Sen. Joni Ernst defends her "we all are going to die" comments: "I'm very compassionate"
Republican Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa defended herself Monday after drawing attention for telling a town hall attendee worried about proposed changes to Medicaid that "we all are going to die."
"I'm very compassionate, and you need to listen to the entire conversation," Ernst told CBS News on Monday.
Ernst's now-viral musings on mortality came during a contentious town hall meeting Friday, as attendees grilled the senator about a GOP-backed domestic policy bill that passed the House last month. The legislation — titled the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, after President Trump referred to the measure that way — would impose work requirements on some Medicaid recipients, among other changes.
At one point, as Ernst defended some of the legislation's changes to the low-income health insurance program, a person appeared to yell that people will die.
"People are not — well, we all are going to die, so for heaven's sakes," Ernst responded.
Ernst went on to say that she will "focus on those that are most vulnerable" and added, "those that meet the eligibility requirements for Medicaid we will protect."
The senator later dug in and posted a sarcastic apology video to Instagram.
"I made an incorrect assumption that everyone in the auditorium understood that, yes, we are all going to perish from this Earth. So, I apologize," Ernst said in the video. "I'm really, really glad that I did not have to bring up the subject of the Tooth Fairy as well."
The town hall comments drew criticism from some opponents of Ernst, who is up for reelection next year. Nathan Sage, who is running for the Democratic nomination for Senate, said Ernst is "not even trying to hide her contempt for us." And Democratic state Rep. JD Scholten announced Monday he's entering the race, saying in an Instagram post he wasn't planning to launch his campaign now but "can't sit on the sidelines" after Ernst's town hall.
As passed by the House, the domestic policy bill would add restrictions to Medicaid, including a work, volunteer or schooling requirement for non-disabled adults without children. The bill would also add more frequent eligibility checks, cut funding for states that use the Medicaid system to cover undocumented immigrants, freeze provider taxes and ban coverage for gender transition services.
The bill's proposed changes to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, better known as food stamps, could save hundreds of billions of dollars, which would help pay for extending Mr. Trump's 2017 tax cuts and boosting border security.
But before it reaches Mr. Trump's desk, the bill still needs to pass the Senate, where some Republicans are pushing to roll back some of the Medicaid cuts. In last week's town hall, Ernst said she agrees with parts of the legislation passed by the House, but "the bill will be changing."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
22 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Elon Musk may be the only person in the world who can criticize Donald Trump in public. For now.
If you come at Donald Trump, he's going to respond. Unless, apparently, you're Elon Musk. Trump hasn't said a word about Musk's public complaints about Trump's budget bill. It's hard to imagine Trump staying silent forever. But even this restraint tells you a lot about the Musk/Trump alliance. A pretty fundamental rule of political physics in our age: If you criticize Donald Trump, he roars back. Which makes what's happening now worth noting: Elon Musk is criticizing Donald Trump, and Trump … isn't responding. As you likely know by now, on Monday afternoon, Musk used his X account to complain about the Republican budget bill — the one that's supposed to be Trump's signature legislation, and the one that's literally called the " One Big Beautiful Bill" act because that's the name Trump likes. More specifically: Musk called the bill " a disgusting abomination." "Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it," he added. That story — the richest man in the world, and for at least several months, a key Trump ally, blasting a Trump project in public — dominated Monday's news cycle. Even Fox News had to cover it. And under normal circumstances, Trump would rage back. Not this time, though. Trump has yet to acknowledge Musk's broadside out loud, or on his Truth Social platform. When a Fox News reporter asked White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt "how mad" Trump would be when he learned about Musk's comments, she had a restrained answer ready: "The president already knows where Elon Musk stood on this bill. It doesn't change the president's opinion. This is one big, beautiful bill, and he's sticking to it." And when I asked the White House press office for comment Wednesday morning, they referred me to Leavitt's previous statement. Obvious conclusion: For now, at least, the Trump team is going out of its way not to stoke a feud with Musk. It seems very unlikely that Trump's silence is going to be permanent: Trump loves holding forth in front of the press, so someone's going to ask him about it at some point. Still, this level of what seems to be restraint is remarkable for a man who doesn't usually restrain himself, and who loathes people who poke at him in public. What's happening? For starters, it's worth noting that Trump has already gone through a version of this. Last week, Musk used much more muted language to criticize the same bill in a CBS interview, and those comments also became a news story. And Trump didn't fire back at Musk then, either — even when asked about it at a press conference. It's also worth noting that even though Musk used scathing language to condemn the bill on Monday, he never once criticized Trump directly. That gives both men rhetorical wiggle room: Musk can argue that his problems with the bill have nothing to do with the man who's promoting it. And Trump can lump in Musk's critique along with everyone else who has problems with the bill, including some Republicans like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. But it's also likely that the most likely thing is the most likely thing: That Donald Trump has enormous admiration for Elon Musk, and treats him differently than just about anyone else in the world. And that even though Musk has officially left his role as a part-time White House advisor, Trump still wants him on his side.
