Latest news with #RileyBeggin
Washington Post
11-07-2025
- Business
- Washington Post
Riley Beggin Named Congressional Economic Policy Correspondent
We are excited to announce that Riley Beggin will join The Post as congressional economic policy correspondent to lead our coverage of taxes, spending, deficits and legislation affecting the broader economy on Capitol Hill. Riley joins us from USA Today, where she covered Congress through the 2024 elections and the recent passage of the Republican reconciliation bill. Her reporting has explored Vice President JD Vance's rise in the MAGA movement and House Speaker Mike Johnson's evolving relationship with President Donald Trump. She also scooped multiple changes at the National Science Foundation prompted by the U.S. DOGE Service. Before joining USA Today, Riley reported on economics in Washington for the Detroit News, where she won state and national awards for her coverage of automotive policy and broke news on the Biden administration's efforts to overhaul domestic car manufacturing. She also previously covered Michigan politics for Bridge Michigan. Riley graduated from the University of Wisconsin with a BA in history and the University of Missouri with an MA in journalism. Please join us in welcoming Riley to the newsroom. Her first day is July 21.
USA Today
10-07-2025
- Business
- USA Today
Trump's \
On a special episode (first released on July 9, 2025) of The Excerpt podcast: USA TODAY Senior Congress and Campaigns Reporter Riley Beggin breaks down the signature policy changes laid out in the recently passed GOP budget. Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text. Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here Dana Taylor: Hello, I'm Dana Taylor, and this is a special episode of USA TODAY's The Excerpt. After a furious few weeks of debate, closed-door negotiations, open floor debate, and deal-making, the Republican-controlled legislature has finally passed a final version of President Donald Trump's budget priorities referred to by Republicans as one Big Beautiful Bill. It's likely going to be the most significant legislative accomplishment of Trump's second term. And as with most bills, this one has its winners and its losers. But make no mistake; it will impact every American one way or another. Here to help us dig into its impact on Americans is USA TODAY's Senior Congress and Campaigns Reporter Riley Beggin. Riley, I know you've logged a lot of hours following all of the developments on the hill. Thank you so much for coming on The Excerpt. Riley Beggin: So happy to be here. Dana Taylor: Let's start with one of the most discussed, some would say contentious aspects of this bill, its price tag. What does the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office say it will cost, and how might this impact the economy? Riley Beggin: So the latest estimates on this from the Congressional Budget Office, as you mentioned, is $3.4 trillion added to the national deficit over the next 10 years. In terms of economic impact, there are a lot of potentials here, and I will say that that is just an estimate. Things tend to change over time. There are business incentives in this bill that would boost economic output, but what the CBO has found is essentially the costs outweigh those benefits when it comes to addition to the deficit. And when we're talking about the size of the national debt, that's a big topic. There are a lot of potential risks for that that's long term, and we're not really sure at what point it becomes a tipping point. So the long-term risk of a huge amount of national debt is a downturn in demand for Treasury Bonds, which could lead to a fall in the value of the dollar and potentially risk a global financial crisis. Of course, we are not saying that is going to happen, but that is the potential long-term risk of debt. Dana Taylor: Now let's get into some of the specifics. The biggest component of the bill's price tag is by far the cost of making the president's 2017 tax cuts permanent. Talk us through who the winners and losers are here. Riley Beggin: So this is actually something that the average American is not really going to see much change. This is extending the current income tax structure. What that means is that no American is going to see an increase in their income tax, which they would've otherwise seen if this bill did not pass because the 2017 tax cuts would have expired. But not everybody benefits in the same way. Wealthier Americans are going to benefit a little bit more than low-income Americans here. And then I will say it doesn't end taxes on social security, which is something that we've talked about in the past, but it does create a new $6,000 deduction for seniors. So there are a bunch of other benefits in this bill, but in terms of income taxes, your taxes are going to stay the same. Dana Taylor: There's also a big win for Trump in accomplishing one of his key campaign promises; canceling taxes on tips and overtime. What's in the bill on this, and what are the likely impacts for Americans whose earnings fall into one or both categories? Riley Beggin: These are both temporary tax breaks that last through the end of President Trump's presidency, so will go through 2028. For the no tax on tips carve out, people will not have to pay for taxes on the first $25,000 of tips that they receive. We still have to pay social security and Medicare taxes, and it phases out if you make more than $150,000 a year. A caveat I will mention here is that more than a third of tipped workers in America actually don't make enough money to pay income taxes to begin with, and in that case, they would not benefit from this tax break. The tax break is also limited to certain professions. The way that we maybe typically think of tipped workers, waitresses and hairstylists and things like that, as a way to try to prevent people from taking advantage of this tax break who maybe aren't intended to receive it. On the overtime front, people who are getting paid overtime can deduct up to $12,500 in overtime. Annually, it's $25,000 if you're filing jointly. And this, again, only applies to federal income taxes. So if you don't make enough money to have to pay income tax to begin with, you would not benefit from this tax credit. Dana Taylor: Let's talk about Medicaid and the changes to that social safety net program. This is largely how Republicans are paying for Trump's tax cuts. What are the changes they've agreed to with Medicaid and also with food assistance? Riley Beggin: Both of these are pretty sweeping changes. So on the Medicaid front, the biggest change, and this would be the biggest cost saving like you mentioned, is the