Latest news with #MitchMcConnell
Daily Mail
a day ago
- Business
- Daily Mail
Karoline Leavitt's unsettling warning to Republican rebel holding up Trump's 'big beautiful bill'
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt is attacking members of the president's own party for their opposition to his 'big, beautiful bill.' During a Monday afternoon appearance on Fox News, Leavitt called out Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) who is presently a no vote on the GOP spending package which is soon headed to the Senate after it passed the House before Memorial Day. 'Well, anyone who votes against the one big, beautiful bill including Senator Rand Paul, will be voting for a tax hike of more than $4 trillion on the American people and their voters will know about it,' Leavitt warned. 'That is unacceptable to Republican voters and all voters across the country who elected this president in a Republican majority to get things done on Capitol Hill,' Leavitt continued. Paul was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 2010, long before Trump's foray into politics, and was reelected to a third term in 2022 during Joe Biden 's presidency. Paul is not up for election again until 2028. Kentucky 's other Senate seat is up as an open seat in the 2026 midterms election. The commonwealth's senior senator and former U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is not running for another term. Paul has been making his rounds on the Sunday shows in recent weeks, sharing his perspective against the GOP spending package during appearances on Face the Nation on CBS Fox News Sunday and Fox News Sunday. On Face the Nation, Paul told host Margaret Brennan that the math in the 'big, beautiful bill' 'doesn't really add up.' 'Well, the math doesn't really add up. One of the things this big and beautiful bill is, is it's a vehicle for increasing spending for the military and for the border. It's about $320 billion in new spending,' Paul said. Senator Paul then put those numbers into perspective, comparing the spending package with the funds anticipated to be saved by spending cuts pushed for by the Depart of Government Efficiency (DOGE). 'That's more than all the DOGE cuts that we found so far. So, the increase in spending put into this bill exceeds the DOGE cuts. When you look just at the border wall, they have $46.5 billion for the border wall.' He went one: 'Well, the current estimate from the CBP is $6.5 million per mile. So, if you did 1,000 miles, that's $6.5 billion, but they have $46 billion. So they've inflated the cost of the wall eight fold,' Paul continued. 'So, there's a lot of new spending that has to be counteracted. But essentially, this is a bill by the military industrial complex advocates who are padding the military budget. There's going to be a lot of extra money.' 'Look, the President has essentially stopped the border flow without- without new money and without any new legislation. So, I think they're asking for too much money. And in the end, the way you add it up to see if it actually is going to save money or add money, is how much debt are they going to borrow? 5 trillion over two years, an enormous amount' Paul concluded. A May 20th analysis from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the federal deficit would increase by $3.8 trillion due to tax changes. The American people, like the Great People of Kentucky, do not support Biden spending levels and $5T in new debt. Therefore, I will not. It's simple. — Rand Paul (@RandPaul) June 1, 2025 Speaking with Fox News Sunday host Shannon Bream on May 25th, Paul shared further reservations about the increase to the national debt, while also touting his past support for lowering taxes. 'You know, the bigger a bill, the more it includes, the more difficult it is to get everybody to agree to things. I supported the tax cuts in 2017. I support making them permanent. So, I support that part of the bill,' Paul noted. WATCH: @RandPaul explains why he's a no on the current House GOP's version of Trump's 'big, beautiful bill'. — Fox News Sunday (@FoxNewsSunday) May 25, 2025 'I support spending cuts. I think the cuts currently in the bill are wimpy and anemic, but I still would support the bill even with wimpy and anemic cuts if they weren't going to explode the debt,' Paul argued. Later in the conversation, Paul also warned that 'the deficit is a threat to our country. I think it's the greatest threat to our national security', adding that the United States brings in 'about $5 trillion in revenue', while spending $7 trillion.
Washington Post
2 days ago
- Business
- Washington Post
For Senate Majority Leader John Thune, Trump's big bill is a big test
Senate Republicans are rushing to pass a massive bill that includes much of President Donald Trump's domestic agenda, the first big legislative test for the party's new majority leader, Sen. John Thune. When Republicans passed their last mammoth tax bill in 2017, the South Dakota Republican was a top lieutenant to Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky), the longtime majority leader. Now, it's all up to Thune to shepherd Trump's agenda through a narrowly divided chamber — where some Republicans are already bashing the bill.
The Herald Scotland
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
Trump attacks conservative judges, Federalist Society. Why?
