[MUSIC]

 

Brian Lehrer: Brian Lehrer on WNYC. Before we talk about tariffs and midterm politics, in light of Friday's Supreme Court decision, which we will or how the actual Democratic Socialists of America group is judging Mayor Mamdani so far, which we will, we'll update the storm and safety conditions first. First of all, thank you to anyone who has to work outside or go outside to get to work in this.

Sanitation workers, first responders of all kinds, hospital staff, oh, nurses, aren't you glad your strike is over just in time to go out and be an essential worker in a blizzard? The New York City travel ban, really a driving ban on the streets, highways, and bridges, remains in effect for two more hours until noon, except for essential workers. Now the ban includes trucks, if you didn't know, which means your Amazon package or supplies for neighborhood stores and other deliveries are being delayed as part of that.

DoorDash I saw announced that they've suspended their operations for the moment. Not sure about the other delivery apps. Check your local listings. You know that schools are closed with no remote learning day this time in the city, as well as just about everywhere in the area. The law allows the New York State Education Department to issue a waiver for extreme weather for up to five days a year without reducing state aid.

The formula is the schools get X dollars from the state per day that they're open, and it has to be 180 days, but they can waive a few for a few different reasons, including extreme weather, and this time they did. I don't know why they didn't the other time, but this is the first full snow day in the city since 2019. Warming buses and fully indoor warming spaces are open around the city.

They say 22 warming buses and the warming centers at 11 city-run hospitals and 13 schools are open, an important thing, obviously, after almost 20 New Yorkers have died in the cold this year. The mayor said homeless outreach teams are out there to get people to accept shelter. He has said in the past that the standards for involuntary removal from the streets is the same as under Mayor Adams.

We're going to talk later in the show to the borough presidents of Brooklyn and Queens about how that's being applied in their boroughs, as well as other conditions around the city, with the beeps coming up in about an hour. Listeners, if you want to alert the city of any apparently homeless people who you think need shelter or other help, anyone can call 311 or 212 New York, 212 New York, or 311.

The entire Long Island Railroad is suspended, right? All of NJ Transit shut down as well. Metro-North trains are running on a limited schedule. Few subway lines are suspended and whole or in part, and some express lines are running local. I can't go into every change on every subway line. That would take too long. Just check mta.info if you need those specifics. Here's a little local color. There's a CBS local story called "Snowplow driver on Long Island says Cruz couldn't see the roads."

It says, "A snowplow driver said he has been on the Long Island road since Sunday night, plowing the same spots repeatedly." Tyler McCarthy, somewhere in Suffolk County, said he has to plow the same spot over and over because it just keeps coming, and he said the visibility went nowhere, and you couldn't see the road, couldn't see the lanes. That should also be an indication for everybody else who's not driving a snowplow to stay off if you can. Power outages, more than 50,000 New Jersey customers have reportedly been without power. Here's Governor Sherrill, who was on with us on Morning Edition earlier.

Governor Sherrill: We have over 5,000 utility workers on the ground here in New Jersey. Many of the companies called in mutual aid to have workers come in from places like Ohio to be ready for this storm. With the heavy wet snow and the winds we were expecting, we knew we'd have some power outages, and unfortunately, that's been the case. We've had over 200,000 outages. Over half of those have-

Michael Hill: Wow.

Governor Sherrill: -already been restored in really difficult conditions, and this is why these travel bans are so important.

Brian Lehrer: Governor Sherrill, and you heard Michael Hill giving a little wow to some of those numbers there. That's New Jersey. In New York, Con Ed says about 3,000 Con Ed customers, that's New York City and Westchester, out, plus around 4,000 PSE&G customers on Long Island. I looked at their power outage maps, which the power companies have online, and the outages are very scattered in New York. Just a few here and there. No pattern that I was able to discern.

In Jersey, it looks like there have been some concentrations in Jersey City and south of around Woodbridge, but in fairness, all those numbers are from earlier this morning, and as the Governor said, some have already been restored. Now, if you are experiencing a power outage, and I thought this might be a good service to go over some of this, here are some safety tips from a New York State emergency services page.