addition of work requirements for able-bodied people without dependents. This is something that is not going to kick in until 2027, but it would save a lot of money from the program, could have huge impacts on the number of people that are eligible. The bill will also change the way that money flows to states for Medicaid. It will require more frequent eligibility checks. A lot of new restrictions on that program for low-income people. The estimated potential hit here is 11.8 million people losing access to Medicaid over the next 10 years. On the food stamps front, they are also making pretty significant changes. Raising the working age from 54 to 64. That's how long you have to be working to still get access to food stamps. Lowering the age exception for dependents at this point now parents with children younger than seven are exempt from the requirements, but that is different from before. And then it will also change for the first time the federal match rate requiring states to pay more for food stamps, which some experts say could impact the quality of benefits. And on that front, two million people are estimated to lose access to food stamps. Dana Taylor: Obamacare is another program the GOP is pairing back to cover Trump's tax cuts. How will people be impacted here? Riley Beggin: This bill does not extend enhanced subsidies for ACA recipients that were put in place under former President Joe Biden. That would expire at the end of the year. The impact for everyday Americans who are covered under the ACA, they would see an increase in their premiums by more than 7.5%. Dana Taylor: Let's talk about another line item in this bill, also known as SALT. What is it? What's in the final bill, and how will it impact Americans? Riley Beggin: SALT; something that people may have heard of throughout this process. It was very a contentious part of the debate in Congress. It applies mostly to people who live in high-tax states. SALT stands for State and Local Tax Deduction. Under the 2017 bill that we talked about earlier that cut income taxes. They also put a cap on the amount that people could deduct under this provision. So they put that cap at $10,000. It became a huge part of the negotiations in Congress because there was this cohort of Republicans who represented high-tax states like New York, New Jersey, California, who wanted to bump up that cap. So they were successful, and they were able to raise the cap to $40,000 for people who make less than $500,000 a year. Dana Taylor: The bill has earmarked significant monies for immigration enforcement, allowing ICE to scale up. How much, and how will this money be spent? Riley Beggin: Yeah, I think this is going to be a huge thing that we're going to be following at USA TODAY on what happens out of this bill. So it puts $170 billion into immigration enforcement over the next five years. There are earmarks in there to hire at least 10,000 new ICE agents, new CPP agents, expand detention spaces, 46 billion for construction of the wall at the southern border. This is really going to amplify and fund the president's interest in a mass deportation campaign. And I think we're going to have to sort of wait and see the implications of this funding. Dana Taylor: One policy shift that Democrats were particularly unhappy with in this bill is a rollback of clean energy subsidies. What are the specifics here, and what are the likely impacts? Riley Beggin: This was, again, one of the most controversial parts of this bill. And to sort of bring us back to the beginning here, the focus of this was a Biden era policy, the reconciliation bill that Democrats passed when they had total control of government to amp up clean energy production. So they put in a bunch of tax credits for electric vehicles, for renewable energy, like wind and solar. And essentially what this bill does is rolls back or completely eliminates most of those tax credits. It ends credits for home energy improvements, like solar and heat pumps, ends a tax credit for electric vehicles. And in terms of impact, of course, this is going to potentially slow clean energy growth as federal subsidies dry up. And experts say could potentially increase energy costs as the diversification of energy options dwindle here. Dana Taylor: The 2021 temporary expansion of the Child Tax Credit passed by the Biden administration led to a historic reduction in the number of children living in poverty. Some argue it reduced poverty by up to 60%. The bill passed by the Senate and House does raise the credit a bit, but it also limits eligibility. Give us the overview of what the bill accomplishes here. Riley Beggin: Yeah, so like you mentioned, this does boost the Child Tax Credit by $200 from 2,000 to 2,200. The expanded Child Tax Credit that you mentioned was going to expire. So this will extend that and add a little bit to it. Like some of these other provisions that we discussed, if you have very low income, you actually can't use the whole credit, because the way that it is structured is it applies to up to 15% of your adjusted gross income until you hit $2,000, or in this case, $2,200. So what that means is if your income doesn't reach that 15% of the $2,000, you can't actually take advantage of the whole thing. Dana Taylor: Getting to Democrats responses, their main criticism is that the bill is a gift to wealthy Americans and will leave a lot of lower income people less well off. Is that true? What is your reporting revealed? Riley Beggin: It is true. Over the next 10 years according to the Nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, and this is looking at the bill as a whole, so we're talking about the tax cuts, but also some of the changes in Medicaid and SNAP, as we discussed, benefits for low-income people, what the CBO found is that resources for the poorest Americans would decrease by about 2% by 2027, and in comparison, household resources for the richest Americans would increase by about 4% in that same time period. That's mainly due to tax cuts. And the loss in household resources is mainly due to the cuts in Medicaid and food stamps. That is reflected across the income brackets. So the poorer you are, the more likely you are to potentially lose resources under this bill. Dana Taylor: Riley, thank you so much for being on The Excerpt. Riley Beggin: Thank you for having me. Dana Taylor: Thanks to our senior producers, Shannon Rae Green and Kaely Monahan, for their production assistance. Our executive producer is Laura Beatty. Let us know what you think of this episode by sending a note to podcasts@ Thanks for listening. I'm Dana Taylor. Taylor Wilson will be back tomorrow morning with another episode of The Excerpt.
