Lisa Murkowski Stares Down Reporter for 10 Seconds After Being Confronted Over ‘Big Beautiful Bill' Vote
'Sen. [Rand] Paul said that your vote was a bailout for Alaska at the expense of the country,' Nobles told Murkowski on-camera.
More from TheWrap
Lisa Murkowski Stares Down Reporter for 10 Seconds After Being Confronted Over 'Big Beautiful Bill' Vote | Video
CNN Argues Its Report on ICE Location App Did 'Nothing Illegal' as Trump White House Threatens Prosecution
Senate Approves Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' With VP Vance as Tiebreaker
Trump: CNN, New York Times Demean the 'Great Soldiers' Who Bombed Iran
Nobles' inquiry stemmed from remarks Paul reportedly made about Murkowski after the Senate passed the legislation on Tuesday. Per the Daily Beast, Rand stated that Republicans 'chose subsidies and carveouts for the Senator from Alaska,' claiming the party modified the bill to benefit the state of Alaska in exchange for Murkowski's vote.
'Oh my…' Murkowski replied, in apparent shock.
'That's what Sen. Paul said,' Nobles responded.
Murkowski, who appeared to be irritated by the question, blinked her eyes one last time at Nobles before launching into a stare down. Breaking the silence, Nobles shared the first word, which was a him clarifying that he did not make the statement himself, though he still wanted a response.
'I didn't say it, ma'am. I'm just asking for your response,' Nobles noted.
After a second more of nothing, a visibly frustrated Murkowski answered. 'My response is, I have an obligation to the people of the state of Alaska, and I live up to that every single day,' she said, adding that this has been an 'agonizing' experience. 'I fight for my state's interest and I make sure that Alaskans are understood. I work hard to take care of a state that has more unique situations, more unique people and it's just different. So when people suggest the federal dollars go to one of our 50 states in a quote, 'bailout,' I find that offensive.'
Another brief moment of silence between the two then set in. Murkowski eventually continued to explain her reasons for voting 'Yes' on the bill while acknowledging that the bill will allow Alaskans to reap benefits that Americans in other states will not.
'I advocated for my state's interest. I will continue to do that, and I will make no excuses for doing that. Do I like this bill? No. I tried to take care of Alaska's interests, but I know that in many parts of the country there are Americans that are not going to be advantaged by this bill. I don't like that,' she explained. 'I don't like the fact that we moved through an artificial deadline, artificial timelines to produce something to meet a deadline, rather than to actually try to produce the best bill for the country. But when I saw the direction that this was going … you can either say I don't like it and not try to help my state or you can roll up your sleeves.'
On Tuesday, the Senate voted 51-50 in favor of the controversial spending bill, with the tie-breaking vote cast by Vice President JD Vance after a handful of Republicans sided with Democrats and Independents against it. Some of the unique privileges Alaska will receive that differ from the other 49 states will be an exemption from new Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (S.N.A.P.) requirements and state cost-sharing, only if the state implements a plan to reduce administrative errors as the state has had the highest S.N.A.P. payment error rate in the country for the past two years.
