Trump Tax Bill Stalls in the House

Watch Joe and Kailey LIVE every day on YouTube: http://bit.ly/3vTiACF.

Donald Trump’s signature economic legislation stalled in the House Wednesday afternoon as the president worked to win over Republican fiscal conservatives angry over the $3.4 trillion cost of his massive tax and spending package.

Republican congressional leaders delayed a key procedural vote for hours while the hardliners met in a room just off the House floor to refine their demands and then meet with the Trump’s budget director, Russ Vought. 

Vought told reporters the two sides were “making good progress” as he left the session late in the afternoon. Earlier in the day, Trump summoned the conservative holdouts to the White House to meet with them in person.

Bloomberg Washington Correspondents Joe Mathieu and Kailey Leinz deliver insight and analysis on the latest headlines from the White House and Capitol Hill, including conversations with influential lawmakers and key figures in politics and policy. On this edition, Joe and Kailey speak with:

• Republican Congressman Greg Murphy of North Carolina.
• Bloomberg Politics Contributor Rick Davis and Obama 2012 Campaign Manager Jim Messina.
• Bloomberg Washington Correspondent Tyler Kendall.
• Democratic Congresswoman Suzan DelBene of Washington.
• Republican Congressman Jim Jordan of Ohio.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the
Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at
noon and five pm Eastern on Apple Coarckley and Android
Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever

(00:20):
you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.

Speaker 2 (00:25):
That centeen youth is remarkable and something that will play
into the conversation that we're about to have with not
only a member of Congress, but one of the only
physicians who's going to be voting on this bill. Whenever
this does happen today tomorrow, we can bring you up
to date. Right now, we're waiting for a vote on
a rule here on the House floor, and the potential
for a full floor vote could be today, tonight, tomorrow morning,

(00:48):
maybe on the fourth of July. As we just discussed
with Laura Davison, it appears nobody's going home until this
is done, unless, of course, this is really derailed with
worries about debt and deficit, with orri about changes dare
I use the word cuts to Medicaid and a couple
of other matters. It does seem the Salt Caucus has
come around, but there are a lot of questions right

(01:09):
now about what this is going to bring to the floor.
The members of the Freedom Caucus, the fiscal Hawks who
oppose this, our meeting at the White House right now,
and we're joined in studio by a Republican member of Congress,
so you've heard from before on this program who was
in fact treating Medicaid patients as recently as yesterday, Greg
Murphy from North Carolina.

Speaker 3 (01:29):
Great to see you and welcome back to Bloomberg.

Speaker 4 (01:31):
Thank you.

Speaker 2 (01:31):
It's quite a moment that we're in right now, and
you have a unique perspective. I like to think that
your colleagues are asking for your advice on this and
I want your input on the changes to Medicaid before
we get that far. Does this rule even get to
the floor today, what's the state of play?

Speaker 4 (01:48):
Well, I think the rule gets to the floor. Whether
it passes or not is the real question, because you know,
we don't pass the rule. Basically, it is a stop
it is not if we don't. If the bill doesn't pass,
things can be dead. If we don't pass rule. It
brings us a chance to come back and address concerns
that maybe different portions of the House Caucus made are
have well and you know, things getting directly from the Senate,

(02:09):
that's what they wanted. Great, But if we have questions
about them, or real concerns about them, there needs to
be a mechanism, I think, to get those addressed. So
that's where we are.

Speaker 3 (02:18):
When it comes to Medicaid.

Speaker 2 (02:19):
We've talked about this before, and I know that you
supported eliminating waste, fraud and abuse from the program. You've speaken,
you've spoken openly about that. There are other changes and
potential cuts that you might be worried about. There's also
the matter of the provider tax, so what it means
for rural hospitals.

Speaker 4 (02:36):
Give us the physicians view here, Yeah, I think if
we back up, this is an exceedingly overly complex system
of Medicaid reimbursement where we have, you know, things where
the hospitals tax themselves, send the money to the state,
and the state then draws down more money to give
back to the hospitals. You have these direct funds, you
have indirect funds. It is a very very complex scheme

(02:57):
as if it will and what's been happened once it
been allowed to happen really over the last couple decades,
especially the last decade, is a lot of drawdowns from
the federal government to do things that states really should
be doing on themselves. You know, North Carolina just expanded
Medicaid a couple of years ago, and that brings an
entirely new population in I was in favor of that
because those are our working poor, the farmers, the fishermen,

(03:18):
the clergy, the people in eastern North Carolina that are
working but just simply can't afford healthcare. You know, we
want to attack this. And the House version was waste, fraud,
and abuse. Nobody can argue with those things, getting people
off the rolls that were illegally on the rolls or
illegally in the country, or were able bodied. The Senate
has taken a little bit different approach. It's kind of
one of those things that it's like, I'll use the

(03:40):
basketball analogy. It's not the first foul you see, it's
the reaction to the foul, and the first foul we've seen.
Really a lot happened with the Biden administration of expanding
the Medicaid roles to people that honestly should not be eligible,
are not eligible to beyond this. So it's trying to
now correct that, and we look like we're the bad
guys because we're the second person seen as the foul

(04:00):
and trying to fix a system and reform a system
for those individuals who truly deserve it.

Speaker 3 (04:04):
That's quite an analogy. So are you close to a
yes or are you stuck on this?

