skipped that vote at the state capitol, by the way.

So he's not even showing up to deploy these resources for health care to rural Iowa.

What I think is also important is

Iowans care a lot about fraud, right?

We don't want our tax dollars going to things they shouldn't be going to and certainly we don't like when people are gaming the system.

What we have done is made the necessary changes to ensure these programs will exist for people who need them.

So our working poor, that's what Medicaid is designed for.

That's what SNAP is designed for.

What we shouldn't have those benefits going to are people who are 29 year old single dude living in his mom's basement who should actually be working instead of playing video games.

So the requirements we put into play

for example working or volunteering two hours a day in order to get a government benefit I think most Iowans agree you should have a little skin in the game if you're going to take that benefit.

And as I recall the concept of requiring those receiving benefits who are able to then work in some manner

I believe that came up during the Clinton administration if I'm not mistaken.

Yeah.

He was a big proponent.

I still remember.

I wrote a paper on it in high school actually on welfare to work fair, right?

And you think about the dignity of work and people should want to.

And I had a lady who took part in another roundtable that I did.

She's now a dialysis nurse, but she for a while had to actually use those benefits.

For her, it was a point of pride though.

She worked very hard

got herself off of them as a single mother, and again, now is successful and was there to talk about the benefit of no tax on overtime, right?

Because she's working a lot of hours as a nurse now.

So, no, I think there are some amazing stories.

And again, I want to be very, very clear here.

We want these programs to exist for people who need them.

I had a mother come to one of my town halls that I did, and she was very concerned.

She has a disabled son.

She's his caretaker.

Of course, we want to make sure she's got benefits, and so does he.

And that's exactly who those programs are designed for, someone who's permanently disabled or a caretaker.

That was all explicitly written out in that bill, and we did that on purpose.

Is there a disconnect between the application of the law, because again, it takes time to implement things, and what

people who are trying to stir up a little bit of fear are able to put out there.

In other words, it's hard to rebut because it hasn't actually been put in place yet.

There are triggers that don't even start for a few years.

Yeah, well, and we were very intentional in giving people enough time to adapt to the changes we were making.

And I think that's important when you're looking at big changes in health care programs or in any government program.

Not pulling the rug out from these providers was really, really critical to us.

And specifically when I look at what we did to advocate

for the Rural Health Transformation Fund.

I mean, that's more than $200 million that has already been deployed in rural Iowa to make sure, again, there's a nurse midwife in Howard County.

There's another provider available to deliver babies in Grinnell someplace else that I've invested resources and made sure that we got those tax dollars back to provide health care, again, no matter what your zip code is.

Ashley Hinson is a congresswoman, presently from northeast Iowa.

She is running for the U.S.

Senate, the Republican nominee.

AshleyHinson.com is the website.

More when Iowa Talking Points, the candidates continues after this.

One opportunity, change your career.

Mud advertising is hiring product specialists.

$20 an hour, paid weekly.

That's 52 weeks a year plus record-breaking profit sharing.

Let me repeat, $20 an hour plus record-breaking profit sharing.

But we're just getting started.

The best in the business, 401k, company match, gold standard health plans, on-site fitness center, generous pay time off, and so much more.

Apply today and don't look back.

you

You're watching Iowa Talking Points, the candidates.

Here again is Jeff Stein.

And we continue with Congresswoman Ashley Hinson.

She is the Republican nominee for U.S.

Senate in the November General Election.

AshleyHinson.com is the website.

As I've mentioned, you're a current member of Congress.

You served in the State House.

You mentioned a past career in television, but for folks who may not be as aware of your background, fill in some of the gaps, please.

Yeah, well, I guess my most important role is I'm a wife and mom.

husband Matt is an insurance agent.

We live in Marion.

We're raising our two teenage boys, Max and Jack's, 15 and 13.

So I say this all the time out on the trail and other teenage mom, parents out there can relate, but I think nothing prepares you more for serving in Congress than being a parent to teenagers because you're always negotiating with unreasonable people and the personal hygiene is questionable.

So no, I think that being a parent brings an added set of, I think, good context to what we're making decisions.

on because it is about the next generation.

It's about what are we doing to make sure they're set up for success, that we're respecting taxpayers in this process, we're focused on protecting our rural way of life here in Iowa, and we have a safe and secure country.

And those are the things that drive me as a mom.

But my career was as a storyteller.

Before I ran for public office, I was in the state house for four years, but I spent 11 years as a news anchor and reporter.

And so what that taught me was that it really

is about listening because you get the best stories by listening and letting people tell their story.

So I heard the good and the bad, right?

I heard what was working really well in government and what was working poorly.

And that really inspired me to stop talking about it and step up to start doing something about it.

It's one thing to say, all right, I'll do something different.

It's another to say, I'm going to run for public office.

What was the bridge or what led you to make that leap?

Yeah.

Well, I think it came down to, again, I had been doing stories for years about state government and seeing, again, I watched what happened after the flood of 2008, for example.

So here I was literally in the trenches with everybody sandbagging, covering the flood, the devastation to my community.

And I saw what happened when Republicans and Democrats did work well together.

They put together the flood mitigation board.

and had a dedicated funding stream to help make sure we could prevent these future disasters to our communities.

I loved seeing that, and I loved covering it.

But then I also saw what wasteful spending looked like in a Democrat trifecta here in Iowa, which, by the way, we are still paying for today, some of the things that happened in the late 2000s with the overspending.

But I saw the across-the-board cuts that had to happen, and they were done in such a destructive way that it made me mad as a taxpayer.

Here I was getting out of bed.

in the middle of the night, not making very much money.

And I just saw them wasting my precious resources, the taxpayer resources.

And so I think those kinds of things were what happened to make me think, oh, something needs to be done about this.

And then when the opportunity presented itself in 2016 and I had the conversation with my husband, again, I had covered these things at the state house for years and at the federal level too.

I just wanted to affect change.

And I thought the best way to do that would be the same way I'd been as a journalist.

working my source network.

I'm not a doctor, I'm not a farmer, but now I have them all as my experts, my resident experts, so I can make the best decisions on policy and now I can actually affect that change and make Iowans lives better.

People knew you in Eastern Iowa because that's where you worked in television, but you grew up in Central Iowa, so you really know a lot about

all corners of the state.

Yes, born and raised in the Des Moines area.

So that's where I graduated from high school valley.

So I'm a valley girl if you want to call me that, but really enjoyed my upbringing here in Iowa.

I think it's just

There's no place better than Iowa.

