GOP leader sets Saturday vote on Trump ‘big, beautiful bill' despite Republican pushback
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) told Senate Republicans to expect to see the legislative text of the budget reconciliation package on Friday evening and then to vote at noon Saturday to begin debate on President Trump's tax and spending bill.
Thune gave GOP senators the updated schedule after they met with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to discuss a tentative deal between the White House and House Republicans from New York, New Jersey and California to raise the cap on state and local tax (SALT) deductions from $10,000 to $40,000 for a period of five years.
But Thune acknowledged after the meeting that the schedule could slip, calling the Saturday vote 'aspirational.'
'All of it depends on we got a few things we're waiting on, outcomes from the parliamentarian. If we can get some of those questions, issues landed then my expectation is at some point, yeah, tomorrow we'll be ready to go,' Thune told reporters.
'I said, again, aspirationally, that we'd try to do it at some point in the middle of the day,' he said of the plan to vote Saturday to proceed to the bill.
Senate Republicans control a 53-seat majority and can afford three GOP defections on the bill and still pass it with a tiebreaking vote from Vice President Vance.
Several GOP senators, however, refused to say whether they would vote to proceed to the bill, including Sens. Bill Cassidy (La.), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Ron Johnson (Wis.).
'I don't know what we're voting on,' Cassidy told reporters when asked whether he would vote for the motion to proceed to the bill.
Murkowski said, 'We have not seen text. I don't have anything more to say other than that.'
Hundreds of billions of dollars in cuts to Medicare spending are a major problem for several Republican senators, including Murkowski and Sens. Susan Collins (Maine), Josh Hawley (Mo.) and Jerry Moran (Kan.).
Johnson appeared angry over the decision to forge ahead with a vote, despite his pleas to spend more time on finding additional spending cuts.
'We'll see,' he said when asked about whether he would vote to move forward.
He said before the lunch meeting that the Senate is 'not ready' to begin voting on the bill this weekend.
'We're just not ready for it, I hope that they don't do that,' he said.
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) told reporters after the lunch that he's not ready to vote to move forward on the bill unless he sees substantial changes to it.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) says he's a hard 'no' on the legislation because it includes a provision to raise the debt limit by $5 trillion.
'Some people want to spend more money, some people want to spend less money. And so they're pulling. I don't know if it rips. If they keep going in the current direction, they could rip it apart,' he said. 'I think it eventually is going to be much more of a spending bill than a bill that rectifies the debt problem.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Crypto Investors Open Up About $200K Losses to Million-Dollar Mistakes — What Their Stories Teach About Market Psychology
Benzinga and Yahoo Finance LLC may earn commission or revenue on some items through the links below. When Reddit user mickeyhusti asked the crypto community a simple question—'How much have you lost?'—the flood of responses painted a stark picture of the current market's brutal reality. From six-figure portfolio wipeouts to million-dollar mistakes, the thread became an impromptu therapy session for investors grappling with substantial losses in Bitcoin, Ethereum, and altcoins. The original poster set the tone by revealing their own $200,000 decline from peak portfolio value, expressing shock at Bitcoin's recent dumps and calling Ethereum's performance 'brutal.' What followed was a mix of financial confessions, investment philosophies, and coping mechanisms that reveal deeper truths about crypto market psychology. Don't Miss: Trade crypto futures on Plus500 with up to $200 in bonuses — no wallets, just price speculation and free paper trading to practice different strategies. Grow your IRA or 401(k) with Crypto – unlock the power of alternative investments including a Crypto IRA within your retirement account. The losses shared ranged from the sobering to the catastrophic. One trader revealed losing nearly everything: 'Started with $90,000, reached $120,000, and now my portfolio is $400... futures...' Another investor reported being down $100,000 'so far,' while a startup employee with no salary shared their panic over a $120,000 loss. Perhaps most dramatic was the investor claiming '$4 years and 10 million USD' in losses, though the community's response suggested skepticism about such extreme figures. These aren't just numbers—they represent real financial stress, with one commenter noting they'd lost 'about 30k and my mental health.' The human cost becomes particularly clear when investors mention working without salaries or facing relationship strain due to investment decisions. Despite the substantial paper losses, a dominant theme emerged around the concept of unrealized versus realized losses. 