Speaker 4 (04:10):
I am in the information gathering stage. I will tell
you this. As a surgeon, we always measured twice and
cut once. That's just what we do. And usually surgeons
are pretty direct and we go through things. But this
is too important just for a knee jerk response. Look,
I'm on Trump's team. I want him to succeed, but
I also think he wants the best package possible delivered

(04:33):
to the American people.

Speaker 2 (04:34):
This is interesting because I know that you support Donald Trump, sure,
but you also see a window that's not necessarily closing here.
We don't have to manage the debt limit, for instance,
until we're probably into August.

Speaker 3 (04:45):
That gives you a whole other month to work on.

Speaker 4 (04:47):
This, right, Yeah, you know what time is of the essence,
We do want to get this done now. We don't
want to sit there and let this drag out. Because
there are some truths be told some political concerns to
do this, but we have a chance, we have a
moment in time really to get this right. Stop some
of the abuses that are occurring within the medicaid system.
I mean there are not only on the individual level,
but on hospital levels and other levels. There are abuses

(05:09):
that have occurred. I was chief of staff of are
at the time, a two billion dollar medical system, and
so I know a lot about where the moneys come from,
where they go. There's a lot of individuals that there's
a lot of ways for fraud abuse that goes in
these you know, I see you see some of these
CEOs of hospital systems earning millions and millions of dollars
when most of the problem, most of their moneys are

(05:30):
coming in from taxpayer initiatives. There's I have a problem
with some of that.

Speaker 5 (05:34):
You know.

Speaker 4 (05:34):
It's one thing for CEOs that run companies on the
on the five hundred index or whatever, but it's a
different thing when you're making your money based upon taxpayer dollars.
That said, there are a lot of abuses that go
in this system. There is this is once in a
lifetime opportunity to get it right. We need to get
it right. You know. One other thing I'll just say
is in the state of North Carolina, fifty two percent

(05:55):
of the births occur to mothers on medicaid. So how
is this This is a symptom of a societal issue.
Now we're being paid for with medicaid dollars, and how
do we fix that issue which actually makes then the
medicaid issue much easier to treat. I don't have the
answer to that. We have And I see this all
the time, Joe. I see kids coming in, having kids
and their grandmother who's thirty two taking care of the

(06:17):
child when the child still is either in high school
or trying to figure out if they can go to
college or not. That's a systemic issue of society, and
we're trying to deal with it, trying to pay for
it somehow, which at some point you got to draw
the line. We can't keep doing this. We have to
have some financial responsibility here.

Speaker 3 (06:34):
Is there anyone to tell a story like that to
President Trump? I mean, that's an incredible.

Speaker 4 (06:38):
Well, I think, well, I don't know anybody in Congress
that's still practices medicine. I'm the only physician that still does.
I live in a very very poor area of eastern
North Carolina, which are all Trump supporters, and so I
do think it is a message he needs to hear
how critical this is going to be for eastern North Carolina.
I'm just trying to figure out how to thread this needle,
you know, to fulfill the agenda that the president wants,

(06:59):
but at the same time to make sure that access
is affordable and accessible for the patients I see in
eastern North Carolina.

Speaker 2 (07:05):
When you consider the process here and the potential for
another reaction or another foul, Yeah, you make enough changes,
this has to go back to the Senate.

Speaker 3 (07:11):
Does that need to happen? Can you make changes without
that happening?

Speaker 4 (07:15):
I don't know that. If we make changes, I think
legislatively it has to go back to the Senate. But
you know, again, measure twice, you cut once. Let's do
this right. Let's not try to have to say, well,
we'll come back and fix that later. I'm not into
that kind of stuff.

Speaker 3 (07:30):
Otherwise you feel like you got jammed by the Senate.

Speaker 4 (07:32):
Well, yeah, and you know, I think the Senate the
guys were with guys and gals were with great intent
and what they wanted to do. I had been told
there was a lot more discussions about this beforehand, but
I think the Senate really actually did close to excuse me,
ninety percent of what we wanted. The changes they are
were pretty drag radical changes.

Speaker 3 (07:50):
Yeah, boy, that's right.

Speaker 2 (07:51):
I want to ask you about your colleague from North
Carolina on the Senate side, som till Us. Pretty remarkable
development here, James. I don't know if we can get
that sound of Senator Tillis on the Senate floor over
the weekend. Of course, he's decided not to run for
reelection based on a pretty tight jam that he was in,
and some would argue that he was facing a very

(08:11):
difficult primary to begin with. Let's hear from Senator Tillos
if we can, from earlier on this process.

Speaker 6 (08:18):
I'm telling the President that you have been misinformed. You
supporting the Senate mark will hurt people who are eligible
and qualified for Medicaid. We're going to make sure that
we fulfill the promise and then we can feel I
can feel good about a bill that I'm willing to

(08:38):
vote for, but until that time I will be withholding
my vote.

Speaker 3 (08:44):
Pretty passionate stuff.

Speaker 2 (08:45):
I'm sure you've had a chance to talk to the Senator,
what would you tell him?

Speaker 3 (08:48):
Though he is he off on this one.

Speaker 4 (08:50):
I think there are very are parts that Senator Tillis
is spot on correct. But we're in a system that
is exploded. Exploded, you know, the bidendministration. Normally, medic state
is state audits, they're Medicaid roles every year, who's eligible,
who's not eligible. The Biden administration didn't want any of that.
In fact, the head of CMS had two jobs to do.