Republican Sens. Rand, Susan Collins and Thom Tillis voted 'No' against the legislation, while zero Democrats voted in favor of it. The 'Big, Beautiful Bill' will now head back to the House of Representatives for approval, following some alterations that came during a marathon weekend session that stretched into the early hours of Tuesday.The post Lisa Murkowski Stares Down Reporter for 10 Seconds After Being Confronted Over 'Big Beautiful Bill' Vote | Video appeared first on TheWrap.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
an hour ago
Alleged mastermind behind shooting of Colombian senator and presidential candidate arrested
BOGOTA, Colombia -- The alleged mastermind behind the shooting of a conservative Colombian senator and presidential candidate was taken into custody Saturday, almost a month after the attack, law enforcement authorities said. Elder José Arteaga Hernández, alias 'Chipi" or "Costeño,' was arrested in a neighborhood in the northwestern part of the capital, Bogota, National Police Director Maj. Gen. Carlos Fernando Triana told reporters. Authorities had previously accused him and other suspects of being near the Bogota park where Miguel Uribe Turbay was shot in broad daylight on June 7. Uribe was giving a political speech in the park when he was attacked from behind and wounded in the head, allegedly by a minor who was captured as he fled. Three other people have been arrested for participating in the logistics and execution of the crime. The motive is still being investigated. Uribe, who in October announced his intention to run in the 2026 presidential election, remains in intensive care and has undergone several surgeries. From his Senate seat, he had become one of President Gustavo Petro's most vocal critics. The attack has been widely condemned in a country with a dark past in which drug cartels and insurgent groups murdered and kidnapped politicians. Charges against Arteaga include attempted aggravated homicide; manufacturing, trafficking and carrying firearms or ammunition; and using minors to commit crimes. Interpol issued a red notice against him Friday. It was not immediately clear Saturday if Arteaga had an attorney who could comment on his behalf. Authorities said he would make his first court appearance over the weekend. Triana last month said Arteaga 'has been involved in a life of crime for more than 20 years, performing hit jobs in all types of crimes in Bogotá.'
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Megabill hits health care for immigrants, including legal ones, hard
As President Donald Trump intensifies his targeting of undocumented immigrants, the GOP megabill passed Thursday takes aim at those here legally by revoking their access to subsidized care. Under current rules, those immigrants — green card holders, refugees, survivors of domestic violence, and individuals on work and student visas — can purchase health insurance on the Obamacare marketplace and receive tax credits to offset the cost. Some of them are also eligible for coverage through Medicaid, the state-federal program for low-income people, if they earn incomes below the poverty level, as well as Medicare, the federal program for elderly people. But the provisions in the GOP megabill narrow immigrant eligibility for these programs, allowing only green card holders, immigrants from Cuba and Haiti, and immigrants from certain Pacific Island countries access to federally funded health care. The move to restrict coverage for legal immigrants comes as the Trump administration pushes ahead on its aggressive immigration campaign, delivering mass deportations, challenging birthright citizenship, and ending temporary protected status for hundreds of thousands of immigrants. 'These are the largest cuts to health coverage that we have seen, and this will be one of the largest cuts to immigrants in recent years,' said Drishti Pillai, director of immigrant health policy at KFF, a health policy think tank in Washington. The Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan scorekeeper, estimated similar provisions would leave 1.3 million lawfully present immigrants uninsured in 2034. Low-income green card holders in the five-year waiting period that applies to them for Medicaid, but who are currently eligible for subsidized Obamacare coverage, are expected to be the largest group hit. The provisions have been overshadowed by broader Medicaid cuts, and the politically fraught nature of immigration has made Republicans reluctant to speak out about the restrictions. Still, they have raised concerns in both red and blue states because it would mean their already financially strained health care systems would have to bear the higher costs of uncompensated and emergency care. 'There is a lot of concern about how some of the immigration policies and some of the enrollment policies might play out throughout our patient population and our communities,' said Jonathan Chapman, chief executive of the Florida Association of Community Health Centers, who flew to Washington last week to lobby Congress and the White House on the megabill. Over 70 percent of patients at the state's federally qualified health centers are uninsured or on Medicaid, and they have already reduced services due to insufficient funding. Chapman added that Florida GOP Gov. Ron DeSantis' support for Trump's crackdown has already discouraged patients from seeking care at the community health centers, even though they typically do not ask about immigration status. 