Fla. Sen. Rick Scott calls for more budget cuts to restore ‘fiscal sanity' into Trump's ‘big, beautiful' bill
Florida Sen. Rick Scott, who serves on the Senate's Budget Committee, told WABC 770 AM radio's 'Cats Roundtable' that his fellow GOPers in the House did not do nearly enough to control spending or help rein in America's explosive debt when they passed the bill last month.
He said he and other Senate Republicans will work with the president and House GOPers to remove bloat and confront the debt bomb in a final spending bill.
5 Senator Rick Scott says more spending cuts are needed to infuse 'fiscal sanity' into President Trump's proposed 'big, beautiful' budget bill.
Getty Images
'The House worked their tail off. Unfortunately, the House bill cuts the spending over the next 10 years by something like 1.7%. There's a lot more we have to do,' Scott told show host John Catsimatidis.
Scott, a two-term senator who previously served as Florida's governor, said the bill passed by the House includes many good things such as renewing the 2017 Trump tax cuts and boosting spending for border security and the military.
'But we have to bring more fiscal sanity to the table,' he said. 'In the next few months, we'll probably hit $37 trillion in debt. And we're running over $1 trillion a year on interest expense.'
'If we leave it just the way it is, we're going to be close to $60 trillion worth of debt in 10 years. We'll never be able to pay for anything else we care about.'
He said Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, have shown where spending can be slashed.
'We've got to go line by line through the budget and do everything we can to save money,' Scott said. 'I'm committed to getting this bill done. I believe every Republican I know wants to get this bill done. But we also will want to create some fiscal sanity.'
5 Elon Musk accompanying Scott as they walk through the U.S. Capitol on March 05.
Getty Images
The proposed One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which is intended to be Trump's signature legislative achievement of the year, features more than $1.5 trillion in spending cuts over a 10-year period but is projected to add between $3 to $4 trillion to the debt during that time frame, according to various estimates.
Deficit concerns have prompted backlash from GOP fiscal hawk such as Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), who have expressed opposition to the mega-bill in its current form because of its impact on the deficit.
Other Republican critics, such as Sens. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), have voiced reservations over the Medicaid reforms in the mammoth bill.
5 Speaker of the House Mike Johnson speaks to the media after the House narrowly passed a bill forwarding President Donald Trump's agenda on May 22 in Washington, DC.
Getty Images
5 Sen. Rand Paul has expressed opposition to the mega-bill in its current form because of its impact on the deficit.
AP
Last month, Scott told conservative pundit Charlie Kirk, 'Absolutely I'd vote no' on the bill in its current form and, 'If they brought it to the floor right now, there's not a chance it would get to 51 votes.'
Republicans hold a 53-47 edge over Democrats in the Senate.
Trump has warned that Republicans who threaten to vote against his spending plan are playing into the hands of Democrats. He singled out Paul on Saturday.
'If Senator Rand Paul votes against our Great, Big, Beautiful Bill, he is voting for, along with the Radical Left Democrats, a 68% Tax Increase and, perhaps even more importantly, a first time ever default on US Debt,' Trump wrote on Truth Social.
5 Trump has said Republicans who threaten to vote against his spending plan are playing into the hands of Democrats.
AP
On a different segment of the Sunday radio show, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) defended the bill passed by one vote in his chamber and vowed that the Senate and House and the White House would agree on a final package by July 4.
In response to criticism from Senate budget hawks such as Scott, the speaker insisted the House made historic cuts.
'No other government has ever cut this much in a single piece of legislation,' Johnson said. 'You're talking about more than $1.5 trillion. It's by a factor of two the largest cut that Congress will have ever made.
'Is it enough? No, it's not,' he acknowledged. 'We have $36 trillion in federal debt. But it's important to remember that we did not get into that financial situation overnight. It took many decades.
'It's going to take more than a flip of a switch to turn it around … It's like a large vessel on the sea. It doesn't turn on a dime. You need like a mile of open ocean to do it.'
