logo
Lisa Murkowski's not good after 'Big Beautiful' vote

Lisa Murkowski's not good after 'Big Beautiful' vote

Gulf Today3 days ago
Lisa Murkowski does not seem to be enjoying the summer. Perhaps it's the insane heat and humidity. She is from Alaska, after all. But judging from the Republican's responses to questions on the Senate's passage of President Donald Trump's "One Big Beautiful Bill" last week — where she once again was a pivotal holdout ... until she wasn't — Murkowski's demeanor of late has more to do with the 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' position her independent streak has fated for her. Asked by The Independent Thursday about her keen hope that the House of Representatives would fix what troubled her about the bill she voted to pass — which extends the 2017 tax cuts that Trump signed while also significantly slashing welfare programs like Medicaid and forcing states to shoulder more of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as food stamps — Murkowski bristled.
"Yeah, and they didn't do it," she said of the House's unchanged passage of the bill in time for Trump to sign it into law on July 4. When pressed about it, Murkowski sniped back, "You know what happened today? A whole new crisis."
"And so I wish I had the luxury of time to regret things, but we just got to keep moving forward," Murkowski concluded in her brush off of the question. She didn't elaborate on what that new crisis might be.
"That's it," she snapped. "You got one." And then she walked away from the gaggle.
Republican leaders finally swayed Murkowski on July 1 with a deal that created a carve-out for work requirements for Medicaid and SNAP and, in a direct appeal, increased the amount that Alaska whaling captains can deduct from their expenses as charitable contributions from $10,000 to $50,000. She insisted she wasn't pleased with the final bill, despite voting yes and creating a 50-50 tie that Vice President JD Vance was able to break, rationalising that the House might make final changes before ratifying it and sending it to the White House for Trump's signature.
Those changes never came as the lower chamber passed the same bill that the Senate had sent back to it, in large measure to meet Trump's deadline of July 4 for passage. Murkowski said she is now trying to move forward the 12 appropriations spending bills that Congress needs to pass by the end of September to keep the government open. If the Senate does not pass these, then it would need to either pass a stopgap spending bill or the government would shut down. As a member of the Appropriations Committee, Murkowski has immense authority in the decisionmaking for the spending bills alongside her fellow moderate, Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, who voted against Trump's tax and spending bill out of concerns it would endanger rural hospitals in her home state.
Murkowski has long expressed frustration at having to answer questions about the news of the day since Trump returned to office. Ahead of the vote-a-rama, Murkowski dodged when asked about the fact the bill would phase out renewable energy credits she wanted to preserve. "I haven't decided whether to share comments with reporters this morning or not," she told The Independent. "You're the first one to ask me a question this morning, so you win the bonus round."
She later offered a brief response about the actual policy.
"I don't want to see us backslide on clean energy," Murkowski said. In Februrary, Murkowski avoided reporters asking her about Trump's comments about the United States taking a "long-term ownership position" of the Gaza Strip by hiding behind a crate of boxes being wheeled in the Senate basement. She later offered a tepid response to The Independent.
"I think they've seen enough turmoil in that region," she told The Independent. "I don't think that we need to contribute with a proposal." After she voted to confirm Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has spent decades promoting the debunked theory that vaccines cause autism, to be Health and Human Services Secretary despite her concerns about him, she said the Senate would have a way to handle him.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Better than Trump
Better than Trump

Gulf Today

time35 minutes ago

  • Gulf Today

Better than Trump

Rather strangely, Donald Trump complimented Joseph Boakai, President of Liberia, saying he was 'speaking good English.' It is odd in that English is the official language of Liberia, and thus it would be assumed that its president would be able to speak it fluently. It is also odd that he would know the difference, as President Trump's own command of the language is tenuous. His speeches are often seen to be rambling at best and the rest incoherent and disjointed. President Trump also creates new words, best illustrated with 'Covfefe'. Creating new words is not a fault, as Shakespeare did so with over 1700 words added to the English language. Shakespeare however, was one of the greatest writers of plays, poems, and sonnets, whereas Trump is one of the greatest manglers of the language, as shown by numerous of his post-midnight tweets. He has insulted too many people, intentionally and accidentally to be the best that America has. Dennis Fitzgerald Melbourne, Australia

Trump says US will send Patriot missiles to Ukraine
Trump says US will send Patriot missiles to Ukraine

