How Senate Republicans Frame the Midterms / Pope Leo Draws 800,000 in France

0:29This episode is brought to you by Charles Schwab. On the pages of The Wall Street Journal, this is Potomac Watch. Senate Republicans used their last weeks before the November election to try to frame the choice facing voters. Plus, Pope Leo wraps up a trip to France after drawing 800 ,000 people to a mass in secular Paris. Welcome, I'm Kyle Peterson with The Wall Street Journal. We're joined today by my colleagues on the WSJ's opinion pages, columnists Kim Strassel and Bill McGurn. With five weeks now to go before the midterm elections on November 3rd and mail ballots in many states already on route to voters, Senate Republicans are spending their final days before break on a flurry of votes, some of which could change law and policy, others of which look like efforts to pressure Democrats on points of potential political vulnerability.

1:20Kim, what's your sense of the dynamic here in the Senate as we get to the final days before they break it and go out campaigning? So it's all politics, politics, politics. And I mention this because in Washington, there are things that are about policy and then there are things that are engaged in just politics. Everyone's thinking about the midterms right now. And so for better or worse, a number of things that the Senate is focused on as it has its last days before it breaks for the midterms, they seem to be very much focused on giving a boost to the party, showing voters that they're thinking about some of the issues that are on voters' minds.

2:02So top of the agenda is likely a bill called the Ratepayer Protection Act. This addresses data centers. There's nothing wrong with the bill. In fact, I kind of like the flexibility in it, but it's not a mandatory bill. And so this is sort of like, hey, we've been thinking about this. We really do feel for you. There is an issue here, kind of messaging bill that in particular could help the sponsor of the bill, John Husted, who is the Republican candidate in Ohio who is facing a tough race. There's also a bill that would ban stock trading, certain amounts of stock trading in Congress. There's been enormous amounts of ads running about this out on the campaign trail, suggesting that this is a way to clean up Congress at a time when Americans are very angry at everything that's going on in Washington.

2:56Again, a bit of a messaging bill. Look, we hear you. We know you're unhappy with us. We'll do something about it. They obviously just passed a college sports bill, which actually was an issue of a certain amount of substance. You know, and then there's also some Congressional Review Act provisions that are up and even some nominations. Well, starting with that data center piece of it, let's listen to a clip of John Husted, the Ohio senator, making his case. America is expected to build the equivalent of 1 ,000 major data centers during the next five years. Heard that correct. 1 ,000 data centers within the next five years, with more than 2 ,000 projects currently being proposed or tracked.

3:39And we need to protect American ratepayers from footing the bill. The clock is ticking, and we have no time for delay. Americans are becoming ever more reliant on computing power from data centers for their daily lives, from medicine to manufacturing, education to agriculture, national defense, and the way we deliver basic services. Kim, interesting part of the political dynamic here is that John Husted was appointed the Republican senator for Ohio in 2025. So this is his first time running for that office in this statewide election, and he is facing former Democratic Ohio senator Sherrod Brown.

4:19Some of the polling is pretty grim for the Republicans. Most recent polls from Marist University shows Brown up by eight points. Always it's worth taking those things with a grain of salt, given some of the polling error that we've seen already this cycle. But Kim, what does this bill do? I mean, I think some of the hammering of candidates on data centers looks like kind of a political panic to me. And I think some of these voters and candidates should go talk to the people in Loudoun County who have had their taxes cut because of the data centers and the tax revenues in that county that has welcomed them.

4:53But it is an issue that's on voters' minds, that's for sure. What I like about this bill is it's kind of a do-no-harm bill, but it's something that could help. So what it does is it applies to all non-residential large users of electricity, in particular, that are engaged in IT or data storage or AI infrastructure. And it essentially says that these large load customers should cover the incremental costs of upgrades to generation or transmission or distribution of electricity. And it also directs utilities to get financial assurances from these companies or contributions or certain protections in their contracts before they break ground on any of this infrastructure.

5:41Here's the hitch and the excuse Democrats in the Senate are now using to not vote for it, to oppose it. They say, you know, it's non-mandatory. This essentially direct states and utility commissions to consider this new standard within a year and then decide whether or not they're going to adopt it within two years. But it does not force states to adopt it. Now, I think that that's completely understandable. This is a brave new world out there and States are going many different directions on this. And again, while this isn't a bill that could necessarily do any harm, there might be other ways of states working through these issues.

6:20This bill passed the House in an overwhelming 417 to 3. 206 Democratic members voted for it. This ought to be an easy thing, but you just put your finger on why Senate Democrats have now tried to come up with this excuse to vote again. They see this as a boon to John Hestead, and they do not want him to prevail in that race because they see Senate control as being on the line. The problem they face is who really wants to go out and say that they voted against a bill that was supposed to protect ratepayers. So they're in a little bit of a bind at the moment. Hang tight. We'll be right back in a moment.