USA Today
02-06-2025
- Politics
- USA Today
8 injured in attack on event calling for release of Israeli hostages
8 injured in attack on event calling for release of Israeli hostages | The Excerpt On Monday's episode of The Excerpt podcast: The FBI is investigating the attack in Colorado as an act of terrorism. USA TODAY Senior Congress Reporter Riley Beggin discusses some potential changes to President Donald Trump's tax bill in the Senate. Some parents are 'unschooling' their kids. What does that mean? USA TODAY National Correspondent Trevor Hughes talks through concerns about an emerging surveillance state. Steve Carell told students their prom expenses were paid after wildfires. Ronnie Li reports in this month's segment of Kind Time. Find more from USA TODAY's Humankind page here. Let us know what you think of this episode by sending an email to podcasts@ Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text. Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here Taylor Wilson: Good morning. I'm Taylor Wilson, and today is Monday, June 2nd, 2025. This is The Excerpt. Today, what we know about an attack that saw a suspect throw firebombs into a Colorado crowd at an event calling for the release of Israeli hostages. Plus how the Senate will tackle Trump's tax bill, and we discuss concerns about an emerging surveillance state. ♦ Multiple people were set on fire during an event calling for the release of Israeli hostages in Gaza at a pedestrian mall in Boulder, Colorado, yesterday, according to authorities. At least eight people were injured, and a male suspect has been taken into custody. The suspect, identified by authorities as 45-year-old Mohamed Sabry Soliman, yelled "Free Palestine" during the attack. According to the FBI special agent in charge of the Denver Field Office, Mark Michalek, who held a news conference last night. He also gave insight into how the FBI is approaching their investigation. Mark Michalek: As a result of these preliminary facts, it is clear that this is a targeted act of violence, and the FBI is investigating this as an act of terrorism. Taylor Wilson: The incident came just over a week after the slaying of two Israeli embassy aides outside of a Jewish museum in Washington, D.C., and as Israeli hostages are still being held in Gaza. The violence also comes amid continued Israeli strikes in Gaza and renewed hunger concerns there. Israel is blocking all but a trickle of humanitarian aid from entering Gaza, according to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. With little ready-to-eat food entering it, a spokesperson described Gaza last week as the hungriest place on earth. ♦ The Senate is preparing to tackle President Donald Trump's big tax bill and make some changes. I discuss with USA TODAY Senior Congress & Campaigns Reporter Riley Beggin. Welcome back, Riley. Riley Beggin: Of course. Happy to be here. Taylor Wilson: So just in terms of the logistics here at the top, how do we expect this to play out? Will there be public hearings on the Senate bill, and what's the expected timeline now that lawmakers have returned from this week away? Riley Beggin: So they are going to hit the ground running. They want to try to pass this bill by the 4th of July, which gives them only four working weeks to work out what they want to change in the Senate and then make sure that that grooves with the House. The House will have to pass it again before it can get to the president's desk. So that is a very short timeframe for all of those changes. So we can expect things to really start moving here pretty soon next week. But in terms of what to expect, it's actually unclear at the moment whether there are going to be public committee hearings known as markups, where senators are going to be going through potential changes, taking amendments, debating things publicly. That is going to be left up to individual committee chairs to decide. So, for example, the finance committee, if they're going to be looking at the tax package, it's really up to the chairman of that committee to decide whether it's going to be a public hearing that does this. The hope is definitely still to pass it by July 4th, but the real deadline I will mention for you guys is the end of July. That is when they will potentially hit the debt ceiling in August. And so lawmakers want to make sure they can get a provision in this bill across the finish line before then, which would raise the debt ceiling by $4 trillion. Taylor Wilson: Who are some of the Senate Republicans, Riley, with major concerns, and what are some of those concerns? Riley Beggin: They really run the gamut. Just like in the House, there are different factions of the GOP conference that have different concerns, and the Senate is much smaller than the House, of course. So every senator is sort of an island of their own ideas and their own interests. So when I say factions, these guys generally align, but they're not necessarily working together towards the same goal, usually in the same way that they are in the House. But I would say keep your eyes on Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, Rick Scott of Florida, Mike Lee of Utah, and Rand Paul of Kentucky. These are senators who lean more fiscally conservative and have raised concerns about the overall cost of the bill and want deeper cuts to offset the tax cuts. The other people that I will mention... Is there are significant cuts to Medicaid in this program; $625 billion would be shaved off of it. Primarily through the addition of work requirements for able-bodied adults who don't have children. It is estimated to push 7.6 million Americans off of coverage. There are several senators who've raised concerns about that. Susan Collins of Maine, Josh Hawley of Missouri, Jim Justice of West Virginia. So that's another group to watch. And then finally, I'll say there was the Inflation Reduction Act, this democratic bill passed under former President Joe Biden, that had a lot of renewable energy credits in it. Republicans are looking to roll back some of those credits, and there are a handful of Republicans who have said they have concerns about that. They've helped businesses in their state, and they want to protect some of those provisions. Taylor Wilson: As for Senate Majority Leader John Thune, you mentioned him, Riley. How will he factor into these discussions, and really, what's at stake for him? Riley Beggin: Yeah, I mean, he's the new leader succeeding Mitch McConnell, so he definitely has a lot at stake. He is somebody who the conference seems to have a lot of trust in; he's going to be listening to all different sides of this. But he wants to make sure that he can deliver for Republicans and for President Trump, so he can only lose three Republican votes and still get the majority necessary to pass it because most Democrats are not going to cross party lines and support it, if any. We will, of course, be watching him closely. Taylor Wilson: Riley Beggin covers Congress & Campaigns for USA TODAY. Thanks, Riley. Riley Beggin: Of course. ♦ Taylor Wilson: Unschooling videos have amassed millions of views on social media as fascination with the educational movement grows. Self-directed education, commonly known as unschooling, is a form of homeschooling that's based on activities and life experiences chosen by the child, according to the Alliance for Self-Directed Learning, or ASDE, a nonprofit dedicated to increasing awareness and accessibility to unschooling. Education experts say parents and caregivers unschool differently. Some take a few pages from the homeschooling curriculum and then carve out lessons for their children. Others attend micro schools or free schools where unschooled children are grouped together in a nature school or outside school, under the guide of parents or teachers. According to Daniel Hamlin, associate professor of education policy at the University of Oklahoma. Some parents dive into unschooling with no structure and don't initiate any semblance of traditional education unless explicitly asked by their children. There are various reasons why parents and caregivers decide to unschool their children. Many say it's to shield them from the bullying and violence that sometimes play out in a traditional educational setting. Some don't want their children to be forced into learning things they don't find interesting. Others say they don't trust educators to focus on their children if they have special learning needs. While unschooling may work for some families, some argue it's also vulnerable to unintended consequences such as abuse and educational