It says, "Turn off major appliances to prevent damage from a possible surge when the power comes back on. Keep one light turned on so you know when power returns. Call your utility provider to notify them of the outage." That's a good idea. Don't assume that somebody else did. It says, "If you go outside, avoid all downed power lines and report them to your utility provider for repair.

"Assume all downed power lines have live electricity. Check to see if your neighbors have power. Use only flashlights for emergency lighting. Candles pose the risk of fire. Keep your refrigerator and freezer doors shut to keep food from spoiling. When in doubt, throw it out," it says. "Do not use a charcoal grill or generator indoors, and do not use a gas stove for heat." That's important. "Do not use a gas stove for heat. They could give off harmful levels of carbon monoxide.

Finally, relevant to this, it says, "In cold weather, stay warm by dressing in layers and minimizing time spent outdoors. Be aware of cold stress symptoms, hypothermia symptoms, and seek proper medical attention if symptoms appear." Hopefully, those things from the New York State Department of Emergency Services will help keep you safe if you do have a power outage.

One other piece of advice, besides watching for downed power lines, if you're outside, watch for falling tree limbs, because they can kill, and they can cause permanent injury. Now, this storm is different than the one a few weeks ago, with different chemistry and different risks and hazards. It's warmer. Here's a little snow chemistry, snow science. It's warmer now than it was in the first storm. It's windier.

The snow is deeper, as you no doubt know, right in the metro area, not just in the mountains, where it always gets deeper. Locally at the neighborhood level, there are areas of especially deep snow that you should watch for from what they call snow bands, which can take hours to move through an area and bring it really heavy snow and even worse visibility, and also, of course, drifts can build up anywhere from the wind.

Also, the warmer temperatures, and this is another safety thing as well as a little fun thing that I'll bake in here, but the warmer temperatures tend to make the snow wetter and denser. Be careful because 12 inches of this wetter and denser snow might be heavier to shovel than 12 inches of the lighter, fluffier stuff that fell in the previous storm. Be careful for heart attack and back injury reasons, for example. This snow is heavier per shovelful.

One final thought, the light fluffy snow from last time didn't pack into good snowballs. As a public service, I did test this snow outside, and wow, does it make great snowballs. Once you can stand being outside and once it's safe, go and have some fun. Now, here's one way to look at tomorrow night's State of the Union address, and it might be a way that many Republican members of Congress are looking at it, if they're running for reelection in competitive districts.

An article this month in The Atlantic is called "Trump Is Doubling Down on All the Wrong Things. Republicans are worried about the midterm elections, but the President doesn't seem to be." The author of that article joins us. To begin the week. It's Jonathan Lemire, staff writer at The Atlantic and co-host of MS NOW's Morning Joe, and with 10 years now of covering the White House under his belt. Jonathan, always good of you to stay up. Way too late for us after your morning show. Welcome back to WNYC.

Jonathan Lemire: Happy to be here on this snowy Monday.

Brian Lehrer: We'll get to the fallout from Friday's Supreme Court tariffs ruling. Also, are we on the brink of an actual regime change war with Iran? I saw you on TV last hour, ticking down the list of bad poll numbers for the President right now on issues from the economy to immigration to RFK vaccine stuff. Give us more on the premise of your article before the most-watched political event of the year tomorrow night.

Jonathan Lemire: Well, there's no question that what used to be considered Trump's two biggest strengths, his handling of the economy and his handling of immigration, have now become real political weaknesses, real liabilities. On immigration, though Americans still are pleased that he largely closed the southern border, they have found, and we ticked through some of those polls in the last hour on Morning Joe, that they do not care for the heavy-handed tactics, the mass deportations of nonviolent criminals and, of course, these scenes of violence that we saw on the streets of Minneapolis, which claimed the lives of two Americans.