"I was new to Washington, and it was suggested that I use The Federalist Society as a recommending source on Judges," Trump said on Truth Social. "I am so disappointed in The Federalist Society because of the bad advice they gave me on numerous Judicial Nominations." With that, Trump shifted from being a Republican president with a strong legacy of appointing conservative judges to a Republican president with a growing legacy of attacking conservative judges. That's a bad sign for any of his upcoming judicial nominations. Trump turns on conservative legal movement he helped build Trump and former Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, helped deliver Republicans a 6-3 majority on the Supreme Court. A significant part of that effort was The Federalist Society, a conservative legal organization that advocates for an interpretation of the Constitution that adheres to its original meaning. During his first term, Trump's judicial picks were tightly curated by adviser Leonard Leo, then the executive vice president of The Federalist Society. Most notably, all three of Trump's Supreme Court picks - Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett - all had ties to the organization. Opinion: Vance is doing his best to help Trump tear down the Supreme Court These three justices had a hand in overturning Roe v. Wade, striking down unconstitutional firearm restrictions, striking down racist affirmative action practices, curbing the power of administrative state bureaucrats and blocking much of the illegal Biden agenda. Even beyond the Supreme Court, Trump nominated 226 federal judges during his first term, many of those nominations guided by Federalist Society advisers. When did Trump start to turn on conservative judges? While the beginning of this spiral happened when the Supreme Court refused to entertain his 2020 stolen election claims, things have accelerated in his second term. Now, originalist judges have halted Trump's unconstitutional trade policy and have ruled against parts of Trump's mass deportation attempts. Even so, Trump until now was reluctant to outright condemn The Federalist Society. After all, one of the high points of his conservative agenda was his redecorating of the American courts with top-tier judges. The track record of Federalist Society judges is nothing short of a resounding victory for conservatives and the single best accomplishment of Trump's first term in office. Opinion: Elon Musk is frustrated with Republicans wasting DOGE's effort to cut. So am I. None of that matters now. Trump despises those judges because their loyalty is to the Constitution, not to him. He cannot fathom the discipline or honor required to be committed to preserving America's founding documents, rather than his own self-interest. The partnership between the conservative legal movement and Trump was always a temporary one, and Republicans in Congress had to have known that. While Republicans used Trump to reach their goals within the conservative legal movement, they made the mistake of allowing him to undermine the very accomplishments they made in his first term. Trump's future judicial nominations have judges worried Data from Notre Dame Law professor Derek Muller shows that federal judges are retiring at a record-slow pace at the beginning of Trump's second term. Just 11 vacancies have opened up since January, likely because judges are thinking twice about retiring in the face of who may replace them. Trump's first slate of judicial nominees is taking longer than it did in his first term, with confirmation hearings to take place on June 4, according to Axios. There are also fewer vacancies compared with Trump's first term, when he was handed more than 100 on Day 1 as a result of a stubborn Republican Senate majority in President Barack Obama's second term. Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store. Trump appears to be prioritizing his supporters in his early slate of judicial picks. Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove, who has previously represented Trump personally, has been nominated to the 3rd U.S. Circuit Courtof Appeals and sparked some concern even among conservatives. Trump's early judicial picks will determine how comfortable more aging federal judges are with retiring under his second administration. Those committed to the Constitution are understandably worried about who may replace them, and his recent rhetoric does not help me feel better. As Trump's brand of the Republican Party drifts from most of the conservative values it once claimed to support, so too does his support for conservative legal philosophy. Now, anything that stands in the way of Trump is bad, even if it is conservative in ideology. Dace Potas is an opinion columnist for USA TODAY and a graduate of DePaul University with a degree in political science.