I'm so proud to be in Iowa and I'm proud to be an American and I'm wearing my America 250 pin today.

I think we need to remember that.

You know, we're celebrating our 250th birthday as a nation this year and I am running because I hope we have 250 more and that means that we need to make responsible decisions.

I talk about.

Respecting taxpayers, rural America, and safety and security, if you focus on those three things for our country, I think we will have a prosperous next 250 years.

Well, let's pick up on that because other members of Congress who have sat in that chair during the series of programs, I've had a similar conversation.

Yeah.

We're involved in a military conflict in Iran right now.

There have been various votes in Congress taken to either invoke War Powers Act, investigate.

all manner of things.

First of all, give me a sense of what the role of a member of Congress, and I think it would be the same House or Senate, but correct me if I'm wrong.

What's the role for someone in your position?

And give me a sense of why you have taken the stance as you have, either on the floor or in public comment.

Yeah, well, and I've been very clear.

I do not like forever wars.

I don't want us to be in a forever war.

And I wish this one hadn't happened in the first place.

I'm going to put my mom hat on here for a second.

I think about my boys and what it means for them for their future.

We have to have a safe and secure country.

But I also am very worried about the threat that Iran poses.

I mean, they have been shouting death to America and they can never be allowed to have a nuclear weapon.

And let's not forget, they are also responsible for the murders of thousands of Americans.

And we can't let that go beyond our sights.

What I do think is important, though, is that

Iowans are getting squeezed because of the war and that's why I've called for an immediate and successful end to the conflict.

And I think that looks like, again, making sure that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.

We are applying that maximum pressure financially.

Secretary Besant is doing that right now, that final squeeze, I think.

We need to get the straight open so that that oil and all those resources can flow out of the Middle East.

And we need to provide relief immediately to Iowans.

And so I've actually called on the speaker.

I've called and texted him to tell him I thought we should be back in DC.

dealing with this.

But I do think we need to end the conflict.

I don't think that needs another resolution on the floor of the House.

I think the President has the ability to bring this to resolution, and he should do that.

And I trust our – the best fighting force in the world.

We have the U.S.

military.

We need to bring them home, but we need to trust them to get this done.

So, again, just to make sure that I'm hitting the nuances that are appropriate in such a situation, you're saying, let's end this.

with conditions in place that allow us to prove that we've met the objective.

Well, what I don't want to see is Iran be able to immediately turn around and have a nuclear weapon.

I think that's what we are avoiding at all costs because, you know, they might aim at it.

It is Israel first, but you know they're going to aim it at Europe and you know they're going to aim it at us.

That's exactly what they had been doing.

They had been supercharging their ballistic missile program and we know what they've done with drones.

I actually, you know, I, it was the

probably the worst experience of my life to have to go to Dover and welcome families who had lost someone.

That is a terrible, terrible experience.

And the Iranian drones that killed those young men and women, we can't forget it was the leading state sponsor of terror that killed those people, those Americans.

And so again, they have been super charging those programs and we cannot allow them to rebuild those programs.

I also asked this question of people who sit in that chair.

Now you'll be going to the US Senate.

Do you have a commitment to vote for any individual as the leader of your caucus?

That's the first vote that you take whether it is for majority leader or minority leader depending on how the election turns out.

Is John Thune your choice?

Are you open?

What's your status on that?

Well, obviously, I think we'll take a look at whoever runs, but Leader Thune has been to Iowa several times and he is helping me to get elected.

I think it's really important.

Again, you look at what all we've been able to accomplish and working with the Senate.

And the House, together, passed the Working Families Tax Cuts 1,100 pieces of legislation, despite incredible headwinds from the Democrats trying to stall every single nomination, which I have no doubt they will continue to try to do in the U.S.

Senate.

They have been able to get nominees confirmed, including just this week.

The Labor Secretary got confirmed.

So they have been able to work through that, despite, again, those Democrat headwinds.

Chuck Schumer isn't doing the American people any favors by how he's navigating this process.

And frankly, it's just

just because they hate the president.

They don't want any of these things to move forward.

And so I think that's the wrong kind of leadership.

I think Leader Thune has shown grace through that process.

And of course, there are bills that I would like to see get through the Senate.

I think the Save America Act is a huge priority for the American people.

It's not going to get done before the election.

Thank goodness we have a good voter ID law on the books here in Iowa.

But I think he's navigated that challenging time with amazing Democrat headwinds.

And this is a Democrat problem.

They will not get on board with a policy that the American people support.

So with regard to something like the filibuster, I mean, the Senate has rules that it's different with every new Congress, et cetera.

The president has his view on it.

The Iowa delegation.

Current senators Grassley and Ernst have their view.

Yeah, so I'm wondering if you take the seat in the Senate What's your view on that if you're in the majority?

Yeah, so I serve on the appropriations committee and that's one place where I think we should not have a filibuster rule on because I think that if you look at the Constitution of this country There are very very minimal requirements of what government has to be doing and one of those things is appropriations I think we wouldn't be in the position we're in with the constant posturing over government shutdowns if we just had a some

majority threshold there.

I also think that could be the kind of the olive branch to get other things done with the 60 vote threshold.

So that would be where I'd want to go first because I do think we need to work together.

And right now the filibuster has protected the minority party and it mostly protects Republicans when we're in the minority.

I hope we're not.

But think about all the bad things it has stopped over the course of history.

The reason we don't have a packed court yet and the reason we don't have two additional states is because the filibuster

been in place.

So again I'm hopeful that people get out to vote and hopefully vote for me so we don't have a Democrat majority where they will no doubt torpedo the filibuster and move forward on all these terrible policies for our country.

Congresswoman Ashley Hinson represents the second district in northeast Iowa presently.

She's the Republican nominee for U.S.

Senate in the November election.

AshleyHinson.com is the website.

More when Iowa talking points the candidates returns in a moment.

Studio 5 at Mud is built to get attention and get results.

From radio and television to digital video and live productions, it all happens inside our 3100 square foot production studio.

An infinity wall, multi-camera live webcast capabilities, massive green screen, audience seating and a full creative team for pre and post production.

Whatever you need for media or production, get noticed and get results.

At Mud Advertising, we love it when you succeed.

Watch all the programs in the Iowa Talking Point series online at iowatalkingpoints.com.

Iowa Talking Points, the candidates, continues with Jeff Stein.

And we continue with Congresswoman Ashley Hinson, currently representing Northeast Iowa's second district.