'If my status was not clearly defined, I would be concerned about signing anything,' he added. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.), vice chair of the Ways and Means Committee, told POLITICO the megabill 'ensures that federal health care dollars are prioritized for American citizens.' Buchanan led a letter with 11 members of the Florida Republican House delegation supporting the megabill. Under fiscal pressure, blue states, including Minnesota and Illinois, have moved to roll back health care access for undocumented immigrants, who are not eligible for any federally subsidized health care programs. Last week, California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, approved a state budget that will scale back free health care for undocumented immigrants. One of the hardest-hit states from the megabill restrictions on immigrants will be New York, which is one of three states that have enacted a basic health program allowed under the Affordable Care Act known as the Essential Plan. The Essential Plan offers low-cost health insurance for New Yorkers earning up to 250 percent above the federal poverty line and is funded by federal dollars that would otherwise be used for ACA tax credits. The GOP megabill will strip coverage for half a million immigrants covered by the plan and shift the cost to New York. The state must pick up the tab because of a 2001 state court decision that requires it to cover immigrants who are ineligible for Medicaid due to their immigration status. The state's hospital lobby, the Greater New York Hospital Association, believes the provisions as a whole will cost New York $3 billion annually and leave 225,000 immigrant New Yorkers uninsured. 'The downstream impacts are not just on immigrants,' said Elisabeth Wynn, executive vice president at the New York hospital group. 'We don't close services for a particular insurance category, those get closed for all.' Earlier this month, five Republican House members from New York wrote a letter to Senate Finance Chair Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) urging a two- to three-year delay to the immigrant restrictions, warning an 'abrupt elimination…will have drastically disruptive consequences for New York's healthcare system.' The bill will exclude lawfully present immigrants earning below the federal poverty level from the Obamacare marketplace starting next year. Marketplace restrictions for lawfully present immigrants earning above the poverty level will start in 2027.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Tax breaks and spending cuts: Here are the winners and losers in Trump's big bill
There are major changes coming for Americans' finances, after the House of Representatives passed a landmark tax and spending bill at the center of President Donald Trump's domestic agenda. House Republicans passed the legislation Thursday in a 218-214 vote along party lines. The Senate passed it in a 51-50 vote two days earlier. Trump's signature, which came Friday, was the last thing needed to usher in the changes that many people will start seeing early next year. Now that the megabill has passed, expect a ton of short-term debt to be sold to finance the government's deficit 'I'm single': At 70, I have $500,000 in stocks and $220,000 in savings. How do I invest my $130,000 windfall? 'Today is my 61st birthday': I have my ex-spouse's Social Security benefits. Should I retire at 65 and travel? 'I do all the yard work, cooking and cleaning': I live with my daughter and her lazy boyfriend. She wants me to buy her house. Do I say yes? My wife and I are in our late 60s. Do I sell stocks to pay our $30,000 credit-card debt — or do it gradually over 3 years? The bill is permanently etching lower income-tax rates into the tax code and averting a widespread 2026 tax hike, when the 2017 tax cuts from Trump's first term were supposed to expire. But the bill is about more than tax cuts, and its myriad provisions mean that some Americans will benefit from the legislation while others will lose out. For a law Trump calls the 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' the beauty may be in the eye of the beholder. For example, millions of Americans are poised to receive tax cuts — but richer Americans are more likely to see bigger tax savings. There are new tax breaks geared at low- and moderate-income households, but also spending cuts that could make it harder for some to receive public assistance or hold onto health insurance. Homeowners win, so long as they live in areas where they can put a more generous write-off to good use. Car buyers win too, depending on the vehicle they are getting. 'The One Big Beautiful Bill delivers for the American people,' Republican Rep. Jason Smith of Missouri, chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, said in a predawn floor speech. 