(09:11):
She was in charge of infusing as much DEI into
medicine as possible and trying to put people on Medicaid
roles honestly who don't deserve to be. There will there
be some collateral damage. There's collateral damage with any legislation,
any legislation, But it's my job is to try to
make sure that there are agreements not only from the
federal government but also back in the state legislature. I

(09:32):
spoke with the Senator pro Tem A Burger, and I
pretty much was very firm that look, if this comes
down the pike, the state's going to have to cough
up some other moneies that it's been trying to pull
down from the federal government. Now we cannot bankrupt the
federal government on issues that the state should be taken
care of.

Speaker 2 (09:48):
Well, we see a lawmaker like that call it quits,
and we've seen a few Don Bacon and other and
I realized he may have had his own personal.

Speaker 3 (09:55):
Issues in making that decision.

Speaker 2 (09:56):
But you wonder you're more effective by staying here in
office trying to make changes.

Speaker 4 (10:01):
Well, you know, I think I think Senator tell Us
has been thinking about this for a while and it
may just have been the you know, the last straw.

Speaker 2 (10:08):
Sure, of course, everyone's got their wrong story. You're going
to run for Senate in North Carolina.

Speaker 4 (10:12):
Well, I've been asked to. I was on the way
over here. I got another text ass I'd consider it.

Speaker 2 (10:16):
So, well, this is interesting. Are you allowing yourself a
certain period of time to make that?

Speaker 4 (10:19):
But I think, you know, Joe, I did not raise
my hand to get into politics undred years ago. I
got recruited, and it gives me a little bit of freedom.
I can always fall back on being a lowly surgeon
full time. And I've said that before. I want to
do the right thing. And and you know, next week,
if we get something done, I think we'll really start
to look at this who are the players in the game.

(10:41):
We can't let a Democrat take this seat. I'm sorry.
North Carolina needs a Republican in that seat.

Speaker 3 (10:45):
And wonder what happened if Roy Cooper became the next senator.

Speaker 4 (10:48):
From uh I don't yeah, I think that would be problematic.
He's been a little too far left and supported things
that the Democrat Party right now, Good Lord, if you
saw what you can look and see what happened with
the New York mayor's race. Nobody can recognize the Democratic
Party anymore. So you know, I'll make that decision next
week or the week thereafter.

Speaker 2 (11:06):
And so you could take a pay cut for a
whole other job as a fascinating to stay here and watch.

Speaker 3 (11:11):
It's to make less money, Yeah, fascinating.

Speaker 2 (11:13):
I'd love to stay in touch with you on that
and hear about this deliberation because I know that's not
an easy decision to make.

Speaker 3 (11:17):
Is that something you're talking to your family about?

Speaker 5 (11:18):
Oh?

Speaker 4 (11:18):
Absolutely? And you know, just like with all the other decisions,
you sit down, you talk with your family, ask the
Good Lord for some prayers and guidance, and you either
walk through doors that are opened up or you let
somebody else that you think can do the job as well.
Walk through too. I've got great colleagues in North Carolina. Yeah,
we just have to make sure we put somebody that
can be a Democrat and be a great senator.

Speaker 3 (11:40):
Measure twice cut once.

Speaker 4 (11:41):
That's exactly right.

Speaker 2 (11:42):
That's the takeaway here from Greg Murphy. You're going to
head back to the House now. Yeah, we'll have our
eyes on you, and this is going to be wild.
Good luck in the next twenty four to forty eight hours,
we'll see if this bill passes.

Speaker 4 (11:51):
Great.

Speaker 3 (11:51):
Thanks for talking to us, all right.

Speaker 2 (11:52):
Thank you from North Carolina of course, and speaking on
behalf of the Republicans here in Washington, some of whom
have not made up their mind, and we could still
see some changes to this legislation, as we just heard
from Congressman Murphy himself. We'll assembled our panel coming up next.
Rick Davis and Jim Messina are with us to hash
this out here as we prepare to count the votes
on a Wednesday in Washington. We've got a lot more

(12:14):
ahead here on the fastest show in politics.

Speaker 3 (12:15):
Stay with us. I'm Joe Matthew live from Washington. This
is Bloomberg.

Speaker 1 (12:21):
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on
Apple Cockley and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App.
You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our
flagship New York station Just Say Alexa played Bloomberg eleven thirty.

Speaker 2 (12:40):
We're all watching, of course, the House floor right now
with the series of procedural matters that we're going through
here that may or may not lead us to a
full smash.

Speaker 3 (12:51):
Vote on the big beautiful Bill. Thanks for being with
us here on the Wednesday edition.

Speaker 2 (12:56):
Indeed, I'm Joe, Matthew and Washington here on Bloomberg Radio,
Satellite radio Channel one twenty one, Bloomberg Originals and YouTube.
Search Bloomberg Business News Live to see our video feed here.
A UC storm, they're calling it taking place on the
floor of the House right now, as members of the
Congressional Black Caucus storm the rostrum with a series of

(13:19):
unanimous consent requests not to necessarily get anything done other
than slow the process. Democrats, of course, have been locked
out of this process. That is the way it works
when you're dealing with reconciliation. It's a Republican family matter,
although Democrats are speaking about it, as we heard from
Minority Leader in the House Hakim Jeffreys earlier.

Speaker 7 (13:40):
Listen, every single House Democrat will stand up for your healthcare,
stand up for your Medicaid, stand up for your Medicare,
stand up for the Affordable Care Act, stand up for
nutritional assistance for our children, our seniors, and our veterans.
That's all we need are four Republicans to join us

(14:03):
in support of their constituents, to have John McCain level
courage and stand up in defense of the healthcare of
the American people.