She is the Republican nominee, having won the primary in June for U.S.

Senate.

in the November election, ashleyhinson.com, is the website I've mentioned.

There are three of you on the ballot, a Republican, a Democrat, and a Libertarian.

I'll give you the opportunity to distinguish yourself and your positions from your opponents.

Yes.

Well, I think first and foremost, I have a strong record of standing up for taxpayers.

You look at where our country is, and I'm a big proponent of strong investments and bringing those back to Iowa, but at the same time trying to cut wasteful spending.

My opponent, Josh Turrick, in this race is...

talking about a 50% tax increase on corporations and a 91% marginal tax rate, I think that is wrong.

I think it's your money, it's not the government's money and that's my philosophy.

My opponent didn't show up to work 58% of the time this year.

I have a 99% voting record on the floor of the US House this year.

I think that shows Iowans, I have a work ethic and I'm going to show up and do the tough work in Washington DC for you.

My opponent was there 42% of the time and wrong.

all that time.

I mean, he voted for things that allowed illegal immigrants to get taxpayer benefits.

I'm voting for a secure border.

He's voting to make it harder for local law enforcement to cooperate with ICE to do their job.

And he's voting for policies that would be devastating for Iowa agriculture, including allowing fake meat to be sold in our schools.

I've been a strong advocate for agriculture in Washington, D.C.

not only working on policies like E-15, which we need year-round.

And speaking of fuel prices, that would drop fuel prices across the country.

It's a consumer choice-driven policy, which is a good thing.

And in some cases, it's like 30 cents cheaper, a gallon.

I mean, wouldn't that be amazing relief if everybody had access to it across the country?

I supported the Farm Bill.

We got that passed through the House.

My opponent skipped the vote on the Iowa Farm Bill.

So I think there are some glaring differences between us as candidates, and there's never been a worse time.

to elect a tax and spend liberal then right now and Josh Turrick will raise your taxes and he's too liberal for our state.

I don't want to put any words in any candidate's mouths so I don't even want to state their positions but there is a libertarian on the ballot and many of the libertarian views broadly might appeal to some people who are Republicans.

So address the distinction of why a vote for you as opposed to the libertarian since we've already covered

you as opposed to the Democrat?

I think important to note, you know, at this point, you know, you look at the polling, the libertarians not gaining any traction, really.

So a wasted vote for a libertarian candidate versus allowing a Democrat to go serve in Congress.

If you're looking at policies you most align with, whether that's reducing the size and scope of government, which is something I support, lowering taxes and lowering the impact of the federal government on your life.

I think there are a lot of places where if you are a libertarian and you're trying to figure out where to go, I would align best with you.

So I would ask for

those folks to vote for me, so you don't elect Chuck Schumer, the leader of the United States Senate.

They say that the first casualty of war is the truth.

I would suggest that's the same in political campaigns, and there are a lot of ads out there.

I hesitate to ask simply because I know often you hate to bring any more volume or light to a false claim, but

There are a lot of claims out there, and I'm just wondering if there are any that you'd like to address, either to correct the record, clarify or point out when...

Someone's nose is growing.

Well, certainly.

And I think it's unfortunate we've really reached the political silly season now where my opponent feels the need to shamelessly lie time and time again and his liberal allies as well.

There are a couple of places, and I would just point this out.

My opponent admitted on camera that he missed 58% of the votes and didn't think it mattered to Iowans.

We put that on the air because that was him in his own words.

They are continuously misrepresenting my record and my family.

And I take that personally.

I think one of the ads running is talking about implying that I got rich while I was in Congress because I was trading stock.

That is patently false.

It's a bald-faced lie.

My husband built and sold a business in 2021.

I sold the same year, all of our publicly traded stocks.

So we do not trade stocks.

I don't think members of Congress should be trading stocks.

I voted to ban it.

And I've actually led on market language to make sure that members of Congress are not betting on prediction markets either, because we get access to information that many people might not have sometimes weeks in advance.

So I don't think that's fair.

And the best-eating Congress shouldn't be on Wall Street.

And so I pride myself on having done things the right way.

We're achieving the American dream, but I want to be very clear.

I do not trade stocks.

And then the other ad that

I think is really offensive.

And frankly, if you're watching this, you should be really mad at Josh Turrick and his allies for lying about this.

But I voted to release the Epstein files.

I have stood up for crime victims my entire career, whether that was telling their stories as a journalist,

or making sure that we are putting bad guys behind bars and providing resources to crime victims.

I think that's a ball place lie as well.

And they're running an ad now that says I voted to block the release of the Epstein files.

I never voted to block the release.

I voted to release the Epstein files.

My work to protect victims of crime.

When I was in the state legislature, we had a young woman who had been abused by a teacher and found out that there was a loophole in Iowa law that allowed teachers to jump.

They could resign from a school district.

and jump to another school.

Well, guess what?

My bill closed that loophole, and now school districts have to actually report these people to the Board of Educational Examiners within 30 days.

So stopping child predators, making sure that we have funding for the DNA rape kit backlog that existed.

Guess what?

We supported that at the federal level.

Now that backlog is down to zero.

So people are going to actually get justice.

So these are all policies that I've worked on in addition to trying to get victims' rights enshrined into our state constitution.

So nothing could be further from the truth.

And again, if you're watching and you're a victim of crime, I would say that Josh Turrick, that is disqualifying to have him as your U.S.

Senator, because if he's willing to lie about this, he will do or say anything to get elected.

And again, just to make sure that everything is clear.

You're not trading stocks.

You divested after you came to Congress.

So I suppose they could say, oh, look, her income went up.

That's because you divested because you took office, right?

I mean, that's how I'm reading it.

Yep.

In March of 2021, so I was elected in 2020.

sworn in January 3rd of 2021.

And in March of 2021, my husband and I divested of all of our publicly traded stocks.

So we have only mutual funds and ETFs.

And he has private stock in his company that he sold.

And that's, that's literally our financial portfolio.

So anybody who's trying to imply that we did something wrong after we got to Congress is lying.

I actually serve on the House Ethics Committee.

So it's an evenly balanced Republican and Democrat committee.

We go after the bad guys.

And that's what I

pride myself on in Iowans are ethical, good, hardworking people.

And I want everyone who is casting their vote for me to know that the decisions I'm making in Washington DC are not based on that.

Congress shouldn't be a casino and public service shouldn't be about enriching yourself.

And it's one of these things, I suppose, where there are nuances that are conveniently ignored in a 30 or 60 second television or radio ad.

