'We all are going to die': Senator Ernst booed at Town Hall over support for Trump's $700 billion spending cuts
Senator Joni Ernst (Image credits: AP)
Republican senator Joni Ernst faced boos and groans from constituents during a tense town hall in Parkersburg, Iowa, on Friday after defending a Republican-backed spending and tax cut package, dubbed as 'the big, beautiful bill' by US President Trump, which includes $700 billion in cuts, including significant reductions to Medicaid.
Speaking at a high school in north-central Iowa, Ernst was responding to a constituent who warned that people could die without health coverage.
'People are not... well, we all are going to die,' Ernst replied, drawing audible groans from the crowd. She added, 'For heaven's sake, folks,' and stressed that the proposal would protect 'those that are most vulnerable' and eligible for Medicaid.
The controversial legislation narrowly passed the House last week by a single vote and now moves to the Senate.
Ernst acknowledged that the Senate version will likely differ from the House bill.
Republicans argue the bill's new work requirements and stricter eligibility checks for able-bodied adults without dependents will preserve the program for those who need it most.
Democrats, however, warn that millions could lose coverage. According to a preliminary estimate from the nonpartisan Congressional budget office, the plan could leave 8.6 million people without healthcare over the next decade.
Video of Ernst's comment quickly circulated on social media, with Democratic leaders using it to attack the GOP's stance on healthcare.
'This morning, Joni Ernst said the quiet part out loud: Republicans do not care about whether their own constituents live or die as long as the richest few get richer,' said Ken Martin, chair of the Democratic national committee.
Ernst is up for re-election in 2026.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
an hour ago
- New Indian Express
‘Mamata stooped low to appease vote bank by opposing Operation Sindoor': Amit Shah
The home minister alleged that senior TMC leaders were complicit in the violence in Murshidabad in April, which broke out during protests over the contentious Waqf Amendment Act. 'The way a TMC minister incited the violence, it can be said that the Murshidabad riots were state-sponsored,' he claimed. 'The MHA kept on insisting about the deployment of BSF during the Murshidabad riots, but the TMC government didn't allow it to happen so that the violence could continue. If BSF personnel had been deployed, Hindus would have been protected. It was only after BJP workers approached the high court that the BSF was finally sent in,' he alleged. At least three people died and several others were injured in the April riots. This was Shah's first visit to West Bengal since the Murshidabad clashes. Sharpening his attack on Banerjee for the state of affairs under her rule, Shah said, 'Today, Mamata didi has turned this great land of Bengal land into a hub of infiltration, corruption, atrocities on women, crime, bomb blasts and mistreatment of Hindus.' Hitting out at the state government for obstructing national security efforts, he said, 'Mamata Banerjee is opposing the Waqf Amendment Act for appeasement politics.' The home minister also accused the ruling TMC of facilitating illegal cross-border movement. 'The Bengal elections will not only decide the future of the state, but it is also linked to the security of the country. Mamata Banerjee has left Bengal's borders open for Bangladeshis. Infiltration is taking place with her blessings. Only the BJP government can stop this,' he said. Responding to the TMC's criticism of the BSF's inability to stop infiltration, the senior BJP leader said the Mamata Banerjee-led government has not given the required land to the BSF. 'Once the TMC government gives BSF the required land, we will stop infiltration. But, it would never give land to the BSF, as the party wants infiltration to continue so that it can remain in power,' he claimed. Shah also accused Banerjee of failing to take a firm stand on issues of national security. 'During previous regimes in which Mamata didi was also a minister, no steps were taken to deal firmly with terror attacks. But our PM Narendra Modi took firm measures against terror attacks by destroying terror camps across the border. But, Mamata didi has a problem with it,' he said. 'For the sake of her vote bank, Mamata didi has crossed all limits of stooping low. A few days ago, Pakistan-backed terrorists killed our innocent citizens in front of their families after asking them about their religion. Operation Sindoor was carried out to punish these terrorists. The headquarters of the terrorists were destroyed by entering Pakistan. However, Mamata didi was pained over the death of these terrorists. She opposed Operation Sindoor by issuing a cheap political statement,' Shah said. He said that under Operation Sindoor, the central government conducted a deep strike 100 km into Pakistan, targeting terrorist headquarters. 'Numerous terrorists were killed, but this seems to trouble Mamata ji. By doing so, you are not only opposed to the mission, but also disregard the sentiments and emotions of the women of our country,' Shah said.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Can Trump fix the national debt? Republican senators, many investors and even Elon Musk have doubts