More than anything, President Trump was reelected to be a steward of the nation's economy and combat inflation, and there's a sense from many, including also many who voted for him, that he's simply not doing that, that he's taken his eye off the ball. He's focused on the wrong things. I know we'll dive into the tariffs in a few minutes, but even this, his insistence that the tariffs should be put in place to come up with alternative means to do so, I will say a number of Republicans have publicly and privately said that they wish he wouldn't.

They feel like the Supreme Court actually offered him something of a lifeline by overturning his tariffs because they weren't really helping the economy and certainly weren't driving costs down, but he's a president right now who has seen his power until very recently largely be unchecked in this second term, and he seems to be governing by whim and impulse, and a lot of Republicans fear that if his poll numbers plummet, he's to going to take them down with him.

Brian Lehrer: Listeners, I want to invite you to help us start to report the impact of the tariffs ruling. Are you involved in any affected business? How will it affect your business? 212-433-WNYC, if anybody out there taking a snow day, maybe working remotely or just listening anyway, has a take on this. 212-433-WNYC, help us report on the impact of the tariffs ruling, if you're in a business that might be affected in any way. 212-433-9692.

You can call, or you can text, or any other comment or question for any of the things that we'll be talking about with Jonathan Lemire from The Atlantic and MS NOW. 212-433-WNYC, call or text. 212-433-39692. How about those down poll numbers on Trump and the economy, Jonathan? Those polls were presumably taken before the tariffs ruling. What were those about?

Jonathan Lemire: You're right that they were. I think it was the idea that, well, first of all, the tariffs were in place, and I think there's a perception even among Americans who don't fully understand them, perhaps that they're not helping, that they've driven up costs or at least not reduced them. I think there is a sense, and frankly, the Supreme Court seized upon this idea that Trump was haphazardly applying them and used them as a political cudgel to punish his foes, and I think that was not sitting well with people.

Also, there's just a sense of uncertainty that, because the tariffs, even before Friday's relief, Trump kept adjusting them or occasionally would blink and roll them back. It would just create this sense of uncertainty that we've made it very hard for American businesses to thrive, to plan, to grow as they want, and that, in turn, kept the economy humming at a lower rate than perhaps some people feel, and I think there is also this real sense of stratification.

I think that we have seen that play out a number of other political races, including for mayor of New York City, in the last few months, that the Trump economy seems to be working for those at the top, and he keeps touting the stock market and the Dow, but it's not working for much of the country. They feel very left behind by his policies.

Brian Lehrer: By the way, just as a side note on having played the Trip Shakespeare's Snow Days clip earlier, listener writes, "It's especially cool to hear Trip Shakespeare on WNYC with their Minneapolis roots." I didn't know they had Minneapolis roots, but see, even a little fun Snow Day piece of music can tie into how people are feeling about the national situation right now. On the tariffs, here is Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent saying not much will actually change, despite the Supreme Court ruling Friday that struck some of them down.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent: This administration will invoke alternative legal authorities to replace the IEEPA Tariffs. We will be leveraging Section 232 and Section 301 tariff authorities that have been validated through thousands of legal challenges. Treasury's estimates show that the use of Section 122 authority, combined with potentially enhanced Section 232 and Section 301 tariffs, will result in virtually unchanged tariff revenue in 2026.

Brian Lehrer: Jonathan, we'll do more on the economics of the tariffs ruling and reset with an economics expert another day, but for you as a political reporter and anchor, how do you see the early implications for the midterms, if any, of the ruling?

Jonathan Lemire: There's a lot to dig into here. First, let's just say that the Supreme Court has largely been a rubber stamp for the Trump agenda to this point. I think many found it refreshing that they acted as a bulwark here and interpreted the law towards the Constitution, including, to the surprise of some, Neil Gorsuch, a Trump appointee, put a concurring opinion out that made it clear that tariffs are the work of the legislative branch, even if it could be slow, even if it can be messy and not the work of one man, meaning the President.

