Lawmakers, organizations react to sick time, tipped wage passage
LANSING, Mich. (WLNS) — Michigan lawmakers reforms in a late-night vote Thursday, pushing on a midnight deadline. The final vote in the Senate came in just after 10:40 p.m., with the House sending it to the governor's desk soon after.
passed with amendments, blocking 2018 ballot measures that would have required businesses with 10 or more employees to provide up to 72 hours of paid sick leave a year, and smaller businesses to provide 40 hours. It was tie-barred with , which preserves the tipped wage for restaurant workers and bartenders, also passed. It raises the standard minimum wage to $15 by 2027, and tipped wages up to half of the standard.
Lawmakers and other interest groups are speaking out after the vote, with some calling it an imperfect solution—and some saying the measures are preferable to those that would have gone into effect otherwise.
Here's what they are saying:
'Michiganders should be able to care for themselves and their loved ones when they are sick without fear of jeopardizing their wages or losing their jobs. This legislation was thoughtfully crafted from extensive discussions held with workers and businesses alike and significantly improves earned sick leave access and Michigan's national standing in providing it.
State Sen. Sam Singh (D-East Lansing)
'Emergencies and illnesses are a part of life, and our core mission with this legislation is to help Michiganders sleep at night knowing that there is a reasonable amount of cushion for them when the unpredictable happens. This bill is informed by the people of Michigan and negotiated in good faith across bipartisan lines, and in years to come, other states will be modeling their own laws on what we passed today.'
Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks (D-Grand Rapids)
'This is not the plan we drew up, but it's the best move we can make to ensure our small business owners and tipped workers are protected. The other side didn't want to compromise on anything, and they were willing to let countless Michiganders who are struggling to stay afloat lose their jobs. House Republicans were not going to stand around and let that happen. Owning a small business is hard enough without government red tape. As a small business owner myself, I understand how narrow the margins are, and the kinds of sacrifices owners make just to stay afloat. The negotiated plan is a necessary stopgap for what we were facing. Given the alternative, I hope businesses can breathe a bit easier on Friday morning.'
State Rep. Ron Robinson (R-Utica)
'This isn't a fairy-tale deal where everyone got exactly what they wanted, but this is a workable solution and far better than what was going to take place if the Legislature chose to do nothing. Our hospitality industry and countless small businesses would have faced devastating consequences had the Legislature not acted. Business owners and workers from across the state made clear what these extreme new mandates would have meant for them: In the best-case scenario, many servers would have taken a pay cut and businesses would have had to lay people off. The worst-case scenario was countless businesses closing their doors for good. I am happy we were able to negotiate a deal — though waiting until the last second is far from an effective or preferred way to legislate. My Republican colleagues and I pushed for Democratic leadership to take this issue seriously for months, to no avail, but were ultimately able to lead negotiations and force a deal to be put on the table. In the end, we were able to get it done and send a bipartisan agreement to the governor's desk, where I hope to see it signed into law this evening to avoid the looming economic disaster.'
State Sen. Roger Hauck (R-Mt. Pleasant)
'While the legislation we've passed today is not the perfect solution, it is a better outcome than allowing the Michigan Supreme Court's extreme sick leave policy to go into effect. In the coming year, there are many issues facing small businesses that need to be addressed. I will continue my fight to limit regulation, stop reckless government spending, and prevent higher taxes.'
State Sen. Michele Hoitenga (R-36)
'Disaster averted. After months of Democrat inaction, Republicans led the way in passing these critical reforms to preserve the tipped wage, help keep family restaurants across Michigan open, and save the jobs and livelihoods of tens of thousands of hospitality workers. These measures will also put in place a flexible leave time solution that benefits Michigan workers without imposing a one-size-fits-all big-government burden on struggling small businesses. Doing nothing was never a responsible option. While no compromise is perfect, this plan puts Michigan workers and small businesses first — instead of out-of-state special interest groups.
