Return to Transcripts main page

Smerconish

Don't Spend That DOGE Dividend Quite Yet; Investor Proposes "DOGE Dividend" Plan To Give Savings To Taxpayers; Toying With A Third Term; Is it Safe To Fly? Aired 9-10a ET

Aired February 22, 2025 - 09:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:00:30]

MICHAEL SMERCONISH, CNN ANCHOR: Don't spend that DOGE dividend quite yet. I'm Michael Smerconish in Philadelphia. DOGE they say they're about to show us the money the Department of Government Efficiency led by Elon Musk is claiming to have saved taxpayers approximately 55 billion through various cost-cutting measures. They're breaking down how they claim they're doing it on the department's website.

For example, just yesterday, DOGE published its latest cost-cutting measure. They say that it resulted in a value of up to $235 million in savings. It's also pointing out wasteful spending with posts like this showing how taxpayers spent over $20 million on a boarded-up building over the course of 20 years.

There's also a wall of receipts listing savings on the website detailing canceled contracts and terminated leases as part of the department's they say transparency initiative. And now there's a new potential layer to these DOGE savings that's gaining steam across social media to give us some of that money back. It's called the DOGE Dividend and it was explained in a four-page plan that was introduced this week on X, breaking down how every taxpayer would get a $5,000 tax refund check funded exclusively with a portion of the total savings delivered by DOGE, so long as Musk's goal of 2 trillion in federal savings is met.

The tweet was from an investor and CEO, James Fishback, who's been a guest at Mar-a-Lago and has ties to both Trump and former DOGE official Vivek Ramaswamy. Well, the idea grabbed Elon Musk's attention, who replied he'd check with the President. It appears that he did, because one day later President Trump expressed interest in this proposal.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DONALD TRUMP, USA PRESIDENT: There's even under consideration a new concept where we give 20% of the DOGE savings to American citizens and 20% goes to paying down debt because the numbers are incredible.

(END VIDEOTAPE) SMERCONISH: So with attention comes scrutiny with DOGE the accuracy of

its reported savings being called into question. For instance, an initial claim of saving 8 billion by canceling a single Immigration and Customs Enforcement, ICE contract was later revised to 8 million after discovering a clerical error. And that's not all. Critics are calling Musk out for the haphazard way that he's approaching cost- cutting. There's the firings, then rehiring's across agencies, questions about transparency, conflicts of interest, the true dollar amount of these savings being questioned, and the long-term impact of the overhaul.

Well, who better to answer some of these questions than James Fishback, the CEO of Azoria, the originator of the DOGE dividend.

James, thank you for being here. How did this all come to pass?

JAMES FISHBACK, CREATED A "DOGE DIVIDEND" PLAN: Well, good morning, Michael. To tell you the truth, it came to me in a dream. I woke up, I called our head of research at Azoria. We met at Capitol Grill, we fleshed this thing out in two hours. And I'm honored that the President has endorsed it.

This is a real plan to send the savings that DOGE generates over the next couple of years right back into the pockets of hardworking Americans all across this country. They deserve it. It was their money in the first place, and they need a break.

SMERCONISH: Okay, I'm all for ridding the government of waste, fraud and abuse, but at some level, isn't it all illusory? In other words, if there's a quote-unquote savings made by Elon Musk and DOGE, we're still $36 trillion in debt. So there's no pie to cut up. There's no slice of the pizza that I can hand back to you unless we continue to borrow those funds.

FISHBACK: Our plan is really simple. Over the next couple of years, DOGE will save a set amount of money. We're going to take 20% of that and put it right back in the hands of taxpayers. The other 80, as President Trump has pointed out, will go back to paying down the debt and narrowing the deficit.

Here's the truth, Michael. For every $5 that DOGE saves, as we believe calculated by the Congressional Budget Office, when this whole project is said and done next summer, for every $5, $1 goes back to the pockets of American taxpayers, here's why. They sent their money to DC to be spent in America. Not to be abused, not to be disrespected, and not to be defrauded. That $20 million to Iraqi Sesame Street, that money sent for a transgender opera in Colombia, all the same time, Michael, that we have roads and bridges crumbling. We're losing 900 Americans every day to deaths of despair, alcoholism, and suicide. Eight out of 10 Black American fourth graders are not even reading at grade level. This is pathetic.

