Rand Paul says he would support 'big, beautiful bill' if debt ceiling hike removed
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said on Sunday that he would support President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill" if the debt ceiling hike was removed.
Paul told CBS' "Face the Nation" host Margaret Brennan that he and three other Republican senators will hold out against the bill unless it is modified.
"I think there are four of us at this point, and I would be very surprised if the bill at least is not modified in a good direction," Paul said.
"I want the tax cuts to be permanent. But at the same time, I don't wanna raise the debt ceiling five trillion," he continued, adding, "The GOP will own the debt once they vote for this."
Senate Republicans Eye Changes To Trump's Megabill After House Win
Trump on Saturday warned Paul would be "playing right into the hands of the Democrats" if he votes against the bill.
Read On The Fox News App
"If Senator Rand Paul votes against our Great, Big, Beautiful Bill, he is voting for, along with the Radical Left Democrats, a 68% Tax Increase and, perhaps even more importantly, a first time ever default on U.S. Debt," Trump wrote on Truth Social Saturday afternoon.
Trump Warns Rand Paul He's Playing Into 'Hands Of The Democrats' With 'Big, Beautiful Bill' Opposition
"Rand will be playing right into the hands of the Democrats, and the GREAT people of Kentucky will never forgive him! The GROWTH we are experiencing, plus some cost cutting later on, will solve ALL problems. America will be greater than ever before!"
Next week, Senate Republicans will get their turn to parse through the colossal package and are eying changes that could be a hard sell for House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., who can only afford to lose three votes.
Congressional Republicans are in a dead sprint to get the megabill — filled with Trump's policy desires on taxes, immigration, energy, defense and the national debt — onto the president's desk by early July.
Fox News Digital's Brie Stimson and Alex Miller contributed to this report.Original article source: Rand Paul says he would support 'big, beautiful bill' if debt ceiling hike removed
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump offers final trade deadline to countries as markets stall
Trump offers final trade deadline to countries as markets stall originally appeared on TheStreet. The crypto markets remain stalled as the Trump administration has urged countries to submit their best trade offer by Wednesday, Reuters reported on June 2. The crypto market has seen its total capitalization decline from approximately $3.5 trillion to a little above $3.2 trillion within the last 7 days. Similarly, the price of the largest cryptocurrency, Bitcoin, is 7% lower than the all-time high (ATH) it reached on May 22. Other leading cryptocurrencies, such as XRP, SOL, Dogecoin, ADA, and SUI, have seen their prices decline as much as 14% over the last week. The crypto market, which is already well-known for its unpredictability, has seen a great deal of ups and downs as a result of the ebbs and flows of President Donald Trump's tariff war over the last two months. Trump hiked tariffs on all countries on Apr. 2 before pausing them for all except China for 90 days. While the administration has claimed its goal is to finalize 90 trade deals within 90 days, it has so far reached an agreement with only one of its partners, Britain. As per Reuters, it has seen a draft letter the office of the U.S. Trade Representative has sent to countries that are engaged in active negotiations. The countries are supposed to offer their best proposals regarding tariff and quota offers for the purchase of industrial and agricultural imports from the U.S., among other details. The U.S., in turn, will offer "a possible landing zone" after assessing the proposals within days. The letter indicates growing urgency within the Trump administration to finalize deals by the July 8 deadline. Trump offers final trade deadline to countries as markets stall first appeared on TheStreet on Jun 2, 2025 This story was originally reported by TheStreet on Jun 2, 2025, where it first appeared. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Elon Musk Has Left the White House -- Should Dogecoin Investors Run for the Hills?