Johnson said the House bill was a 'dramatic shift in the right direction.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senate passes Trump's spending bill with massive Medicaid cuts
This story was originally published on Healthcare Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily Healthcare Dive newsletter. The Senate narrowly passed a massive tax and domestic policy bill on Tuesday that would likely cull millions of beneficiaries from the safety-net insurance program Medicaid. The passage of the legislation — a major priority of President Donald Trump — is a success for Republicans, who've dodged a number of policy and political hurdles to get the bill to the finish line. However, it was a battle to get passed. The Senate slogged through a 'vote-a-rama,' where Democrats introduced a number of amendments urging lawmakers to reconsider the Medicaid cuts or boost support to rural hospitals, that began Monday and went through Tuesday midday. The bill ultimately passed 51-50, after three Republicans, Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky, Thom Tillis from North Carolina and Susan Collins from Maine, joined Democrats to vote against the package. Vice President JD Vance cast the tiebreaking vote. A similar uphill battle may lie ahead when the bill returns to the House. The legislation includes several healthcare plans. Many of them center on Medicaid and have become some of the most hotly debated provisions. Notably, it would require many adult beneficiaries in the safety-net insurance to log a minimum of 80 hours of work, volunteer or education hours a month to stay covered. States would also be required to check beneficiaries' eligibility for Medicaid more frequently and implement cost-sharing for some services delivered to higher-income enrollees. Additionally, the bill would freeze provider taxes — arrangements states use to finance their share of Medicaid funding — in states that haven't expanded Medicaid, and gradually lower allowed rates in expansion states. This is a more aggressive policy than that proposed in the House and was a sticking point for some senators late into Monday evening, who worried rural hospitals in their district would be unable to survive the financial ramifications. In an effort to woo those on the fence, lawmakers added a $25 billion fund to aid rural hospitals to the package. Late Monday night, Collins proposed doubling that amount to no avail. "I am pleased that the bill contains a special fund that I proposed to provide some assistance to our rural hospitals, but it is not sufficient to offset the other changes in the Medicaid system," Collins said on X after the vote. In total, the reconciliation legislation would increase the number of uninsured people by 11.8 million people in 2034, according to an estimate released Saturday by the Congressional Budget Office. It would also increase the nation's budget deficit by $3.3 trillion over the next decade. The Senate's bill cuts Medicaid more steeply than the lower chamber's proposal — $100 billion more due to restrictions on provider taxes and state-directed payments that allow states to boost funding for Medicaid providers, according to an analysis by Manatt Health. Some House Republicans have raised concerns about the Senate's text, arguing cuts to Medicaid are too steep. The legislation additionally cuts Medicaid funding for a year for large abortion providers, restricts how Medicaid funds can be used to treat legal migrants and caps how much federal money states can receive if they use their own funds to provide healthcare for undocumented people. The Senate also made changes to Medicare, including barring most immigrants from receiving services and removing a provision that would tie physician reimbursement rates to a measure of inflation. The bill faced plenty of challenges in the upper chamber too. GOP senators worked through the weekend in an effort to get the reconciliation legislation to Trump's desk by July 4, reworking parts of their proposal to appease the Senate parliamentarian and convince lawmakers skeptical about the deep cuts to Medicaid. Democrat lawmakers staunchly oppose the bill, arguing it preserves tax cuts that benefit the wealthiest Americans while reducing funds for Medicaid and food assistance. 'It's the biggest Medicaid cut in history and represents the largest transfer of wealth in history,' Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said on the Senate floor Monday. 'It is caviar over kids, hedge funds over healthcare, Mar-a-Lago over the middle class.' The healthcare sector has been outspoken about the possible impacts of the legislation. Hospitals argue the Medicaid cuts will increase their burden of uncompensated care as the number of uninsured rise, hitting their bottom lines and forcing them to cut services. 'We are deeply disappointed by today's vote in the United States Senate,' said American Hospital Association CEO Rick Pollack in a statement Tuesday. 