The Americans sent their money to be spent in America. They were defrauded. They were lied to. They now deserve restitution. And the second point of President Trump. Just one sec, Michael.

[09:05:04]

The second point that President Trump brought up on Air Force One is that these DOGE dividends will incentivize Americans to report waste, fraud, and abuse in their own community. Why? Why? Because the more the DOGE saves, the more the bigger their DOGE dividend check will be. Remember, in economics, show me the incentive and I'll show you the outcome. We're giving every American --

SMERCONISH: Okay. I'm going to get to the economics.

FISHBACK: Go ahead.

SMERCONISH: I gave you a chance for a great sound bite. And those soft power exercises make for great sound bites. But when you drill down, for example, on Sesame Street in Iraq, they often make sense. Joseph Nye from Harvard, who gets credited with the coinage of the word soft power, you know, you'd rather spend on that than bullets. But wait, you want to talk about the economics --

FISHBACK: There was a terrorist attack in Iraq last month that killed 40 people. It's clearly not working. Soft power and Sesame Street are not working. If there are terrorists, we need terrorists. We don't need to fund Big Bird and Elmo.

SMERCONISH: Maybe, come on. Listen to me. Maybe the terrorist would have been better off watching Big Bird than learning in a madrasa. Let me make my point.

Put on the screen from the Peterson Foundation. This is where the rubber meets the road. We are $36 trillion in debt. I don't know if you can see that, but that's 106,121 for every single person in America. So if Elon Musk is successful in saving us money from waste, fraud, and abuse, and by the way, James, I hope that he is. I don't like the approach, but I like the fact that something's being done.

There is no money in the till. We owe 36 trillion. We owe $106,000 each. So whatever the savings ought to be, it's not like President Trump's doing us a favor by giving us 20%.

Everything ought to go to the debt because the Peterson people say by 2050, 50% of all revenue is going to go to satisfying interest on the debt. We should be paying the debt. Your response?

FISHBACK: My response is this. We should be paying the debt. Which is why the DOGE dividend incentivizes every American to call out waste, fraud, and abuse to lower the budget, to narrow the deficit, and to bring down the debt. Where was this emergency over the debt when we sent $350 billion to Ukraine to be wasted? Where was this emergency, Michael, on CNN when you guys were advocating $7,000 to migrants in Chicago? $7,000 a month per migrant. And now we want to spend $5,000 one time from President Trump to hardworking Americans. The migrants didn't deserve $7,000 a month. Hardworking Americans deserve a $5,000 check with President Trump's name on it. So enough with the double standard. Ukraine did not deserve $350 billion.

SMERCONISH: Okay. Listen to me, listen to me. This is Madoff-like, this is a Ponzi scheme. We don't have --

FISHBACK: No, Ukraine was a Ponzi scheme. The migrant funding was a Ponzi scheme. Hardworking American a break.

SMERCONISH: You're not going to divert me. Now, you're not going to divert me. James.

FISHBACK: It was their money, Michael. It was their money.

SMERCONISH: James, James, give me a chance to speak. Theoretically, it's my program. We don't have the money is what I'm trying to tell you. It's a Ponzi Madoff-like.

FISHBACK: So we didn't have the money for Ukraine, right? We didn't have the money for Ukraine. 350 billion.

SMERCONISH: I never do this. I don't, I don't want to be that guy. Do I have to silence your microphone so that I can respond to what you've said? Because there's so much fallacy in what you've just offered.

FISHBACK: Please don't (inaudible).

SMERCONISH: I have a very simple, I have a very simple premise here. We're $36 trillion in debt. It's a fraud. As much as I want to see us cut waste, fraud and abuse, it is an absolute fraud to say to the American people, because of what Musk is doing, we have five grand to give each of you. The only way we have five grand is if we're borrowing it because we're that far in debt.