7:00This episode is brought to you by Charles Schwab. Decisions made in Washington can affect your portfolio every day. Washington Wise from Charles Schwab is an original podcast that unpacks the stories making news in Washington. Listen at schwab.com slash Washington Wise. This is Matthew Hennessey, the editor of Free Expression. I want to personally invite you to come check out what we're doing. Signing up for the newsletter couldn't be easier. Just go to our homepage. Directly below the Wall Street Journal logo, you'll find the magic words. Free expression wedged between opinion and arts. There's an option to sign up for the newsletter right at the top of our section.

7:39Just hit that button and you'll start getting the world's hardest working newsletter delivered directly to your inbox Monday through Friday. If you aren't a journal subscriber, the newsletter is free, but we are going to need your email address. There's a lot of fun stuff in the newsletter that you can only read in the newsletter, and I don't want you to miss any of it. Sign up for free expression today. We'll see you in your inbox.

8:03Welcome back. Let's take up next this college sports bill. This is the Protect College Sports Act, which passed yesterday in the Senate, a pretty overwhelming vote, 77 to 22. And this has to do with the free-for-all that we've seen in college sports in recent years after a ruling by the Supreme Court on antitrust grounds against the National Collegiate Athletic Association, the NCAA. The bill is an effort to impose some kind of order on that free-for-all, for example, a limitation on how many times athletes can transfer, limits on how much money can be spent on certain programs. Kim, notably, though, there have been some griping, even from Republicans, that this is what the Senate has been spending its time on.

8:49For example, here's Louisiana Senator John Kennedy. He said, we've been spending all week on trying to make the football coaches happy. I'm voting for the bill, but I can assure that moms and dads out there across America, when they lie down to sleep at night, they're not worried about the football coaches. Nevertheless, let's listen to a clip of Senator Ted Cruz, one of the main sponsors of this bill, making his case for it. The question before this body is whether we will act or stand by while the institution that Americans have known and loved for generations, college sports, is fundamentally changed.

9:23Will we protect the future of women's sports, of Olympic sports, of non-revenue sports, or allow college athletics to be consumed by uncontrollable bidding wars that force schools to cut programs simply because they don't generate headlines or massive television contracts? Kim, what's your sense of this? I mean, one question is, why is this an issue for Congress? But there's a lot of federal money in student loan dollars that are going to these kinds of schools. And there is, I think, an interest by the voter, the public in not having them turned into minor league athletic programs with a little bit of schooling on the side.

10:04Well, he is right that this is a serious problem and no one can deny this. You kind of got into it. But I mean, essentially, ever since that Supreme Court ruling in 2021, men's sports in particular, football and basketball in extreme particular, they're essentially have become professional leagues, but with no rules whatsoever regulating competition. And you've got these colleges out there bidding for players like they're free agents. Most NCAA Division I schools have these collectives that are funded by private donors to sort of pay these athletes. Some of the colleges directly pay their athletes.

10:43And these top players can, you know, net$5 million. dollars. And it's left smaller schools and conferences at a disadvantage. And it's caused all these questions about eligibility. You've got players that are challenging the five-year role. They're playing into their 20s. Some have actually gone to the pros and then tried to come back to college because it's better there and there's more money. It's a mess. And Senator Cruz is also correct that this is something that is a deeply loved television watching go to the game experience for millions of Americans. So this bill, there was a lot of negotiations.

11:21It was a classic case. In fact, it is actually a nice example of Congress working together. There was a lot of compromises that were made. People are kind of grumpy on both sides about certain provisions, but they found their way to an answer. Probably an argument for maybe Congress getting involved because nobody else was going to. There is a real problem and there is a taxpayer element of this certainly involved. The question I think that a lot of Republicans are asking, and you heard Senator Kennedy say that, is, you know, why now? Why now? Well, we should be focused on the things that are going to get us attention in the midterms.

12:00Myself, I was just sort of happy to see it happen because, again, I think something needed to happen. Whether Congress got the best solution, I'm sure we'll find out that there are some real problems with this bill. But it was at least them attempting to address a legit issue out there that wasn't all just about trying to get votes. So what else? You mentioned this effort to ban Congress from trading stocks. There's a bill that passed the House and is now over in the Senate. But is that in the bucket of things that could actually get done? Or is that in the bucket of, you know, efforts to pressure the other party?