Speaker 2 (14:18):
Haven't we come a long way when the Democratic leader
in the House is referring to John McCain to get
a round of applause from other Democrats. Let's assemble our
political panels speaking of John McCain. Bloomberg Politics contributor Rick
Davis is with US Republican strategist and partner at Stone
Court Capital. I'm also happy to say Jim Messina's back
Democratic strategist of course, ran Barack Obama's twenty twelve campaign. Gentlemen,

(14:40):
Great to see you both, and welcome to the conversation. Rick,
I don't know if your ears were ringing there. But
we just had a conversation with a Republican member of
the House, Greg Murphy from North Carolina, the last I
believe are only serving physician in the House of Representatives.
He's a Trump supporter, he's a Maga guy, and even
he has deep concerns about the changes that are being

(15:02):
made to Medicaid the impact it could have on his state,
he's still not a yes. How far are we away
from this actually potentially passing?

Speaker 8 (15:11):
Yeah, I only wish we had a few of those
Democrats that thought John McCain was a hero at the
time we were voting for him for president at two
thousand and eight, when Jim Massena and his team kick
my butt. Yeah. Look, I mean, this is a pretty
unpopular bill in America. Most polls I've seen really significantly negative.
I think that the White House and the Republican majority

(15:34):
have done an average job at best selling it to
the American public. Obviously, they've been consumed with selling it
to each other, and that takes up a lot of time.
But they're really going to have a job to do
if this thing gets signed in the law, They're going
to have to hit the road and sell this hard,
otherwise they're going to get the wrath of the American
electorate come midterms. But look, I think that you know

(15:57):
the Congressman Murphy, you know he's looking at running for
the set potentially. He made no bones about that in
a conversation with you just now that's a news item.
The reality is anybody who's going to be on a
ballot in twenty twenty six is trying to figure out
how do you go back and sell this to the
constituents that put you into office. And I think a

(16:17):
lot of these guys are starting to worry about that today.

Speaker 3 (16:21):
Really interesting.

Speaker 2 (16:21):
Yeah, I have to admit I was struck by Congress
and Murphy's answers. It does sound like he's really considering
a run for Senate.

Speaker 3 (16:28):
Jim is seen. I can't imagine what's going through your
head right now.

Speaker 2 (16:32):
Democrats don't play a role in this, but they're going
to have a lot to say on the midterm trail.
As Rick just mentioned, are you making commercials already?

Speaker 4 (16:42):
Boy?

Speaker 9 (16:42):
They'd be pretty easy to make. Joe, I agree with Rick.
I mean, this bill is about as popular as as
garbage like it is. When you look at the number
seventy eight percent of Americans want no cuts to Medicaid.
This cuts Medicaid almost a trillion dollars, and more importantly
for a bunch of people who are Bloomberg regular I
don't think anyone on this line or watching things that

(17:04):
adding another four trillion dollars to the debt is a
great idea. I think defending this next year in the
ballot box is going to be a nightmare for Republicans.
And you know, it's like groundhog Day. We've been through
this in twenty eighteen, Donald Trump and the Republicans lost
the House because the American public thought they were going
after Obamacare and going after healthcare. So then fast forward,

(17:25):
we're going to do the same thing again when they're
making cuts to Obamacare, they're making cuts to Medicaid, they're
making cuts to Medicare, and they think it'll be a
different response. And I just think that it is very,
very unclear that the American public is going to sit
back and say this is a great idea.

Speaker 2 (17:43):
Well, while we're talking about the messaging component, here interesting
poll rick that came from Tony Fabrizio. Donald Trump, as
they say, preferred Polster. He ran numbers in Georgia Maine, Michigan,
and the aforementioned North Carolina and talked about this bill
as a branding it essentially as the Working Family's Tax

(18:03):
Cuts Bill. Poll found respondents came back sixty two percent
favorable twelve percent unfavorable when it was given that title.
That framing and measures taken individually like child tax credit,
no taxes on tips, no taxes on overtime were overwhelmingly popular.
Can Republicans thread the needle on this and talk about

(18:24):
the individual components as opposed to well, the big beautiful
bill or you've seen this movie before and it's pretty
difficult to delineate to the voter.

Speaker 8 (18:35):
Yeah, look, I mean the problem with doing this segmentation
act right, taking little pieces of the whole and saying, oh,
look it, you should be happy with this because it
has this in it. I mean, this is a thousand
page bill with you know, trillions of dollars at stake,
and when you boil it down, if you're a family

(18:55):
that has now become at risk with its medicaid in
those states, it doesn't matter what the politicians are telling you.
If your Medicaid gets cut, if it's if your local
rural hospital shuts down, These are the things that matter
to voters. Voters don't care about the rhetoric. They care
about the impact on them. If they don't see a

(19:16):
tangible plus in their pocket books between now and November
of twenty six, they're going to vote their pocketbook. And
it's an awful hard sell to try and help people.
Don't believe what's happening in your kitchen table. Believe what
we're telling you happened in Washington. I go with the
kitchen table every time, and.

Speaker 2 (19:37):
Even larger majority. Really interesting here, Jim Messina agree that
able bodied adults should have some sort of work requirements.
When it comes to the Medicaid cuts. Two thirds of
voters agree there is waste, fraud and abuse. How do
you message against.