So they can claim, well, it's technically accurate.

but it leaves a very different impression in the mind of the audience.

Is there a place in Congress for reform of campaigns in this respect?

I mean, we have First Amendment issues, we have financial issues, and I understand all of that, but is there, have we hit the tipping point to where enough people in Congress might say, you know what, maybe we should fund campaigns, we should do something to

Elevate the discourse.

All I want all I want is the truth on on these ads right and I think that's really really important as we're looking at that and we can send a cease and desist letter and we have when we think something's a bald-faced lie right and if if there's even a hint to saying how they've teed it up and it might be true in that sense then that is the problem but I think if you look at the root problem here it's the context is missing and

This comes down to if a station is really willing to do the right thing, I think in my mind.

And if you're very clear that this is clearly wrong and is clearly misleading, that's a decision that they should be making to not air that ad.

Well, and that gets us into the, you have to be so careful if you're the station, because if you censor something, then there's a complaint with the Federal Election Commission.

And that's why, again, it's a- I know it is a

slippery slope.

Yes.

Again, all I want is the truth.

And that's why when I put up an ad,

on TV that I approve.

It's something my opponent said or his voting record.

And I think that's really, really important.

Congresswoman Ashley Hinson is the Republican nominee for the U.S.

Senate in the November general election.

Ashley Hinson dot com is her website.

A final segment when Iowa Talking Points, the candidates continues at a moment.

Iowa has a wonderful heritage, and each day I'll share these stories of historic people and events with you.

I'm Jeff Stein.

Join me for the Iowa Almanac program and learn more about this great place we call home.

Now, seven days a week.

Listen on radio stations across the state via podcast or at IowaAlmanac.com.

Signs can set the tone.

Signs can direct, instruct, and motivate, and even seal the deal.

At Mud Advertising, we create signs in every shape, size, and material for clients nationwide.

From point-of-purchase displays that turn heads and drive traffic to campaign signage that brings your marketing to life.

Need to go big?

We do that too, with large format banners, trade show displays, vehicle wraps, and more.

Whatever the message, whatever the size, wherever it needs to go, whatever your signage need, call us today.

At Mud Advertising, we love it when you succeed.

You're watching Iowa Talking Points, the candidates.

Here again is Jeff Stein.

A few minutes more with current Iowa Congresswoman, Senate candidate Ashley Henson, Republican AshleyHenson.com is the website.

Again, three people running for U.S.

Senate, an open seat in Iowa.

So you have had certain things you've been interested in as a member of the House.

What sort of an agenda might you bring to the table as a member of the U.S.

Senate?

I assume some continuation of what you have done previously, but again,

One of a hundred as opposed to one of four hundred thirty five.

What's your agenda?

Well, and I certainly have a long to-do list of things that maybe we haven't quite gotten across the finish line But we're almost there.

I have a bill that I actually hope to get across the finish line yet this year the Senate just needs to take it up But it's a bill to actually enforce trade crimes laws against our adversaries who are taking advantage of us.

We talk about Making sure that we have a level playing field and when our opponents cheat it's not fair to the United States and frankly it undercuts American

manufacturing and American jobs.

And so I've been laser focused on that specifically as it comes to China.

So I'm hopeful we're able to get this piece of legislation which would allow the Department of Justice to have a little bit more resources and a dedicated task force to go after these people who are maybe shipping in steel through Canada, for example, and not labeling it as such that it's Chinese steel and then not paying what they should pay to get that into our country.

So that's just one example.

But I'm really focused on issues that affect working families.

about so many of the challenges facing our families in this state, and I want to really work to address those.

So I've introduced a six-point affordability plan to make sure we're laser focused on the areas that can affect that change as quickly as possible, whether it's feeding and fueling the world, making sure we're lowering gas prices, changing the cost of inputs for agriculture, which has driven up prices there.

They're facing some major headwinds.

Looking at healthcare, how do we hold big health insurance companies accountable?

lower the cost of prescription drugs.

When it comes to housing, how are we lowering those housing costs, both through permitting reform and allowing people to maybe save tax-free for their first home?

Childcare, which is the workforce behind the workforce.

How do we make sure we have accessible, affordable childcare no matter what your zip code is and no matter what hours you're working?

So when I look at those priorities and what I want to do on day one, I think tax certainty is probably the first place.

to start.

So when I talk about wanting to protect taxpayers, I think making the working families tax cuts provisions that we passed last year permanent would provide that certainty.

So let's make sure no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, no tax on social security is the law of the land so that more people can take advantage of those policies and have the certainty in their life to do that.

And to some degree, it's also a streamlining, is it not?

Because as I understand it, and please correct me,

There's no tax on tips, but you still have to report it and then you get a credit back.

There's no tax on Social Security, but you report it and then there's a credit back.

Simplicity in the tax code might be a good thing for all

of us.

I'm all for that.

If there's a way where we can find a way to make it more easy or easier, I should say, for people to take part in that process, I want to do that.

My most important goal though is to make sure people are keeping more of their own money.

So when I talk about no tax on tips, I had a woman come to my round table who was able to utilize that provision.

And she used the Persian to buy a new car first.

She drove Uber and then she was able to use her no tax on tips money that she had that certainty for to send her child to private school and pay for her braces.

So I think about that story that sticks out in my mind about how a good policy we passed is really helping a middle class family to live a better quality of life.

And so that's what I want to see more of.

And I think again, on day one, I'd like to see that policy become permanent.

Something you said about childcare struck me because

It could only have been said by someone who had young children as a working mother who went to work at two in the morning.

The concept of no matter what shift because we all think of

What, seven in the morning till six o'clock?

That's daycare.

But that doesn't fit very well, does it?

Yeah, we've got a lot of people.

Yeah, I was a 3 a.m.

to noon shift, whatever that, I don't know, it's not a like first or second or third shift.

It's kind of like a weird middle of the night shift.

But there are a lot of people in that same boat, right?

The first responders, healthcare workers, people who are not working bankers hours.

So I would like to see, I have a piece of legislation called the After Hours Childcare Act, but it's focused on how can we use existing funding streams.

to target those resources to incentivize child care providers to offer care during non-traditional work hours.

So that's one place where we could definitely provide relief.

And yeah, I've been there.

I've written that child care check.

I know how expensive it is.

I know how important it is to have a safe place to take your child and not have to worry about it so you can be in the workforce.

And I also know what it's like to have the conversation of, is it gonna be too expensive to do this?

But do I need to go back to work because I need the healthcare benefits, right?