neglect. Laws to prevent abuse and neglect when a child is educated at home, whether it's unschooling or homeschooling, vary from state to state, but about a dozen states don't have any safety nets to ensure a child receives a proper education. According to Jonah Stewart, interim executive director of the Coalition for Responsible Home Education. You can read more about this conversation with a link in today's show notes. ♦ There are emerging concerns about surveillance under the Trump Administration. I spoke with USA TODAY National Correspondent Trevor Hughes to learn more. Hi, sir. Trevor Hughes: Hey. Taylor Wilson: So Trevor, what has the administration been doing when it comes to surveillance? Let's start there. Trevor Hughes: The government has a whole bunch of information about every single person that lives in this country. You pay taxes, you pay property taxes, you register your car. The government has all kinds of information about every single one of us. What the Trump Administration is doing is very deliberately breaking down the silos between those government databases, and the end result, they say, is a better ability to detect fraud, detect people who are living here illegally, and to prevent people from voting illegally in American elections if they are not a U.S. citizen. Taylor Wilson: In terms of just kind of formally what's happening here, how is Big Tech helping to make this happen? Trevor Hughes: So we give social media a whole heck of a lot of information. There's an old saying, which is that "if the software is free, then the user is the product." And what I mean by that is that we give social media companies all kinds of information about where we go, who we hang out with, where we shop, what we do, what we like to do. It's no surprise that Facebook and Instagram serve us ads about things we've been talking to with our friends. And so what big data does is it takes that kind of information, which you can buy, and combines it with these federal databases and can create an incredibly accurate picture of what your life is like. Taylor Wilson: Trevor. There have been surveillance concerns in this country for generations. I'm thinking back especially to the Bush era and some of the issues during those years. How does this compare to previous administrations, what we're seeing now under Trump? Trevor Hughes: During the Bush era, there was a robust conversation about privacy issues. And even though FISA ended up getting approved, the Patriot Act getting approved, there were sort of guardrails. What we're seeing with the Trump Administration is, frankly, a lack of public conversation about what it means to do this. And the justification is almost essentially anything is necessary to get rid of all these illegal immigrants that are living in our country, but there's no real public conversation about what it means for the government to sort of turn on and compile all of this data. Taylor Wilson: And Trevor, you mentioned FISA. We should just remind folks that's the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. As for the Trump Administration, I guess the migrant point is part of this, but how do they really defend these moves writ large? Trevor Hughes: The issue is that people who are living illegally in this country under the law are not allowed to federal benefits, right? That could include housing, that could include food, medical care, certainly includes voting. And so the Trump Administration says it is absolutely necessary to make sure that people who are living here illegally have no access to these sort of federal benefits, but the data that's being collected allows the government to go much, much further than just that. Taylor Wilson: Trevor, how do Americans, just everyday Americans, feel about this stuff and these concerns? Trevor Hughes: It's really important to remember that we wrote, we collectively as a society wrote, the Fourth Amendment into the founding document of our country because we were so concerned about government intrusion into private lives. And so privacy has been a core product or value of Americans for a really long time. It's a reason we don't have a national ID system like almost every other major country. And so there is a concern out there, a huge concern. The majority of people worry that the government will misuse this data that it has, but again, we're not seeing a lot of conversation from our elected officials saying, "Hey, wait a minute. Maybe this isn't a good idea." Taylor Wilson: Did you speak with any privacy experts for this piece? What are some of just the specific concerns that they're outlining in this moment? Trevor Hughes: The privacy concerns really come down to this idea of a double-edged sword. The government needs information to provide services. "I need to file my taxes, and the government needs to know my bank account number so it can send me that tax refund every year." The government needs to know my driver's license information, my insurance information, my car information. The concern that privacy advocates have is that because the government has all this data and because it has previously been siloed but is now explicitly being targeted to be shared amongst government agencies, that there's a real concern of abuse. We have seen police officers abuse access to these databases to stalk people. We have seen people improperly release tax returns of politicians or notable figures. So the abuse already exists. We've seen examples of it, and privacy experts are saying, "If you make it even easier to cross-reference all this data, there's a greater risk of that happening going forward." Taylor Wilson: All right. Always eye-opening work from you, Trevor. Trevor Hughes is a national correspondent with USA TODAY. Thanks, Trevor. Trevor Hughes: Yep. You bet. ♦ Taylor Wilson: It's kind time again when good news makes Mondays better. Today's story has it all. Prom night, Steve Carell, and a big surprise for hundreds of students affected by the Los Angeles wildfires. Here's Humankind reporter Ronnie Li. Steve Carell: Attention all seniors. This is Steve Carell with a very special announcement. Ronnie Li: When Steve Carell appeared on the screen, Pasadena High School senior Emma Thatcher was totally unfazed, at least at first. Emma Thatcher: I thought it was a rumor. I thought it was a joke. I was like, "No way." Ronnie Li: But then came the Twist. Steve Carell: I work with a wonderful charity based out of Virginia called Alice's Kids. And Alice's Kids wanted me to let you know that they will be paying for all of your prom tickets. Have fun. Enjoy the prom. Ronnie Li: In a single announcement, prom night changed for hundreds of students across six Southern California high schools. But for Emma, this gesture meant even more. When LA wildfires forced her family to evacuate, they had no idea what they'd return to. Emma Thatcher: We were in a parking lot in Glendale, at Glendale Community College, and two hours later, my dad had driven back up, and our house was gone. Ronnie Li: After losing everything in the fire, Emma found hope in unexpected places. Her community rallied around her family, and then came this surprise announcement. Emma Thatcher: I'm at home, and I'm, like, hearing my mom stress out about literally everything. And then it's like, "Okay. Mom, you don't have to worry about prom tickets. That's all covered." It's a massive sigh of relief. It felt really nice to not have to worry about that. Ronnie Li: For Emma and her classmates, prom night became more than just a dance. It was a symbol of hope and community coming together. Emma Thatcher: It made the biggest difference in the whole world. Just the thought that I could do that for somebody else in the future. It's so much more empowering to want to do that because you felt the effects. Taylor Wilson: For more about this story and other inspiring moments, visit Humankind at You'll find the link in today's show notes. ♦ And coming up later today, we have a new episode of Forum hosted by Michael McCarter. Michael McCarter: What do you think? Is Caitlin Clark changing the WNBA and women's sports for the better or worse? Is she being covered too much or too little? You can hear what listeners and readers like you are feeling about this. Tune into Forum. Publishing today at 4 PM, Eastern time, on this feed. Taylor Wilson: You can find more opinions on ♦ Thanks for listening to The Excerpt. You can get the pod wherever you get your audio, and as always, you can email us at podcasts@ I'm Taylor Wilson. I'll be back tomorrow with more of The Excerpt from USA TODAY.