There's that, and the part of that opinion from Gorsuch is a plea to Congress, "Do your job," which also is another major storyline right now. The Congress has abdicated so much of its power. The GOP-controlled Congress, particularly the House, has abdicated so much of its power and has just become a seal of approval for whatever the President wants to do. That's a storyline to watch as well, the politics of this. Is this a moment where some Republicans start to find their own voice to try to defy the President, to just reclaim some of their own authority?

There have been a few who have over this last year and change, but very few, and the majority continue to go along with what he wants, but I will say, as I reported in my piece that you cited a few minutes ago, there's a growing concern among Republicans that Trump has the wrong priorities right now, that they feel particularly maybe after filing deadlines pass or after their primaries pass, they feel they might be forced to break with the President to try to carve out a little bit of their own identity again, if his poll numbers continue to be this poor.

Tariffs, here is an opportunity for some to do just that. We had Congressman Turner, Republican from Ohio, Mike Turner, on our show a short time ago, which he made clear that he did not think these tariffs were the constitutional authority of the President of the United States. He does want Congress to step back in, but it remains to be seen if his colleagues, in particular Speaker Johnson, think the same.

Brian Lehrer: Yes. Interesting what you pointed out about Justice Gorsuch and that kind of general language about "Congress, do your job," which indicates that maybe in other cases that will come before the court about executive power versus congressional power, he may be inclined to limit Trump's assertion that he can do so much unilaterally. We'll see. Also, we should say Amy Coney Barrett, another Trump appointee, also voted with the majority here.

Two of the three Trump appointees voted to strike down at least those tariffs. Here are a couple of businesspeople calling in on the effects of the tariffs so far on them. Jay in Morris County in Jersey, you're on WNYC. Hi, Jay.

Jay: Hey, there. How are you? Good morning.

Brian Lehrer: Good morning. How's the snow where you are, by the way?

Jay: Oh, too much. Too much. I'm in Roxbury, New Jersey, in Morris County, and where I am is a higher elevation, typically get more than most of the town, but I'm a local HVAC business owner, and at least as far back as I can remember, a year about, we've been dealing with a lot of tariff issues. We get quotes on equipment. We have to pass the increased costs down to consumers. If anything, we see the direct effects every day.

Say you quote a project a year or so ago or a few months ago, and someone comes back to you and says, "Oh, can you still do it for this price?" You have to go back to your suppliers, and guess what, it's up 15%, 20%, 25%, and not only on aluminum, but copper, which directly affects the HVAC industry. I think not only our general contractors, but even our residential clients are really feeling the squeeze.

Brian Lehrer: In light of that story, Jay, one of the things I've been hearing since the ruling is that there's a question about whether individual businesses like yours might be eligible for refunds from the federal government under this ruling because of those costs that you incurred on the basis of if those were the illegal tariffs. Have you thought about that?

Jay: This is kind of the first time I'm hearing about it. As far as I understood, only the big businesses were getting their refunds for this one.

Brian Lehrer: That could be, I don't know. Jay, thank you very much. Good luck out there. Jonathan, anything on the refunds?

Jonathan Lemire: It seems to be an open question. We have a few experts on this morning who said they just simply don't know. The Supreme Court didn't weigh in on that. Bessent said that a lower court ruling may be applicable here. We should note the story we just heard there from that caller, pretty common throughout the country, that the tariffs are attacks on consumers and American businesses here in the United States, and that for many ways, it's being passed on to voters.

As I mentioned a short time ago, there were some Republicans who were openly rooting for the Supreme Court to do exactly what it did and strike down these tariffs and then hope that Trump would get angry and blame the court, but then walk away from them, and he's simply not doing that. We have seen global tariffs. He issued 10% on Friday and then, without warning, upped it to 15%.

He's suggesting this morning in a lengthy social media post, in which I should add as an aside, he has decided he will no longer capitalize the name Supreme Court because they're not worthy of that respect anymore, so from now on, the President's going to use lowercase for Supreme Court, the S and the C, and he's saying there could be licensing fees that they use. They're trying to come up with other ways to raise the revenue and to keep the tariffs or something akin to these tariffs in place, I think, to the dismay of many Republicans.