'Nothing. Haven't sold a dime,' became a rallying cry, with many investors maintaining that losses only become real when positions are closed. This philosophy reflects a deeper investment discipline that separates long-term holders from panic sellers. As one decade-long investor put it: 'Haven't sold so nothing. Been stacking over a decade. Just DCA and enjoy the ride.' The strategy appears to have merit for those with sufficient time horizons. Several investors reported significant gains over longer periods, with one claiming to be 'up 250% (6 figures)' despite daily volatility, and another maintaining they're 'still up 130k' after investing in XRP. Trending: New to crypto? Get up to $400 in rewards for successfully completing short educational courses and making your first qualifying trade on Coinbase. A clear pattern emerged distinguishing Bitcoin performance from alternative cryptocurrencies. Many investors attributed their losses specifically to 'altcoins,' with several transitioning to Bitcoin-only strategies after disappointing experiences with other tokens. 'After dozens of hours here and there, I walked away from alts up a few thousand... It's just not worth the effort and stress,' explained one investor who became a 'Bitcoin maxi.' Another reported earning 'close to 40%' by simply buying $25 worth of Bitcoin weekly. This divergence reflects Bitcoin's relative strength compared to many altcoins, which have failed to recover to previous highs even as Bitcoin reached new records. Ethereum, despite being the second-largest cryptocurrency, remains at September 2022 price levels according to community observations. The discussion revealed growing concerns about crypto's relationship with traditional economic cycles and political events. Several investors expressed worry about how cryptocurrencies might perform during a prolonged recession, questioning the asset class's role as a hedge against traditional finance. Political developments, particularly around the Trump administration and potential tariff policies, emerged as significant concerns. Some investors directly blamed political uncertainty for portfolio declines, while others worried about policy impacts on the broader crypto ecosystem. 'Today feels very much different,' noted one investor. 'Crypto is already a mainstream speculative asset. Has less and less to do with anarchy and financial independence.' The thread illuminated crucial differences between successful and struggling crypto investors. Those reporting gains typically exhibited several common characteristics: Disciplined approach: Regular dollar-cost averaging rather than lump-sum investments at peaks Time horizon: Multi-year investment perspectives rather than short-term speculationRisk management: Only investing money they could afford to lose Emotional control: Avoiding frequent portfolio checking and panic decisions Conversely, those reporting significant losses often described: Investing money needed for short-term expenses Heavy use of leverage and futures trading Emotional decision-making during market volatility Concentration in speculative altcoins rather than established cryptocurrencies Perhaps most revealing were the various ways investors coped with substantial losses. Humor emerged as a common defense mechanism, with jokes about losing body parts, relationships, and sanity alongside financial assets. Others adopted philosophical approaches, viewing losses as tuition for investment education or accepting volatility as inherent to the asset class. 'You know, or at least you SHOULD KNOW, if you speculate on anything's future valuation, it's just that: a SPECULATION,' one commenter emphasized. Some investors completely disconnected from daily price movements, with one stating they're 'not checking my portfolio for many, many years.'The Reddit confessions offer several crucial insights for both crypto and traditional investors: Position sizing matters: The most distressed investors typically had oversized positions relative to their financial capacity. Those who invested only what they could afford to lose showed greater emotional stability. Time horizon discipline: Long-term holders consistently outperformed those making frequent trading decisions, regardless of their technical analysis skills. Asset allocation within crypto: Bitcoin's relative strength compared to altcoins suggests that diversification within crypto may not provide the intended risk reduction. Market cycle awareness: Understanding that crypto markets operate in cycles helps investors maintain perspective during downturns, though past performance doesn't guarantee future results. This community discussion occurs against a backdrop of increasing crypto mainstream adoption, regulatory clarity, and institutional investment. Yet the individual stories remind us that behind market statistics are real people making real financial decisions with real consequences. The thread also highlighted how crypto investment has evolved from early adopter speculation to mainstream asset allocation, bringing both opportunities and risks to a broader population of investors. For investors currently facing significant crypto losses, the community discussion suggests several potential approaches: Reassess position sizes and risk tolerance Consider the difference between speculation and long-term investment Evaluate the role of crypto within overall portfolio allocation Focus on risk management rather than return maximization Seek professional financial advice for significant positions The raw honesty of these investor confessions provides valuable perspective on crypto market psychology and the very human experience of financial volatility. Whether the current downturn represents a temporary setback or a more fundamental shift remains to be seen, but the lessons about investment discipline and emotional management remain universally applicable. Read Next: Peter Thiel turned $1,700 into $5 billion—now accredited investors are eyeing this software company with similar breakout potential. Learn how you can invest with $1,000 at just $0.30/share. This article Crypto Investors Open Up About $200K Losses to Million-Dollar Mistakes — What Their Stories Teach About Market Psychology originally appeared on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Forbes
