Dan Crenshaw on CNN: Put Armed Guards in Every School

Dan Crenshaw on CNN: Put Armed Guards in Every School

On CNN’s State of the Union this past Sunday morning, we discussed the tragedy in Nashville, Tennessee, in which three children and three adults were murdered in yet another school shooting at the hands of a deranged individual. 

We are all so sick of these tragedies. Truthfully, no one can understand what possesses a human being to commit such evil. It’s a contagion that has spread within our society ever since the Columbine shooters opened the door to senseless, dramatic, public mass shootings. And because no one understands it, the national conversation devolves into senseless finger pointing. 

The common narrative from the left and much of the media after these tragedies is always to go after guns. They want to ban certain types of guns and deny law-abiding Americans the right to own a firearm. But their proposed solutions will undermine the Second Amendment while doing little to actually solve the problem. 

The best way to solve this problem without trampling on our Constitutional rights is to put armed security guards at every single school in this country. Anyone who is serious about securing any location, whether it’s a school, or an airport, or corporate offices like the ones at CNN, knows that armed guards are the first thing you put resources toward. 

Texas alone recently allocated $400 million for school security upgrades. Most schools already have armed security guards but we need to make sure they ALL do. We are never going to be able to change the evil inside a person that drives them to kill innocent children. What we can do is have all of the security measures in place to stop them. In fact, the Nashville shooter was deterred from attacking another school in the area because it had “too much security,” according to police. 

Taking away guns from law-abiding Americans won’t stop school shootings. Putting armed guards at every school in America will. It’s common sense and a good investment for the safety of our kids.

TikTok CEO Testifies

TikTok CEO Testifies

Since I began my efforts to expose the threat of the Mexican drug cartels and introduce legislation to stop them, this issue has garnered national and international attention. And for good reason. 

At the national level, we’ve seen the cartel’s main product (fentanyl) rip our communities apart. Tens of thousands of Americans (a lot of young people) are deliberately poisoned every year when they take street drugs without knowing they’ve been laced with fentanyl. We’ve seen cartels capitalize on the chaos of our southern border and turn it into a human smuggling cash-cow that earns them billions of dollars. 

At the international level, we’ve finally gotten the attention of President AMLO of Mexico. President AMLO has done next to nothing to confront this threat. To make matters worse, AMLO denies that fentanyl is coming from his country, denies cartels are trafficking the drug into our country, and threatens to interfere in American elections against lawmakers like myself who introduce legislation to confront the cartels he protects. We’ve also put China on notice, as we’ve made clear that the precursors cartels use to make fentanyl are coming from one place: China, with the tacit permission of the Chinese Communist Party. 

I’ve introduced serious bills to confront the threat from the Mexican drug cartels, which you can read about in the story above. I will continue pushing for serious action against these narco-terrorists until the threat is neutralized.

My legislation against the cartels is not partisan

In a closely divided Congress, opportunities for bipartisanship are rare. That’s why we should seize those opportunities whenever possible, because that’s the only way anything is going to become law in a divided government. I believe my legislation to target the cartels is an excellent opportunity for bipartisanship. Let me explain why. 

1. These bills are very simple. They are specifically focused on the threat from the Mexican drug cartels and improving our capabilities and authorities to target them. One bill authorizes the use of military force against the cartels, so that we can work by, with, and through the Mexican government (just like we do with any host government when we have military authorities in their country) to assist them with all of the military resources at our disposal (including intelligence gathering and sharing). The other bill I’ve introduced would hit the cartels where it hurts: their wallets. My legislation would seize the cartels’ assets and would also sanction and deny aid to foreign governments that coordinate with cartels or do not take the necessary action to stop cartel activity in their own countries–Mexico is an obvious example. It would also authorize increased punishment for anyone convicted of aiding cartel-related crimes by adding up to 20 years to their sentence and naturalized citizens could lose their citizenship if they are convicted. These are narrowly focused bills on an issue that both Democrats and Republicans have publicly acknowledged is a threat.

2. These bills are also not inherently partisan as they do not wade into other divisive issues. I purposefully do not address immigration reform or border security in either bill, because we are never going to bring Democrats to the table on those issues in divided government. Obviously, I believe we need to improve border security and have introduced legislation to give our Border Patrol more resources, fix the problems within our asylum laws that encourage illegal immigration, and increase penalties against those who come into our country illegally. However, with Democrats still in control of the Senate and with a Democrat president in the White House, we need bipartisan support for any legislation to become law and my top priority is getting legislation enacted that would take on the criminals killing 70,000 Americans every year with fentanyl.