USA Today
23-05-2025
- Business
- USA Today
What Trump's tax bill does with Medicaid, SNAP, tax breaks
What Trump's tax bill does with Medicaid, SNAP, tax breaks | The Excerpt On Friday's episode of The Excerpt podcast: USA TODAY Senior Congress Reporter Riley Beggin takes a closer look at President Donald Trump's House-approved tax bill. The Trump administration says Harvard can no longer enroll international students. Oklahoma will require schools to teach President Trump's 2020 election conspiracy theories. USA TODAY Supreme Court Correspondent Maureen Groppe breaks down a divided court decision to block the creation of the nation's first religious charter school. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. blames ultra-processed foods, environmental chemicals, 'overmedicalization' and more for driving chronic diseases in U.S. children, according to a commission report. NOAA predicts a 60% chance of an above average hurricane season. Let us know what you think of this episode by sending an email to podcasts@ Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text. Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here Taylor Wilson: Good morning. I'm Taylor Wilson. And today is Friday, May 23rd, 2025. This is The Excerpt. Today, taking a closer look at the House-approved Trump tax bill. Plus the Trump Administration has revoked Harvard's ability to enroll international students. And the Supreme Court has blocked the creation of the nation's first religious charter school. ♦ The House this week passed President Donald Trump's tax bill for a closer look at what it might mean for Americans, my colleague Dana Taylor, spoke with USA TODAY, Senior Congress Reporter, Riley Beggin. Dana Taylor: Riley, I know you haven't had a lot of sleep lately covering the House wrangling over the spending bill into the wee hours. Thanks for coming on the show. Riley Beggin: Yeah, of course. Dana Taylor: There's been a lot of heated negotiations regarding cuts to Medicaid and SNAP, the Food Stamp Program. Give me the broad strokes please of what's in this bill on this front? Riley Beggin: Yeah. There are a lot of changes on those two fronts. Medicaid that is really the biggest cost saving, which also translates to the biggest cuts that we see in this legislation. The earliest estimates show $625 billion being cut from Medicaid, an estimated 7.6 million Americans could lose their health insurance with these changes. Medicaid covers 71 million low income Americans. So there's a lot of provisions of that. One of the marquee things is some additional work requirements for people who are on Medicaid expansion, that's primarily adults. There would be an increase in the frequency of eligibility checks to make sure that people are not enrolled in multiple states or are validly enrolled. So those are some of the changes you could see on Medicaid. When it comes to food assistance, we're talking about SNAP or Food Stamps, which provides food assistance to around 42 million Americans. This is another big chunk, $300 billion will be cut from this over the next 10 years. One of the biggest things is it would shift more of the cost of the program to states, which could have repercussions as states try and figure out how they're going to spend their money. There could be additional cuts there, and it would require new work requirements for people ages 55 to 64 who receive SNAP. Those are just a few of the changes in that broad umbrella. Dana Taylor: Border security is another sizable part of this bill. What slice of the American taxpayer pie did they get? Riley Beggin: So in the House version of the bill, there's more than $140 billion that would go to support the Trump Administration's plan to crack down on illegal immigration. Another thing I'll mention here is that the bill includes around $150 billion for defense spending, which really could increase as it goes through the Senate. Within that defense spending, there's $20 billion that would go towards creating the Golden Dome Defense System that Trump has talked about on the campaign trail and so far in office this year. Dana Taylor: Taxes are another big part of the spending bill. What did House Republicans agree to on this front? Riley Beggin: This is really the big priority for Republicans. In addition to all of these other things, making the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act permanent is front and center for House Republicans and will be for Senate Republicans as well. These lowered income taxes for all income tax brackets has disproportionate benefit to the highest earners. This bill would make those permanent at a pretty high cost. We're talking well over $3 trillion. If this bill doesn't pass, those tax cuts would expire at the end of the year, which is something conservatives are definitely concerned about. Another thing I'll mention is these Trump campaign trail promises, no taxes on tips, no taxes on overtime wages are included in this bill. They are temporary as tax deductions, they would go through 2028. Dana Taylor: Riley, this bill is going to have a huge effect on the U.S. deficit, which has all kinds of downstream impacts. What can you tell us here? Riley Beggin: This bill would add an estimated $3.8 trillion to the U.S. deficit over the next 10 years. That's something that has been a major sticking point for Republicans in these negotiations, and I would expect is going to be even more of a conversation in the Senate. We saw bond markets start to shutter a little bit at the increase in the debt in the possibility that it would impact Treasury bonds. So that does have big downstream consequences. I will also mention we are set to default on our debt in August would hit the debt ceiling, the Treasury secretary has said. That would also have huge, huge catastrophic consequences for the U.S. economy and for the global economy in a lot of ways. This bill would raise the debt ceiling by $4 trillion to avoid that consequence, but it does set a timeline. Dana Taylor: Finally, the bill has one more big hurdle to overcome coming up and that's the Senate. How might Republicans in that chamber potentially change the bill? Riley Beggin: In a lot of ways. I'm actually in the Senate this morning talking to senators about what they would like to see changed here. And even really conservative senators like Ted Cruz are saying, "There's going to be major changes here." I mentioned the deficit adding here, there are senators who are really concerned about that and want to enact additional cuts. There are senators who are worried about the Medicaid changes that are happening. There are senators who are worried about the rollback of green energy tax credits that might impact their states. And we're just in the first few hours of this legislation sort of being in their hands. So I think it is not going to be smooth sailing. Dana Taylor: Riley Beggin covers Congress and Campaigns for USA TODAY. Riley, thanks for coming on the show. Riley Beggin: Thank you. ♦ Taylor Wilson: The Trump Administration has revoked Harvard University's ability to enroll international students. The move jeopardizes the legal status of more than a quarter of the Ivy League school student population. That's a major escalation in the White House's battle, to pressure the university to fold to demands, to overhaul its admissions, hiring and teaching practices. The decision will almost certainly prompt a legal challenge from the school, which is already an active litigation against the Federal Government for freezing billions of dollars in research funding. In a statement, Kristi Noem, the Homeland Security Secretary, said that current international