32 minutes ago
- Forbes
When Labor Meets AI: The Next Frontier In Workforce Economics
Industry engineer construction,using smart tablet,control automation robot arm machine intelligence ... More operation construction site,concept business industry 4.0,Artificial intelligence or AI,5G network Even in the mid-20th century, leaders understood that organized labor was not only a bargaining tool but a pillar of economic credibility. Addressing the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America Convention in 1956, Eleanor Roosevelt observed: Nearly seventy years later, her words echo with renewed relevance. As artificial intelligence accelerates in capability and adoption, the definition of work—and the institutions built to protect it—are entering uncharted territory. Labor unions, long a cornerstone of worker advocacy and financial leverage, now confront a systemic test: whether they can not only defend wages and conditions, but credibly guide the transition toward a machine-augmented economy whose disruptions are often invisible until they are irreversible. From their origins in the trades and industrial movements of the 19th century, unions gained influence by organizing workers around shared physical spaces, defined tasks, and predictable employment structures. Over the 20th century, these organizations grew into major political forces, channeling member dues into campaigns, legislation, and collective bargaining aimed at securing better wages, conditions, and protections. But technology has always tested the boundaries of labor. The disappearance of elevator operators—once a common union job—following the introduction of automated elevators in the mid-20th century serves as an early example of how technological efficiency can render once-essential roles obsolete. Today, artificial intelligence presents a far more expansive and systemic challenge. AI is not merely optimizing tasks; it is absorbing entire functions. From logistics to legal review, customer service to manufacturing, AI systems are increasingly performing duties once reserved for human workers, often at higher speeds and lower costs. world. During a conversation at Hamilton College in Upstate New York on April 3, former President Barack Obama remarked that only the most elite coders will be able to keep up with machine-generated code, signaling a broader trend: automation is no longer confined to repetitive tasks. It now threatens knowledge work and professional careers once thought immune to disruption. For unions, this evolution raises urgent questions. The traditional tools of organized labor—strikes, contract negotiations, grievance processes—were designed for human-centered workplaces. As algorithms replace decision-makers and predictive models supplant manual oversight, those tools are being tested. What does collective bargaining look like in a workplace run by artificial agents? How do you negotiate with a system that cannot respond to protest? Some unions are adapting. Contract language in select industries now includes clauses on algorithmic transparency, human review of AI decisions, and mandated re-skilling initiatives. Others are advocating for legislation that treats AI systems as subjects of labor law, requiring disclosure, audits, and ethical use standards akin to workplace safety regulations. In elections to come, we may see political contributions, once focused on wage floors and benefits, that are increasingly focused on supporting candidates who prioritize digital rights and AI governance. Still, many labor organizations remain caught in a reactive posture, confronting displacement after it has already occurred. Unlike prior technological waves, AI does not just replace physical tasks, it replicates judgment, analysis, and communication. Its spread is faster, its learning curve steeper, and its effects less visible until the disruption is complete. The future of organized labor may depend on its ability to reframe its role, not just as a protector of existing jobs, but as a steward of equitable transitions in a machine-augmented economy. Just as elevator operators once gave way to automation, today's workforce may need to accept that some roles will vanish. The question for unions is whether they can still shape what comes next. The German Model: IG Metall and Volkswagen A recent agreement between Volkswagen AG and IG Metall, one of the world's largest industrial unions, offers a roadmap for how labor organizations might not only adapt, but also influence the transformation. Finalized in December 2024 and titled Zukunft Volkswagen (Future Volkswagen), the agreement redefines union relevance in an age of automation. The deal includes a socially responsible workforce reduction of more than 35,000 positions across German plants by 2030. Rather than through layoffs, this reduction will be managed through early retirement, voluntary buyouts, and attrition. In return, Volkswagen committed