And that's a conversation that we had around our kitchen table.

You know, my boys are now 15 and 13, but we had that talk when I had our boys all those years ago.

They go to school, so that takes me to the topic of education.

And one of the things that the president ran on was disbanding the Department of Education.

And I've heard from a number of

supportive Republicans who say they're still a Department of Education.

So give us a sense of any part of the president's agenda that people voted for two years ago.

Nothing has happened or we don't think anything has happened.

How does that work forward if you're in the US Senate?

Yes Well, and I think part of it is we are returning power to the states So the Department of Education looks very different today than it did two years ago I think that's what Iowans need to hear is that we want as many of those federal resources direct to the states because states know best how to educate their people and it's going to be different in every state I love the way we've done things here in Iowa where we're really focused on getting that money to

to the student and the parent and having the parent be the driver of their child's education.

And my mom was a teacher, so I grew up in a household with an art teacher as a mom.

And I know how important supporting educators is, and I believe in a robust public education system and a private education system for families to have the choice that best suits them.

Look, I think the president has some good policies on making sure we're returning it to the states.

I don't think closing it overnight is the right approach.

Like earlier when we were talking about

If you're going to make a change in a policy, not ripping the rug out, there are a lot of considerations like our loan programs and who administers those.

Where does that go?

And so some of those shifts have happened.

But what I do support across the board, across government, is getting rid of government bloat, finding ways where we can be more efficient.

If one hand doesn't know what the other hand's doing or being duplicative, that's not a good service to the taxpayer.

No matter if it's at the Department of Education, at SBA, at Homeland, you name it.

We have just a couple of minutes left.

You're asking Iowans to cast a vote for you for U.S.

Senate.

I'll let you take our remaining time and make the case directly to them.

All right.

Well, thank you, Jeff.

And thank you, everyone, for watching today and hearing me out as I work to earn your vote to become your next U.S.

Senator.

My name is Ashley Hinson.

I'm a minivan driving mom trying to drive common sense back into Washington, D.C.

And this election is going to be about a choice.

It's going to be whether we move our country forward or whether we go back to disastrous policies of the past.

And that's what Josh Turrick would do.

He'll raise your taxes.

He'll support a wide open border.

And he'll be a reliable vote for Chuck Schumer to take our country back to the brink of that cliff.

I want to see us move forward.

So again, what's at stake?

I said I want to support taxpayers.

I voted for tax relief direct to working families.

My opponent wants to raise your taxes.

He's talked about a 50% corporate tax rate and a 91% marginal tax rate.

We talk about supporting rural America.

I'm showing up for Iowa's farmers who feed and fuel the world, whether that's to support policies like E15 or the Farm Bill and standing against California's disastrous Prop 12, which would over supersede Iowa family farms who know how to do that best.

My opponent didn't even bother to show up for the Iowa Farm Bill vote at the state Capitol this year.

Skip 58% of his.

So he's not showing up for Iowa farmers.

And finally, if you want a safe and secure country, I'm your person.

I have advocated for a strong and safe border, making sure our law enforcement can do their jobs and stay funded.

My opponent, called Immigration Enforcement.

fundamentally wrong and un-American and voted to allow your taxpayer benefits to go to illegal immigrants and to make it harder for our local sheriffs to work with ICE.

I think that's wrong.

It makes our country less safe.

And if you want the cartels back in power, then support Josh Turrick.

If you want a safe and secure country, then I'm the person you want to support.

So I'm asking for your vote to be Iowa's next U.S.

Senator and continue delivering common sense to Washington, D.C.

Congresswoman, thank you for the time.

Good luck on November 3rd.

Thank you, Jeff.

Appreciate you having me.

Thank you for coming in.

And she's Ashley Henson, Republican, won the June primary, the nominee for U.S.

Senate, AshleyHenson.com.

And that brings us to the close of this edition of Iowa Talking Points, The Candidates.

As always, we thank you for watching.

This has been Iowa Talking Points, The Candidates, produced by Studio 5 at Mud Advertising and totally Iowa Media.

For more information on this series, go to IowaTalkingPoints.com.

It is always a privilege to welcome the co-founder and president of Convention of States Action, Mark Mechler, to KXEL, conventionofstates.com, is the website.

Mr. Mechler, good morning and thank you for the time.

Good morning, great to be with you, my friend.

Remind folks, Convention of States Action, who are you folks and what do you do?

Yeah, so Article 5 of the US Constitution gives us a way to restrain the federal government.

We all know it's out of control.

We can call a convention of states and propose amendments to limit the federal government.

We could propose a term limits amendment.

Everybody wants that.

I think we need to term limit staffers and bureaucrats as well.

We can propose a balanced budget amendment.

and tax caps and spending caps to limit their spending.

And most importantly, we can limit our power.

One of the things we can do, Jeff, that I think everybody wants right now is we can overturn what's called the Barbara decision, which allowed birthright citizenship, illegals to come here, have babies.

They're automatically citizens.

Supreme Court got that wrong.

We can fix it with a convention of states, and folks can find that at conventionofstates.com.

I wanted to have you on and because, again, your insight is so valuable in so many ways, but we're 25 days before Election Day.

Early voting's been in place in some areas of the country for weeks now.

Let's talk about the key points of turnout.

It seems to me we have a larger slice of independence than ever.

They're harder to predict.

They don't have the loyalty of wearing the red jersey or the blue jersey.

So what thoughts do you have about turnout and how that's being impacted by some news coverage these days?

Yeah, there are two different kinds of elections.

One I would call an issue election and two is a turnout election.

And an issue election focuses on a particular issue that seems to be the hot, but there's a little of that in this election.

I would argue the Iran war is a little bit and the economy is a little bit, but mostly this is a philosophical election.

And what it's really about and why that means a turnout election is just, what do you believe broadly speaking?

It's not on the issues.

And so people who believe that the country should swing towards communism, socialism,

giant welfare programs government in charge of any everything that's one side of the philosophy the others are those of us who believe in self-governance in the principles of the founders in the framers the question is which side is going to turn out that is generally an advantage to the democrats but it's an enthusiasm question right now the polling shows that on the base the enthusiasm is equal at seventy one percent of the base on both sides so that means it's a toss-up game

I can rarely think of an election where the two sides are so diametrically opposed in virtually every race.

It's not like you go to the polls and say, well, they're pretty close.

I'm not sure who to vote for.

There are clear choices up and down the ballot in virtually every race I'm aware of.