Dubai Eye

timean hour ago

  • Dubai Eye

Trump says US will send Patriot missiles to Ukraine

US President Donald Trump said he will send Patriot air defence missiles to Ukraine, saying they are necessary to defend the country because Russian leader Vladimir Putin "talks nice but then he bombs everybody in the evening". Trump did not give a number of Patriots he plans to send to Ukraine, but he said the US would be reimbursed for their cost by the European Union. The US President has grown increasingly disenchanted with Putin because the Russian leader has resisted Trump's attempts to negotiate a ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has asked for more defensive capabilities to fend off a daily barrage of missile and drone attacks from Russia. "We will send them Patriots, which they desperately need, because Putin really surprised a lot of people. He talks nice and then bombs everybody in the evening. But there's a little bit of a problem there. I don't like it," Trump told reporters at Joint Base Andrews outside of Washington. "We basically are going to send them various pieces of very sophisticated military equipment. They are going to pay us 100% for that and that's the way we want it." He plans to meet NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte to discuss Ukraine and other issues this week.

Trump wants to deport migrants to South Sudan
Trump wants to deport migrants to South Sudan

Gulf Today

time3 hours ago

  • Gulf Today

Trump wants to deport migrants to South Sudan

When I saw the news a few weeks ago that President Donald Trump's administration was trying to deport eight men to South Sudan, I was shocked. I had worked and lived in South Sudan as a diplomat and know the country well. It is on the brink of yet another civil war, and its government has a horrific human rights record. America's own travel warning for the country, updated most recently this March, is Level 4: Do Not Travel. The United States evacuated its nonemergency staff from the embassy earlier this year due to ongoing armed conflict and high levels of violent crime. It advised any Americans who choose to travel there anyway to draft a will, establish a proof of life protocol with loved ones in case they're taken hostage and prepare their family to manage their affairs in the case of their death. These are not warnings the US government issues lightly. Of nearly 200 countries on earth, why choose this as a deportation destination? Only one of the men deported there is from the country. The others have no ties to South Sudan whatsoever — rather, they come from Myanmar, Laos, Vietnam, Cuba and Mexico. None of those are even on the African continent. This puts most of the men on a far, difficult and expensive journey away from anywhere they know. The only purpose would be to punish these individuals and to instill fear in any others considering migrating to the United States. The Statue of Liberty's promise has been turned on its head. South Sudan is one of several countries where this administration seeks to deport migrants, regardless of country of origin. This includes El Salvador, where hundreds have been detained in a notorious prison, but the Trump administration is also considering war-torn Libya, corrupt Equatorial Guinea and authoritarian Rwanda, to name a few. As someone who has worked in South Sudan, I can speak to what migrants could face there specifically, and it isn't pretty. I wrote our annual human rights report on the country and was responsible for assisting American citizens there in need. This means I have documented the detention and prison conditions, the government-perpetrated violence and the futility of its justice system. It also means I worked to help US citizens caught up in it — often detained unlawfully and stuck for weeks or longer in prisons with horrific conditions, usually sick, and with no recourse until they typically bribed their way out. For a place with few comforts to offer, conflict and corruption have also made South Sudan incredibly expensive. Someone without a network for support or any knowledge of the country will only be that much worse off. Neither the US nor the South Sudanese government has indicated what fate awaits these men in the capital city, Juba: Will they be detained or released and what then? Will they have any help securing onward travel? Will they have contact with their families? Will they be able to work to earn enough to support themselves or to earn a ticket out? What conditions — if any — did the US government negotiate for their presence? South Sudan's government is violent, unaccountable and corrupt, so I wouldn't put much faith in its commitments anyway. It also needs money, and I expect that's what it got in return. In April, the US government revoked all South Sudanese visas as punishment for the country after its government refused to accept a deportee who was in fact from the Democratic Republic of Congo. Cooperating probably has more appeal now. Unlike most migrants detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement this year, these eight men are indeed convicted criminals, though many had either finished or were soon to finish serving their sentences. Being sent to an unfamiliar war zone far from their countries of origin, families or communities must feel like another criminal sentence. How and why did this happen? The due process rights of all people — not just citizens — in the United States have been well established by now. The Supreme Court ruled as recently as this May that deportees must be given a proper chance to raise legal objections to their removal to a third country. But, in the case at hand, weeks of legal battles over that right ended in July with the Supreme Court ruling that these deportations could go ahead anyway. Their case has been met with curiosity but little outrage. Perhaps it's because only a few people were affected. Or the criminal convictions make it easier to dismiss inhumane treatment. Or maybe the American public is just growing accustomed to our government treating migrants in this way.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store