I'm trying to meet you halfway, which is simply to say what a good thing, that finally we're going to look at waste, fraud, and abuse, albeit it shouldn't be in this haphazard fashion. But let's at least be honest with the American people that whatever we quote-unquote, save, we already owe.

Now, I'm going to give you 30 seconds to respond and then I'm going to say, see you later. Go ahead.

FISHBACK: Michael. Let me say this. We're fellow Americans. We care about this issue, and I'm grateful for the opportunity to come on this program, but I got to speak truth here.

At the end of the day, we have got to send the money back that is saved just 20% of it. The other 80% going goes down to paying the national debt and narrowing the deficit. To your point, yes, there has been a fraud. A fraud against the American people. The Green New scam, Ukraine, the migrant crisis. Their taxpayer dollars were sent abroad, were not sent at home, were not spent in America, not on health care, not on education. That ends with President Trump's leadership today. He is delivering on his promise of major government reform, Michael.

The DOGE Dividend plan is and Americans support it.

[09:10:10]

SMERCONISH: Okay. Thank you. All right, I'm calling time on all of that. I appreciate your being here. I think we've each, I hope, made our respective points. Thank you.

FISHBACK: Thanks, Michael.

SMERCONISH: What are you thinking? Hit me up on social media. I will read some responses throughout the course of the program. From the world of X and Twitter. I would prefer 100% be applied. Oh, imagine this. Imagine that. I would prefer 100% be applied to the debt and deficit in addition to downsizing the government, eliminating redundancy, failed programs, waste, and fraud.

Absolutely. That is the answer. You know, look, everything I know about the markets and finance, I learned from watching Trading Places. Duke and Duke, Billy Ray Valentine, Capricorn. So maybe I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer on this, but it seems to me that if I'm bankrupt and you come into my home and you now shed some of the expenses that have led to my bankruptcy, it's not as if I suddenly have a sum of money in my hand, because guess what? I still owe a lot of people. And that's the situation that we find ourselves in.

The Peterson Foundation tracks this. We're 36 trillion in debt. It's more than 100 grand for each one of us. So you don't give to someone in that kind of debt, you know, a $5,000 stipend. That's a political stunt. I'm all for ridding the government of waste, fraud, and abuse. This is not the way to do it.

Is President Trump really consider? But I enjoyed having him here. I mean, he's the guy, he wrote the memo, so it's ideal. And by the way, take that off the screen for a second.

I just, I'm like laughing out loud when he wants to make it about CNN and me because there couldn't be a more contrarian in the tent than this show. Just saying.

Is President Trump really considering the idea of a third term? He raised the topic during a Black History Month event on Thursday.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TRUMP: Did I run again? You tell me. There's your controversy right there. There's your controversy.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SMERCONISH: Okay, so what's going on here? Is he just playing with the crowd? I want to know what you think. Go to smerconish.com and answer today's poll question. Why does President Trump tease a third term? Is he just needling his opponents, or does he really intend to try to challenge or change the Constitution?

Up ahead, Trump is using his power to push for a mineral deal with Ukraine. Will he pull it off? Or will his public feud with the Ukrainian president get in the way? A former member of Zelenskyy's cabinet joins us live from Kyiv with the very latest insight.

Please make sure when you're voting at smercondish.com that you're signing up for the newsletter, which drew the work of Rob Rogers this week.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:17:11]

SMERCONISH: The draft deal between the United States and Ukraine over rare earth minerals is at a standstill. The current proposal by the U.S. is not the one President Zelenskyy would accept, according to a source familiar with the discussions. The deal would give the U.S. Access to Ukraine's natural resources as reimbursement for the billions of dollars the U.S. already spent in Ukraine's war against Russia, with potential for future aid.

President Zelenskyy previously rejected the original offer after it did not guarantee aid, which sparked a war of words between President Trump and the Ukrainian president this week.

Zelenskyy accused Trump of repeating Russian disinformation and is arguing any deal leading to an end to the war would require his involvement. President Trump took to Truth Social, called Zelenskyy a dictator.

In response to the social media blast, the New York Post used its cover on Friday to send a message to the president. It read, actually, I have it right here. This is a dictator.