Speaker 9 (19:51):
That, Well, you message you get well, it's true, right,
there is waste, froud, abuse and getting rid of some
of that is Congress from Murphy talked about American public supportive.

Speaker 4 (20:01):
But they're not going to look at that.

Speaker 9 (20:03):
Voters are going to look exactly like like Rick just said.

Speaker 4 (20:07):
And they're going to say, what does this do to me?

Speaker 9 (20:08):
Voters want to know what it does to me, and
there's no question they're going to get less Medicaid next year.
There's no question they're going to get less Medicare and
they are Obamacare tax credits which everyone files at the
end of the year, are going to be substantially reduced,
and that's what they're going to look at. They're just
not you know, you can't say, look at this shiny
penny over here and think voters are going to fall

(20:30):
for it. They are going to look at what's in
it for them, and what's in it for them is
going to be a very difficult thing to defend. And
I'm not being partisan about this. Rick's exactly right. I
had to try to defend Obamacare in twenty ten after
we pass one thousand page changes to the ACA, and
it was impossible. It was so difficult, and we lost
seventy seats in the House. And this is likely what

(20:51):
the Republicans are going to have to try to do
in the midterm elections. And I think at the tall order.

Speaker 3 (20:57):
Wow, Rick Blueberg's time.

Speaker 2 (21:00):
Kendall just caught up with Congressman Andy Harris and chairs
the House Freedom Caucus on Capitol Hill. We'll try to
get this sound a little bit later in the broadcast.

Speaker 3 (21:08):
Asked if he's.

Speaker 2 (21:09):
Negotiating with the White House, knowing that there were members
of the Freedom Caucus at the White House. I believe
they're still there right now talking to the President. Whether
you're deal making over potential EOS commitments to legislation down
the line. Andy Harris said on camera, Rick, I have
not been talking to the White House about it. This
is a decision to be made inside the House, and
it will be handled inside the House today. What does

(21:31):
that tell you about the state of affairs? Do we
get a rule vote today or is this thing going
off the rails?

Speaker 8 (21:37):
Well, he sounds a little spunky this morning, no telling
what he had to leave at home to get to
Washington and do this work. But look, I mean, you know,
anybody who's been betting against Speaker Johnson and Donald Trump,
our deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives, has been
raw one hundred percent of the time this year, right,

(21:58):
And there is there's a magic in the White House.
When you get these guys sitting in the Oval Office
with the President of United States, regardless of who he is,
you're going to get your way ninety percent of the time.
My guess is he gets his way, and those guys
who are there are going to sit down with Ay
and say, oh my god, you are making our lives intolerable.
Would you just not do any interviews between now and

(22:20):
the rules votes you know we've got today, because look,
I mean, it's every man for himself in the House always.
But Johnson has been cagy about getting his caucus to
vote the right way. And I have no doubt Donald
Trump has got thumbscrews working overtime today in the Oval Office.

Speaker 3 (22:40):
Thumbscrews.

Speaker 2 (22:41):
Yeah, he's got no public events schedule, and we haven't
seen an update on the guidance certainly as of yet.
Fascinating reporting by NBC News Jim Assina. You spent enough
time in the Oval to know how things operate inside
the West Wing, and Donald Trump is a very different brand.
He calls the Oval Office his nickname for the Oval Office.
Off to find this. It's basically Grand Central and off

(23:05):
of Grand Central, where you have lots of people milling
in and out. Apparently there's something he calls the Monica
Lewinsky Room, the space near the Oval Office.

Speaker 3 (23:13):
If you don't know what I'm talking about, you can
google it.

Speaker 2 (23:16):
Where he keeps a beautifully organized gift shop of maga
hat's T shirts and the rest. A Republican senator who
was invited for a bill signing described this jd Vance
standing outside the oval, drinking coffee, eating cookies. Does this
sound like somebody who cares about the details of this
bill or just wants it passed.

Speaker 4 (23:38):
I think he just wants it passed.

Speaker 9 (23:39):
And that's not a criticism of him. Like he've views
himself as the kind of orchestrator and the leader and
someone who wants this thing done. And he's smart enough
to Rick's point, to say, look, the speaker knows how
to get votes. The speaker hasn't failed, you know. The
Speaker will let me know who I need to put
the thumbscrews to and we'll go get this done. And
eventually what's going to happen here. I think this bill

(24:00):
is going to pass this week because they're going to
have some version of Rick or I the political hack,
walk into the caucus and say, do you guys really
want to go home and have the entire country lobbying
you on this bill and start to figure out what's
in this bill? You want to go home to your
districts and have to defend some of the stuff in this.
No you do not, So let's pass this and go
home and keep low and start to try to sell it.

(24:22):
And I think that's probably what Donald Trump's version of
this is. He's been calling members saying, I will primary
you if you don't vote for this, and then Johnson's
going to hand out every piece of candy he can
to get people.

Speaker 4 (24:35):
To vote for it.

Speaker 9 (24:35):
If you need a water project in your district. Today's
a pretty great time to ask.

Speaker 2 (24:39):
Joe grand Central terminal is how do he describe the oval?
Rick Davis, what do you think it's like in there
right now?

Speaker 8 (24:48):
Oh, I'm sure there's all kinds of interesting discussions going on.
Jimson just mentioned the approach that hacks like us take
you combination of cajoling and special offers. The really good
cuff links come out of the box today and get

(25:08):
shuffled around. But if he also at the other end
of the equation, there are people out there showing polls
right now that shows vulnerable incumbent House members who might
get introduced to their MAGA primary opponent this afternoon. You know,
it goes both ways, just depends upon what they think
is going to need to get a vote and I agree.