'The real-life consequences of these nearly $1 trillion in Medicaid cuts – the largest ever proposed by Congress – will result in irreparable harm to our health care system, reducing access to care for all Americans and severely undermining the ability of hospitals and health systems to care for our most vulnerable patients.' The CEO warned hospitals could see longer wait times and may have to cut staff or close entirely, especially in rural areas. Now, the bill will return to the House to gain approval. The Senate's version is likely to face challenges from some conservative members who believe the bill has not gone far enough to cut costs. 'The Senate's version adds $651 billion to the deficit — and that's before interest costs, which nearly double the total,' the caucus said in a statement Monday, 'That's not fiscal responsibility. It's not what we agreed to.' Recommended Reading Senate Republicans propose deeper Medicaid cuts in reconciliation bill
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Powell says the Fed would have cut rates this year if it weren't for tariffs
The Federal Reserve would likely have lowered interest rates this year if it weren't for President Donald Trump's significant policy changes, Chair Jerome Powell said Tuesday. 'I do think that's right,' he said at a central banking forum in Sintra, Portugal, when asked if the Fed would have cut rates by now. The Fed hasn't lowered interest rates at all this year: Central bankers broadly expect Trump's tariffs to have some effect on the US economy and they've said that they want to see how the dust settles first before resuming rate cuts. But the Fed's wait-and-see approach hasn't sat well with Trump, who has repeatedly lashed out against Powell for not yet lowering rates, describing him as a 'numbskull' and a 'moron.' On Monday, Trump posted on his social media platform a note in his handwriting slamming Powell for keeping interest rates higher than dozens of other nations, writing that he 'cost the USA a fortune' and that he continues 'to do so.' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the note was delivered to the Fed that same day. Trump hasn't been the only one calling for rate cuts. Two of Powell's colleagues — Fed Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman and Fed Governor Christopher Waller — have recently broken rank and said the central bank could consider a rate cut as soon as July. But neither of them has gone as far as to call for the supersized rate cuts Trump has demanded. Both have said rate cuts still depend on how mild any tariff-induced inflation turns out to be. Still, a rate cut in July seems unlikely and would be difficult for the Fed to defend. Investors estimate a 81% chance of the Fed holding rates steady at its July 29-30 meeting, according to futures, compared with a 19% chance of a quarter-point rate cut. Powell in his Sintra panel noted that most Fed officials expect to lower rates at some point later this year, depending on what happens with inflation and the labor market. 'A solid majority of (Fed officials) do expect that it will become appropriate later this year to begin to reduce rates again,' Powell said. When asked if July would be too soon for a rate cut, Powell said 'he can't say' but that he 'wouldn't take any meeting off the table or put it directly on the table.' European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde — who has publicly backed Powell's apolitical, data-driven approach to policymaking — praised the Fed leader on Monday, noting that he 'epitomizes the standard of a courageous central banker.' She was on the panel with Powell Tuesday. So far, Powell has avoided commenting on Trump's attacks, including on Tuesday when he was asked if Trump's harsh public comments make it difficult to conduct monetary policy. Powell said that 'I'm very focused on just doing my job.' Lagarde was asked how she would handle Trump's criticism if she were in Powell's position, to which she responded: 'I think we would (all) do exactly the same thing as our colleague, Jay Powell, does. The same thing.' Conference attendees clapped after Lagarde's comment. 'We're trying to deliver macro stability, financial stability, economic stability for the benefit of all the people,' Powell said. 'If we're going to do that successfully, we need to do it in a completely non-political way, which means we don't take sides. We don't play one side against the other. We stay out of issues that are really not our bailiwick.' Sign in to access your portfolio
Newsweek