President Donald Trump faces the challenge of convincing Republican senators, global investors, voters and even Elon Musk that he won't bury the federal government in debt with his multitrillion-dollar tax breaks package. The response so far from financial markets has been skeptical as Trump seems unable to trim deficits as promised. "All of this rhetoric about cutting trillions of dollars of spending has come to nothing - and the tax bill codifies that," said Michael Strain, director of economic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, a right-leaning think tank. "There is a level of concern about the competence of Congress and this administration and that makes adding a whole bunch of money to the deficit riskier." The White House has viciously lashed out at anyone who has voiced concern about the debt snowballing under Trump, even though it did exactly that in his first term after his 2017 tax cuts. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt opened her briefing Thursday by saying she wanted "to debunk some false claims" about his tax cuts. Live Events Leavitt said that the "blatantly wrong claim that the 'One, Big, Beautiful Bill' increases the deficit is based on the Congressional Budget Office and other scorekeepers who use shoddy assumptions and have historically been terrible at forecasting across Democrat and Republican administrations alike." But Trump himself has suggested that the lack of sufficient spending cuts to offset his tax reductions came out of the need to hold the Republican congressional coalition together. "We have to get a lot of votes," Trump said last week. "We can't be cutting." That has left the administration betting on the hope that economic growth can do the trick, a belief that few outside of Trump's orbit think is viable. Tech billionaire Musk, who was until recently part of Trump's inner sanctum as the leader of the Department of Government Efficiency, told CBS News: "I was disappointed to see the massive spending bill, frankly, which increases the budget deficit, not just decreases it, and undermines the work that the DOGE team is doing." Federal debt keeps rising The tax and spending cuts that passed the House last month would add more than $5 trillion to the national debt in the coming decade if all of them are allowed to continue, according to the Committee for a Responsible Financial Budget, a fiscal watchdog group. To make the bill's price tag appear lower, various parts of the legislation are set to expire. This same tactic was used with Trump's 2017 tax cuts and it set up this year's dilemma, in which many of the tax cuts in that earlier package will sunset next year unless Congress renews them. But the debt is a much bigger problem now than it was eight years ago. Investors are demanding the government pay a higher premium to keep borrowing as the total debt has crossed $36.1 trillion. The interest rate on a 10-year Treasury Note is around 4.5%, up dramatically from the roughly 2.5% rate being charged when the 2017 tax cuts became law. The White House Council of Economic Advisers argues that its policies will unleash so much rapid growth that the annual budget deficits will shrink in size relative to the overall economy, putting the U.S. government on a fiscally sustainable path. The council argues the economy would expand over the next four years at an annual average of about 3.2%, instead of the Congressional Budget Office's expected 1.9%, and as many as 7.4 million jobs would be created or saved. Council chair Stephen Miran told reporters that when that growth is coupled with expected revenues from tariffs, the expected budget deficits will fall. The tax cuts will increase the supply of money for investment, the supply of workers and the supply of domestically produced goods - all of which, by Miran's logic, would cause faster growth without creating new inflationary pressures. "I do want to assure everyone that the deficit is a very significant concern for this administration," Miran told reporters recently. White House budget director Russell Vought told reporters the idea that the bill is "in any way harmful to debt and deficits is fundamentally untrue." Economists doubt Trump's plan can spark enough growth to reduce deficits Most outside economists expect additional debt would keep interest rates higher and slow overall economic growth as the cost of borrowing for homes, cars, businesses and even college educations would increase. "This just adds to the problem future policymakers are going to face," said Brendan Duke, a former Biden administration aide now at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal think tank. Duke said that with the tax cuts in the bill set to expire in 2028, lawmakers would be "dealing with Social Security, Medicare and expiring tax cuts at the same time." Kent Smetters, faculty director of the Penn Wharton Budget Model , said the growth projections from Trump's economic team are "a work of fiction." He said the bill would lead some workers to choose to work fewer hours in order to qualify for Medicaid . "I don't know of any serious forecaster that has meaningfully raised their growth forecast because of this legislation," said Harvard University professor Jason Furman, who was the Council of Economic Advisers chair under the Obama administration. "These are mostly not growth- and competitiveness-oriented tax cuts. And, in fact, the higher long-term interest rates will go the other way and hurt growth." The White House's inability so far to calm deficit concerns is stirring up political blowback for Trump as the tax and spending cuts approved by the House now move to the Senate. Republican Sens. