Tina Smith confronts Mike Lee over posts about fatal shooting of Minnesota lawmaker
Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.) on Monday confronted Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) over of series of comments he made blaming Democrats for the fatal shooting of a Minnesota state lawmaker.
Shortly after the Senate began its Monday evening vote, Smith was seen walking into a conference room where Republicans were about to hold a meeting to discuss the text the Finance Committee had just unveiled for the party's massive tax bill.
She emerged a minute later talking to Lee in an adjacent hallway. The two spoke for a couple of minutes before the Minnesota Democrat emerged.
Andddd she found him https://t.co/mXaTYaj1co pic.twitter.com/ugSPoBMnPw
'Let me gather myself,' Smith said as she left, declining to comment initially.
She eventually told told reporters that Lee 'seemed a little surprised to be confronted.'
Lee angered Democrats of all stripes when he pinned blame on their side of the aisle after Melissa Hortman, the Democratic former Speaker of the Minnesota House of Representatives, and her husband were killed over the weekend at their home. The same man is suspected of shooting a second state lawmaker, state Sen. John Hoffman (D), and his wife at their home.
'This is what happens When Marxists don't get their way,' Lee wrote on Sunday on his personal X account.
Shortly after, he commented, 'Nightmare on Waltz Street,' referring to Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D), alongside a photo of the suspected shooter.
The two remarks were condemned by numerous Democrats. Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) called Lee's remarks 'beyond dangerous' and 'absolutely unacceptable.'
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), a friend of the late legislator, had told MSNBC prior to returning to Washington that she also planned on talking to Lee and condemned his comments.
'What I'm going to tell him is: This isn't funny,' she said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
24 minutes ago
- CNN
Suspect In Killing Of Minnesota Rep Faces 6 Federal Charges - The Arena with Kasie Hunt - Podcast on CNN Audio
Suspect In Killing Of Minnesota Rep Faces 6 Federal Charges The Arena with Kasie Hunt 47 mins A Minnesota Democrat who knew the lawmaker targeted in a politically motivated assassination joins Kasie Hunt to discuss the latest developments in the case. Also, how the politics of the Israel and Iran conflict is dividing the GOP, and what the "No Kings" protests may signal about Democratic messaging.
The Hill
31 minutes ago
- The Hill
Here's what's in the Senate GOP's version of Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill'
The Senate Finance Committee on Monday unveiled its portion of President Trump's 'big, beautiful bill,' containing provisions on Medicaid, taxes and green energy tax credits. The committee's text is the final piece of the upper chamber's version of the bill to be released, and was the most highly anticipated. It contains some of the thorniest provisions that Senate GOP holdouts have expressed concerns about, and the issues that could set the upper chamber on a collision course with the House. The House narrowly passed its version of the legislation last month. Here's what's in the Senate's bill. The bill makes many of the core elements of their 2017 tax cuts permanent but scales back additional cuts from what the House passed. The Senate bill locks in existing federal tax brackets, boosts the standard deduction and maintains the termination of personal exemptions — all without sunsets. In contrast with the House version, the bill sets a lower increase for the child tax credit, raising it to $2,200 per child as opposed to the House's $2,500. The bill creates new deductions for taxes on tips, overtime pay and car loan interest — a priority of Trump's that he campaigned on — but doesn't make them fully deductible. Tips are deductible up to $25,000 through 2028. Overtime pay is deductible up to $12,500, or $25,000 for joint filers, through 2028. Auto loan interest is deductible up to $10,000, also through 2028. Senate Republicans are taking a bigger swing at Medicaid in their version of the bill. The legislation would effectively cap provider taxes at 3.5 percent by 2031, down from the current 6 percent, but only for the states that expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. The cap would be phased in by lowering it 0.5 percent annually, starting in 2027. Non-expansion states would be prohibited from imposing new taxes, but as was true in the House-passed version, their rates would be frozen at current levels. The lower cap would not apply to nursing homes or intermediate care facilities. Limiting provider taxes is a long-held conservative goal, as they argue states are gaming the current system and driving up federal Medicaid spending. The policies are designed to inflate Medicaid spending on paper to allow states to receive more federal reimbursement dollars. The Senate bill also cuts certain existing state-directed payments to hospitals, which would be a significant hit to the hospitals' bottom line. The House version in contrast limited future payments but grandfathered existing arrangements. The change in the Senate bill is sure to anger Republicans who were already expressing concerns about the impact of the freeze in the House-passed version, including key holdouts like Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.). Provider taxes have become an important lifeline for hospitals, and rural hospitals would be hit hardest by the cuts. Hawley on Monday night signaled dissatisfaction with the newly unveiled text. Like the House bill, the Senate legislation imposes work requirements on Medicaid beneficiaries beginning at 19 years old. But the Senate version says adults with dependent children older than 14 will also have to prove they work, attend school or perform community service for 80 hours a month, while the House-passed version would exempt all adults with dependent children. The bill includes changes to green energy tax credits that are more flexible than those passed by the House — but would still be a significant rollback. The Senate text appears to eliminate the most stringent provision in the House bill, deleting a measure that would have required climate-friendly energy sources to start construction within 60 days of the bill's enactment to qualify for the credits at all. Instead, things such as solar panels and wind farms would need to begin construction this year in order to receive the full credit amount. Projects that begin construction in 2026 would get 60 percent of the credit, while projects that begin construction in 2027 would receive 20 percent. Projects constructed in 2028 or later would not be eligible for the credit. This, too, appears to be more flexible than the House text, which required projects to not just start construction but actually be producing electricity by the end of 2028 to qualify for the credit. Nevertheless, the Senate provisions are still a major rollback of the tax credits passed by Democrats in their 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. Under that law, the credits would have lasted until either 2032 or when U.S. emissions from the electric sector are 25 percent lower than their 2022 levels, whichever came later. The Senate text also adds carve-outs for hydro, nuclear and geothermal power, allowing them to receive the full credit if they begin construction before 2034. The Senate bill as drafted would keep the cap on state and local tax (SALT) deductions at $10,000 a year, rolling back the deal that Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) painstakingly cut with blue state Republicans to raise the limit on SALT deductions to $40,000 a year for households earning less than $500,000 annually. It would permanently extend the $10,000 cap, which is scheduled to expire at the end of this year. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) told reporters Monday afternoon that the $10,000 deduction cap is a 'marker' for talks with House Republicans, and that they will find a number in the middle that satisfies both camps. But the House's SALT Caucus Republicans are insisting on the $40,000 number. Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), a key member of the group, wrote on the social platform X that the proposal was 'DEAD ON ARRIVAL' and warned in a statement that a $40,000 deduction cap 'is the deal and I will not accept a penny less.' The bill would raise the debt ceiling by $5 trillion, instead of the $4 trillion increase adopted by House Republicans. The debt-ceiling language is a major problem for Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who has told his leadership he won't support the bill if it includes such a large extension of federal borrowing authority. Mychael Schnell and Al Weaver contributed.