Yeah, and that is what makes this a philosophical election and that's a turnout election because

It's not like you're going to go and be wondering who to vote for.

It's not like the issues are not completely clear and totally crystallized.

Almost everybody has an opinion on the issues.

So it's going to be who can get their team out.

And normally Republicans are not as good at this, but I would argue that while the Democrats don't like it, it's a Trump election again.

And Trump is extraordinarily good at turning out his base.

He said, specifically, you got to consider me on the ballot.

And I think that's true.

Because obviously if the Democrats win the House of Representatives, there's going to be an immediate impeachment.

There's going to be investigations and all of that stuff is going to stymie the Trump agenda.

And I don't think his base would be very happy about

that.

I have suggested very similar things.

You've got the Trump base, which may be separate from the Republican base, but you need both of them to show up on November 3rd.

and then get the appropriate slice of independence in order to win in most of these elections, which frankly I don't think favor incumbents regardless of whether the incumbents are Republican or a Democrat.

That smells to me like we've got a lot of unrest out there in the land.

Yeah, I think that is a perfect analysis that the base on the right is fractured and the base on the left is fractured.

So the question is, who is advantaged by that?

And I do think it's Republicans.

And the reason I say that is because you've got the Trump base.

They're going to come out.

They're going to vote for Trump.

And then you've got what I would describe as the Republican base, the non-Trump Republican base.

And even if they don't like Trump, they are appalled by what they're seeing on the left.

They don't like communism.

They don't want the prisons done away with.

They believe in funding the police.

They don't want boys and girls sports.

They don't want transgender mutilation on kids.

And so they're going to vote out of disgust for the opposition.

I don't think that the left has that in the same way the Democrat Party.

You've got the radical left of the base and they're going to be enthused and they're going to come out of vote.

The folks that are just sort of the regular Democrat base, everything I just described, they don't like either.

And so they're not going to be enthused to come out and vote.

And I think that makes the difference in this election.

Mark Mechler is our guest.

Mr. Mechler is co-founder and president of Convention of States Action.

He was a co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots Movement some what 16 years ago already or so and he joins us live on News Talk 1540 KXEL.

Now we got rid of straight ticket voting in the state of Iowa some years ago and so you've got to actually fill in the oval with your pencil up and down the ticket.

I wonder how many I'm interested in your thoughts.

I wonder how many people, especially some of those Democrats you mentioned, may just skip a race.

In other words, they'll go to vote, but they're not going to vote in every contest.

Certainly not going to flip to the other side, but it'll just be a no vote.

And I'm wondering if we're going to see more of that in those states.

Yeah, I think we will with a caveat what you just described requires an educated voter Yes, they have to look at the races.

They have to know the races I think this is going to have an impact and it's important are the really notable races where you have folks for example that are really radical there's been a lot of PR around it in those places you might have the left skip the election and It's possible by the way that you might have the right skip the election to

I'll give you an example.

I'm here in Texas, and I think that's a real factor.

I think just regular Democrats here in Texas, they're not voting for Tallerico.

A lot of them are Christians.

They think he's, you know, to put it lightly, they think he's a blasphemer and a heretic.

And so they're not going to pull the lever for him.

And then, but you look on the right and Paxton has a bunch of baggage and I'm voting for Ken and I like Ken, but he's got baggage.

And I think you've got folks on the right that are just not going to vote for him.

There's all this talk about changing rules for voting and people who are taking things to court Right to the last minute.

I mean cases that are still pending.

How's that?

Do you think impacting the potential turnout where again?

It's like the the rules aren't even set in many of these places

Yeah, I think it's impacting it.

It's a wild card I don't know how much but we've got litigations pending all over the country and those litigations make things very uncertain

One of the best examples of this is Missouri.

And Missouri has been going back and forth and back and forth about what even are the districts going to be.

I think it's finally settled out now, but it causes voters to not want to vote.

They don't know what's going on.

It's just confusing.

It's messy.

It seems corrupt to them.

Even the litigation, just the fact that it's going back and forth.

And so I think that could suppress turnout in places where you have active litigation pending that's very public.

speed in Missouri that was where Ed Martin did an awful lot of his work as a professional and having left the Trump administration setting up his own law firm he was on the program within the past week and The story supposedly is that he wanted or people wanted him to be ready as a lawyer not tied to the government in case there needed to be lawsuits filed for shenanigans And I'm just wondering if you're aware of any efforts

to make sure that lawyers are in place, if you will, across the country.

The Democrats have done that before.

Yeah, I think Republicans did a horrendous job of this in 2020.

They were unprepared.

Democrats were very prepared.

And I think that ultimately was a part of why we lost in 2020.

In 2024, the Republicans did a much better job of this.

They were much more prepared.

There are a lot more volunteer lawyers available.

I'm a little bit intimate with this.

My son is a lawyer who had worked for America First Legal at the time, and he was one of the volunteers that was sent out into the field.

And so I think by 2026, we're ready for those fights all over the country.

I think they're well-funded.

Interestingly, when you look at the money in the bank, the parties on a state basis and on a national basis, the Republican Party has a tremendous fundraising advantage, that advantage.

roughly 130 million, 136 million in the bank for Democrats, about a billion dollars for Republicans at the party level.

That evens out a bit in the high profile races between the candidates themselves and the PAC supporting the candidates.

But on a party basis, the Republicans are way ahead and that helps build out infrastructure.

I would suggest that because of polling itself, how it has evolved

become to some degree more difficult respondents who don't trust it, the larger number of independence, that all put into the stew pot comes up with the fact that it's just blessed hard to predict what might be happening.

And I think this may, we may be back to the old days where, gosh, we may actually have to count the votes before we figure out who wins.

Yeah, look I my personal opinion is like if I had to use one word to describe polling in modern America The word would be garbage.

Yes, it's just terrible and it's they pretended some sort of science.

It's at this point.

It's not even black magic.

It's nothing and People like you and me and everybody we know we don't respond to polls if we do we just mess with the polls So we know that Republicans are under sampled or they're giving false answers

the real base never responds and so they're just guessing at republicans because we don't trust it.

I think you have issues where the broader a poll is the more that poll sort of flattens out and you get false numbers because in a given state you could have a district or two that go wildcard and flip a race and that can make the whole difference.

They never pull down to the district so we just have no idea what's going on.