State Sen. Joseph Bellino (R-Monroe)
'Last week, I voted to preserve Michigan's tipped credit, and tonight, we completed the final piece of the puzzle by approving a bipartisan solution on changes to the earned sick leave proposal. Over the last several months, thousands of restaurant workers and small business owners have voiced their dismay with the overbearing new mandates set to take effect on February 21st and called on their elected officials to come up with a solution. Senate Republicans led negotiations on both reforms and were able to force changes that acknowledged the concerns of people in every one of our districts and ultimately prevent the economic disaster these radical new laws would have caused. What we ended up with was a bipartisan compromise that weighed concerns from both employees and employers while fighting to keep jobs in Michigan and helping small businesses keep their doors open. The nature of a compromise means not everyone got everything they wanted, but everyone did get a chance to make their voices heard and no one left the negotiating table empty-handed. This solution isn't perfect, but it does protect our businesses from out-of-state interests, offers flexibility to adapt to policy changes, and maintains employee benefits without driving mom-and-pop shops out of business.'
State Sen. Michael Webber (R-9)
'We had months and months and months to do this, yet here we are at the eleventh hour rushing to get this done. Issues of this magnitude deserve significant consideration, and Democratic leadership kicking the can down the road not only pushed this issue to the last minute, but it also sent a message to the people who asked their lawmakers to do something that their concerns weren't a top priority. I was happy to see the tip credit get the attention it deserved late last week, but business owners, by and large, are far more concerned with what the overbearing sick leave changes would have meant for them. Because of that, I made my position clear: I would not support any proposals without a reform to the sick time law. Business owners in my district made their concerns abundantly clear and my vote was going to reflect that. While I am disappointed with the timeline of these changes, we were able to finalize a bipartisan agreement that brought everyone to the table. The deal wasn't perfect, but what I can guarantee is that the solution we reached is far better than what would have happened had the Legislature chosen not to act. I'll be patiently waiting for the governor's signature this evening. I hope she chooses to join the bipartisan deal and do her part to prevent the economic devastation these new laws would have undoubtedly caused.'
State Sen. John Damoose (R-Harbor Springs)
'This solution is far from perfect, but it's better than the alternative, which would have sent our businesses over a cliff. We had two options: let bad policies take effect and watch small businesses get carried to hell in a handbasket, or step in with a plan that gives them a fighting chance. This deal isn't ideal, but it keeps businesses afloat and protects the livelihoods of hardworking people, small business owners and their employees. Waiting until the last minute to fix this mess put a lot of people on edge. While this isn't the solution any of us would have drawn up in a perfect world, it at least gives our businesses a way forward instead of pushing them into chaos. That's especially important in my district, where bad policies that make it harder to run a business don't just hurt local employers — they send them packing just a few miles across the border into Ohio. We can't afford to keep making Michigan a less competitive place to work and do business.'
State Rep. William Bruck (R-30)
'Job providers across Michigan can breathe a little easier after the Michigan Legislature passed important fixes just under the Feb. 21 deadline to the onerous Earned Sick Time Act and minimum wage laws. The policy put in place by virtue of a judicial activist approach by the Michigan Supreme Court would have quite simply devastated Michigan's economy. However, we have long been optimistic that a bipartisan mix of votes existed in the House and Senate to make these laws more workable and implementable. While a paid leave mandate and higher minimum wage may sound good on paper, the proposals as written were fraught with ambiguities, administrative challenges and unintended consequences that would have led to businesses closing and jobs being lost. We appreciate Speaker Hall's leadership on this important issue as he ensured negotiating a compromise was kept at the forefront of policy priorities. We are pleased by the willingness of policymakers from both sides of the aisle to listen and find more feasible solutions that work for businesses and employees alike.'
