
GOP Senators Show Unease on Tariffs During Hearing With Trump Trade Chief
By and Catherine Lucey
Updated on
Save
Republican senators expressed anxiety over the potential economic toll of Donald Trump's global tariffs and pressed his trade representative for more clarity on the president's objectives in the trade conflict.
'Whose throat do I get to choke if this turns out to be wrong?' Republican Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina asked Tuesday as US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer testified before the Senate Finance Committee.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senate passes stripped-back version of ‘no-cause' eviction bill, but House likely to oppose it
Senators scaled back the bill to lessen the effect on tenants — raising the likelihood of a clash with the House. (Getty Images) The New Hampshire Senate passed a bill Thursday intended to make it easier for landlords to terminate tenancies. But before passing it, senators scaled back the bill to lessen the effect on tenants — raising the likelihood of a clash with the House. In current law, New Hampshire landlords must cite a specific reason to initiate evictions, including nonpayment of rent, failure to follow the lease, behavior affecting the health or safety of others, or a business reason by the landlord, such as a renovation. As originally passed by the House, House Bill 60 would have allowed for 'no-fault' or 'no-cause' termination of tenancies for leases six months or longer. In those cases, landlords could ask a tenant to leave at the end of the lease period with no reason given. Republicans argue allowing no-cause evictions would let landlords treat leases as fixed-length contracts with tenants, and relieve them of the burden of finding a reason if they no longer wished to rent to someone. But Democrats and legal aid organizations argue it would increase the pace of evictions and could make it easier for landlords to discriminate. On Thursday, the Senate dramatically altered the bill, keeping the 'no-fault' evictions but adding a trigger provision that prevents application of the law unless the state has had a 4% or higher rental vacancy rate for four quarters in one calendar year, as determined by the Federal Reserve. Currently, the Federal Reserve estimates New Hampshire has exactly a 4% vacancy rate, citing U.S. Census data. The Senate's version would also allow landlords to use no-cause evictions only with leases of 12 months or more. And it would exempt tenants who are subject to no-cause evictions from having those evictions added to their record for the purpose of rental applications and tenant screening reports, easing concerns from housing advocates about the effects of the original bill. Those changes earned the support of Senate Democrats; the amended bill was voted through unanimously Thursday. But before the bill can go to Gov. Kelly Ayotte's desk, it must receive final sign-off from the House, and some House Republicans have made it clear they are not happy with the Senate's changes. Rep. Joe Alexander, a Goffstown Republican and the chairman of the Housing Committee, said he will be requesting a Committee of Conference with the Senate to attempt to find a compromise when the House meets on Thursday. The Senate's version of the bill does not fit with the House's position, Alexander said in an interview. And he noted that the full House already voted down two attempted Democratic amendments to add trigger provisions. 'The House position is the lease is a contract,' Alexander said. 'And (in) every other place in contract law, when a contract ends, both parties go their separate ways unless there's conversation about renewing it. So we're just trying to bring it in line with all other contract law in the state.' Elliott Berry, a former attorney for New Hampshire Legal Assistance who has been following the bill, said even with the Senate changes, he and other housing advocates believe HB 60 could harm tenants. 'It's going to make a lot of landlords take the easy way out,' he said. 'And so tenants who for whatever reason feel any kind of antagonism towards them in general, well-based or not, they're going to be in jeopardy.'
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The governor, House, and Senate each created a budget for NH. Now, they must agree on one.