Those are we talked initially about turnout that's where turnout matters right on the ground at the district level.

so one or two districts do an incredible job at turnout because their local parties good or other groups are good back in flip a race i would also point out that in twenty twenty four when you look at the polling that the mainstream media all the polling all the big polling companies were off between five and nine point well five and nine point is enough to swing every single major race that's in the news right now so i just think the polling is way off

And I suppose if it's consistently off, as it appears to be, you could make the assertion that this is an attempt to disenfranchise Republicans because you think, well, so-and-so, so far behind in the polls, why bother voting?

And then that depresses the Republican voter turnout.

And I think we know that's absolutely true.

Look, I can't think of a place where a poll showed

that the democrats were way behind when they were where they where it was mistaken in that way it's always against the republicans another interesting factors if you look at those polls and they'll show the republicans way behind us depressing potentially republican turnout you'll notice that those polls close as we get closer to the election i think part of the reason for that is the pollsters

start pulling more realistically because in order to preserve their reputation, they can't be that far off when they get to the final stretch.

Final question for Mark Mechler of convention of states action convention of states.com.

Are you hearing anything about some sort of not necessarily an October surprise, but some sort of big election moving national issue or is this going to be

an election where it's subject to what we hear in our local congressional district or in our states

the

last couple of weeks before the election.

Is there a national event that could turn this as opposed to these local ones?

I guess I'm asking.

Yeah, I mean I haven't heard of anything.

I'm not hearing any buzz about anything in particular.

I discussed that question with a lot of people.

None of us can think of anything in particular that could actually flip the election.

And again, remember, we'll go back to where we started.

It really is a turnout election.

It's not an issues election.

So some big issue blowing up, unlikely to affect the national race.

Mark Mechler is the co-founder and the president of conventionofstatesactionconventionofstates.com.

Excellent analysis as always, sir.

It's always a privilege when you have time to join us.

Come back again soon.

Thanks, Jeff.

God bless you.

God bless you and take good care.

Mark Mechler of conventionofstatesactionconventionofstates.com.

And he joined us live on the news line on News Talk 1540, KXEL, where Iowa comes to talk.

It is always a privilege to make connection with America's Money Answers man, Jordan Goodman.

He joins us at least twice a month.

We're going to talk to him today.

We get the pleasure of talking to him again next week as well.

Mr. Goodman, thank you for the time.

Appreciate it.

Great to be with you, Jeff.

So we're in this country focused on an election.

We're focused on a hurricane, and I think that what may not be getting the attention it deserves is what's breaking out, not just in France, but other European nations as well.

Folks aren't happy.

Very much so.

Massive demonstrations and riots in France, but also in Belgium, Netherlands, Spain, Austria, Germany, all kinds of different places.

It's a combination of things.

A lot of it is Islamic, tons of Islamic people have come into Europe the last few years, and they're not happy, and they're doing pro-Palestinian kind of demonstrations.

There's austerity because these countries have spent more than they really can afford.

They have these huge deficits now, so they're having to cut back on various social services and funds to education so people don't like cutbacks in that area.

It's just kind of fed on itself right now.

So I mean, the scenes you see from not only Paris, but all over France are just very violent.

I mean, the police are wrecking people's heads and the students are burning up schools.

It's really quite, quite violent.

I think the impact of this is going to be a resurgence of the right wing part of Europe.

In France, they have elections next year.

And all this, I think, just feeds Marine Le Pen, the right wing party.

who's very anti-immigrant, to come and save people from all this violence.

I think the same is going to be true in Germany and other places as well.

So the people that are protesting are not going to get what they want.

They're going to get less than what they want if the right wing takes over.

Well, and to the point you were just making, it's breaking out now in France, but that is going to inspire others similarly situated throughout Europe to do much of the same thing.

What I find interesting is

you have these governments running deficits so they're trying to get the fiscal house back in order that means cutting services that's angering one segment of the population but you you might have this uh... this uh... riot or demonstration with multiple different groups of people complaining about different things the the one thing they have in common is anti-government but boy that's enough to move the needle isn't it

yeah so in them in the market uh... the

bonds of these countries, like the French government and the German government and so on, the yields are rising pretty sharply because the investors are worried that these governments are not going to be able to pay the debts.

So it's in the short term causing interest rates to rise and make it more difficult for them to get out of these deficits in a certain way.

So they can ride all they want, but it's not going to have the impact they want, which is to get the services back.

The higher interest rates go,

The more the governments have to cut back in order to be able to pay their debts.

Now, the left wing head in France, named Melanchom, said, well, we should just default on the debt.

Just lose all the investors.

We don't care.

That just makes people even more nervous about the whole situation, because that's never going to work.

I was going to say, just not paying the debt is not exactly going to inspire confidence for investors.

To be sure and there are a lot of things about the American representative democracy in our system that folks may want to emulate but 40 trillion dollars of debt is not one of them I might suggest.

Well they're trying.

Great.

They're trying.

I mean in France it's about four trillion in debt so to give you a sense of comparison we've been out much longer than they have but it's a smaller economy as well and they're used to all kinds of government benefits including for a lot of people who

are illegal who are coming in from north africa we're getting all kinds of benefits and in many cases not working uh... it's just tremendous strain on the government they just can't handle it anymore so they've they've got to do some austerity and whenever they do any austerity in france particularly you know they strike and they protest and they they give in and i remember last year the french were trying to raise the retirement age and pension from sixty two to sixty four and that caused like a mess

general strike over the entire country to do something as small as that.

Jordan Goodman, his America's Money Answers man, he joins us live on News Talk 1540 KXEL.

Well, I drive to work and I go by a couple of gas stations every day and it's almost like looking at the tote board for the lottery.

The numbers go up, the numbers go down.

There's no rhyme nor reason to it, but oil prices remain high in the Middle East.

Well, they're going up more.

Price per barrel is now over $100 a barrel, almost to $105 a barrel.

The Strait of Hormuz is still pretty much closed.

They're shooting the ships left and right there.

The Red Sea is now highly contested.

The Hooties are taking over a lot of the Saudi facilities.

The Saudis are fighting back.

So those are the two main choke plates.

Well, it's not only oil, it's natural gas, it's fertilizer.

It's all kinds of things that are not being able to get through.

So the higher price is clearly a problem.

But also, it's a shortage.

Just literally, there's not going to be enough oil and natural gas.

The heat homes in Europe this winter, people may literally freeze to death because of what's going on in the Middle East.

Now, the negotiations are pretty much broken down.

Have any kind of ceasefire or peace agreement between Iran and the US.

And we're now adding another aircraft carrier contingent.

So I think it's highly likely that the war is about to escalate dramatically.