Wendy Block, senior vice president of business advocacy, Michigan Chamber of Commerce
'This plan is a common-sense win for Michigan's small businesses, restaurant workers, and economy. Servers and bartenders made it clear they want to keep the tip credit, and we heard them loud and clear. This legislation ensures they can continue earning strong wages while also giving small businesses the stability they need to thrive. This should never have come down to the last minute, but I'm glad we were able to come together and get it done. We fought to make sure Michigan's workforce is protected, small businesses can keep their doors open, and families don't lose their livelihoods due to reckless policies. This bipartisan solution does just that.'
State Rep. Sarah Lightner (R-45)
'My House Republican colleagues and I made this issue our main priority to begin the term, introducing legislation to protect small businesses before we did anything else. While the bills we passed this evening ensure Michigan's small business community avoids disaster, we have a far-diminished restoration of reasonable wage and paid leave requirements because of the Senate Democrats. I've said before that the Supreme Court-mandated law changes were not supported by the voters, their elected representatives, or anyone in the small business community, so it makes no sense to me that Democrats would try to retain so much of those mandates. As frustrating as it is that they would not listen to the voice of the people, I'm glad we were at least able to get a deal done to prevent disaster thanks to Republicans' consistent efforts.'
State Rep. Jason Woolford (R-Howell)
'This is a common-sense solution that puts workers first while recognizing the challenges our small businesses face. Servers, bartenders, and restaurant owners told us loud and clear that they wanted to keep the tipping system intact, and we listened. At the same time, we made sure employees can take needed time off without placing an impossible burden on job providers. This is about fairness — fairness for the workers who rely on tips, fairness for the small businesses that keep our communities thriving, and fairness for every employer trying to provide good jobs while keeping their doors open. I'm glad we could come together on a responsible, bipartisan plan that works for everyone.'
State Rep. Kathy Schmaltz (R-Jackson)
'I am going to be real frank and direct here — the earned sick leave and minimum wage legislation does not go far enough to deliver the relief that Michiganders deserve and need. The policy falls short of giving folks — many of whom live paycheck to paycheck — a fair sick time policy and solid worker protections. House Republicans refused to consider pro-worker changes supported by myself and Mothering Justice, the organization that has fought this fight for the working people of Michigan since day one.For instance, as passed, the policy takes away worker's right to sue an employer if they screw over the employee — this lacks the teeth needed to give workers necessary tools to protect themselves. I remain committed to fighting for hardworking Michiganders — the very people who keep this state strong — and will never stop being in their corner. The fight is not over.'
State Rep. Tonya Myers Phillips (D-Detroit)
'Workers and small businesses should be allowed to have paid leave options that work for them. The Michigan Supreme Court's ruling from last summer would have imposed a rigid, one-size-fits-all mandate on job providers no matter how big or small they are, and some businesses actually would have had to offer worse leave options with what the Court decided. These reforms will provide clarity and cut red tape so family-owned businesses can focus on serving their customers and supporting their hardworking employees. House Republicans led the charge to restore the tipped wage for restaurant workers and fix the sick time law for our workers and small businesses. After months of inaction last term, it was time for the Legislature to come together and listen to those who were going to be impacted by the Court's ruling once it became effective on Feb. 21. It was time to deliver solutions so that jobs weren't lost and local businesses that have been in our communities for decades didn't have to close for good. These compromises aren't perfect, but heading off the absolute chaos that would have been caused had the Court's ruling gone into effect is a big win for workers, businesses and our economy.'
State Rep. Bill G. Schuette (R-Midland)
'Negotiations have resulted in a bicameral, bipartisan compromise that will incrementally increase wages and earned sick time for most of Michigan's workers — but this is just one small step in the bigger picture of providing workers what they deserve. Frankly, our work is not done — too many hardworking people are one flat tire, roof leak or broken arm away from facing a life-changing hardship. A central part of our vision as House Democrats is paving a path to give families and workers more breathing room and day to day stability. We heard loud and clear that people want lower costs and higher wages; they want life to be more affordable; folks need more opportunities to thrive — my Democratic colleagues and I couldn't agree more, which is why we are going to keep showing up every day to deliver results for the people.'