Joining me now from Kyiv is Tymofiy Mylovanov. He is president of the Kyiv School of Economics and previously served in President Zelenskyy's cabinet as the Minister of Economic Development of Ukraine.

Tymofiy, thank you for being here. I know you're no longer in the cabinet, but you've maintained that relationship. You see the president on a fairly regular basis. Is that accurate?

TYMOFIY MYLOVANOV, FORMER MEMBER OF THE ZELENSKYY ADMINISTRATION: Well, maybe. No, not the president, but I talk to people. Yes, that's right.

SMERCONISH: So what's going on here? Why is President Trump suddenly targeting Zelenskyy and not Putin, calling him a dictator and saying it's Zelenskyy who started the war?

MYLOVANOV: I've written about this publicly just today. I think there are three theories that are being circulated among Ukrainians. One is it's just hard bargaining, like really ugly bargaining, trying to get the best deal possible out of Ukraine, and frankly, Ukraine will benefit from even the worst deal, in my view. So that's bargaining.

And there are a couple of other ideas, and some of them, there is something behind the doors. Maybe there is a semi-Russian conditions or something else is going on.

SMERCONISH: Okay, when you say bargaining, do you mean bargaining relative to the minerals or bargaining relative to end or the end of the war. MYLOVANOV: Relative to the minerals, relative to the conditions of the deal?

SMERCONISH: Okay. Why is it necessary by that theory, the negotiation theory? Why is it necessary for Trump to denigrate, to dis, to emasculate your president?

MYLOVANOV: Well, I think there's also something going on the personal level or maybe on communication level. Over the last two days, the administration, different officials of the United States, from the president himself to the Secretary of State to everyone else, spoke about how upset they are, how insulted they are, how the Munich conference talk was not well received, how this remark about the disinformation bubble. So I think there is a little bit of that. There's posturing and there is, frankly, some emotional negativity right now. But I think we can move past that real soon.

[09:20:27]

SMERCONISH: Okay. I'm just wondering why that negativity is not expressed toward the man who initiated the invasion, meaning Vladimir Putin. Let me raise this possibility with you.

We have a political figure here in the United States. His name is Karl Rove. He served in the W. Bush administration. I'm going to put on the screen and read something to the audience that he wrote. He said, "Still, it's possible the author of the Art of the Deal, meaning Trump, is lulling Mr. Putin while setting him up for a great fall. Maybe Mr. Trump has thought a dozen moves ahead and has Putin right where he wants him."

I don't understand how that could be the case, but maybe you do. Is it possible this is a Trump strategy to try and get Putin to come around?

MYLOVANOV: So, first of all, I don't think President Trump cares either way about Russia or maybe about Ukraine, wants to get the best deal possible for the United States in his understanding what it means. Okay, we might disagree about this strategy, long term interest, but basically, I think there is no idea of getting the best deal for Russia. So that's off the table.

Now, I'm not sure. I personally believe that President Putin is not interested in negotiations. So the only way to get him to the deal is to be nice to him. Because what he needs back home to sell to his domestic audience is some kind of legitimacy. Look, I'm sitting down with the American team. Even Europeans are not involved. Even Europeans don't have a seat. I'm the big man now.

I think that goes well domestically, and that's exactly what this administration is paying in.

SMERCONISH: Okay, but Tymofiy, Putin doesn't have a constituency. He is a dictator. Who does he need to keep happy? He can do whatever he wants to do.

MYLOVANOV: Well, that's assuming that he continues to stay in power. And that means giving rents to people who he supports. Yes, he's an absolute dictator. And if you speak against him or move against him, you disappear or you get poisoned. But still, this system is run on money, is run on corruption, is run on force, on enforcers.

SMERCONISH: I want to show a headline to the audience from here in the United States. It's the Associated Press. And it has to do with the way in which this is all being perceived in Ukraine. It says, "Trump's attempts to denigrate Zelenskyy have led to a surge in Ukrainian unity." Is that accurate? Tell me more.

MYLOVANOV: Yes, absolutely. There have been two or three recent polls just this week after the attacks, the latest attacks by the President of the United States, and they show 5% to 7% bump in approval ratings, in trust ratings, and in fact, for the first time in the last maybe half a year or a year, if there were an election held today, Zelenskyy would be number one. Before that he was number two. So there is rally around the flag effect in Ukraine.