We're going to bomb them, including

civilian infrastructure and their electricity plants and ridges and so on.

And the Iran is going to shoot at all the Gulf states, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, UAE, and Israel.

So it just seems to me that's the way things are going to go.

The peace has not been given a chance here, and it's going to escalate dramatically, which will mean our prices will go up even higher.

And again,

When you started our conversation, we were talking about riots in Europe.

If you don't have fuel to heat with come the winter, that just is feeding into the discontent.

I mean, you can just see Domino's continue to fall throughout with no end in sight on multiple fronts, obviously.

Right.

I mean, this is already happening.

For example, in Russia, where Ukraine has bombed a lot of the refineries, there are lines to

get gas miles long.

They don't have enough gas to get around, and heat their homes as well.

Normally, they call it Father Winter in Russia as a good defense against invading armies, like the Germans and Napoleon.

But in this case, it's the opposite.

Iran has taken out their refinery.

Ukraine has taken out their refineries, and they may freeze to death in Russia as well.

That's the situation we're in here.

Jordan Goodman, America's Money Answers Man on News Talk 1540, KXEL.

So the Treasury yields, the 10-year, the 30-year, these rates just keep going up.

Dramatically so.

This week, the Treasury yield on the 10-year went up to 5.4%, which is the highest since 2002.

This is really a dramatic increase, and it's several things.

The concern about inflation that we've just talked about because of the oil price going up and probably going to go up more, it's the budget deficits widening, and the war is adding another few hundred billion to our spending that we didn't have before.

So the treasury yields go up and everything tied to that goes up.

So this week, the 30-year mortgage rate went up to 7.4%, which really hurts the housing market.

People just can't afford these kind of mortgage rates and housing prices.

And the housing is a key part of the economy.

When people buy homes, they buy furniture, and carpeting, and TVs, all kinds of stuff that go in, and that doesn't happen if people don't buy homes.

So these rising interest rates, because of what's happening in the Middle East, are really impacting people on the ground here in America right now, particularly in the housing market.

OK, Axial, listeners sent this email.

Can you think of any good reason why we did not lock in more 30-year treasuries when interest rates were in the basement?

There were a lot of people that said they should do that.

But they didn't.

They kept the interest rates, they kept the maturities relatively short.

And that's not possible now.

We have the 10 year treasury at 5.4.

Back in the COVID days, it was like 1% or something like that.

Remember the Fed Reserve at zero for a long time.

So that would have been a good idea.

And people talked about the time, but they didn't do

it.

Again, so much of this, and this was the case, was it not, with the government buying back on some of these securities, it's a gamble.

But boy, when it doesn't pay off the multiplier of that interest, that's hard to get.

But the interest creates, and so all those bombs that were issued, like in 2001 and 2020, all these ones are now maturing at higher rates.

So say you had a bond at 2,021 at 1%, a five-year bond is now maturing, instead of paying 1%, you're gonna pay 5%, something like that.

So that in itself raises the amount of interest we have to pay, which is well over a trillion dollars now, and it's just kind of multiplying exponentially here.

And a thank you to KXEL listener John for the excellent questions and your questions, Jeff at kxel.com.

or send a text 319-235-1540 and you can connect with Mr. Goodman anytime.

Jordan at moneyanswers.com.

That's his email.

He'll get back to you.

Jordan Goodman, America's Money Answers man, joining us live on News Talk 1540 KXEL.

You know the deal's official when they start repainting the water tower.

on the uh... on the

uh... no skydance water towers they're right

i mean you know they uh... it's it's like the the it's not exactly putting trump's name on the kennedy center but uh... they added a skydance company to the famous uh... warner logo on the uh... studio lot so that's now a done deal

but this week that the finally closed the uh... paramount skydance election is calling it skydance uh... took over water brothers discovery for a hundred and eleven billion dollars

The company has $82 billion in debt because of this deal.

And so it's just a massive consolidation in the media business.

In the streaming world, Paramount Plus and HBO are now under one banner.

CBS, CBS News, and CNN are now under one banner.

Paramount Studio and Warner Brothers TV and movie studios are under one banner.

There are a whole bunch of cable channels and sports rights.

That's not part of this colossus There's going to be a lot of layoffs because there's a lot of duplication between the two companies And the overlapping functions This was very hard fought you remember originally Netflix had made a bid for Warner Brothers Discovery and then Paramount beat them and then back and forth the investment bankers are getting very rich on this one for sure and Paramount which is now skydance is

triumphant and feeling very good about this and I think a lot of the employees are going to get laid off for probably not feeling so good about it.

When you mentioned the sports rights, CBS, part of this deal, and Turner Network Television, TNT, TBS, they had been sharing costs and sharing the rights to some of the NCAA basketball tournament games.

This has gone on for some period of time, but they still operated with separate and distinct crews and so now you've got

all these major sports rights under one rough so not only are you gonna have the layoffs but you have fewer competitors in the marketplace bidding for these sports rights and that might change that landscape within the next 10 or 15 years.

It's

possible, but other players have come in.

For example, Netflix is now doing some live sports, Amazon is now doing some live sports, Apple.

So some of the big tech giants are actually getting into the sports rights game as well.

But as far as the pure plays, you're right.

They're all under one.

So they're not competing with each other anymore.

It's hard to figure out how widespread the impact of this merger is going to be.

But it's going to take quite a while.

And I don't think it's a good thing.

But it happened.

And the Trump administration basically likes all mergers.

So they let it go through probably under Biden.

This would have been stopped.

My understanding, and I may have it wrong, and I'm

Wouldn't be surprised if I was wrong, but I thought I saw where in order to avoid especially California, but states from objecting Not that they would have had much grounds necessarily, but it would have just gummed up the works and delayed things Paramount and Warner Brothers as studios will still operate independently from one another

Yes, I made a pledge

to spend one and a half billion dollars on films for a year.

They had threatened, Warner Brothers and Paramount threatened, that if they didn't get their way, they were going to take their movie operations out of California and bring it to Nashville.

And that kind of said, I don't think we want to lose that.

The California Attorney General kind of caved on that one.

But yes, at the moment, they're still going to operate separately, but this probably won't last forever.

And other than layoffs of employees, which I don't dismiss, but there probably will not be much significant change for the next six months just to let the dust die down because they're talking about Paramount Plus, HBO, their two different streaming services, HBO Plus or Max, I don't know what they call it these days, but they're talking about that may merge, you know, the CBS CNN things.

You probably won't see too much structural for a while.