State Rep. Ranjeev Puri (D-Canton)
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Don't give Dan Patrick his THC ban. Here's a better way for Texas on cannabis
Sometimes, the Texas Legislature creates a mess that only it can fix. And unfortunately, the clean-up is often a mess of its own. So it is with a bill that would ban products that contain THC, the psychoactive ingredient in cannabis. It's an attempt to right a loophole in the 2019 state law that allowed a Texas hemp industry to develop. But the medicine is simply too strong. Gov. Greg Abbott should veto the bill and give the Legislature the chance to try again with precise, thoughtful regulation. How did we get here, with lawmakers wanting to dismantle something they essentially created a few years ago? In 2019, Texas needed a law to comply with new federal statutes on hemp, the non-intoxicating version of the cannabis plant. Legislators charged ahead, missing the distinctions among the chemicals that can provide a high. They also failed to ask enough questions about testing, including whether police labs had the capacity to determine the level of THC in a product and thus the difference between hemp (legal) and marijuana (still illegal). Still, a business opportunity was born, and Texas, as our leaders like to say, is open for business. Responsible retail shops boomed, but so did unscrupulous producers who offered wares that enticed children and didn't distinguish between a professional who would demand ID or a convenience store where somnolent clerks wouldn't even notice who was buying gummies and the like. Enter Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick. Before some lawmakers could even settle in their offices, he declared that a complete ban on products containing THC was the only option. He suggested that he would not negotiate and that if he didn't get his way, he would melt down the whole legislative session. He never said exactly how, but Patrick, who controls all the levers in the Texas Senate, could have held back one of Abbott's priorities, such as school vouchers, or even prevent passage of the state budget, which would leave no option but a special session. Patrick was never willing to entertain the obvious solution: more precise regulation with more robust enforcement. Texas could allow for the sale of low-level THC products without embracing a full-blown marijuana culture. The experience of legalization in other states has been fraught with problems. There's increasing concern that today's much stronger, much more available marijuana is incapacitating too many people — as well as creating alarm about possible unknown long-term health consequences. Licensed dealers can sell well-tested products in packaging that's unappealing to children. The state could bar corner gas stations or other generalized stores and businesses within walking distance of schools from dealing in THC products. It could create an agency to regulate them, funded through a tax on the products, or create such a function within an existing state entity. In other words, it could treat the substance similar to the way it treats alcohol. We all know that even with a regime of rules and enforcement, teenagers sometimes drink. A few, tragically, even die as a result. Few people would say that's sufficient reason to ban beer and wine. Heck, they are venerated Texas industries. Patrick gave away the game when, late in the session, he declared that cannabis producers and retailers 'want to kill your kids, and they don't give a damn.' It's the kind of pompous, self-righteous rhetoric that Patrick frequently uses to substitute for actual debate. And if someone else made similar remarks about, say, the gun industry, Patrick would be the first to get in front of a Fox News camera and decry it. The lieutenant governor declared it 'stupid' to even raise the comparison to alcohol — though, to be fair, few are more familiar with stupid rhetoric than Patrick. Patrick did eventually agree to expanding the availability of medical marijuana under the state's Compassionate Use Program. If Abbott signs that bill — and he should — conditions such as traumatic brain injuries and chronic pain would be among those added to the list that qualifies a Texan to purchase THC products. The state would add more dispensaries, too. In other words, through specific, careful regulation, Texas is steadily finding ways to get needed relief to those who can find it nowhere else. Someone alert Patrick: It can be done! We love to hear from Texans with opinions on the news — and to publish those views in the Opinion section. • Letters should be no more than 150 words. • Writers should submit letters only once every 30 days. • Include your name, address (including city of residence), phone number and email address, so we can contact you if we have questions. You can submit a letter to the editor two ways: • Email letters@ (preferred). • Fill out this online form. Please note: Letters will be edited for style and clarity. Publication is not guaranteed. The best letters are focused on one topic.