Elon Musk has reached the end of his 130-day tenure at the White House, which is the annual limit for "special government employees." Musk was leading the Department of Government Efficiency (or DOGE for short, which is a reference to Dogecoin). Musk has supported Dogecoin since 2019, but the meme token has struggled to generate sustained upside. 10 stocks we like better than Dogecoin › Dogecoin (CRYPTO: DOGE) was founded as a joke by two friends in 2013 who used the famous "Doge" meme as inspiration. Little did they know, it would go on to reach a peak of $0.73 per token in 2021, which translated to an eye-popping market capitalization of almost $90 billion. A lot of that value was created on the back of Elon Musk's support, which has been ongoing since 2019. In fact, Dogecoin's most recent rally was sparked by Musk's involvement in the Trump administration, where he temporarily ran an external government agency with a name that references the meme token. But Musk's time at the White House has officially come to an end, so investors might be wondering what to do next. Is Dogecoin still a buy, or is this a sure sign to run for the hills? Between 2019 and 2021, Musk regularly shared Dogecoin-related memes on social media and participated in friendly banter with other enthusiasts. Investors started to think he had a plan to create real value for the meme token, and that speculation reached a fever pitch in the lead-up to his appearance on Saturday Night Live. During the show on May 8, 2021, Musk participated in a Dogecoin-themed comedy skit, which ended with him calling the meme token a "hustle." While it was a light-hearted joke, investors started to realize that Musk had no concrete plans to create value outside of his support on social media, so Dogecoin peaked at $0.73 per token that very night. It plunged over the next 12 months, losing more than 90% of its value by mid-2022. It stayed dormant during 2023 and for most of 2024, until the U.S. presidential election. Musk threw his cash and his influence behind Donald Trump, who campaigned on a series of pro-crypto policies, and Dogecoin soared (along with most cryptocurrencies) when Trump eventually won the presidency. A short time later, Trump announced plans to appoint Musk to run an external government agency tasked with reducing America's national debt by slashing spending. Musk named the agency the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE for short, which was a clear reference to his favorite cryptocurrency. However, to this day, Dogecoin has played no actual role in the agency, so its post-election rally was purely speculative. Musk's time at the White House has now come to an end. He was classified as a "special government employee," which means he can only work within the administration for 130 days per year -- and Jan. 20 (Trump's Inauguration Day) to May 30 was exactly 130 days. Dogecoin has plummeted by 59% from its recent 52-week high, but Elon Musk's departure from the DOGE agency isn't the biggest reason. The meme token has struggled to find a use case in the real world, and if consumers, businesses, and investors don't have a tangible reason to own it, then it's impossible to create sustainable value. According to Cryptwerk, just 2,096 businesses around the world accept Dogecoin as payment for goods and services. If consumers can't spend Dogecoin at their favorite stores, then they have no reason to buy it. Businesses probably won't warm up to the meme token anytime soon, because its extreme volatility would make cash-flow management a nightmare. Dogecoin also has a supply issue. There are 149.5 billion tokens in circulation as of this writing, and although there is a cap on how many more can be "mined" each year, there is no end date. In other words, new tokens will enter the market until the end of time. I've never seen an investment-grade asset with an unlimited supply that rises in value over the long term. Dogecoin's post-election rally peaked at $0.47, which was well below its 2021 high of $0.73. That suggests investors were less willing to buy into the Musk-driven hype this time around. But the meme token is now trading at just $0.19, and there could still be plenty of room to fall if history is any guide. Dogecoin bottomed at around $0.06 in 2022, which might be the level to watch. It implies there could be 68% downside from the current price, and with Musk now out of the White House and no improvements to the meme token's fundamentals, that might be the path of least resistance. As a result, I think it might be time to abandon Dogecoin and run for the hills. Before you buy stock in Dogecoin, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Dogecoin wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $651,049!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $828,224!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 979% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 171% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 2, 2025 Anthony Di Pizio has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Elon Musk Has Left the White House -- Should Dogecoin Investors Run for the Hills? was originally published by The Motley Fool 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