(25:31):
I think it's going to happen. I think it's going
to happen. You know, either honor before fourth of July.
The President's going to get his way. I would not vote.
I would not back against him, you know, with this caucus.

Speaker 2 (25:42):
All right, I just needed to hear Rick Davis say
it absolutely great, as Ryan notes, what a line here.
You want to go home and find out what's in
the bill and have to defend it. This is the
world we're in right now. With Jim Assina and Rick Davis,
many thanks. Do you both stay with us on The
fastest show in politics is Bloomberg.

Speaker 1 (26:04):
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
us live weekdays at noon and five pm. E's den
on Alma Cocklay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App.
Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch
us live on YouTube.

Speaker 10 (26:20):
Voting is starting, not yet voting on the rule.

Speaker 11 (26:24):
That, of course, is the key procedural hurdle that needs
to be conquered in order for the House to get
to a vote on final passage of the bill, the
Reconciliation Bill that the Senate passed yesterday. We have a
multi vote series about to go down, Joe. The third
vote will be on this rule, and there is no
guarantee that the rule itself can pass, as House Freedom

(26:45):
Caucus members are suggesting they will not support it. And
of course you just spoke in the last hour with
Congressman Greg Murphy who suggested that this thing very well
could go down.

Speaker 2 (26:54):
Yeah, he thought the rule may well fail and this
whole process could move into next week. The only serving
physician in the House of Representatives, Greg Murphy, was very
concerned about the changes being made to medicate. He was
asking to slow the process down and in fact make
changes to this bill specifically to medicate, which would require
it going back to the Senate. Kayley, and I'm not

(27:14):
sure anyone has the wherewithal for that.

Speaker 11 (27:17):
Well, it certainly would make that July fourth deadline the
President wants to meet very difficult to.

Speaker 10 (27:21):
Meet if you have to take this to conference.

Speaker 11 (27:23):
But even some senators were calling for that yesterday, like
Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who ultimately voted to pass it
in the Senate, says she hoped the House would change
it and send it back to her chain.

Speaker 2 (27:32):
We've heard that from a couple of folks here on
the Senate side. It's unclear exactly how this is going
to play out today, but as Kaylee mentioned, we are
anticipating at least a rules vote, and so let's bring
you to the House right now. Bloomberg's Tyler Kendall has
been up there all morning and has the latest for us.

Speaker 3 (27:46):
Tyler, what are you hearing?

Speaker 5 (27:49):
Yeah, hey, jos. We are still waiting for this vote
to happen. Of course, it's a procedural vote to this
vote on the rule, but it is important to ultimately
paving the way for final passage because they can't vote
on the final contents of the bill until this rule
is passed. And it's going to give us an indication
here in the following moments how difficult House Speaker Mike
Johnson's job is about to get, because if the rule fails,

(28:11):
that could have a whole bunch of different implications for
how they need to negotiate this package to get it
over at the finish line. Now, we've broadly been talking
about how there's pretty broad agreement about the core pillars
of this package when it comes to the tax cut
side of things, but it is those spending cuts and
how this bill will add to our national debt that
is really starting to spur some of the most vocal

(28:33):
critics of the bill here on Capitol Hill. That includes
those members of the House Freedom Caucus, such as Congressman
Chip Roy, a Republican from Texas. I actually had the
chance to catch up with him earlier today. He predicted
that this first vote on the rule will fail and
suggested that the Senate might need to come back into
town so they can talk about this legislation.

Speaker 12 (28:52):
We sent them a product. We liked it in some
respects could be better than others. The Senate has now
made some changes, some are good, some are bad. Now
we got to look at the total product and decide
what it is that is take it or leave it?
How did you take it or leave it?

Speaker 4 (29:04):
Legislating?

Speaker 12 (29:05):
How about we send it back to him?

Speaker 4 (29:06):
We say take it or leave it?

Speaker 12 (29:07):
Right, so the Senate doesn't get to be the final
say on everything. Got to work this out.

Speaker 5 (29:14):
So Joe and Kelly, we're going to have to see
how this ultimately develops, whether or not there actually is
an appetite for the Senate to retake this up. Considering
when we think about how these fiscal hawks counterparts in
the Senate like Ron Johnson and Rick Scott ultimately ended
voting in favor of this spill. Now, I also caught
up with the House Freedom Cocks chair Andy Harris. He
told me that he's actually not talking to the White

(29:35):
House about this. When I asked if there's any sort
of negotiations going on for some sort of other deals
such as promises for legislation down the line, or executive orders,
say to boost revenue raisers or curb spending, that they
could maybe get on board with, and he said that
they're not discussing it. Instead, they are focused on changing
the priorities in this package. Two main ones I'll leave
you with. One is snapping back the phase out of

(29:56):
the clean energy tax credits to how the House originally
had them, that would be twenty twenty seven. In the
House has a more lenient timeline. But second, something that
struck me as really interesting, he wants to see some
of the business tax credits made it temporary again. The
Senate had made most of them permanent, so we're gonna
have to see it. Potentially there could be any sort
of wiggle room there, because, as you both well know,
this bill is not designed to ping pong between the chambers.