students at Harvard must transfer to other universities or risk losing their legal status. Harvard said the move by the Trump Administration was illegal. At President Donald Trump's direction, Federal agencies have targeted dozens of universities across the country in recent months that officials have accused of not doing enough to protect Jewish students. The government has canceled billions of dollars in research grants and contracts forcing significant layoffs and budget cuts at many institutions. ♦ Meanwhile in other Trump-related education news, in Oklahoma public school history teachers will soon be required to teach the disproved conspiracy theory that the Democratic Party stole the 2020 Presidential Election from President Trump. The Republican-led state's new high school history curriculum says students must learn how to dissect the results of the 2020 Election, including learning about alleged mail-in voter fraud and unforeseen record number of voters and security risks of mail-in balloting. You can read more about that with a link in today's show notes. ♦ A divided Supreme Court yesterday blocked the creation of the nation's first religious charter school. I spoke with USA TODAY's Supreme Court Correspondent, Maureen Groppe to learn more. Hello, Maureen. Maureen Groppe: Hello. Taylor Wilson: All right. Maureen, you and I have talked about this case here previously. What did the Supreme Court block? Maureen Groppe: Well, they blocked the creation of the nation's first religious charter school, the Catholic Church in Oklahoma wanted to create a virtual charter school, which included religious instruction. The Oklahoma Supreme Court said that that would be a violation of the Constitution's prohibition against government's endorsing their religion because the Supreme Court didn't have enough votes to either overturn that decision or back that decision, it remains in place. That means the charter school can't move forward. But the issue could come back to the Supreme Court in another case because a tie decision here doesn't establish any kind of precedent. Taylor Wilson: And Maureen, this was a completely divided court. How did the justices align themselves? Maureen Groppe: Well, we don't know because the court didn't tell us. All we know for sure is that Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused herself from the case that left eight justices to decide it. And during the oral arguments, the court's three liberal justices seems clearly on the side of not allowing religious charter schools, while most of the five conservative justices seem to feel just as strongly that they should be allowed. The Chief Justice John Roberts was harder to read. At one point he did express a view that charter schools may be different from the other situations in which the court in recent years had said it's okay for taxpayer dollars to go to religious schools. But because the court didn't tell us how he or any other justice voted, we're just speculating on who was on which side. Taylor Wilson: Refresh us, Maureen, what led up to this point? Maureen Groppe: The two Catholic Dioceses in Oklahoma, they put together a proposal for a virtual charter school. That plan was approved by the State Board that oversees charter schools. But then the Oklahoma Attorney General, who is a Republican, said that religious charter schools are illegal under State Law. The Oklahoma Supreme Court agreed with him in a six-two decision last year. They said that religious charter schools would violate State and Federal Laws including the Constitution. Taylor Wilson: And how did advocates or lawyers on really both sides of this debate respond after this move from the high court? Maureen Groppe: The Catholic Church said it's disappointed in the decision, but they said they're going to explore other options for offering a virtual Catholic education throughout the State. Lawyers for the Oklahoma School Board, which had approved the charter school, they noted the issue isn't dead since the court deadlocked. So as I said, no precedent was set so this could come back in another way. Advocacy groups on the other side, they were relieved. They said that if the court had allowed religious charter schools that would have obliterated the wall of separation between church and State. Taylor Wilson: This case really puts the First Amendment's religious clauses intention as you write, Maureen. Talk through that a bit for us, if you would. How so? Maureen Groppe: So one clause in the First Amendment says the government can't establish a religion, and another clause says people have the right to exercise their religion. In this case, the Catholic Church said it's discrimination against religion to allow other private entities to run charter schools, but not the Catholic Church. The Oklahoma Attorney General was focusing on the clause that says the government can't establish a religion, and he said religious charter schools would violate the separation of church and State, that's required by the First Amendment. Taylor Wilson: And Maureen more religion clause decisions are coming down the pike. What's next in the crosshairs? Maureen Groppe: One decision still to come is whether the charitable arm of the Catholic Church in Wisconsin should have to pay into the State's Employment Tax Fund. And the other case is about storybooks with LGBTQ characters that are being used in Maryland. And in fact, in one of the nation's largest and most religiously diverse school districts. Parents with religious objections to the books said they should be able to have their elementary school children excused from class when those books are being read. And so that's the other decision that we are waiting for. Taylor Wilson: All right, Maureen Groppe covers the Supreme Court for USA TODAY. Thanks as always, Maureen. Maureen Groppe: Thanks for having me. ♦ Taylor Wilson: Health Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. blames ultra-processed foods, environmental chemicals, lack of physical activity, chronic stress, and over-medicalization for driving chronic diseases in U.S. children according to a commission report published yesterday. The report comes after President Trump signed an executive order to establish a commission to make America healthy again during Kennedy's swearing-in ceremony in February and tasked it with investigating chronic illness and delivering an action plan to fight childhood diseases. Starting with this report, which was due within a hundred days of Trump's time in office. Authors say ultra-processed foods or UPFs replace healthier foods and encourage people to eat more. UPFs include foods like chips and candy. In the report, authors also argue that American children are on too much medicine and criticize the childhood immunization schedule for encompassing more vaccines than Europe. You can take a closer look at the report's findings with a link in today's show notes. ♦ The Atlantic Hurricane season begins next week in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is predicting a 60% chance of an above-average season. Specifically NOAA is forecasting a range of 13 to 19 total name storms. Of those six to 10 are forecast to become hurricanes, including three to five major hurricanes, meaning a category three or higher. ♦ Thanks for listening to The Excerpt. We're produced by Shannon Rae Green and Kaely Monahan, and our Executive Producer is Laura Beatty. You can get the podcast wherever you get your audio, and if you're on a smart speaker, just ask for The Excerpt. You can always email us as well at podcasts at I'm Taylor Wilson. I'll be back tomorrow with more of The Excerpt from USA TODAY.