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
House settlement explained: How Louisville Cardinals, Kentucky Wildcats would be impacted
Roughly five years after its initial filing, the House v. NCAA settlement is still awaiting a decision from the courts. It's one of the most talked-about lawsuits in the history of college athletics. And for good reason. If approved, the settlement would establish a first-of-its-kind revenue-sharing model between schools and athletes. Advertisement Industry leaders have been operating for months under the assumption that the agreement would go through this spring and go into effect July 1, including those at the University of Louisville and the University of Kentucky. But they've yet to receive the all-clear. Here's everything you need to know about the settlement, including how Kentucky's two major schools are planning for two different futures: one where the agreement is approved and one where it's not. What is the House v. NCAA settlement? The proposed House settlement stems from the merging of three different lawsuits filed by current and former Division I athletes against the NCAA: House v. NCAA, Hubbard v. NCAA and Carter v. NCAA. Advertisement Plaintiffs Grant House (former Arizona State swimmer) and Sedona Prince (former Texas, Oregon and TCU basketball player) filed a class-action complaint in June 2020 alleging that the NCAA violated antitrust laws by restricting athletes' ability to profit off their name, image and likeness. Former Oklahoma State running back Chuba Hubbard and former Duke defensive tackle DeWayne Carter filed similar complaints against the NCAA and power conferences. Judge Claudia Wilken, who previously presided over the Alston v. NCAA lawsuit finding the NCAA in violation of antitrust laws by capping the value of athletic scholarships, later consolidated the House suit with Hubbard and Carter. On Oct. 7, Wilken granted the House settlement preliminary approval. That version of the settlement would provide $2.8 billion in back damages to athletes who could not profit off their NIL between 2016 and Sept. 15, 2024. It would also bring revenue sharing to college sports starting July 1 with a projected cap for 2025-26 of $20.5 million per school. But one aspect of the agreement has delayed her final decision by nearly two months. Instead of scholarship limits, the version of the House settlement Wilken granted preliminary approval to established roster caps. Objectors spoke out against roster limits at the April 7 final approval hearing in Oakland, California. Afterward, Wilken gave attorneys two weeks to amend the roster limit concept. She suggested grandfathering in athletes already on existing rosters. Executives from the Power Four conferences — Big Ten, SEC, ACC and Big 12 — agreed to an optional grandfathering-in model for schools. The settlement has been back in Wilken's hands since May 16. How will settlement money be distributed? As the settlement currently stands, $2.8 billion would be provided to college athletes who could not profit off their NIL between 2016 and Sept. 15, 2024. These athletes had to file objections to or claims to be part of the settlement before Jan. 31. About 40,000 filed claims suggesting they would participate in the settlement, Front Office Sports reported in February. Advertisement The backpay is to be doled out over 10 years — 60% by the NCAA from its reserves and 40% from schools. In addition to damages, the House settlement would bring revenue sharing to college sports starting July 1 with a projected cap for 2025-26 of $20.5 million per school. How that money is divvied up will be left to individual institutions. Louisville athletics director Josh Heird told The Courier Journal at ACC spring meetings that U of L knows how it will distribute the $20.5 million among its varsity sports but declined to share exact numbers. Kentucky athletics director Mitch Barnhart told the CJ at SEC spring meetings that, rather than establishing firm percentages for each program, Kentucky will take a less rigid approach to meet each sport's needs year in and year out. Front Office Sports reported that power conference schools are expected to dedicate 75% of the $20.5 million toward their football programs. Texas Tech's reported breakdown gives 74% to football, 17% to 18% to men's basketball, 2% to women's basketball, 1.8% to baseball and the rest to other sports. That's $15.17 million for football, $3.69 million for men's basketball and $410,000 for women's basketball. How much are college athletes getting paid? College athletes would make money through revenue-sharing agreements with their schools and still be eligible for third-party NIL deals if the settlement is approved. However, the NIL market would be more heavily monitored than it is now under an enforcement structure that some industry leaders are skeptical of. Advertisement All NIL deals exceeding $600 will have to be reported to and pass through a clearinghouse called 'NIL go,' starting three days after the settlement is approved. NIL go will be operated by Deloitte with the purpose of assessing athletes' fair market value. Officials from the clearinghouse have been sharing data about past deals with athletics directors and coaches over the last several weeks, including 70% of agreements from collectives would not have passed through NIL go; 80% of NIL deals with public companies were valued at less than $10,000; And 99% of those deals were valued at less than $100,000 Those numbers are a far cry from the millions collectives have reportedly spent on athletes over the last four years or so. Restricting compensation in this way feels, to some, like a bit of a step backward. 