It speaks again that President Trump is a political chameleon. He has very few, actually, core ideologies, but one of them has always been tariffs. He's, since the 1980s, talked about how he believes in tariffs, even though many economists disagree with him, and how he suggests they be applied and what benefit they may have. He's even gone so far on a number of occasions to claim the word "tariff" is his favorite word, which is undoubtedly an odd choice, but is one that's reflective of how he feels about this, and he's simply not going to abandon them without a fight.

Brian Lehrer: He likes tariff better than onomatopoeia. Isn't that a great word, onomatopoeia? Anyway, here's another story from--

Jonathan Lemire: There are so many other good contenders, so many better contenders than "tariff."

Brian Lehrer: Another story from another business owner, Mickey, in Manhattan, you're on WNYC. Hi, Mickey. Mickey, are you there? Still there?

Mickey: Yes, I'm here. I'm here. Sorry. Yes. Thanks for having me on. Good morning.

Brian Lehrer: Hi. We have you now.

Mickey: Big fan.

Brian Lehrer: Thank you.

Mickey: Yes. Thanks for having me on. Good morning. I'm a big fan.

Brian Lehrer: Thank you. What's your business?

Mickey: I have a shoe business called Sabah. We make shoes in Turkey, in Texas, and in Italy. We're based here in New York City with a few stores around the US and actually a store in London as well. Been in business for almost 15 years, and as I said, we make in Turkey and in Italy, some importing shoes, handmade leather shoes that you really couldn't make anywhere else, and we've been hit pretty hard by those tariffs, by the tariffs, not to mention the change in euro to dollar has really put an increase on our costs as we bring in shoes, and likewise, as you make shoes in Texas as well, in El Paso, and in that instance, most of the materials we work with are having to be imported.

Even our domestic product that we make here locally, we've seen significant cost increases, and in one instance, it's forced us to increase prices, but we also understand we need to be thoughtful to our customers. On the other side, just as a business, those increased costs have impacted us and our ability to invest, our ability to hire, our ability to just operate in a healthy manner, and it's been a difficult year, a lot of things changing, and certainly tough to navigate as a small business through all this.

Brian Lehrer: Thanks for putting it all so clearly. Can you tell if the tariffs that will now be undone will change what you just described for your business, or will the tariffs that Trump has now imposed as replacement tariffs keep things steady for you?

Mickey: Yes. Well, when we first heard the news about the Supreme Court decision, we were really excited because that would have undone a lot of what we're dealing with, but if Trump's latest decision ends up imposing those tariffs, we will certainly be hit by them, and it's kind of a one-for-one for us, one replacing the other, and I think it's pretty unfortunate.

Brian Lehrer: Mickey, good luck out there. Thank you very much for chiming in. Oh, look at this. It looks like we have a caller who works for the lead plaintiff that won the SCOTUS case. Chloe in Manhattan, you're on WNYC. Hi, Chloe. Did I get that right?

Chloe: Hi, Brian. Yes, my dad and I, we are VOS Selections, wines and spirits importers, and we just won that Supreme Court case on Friday.

Brian Lehrer: Why did you bring the case? People may think, of all the businesses in America, why a wine company? What exactly do you think you won?

Chloe: Well, I think that a wine company was very attractive to the Liberty Justice Center, who took our case on pro-bono. We're a small company and never could have afforded to get to the Supreme Court without pro bono representation. Wine is not a fungible product. Just because we have amazing American wine, you can't make that amazing American wine in Europe, and vice versa.

It's really tied to its place. That's what we love about wine. You want to have a really nice Chianti with your really nice Italian sauce on a cold day like today. It's partially that. What we won was a real defense of American small business, just the fact that an American small business can sue the arguably most powerful person in the world and win, that is not possible in many countries around the world.