The rear of the New Hampshire State House on May 19, 2025. (Photo by Dana Wormald/New Hampshire Bulletin) When the New Hampshire Senate approved its proposal for the state's two-year spending plan on Thursday, it set off a new phase of the lengthy state budgeting process. That process began in February when Republican Gov. Kelly Ayotte released her budget proposal. Then, House lawmakers got their turn to rework that proposal and in April, they approved their version of the budget before handing it off to the Senate. Soon, the House and Senate will enter what is known as a committee of conference, where negotiators will hash out the differences of their two budgets with the hope of agreeing on one proposal. Once that is complete — and both chambers sign off once again — Ayotte will have the opportunity to approve the budget, veto it, or allow it to go into law without her signature. The new fiscal year begins July 1, so officials from the three bodies have to approve a single budget by then in order to fund the government. Perhaps the most contentious disagreement between the Legislature and the governor was on revenue projections. Months of lagging business tax revenues, combined with the millions of dollars the state must pay out to victims of a massive abuse scandal in its juvenile justice system and the end of pandemic-era federal funding, have made this a particularly tight fiscal environment. In February, Ayotte unveiled her budget proposal and with it her revenue projections, which were immediately labeled as optimistic. Ayotte predicted the state's revenues would rebound quickly and provide the state with around $6.3 billion over the next two years. House Republicans were quick to balk at those projections. 'We're just not as optimistic as the governor is with growth,' Rep. John Janigian, a Salem Republican and chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, told the Bulletin at the time. 'We think it's a steamship: It takes time to turn it. It's moving in a positive direction, but at a slower rate.' The House Ways and Means Committee projected $5.8 billion in revenue later in February. Ayotte rejected those figures, telling reporters in April she was 'confident that the revenue numbers that I laid out in my budget are actually more accurate revenue numbers than the lower proposals made by the House.' The Senate's projections ended up falling in the middle. The Senate Ways and Means Committee voted to accept a projection of roughly $6.1 billion total revenue over two years. That's about $228.1 million above the House's estimate, but $172.1 million below Ayotte's. While the Senate landed closer to the governor than the House did, Ayotte still expressed her frustration. 'I disagree with that vote,' she said at a press conference soon after. 'And I also will tell you this: I don't understand why Republicans are joining with Democrats who want to put us in a position to raise taxes instead of adopting, I think, what would be a more accurate revenue picture for the state.' When she announced her budget in February, Ayotte emphasized the need for belt-tightening, calling her plan a 'recalibration' during a speech in the State House. Still, her budget kept many agencies and programs intact. In some cases, it expanded programs. That includes the state's voucher-like education freedom accounts, which she proposed opening to students attending public school at all income-levels, increased funding for state services for people with disabilities aimed at eliminating the waitlists for those services, and an additional $32 million for special education. Ayotte also tried to recoup funds through changes to Medicaid. She proposed instituting premiums on some recipients based on their income, charging higher copays for prescriptions, and allowing Medicaid to purchase name-brand drugs when those drugs are cheaper than generics. Each chamber's proposal was determined largely by how optimistic or pessimistic their revenue projections were. So for the House, which projected a gloomy financial outlook, steep cuts to Ayotte's budget were proposed. 'We must fit (the budget) to the revenues proposed by the House Ways and Means Committee,' Rep. Ken Weyler, a Kingston Republican and chairman of the House Finance Committee, said during a hearing in March. 'That revenue differs from the governor's estimate by almost $800 million in an almost $16 billion budget. Obviously, this is a bigger challenge than most budgets, but less than some previous challenges.' Weyler said the governor's budget is 'on a path to overspend by about $50 million.' When Republican House lawmakers got their hands on the budget, they decided to cut costs by axing several agencies. They voted to eliminate the Office of the Child Advocate, the state's child-focused watchdog overseeing New Hampshire's child welfare, juvenile justice, and youth care systems. They moved to disband the Housing Appeals Board, which allows residents to contest decisions from their local planning and zoning officials. They proposed eliminating the State Council on the Arts, the Human Rights Commission, and the Right-To-Know Ombudsman, among