to a job security guarantee through 2030 for remaining workers, even as automation and electric vehicle production reshape operational needs. The agreement also introduced flexible work models, redistributed development roles within the corporate network, and preserved core manufacturing functions across sites. The union's role extended beyond protection, it also helped co-design the structural transition, ensuring that workers had a voice in how technology would be integrated and labor reallocated. From a financial standpoint, the arrangement allows Volkswagen to realize €1.5 billion in annual labor cost savings while retaining production viability in Germany. It aligns with the company's goal to become the world's leading volume manufacturer of electric vehicles by 2030, without discarding its workforce. Implications for U.S. Labor While the U.S. legal and economic environment differs from Germany's, elements of the Volkswagen AG and IG Metall agreement offer instructive value for American unions navigating the AI era. Sectors including logistics, transportation, customer service, administrative support, and even healthcare are likely to become more vulnerable to automation-driven role reduction. In these fields, labor organizations might consider: From the steam engine to the microchip, labor unions have consistently recalibrated to meet changing conditions. AI represents a steeper curve, but not an insurmountable one. If unions can establish a role not only in defending existing positions but also in shaping the frameworks that govern new ones, it may help them continue to serve as key stakeholders in an evolving economic landscape. In this respect, they have an opportunity to reinforce the aspiration Roosevelt articulated: that collective strength, applied thoughtfully, can help align technological progress with broadly shared prosperity.
CBS News
33 minutes ago
- CBS News
Gov. Healey calls same-sex marriage and abortion access "non-negotiable" in Massachusetts
Ten years after the U.S. Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage nationwide and three years after it overturned Roe v. Wade, Gov. Maura Healey said both topics are "non-negotiable" in Massachusetts and vowed to protect them. On the 10th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling legalizing same-sex marriage nationally, one of the nation's most prominent gay politicians, Healey, was asked if she thought that right was secure in the face of a movement among some Republican lawmakers at the state level to ask the court to reverse its position, a possibility mentioned by conservative Justices Thomas and Alito. "Non-issue here in Massachusetts" "It's a non-issue here in Massachusetts," she said. "Marriage is marriage, whether you're gay or not, and that's the law here. It's going to continue to be that way." Healey said the same about abortion rights in Massachusetts. "This is the third anniversary of the Supreme Court's decision overturning Roe v. Wade, and I'll also just say that abortion rights, abortion access, access to reproductive health care, is non-negotiable. In Massachusetts, we're going to continue to protect that right, continue to protect patients, providers and others who need that care," Healey said. Massachusetts energy costs In the meantime, Healey says she's intently focused on curbing the high cost of living in Massachusetts, most recently with legislation aimed at bringing down energy costs. "We need to get as much energy into the region as possible. I've been saying this for years, and I don't really care what form of energy that is, I just want more supply so that we can drive costs down," she says. Does that mean Healey is dropping her past opposition to new gas pipelines? "We already have gas coming in, and I support that. It's very important that we continue to build out solar, that we bring wind in. We need to do everything. There is a reason that the states, you know, the states in this country that are have the fastest growth in wind and solar, Texas, Louisiana, you know, so called red states, because this is where we need to go. Everybody needs energy. We're consuming so much energy now with our devices, with AI coming.... It's why I convened all the New England governors and the state of New York, along with the Canadian premiers recently, to have a discussion about how we can bring more energy into the region from Canada." Antisemitism in Massachusetts Healey also claimed she had "immediately" pressured officials at the Massachusetts Teachers Association to remove antisemitic material from a teacher "resource" section of their website when it became public a few months ago. "I had direct conversations with union officials asking them to remove that from the website. I've also said, because we've seen a rise in antisemitism around this country, and even incidents here in Massachusetts, there is no place for anti-Semitism. I don't tolerate it, and we all need to work together to speak out to denounce that kind of bigotry and hatred and racism and xenophobia in all forms." Healey also discussed tax policy, vowing to revisit raising the amount of wealth exempted from the estate tax and keep an eye on the impact of the income surtax on business. You can watch part one of our two-part interview with the governor here on-demand; join us next Sunday morning at 8:30 a.m. when Healey directly rebuts the criticisms of her potential Republican challengers in the 2026 election, on the Sunday edition of "Keller At Large."