SMERCONISH: So just one final observation. I sense that I'm more offended by Trump, our president, his treatment of your president than you are. I even wore my Ukraine tie today in solidarity. Like, it sounds as if you're just accepting all of this as business. They're doing business. This is the way that Trump is.

MYLOVANOV: We don't have a choice now, personally, and I don't want to make things worse. Of course we are offended. Every single Ukrainian is offended. But it's important when you are under siege to sort of fight your panic reflex or fight or flight reflex and be strategic.

SMERCONISH: Okay, that makes sense. Thank you, sir. Wish you good things.

What are you saying via social media, via the world of X? What do we have? Can someone please state the obvious here? This is Trump's revenge for Zelenskyy not doing the fake Biden investigation.

Yes, I mean, Florida Philly fan, I get it. You're saying the perfect phone call, right? Alexander Vindman, everybody remember. That was impeachment number one.

I don't get it. I don't get it. I don't understand why all of the vitriol has been directed toward, to my way of thinking, the one guy who has kept Ukraine afloat and he becomes the focus of all the ire. It's nonsensical to me.

Karl Rove is a smart guy. When I read Rove's column, I say, maybe I'm missing something. I miss plenty of things.

And then I hear my guest, who's totally wired in Kyiv on the inside. And to him, it's a certain extent of this. It's business. It's Trump trying to get Zelenskyy in a position that he needs to accept the mineral deal.

[09:25:09]

And by the way, the Wall Street Journal has been on the vanguard of a lot of the reporting on the mineral deal. And yes, I printed it out this morning and I went, I read the comments. And you've got a lot of comments from people on the Journal who are saying another example of where Trump is perceived as being extreme or bat-blank crazy. And then all of a sudden, look, he cuts a deal and the United States is going to be reimbursed from minerals in a way that Iraq should have reimbursed with oil reserves.

I get it. It's complicated stuff.

Speaking of President Trump, he keeps talking about a third term. Even though the US Constitution is real clear and prevents him from running, it has not stopped his supporters.

This week during a CPAC event, they touted a proposed third term project. And former White House senior adviser Steve Bannon had this to say.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

STEVE BANNON, FORMER CHIEF WHITE HOUSE STRATEGIST: We want Trump in '28. That's what they can't stand. A man like Trump comes along only once or twice in a country's history, right? We want Trump. We want Trump. We want Trump. We want Trump.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SMERCONISH: All right, I love today's poll question at smerconish.com. What is going on here? Why does President Trump tease a third term? Is he just needling his opponents? Is he just a burr in everybody's saddle? Or is it because he intends to try to challenge or change the constitution?

Go to smerconish.com and cast your ballot. I'll have results later in the hour. Still to come, your social media reaction today's program. And later, the fear of flying appears to be at an all-time high after a series of deadly crashes. But what does the data say?

When you're voting on the poll question, sign up for the free daily newsletter. Check out, I love what Steve Breen just drew for us. The Gadsden flag as seen by the far right and the far left.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

Jjjj

[09:31:33]

SMERCONISH: Hey, gang. I'm on every social media platform you can think of. So, find me during the course of the show, during the course of the week, and react. For example, from X.

It came to me in a dream and we hashed it out in two hours pretty much describes the entire Trump administration.

OK, I'm laughing with you because you're reacting to my guest, James Fishback, who explained to us all how did they come up with the idea for the DOGE dividend. And like fairness, I'm tempted to say, yes, but Lennon and McCartney wrote a couple of great songs on a napkin in just a couple of minutes.

Give me the next one. What's next? A lot of social media reaction, I'm told.

Raising the issue of a third term takes media attention away from the problems caused by the mass firings.

Eric, it's the poll question. Cut me some slack. We just did an entire segment to open the program all about DOGE. So, it's not as if I can't walk and chew gum at the same time. We've done both. Next. Come on.

Liberals have been propagandized to support another endless war, Afghanistan -- liberals -- liberals have been propagandized to support another endless war, Afghanistan 2.0.