others. The House's budget also included a lot of layoffs. It proposed eliminating 190 positions in the Department of Corrections, 34 in the Liquor Commission, 27 in the Department of Education, 14 in the Department of Business and Economic Affairs, eight in the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources, eight in the Department of Safety, five in the Secretary of State's Office, and three in the Insurance Department. Among the most controversial moves made by the House were a 3% cut to Medicaid reimbursement rates, a cut to the $1 billion Ayotte set aside in an effort to eliminate the developmental disability services waitlist, and some funding for community mental health centers. It also increased some state fees to help make up for lost revenue, including fees for vanity license plates, dam registrations, wetlands dredging and filling, sewage, state elevator inspections, trucking, agricultural products and equipment, fisheries habitats, driver's licenses, and motor vehicle titles. 'Preliminarily, there's been a difference between what (House Ways and Means) see as revenue and what your budget proposes,' Weyler told Ayotte during a hearing in February. 'We may have to be making some further adjustments as we go, and I hope you will support them.' Ayotte ultimately didn't support many of those adjustments. In May, after the House finalized its budget, she told reporters, 'My takeaway is that my budget was a lot better.' When the Senate's turn to amend the budget began last month, senators quickly moved to reverse the Medicaid reimbursement rate cut and the cuts to developmental disability services and community mental health centers. However, on many of the others they looked for a middle ground. For example, they restored the Office of the Child Advocate, but with reduced funding. Their proposal calls for four positions to be eliminated from the office as opposed to all nine. Sen. Sharon Carson, who spearheaded the proposal, told the Bulletin she 'know(s) the value of the work they do' so they were 'trying to find a middle ground that the House will accept.' They took a similar approach to several of the other agencies. For the State Council on the Arts, (which they also debated axing, but eventually reversed course) senators turned it into a volunteer council, appropriating just $1 but allowing it to accept donations and tap into a business tax credit. They also reinstated the State Commission on Aging but cut about $130,000 to bring its total funding down to $150,000. Ayotte's proposal came out to a total of roughly $16 billion. The House's proposal trimmed that down to spend a total of around $15.5 billion over two years. And the Senate, seeking a middle ground, created a budget that spends roughly $15.9 billion. The current state budget for fiscal years 2024-25 is $15.4 billion. Now, the Senate and House must agree on one proposal. The House is allowed to accept all the amendments made by the Senate outright, but it is most likely that the two chambers enter into the committee of conference process to hash out differences between their budgets. Their deadline to pass a single budget is June 26. Once they approve a budget, it goes to Ayotte's desk and the governor can sign it, veto it, or allow it to be enacted without her signature. Ayotte does not have the option of a line-item veto — as many other state constitutions allow their governors to do — which means she has to accept or reject the budget in its entirety. The state's new fiscal year begins July 1. The new budget must be finalized and enacted by then to fund the government.
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senate Republicans Plan to Release Major Revisions to Trump's Tax Bill
(Bloomberg) -- Senate Republicans intend to propose revised tax and health-care provisions to President Donald Trump's $3 trillion signature economic package this week, shrugging off condemnations of the legislation by Elon Musk as they rush to enact it before July 4. Next Stop: Rancho Cucamonga! Where Public Transit Systems Are Bouncing Back Around the World Trump Said He Fired the National Portrait Gallery Director. She's Still There. ICE Moves to DNA-Test Families Targeted for Deportation with New Contract US Housing Agency Vulnerable to Fraud After DOGE Cuts, Documents Warn The Senate Finance Committee's plan to extract savings from the Medicaid and — perhaps — Medicare health insurance programs could depart in key respects from the version of the giant bill that narrowly passed the US House in May. The release of the panel's draft will likely touch off a new round of wrangling between fiscal conservatives and moderates. As the debate unfolds, businesses in the energy, health care, manufacturing and financial services industries will be watching closely. SALT Dilemma A crucial decision for Majority Leader John Thune, Committee Chairman Mike Crapo and other panel members will be how to handle the $40,000 limit on state and local tax deductions that was crucial to passage of the bill in the House. Senate Republicans want to scale back the $350 billion cost of increasing the cap from $10,000 to $40,000 