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Rand Paul of Kentucky have both expressed concerns about the likely deficit increases, with Johnson saying there are enough senators to stall the bill until deficits are addressed. "I think we have enough to stop the process until the president gets serious about the spending reduction and reducing the deficit," Johnson said on CNN. Trump banking on tariff revenues to help The White House is also banking that tariff revenues will help cover the additional deficits, even though recent court rulings cast doubt on the legitimacy of Trump declaring an economic emergency to impose sweeping taxes on imports. When Trump announced his near-universal tariffs in April, he specifically said his policies would generate enough new revenues to start paying down the national debt. His comments dovetailed with remarks by aides, including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, that yearly budget deficits could be more than halved. "It's our turn to prosper and in so doing, use trillions and trillions of dollars to reduce our taxes and pay down our national debt, and it'll all happen very quickly," Trump said two months ago as he talked up his import taxes and encouraged lawmakers to pass the separate tax and spending cuts. The Trump administration is correct that growth can help reduce deficit pressures, but it's not enough on its own to accomplish the task, according to new research by economists Douglas Elmendorf, Glenn Hubbard and Zachary Liscow. Ernie Tedeschi , director of economics at the Budget Lab at Yale University , said additional "growth doesn't even get us close to where we need to be." The government would need $10 trillion of deficit reduction over the next 10 years just to stabilize the debt, Tedeschi said. And even though the White House says the tax cuts would add to growth, most of the cost goes to preserve existing tax breaks, so that's unlikely to boost the economy meaningfully. "It's treading water," Tedeschi said.
News18
an hour ago
- News18
Mexico's first judicial elections stir controversy, confusion among voters
Last Updated: Mexico City, Jun 1 (AP) Mexico is holding its first ever judicial elections on Sunday, stirring controversy and sowing confusion among voters still struggling to understand a process set to transform the country's court system. Mexico's ruling party, Morena, overhauled the court system late last year, fuelling protests and criticism that the reform is an attempt by those in power to seize on their political popularity to gain control of the branch of government until now out of their reach. 'It's an effort to control the court system, which has been a sort of thorn in the side" of those in power, said Laurence Patin, director of the legal organization Juicio Justo in Mexico. 'But it's a counter-balance, which exists in every healthy democracy." Now, instead of judges being appointed on a system of merit and experience, Mexican voters will choose between some 7,700 candidates vying for more than 2,600 judicial positions. Mexico President Claudia Sheinbaum and party allies have said the elections are a way to purge the court system of corruption in a country that has long faced high levels of impunity. Critics say the vote could damage democracy and open the judicial system up further to organized crime and other corrupt actors hoping to get a grip on power. That process has only grown more chaotic in the run-up to the vote. Civil society organizations like Defensorxs have raised red flags about a range of candidates running for election, including lawyers who represented some of Mexico's most feared cartel leaders and local officials who were forced to resign from their positions due to corruption scandals. Also among those putting themselves forward are ex-convicts imprisoned for years for drug-trafficking to the United States and a slate of candidates with ties to a religious group whose spiritual leader is behind bars in California after pleading guilty to sexually abusing minors. At the same time, voters have been plagued by confusion over a voting process that Patin warned has been hastily thrown together. Voters often have to choose from sometimes more than a hundred candidates who are not permitted to clearly voice their party affiliation or carry out widespread campaigning. As a result, many Mexicans say they're going into the vote blind. Mexico's electoral authority has investigated voter guides being handed out across the country, in what critics say is a blatant move by political parties to stack the vote in their favour. 'Political parties weren't just going to sit with their arms crossed," Patin said. Miguel Garcia, a 78-year-old former construction worker, stood in front of the country's Supreme Court on Friday peering at a set of posters, voter guides with the faces and numbers of candidates. He was fiercely scribbling down their names on a small scrap of paper and said that he had travelled across Mexico City to try to inform himself ahead of the vote, but he couldn't find any information other than outside the courthouse. 'In the neighbourhood where I live, there's no information for us," he said. 'I'm confused, because they're telling us to go out and vote but we don't know who to vote for." (AP) RD RD First Published: June 01, 2025, 16:45 IST