Yes, we know that tariffs are going to be an ongoing fight with this administration, but these IEEPA Tariffs were unconstitutional, and we ultimately want tariffs to have to go through Congress because we know that they are really unpopular. The Constitution was written with the ideal of having representation to control the purse, not one person, but a group of our representatives deciding how money was spent and collected.

Brian Lehrer: I imagine Trump might say to you, if we had you one-on-one, "Look, why don't you just focus more on wines that are from grapes that are grown in the United States? You'll employ more people here, or result in the employment of more people here, and it's more patriotic."

Chloe: I would say to that, I appreciate that, but also, let's not forget that because of these tariffs and how they're affecting everything, our American winemakers are also being impacted by tariffs with the barrels that they have to buy and all of the other wine supplies that are coming from Europe, and on top of that, they are dependent on the three-tier distribution system we have in America, where you need a distributor, and that distributor needs to buy cheaper wine from Europe in order to also be able to sell wonderful American wine.

Brian Lehrer: Chloe, thank you so much for adding your voice to this.

Brian Lehrer: Thank you, Brian, and congratulations on the win. Jonathan, interesting caller.

Jonathan Lemire: Yes, no question, that we've had a couple of good callers here who have really put a face, if you will, on the dilemmas posted by these tariffs, and you hear a sense of resignation, particularly in your caller before this one with the shoe company, that the President is still forging ahead with these tariffs. Now, he does have some constitutional authority to issue tariffs, mostly of the temporary nature, 150 days or so, and he seems like he's doing that.

Although much of what he's doing now, you can rest assured, is going to end up being litigated in court again, perhaps even working its way all the way back to the Supreme Court. It's that sense of uncertainty, the inability for businesses to plan to figure out costs and expenditures and such for the months and years and beyond ahead, that is going to continue, many economists feel, to drag down the overall feel of the economy and keep prices higher than many consumers want.

Brian Lehrer: We'll continue in a minute with Jonathan Lemire from The Atlantic and MS NOW. I will say I think Trump is going to say in the State of the Union or a way that I think he'll approach this greater affordability issue, and I'm going to ask you, Jonathan, how you think Democrats might respond to that and more as we continue here on The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC.

[MUSIC]

Brian Lehrer: Brian Lehrer on WNYC as we continue to talk about the Supreme Court's tariffs ruling, more from a political than an economic perspective for the moment, with political reporter and anchor Jonathan Lemire, who wrote an article for The Atlantic where he's a staff writer called "Trump Is Doubling Down on All the Wrong Things. Republicans are worried about the midterm elections, but the President doesn't seem to be."

He is also co-host of MS NOW's Morning Joe, and with you telling us how the tariffs or this tariff ruling affects your business or anything else for Jonathan. We'll get to a couple of other topics before we run out of time. 212-433-WNYC, call or text. 212-433-9692. Jonathan, I imagine in the State of the Union, we'll hear some of the statistics that could be spun in the President's favor.

Notably, the January inflation rate was only at a 2.4% annual pace, down from 2.7% in December, very close to the Fed's 2% target for what they consider optimal for the balance between unemployment and growth, and an indication that the tariffs have not sparked the wave of inflation that critics predicted, if inflation is only going at a 2.4% annual rate, at least not so far, so politically, that would put the ball in the Democrats' court. How do they argue tariffs are bad if they're not causing inflation?

Jonathan Lemire: I think they'll point to some of the stories we've just been hearing all morning about business owners saddled with these extra costs and consumers. I think they'll point to other metrics that show, because it's where costs are. We could point to how the GDP has not grown in the way that many economists had hoped it would. They can point to the jobs report, and even though the last one was surprisingly pretty good, there was a wave of downward revisions for the months prior, so the overall was not strong.

This president has not added jobs nearly at the pace of his predecessor, President Joe Biden. I think we will hear that. I think it'll be interesting. It's an important moment tomorrow night in this State of the Union for President Trump, who, as just noted, he and his party are somewhat wheeling and not just because of the tariffs decision, by no means, and not even just because of how unpopular his deportation plan has become.