Ferrari, Ronald Reagan is rolling over in his grave. Ronald Reagan is rolling over in his grave. This is so far removed from the Soviet '79 invasion and the U.S. response in supporting the Afghan freedom fighters. Do you know, I used to go to CPAC in the 80s when I was a Reagan Republican? The Republicans were still like Reagan, I'd still be a Republican.

But I can remember I have a distinct recollection of being at CPAC dinners. President Reagan used to attend like all of them. There'd be a black-tie dinner at the end. I was in college at the time, or maybe law school.

And I remember there were a couple of tables of individuals in Arabic garb and turbans. And we were effusive in our praise of them because they were the Afghan freedom fighters, and we were funding them privately, publicly, because they were fighting the Soviet invasion. And to look now where instead Zelenskyy gets cast as the bad guy for standing up to Putin because his nation was invaded? No, hell no. No, no.

One more. Do I have time for it? I think that I do. Go ahead.

My take. Since he still believes he won in 2020, then let's encourage him to think it's -- that it's his third term.

Look, I think -- my view of today's poll question is that that he's playing with his opponents, that he loves needling his opponents. You saw the laughter in Trump. I mean, Trump has a sense of humor, but not often, you know, outwardly emotive unless -- he was laughing when he was saying it.

And the more that people make it a controversy, the more he's going to continue to tease a third term. But I don't think that's the objective here. I could be wrong.

Still to come, did the recent crashes in the U.S. highlight legitimate concerns with air travel, or is the media's excessive coverage of these tragedies amplifying unnecessary or excessive fears from the public? And as I referenced earlier this week, Trump likened himself to a king as he celebrated his move to kill New York City's congestion pricing program. I want to know what you think.

[09:35:00]

Go to Smerconish.com, vote in the poll question. Why does he continue to tease a third term when the Constitution is so clear, 22nd Amendment, precluding it? Is he needling his opponents, or does he really intend to try and challenge or change the Constitution?

When you're there voting, sign up for the free and worthy daily newsletter. Check out what Scott Stantis drew for us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SMERCONISH: The recent string of horrific plane crashes are making many wonder, is it safe to fly? This month, Google Trends saw a spike in online searches for air travel safety. A similar finding came during the pandemic, when travelers then were worrying might they catch COVID in flight.

Several aviation disasters have dominated national headlines recently. The deadly mid-air collision between two small aircraft at an Arizona airport just this week.

[09:40:03]

The Delta commercial flight that flipped upside down after crash landing on the runway in Toronto on Monday. Last week, a pilot died after a jet owned by Motley Crue lead singer Vince Neil crashed into a parked plane in Scottsdale, Arizona. Here in Philadelphia, a medevac jet carrying a pediatric patient plunged into a sidewalk last month, causing a fiery explosion and killing seven people. And of course, let's not forget the U.S. army Black Hawk helicopter that collided with an American Airlines flight and crashed over the Potomac River in D.C., killing 67 people on board.

But before we rush to judgment about the safety of air travel, let's consider the media frenzy of previous news cycles and their impact on public perception. In 2001, do you remember, after a string of reported shark attacks in the U.S., "Time" magazine splashed a jaw dropping headline across their front page dubbed 2001 is the "Summer of the Shark."

Well, a subsequent study from the University of Florida found that shark attacks that year worldwide were slightly down from 85 in 2000 to 76 in 2001. And then the number of deaths of shark attacks that fell from 12 to five. Many experts agree there was nothing unusual about the frequency of shark attacks in 2001, only the way the media covered them during a slow news cycle.

Similarly, 2018 remember this many Americans scared to travel to the Dominican Republic after nearly a dozen American tourists died there from natural causes, respiratory issues, or heart related condition. Officials found no evidence of foul play or violence. But despite over 2 million Americans visiting the Dominican Republic every year, the number of tourist deaths it has declined since 2015.