12:33Because the bill as passed by the House also includes some voter ID provisions that Democrats seem unlikely to go for. Yeah, I mean, look, it's about pressuring the other party and trying to look good for voters, right? Oh, look, we're self-policing ourselves. I've commented on this before. This bill, which essentially would put a purchasing ban on lawmakers and their spouses and their dependents from buying individual stocks and throw up some new disclosure rules, you know, this is not going to necessarily stop any, like, widespread corruption that is going on Congress. We already have lots of rules about disclosure, et cetera, and things like that.

13:12I am worried that a bill like that further will dissuade real people, especially people from the business community or financial community from engaging in public service because of the increasingly tough restrictions we're putting on folks saying that if you're going to come into Congress, you essentially have to be independently wealthy before you do hand and give up any interest whatsoever in your future financial situation if you do so. And that's not necessarily healthy. But it is putting a lot of pressure on Democrats because there's a stock trading bill, but it has a voter ID language inside.

13:48That voter language meant that only 13 Democrats voted for it in the House. They call it a poison pill. But, you know, Republicans still intend to go out and just say, look, you know, this is a party that voted against new restrictions on members of Congress and efforts that we are making as Republicans to clean up Washington. So that's a goal. And again, Democrats are going to be in a tough position in the Senate. You're going to need at least seven to support it, to even get a vote. So you might not get a vote. But again, Republicans intend to put Democrats on the spot. Hang tight. We'll be right back after one more break.

14:27This episode is brought to you by Hard Lessons, a podcast from Morgan Stanley. Some investing lessons only become clear after you see how a call plays out. On Hard Lessons, iconic investors sit down with Morgan Stanley leaders to go behind the scenes on the critical moments, both successes and setbacks, that shaped who they are today. Watch or listen to Hard Lessons wherever you get your podcasts.

14:53Don't forget, you can reach the latest episode of Potomac Watch anytime. Just ask your smart speaker. Play the Opinion Potomac Watch podcast.

15:04From the Opinion pages of The Wall Street Journal, this is Potomac Watch. Welcome back. Let's turn to Pope Leo's recent visit to France. over the weekend drawing a huge crowd to amass outdoors in Paris. Hundreds of thousands of people thronging the Champs -Élysées. Some estimates put the number at 800 ,000. Bill, this is the subject of your column this week under the headline, Pope Leo's French Resistance. Give us a sense of your argument. My argument that he's had a really warm welcome in France, much warmer than John Paul's visit back in 1980. And I think it's the French are hungering for some touch of transcendent, not because Leo is eloquent or has a special gift for words or putting things, but I think people naturally feel a sort of emptiness in their life, sometimes a little bit overwhelmed by the challenges of technology and so forth.

16:06And Pope Leo's visit kind of awakened them to their own history and maybe a source of hope for the future. Other than that outdoor mass, give us a sense of what else was on the agenda. Well, he visited a lot of places. In one place, they had a parade of French history, and it was largely through the church, different saints. You know, the first, and he wasn't the first French king, but his kingdom grew into France. Clovis I, who was baptized in 496. And they had floats from him all the way through Bernadette Silvios, the little girl who supposedly saw the Virgin Mary and Lord. And that's become a major shrine.

16:49And he just went around the country to visit them. And if you look at the crowds, they were very excited. I don't think it was, again, you know, there's always a question, is it the messenger or the message? And I think in this case, even the Pope would say it was a message. I just think he represents hope. Just to give a sense of the message, I mean, he was there for days and lots of appearances. But here's part of what he said in a speech to the French president and other officials. He said, if we are to avoid losing our humanity amid a paradise of machines invading and conditioning our daily lives.

17:28There is an urgent need for education in ethical discernment and the capacity to acknowledge the moral good, unquote. He also took a stance in France against France's law on assisted suicide. And on the flight back on Monday, he addressed that. This is a Reuters report aboard the papal flight. Popplio said, if that's politics, I did that. But it was not to get involved in French politics. It was to teach what the church really believes, unquote. What do you make of those aspects? AI and this new machine learning age has been kind of a theme for Pope Leo. I mean, it's like I wrote, one of the things that's interesting to me is to compare Leo's comments with John Paul.

18:13And John Paul visited almost a half a century ago. His reception was, It was good, but it was not nearly the reception that Francis got. And I think that that's a result that secularism, the militant kind we see in France, is very different from American, is not giving satisfactory answers to many French people who are looking for them. The meaning of life, respect for life, and so forth. And I think Leo saw his job as to call France back to its better, the better aspects of its heritage, the faith and so forth that really made France. But interesting, taking a stance on assisted suicide, I mean, that is orthodoxy, but it will doubtless come in for criticism and notable that Leo, a new pope on the job now for only about a year and a half, was willing to go there and say that and not shy away from a controversial topic.