3. Finally, the fentanyl crisis is one that impacts every single community and every single congressional district in this country. And there is bipartisan acknowledgement that the fentanyl crisis is being fueled by the Mexican drug cartels. The fentanyl crisis is an issue that gets national attention across the political spectrum–both Fox News and CNN run regular segments on the fentanyl crisis because it is impossible to ignore. That’s why every single time I talk about these bills I frame it in a way that describes my legislation as a solution to the root cause of the fentanyl crisis, which is the trafficking of this illicit, deadly narcotic into our country by cartels just south of our border. 

This is a common enemy that every American should want to defeat. Every policymaker, regardless of their political affiliation, should be joining legislation like mine. Stopping the Mexican drug cartels from killing Americans offers a unique opportunity for immediate bipartisan progress.

USA Today Op-Ed: Mexican drug cartels are terrorizing Americans. Here’s how the US needs to fight back.

Congressman Dan Crenshaw’s op-ed from USA Today. Published on March 8, 2023.

Nemesio Oseguera Cervantes and Ismael Zambada Garcia. If you don’t know their names, you should. They should be as recognizable as Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein or Pablo Escobar.

These men and the cartels they command are responsible for killing tens of thousands of Americans every year. They live and operate right in our backyard and have more control and influence over the security of our border with Mexico than the U.S. government.

These men lead two of the most dangerous Mexican drug cartels – the Jalisco New Generation Cartel and the Sinaloa Cartel. The cartels are well-armed and well-funded. They are not street gangs. In fact, they act more like the Islamic State terrorist organization than the mob.

In January, the Mexican military arrested Ovidio Guzman – son of the notorious Sinaloa Cartel leader known as “El Chapo.” The arrest played out like the battles we saw for years in the Middle East between government armed forces and terrorist groups.

The Sinaloa Cartel, equipped with .50 caliber machine guns and armored vehicles, killed 10 Mexican soldiers and injured dozens. Thousands of Mexican soldiers were involved, and the operation was finally completed after days of intense warfare in the streets of Culiacan, Mexico.

But unlike the battles with ISIS and al-Qaida, this did not happen in a distant land. It happened just south of our border.

The cartel-fueled violence can easily spill into the United States and threaten American lives, and that’s exactly what has happened.

Border communities are increasingly overwhelmed by the influx of migrants who must pay a toll to the cartels to facilitate their crossing. Cartel members wearing camouflage and carrying long guns are regularly spotted on both sides of the border.

Cartels overwhelm communities on the border

Border communities are increasingly overwhelmed by the influx of migrants who must pay a toll to the cartels to facilitate their crossing. Cartel members wearing camouflage and carrying long guns are regularly spotted on both sides of the border.

On Tuesday, two of the four Americans kidnapped last week in the border city of Matamoros were found dead and two others were rescued. Mexican authorities say the Americans, reportedly visiting Mexico for a medical procedure, were caught in a fight between rival cartels.

Earlier this year, six people, including a baby, were murdered in California because of cartel-related activity.

But the greatest threat to American lives is the newest product from these cartels: fentanyl. Using chemical precursors from China, the cartels manufacture this narcotic that is up to 100 times more powerful than morphine.

They take advantage of and facilitate the chaos at our border so they can traffic fentanyl into America with ease.

Fentanyl kills thousands of Americans each year

Due to its highly addictive properties, it is laced into street drugs like oxycontin, cocaine, heroin and even Adderall or Xanax. The result is deadly, killing more than 70,000 Americans a year.

This isn’t a traditional drug problem that can be solved with addiction treatment. This is a deliberate poisoning of Americans.

Every day, we read horrific stories of young people who – without their knowledge – took a fentanyl-laced drug and died. We see the faces of innocent children targeted by fentanyl dealers on apps like Snapchat.

Last year, the Drug Enforcement Administration seized enough fentanyl to kill every single American – 379 million doses. This isn’t isolated to border states like Texas. It’s turning up in the deepest pockets of the country.

We need to target these narco-terrorists on all fronts – financially, with increased criminal penalties and even militarily. I’ve proposed several pieces of legislation that would do just that, including an Authorization for the Use of Military Force against the cartels, which I introduced with Rep. Mike Waltz.

We also need to hit their wallets. That’s why I introduced the Declaring War on the Cartels Act, which would seize the cartels’ assets. My bill would also sanction and deny aid to foreign governments that coordinate with cartels or do not take the necessary action to stop cartel activity in their own countries – Mexico is an obvious example.