And another story that I put into this mix that sparked nationwide panic. Last year, the mysterious sightings of drones near U.S. military bases, airports, New Jersey in particular. The Pentagon received hundreds of reports of new UFO sightings, and lawmakers speculated that a foreign adversary was involved. But in her first White House briefing, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt debunked many of the conspiracy theories that took from the drone sightings.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: An update on the New Jersey drones. After research and study, the drones that were flying over New Jersey in large numbers were authorized to be flown by the FAA for research and various other reasons. Many of these drones were also hobbyists, recreational and private individuals that enjoy flying drones.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: I don't think there was any revelation there, right, that salved fears. The news cycle just moved on. Think about it. Recently, there have been no concerning drone sightings.

The heightened fears and anxieties from these stories and the tragedies may explain why more Americans were also scared to fly after 9/11. But in that instance, those concerns may have actually increased automobile fatalities.

A study published in the National Library of Medicine found that in the days immediately following the terror attacks of 9/11, thousands of Americans chose to drive rather than to fly. They were thus exposed to the heightened risk of injury and death posed by driving. There were approximately 353 excess fatalities caused by people choosing to drive when they otherwise would have flown.

The conclusion from that study inspired Thursday's poll on my Web site at Smerconish.com. Is the declining safety in air travel rooted in actual increased risks, or is it primarily driven by the media? And the results, 30 plus thousand -- or nearly 30,000 voted. The audience was divided.

Joining me now is CNN senior data reporter Harry Enten, the author of a recent CNN piece that caught my eye, "Why I continue to fly, even though it scares me." Harry, thank you for crunching the numbers. What did you do and with what conclusion?

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: Yes, I mean, look, I basically just looked at the NTSB data. I looked at the FAA data, and there are a few things that sort of stood out.

Number one, in fact, there were fewer airline accidents when you combine commercial and private in January than any January on record. And that, of course, is part of a long-term trend whereby 2024 was the safest year on record when looking at fatal air crashes. And it's part of a longer-term trend where the number of commercial airliner fatalities dating back since 2010, it is the smallest on record.

We're talking 62, I believe, in total. That is way less than we saw in the 1980s. I think from '82 to '89 there were nearly 1,000. So, the bottom line is, yes, there have been a couple of high-profile incidents. Yes, it scares some folks. It scares me a little bit. But when you dig down into the data, the fear is a little bit irrational.

SMERCONISH: Harry, I think your number was 80 private crashes in January of 2024. I'm doing it from memory, but I think that was the number. Whatever the number is, when I read it, I said -- I said to myself, my God, there were 80 in that month.

[09:45:02]

I don't remember that. Why don't I remember that?

ENTEN: Because the media really didn't cover it. Because there wasn't a high-profile crash. I mean, I think a lot of this has to do with what happened in late January, that unfortunate event down in Virginia, Washington, D.C. area. And then all of a sudden heighten our fears. And then we're just looking for any little instance, right, of something that went wrong.

And so, there are private commercial -- there are private crashes every single month -- basically, every single day to be perfectly honest with you. But those don't get the outsized media attention that they now have, because I think our focus is all in on it.

SMERCONISH: By the way, I don't know that this needs to be said, but nothing that I'm saying and certainly nothing I know that Harry Enten is saying is meant to diminish the loss of life associated with any of these catastrophes, but rather just to hold our reaction in check insofar as we think there's something going on out there akin to the sharks, akin to the Dominican Republic, akin to the drone -- like, have you heard anybody, Harry, talk about drones recently? And what the heck happened to that story?

ENTEN: I don't know what the heck happened to that story. I remember, you know, my girlfriend's family, they live out in Jersey. They were taking videos of the drones every single night. I think I even did a segment with our dear friend Anderson Cooper on, and I was like, there's no real proof that there's anything nefarious going on here.

And slowly but surely, that story exited the news cycle as we jumped on to other news stories. That fear seemed to be a bit irrational, a little bit like our fear of flying in a plane is a bit irrational, despite, of course, the unfortunate loss of life.

SMERCONISH: Right. Before you leave me any other instance that comes to mind where similarly we have gotten fixated and it's -- it's -- had an outsized influence on our fear, or anything that Harry Enten is looking in the future and saying, that could be the next one?