19:13Well, that's the Pope's job. I mean, I didn't say this. I can't remember who said it was someone famous. But the church's job is to teach the unpopular virtue. Like, what use is there to have a church if they're just going to tell people what they want to hear? And I think the Pope tried to do that. The church above all stands for the dignity of human life in all its forms from conception all the way to natural death. And I think that's what he's trying to do. It doesn't matter if it's unpopular. First of all, you have to rally the people that are still holding fast to the tenets of the faith.

19:51And so I think people that think the church is going to put this aside are just mistaken. And I would say one of the last things, secularism, the kind that we see in France, not the healthy secularism that Pope Benedict called for, that I think that he considered America and the American experience, an example. I think it's lost its confidence. When France was declared the kind of secular state it is in 1905, it was very much on the ascendant and very confident. I don't think whatever side you come down, I don't see the secular side being as confident as they were, say, a century ago. A lot of things have developed their own abuses and so forth.

20:39And I think people are desperate for answers because they look around and they're not getting satisfied. One says satisfy them in the heart. What do you make of this new papacy overall so far? Again, Leo has only been in the post for about a year and a half, and he is 71 years old. So there is probably a lot more of Pope Leo to come in the years ahead. But how do you size up the similarities and the differences with other recent predecessors? Well, the most recent one is Pope Francis. And it's interesting because a lot of my fellow Catholics see Pope Francis and Pope Leo as birds of a feather.

21:22No difference between them. I think they even call this pope the woke pope. I don't see that. He's not exactly where I would be. I think he's been too dismissive of the just war tradition, not the specific answers like on Iran, but on the tradition itself. And I think he's left in place some disastrous things that France has put into effect, like the deal with China that really sold out Chinese Catholics. That said, Pope Leo doesn't have the manner that Pope Francis did. I think he's much more gentle and accommodating to people. He's worked with the more orthodox parts of the church. So overall, I still have hope for him.

22:09You know, sometimes we invest too much hope in the pope, forgetting the church is much bigger than that. The pope is his representative on earth and can do some things, but he's not the end all and be all. And overall, I think Leo has a much better demeanor than his predecessor. I think those who think he's see him as just a continuance of Francis in a kinder form are mistaken. I think there's real differences. I think Leo is more orthodox and has returned to the privileges. And I think he wowed France just by message and his demeanor. He didn't come across as a giant scold coming in and telling them they're doing everything wrong.

22:52He celebrated what he saw were good parts. To me, it was interesting with President Macron, who's a socialist. Macron said that laïcité, the idea of the French secular state, which is much more built-in than ours, doesn't mean no religion. It just means keeping it in its proper sphere. and Leo, for his part, talked about liberté, égalité, fraternité, slogans of the French Revolution, and saying that in a Christian context, they're not all that different. That's a remarkable way of speaking on both sides. It certainly is different from the out-and-out hostility that we had a century ago or so. You mentioned the just war tradition.

23:38That was another one of the headlines coming out of Poplio's trip to France. So here is Reuters headline. Poplio urges concessions for peace as Ukraine war drags on. Here's part of what he said today. We must ask whether we are truly making creative efforts to advance world peace or whether we are simply seeking to stem the tide of war and better prepare ourselves for wars that we assume are still to come, unquote. And Bill, the difficulty, I mean, I think that's a welcome moral message, But the difficulty is we do not have equal culpability, I think, in the Ukraine war. The Ukrainian defenders are trying to save their country, save their countrymen.

24:19And I find myself wondering, I think the Trump administration finds itself wondering sometimes, what kind of concessions could be made other than the end of Ukraine that would satisfy the invaders of Vladimir Putin. Yeah, I think this is where the Pope is at its weakest because he's decried the just war tradition, not just the application, but the tradition is somehow being out of date because it doesn't take into account the destructive force and nuclear power. The irony is that when you criticize a just war tradition, I'm not talking about conclusions, whether this war or that war is just, but the actual measuring stick, the just war tradition, you're kind of using just war criteria.

25:05By what are we supposed to judge just war tradition as coming up short, if not the criteria that they have? And the criteria are very basic, and I think, yes, circumstances mean that some parts can emphasize more than others, but I think there's no escape that to just war tradition is necessary to have some common yardstick to talk about war in a moral sense. Unless the alternative to that, and I think the Vatican gets dangerously close to this, is to kind of have the position that all war is inherently immoral and therefore wrong. And so, though you have the theoretical right to defend yourself, you don't have the practical right.

25:51Thank you, Bill and Kim. Thank you all for listening. You can email us at pwpodcast at wsj.com. If you like the show, please hit that subscribe button. And we'll be back tomorrow with another edition of Potomac Watch. A t-shirt and jeans, mac and cheese. Some things in life are an obvious match, Like RIAs and Schwab Advisor Services, the number one choice for independent advisors. The difference is so obvious, it's Schwabvious. Learn why at schwabvious.com.