USA Today
30-04-2025
- Business
- USA Today
Congress starts working on Trump's 'big beautiful bill'
Congress starts working on Trump's 'big beautiful bill' | The Excerpt On Wednesday's episode of The Excerpt podcast: USA TODAY Senior Congress Reporter Riley Beggin breaks down what to know as the GOP starts work on a sweeping Trump priorities bill. Trump provides automakers some relief from 25% tariffs. Republicans propose a massive overhaul of student loans and Pell Grants. Congress passes a bill to outlaw deepfake pornography. USA TODAY National Correspondent Chris Kenning explains how President Trump's coal push stirs hopes and worries in Appalachia. Let us know what you think of this episode by sending an email to podcasts@ Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text. Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here Taylor Wilson: Good morning. I'm Taylor Wilson and today is Wednesday, April 30th, 2025. This is The Excerpt. Today, what's next as Congress starts working on Trump's legislative priorities, plus there's a bill on the way dealing with deepfake pornography, and we discuss complicated hopes for a coal revival. ♦ Over the next few weeks, lawmakers will craft a sweeping package of President Donald Trump's priorities for taxes, border security, energy, and more that they will eventually try to pass along party lines. I spoke with USA TODAY's senior congress reporter, Riley Beggin, for more on what to expect. Hey Riley. Riley Beggin: Hey, how you doing? Taylor Wilson: Good, good. Thanks for hopping on. So big few weeks ahead. First, how did we get to this point? Refresh us on the budget blueprint passed earlier this month and, I guess, was it a direct version of President Trump's goals and priorities? Riley Beggin: It has been quite the journey just to get to this point. Since the President took office in January, Congress has been working on ... actually even before he took office, has been working on setting the stage for his sweeping agenda on the Hill. This is going to be an expansive bill that touches on a lot of different parts of his agenda. The marquee piece of this is going to be extending the 2017 tax cuts and then additional tax policies like eliminating taxes on tips, on overtime, on social security payments. So the tax portion is going to be huge here. And then in addition to that, there will be elements of border security policy, domestic energy production, and additional defense spending. Taylor Wilson: We know we'll also likely be hearing a lot about Medicaid in the coming weeks. What's at stake? Riley Beggin: There are different cohorts of the Republican Conference who want different things out of this bill. It's going to be really expansive because of those tax portions that I told you about, and the fiscal conservatives want cuts that are going to balance that out at least a little bit, and we're talking trillions and trillions of dollars of spending. They want at least $1.5 trillion cut. The main place that they are seeking to do that is likely going to be through Medicaid programs. What Republicans are saying is, we can fully meet this cutting goal of $880 billion, specifically in this committee that has purview over Medicaid, by eliminating waste, fraud and abuse. Nonpartisan experts that we've consulted say that that is not possible, and as we are getting into this process of building the policy over these next few weeks, it looks like Republicans are trying to figure out some ways to meet that goal without really hitting the pocketbooks of low-income Americans. But we're going to have to see how that goes. There's a lot to unpack there that could potentially impact benefits. Taylor Wilson: Riley, remind us what reconciliation is, I don't think this is the first time I've asked you to give us a definition there, and how will it be used this time around? Riley Beggin: Yeah. Reconciliation is a super wonky word. Reconciliation is a process that lawmakers use to essentially bypass the filibuster. In the Senate, you need at least 60 votes to get past the filibuster, which is often tricky for the majority party because you so rarely have a 60 vote majority in the Senate. So you have to compromise with the minority party if you're going to get regular legislation through. Reconciliation is a way to avoid that compromise process, pass something with only majority support, so that's Republicans in the House and in the Senate, but there are a lot of rules around that. This bill has to be related to the budget related to spending or cutting spending, and if they try to put policy in there that is not related to spending, it could be cut and could endanger the bill. Taylor Wilson: You mentioned the minority. What role will Democrats, if any, Riley, really play over the next few weeks? Riley Beggin: Really, the role of Democrats here is to be a motivator and a threat for Republicans as they try to stay unified here. If they can't really stick together on this, and there's going to be a lot of internal dissension that is going to threaten that unity, they are going to have to go through Democrats to get some of this stuff done. They really don't want to do that. So Democrats don't have a huge role to play in that they are going to be sort of put on the sidelines here. They're in the minority. In the House, there's not a lot they can do, and in the Senate in this particular process, which I mentioned, they also don't have a lot they can do. Taylor Wilson: Interesting. Next few weeks, Riley Beggin covers Congress for USA TODAY. Thanks Riley. Riley Beggin: Thank you. ♦ Taylor Wilson: President Trump is bringing some relief from his 25% tariffs on foreign cars and auto parts. In a proclamation signed yesterday, Trump is offering auto companies credits for a portion of the tariffs on parts that they import to build vehicles in the U.S. The rebates are equal to 15% of the value of a company's vehicles assembled in the country. The so-called Big Three U.S. auto makers, Ford, General Motors and Stellantis, had pushed for relief after raising concerns about the impact Trump's aggressive tariffs could have on the industry. Trump has argued that tariffs are needed on auto imports to help reinvigorate the domestic production of vehicles. ♦ Republicans in Congress are moving forward with a plan to overhaul how Americans pay for college. Earlier this week, a GOP-led committee in the House unveiled a 100-page budget bill that would reshape much of the college financial aid system. If enacted, the legislation would impact millions of students and the colleges they attend. It would reduce undergraduate students' eligibility for traditional Pell Grants and penalize some universities for leaving students with crushing debt. Cost for certain college programs would be capped. At the same time, regulations on for-profit colleges would loosen. It would also give student loan borrowers less flexibility in their monthly bills, which for many would go up. The bill would save hundreds of billions of dollars and pave the way for broader tax cuts according to Congressman Tim Walberg, a Michigan Republican who chairs the Education and Workforce Committee in the House. Critics argue the legislation would make it harder for students, especially those from low-income backgrounds, to get into college, graduate and pay back their debts. ♦ Congress has passed a bill to outlaw deepfake pornography. The legislation will head to President Trump for his signature after