Speaker 11 (30:19):
Well, yeah, that's exactly right, Tyler. When we consider this
vote on the rule, Yes, it going down would certainly
complicate measures and kill the floor effort for now. But
we have seen with votes in the past when the
Speaker has struggled to get his whip count essentially where
it needs to be, he just has left the vote
open and allowed President Trump himself time to make phone

(30:41):
calls to the holdouts. Is it possible that we could
see that this afternoon.

Speaker 5 (30:48):
Potentially, we'll have to see. We won't get too wonky
into the procedure here, but Republicans are going to need
to do a little bit of shifting in how the
bill was actually written, because it does appear that they
actually left out a procedural move that would have opened
up that possibility to keep the debate open. Give House
Speaker Mike Johnson essentially an exit plan if everything goes
to turmoil once it does get to the floor. We

(31:09):
are expecting that to be though an option on the
table for him moving forward. Here, we know that President
Trump is already calling up these members inviting them to
the White Houses. Interesting to hear are understanding that some
of those more fiscal conservatives were over at the White House,
but also Congressman Mike Lawler, Republican from New York, somebody
who helped negotiate that Salt deal that we thought was
happy and on board with it, which does bring us

(31:31):
to another group to keep our eye on, not necessarily
the Salt Republicans, but also those moderate Republicans and those
critical battleground districts who have raised concerns about changes to Medicaid.
Not necessarily tightening the work requirements Joe and Kelly, but
how the Senate plan lowers that Medicaid provider tax for
states that expanded coverage under the Affordable Care Act. That
could also prove problematic when it comes to dissent going forward,

(31:53):
since we know sixteen Republicans had vowed that they wouldn't
vote for this if the bill did lower that provider tax.

Speaker 11 (31:59):
All right, Ty Kendall reporting live from Capitol Hill for
us on Bloomberg TV and Radio. Thank you so much,
and we want to stay live on Capitol Hill as
we turn now to Democratic Congressman and Susan del Betty
of Washington, who of course shares the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
She is charged with making sure Democrats get elected to
the House of Representatives. Congressoman, welcome back to balance of power.

(32:20):
It's always great to have you. And we consider that
there are some of your Republican colleagues who are holding
out on this legislation for now. They'd like to see
it change in ways that could mean more rollbacks or
quicker rollbacks of inflation reduction acts, subsidies, perhaps deeper spending
cuts elsewhere. At this point, is it actually the best
case scenario for Democrats in the American public if this

(32:42):
bill passes as is, because it could only get worse
from your perspective if it's further changed.

Speaker 13 (32:49):
Well, let's be clear, this is a terrible bill. It
raises costs for American families, It guts healthcare, seventeen million
people across the country losing their health coverage, prices going
up for everyone else. This is a terrible bill, and
we are united and being against this bill. And frankly,
more Republicans should be against this bill, because the American

(33:10):
people are against this bill. Pull after pull. The more
people learn about this bill, the more they dislike it,
and it is fiscally irresponsible. They're you know, Republicans who
want to make it worse. They've all voted for this.
Once in the House, they have the chance to decide
what they're going to do going forward. This is a
terrible bill and it's going to hurt all of their

(33:32):
districts and their communities. So hopefully there will be some
Republicans who are willing to actually stand up for the
American people and vote against this bill. But we know
they all cave whenever it comes down to it and
follow along with Donald Trump.

Speaker 2 (33:48):
So you're not expecting these no's to stay nos apparently, Congresswoman.
I'm just wondering, and I know there's not a lot
of conversation across the aisle if any right now, but
are you reaching out to Republicans who are on the fence,
are prepared to vote no, to join your coalition against
this legislation.

Speaker 13 (34:06):
You know, we welcome any Republicans who are going to
vote no. They should be voting no because the impacts
of this are devastating, long term impacts to our communities
and in Republican districts, to thousands and thousands of people
losing access to health here, losing access to basic nutrition support,

(34:28):
making sure that we have healthy foods for our kids,
energy costs going up, the list goes on and on,
and just you know, four trillion dollar increase to the
debt that impacts our kids too. So Republicans say they're
fiscally responsible, absolutely not in this case. If they want
to do something different, they should stand up, vote no,
and come to the table and actually work on a

(34:50):
policy that will help move our country forward, invest in
our future, invest in working families.

Speaker 10 (34:57):
Well Conqureersoman.

Speaker 11 (34:57):
Obviously, it is your charge of the d Triple C
to be looking at the map and if you look
at a district by district and how the impact of
this legislation may ultimately be felt in districts with seats
currently held by Republicans, how many potential pickup opportunities do
you see as a result.

Speaker 13 (35:14):
Well, I think this bill it really defines where Republicans
are and this bill and their vote on this bill
is going to be a huge reason we take back
the majority in the House of Representatives. The American or
people reject the bill. But in district after district, we
have thirty five districts where we're on offense across the country.
In those thirty five districts, people in these communities will

(35:38):
lose healthcare. See healthcare costs go up, See energy costs
go up, see food prices go up. Republicans promise they
were going to lower costs on day one. It's the
number one issue for families across the country. They promised
they were going to lower costs. That's a broken promise.
This big ugly bill is also a big broken promise.

(36:00):
So we're gonna hold them on. So is that for
that across the country?

Speaker 11 (36:05):
Is that potentially thirty five seats? Then, Congresswoman, do you
think it could be.

