PARLIAMENTARY PROBLEMS: Rep. Jodey Arrington Discusses Speed Bumps for the 'Big Beautiful Bill'
Representative Jodey Arrington, Chairman of the House Budget Committee and Republican from Texas's 19th district, joined The Guy Benson Show today to discuss the latest hurdle in getting the Big Beautiful Bill through Congress. He criticized the Senate parliamentarian's removal of a key Medicare provision that would have blocked illegal immigrants from accessing taxpayer-funded benefits, as many have criticized the scrubbing of the provision as a 'partisan scrubbing.' Arrington explained that House Republicans are now working on a 'cure' to reinstate that and other potentially removed provisions, warning that without them, the financial viability of the bill could be in jeopardy. Arrington still said, though, that there's a 'good probability' they'll get it across the finish line by July 4th. Listen to the full interview below!
Listen to the full interview below:
Listen to the full podcast below:
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
22 minutes ago
- New York Times
Republicans Prepare to Open ‘Pandora's Box' of Budget Gimmicks
Over decades of intense disputes about the federal budget, Republicans and Democrats have shared a set of expectations for what government spending and taxes would look like in the future. The baseline, as it is called, assumed that Congress would operate on a form of autopilot. Spending would climb every year, in part to keep up with inflation, and tax rates would go up or down based on laws already on the books. The cost of policy changes would then be assessed against this rough sketch of the country's fiscal trajectory. Senate Republicans are preparing to upend that standard with the broad tax and health care bill they are trying to muscle into law. They want to create a new baseline of their own and wipe away much of the stated cost of the bill. The accounting gambit has angered Democrats and depressed independent budget experts. It could also soon force a reckoning between Republicans' ambitions for cutting taxes and the Senate's longtime parliamentary rules. 'We do worry about the precedent that this sets for both parties to say that this thing, whether it's a spending increase or a tax cut, doesn't cost what traditional scoring conventions, the conventions we've been using for decades, say it costs,' said Andrew Lautz, an analyst at the Bipartisan Policy Center, a think tank. 'You worry about opening Pandora's box when it comes to scoring.' The Republican effort focuses on changing how scorekeepers represent the cost of tax cuts. Under traditional standards, extending tax cuts beyond their scheduled expiration is treated as passing a new tax cut — and therefore a new cost to the budget. In wonky budget-speak in Washington, this is called the 'current law baseline.' Because much of their legislation is dedicated to extending temporary tax cuts from 2017, Senate Republicans have become preoccupied with this accounting practice. Just maintaining the 2017 tax cuts after this year would cost roughly $3.8 trillion over a decade under the current law baseline. How Much the Tax Portion of the Senate Bill Would Add to Deficits G.O.P. alternative baseline Traditional baseline If the cost of tax cut extensions is not counted, $441 billion would be added to deficits over 10 years. If the cost of tax cut extensions is counted, $4.2 trillion would be added. $500 bil. increase $500 bil. increase $400 $400 $300 $300 $200 $200 $100 $100 2025 2034 2025 2034 G.O.P. alternative baseline Traditional baseline If the cost of tax cut extensions is not counted, $441 billion would be added to deficits over 10 years. If the cost of tax cut extensions is counted, $4.2 trillion would be added. $500 bil. increase $500 bil. increase $400 $400 $300 $300 $200 $200 $100 $100 2025 2029 2025 2029 2034 2034 The alternative baseline refers to the current policy baseline, and the traditional baseline refers to current law. Source: Joint Committee on Taxation The New York Times Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
New York Times
22 minutes ago
- New York Times
Our State Cannot Survive This Bill
Across the country, state lawmakers like us are bracing as the federal government considers a bill that will throw state budgets into chaos and add red tape that our social service agencies do not have the capacity to administer. If the budget reconciliation bill that passes Congress in anything like its current form, we will be left to deal with the fallout. The likely impacts from the 'Big, Beautiful Bill' are particularly ugly for our home state, Alaska: Nearly 40,000 Alaskans could lose health care coverage, thousands of families will go hungry through loss of benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, and the shift in costs from the federal government to the state will plunge our budget into a severe deficit, cripple our state economy and make it harder to provide basic services. This is not about partisanship. One of us is a Republican and the other is an Independent. In the Alaska Legislature, our State Senate and House are led by a bipartisan governing coalition. Our focus is squarely on the survival of the people we represent. The benefits of Medicaid and the SNAP program permeate the entire fabric of the Alaska economy, with one in three Alaskans receiving Medicaid, including more than half of the children. In remote Arctic communities, Medicaid dollars make medical travel possible for residents from the hundreds of roadless villages to the communities where they are able to receive proper medical treatments. SNAP, which supports 70,000 residents, puts food on the table and is also used to help purchase subsistence gear for essential hunting and fishing. And at a time when many fish runs are collapsing because of climate change and our overburdened agencies are already struggling to get residents their SNAP benefits on time, cutting federal funding for SNAP will have a profound impact here. The bill being rushed through Congress is based on a one-size-fits-all approach that does not reflect these realities on the ground. Unlike the federal government, most states cannot run a deficit and must balance their budget. If the federal government shifts costs to the states, it generally means we need to cut something else. And while the impacts are particularly difficult for Alaska, our state is not alone. Last year, inflation-adjusted tax revenue fell in 40 states. States with large rural populations are likely to be hit particularly hard. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Washington Post
24 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Republicans' tax bill would water down a century-old gun law
Tucked into the more than 1,000 pages of the GOP domestic policy bill winding its way through Congress is a provision that would water down a nearly century-old firearms law — changes the gun industry has sought for years despite gun-control advocates warning they would come at the expense of public safety.