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Republicans Are Trying to Block My State From Regulating AI
I helped write, pass, and protect the nation's first law to regulate artificial intelligence. As part of Donald Trump's tax bill, Republicans in Washington are now trying to overturn our law in Colorado and preempt any other similar efforts around the country — as the need to regulate AI only grows. The Biden administration formed the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute (AISI) in 2023 to identify potential major risks AI could cause. These federal guidelines ushered tech companies to move toward embracing regulation. Understanding the pattern of inaction by Congress, in 2024, Colorado collaborated with lawmakers in more than 30 other states, attempting to pass a new uniform AI regulation. In the final days of the 2024 Colorado's Legislative Session, I was scrambling to whip votes for what would become the first artificial intelligence regulation in the nation, SB24-205, led by state Senator Robert Rodriguez. We realized an increased use of artificial intelligence, often unseen by the consumer, in important aspects of daily life, like health care, finance, and criminal justice should be a significant concern due to its inherent potential for bias. AI systems learn from wide datasets, and if these datasets reflect existing societal prejudices — whether in gender stereotypes, historical lending practices, or medical research — the AI will not only replicate but often magnify these biases, potentially leading to discriminatory outcomes. This can result in unfair loan denials, misdiagnoses, wrongful arrests, or limited opportunities for just about anybody. Republicans' 'One Big Beautiful Bill' — their effort to extend and expand Trump's 2017 tax cuts for the wealthy — has a dangerous provision to prevent states from enacting any AI regulation of any kind for 10 years. The measure would preempt our state law in Colorado, and have the federal government solely handle regulating AI — which it won't do. That should have you very concerned because the enormous AI growth we've witnessed in just the last couple years will just get exponentially greater over the next decade. As the Chair of the Joint Technology Committee in Colorado's General Assembly, I know what will happen if Republicans enact such a provision into law. Big corporations and tech bros will get uber rich, and we'll become victims of their AI experiments. It's not easy convincing colleagues to show interest in a wonky, nuanced topic like AI, especially with the legislative clock running out, but with carefully negotiated amendments and the support of the Colorado AFL-CIO, we mustered enough votes to become the first and only state to pass the new law. But state lawmakers knew very well that we had to take action because the Feds are notorious for inaction. Colorado's bill and other legislative efforts happening in tandem were supposed to set up a uniform policy any state could adopt to avoid the dreaded 'patchwork of legislative laws' in lieu of federal policy. After our bill passed in 2024, we created a task force, prepared a report, had stakeholder meetings, and drafted legislation, specifically bill SB25-318, to improve compliance, accountability, and processes. We were intent on making a great law other states could model. When the second Trump administration gutted the Biden-initiated AISI guidelines, the tech industry was no longer interested in collaborating. The 'safety first' approach was lost and the free-for-all attitude was embraced. On the third to last day of the 2025 session, we tried to push forward a bill to improve the AI law — but it became apparent that the tech industry was intent on derailing our effort. Led by the venture capitalists, or VCs, and their lobbyists, they created a panic among scapegoats in industries like health care and education and small businesses, to call for us to 'do something about AI.' By 'doing something,' they meant extending the implementation of the current law an additional year so they would have more time for compliance. As a seasoned legislator, I immediately saw this as an obvious lobbying tactic to have more time to create a scheme to prevent the law from ever being enacted. With my legislative colleagues shaken and convinced by the onslaught of the lobbying efforts, Senator Robert Rodriguez was unable to fend off the implementation deadline change, and he was forced to kill the bill. Unsatisfied, the tech industry was still searching for a way out of any regulation. The next day, a seemingly minor bill, SB25-322, was on the calendar for debate. It was basically a simple provision the Attorney General needed for a lawsuit. I got called into several meetings with legislative leaders to talk about how to quell the manufactured VC panic. They proposed I become the 'hero' by running an amendment to SB25-322 to again attempt to push out implementation of our original law on AI regulations. I am no hero to big corporations. I fight for the underdog, the worker, and everyday citizens who don't have billions of dollars to manipulate the legislative process. I said no to their proposal and offered a two month extension to give us time in 2026 to try another bill. That wasn't acceptable, so I went to war. I was not going to let anyone attach an amendment, and if they did, I'd kill the bill. The unwritten rule in the state House and the Senate is the midnight deadline. Every day stops at midnight. Nobody knows what actually happens if we don't end work a minute after 12 a.m. and nobody has ever attempted to find out. The penultimate day of the session embodies the expression, 'If it weren't for the last minute, nothing would get done.' We finally got to SB25-322 at 10:40pm. They called for a vote to limit debate for one hour, which passed. A representative quickly attached the amendment I swore to fight. If I filibustered for the hour, I still needed to fill up the remaining 20 minutes to kill the bill. I blathered for