We have seen Republicans lose elections last fall. They have lost a number of special elections in recent weeks, including in some deep red districts in places like Texas and Louisiana, not exactly Democratic strongholds there, and the idea that he's doubling down on all the wrong things we have not only-- though there are certainly Republicans who voted for him, great independents too, who might have voted for him for a strong border, let's say.

They didn't vote for the deportation program. They certainly didn't vote for a gunboat diplomacy and this international adventurism that we saw in Venezuela, and we may be on the brink of seeing again with Iran coming on the heels of threatening to do so over Greenland, and that's a story that could be revived in the months ahead, and even this idea that I think we've seen some polling that suggests starting to break through to the public the idea that President Trump is trying to personally enrich himself, he and his family by being in office.

These stories of corruption seem to be coming around more and more, he and his administration, and even things like these vanity projects like the East Wing ballroom or putting his name on the Kennedy Center and then closing it because they couldn't fill a calendar worth of events, and talking about building an arch near the Lincoln Memorial that no one seems to want. These are not the things that people were voting for 15 months ago.

Brian Lehrer: Do the polls that you're seeing give any indication that those things are voting issues when it comes to members of Congress in the midterm elections, the things you just ticked off, the East Wing Trump Ballroom project, his closing of the Kennedy Center in addition to putting his name on it for two years to redesign it in his image, the personal enrichment off the presidency? Do you think those are voting issues? Do you see any indication?

Jonathan Lemire: They add to a general feeling that his priorities are not what they should be, that he doesn't have Americans' interests at heart. We are seeing some polls, including those we talked about this morning, one with CNN, another from ABC-Washington Post, that in both polls, suggested that voters, across the board, but particularly with independents who are going to decide, most likely, this midterm elections, who feel they're broadly unhappy with what they feel like he is focused on.

Maybe it's not one particular thing. I don't know how many voters are out there who have the Kennedy Center as the number one thing on their list, but it adds to this general feeling that the President's priorities are misplaced.

Brian Lehrer: You mentioned that eye-popping election result recently in a state legislature race. Listeners, if you haven't heard this, this was a state legislature race in the Fort Worth, Texas area, generally a very red district. Jonathan, what happened?

Jonathan Lemire: Indeed. Trump won that district in November 2024, handily. Democrats had not won that district since 1978, I believe it was, and instead, there was about a 30-point swing, and the Democratic candidate, despite being badly outspent, sailed to victory. You were right to note that it came in Texas, and it was seen as a thunderclap among Republicans. We even had some, and this does not happen a lot, some Republicans go on the record saying, "Whoa, my party should wake up."

That includes the Lieutenant Governor of Texas. That includes the governor of Florida, Ron DeSantis, who are saying even as they said, "Well, look, it's a special election," and their unique circumstances, but both of them went bigger than that and said, "This might be a wake-up call for the party that we're trending in the wrong direction," and I think that is where the Republicans enter tomorrow night's State of the Union, is there's a growing fear that the upcoming midterm elections could be a bloodbath.

We know that the party that's out of power, the party that does not control the presidency, tends to do well in the off-year elections. Democrats took the House back in 2018. Republicans did very well in off-year elections when Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were in office. 2022 was a bit of an exception. Democrats, though they lost a House of Congress, actually did reasonably well, exceeded expectations.

As a side note, that's partially why President Biden decided to run again. Be careful what you wish for, I suppose, in that case, but here, Republicans have long knew the House would be hard to keep this November because margins are so slim. I think most Republicans, if given truth serum, would tell you the House, barring something unexpected, is likely gone. Things are going so poorly for Republicans right now and so well for Democrats that suddenly there's a sense the Senate could be in play.

The map's still hard for Democrats. A betting man would probably still say it stays Republican control, but the fact that Democrats can now credibly say they could swing that chamber too shows you the dire predicament for the GOP.