'This is the largest tax cut for working families, farmers and small businesses in U.S. history.' But House Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries railed against 'this one big, ugly bill,' recounting the stories of people across the country who talked about the necessity of their Medicaid health insurance — and their fears of losing the coverage. The bill is 'the largest cut to health care in American history,' he said in his marathon remarks. In promoting the bill, the White House and Republican leaders emphasized the wins for everyday Americans. The widely-used standard deduction is becoming more generous, along with the child tax credit. There are new deductions for tips, overtime and other expenses that will add to the ways many Americans can cut their taxable income. The full force of taxes and predicted economic growth would boost annual take-home pay up to roughly $10,000 for a family with two kids, according to the White House. But there's also the value of provisions like a permanently higher estate tax, generous business expensing and partnership accounting rules that all help richer taxpayers. Outside models agree the majority of taxpayers are getting tax cuts when the tax provisions are tallied up. Yet those estimates show that the higher up the income ladder, the better those cuts look. That's both in dollar value and as a share of after-tax income. Estimates from the Tax Foundation, the Tax Policy Center and the Penn Wharton Budget Model show the pattern, each comparing the bill to what would happen if the 2017 tax law expired. In the Tax Policy Center numbers, a household making between roughly $67,000 and almost $120,000 a year would be getting a $1,780 tax cut next year, a 2.3% addition to their after-tax income. The top 20% of households, in a band that starts with households making nearly $220,000 and soars to multimillionaires, get an average $12,500 tax cut. That's a 3.4% increase in their after-tax income. The Penn Wharton Budget Model takes into account the effects of stricter rules for Medicaid and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program — two programs geared at low-income households — in determining how the bill would affect Americans' incomes. In 2027, a household making less than $18,000 would lose $165 and a household making less than $51,000 would gain $30. By 2030, when temporary deductions go away, households in these income bands would be projected to lose more than $1,000. For the top band of households, 2027 increases in after-tax income range from nearly $6,700 to over $300,000, Penn Wharton researchers said. The nation's 4 million tipped workers are getting a deduction worth up to $25,000 in a win for hairdressers, bartenders and waiters, among others. Workers who rely on tips could save an average of $1,700 per year, according to the White House Council of Economic Advisers. The tax break runs from 2025 from 2028, meaning people could start taking the deduction on the 2025 taxes they file next tax season. The question is how many tipped workers will use the tax break, according to the Yale Budget Lab. More than a third of the nation's workers relying on tips had incomes so low, they didn't have to file an income-tax return in 2022, while only 4% of workers earning less than $25 an hour received tips. The break on overtime could save workers between $1,400 and $1,750 per year, the White House Council of Economic Advisers said last month. It runs from 2025 to 2028. Workers who earn regular overtime pay, like nurses, firefighters and construction workers, also stand to benefit from the bill's tax provisions. It's a sliver of the workforce, with 8% of hourly workers and 4% of salaried workers conceivably qualifying for the deduction, according to the Yale Budget Lab. Car buyers will gain a deduction up to $10,000 on their auto loans, applying to the interest paid on loans for new vehicles assembled in the U.S. The average buyer paid $1,332 on auto-loan interest charges in 2024, according to AAA. The tax break is available for loans through 2028, but it's limited to new cars. It's expensive buying a new car, with the average final price at $48,799 in May, according to Cox Automotive. So the question is how many people take up the offer of a tax break? A new-vehicle buyer's income averaged $115,000 in 2023, Cox Automotive data said. Other research suggests a six-figure salary is necessary to afford a new car. Homeowners are getting more firepower to write off their state income taxes and local property taxes. After much wrangling, the state and local tax (SALT) deduction is going to at least $40,000. It will drift higher with inflation through 2029 before tumbling back to $10,000 in 2030. The quadrupled deduction is a win for people living in areas with high state income taxes and big property-tax bills. Critics say that's a giveaway putting other homeowners at a disadvantage if they live in states with lower tax bills. People ages 65 and up are getting a $6,000 deduction, in a nod to Trump's campaign pledge to end taxes on Social Security benefits. The tax break coming to seniors technically isn't excluding their benefit money from taxes, due to the budget rules lawmakers had to follow. But the White House says the deduction zaps out the tax differently. The deduction will exceed taxable Social Security benefits for 88% of recipients. The deduction will reach 51.4 million beneficiaries, according to the Council of Economic Advisers. It's a major break for older Americans living on fixed incomes. Coupled with a standard deduction that's already enhanced for seniors, deductions would total $23,750 for single filers and $46,700 for married couples. It's a short-term win with a tax break that runs from 2025 to 2028. But the bill creates indirect problems for retirees, according to critics. Less tax revenue coming into Social Security and Medicare trust funds will speed up insolvency, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. Starting in 2034, Social Security trust funds will hit