for those making less than $500,000. House Speaker Mike Johnson and a group of Republican members from high-tax states have warned that any diminishing of the SALT cap would doom the measure when it comes back to the House for a final vote. At the same time, so-called pass-through businesses in the service sector are pushing to remove a provision in the House bill that limits their ability to claim SALT deductions. The Senate Finance Committee is widely expected to propose extending three business tax breaks that expire after 2029 in the House version to order to make them permanent. They are the research and development deduction, the ability to use depreciation and amortization as the basis for interest expensing and 100% bonus depreciation of certain property, including most machinery and factories. Manufacturers and banks are particularly eager to see all of them extended. To pay for the items, which most economists rank as the most pro-growth in the overall tax bill, senators may restrict temporary breaks on tips and overtime, which Trump campaigned on during last year's election in appeals to restaurant and hospitality workers. The White House wants to keep those provisions as is. White House economic adviser Kevin Hassett said Trump 'supports changing' the SALT deduction and it's up to lawmakers to reach a consensus. 'It's a horse trading issue with the Senate and the House,' Hassett said Sunday on CBS's Face the Nation. 'The one thing we need and the president wants is a bill that passes, and passes on the Fourth of July.' Earlier: Trump Tax Bill Set to Damp Solar Power Buildout, Hammer Wind The committee will also face tough decisions on green energy tax credits. Scaling those back generates nearly $600 billion in savings in the House bill. On Friday, rival House factions released dueling statements. The conservative House Freedom Caucus warned that any move to restore some of the credits would prompt its members to vote against the bill. 'We want to be crystal clear: If the Senate attempts to water down, strip out, or walk back the hard-fought spending reductions and IRA Green New Scam rollbacks achieved in this legislation, we will not accept it,' the group said. In contrast, a group of 13 Republican moderates, led by Pennsylvania's Brian Fitzpatrick and Virginia's Jen Kiggans, urged senators to make changes that would benefit renewable energy projects, many in Republican districts, that came about through President Joe Biden's Inflation Reduction Act. 'We remain deeply concerned by several provisions, including those which would abruptly terminate several credits just 60 days after enactment for projects that have not yet begun construction,' the lawmakers said in a letter to the Senate. Banks are especially interested to ensure that tax credits on their balance sheets as part of renewable energy financing aren't rendered worthless by the bill. Health-Care Perils Medicaid and Medicare cuts present the most daunting challenge in the committee's draft. While Republicans are generally in favor of new work requirements for able-bodied adults to be insured by Medicaid, some moderates like Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska have expressed concern over giving states just a year and a half to implement the requirement. House provisions instituting new co-pays for Medicaid recipients and limits on the ability of states to tax Medicaid providers in order to increase federal reimbursement payments are more disputed. Senators Josh Hawley of Missouri and Jim Justice of West Virginia have said they oppose these changes. To find savings to make up for removing these provisions, Republicans said last week that they are examining whether to put new restrictions on billing practices in Medicare Advantage. Large health insurers that provide those plans would be most affected by such changes. Yet overall, GOP leaders say the tax bill remains on schedule and they expect much of the House bill to remain intact. The Senate's rules-keeper is in the process of deciding whether some provisions are not primarily fiscal in nature. Provisions that restrict state regulations on artificial intelligence, ending some gun regulations and putting new limits on federal courts are seen as most vulnerable to being stripped under Senate budget rules. Lawmakers are largely taking their cues from Trump and sticking by the $3 trillion bill at the center of the White House's economic agenda. Musk, the biggest political donor of the 2024 campaign, has threatened to help defeat anyone who votes for the legislation, but lawmakers seem to agree that staying in the president's good graces is the safer path to political survival. 'We are already pretty far down the trail,' Thune told reporters on Thursday afternoon as his colleagues left for the weekend. The SEC Pinned Its Hack on a Few Hapless Day Traders. The Full Story Is Far More Troubling Cavs Owner Dan Gilbert Wants to Donate His Billions—and Walk Again Is Elon Musk's Political Capital Spent? What Does Musk-Trump Split Mean for a 'Big, Beautiful Bill'? Cuts to US Aid Imperil the World's Largest HIV Treatment Program ©2025 Bloomberg L.P.