'They're just encouraging people to cheat again,' Dan Furman, president of Louisville's official collective 502Circle, told The Courier Journal. Advertisement SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey spoke about the clearinghouse at spring meetings. When asked directly if he had confidence in these guardrails, Sankey said yes. "People are going to have opinions," he said. "Nothing ever worked when people sat around and said, 'Well, this won't work.' We're adults, we're leaders, and I think I communicated this (recently), we have a responsibility to make this work." Why roster limits are delaying Judge Claudia Wilken's decision? Instead of scholarship limits, the version of the House settlement Wilken granted preliminary approval to established roster caps. This structure would cause thousands of athletes across the country to lose their spots — mainly in football and Olympic sports. Objectors spoke out against roster limits at the final approval hearing in Oakland on April 7. Advertisement Wilken told attorneys they needed to fix this issue or else she would reject the settlement. She suggested grandfathering in athletes already on existing rosters. Executives from the Power Four conferences came back with an optional grandfathering-in model for schools. Objectors then argued for mandatory grandfathering, but lawyers from the NCAA and power conferences maintained that their proposal should satisfy Wilken's demands and solicit approval. What does Kentucky's NIL bill say? Several states have laws permitting schools to directly pay college athletes — including Kentucky. The commonwealth passed Senate Bill 3 in March, amending its previous NIL legislation so state universities could legally operate within the House settlement's proposed revenue-sharing model. Advertisement Ross Dellenger of Yahoo! Sports reported in early May that athletics directors predict many schools will use state law to begin paying athletes, regardless of whether Wilken denies the settlement. One AD told Yahoo!: 'What can the NCAA do about it?' What will Louisville do if Judge Claudia Wilken rejects House v. NCAA settlement? If Wilken denies the settlement, U of L will likely move forward with paying its athletes directly, Heird told The Courier Journal at ACC spring meetings. 'That's probably the path we would go down,' Heird said. 'Just from the standpoint of the more control you can have of the situation, the better. It's been a little bit disjointed with outside entities, collectives, doing things. So I would presume that's the road we would go down.' Advertisement Should the settlement get denied, U of L wouldn't be beholden to the $20.5 million cap. Instead, paying athletes would just 'be a budget constraint,' Heird said. 'But I'd contend it's a budget constraint now.' What is Kentucky's NIL budget? UK, like all other universities, will be limited to $20.5 million to share with its athletes under the settlement's current terms. This $20.5 million represents 22% of the average revenue of power conference schools and Notre Dame across eight categories, including but not limited to ticket sales and media rights. UK totaled $129.2 million across those categories, according to its 2023-24 NCAA financial report. Barnhart told The Courier Journal at SEC spring meetings that, rather than establishing firm percentages of the $20.5 million for each program, Kentucky will take a less rigid approach to meet each sport's needs year in and year out. What is Louisville's NIL budget? U of L, like all other universities, will be limited to $20.5 million to share with its athletes under the settlement's current terms. This $20.5 million represents 22% of the average revenue of power conference schools and Notre Dame across eight categories, including but not limited to ticket sales and media rights. Louisville totaled $105.5 million across those categories, according to its 2023-24 NCAA financial report. Advertisement Heird told The Courier Journal at ACC spring meetings that U of L knows how it will distribute the $20.5 million among its varsity sports but declined to share exact numbers. Reach college sports enterprise reporter Payton Titus at ptitus@ and follow her on X @petitus25. This article originally appeared on Louisville Courier Journal: What is the House settlement? How U of L, UK would be impacted