ENTEN: I don't -- look, predicting the future is a little bit difficult. But, you know, I was thinking back to 1973, Johnny Carson went on national TV and said that there is a toilet paper shortage. There was no toilet paper shortage, but it actually caused one a little bit to a degree because I think Harold Froehlich, who is a congressman, said that there was one. There wasn't one. And then of course, they were able to replenish the toilet paper supply eventually. But Johnny Carson actually caused a bit of a toilet paper shortage, a bit irrationally.

SMERCONISH: See, now I'm going to take my $5,000 DOGE dividend, and I'm going to put it all in toilet paper because of what you've just -- it's kind of a joke related to the program. Thank you, Harry, as always.

ENTEN: I know. I'll see you later, buddy.

SMERCONISH: Checking in on social media comments. From the world of X. What do we have?

We've had more aviation mishaps in such a condensed period of time, ever since Trump started messing with the FAA. The risk is not worth the savings.

I know that that's the perception. By the way, Florida -- didn't Florida-Philly fan already get -- we get thousands of responses. How does -- how does somebody get two in one show? Anyway, put it back up on the screen because I lost my train of thought.

Oh, yes, laying this off on Trump. There are a lot of things you can lay off on Trump. I don't think that this is -- that this is one of them. And I don't think that the data, as Harry has evidence, bears out that there's any -- it's -- it's sad. It's damn sad. Each one of these, the Philly crash was horrible. Pediatric patient, terrible. But there's not something going on out there as suggested by the data.

You still have time to vote on the poll question of the day at Smerconish.com. Why does President Trump tease a third term to, needle his opponents, or because he intends to try and challenge or change the Constitution?

Don't just vote and run. Sign up for the newsletter while you're there and check out our editorial cartoons. Jack Ohman drew this for us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:53:01]

SMERCONISH: So, the 22nd Amendment is very clear that Donald Trump cannot run for another term. Nevertheless, he keeps talking about it. Wow, look at that voting.

So, I'm asking, as today's poll question, why? What is he up to? Is he doing it because he wants to needle his opponents, or because he really intends to try and challenge or change the Constitution? Forty- four thousand eight hundred and sixty-seven have voted so far, and it's running like 80/20. Seventy-nine percent say, no, he's serious about it. He's serious about it. I don't think so. I think -- I think the more that it gets talked about and the greater the reaction that it draws, the more it guarantees he's going to continue to go back to that well just to sort of, you know, tweak all of his opponents.

More social media reaction to today's program. What else has come in?

This ass clown Smerconish -- really? Literally defends Sesame Street in Iraq. What an -- by the way, libatard. Like what a stupid -- CNN sucks.

Joseph Nye -- put that camera back on me for one second. Joseph Nye is the -- is the guy who coined soft power. He ran the Kennedy School at Harvard. Now, I'm sure you're thinking he's an egghead. He's actually a brilliant guy. Look him up.

And the logic is that we can only do so much with boots on the ground and bullets. And sometimes you've got to win, you know, hearts and minds of individuals. And expenditures like, yes, Sesame Street have value.

I'm not defending everything on that DOGE list. I looked at some of them and some of them are ridiculous, but a lot of them just don't lend themselves to a soundbite. Sesame street does. Do you want al Qaeda teaching your kids or their kids, or Big Bird?

Here's another one. What else came in? He loves seeing the media jump out of the clown car like their pants are on fire.

Yes, that's exactly why Trump is doing what he's doing. I agree. Next. What's next? That is the correct -- that is the correct answer.

[09:55:02]

As a Trump supporter, I 100 -- whoa. I 100 percent agree with you, Michael. How did that get in there? Michael, that any money that is saved should go back to paying down the debt. No one should get any money back since we owe so much right now.

If we -- if we didn't listen. Thank you, John, for that vote of confidence. If we didn't have 36 trillion in debt and we decided we were going to downsize government, that would be a legitimate savings that could be passed on.

But instead, like the banker, you know, is standing here saying, you owe me $36 trillion. And we're contemplating going out to dinner nonetheless. It makes no sense.

Remember, if you missed any of today's show, you can always listen anywhere you get your podcasts. So, thank you for watching. We'll see you next week.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)