Boston Globe
34 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
It's a really bad time to be an expert in Washington
At the Pentagon, 14 advisory boards have been dismantled, with curt, thank-you-for-your-service notes sent to Democrats and Republicans alike. Some of the boards dealt with obscure matters. But others focused on vital issues, like rethinking the U.S. nuclear arsenal as China's nuclear buildup, Russian President Vladimir Putin's episodic nuclear threats and Trump's ambitious demand for a 'Golden Dome' missile defense system have changed the nature of nuclear strategy. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Also gone: the board of experts who were trying to learn lessons from China's astoundingly successful hack into the country's telecommunications networks -- where, by all accounts, the hackers remain to this day. Then came historians at the State Department and the climate specialists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which employed experts in weather, oceans, climate and biodiversity. Advertisement The National Weather Service lost so many people that the agency had to hire some back. No such luck for researchers relying on the National Science Foundation, where projects are disappearing every month. Advertisement No one killed off the expert advisory board at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as it deliberated whether healthy children should receive the COVID vaccine. They did not have to. While it weighed the pros and cons, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his colleagues announced that they had already made their decision. When the history of these tumultuous past four months is written, it will doubtless focus on the moments when teams from the Department of Government Efficiency shut down the U.S. Agency for International Development, when the president issued tariff threats to much of the world and when he went to war with Harvard. Less noticed, perhaps, may be the devastation of the expert class, which once dominated the city, moving between think tanks and government offices, generating alternative views in its best moments, engaging in groupthink at its worst. Today, the experts are swelling the ranks of Washington's suddenly unemployed. To the MAGA faithful, each one of these disbanded groups is a victory for a trimmer government that follows the president's wishes. To them, the National Security Council was the heart of the so-called deep state, whose members testified against Trump during his first impeachment inquiry. The raft of advisory committees mostly slowed down decision-making, they argued, when they were not undercutting policies they did not like. Worse yet, they were the source of leaks. So if an advisory committee of experts was not needed to help James K. Polk, the 11th president, figure out how to spread the United States to the West Coast, why do we need them to figure out the strategy for adding Greenland and Canada? (The expansionist Polk has been restored to a place of pride in the Oval Office -- his portrait now hangs just below and to the right of Thomas Jefferson's.) Advertisement Part of Trump's problem with experts is their portrayal as neutral arbiters, more interested in the data than presidential spin. That is what has led to the White House this week trying to discredit the Congressional Budget Office, which concluded that, yes, the new tax bill could really add $2.4 trillion to the national debt, no matter the spin. Lacking the authority to fire the budget experts there, the White House turned to casting them as politically biased. And while every new president replaces board members and demands some fealty to the new leader's ideology, what has happened in the past four months seems to some in the federal government more like China's cultural revolution, where the only good ideas are the ones that flow from the leader, and both research reports and intelligence findings should support the president's desires. And when they are not, trouble follows. Just ask the National Intelligence Council, a small subset of intelligence experts -- many drawn from academia -- what happened when it came to the conclusion that the Venezuelan government was not controlling a criminal gang, an argument that Trump had used to justify deportations. The experts were told to 'do some rewriting' so the material could not be used against the president and Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence. After the intelligence findings were left unchanged, the board's leadership resisted and was removed. The whole institution is being moved into Gabbard's organization, where its independent judgments can be better controlled. Advertisement At the Environmental Protection Agency, self-protective action has replaced scientific inquiry. 'We've taken the words 'climate' and 'green energy' off every project document,' one scientist still in the government's employ said recently, refusing to speak on the record for obvious reasons. Veterans of Trump's first term say these changes are a manifestation of the president's bitter memories. 