the whole hour and now it was 11:40pm. When time was up, they were successful in getting their amendment on the bill, and the bill passed. Most people don't know that the work of our legislative debate is not complete until we adopt the Committee of the Whole Report which we endearingly call, the COW. The COW is intended for fixing mistakes. It has been often used nefariously. I don't take this lightly, but this was my final strategy for success. Using amendments I ran during my filibuster, I would say the bill actually didn't pass. In order to stop me, the Majority Leader moved for Rule 16 which calls the 'question.' This means that anything and everything that was about to go down would be done without any debate. It would allow them to just do quick votes on all of it, and 15 minutes was sufficient time. I felt a moment of despair. My efforts would all be for naught if Rule 16 passed. Then, we voted, and it failed. I was now able to bring my amendments, run the clock to midnight, and kill the bill. Just seconds before the clock hit midnight, I was interrupted by the Majority Leader to call to adjourn the day's work. The bill was dead. I had saved the country's only AI law from certain demise. The Speaker was angry. There was a buzz of puzzlement and excitement. In the later days and weeks, those who paid attention recalled the events as legislative heroism. Do I believe that Congress will ever pass meaningful AI regulation? No. There is a lack of courage to stand up for what's right, especially when big money gets involved. But it can be done. I know, because I did it. Unfortunately, not all elected officials have the intestinal fortitude to filibuster their own party to do what's right. So next time there's an election, do your homework so you can distinguish between the true public servants and the self-serving politicians. More from Rolling Stone Escaped Inmate Asks Lil Wayne, NBA YoungBoy, Meek Mill for Help Elon Calls Trump's 'Big, Beautiful' Bill a 'Disgusting Abomination' Neil Young Invites Donald Trump to Summer Tour After Springsteen Spat Best of Rolling Stone The Useful Idiots New Guide to the Most Stoned Moments of the 2020 Presidential Campaign Anatomy of a Fake News Scandal The Radical Crusade of Mike Pence
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
House GOP ‘big, beautiful bill' would increase the deficit by $2.4 trillion, CBO says
House Republicans' sweeping tax and spending cuts package would increase the deficit by $2.4 trillion over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office's analysis of the bill that GOP lawmakers narrowly approved last month. The highly anticipated score, which was released Wednesday, could complicate Senate Majority Leader John Thune's task of crafting a version of the legislation that his divided conference would approve. Several GOP senators have already expressed concern about the House package's potential impact to the deficit and want to make deeper spending cuts, while others are wary of the major reductions to the nation's safety net – particularly Medicaid – in the House bill. The analysis also adds ammunition to billionaire Elon Musk's attacks on the package, which he wrote on X Tuesday would bankrupt America. The posts follow an interview with CBS Sunday Morning, in which Musk said will increase the deficit and undermine the work of his Department of Government Efficiency. 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination,' Musk, who recently stepped back from his role with the federal government, posted on X, later adding, 'Congress is making America bankrupt.' Senators began working on the legislation this week, but whatever changes they make would have to pass muster in the House. Thune is hoping to send it to President Donald Trump's desk by July 4. The CBO analysis also adds fuel to Democrats' and budget watchdogs' claims that the package, which aims to fulfill Trump's agenda, would worsen the nation's fiscal outlook while providing big tax cuts for the wealthy. Trump and House GOP leaders have already sought to undercut the CBO's projections, arguing that nonpartisan agency has missed the mark in the past and that its analyses don't properly account for the economic growth that would result from the tax breaks. They have made similar claims about estimates from independent groups that also project a big hit to the deficit. Some Senate leaders are looking to dodge the question of the package's deficit impact by arguing that extending the 2017 tax cuts should be considered a continuation of current policy, and, therefore, would not contribute to an increase in the deficit. The CBO analysis is based on the standard approach of current law, in which the tax cuts expire at the end of the year, so their extension would entail a cost. The House package calls for making permanent essentially all of the individual income tax cuts contained in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, a landmark achievement of Trump's first term. The bill would also temporarily provide tax relief to certain senior citizens and workers who earn tips and overtime, which Trump promised on the campaign trail last year. And it would temporarily restore two TCJA tax breaks for businesses, including allowing them to immediately deduct the cost of research and development and equipment. To help offset the cost of the tax relief, the House bill would enact historic cuts to Medicaid and food stamps, two of the nation's key safety net programs. The package would institute work requirements in Medicaid, which provides health insurance to low-income Americans, and would expand the work mandate in the food stamp program, known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. These provisions would result in millions of people losing their access to health coverage and nutrition assistance, according to preliminary CBO projections released earlier. The bill would also boost spending on defense, border security and immigration enforcement, which are among Trump's top priorities.