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
McConnell: Medicaid cuts likely to remain in Senate but not easy to pass
Sen. Mitch McConnell thinks the cuts to Medicaid spending in the wide-ranging budget bill backed by President Donald Trump will remain. He said to a crowd gathered at a Kentucky Chamber of Commerce event Friday that he supports those entitlement cuts, which reduce 10-year spending on Medicaid by about $723 billion and are estimated to cut about 12% of the government-funded insurance program spend in Kentucky. 'I'm hoping we come out pretty close to where the House did on Medicaid,' McConnell said. Those cuts are one part of so-called 'Big, Beautiful Bill' backed by Trump that was narrowly passed by the U.S. House in May. The bill also extends tax cuts which primarily benefit the wealthy and cuts spending on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, among other things. McConnell also made sure to mention how politically difficult it might be for those cuts to Medicaid and other entitlement programs that were present in the U.S. House-approved bill to make it through the Senate. He emphasized that the last major change to entitlements in the U.S. was passed just before his 40-year career in the Senate began. 'Ronald Reagan and (late speaker of the House) Tip O'Neill agreed to raise the age of Social Security from 65 to 67. Since then, there's been nothing significant done to any entitlement, and the reason for it, obviously, is they are all immensely popular and no matter which side has controlled the government, nothing has happened,' McConnell said. He also mentioned how he was tasked during the administration of former President George W. Bush with finding Democrats who might support entitlement reform. He recalled the response of one Democrat predicting political doom if they went down that path. 'He said, 'Well, you guys have got the White House, you've got the House, you've got the Senate. Go right ahead,'' McConnell recalled. 'You know what he meant: We'll see you in the next election.' McConnell did not say whether or not he thought the provisions making changes to entitlements aimed at benefiting low-income Americans would make it through the Senate, though the cuts are a key part of financing the tax cut extension. He did make it clear that he supported the general direction of the cuts, though, citing conversations he's had with Kentucky health care providers, many of whom rely on Medicaid. 'We've checked with healthcare providers and state government, and they're comfortable with the way that issue is dealt with in the House bill and (by Kentucky) Congressman (Brett) Guthrie, who was directly involved in it. I'm interested in how those who could potentially be affected by and feel about it, and they seem to be okay,' McConnell said. The proposed changes to Medicaid that would lead to the cuts include mandating that adults getting Medicaid through the Affordable Care Act expansion meet certain work requirements and repealing a Biden-era rule simplifying the eligibility and renewal process, among other changes. One part of the big bill that McConnell felt confident would make it through: the extension of the tax cuts. McConnell said he's 'almost certain' those cuts to the individual income tax rate will remain. 'I think what unifies Republicans the most is the desire to have the lowest tax rate possible, and I think that part of the bill is likely to be very similar in both the House version and what we actually end up passing in the Senate,' McConnell said. Everything else is up in the air, he indicated. 'There are a lot of other things that I'm not going to get into because we don't know now what the final verdict is, but I do think this bill will pass in some form. I think you'll like most of it,' McConnell said. McConnell was not entirely supportive of the president's agenda in other areas. As he's expressed previously, Kentucky's senior senator disapproved of actions Trump has taken on tariffs, noting that the commonwealth would be uniquely affected. 'We ought to be doing more trade agreements, rather than attacking our friends with tariffs,' he said. 'Hopefully the president will give up on this path and remember that free trade is very, very important.' Another hobby horse of McConnell's has been aid to Ukraine, which has totaled more than $180 billion over the course of the country's defense against invasion from Russia, according to the U.S. Department of Defense. He warned against the plans of the United States' ostensible enemies like China, Russia, Iran and North Korea. 'What they want to do is displace American leadership with Chinese leadership or a combination or Russia or China,' McConnell said. 'We need to be leading our allies around the world with free trade.' The longtime politician and political junkie also had some thoughts to share about a Kentucky congressional seat that will be left open as a downstream effect of his choice not to seek reelection in 2026. McConnell told reporters after the event that he believed the Central Kentucky-based 6th Congressional District, which is currently held by Rep. Andy Barr who is now running for Senate, would stay red. That prediction comes in spite of Lexington, which makes up about 44% of the district, leaning more to the left in recent election cycles. 'Well, there's a blue spot in the middle of the sixth district, but it looks like most of it is pretty red, and I think whoever comes out of the primary has got a very good chance of winning,' McConnell said.