It would also authorize increased punishment for anyone convicted of aiding cartel-related crimes by adding up to 20 years to their sentence, and naturalized citizens could lose their citizenship if they are convicted.

Fight against cartels should be bipartisan effort

This is an enemy every American should want to defeat. Every policymaker, regardless of their political affiliation, should be joining legislation like mine. Unlike the border crisis or immigration reform, taking on this common enemy is not inherently partisan.

In a closely divided Congress, opportunities for bipartisan cooperation are rare. We should seize them whenever possible. Stopping the Mexican drug cartels from killing Americans offers a unique opportunity for immediate bipartisanship.

We should not let this chance to save American lives pass us by. 

My response to Biden’s State of the Union

Is the president you saw last night someone you would trust to lead us through the toughest challenges our country faces?

Nope. I don’t think so.

All I saw last night was Biden attempting to gaslight the American people with disingenuous claims about his “leadership.” We could spend all day debunking his lies – but I’ll leave you with the top five that stuck out to me. (Of course, this isn’t a comprehensive list. If you have anything you’d like to add, please share by adding to this form here.)

#1 BORDER CRISIS. Biden spent about four lines talking about the border (and one of those lines was promoting amnesty). He brought up the fentanyl crisis without once mentioning what’s causing it – the drug cartels. The Sinaloa and Jalisco cartels are the main suppliers of fentanyl coming into this country and killing over 70,000 Americans a year. Since Biden took office, there have been over 4.5 million illegal crossings at our southern border.

#2 GAS PRICES. Biden claimed he’s responsible for bringing gas prices down. What Biden didn’t mention was that the only reason gas prices reached record levels in the first place is Joe Biden himself. He canceled the Keystone pipeline, blocked new drilling on federal lands, and crushed the oil and gas industry with excessive regulations. The fact remains that the national average is still over a dollar more than when Biden took office.

#3 SOCIAL SECURITY. This was perhaps the biggest lie of the night. Biden claimed Republicans would end Social Security. No Republican is discussing doing this. The truth is Democrats will, by their own inaction and reckless spending, inevitably cause automatic cuts to Social Security.

#4 DEFICIT. Biden claimed he had record decreases in the deficit, and that President Trump is the one who spent all our money and increased our deficit to record levels. He’s forgetting that the increase in the deficit under Trump’s presidency was because of COVID spending during his last year in office. Why did we need COVID spending? To save small businesses that were being crushed because of Democrat lockdowns. That’s what caused the deficit increase under the Trump Administration. In Biden’s first two years as president, he’s already surpassed what Trump’s deficit spending was during his first three years.

#5 JOBS/ECONOMY. Biden claimed he “created a record 12 million new jobs.” Here’s the harsh reality: 2.6 million fewer Americans are participating in the U.S. labor force compared to before COVID-19. Democrat-imposed lockdowns caused the economic pain which we are still feeling today. When Biden took office, inflation was at just 1.4%. The December Consumer Price Index came in at 6.5%. More Americans than ever before say they are worse off financially under this administration.

So those were the top five claims from Biden’s SOTU that I wanted to debunk for you today. There were many more problems I had with the speech – like not once mentioning Iran, North Korea, or the multitude of foreign policy failures under his presidency.

What else would you add? Let me know here.

What do the radical environmentalists want?

Radical environmentalists say that we need to move to a future in which all of our energy is derived from solar panels and wind farms. They say that all of our cars should be electric and that we should ban any gas-powered vehicles (the far-left governments in California, Oregon, and Washington have plans to ban any new gas-powered vehicles by 2035). They say they want all of this to save the planet from the “existential threat” of climate change. 

But what they don’t say and what they don’t want you to know is that it is precisely the activism of the same radical environmentalists that is blocking ANY energy production from happening in America, including new solar and wind projects and electric vehicles. Let me explain. 

It takes A LOT of raw materials to develop renewable energy. For instance, a 100 megawatt wind farm requires 30,000 tons of iron ore, 50,000 tons of concrete, and 900 tons of non-recyclable plastics. If we want to meet the left’s renewable energy goals, we would need to increase production of lithium by 500%, cobalt by 460%, and graphite by more than 400%. The problem? Radical environmentalists have a militant opposition to the mining that is required to retrieve these materials. 