Brian Lehrer: Texas, where that Fort Worth local race raised everybody's eyebrows, is a state that the Democrats, I know, we hear this every cycle, Beto O'Rourke, everybody, but they are hoping to flip that US Senate seat in Texas as well, that John Cornyn currently occupies. Follow-up, though, from a listener to what you were just saying about Congress. Listener writes, "Doesn't Congress need to approve an extension of these new tariffs?"

The person writes, "If so, it puts Republicans in a very vulnerable position, as they will now be responsible for higher prices and less affordability," and that's true, right? The tariffs that Trump can still impose as replacement tariffs unilaterally come with a five-month limit before Congress would have to vote to extend them. That would be during the summer, five months from now, a very sensitive time as the midterms come closer. Political analysis of that?

Jonathan Lemire: It's completely right that all the statutes he's trying to lean on now, indeed, as you say, 150 days. He does seem like he has the ability to do that, but beyond that would require Congress. Now, Trump and his team are furiously working up other rationales to bypass Congress yet again. Trump, on Friday, in a very angry news conference he gave in the White House briefing room after the Supreme Court decision, made clear he doesn't think he needs Congress.

If he goes down that path, all that's doing, of course, is setting up a similar confrontation in the courts, and one that he very well would lose yet again. What that does in the interim, though, is you're right, if he does decide to go down both normal channels, maybe it's the five months, temporary, that he can do on his own, and then go to Congress and say, "Codify this. Get involved, as the courts say you should."

You're absolutely right. That puts Republicans in a very tricky spot, which is why so many of them hoped Trump would abandon this quest after losing the Supreme Court, and some are still holding out hope that maybe he will after those five months, but it certainly would seem unlikely, considering his rhetoric now and his decades-long belief in the concept of Tariffs.

Brian Lehrer: One last thing before we run out of time, and this, of course, could be its own long in-depth segment, and I know we did one last week, and maybe we'll do more coming up, but what are your sources telling you about how likely it is that we will actually go to war against Iran with regime change in mind, not just maybe another strike at a suspected nuclear site or something like that?

Jonathan Lemire: What I've been told is no decision has been made, but there is a growing likelihood that this could be a sustained campaign. The President would still prefer not to do that. He would prefer, I am told, to have just the threat of this armada be enough to bring the Iranians to the negotiating table and agree to a deal that he deems acceptable, or perhaps another just "limited strike" would be enough.

He is not really ruling out, I should say, not taking off the table, the idea of a much longer campaign, even if it's a little further down the road. Now, there's a whole host of questions here, like the logistics of that. How could you keep that many ships and aircraft carriers in that region for that long? If it is only a target strike, would that be enough of a deterrent? Would that get Iran to change their positions?

This would be Trump going back on his vow to not engage in new Middle East conflicts. He has grown fond of the one-off strike. We saw it in Iran in June, and even that raises the question, well, he said in June that it was a total obliteration of Iran's nuclear program. Well, it seems like that's not the case right now, and if it were to be a regime change operation, that would be weeks long or more; it would likely require American boots on the ground.

That is a very tough political sell for him, even among Republicans, and I'll just also note, finally, that the President has really not even offered a rationale for any of this. He has not made the case to the American people why the US does have this armada in the Middle East right now, why he is threatening Iran. Maybe he'll do that tomorrow night. We shall see. There are more diplomatic talks scheduled for later in the week. Maybe that'll be an off-ramp to this crisis, but right now, this is as close as we've been to a real conflict with Iran in a very, very long time.

Brian Lehrer: Well, as a closing note, Trump said in his angry news conference that the Supreme Court justices are still invited, but just barely invited, he said, to the State of the Union. Our NPR political analyst Ron Elving noted over the weekend that that's not exactly the way it works. What is the State of the Union? It's Congress inviting the President to give a speech to them. We will see what he says tomorrow night. Jonathan Lemire, staff writer at The Atlantic and co-host of MS NOW's Morning Joe, thank you again so much. We always appreciate it, Jonathan.

Jonathan Lemire: Always a pleasure. We'll do it again soon.

 

Copyright © 2026 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.