New York Times
5 days ago
- Business
- New York Times
For These Trump Voters, a Rubber-Stamp Congress Is a Key Demand
Congress is a coequal branch of government empowered to make laws, control government spending and declare war. But according to Trump voters, the role of the legislative branch is to rubber-stamp the president's agenda — and they don't appreciate Republicans who deviate from the party line. In two recent focus groups that quizzed older Trump voters from across the country about their views of Congress and congressional leaders, participants consistently praised lawmakers who displayed 'loyalty' to President Trump and disparaged those whom they viewed as failing to fall in line behind him. They expressed as much disdain for members of the hard-right House Freedom Caucus as they did for the more moderate senators they refer to as RINOs, or 'Republicans in Name Only,' including Senators Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine. And they reserved their purest aversion for Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the solidly conservative former longtime party leader, whom they described alternately as an 'obstructionist' to Mr. Trump's agenda, a 'snake in the grass' and a 'bowl of Jell-O' with no spine. Their perspectives offered a striking contrast to the reception that many Republican lawmakers have confronted at raucous town halls throughout the country in recent months. The lawmakers have been grilled and booed by constituents at these events for supporting Mr. Trump's policies on tariffs, immigration and, most recently, the sprawling domestic policy bill that the G.O.P. pushed through the House last week. And they help explain why most Republican lawmakers have put aside any reservations they may have on key issues and backed the president — because a critical portion of their party's base is still demanding that they do so. 'For loyal Trump voters, they're loving what they see as him 'doing something' and don't want congressional Republicans getting in the way of his agenda,' said Sarah Longwell, the anti-Trump Republican strategist who conducted the focus groups. 'And members of Congress have gotten that message loud and clear.' These voters represent only a piece of the electorate that Republicans must court in the run-up to midterm congressional elections in which their governing trifecta is on the line. Since Mr. Trump took office, G.O.P. lawmakers have struggled to defend his executive actions, his efforts to dismantle the federal bureaucracy and unilaterally defund government programs, and to explain to their constituents why they are not doing more to challenge him. In Nebraska this week, Representative Mike Flood faced an angry crowd grilling him on the Medicaid and food assistance cuts included in the domestic policy bill. And he admitted he had been unaware that the measure included a provision to limit the power of federal judges to hold people, including Trump administration officials, in contempt for disobeying court orders. But Ms. Longwell's sessions, videos of which were shared with The New York Times, were a reminder that there is still a powerful pull for Republicans to swallow whatever disagreements they may have with Mr. Trump and bow to what he wants. Since the beginning of this Congress, Speaker Mike Johnson, whose too-slim majority in the House leaves him little latitude to maneuver, has positioned himself less as the leader of the legislative branch and more as a junior partner to Mr. Trump. That stance is exactly what these voters, whom Ms. Longwell identified only by their first names and last initials to protect their privacy, said they liked about him. Arthur M., a voter from Arizona, described Mr. Johnson as 'loyal,' adding: 'I'm not saying they should never have any other ideas of their own, but they certainly shouldn't have someone dissenting if you're trying to put an agenda through — and that's what the Congress is.' Jeff B., a voter from Georgia, said Mr. Johnson always appeared to be 'in over his head.' But he did not see that as a negative. 'He's not the kind of guy like Mitch McConnell, who was pulling all the strings,' he said. 'He's struggling, and I think that's the way it's supposed to be. He looks like he's in over his head, and I think that's the way it's supposed to be.' The voters who participated in the focus groups, which were conducted on May 16 and 19, had uniformly negative views of those House Republicans they viewed as 'rabble-rousers,' which they defined as anyone expressing an opinion that was not in sync with the White House. Jane H., a voter from Indiana, criticized her congresswoman, Representative Victoria Spartz, an unpredictable lawmaker who often sides with the hard right, for being 'out of line' when she makes noises about opposing Mr. Trump's agenda. Gilbert W. from North Carolina held a similar view of Ms. Murkowski, who has routinely broken with her party to criticize Mr. Trump. 'Murkowski — this woman's never found anything on the Republican side she really goes for,' he said, calling her a 'troublemaker.' In contrast, Allen K. from Arizona praised his congressman, Representative Juan Ciscomani, for never making any waves. 'Whatever Trump does, he'll say,' he said of Mr. Ciscomani, describing that as a positive. As for Senator John Thune of South Dakota, the new Republican majority leader, he earned kudos mostly for not being Mr. McConnell. 'He's pressing Trump's agenda, it seems like,' Gilbert W. said. 'What else can you ask for?' Jane H., a three-time Trump voter, said: 'What I want to see is someone who will work hard and effectively to advance a conservative agenda, and to work closely with the White House to advance at this time Donald Trump's agenda. It's what the American people want, so that's what John Thune should be doing.' Many of the participants in the focus groups had only vague impressions of their own representatives, a reminder that to many voters, Congress remains a faceless institution of 535 mostly anonymous lawmakers about whom they don't have particularly strong feelings. That could help explain why most appeared to judge their elected officials almost exclusively according to how deferential they were to Mr. Trump, about whom they expressed potent — and extremely positive — sentiments. Asked for his opinions on Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill, Steve C., a voter from Michigan, said: 'I don't have an opinion on anyone specifically.'