near unanimous approval. The bill already had a key endorsement from First Lady Melania Trump. Deepfakes are photos, videos, or audio altered or created by AI to appear real, often without the subject of the media's consent. Many of the images are manipulated to put people into compromising situations, showing them appearing inappropriately or putting them in places that could spark controversy or embarrassment. The images have become a major cause for concern with the explosion of AI technology. A newly passed bill will require technology platforms to remove reported non-consensual sexually exploitative images within 48 hours of receiving a valid request. ♦ President Donald Trump wants to help revive the coal industry, but his cuts are leading to worries over mine safety. I spoke with USA TODAY national correspondent Chris Kenning for more. Chris, thanks for hopping on, sir. Chris Kenning: Thanks for having me. Taylor Wilson: Just starting here, Chris, what has President Donald Trump set out to do really when it comes to coal mining? Chris Kenning: President Trump during his first term vowed to revive coal and target President Obama's efforts to transition away from coal power, which is more expensive and more polluting than natural gas and renewables. But during his first term, coal employment still dropped, mainly because of that competition. This time around, Trump's taking another swing. Earlier this month, he signed a series of executive orders that call for extracting coal on federal lands, speeding mining permits, and trying to extend the life of coal-fired power plants. And the administration is also seeking to roll back some of the environmental regulations, including rules to curb some toxic emissions. But coal today generates less than 20% of U.S. electricity. That's down from 50% in 2000. A lot of experts have said that because of that ongoing competition from less expensive natural gas and renewables, it's not likely to persuade utilities to open new coal-fired power plants. But a lot of the folks in West Virginia, which is a big coal producing state, are really hopeful that this does lead to more production and more jobs. Taylor Wilson: Well, Chris, there is a sense that federal cuts are now leading to coal safety concerns. Just how serious are these worries and what are we talking about specifically? Chris Kenning: Amid the optimism that these policies have brought to West Virginia, there's also been this cross-current of concern. One of the reasons is that Trump's cuts to the federal workforce, which have crossed many agencies, have also hit agencies that are dealing with miner safety programs. Earlier this month, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health faced cuts in West Virginia. That really stymied the work of this Black Lung Program, which does surveillance and prevention and helps miners to get the care they need to apply to move to a less dusty and dangerous position in a mine in which they're working. In addition, the administration delayed a new rule that was set to go in effect that would limit exposure to silica dust, which is a driver of the black lung cases that we've seen resurging over the last 20 years. These days, black lung effects one in five coal miners in the Appalachia region. Taylor Wilson: Are coal miners in West Virginia, Chris, where you spoke with a lot of folks, are they now pushing back against Trump's coal plans? Considering some of those worries, are they on board with this kind of coal-friendly president? What do we hear from them? Chris Kenning: They're definitely on board. A lot of the people I talked with voted for Trump in a state where 7 in 10 voters supported him in the last election. But those concerns about mine safety have produced a pushback. You've seen Republican Senator Shelley Moore Capito and others calling on the Trump administration to reconsider the changes and United Mine Workers of America calling on the administration to not jettison these hard-won safety measures. At the same time, they want coal to succeed and they want coal to grow. They just don't want to do it at the expense of safety. Taylor Wilson: In terms of the coal job market right now, Chris, we know a lot of industry has moved to some other maybe renewable resources. We've seen some of these shifts. But what do the jobs look like? Is it relatively easy for anyone wanting to start this career to hop in? Is there steady work? What are you seeing? Chris Kenning: It's been on the long decline for a very long time. I spoke to a guy who heads the health and safety for the Mine Workers Union, and he said during the better years, you could spend an entire career in the same mine when there were still large deposits everywhere. But over time, these coal seams became smaller and more expensive, and companies became more sensitive to drops in the market price, so that meant frequent idling and closures and more on and off work. I think between 2011 and 2022, total coal industry employment fell by 57%. It landed hardest in the Appalachian coal producing states like West Virginia. At the same time, a lot of people who entered job retraining or moved away to find work, they found that these coal jobs are really hard to replace. Taylor Wilson: How does the Trump administration respond to some of the concerns we've outlined, Chris? Chris Kenning: Trump officials have said that the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health programs related to mine safety would remain intact. They said that NIOSH would join an administration for healthy America. Some of the White House spokespeople said that Trump's a huge ally of America's coal miners and they're going to do all they can to make sure to keep hard-working coal miners safe. The Department of Labor said it would work to identify ways to keep mine safety inspection teams on the ground continuing their work despite looking at these office closures. But a lot remains unknown, both for the mine safety workers and the miners themselves as they wait to see how these policies will unfurl. Just this week, we saw that several dozen workers from a coal surveillance program in West Virginia were called back to work after being put on administrative leave earlier in the month. It's not known whether or how long that callback will last and who will remain. Taylor Wilson: All right. Chris Kenning is a national correspondent with USA TODAY. Listeners can find the full version of this story with a link in today's show notes. Thank you, Chris. Chris Kenning: Thank you. ♦ Taylor Wilson: In the 100 days since taking office, President Trump has transformed American government with executive orders, firings, and major cuts. One area where voters are still waiting to see the impact they were promised: the economy. Trevor Hughes: A lot of folks who really wanted to see President Trump swept into office because he had what they believed was a better economic plan. They're still waiting to see it. Taylor Wilson: That's USA TODAY national correspondent Trevor Hughes. He joins my colleague Dana Taylor for a deep dive into how Trump's 100 days have impacted regular Americans. You can hear that conversation right here beginning at 4:00 PM Eastern Time later today. ♦ Thanks for listening to The Excerpt. You can get the podcast wherever you get your audio, and if you're on a smart speaker, just ask for The Excerpt. I'm Taylor Wilson and I'll be back tomorrow with more of The Excerpt from USA TODAY.