'I think somebody convinced President Trump, based on his experience in his first administration, that his own staff would be the biggest obstructionists,' H.R. McMaster, Trump's second national security adviser, said at a conference on artificial intelligence and national security Wednesday. (Trump's current national security adviser, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, is one of around a half dozen across both terms.) While McMaster, now at Stanford, said he did not object to shrinking the National Security Council staff, he worried that also lost would be the capacity to run 'a deliberative process, which I think would be kind of nice on some of these issues, like tariffs, to clarify what you are trying to achieve.' 'Deliberative process' appears to be exactly what Trump is trying to avoid. And if that means eviscerating the expert class, so be it. It helps explain why the Department of Government Efficiency was given license to wipe out USAID. McMaster is hardly alone in concluding that some of the aid agency's programs had 'drifted.' Many Democrats say they agree, though almost never on the record. But McMaster gave voice to the question raised all over Washington when he asked, 'Should you just crush the entire organization or recognize there is a mission for that organization to advance American interests?' It was crushed, with foreign service officers, child health experts and others locked out of the offices. And that has led to both professional and personal angst. Advertisement 'If you work in the field of maternal and child health, you are in trouble,' said Jessica Harrison Fullerton, a managing director at the Global Development Incubator, a nonprofit that is trying to fill some of the gaps USAID's dismantlement left. 'Not only are you devastated by the impacts on the people you have been serving, but your expertise is now being questioned and your ability to use that expertise is limited because the jobs are gone.' In fact, what many of Washington's experts discovered was that crushing the organizations -- and putting their experts out on the street -- was the point of the exercise. It helped create a frisson of fear, and reinforced the message of who was in control. It has also led to warnings from more traditional Republicans that Trump's demand for loyalty over analysis is creating a trap for himself. 'Groupthink and a blinkered mindset are dangers for any administration,' said Richard Fontaine, the CEO of the Center for a New American Security, which, in the days of bipartisanship, described itself as a bipartisan think tank. 'Pulling from multiple sources in and outside of government to develop solid options for foreign policy decision makers is the way to go.' Well, maybe in the Washington of a previous era. Within a 200-yard radius of USAID, DOGE teams moved into the Wilson Center, a nonpartisan foreign policy think tank that had significant private funding and money from Congress. They shuttered it, from its Cold War archives to the Kennan Institute, one of the country's leading collections of scholars about Russia. At a moment when superpower conflict is back, it was the kind of place that presented alternative views. Advertisement DOGE was unimpressed. Like their USAID colleagues in another part of the Ronald Reagan Building, they were soon stuffing their notes into cartons and discovering their computer access had been shut down. (The Wilson Center also sponsored book writers, including some from The New York Times.) The war on expertise has raised some fundamental questions that may not be answerable until after the Trump administration is over. Will the experts stick around -- after hiding out in the private sector or changing professions -- only to reoccupy the 'swamp'? And more immediately, what damage is being done in what may be the country's defining challenge: the competition with China over artificial intelligence, autonomous weapons, electric vehicles, quantum computing? That is what many in the intelligence agencies worry about, not least because Europe is already openly recruiting disillusioned American scientists, and China's intelligence services are looking for the angry and abandoned. Graham Allison, a Harvard professor who writes often on the U.S.-China technological and military competitions, told an audience at the AI Summit on Wednesday that America is not acting like it understands that 'China has emerged as a full-spectrum competitor.' 'Our secret sauce,' he said, has been the American ability to 'recruit the most talented people in the world. Einstein didn't come from America.' 'The idea that we would be taking action that would undermine that makes no sense to any strategic thinker,' he said. Of course, those strategic thinkers rank among the suspect class of Washington experts. This article originally appeared in


Politico
39 minutes ago
- Politico
Men in DC are getting their jawlines done