Politico
34 minutes ago
- Politico
Trump promised to break California water. So far he hasn't.
SACRAMENTO, California — President Donald Trump promised to break California's water rules wide open. So far, he's mostly working within them. Five months after Trump issued a pair of directives for federal agencies to overturn state and Biden-era rules limiting water deliveries, the federal government has done no such thing. Instead, it's quietly increasing water flows following the very rules Trump once railed against — at least for now. It's a sharp contrast to Trump's otherwise confrontational posture towards California and climate policy. In just the last week, he rescinded the state's authority to phase out gas-powered vehicles and sent the National Guard into Los Angeles over Gov. Gavin Newsom's objections. It's also a sharp contrast to Trump's campaign rhetoric, when he vowed to force Newsom to reverse a lawsuit blocking his first-term effort to loosen environmental protections in the state's main water hub, the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. But Trump seems mollified now, declaring victory over the state at a White House event last week. The president brought up the familiar theme of water flowing out to the Pacific Ocean instead of being used in farms and cities, called it 'ridiculous' and declared of the water: 'We got them to take it now.' What's changed? For one, California had a wet winter, which tends to smooth over political differences. And the Trump administration suffered an early headline-grabbing debacle in February when it dumped summer irrigation water from Central Valley dams in a misguided effort to send it to fires in Los Angeles. Newsom has also aligned himself more with Trump on water, as when he jilted Delta-area Democrats last month in pushing to expedite a tunnel to move more supplies from Northern to Southern California. More substantively, some of the water districts that might be expected to agitate for Trump to overturn Biden-era water rules concede that they actually allow more deliveries than Trump's version. 'Our goal really is to try and implement some of the adaptive management and other actions that are in the [Biden-era rules] that provide some flexibility to benefit water supply and the fishery as well,' said Thaddeus Bettner, the executive director of the Sacramento River Settlement Contractors, a group of municipal and agricultural water districts in the northern Central Valley. So even though Trump's January directives gave federal officials the option to redo the Biden-era rules, they haven't done that so far — avoiding both lawsuits and negative headlines. The January orders also directed federal water agencies to write a report within 90 days on how to deliver on Trump's promises, but the White House is keeping that quiet, as well, declining to release it publicly. 'Less than a month into his second term, President Trump turned on the water to prevent another tragedy like the recent California wildfires, and he has urged Democrats like Gavin Newsom to adopt policies that better maintain our nation's forests,' White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in an email. 'He will continue to protect America's abundant natural resources, and updates to our water policy will come from him.' Environmental groups in the sensitive Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, however, aren't buying the quiet approach. They say the Trump administration is still violating endangered species rules, pointing to examples when federal officials pumped more water out of the Delta than state officials, killing or injuring protected species of salmon and trout in the process. 'Reclamation's behavior is cause for extreme concern for the health of the Bay-Delta and for the communities and people who care about and depend on this ecosystem,' the groups wrote in a letter last month to state water officials. (Bureau of Reclamation spokesperson Mary Lee Knecht said the agency 'continues to operate the Central Valley Project to maximize water supply and hydropower in full compliance' with the Biden-era rules.) There are a couple opportunities coming up for Trump to make more of a splash. He has yet to nominate a Bureau of Reclamation commissioner, who could sway the agency one way or the other. And on Tuesday, state and federal lawyers are due to update a judge on whether they want to continue the lawsuit Newsom lodged against Trump in 2020. Water agencies that have been mostly laudatory of Trump are still restive. Westlands Water District's general manager, Allison Febbo, called the Trump administration's latest projected increase in summer water allocations, from 50 to 55 percent, 'disappointing' given that reservoirs are filled to the brim. 'The operations quagmire that has contributed to the self-inflicted water crisis we have in this state, and reconfirmed by the Biden administration before leaving office, are still wreaking havoc on the water projects,' Johnny Amaral, chief of external affairs at the Friant Water Authority, said in a text message. 'Every minute that goes by is a lost opportunity to end the crisis, and the clock is ticking.' Like this content? Consider signing up for POLITICO's California Climate newsletter.