24 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Declassified Election-Related Emails Portray FBI as 'Broken Institution'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Recently declassified documents pertaining to purported Chinese interference in the 2020 presidential election portray the FBI as a "broken institution," according to a top Senate Republican. Newsweek reached out to the bureau via email for comment on Tuesday. Why It Matters In mid-June, FBI Director Kash Patel declassified documents that "detail alarming allegations" about potential Chinese interference in the Donald Trump-Joe Biden election. The documents were then shared for review with Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley, a Republican and chair of the Judiciary Committee. China has denied any nefarious involvement in swaying the election results in 2020, and again in 2024. Allies of President Trump have alleged that China rigged the 2020 results in former President Biden's favor, invigorating hardcore supporters to march on the Capitol, leading to the siege of January 6, 2021. What To Know On Tuesday, Grassley released internal FBI emails that he claims reveal how the agency "suppressed intelligence of alleged Chinese interference in the 2020 election to insulate then-FBI Director Christopher Wray from criticism," after he "provided inaccurate and contradictory testimony to Congress." "These records smack of political decision-making and prove the Wray-led FBI to be a deeply broken institution," Grassley said in a statement. "Ahead of a high-stakes election happening amid an unprecedented global pandemic, the FBI turned its back on its national security mission. "One way or the other, intelligence must be fully investigated to determine whether it's true, or if it's just smoke and mirrors. Chris Wray's FBI wasn't looking out for the American people—it was looking to save its own image. Now's the time to rebuild the FBI's trust." Christopher Wray testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee on his nomination to become FBI director, on July 12, 2017, in Washington, D.C. Christopher Wray testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee on his nomination to become FBI director, on July 12, 2017, in Washington, D.C. MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images Grassley spokesperson Clare Slattery told Newsweek that the senator "draws no conclusions as to any potential impact these allegations may have had on the election." "Grassley's release is exposing the Wray FBI for failing to properly investigate this allegation due to a political calculation," Slattery said. "He is not drawing conclusions as to the veracity of the claims—that is for the FBI to do." The release of these new redacted emails is directly correlated to Patel saying last month that the Chinese Communist Party and potentially others are alleged to have been involved in interfering with the 2020 election outcome by manufacturing fake driver's licenses for the purpose of facilitating fraudulent mail-in ballots, Slattery said. Grassley said that what is being suppressed is an Intelligence Information Report (IIR) from the FBI's Albany Field Office on September 25, 2020, which contained information from an FBI Confidential Human Source (CHS) alleging the Chinese government's production of "tens of thousands" of fraudulent driver's licenses to benefit then-presidential candidate Biden. The CHS was reinterviewed and their allegations purportedly backed the initial IIR's findings. An FBI Albany official described the source as "competent" and "authentic in his/her reporting," per emails, with a high level of confidence in the "9-10 range." The allegations, according to the FBI, showed signs of credibility but were not fully investigated due to the bureau's sudden and "abnormal" decision to halt the probe. Other FBI field offices and members within the intelligence community were disallowed from accessing or studying the IIR. The FBI's stated reason for doing so was because "the reporting will contradict Director Wray's testimony." What People Are Saying Wray, during sworn testimony before the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee on September 24, 2020: "We take all election-related threats seriously, whether it is voter fraud, voter suppression, whether it is in person, whether it is by mail. And our role is to investigate the threat actors. Now, we have not seen historically any kind of coordinated national voter fraud effort in a major election, whether it is by mail or otherwise. ... [B]ut people should make no mistake we are vigilant as to the threat and watching it carefully, because we are in uncharted new territory." FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino posted to X: "We typically work behind the scenes in this space, but we understand we need to rebuild your trust in the FBI and learn from past mistakes. That's why we have declassified and shared with Congress thousands of pages of documents related to our counterintelligence work, and it's why we're continuing to release as much as we can to the public." What Happens Next It remains unclear what further events to which the declassified documents could lead. Grassley's office did not say whether future hearings could be called to have Wray, members of the FBI or whistleblowers testify.