Washington is looking a little different lately — and not just politically. Even the faces of powerful men are beginning to change, as surgeons and dermatologists get more and more male clients looking to enhance their jawlines. 'The surgeons and dermatologists who treat the D.C. power class will never share their patients' secrets,' writes Joanna Weiss in this week's Friday Read. 'Some doctors strategically time surgeries during congressional recess, and many go out of their way to make sure their clients aren't even seen entering the office, using a spy-movie-like web of hidden entries and secret back doors. But they will also tell you that, among the political power set, jaws are currently hot.' In a government led by a TV-obsessed commander-in-chief, appearances are more important in politics than ever. And lately, it's the pursuit of a Chad-like chin that's driving men under the knife. After all, looking weak could be a vulnerability. 'Across the internet and the gossip-journalism universe, it's not hard to find speculation about the mandibles of everyone from the Trump sons to Elon Musk,' Weiss writes. 'And if you're watching TV and wondering if some D.C. figure has a jawline that's newly strong and square … well, you might be right.' Read the story. 'Time to drop the really big bomb: @realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public.' Can you guess who said this about the president? Scroll to the bottom for the answer.** Trump vs. Pride … Dupont Circle is the traditional heart of Washington's local gay community, but you won't see rainbow flags waving through the park for Pride this weekend, as the Trump administration has fenced it off. 'The Park Service claims this is to prevent damage by revelers,' writes Capital City columnist Michael Schaffer. 'But plenty of outraged locals see a more sinister motivation.' Wait, why is everyone talking about a breakup? If you somehow missed the spectacular scrap between Elon Musk and Donald Trump, study up on these talking points so your friends won't think you're living under a rock. (From Associate Editor Dylon Jones) — Make yourself sound like an expert analyst with a word of warning for Trump: 'Seventy-six percent of Republicans view Musk favorably — more than House Speaker Mike Johnson, Senate Majority Leader John Thune and just about everyone else. He could become a real chaos agent who rocks Trump's midterm plans.' — As a political expert, you can speak to the bigger-picture divisions behind this feud: 'This is just the personification of the tech right vs. MAGA populist divide. This was inevitable ever since the H-1B visa debate picked up within the GOP coalition.' — Make sure to bring up Musk's main MAGA antagonist, Steve Bannon. 'Did you see that Bannon quote Rachel Bade got in POLITICO Magazine? 'MAGA's done with him.' He's even suggesting Trump consider deporting him.' — Bring in a dispatch from the podcast circuit for your liberal friends who never tune in: 'JD Vance told Theo Von that he hopes Musk comes back over to their side, but 'maybe that's not possible now because he's gone so nuclear.'' Is MAGA Losing the Tech Right? … Elon Musk's dramatic breakup with President Donald Trump isn't just a sign of two strong personalities that had become allies inevitably clashing. It's also a sign of two strong ideologies that had become allies inevitably clashing. There's the tech right Musk embodies, which supports H-1B visas that promote highly skilled immigration, and there's the MAGA populist right, led by Steve Bannon, that staunchly opposes immigration writ large. They had seemed to have struck an uneasy truce. 'But the renewal of hostilities between Trump and Musk this week shows that the underlying ideological disagreement between the two factions was never really resolved,' writes Ian Ward. Butterworth's Doesn't Care About the Bromance Blow-Up … The Musk vs. Trump earthquake was a tectonic event on the internet, but it hardly registered on the Richter scale over at Butterworth's, the fashionable MAGA bistro on Capitol Hill. 'As the denizens of Butterworth's saw things, the kerfuffle was simply the temper tantrum of a disgruntled administration official who'd run afoul of a popular president,' writes Ben Jacobs. 'And Trump's counter attacks dismissing the world's richest man as 'going CRAZY'? Now that was gospel.' Andrew Yang Has a Pitch for Elon Musk … Andrew Yang has been pushing his independent Forward Party for years. But the recent falling out between Elon Musk and President Donald Trump has given him a new opportunity to bring the world's richest man into the fold — or, at least, to try. 'Elon has built world-class companies from nothing more than an idea multiple times, and in this instance, you have the vast majority of Americans who are hungry for a new approach,' Yang tells Assistant Editor Catherine Kim. 'I'm happy to spell it out for Elon or anyone else who wants to head down this road: A third party can succeed very quickly.' From the drafting table of editorial cartoonist Matt Wuerker. Who Dissed? answer: That would be his erstwhile ally, Elon Musk, who dropped the allegation in a since-deleted post on X. politicoweekend@