a shortfall and pay 81% of the promised benefit, according to the latest official projections. Social programs like Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program are getting tighter eligibility rules and more verification requirements. More SNAP administrative costs are getting pushed onto states and new limits are coming for the ways states generate the fund to pay their side of Medicaid. A tax-credit boost is going away for people getting their health insurance through the Affordable Care Act exchange. Almost 12 million more people will be without health insurance by 2034, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office's tally of the bill. An earlier CBO estimate put the number at 16 million. Democrat criticism is a scare tactic, Republican leaders say. No one who really needs public assistance will lose it, they say, and work requirements are worth adding to promote work and prevent benefit misuse, they say. Still, the Medicaid changes and their possible fallout have been enough to concern some GOP members. Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina voted against the bill due to parts of the Medicaid changes. A reporter asked Trump on Tuesday about the CBO's estimate of nearly 12 million people losing health insurance. The amount of people falling off Medicaid would be smaller and that amount would be targeting Medicaid's waste, fraud and abuse, he said. Medicaid is also the country's biggest payer for long-term care including nursing homes, according to the AARP. Tighter funding may have implications on nursing home access and staffing levels, according to KFF. But the White House says Medicaid without waste, fraud and abuse can better serve the populations it's supposed to help, including low-income seniors. The bill's other main flash point was its price. The bill raises the debt ceiling by $5 trillion, coming at a time when national debt exceeds $36 trillion. Deficit critics on Capitol Hill slammed the bill. So did Elon Musk. Consumers who need financing may lose out with the national debt worries. Lenders use Treasury yields to help determine interest rates for mortgages, car loans and more. For example, the rate on a 30-year fixed mortgage tends to follow the 10-year Treasury note BX:TMUBMUSD10Y. A bond's price and its yield move in opposite directions. If the Treasury Department issues more debt to finance government operations and buyers aren't willing to buy as much, that would lower the price of government debt and raise its yields — which would raise consumer borrowing costs. The bond market has been watching the bill's twists and turns, said Lawrence Gillum, LPL Financial's chief fixed-income strategist. Though investors are expecting higher deficits, Gillum said their reaction will depend on how big those deficits go. The one thing Gillum can say with some certainty 'is that interest rates are not going to go down because of this bill.' An excise tax on private university endowments is becoming steeper. The excise tax tops out at 8% for universities with a per-student endowment value of $2 million or more, but constitutes a significant increase from the current, flat rate of 1.4%. That's likely a hit to schools, including those in the Ivy League — like Harvard University. Schools will have less money for research and financial-aid packages, said Steven Bloom, assistant vice president of government relations with the American Council on Education. 'Students will lose out in that,' he said. The bill is also set to overhaul the way students repay their federal student loans. Among other things, it's scrapping many repayment plans and going with two ways borrowers can repay their debts. The bill does have some help for borrowers repaying their loans. Workers don't have to count it for tax purposes when their employers paid up to $5,250 on these bills. The bill makes the tax break permanent. The legislation is tough news for Americans who want to buy electric vehicles. The bill eliminates a $7,500 tax credit for the purchase or lease of new EVs, as well as a $4,000 credit for used EVs. Those are just some of the clean-energy tax breaks fading fast under the legislation. 'Renewable energy is the big loser, set to lose hundreds of billions in Biden-era subsidies, while most companies that spent 2025 playing defense on taxes walked away mostly unscathed,' John Gimigliano of KPMG. Now, would-be EV buyers have to step on it if they want the tax code to help defray their costs. The credits on new and used EVs are good through Sept. 30. What personal-finance issues would you like to see covered in MarketWatch? We would like to hear from readers about their financial decisions and money-related questions. You can fill out or write to us at . A reporter may be in touch to learn more. MarketWatch will not attribute your answers to you by name without your permission. My wife and I have $7,000 a month in pensions and Social Security, plus $140,000 cash. Can we afford to retire? 'Finance makes me break out in hives': I inherited $240K from my parents. Do I pay off my $258K mortgage and give up my job? The Dow and Russell 2000 are joining the stock market's party. Is it a game changer for the bulls? My job is offering me a payout. Should I take a $61,000 lump sum — or $355 a month for life? I'm a stay-at-home mom. Do I take a part-time job to spend more time with my kids — or get a job for six figures? Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