In Oregon, we have massive lithium deposits. But activists have halted mining activities that could support the production of 1 million electric vehicles annually. Why? To protect the sage grouse – which, if we’re being honest, is basically a fancy chicken. In Nevada, lithium mining is being blocked because of a random species of plant called the Tiehm’s buckwheat that apparently could be endangered but serves no practical purpose (at least not to the extent that it is logical to block mining for lithium for the sake of this plant). Even when companies that wanted to mine lithium in Nevada provided proposals to relocate the Tiehm’s buckwheat so their projects could move forward, the environmental activists refused. And most recently, Joe Biden canceled mining leases on land in Minnesota that would give us copper, nickel, cobalt, and more materials that are all necessary for renewable projects. 

Now, to be clear, renewable energy is really only viable from an economic and energy production standpoint with MASSIVE government subsidies (aka your tax dollars). But the radical environmentalists won’t even let us produce the materials here in America that would allow us to use these renewable energy sources where they make sense. They’d rather us import solar panels from China, which are made using slave labor. They don’t want oil and gas. They don’t want the materials necessary to build out renewable energy. All they want to do is virtue signal about climate change and offer ZERO legitimate solutions that would help us continue to reduce our emissions while also providing reliable, affordable, American-made energy. And Joe Biden is happy to appease their radicalism.

Border Patrol’s Recruitment Crisis

It’s no surprise that Border Patrol is having trouble hiring. CBP agents have to deal everyday with thousands of new migrant crossings, an administration that refuses to enforce our immigration laws, and heavily armed cartels.

But the recruitment process for CBP is also creating an unnecessary hurdle for qualified candidates by requiring a polygraph examination. The bill I re-introduced this week would eliminate that requirement for some candidates with law enforcement or military credentials.

Polygraph tests are notoriously unreliable and easy to manipulate. Beyond serving as an interrogation tool for intelligence officers when vetting an asset, they have almost no useful purpose. They aren’t useful legally and get thrown out as evidence in court all the time. Overly aggressive and unaccountable polygraph testers are causing failure rates of around 50% according to the National Border Patrol Council.

To be honest, polygraph testing should be eliminated for all CBP applicants. Hopefully with Pelosi’s iron fist no longer controlling Congress, we can get enough bipartisan support to at least end the polygraph requirement for law enforcement and military credentialed applicants. If your congressman is a Democrat, please call their office and demand they support this bill.

Read more about my bill at FoxNews.com

Fighting Back Against an Absurd Attack on Law-Abiding Gun Owners

Anti-gun government bureaucrats shouldn’t block law-abiding Americans from exercising their fundamental rights, and the overzealous Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) has done exactly that. Their most recent unconstitutional regulatory overreach is a new rule banning the use of pistol braces, an attachment that allows users to safely fire a gun with one hand.

The ATF has a pathological obsession with pistol braces. Why? Who knows. They feel like it’s “cheating” and that makes them upset. But there aren’t any substantive arguments against pistol braces. Many disabled gun owners use them, for instance. It doesn’t make a gun any more “lethal.” In fact you might argue it makes it safer because you increase stability and accuracy.

On January 25th, 2023 I introduced the ATF Accountability Act, a bill I originally introduced in the last Congress which the Democrats blocked. This bill would allow small business owners to appeal ATF’s haphazard rulings and creates an avenue to have their appeals heard in front of an administrative law judge. Most other federal regulatory bodies have similar appeals processes to keep them accountable and answerable to the public. The ATF should be treated no different, especially when it has authority to regulate a fundamental right of law-abiding Americans.

Read more about it on FoxNews.com

Crenshaw, Waltz introduce joint resolution to give Biden military authority to combat cartels

Deadly cartels are at war with us, importing people & fentanyl into the U.S. every day.

My legislation with Mike Waltz will allow us to fight back by authorizing the use of military force against the cartels. Enough is enough.

This is not partisan, and we ask Democrats join us.

See below or click here to read the full article from Fox News

FIRST ON FOX: Two Republican lawmakers introduced a joint resolution to give President Biden the military authority to combat transnational cartels smuggling fentanyl into the U.S.

Reps. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, and Michael Waltz, R-Fla., introduced a joint resolution authorizing Biden to use military force to combat the cartels pumping fentanyl and other similar, dangerous substances across the border.

Crenshaw, the architect of the bill last Congress, told Fox News Digital that the cartels “are responsible for about 360,000 homicides this year in Mexico” and that they are “militaristic in nature,” mirroring “an all-out civil war” in many cases.

The Texas Republican also said the “same level of cooperation” America saw with the Colombian government under former President Clinton isn’t being mirrored by Mexico “to the extent it needs to” and that the big difference between that situation and today’s is the fentanyl factor.

“What we’ve been dealing with for a while now, and nobody wants to talk about it too much, is a potentially failed narcoterrorist state at our border,” Crenshaw told Fox News Digital in a Wednesday phone call.

“And when you have 80,000 Americans a year dying from fentanyl overdose, oftentimes not even knowing they were taking fentanyl, that to me is active hostilities against the American people,” the congressman continued.

Crenshaw said he did not believe the Mexican government’s “claim that the son of El Chapo’s arrest was not related to [President] Biden’s visit” and that the U.S. needs “to pressure them to do more.”

“They can do more. Under President Trump, they were shown that they would do more if we leverage them,” Crenshaw said. “And this is some pretty serious leverage.”

The congressman also said that the joint resolution “is not some messaging bill” and is “a very serious conversation about what needs to be done to address this threat.” 

The Texas congressman also noted that he previously introduced the Declaring War Against Cartels Act last Congress and that the Mexican government “used to play ball a lot more, and they’ve done it a lot less.

Crenshaw said the Mexican government “is fairly transactional and fairly prone to leverage” and said the joint resolution is “leverage,” adding the U.S. is “done having nice conversations where we all shake hands at the end and put our different flags behind us.”

“We are really, really serious about this. You guys have threats within your country that are becoming serious threats to our country, killing tens of thousands of Americans a year. And we need to address it. So it’s a carrot and a stick. We want to help them, but we need that strong language in there, too.”

Crenshaw said that his GOP colleagues in the House are showing interest in the resolution and quipped that his “message to Democrats” is he’s “giving the Democrat president authority to look good for the American people.”

“Why don’t you take me up on that? How about that? Because this is a problem that faces every American. This is not partisan,” Crenshaw said. “You know, this is not a partisan bill. This is a strong national security bill.”

Waltz told Fox News Digital that the resolution is needed because the cartels “have exceeded the capability of law enforcement” and are a “paramilitary arm armed with armored vehicles, heavy weapons, and billions at their disposal.”

“And we’ve even seen collaboration with international terrorist groups and the Chinese Communist Party with these groups,” Waltz said in a Wednesday phone interview. “So, we believe that we need to start using military assets to address this national security threat.”

“That does not have to mean troops on the ground,” the Florida Republican continued. “That can be cyber, that can be drones, that can be military surveillance assets, space assets, you name it.”

“But we have to start disrupting them, dismantling them, and targeting their leaders,” he added.

Waltz pointed to the U.S.’s “tremendous success” with Plan Colombia under former President Clinton and America needs to look at the issue of cartels as a national security issue, not a law enforcement issue.

The Florida Republican also said that he and Crenshaw want to begin offering the Mexican government “assets and offering them help” and that “cooperation with the United States” is necessary “to defeat” the cartels.

“But obviously, the Biden administration is going to have to take this on board and the Obrador administration is going to take it on board,” Waltz said. “I don’t want to wait until we have… even more casualties than we already have. I want to start pushing this effort while we have a Republican-led Congress and as we’re heading into 2024.”

Waltz said the “cartels have declared war against us” and that “it’s time to hit back.”

Crenshaw initially drafted the resolution last Congress and is introducing the legislation with Waltz as the Republican-controlled 118th Congress kicks off.

The military authorization would give Biden the authority to go after nine cartels — including the influential Jalisco New Generation and Sinaloa cartels — engaging in fentanyl trafficking and the trafficking of related substances, and are destabilizing the Western hemisphere.

The bill also includes a sunset clause of five years, requiring a revisitation to the situation after the time period expires. Waltz said the sunset clause was responsive to the previous military force authorizations that led to “20-something-long years” of military action.

Why I Voted Against the $1.7 Trillion Omnibus Bill

On Friday, December 23rd, I voted against the $1.7 trillion dollar omnibus spending bill. Why? Not because we didn’t have time to read it. That’s a lame excuse. We have methods to digest large bills, and most of the stuff in these bills is expected. Staff within each office and within committees are pouring over the changes to give members a clear picture of what’s in it. Pretty quickly, one can assess whether there’s too many negative aspects of a bill to vote yes. That’s a threshold we consider for every vote. Is there more good than bad? Can we digest the bad stuff or is it too much? That threshold is a bit different for every member. This bill had plenty of bad stuff, not to mention the top line was simply too high. It’s hard to justify an increase in non-defense spending after these same agencies have received trillions in spending since Biden took office, within the “American Rescue Plan,” the infrastructure bill, or the Inflation Reduction Act. There’s plenty more bad things, which you’ve probably already seen all over social media. This should not have passed. The Senate should have blocked it and allowed a GOP House a chance to do better in January.