Speaker 13 (36:09):
That Numbhere we have thirty five seats. We're in play
across the country where recruiting great candidates, folks are going
to actually stand up for their communities, who are going
to really be voices for their communities, talk about the
issues that matter, and who actually want to come to Washington,
DC to govern four communities, not be a blindly loyal

(36:30):
vote for Donald Trump.

Speaker 2 (36:32):
You've mentioned the number of people who could potentially lose
health coverage, and I think seventeen million is the number
that we've been hearing a congresswoman that you mentioned as well.
There's a new survey from Tony Fabrizio's group commissioned by
One Nation that found two thirds of voters agree there
is waste, fraud, and abuse in Medicaid.

Speaker 3 (36:51):
How do you message to them.

Speaker 13 (36:54):
We know that families across the country depend on Medicaid,
our rural hospitals on Medicaid. Look across the board. This
has nothing to do with strengthening Medicaid. What Republicans are
trying to do is rip it apart, a trillion dollars,
rip it apart, Rip apart the affordable care accessidies that
are out there, seventeen million people losing healthcare, but also

(37:17):
rural hospitals closing across the country, nursing homes. All of
these are things that are supported through Medicaid that are
critically important to all of our communities. And healthcare costs
will go up for everyone in the country because even
if you have coverage, premiums are going to go up.
When more and more people are using the emergency room

(37:39):
as their primary care. We know we've seen before how
damaging that is. They're walking us down that path again
now and the American people know that.

Speaker 11 (37:50):
Congressman, I know you need to run back to the
floor so very quickly. Here Elon Musk this week has
threatened to fund primary challenges of Republicans who vote for
this bill, but it also has threatened to start a
new third America Party. Does Elon Musk pose a potential
gift for Democrats if he's going to fund challengers to
Republicans or potentially a risk if he actually wants to

(38:12):
fund a third party?

Speaker 13 (38:14):
Well, I think Elon Musk called this bill discussing abomination.
That's an app description. We all should be fighting to
prevent this bill from moving forward, but making sure we
have great representatives across the country. The American people are
with us on this. We're on offense, and this vote
is going to cost Republicans the majority in twenty twenty six.

Speaker 3 (38:38):
Congresswoman, it's great to have you back.

Speaker 2 (38:40):
She is chairwoman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Susan
Delbenny of Washington. Remarkable to hear her way in on
this kale as we try to get a sense of
what Democrats want to do, likely in the aftermath of
this vote, knowing that they can't impact this legislation in
the meantime, I want to bring in Rick Davis, Bloomberg
Politics contributor and Republicans strategist for his view on this,

(39:02):
Rick is Susan del Bennet. Correct, do Democrats win the
midterms because of this bill?

Speaker 8 (39:08):
You know, the midterms are usually bad for the party
in power anyway, regardless of what kind of legislation was passed.
But early in this program we heard from Jim Messina
talking about twenty ten, the cycle after they passed ACA
and was very controversial at the time, very similar to
this bill in some respects, and they lost fifty three seats.
That was the largest gain by Republicans since the nineteen thirties.

(39:31):
And so if you start looking at parallels, it could
be a really horrific year for Republicans if it looks
like ten reincarnated.

Speaker 11 (39:42):
Does that apply to the Senate as well? Rick, We're
at the very least we know North Carolina. Maybe more
of a live question now that Tom Tillis has decided
he's not seeking re election.

Speaker 8 (39:52):
Yeah, the Senate has been able to avoid the sort
of party in power losses that had and historic for
the House of Representatives. That being said, as you point out, Kayley,
I mean like this is an interesting year because we
have some retirements and some close seats that could actually
make a bad year look even worse than the United

(40:12):
States Senate. So I think nobody's taken anything for granted
right now in the United States Senate. But there are
seats like in Texas and in North Carolina, and certainly
Susan Collins perennially is at risk in Maine. These are
seats that are going to have to be really, really
harshly defended. But the key is that the Republicans step
out from this week when they do pass this bill

(40:33):
and sign it in a law, and actually try to
sell it in a way that, as Tony Fabrizio pointed out,
there are things that people like in this bill, but
they got to sell it.

Speaker 1 (40:44):
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcasts. Catch
us live weekdays at noon and five pm e's durn
on Apple Cockley and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App.
You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa. From our
flagship New York station, Just Say played Bloomberg eleven thirty.

Speaker 2 (41:03):
We talked politics in Washington with a lot of question
marks over the Capitol right now, and I suspect over
the White House as well, with members of the House
Freedom Caucus meeting today with President Trump and a series
of procedural votes that are underway right now in the House.
They are preparing to vote. Republicans hoping to vote on
the floor on President Trump's big, beautiful bill that's coming

(41:25):
back from the Senate. But there are changes to this bill, Kaylee,
that a lot of members of the Republican conference are
uncomfortable with. It's kind of like we're just relitigating this
entire debate, remembering that the Moderates were concerned about spending cuts,
cuts to medicaid. House Freedom Caucus wanting to see lower
debt and deficits lower spending. These are the same lawmakers

(41:45):
who are hashing this out for.

Speaker 11 (41:46):
A second time, yeah, knowing they barely sorted out their
differences the first time when it passed the House. Initially
it was on a margin of a single vote, squeaker,
and then it went back to the Senate it changed.
And now the House Freedom Caucus, especially especially as Super,
willing to just take what the Senate gave them and
give it a thumbs up. That's what we're hearing from
the likes of Congressman Ship Roy, who has suggested that

(42:08):
it shouldn't be taken or leave it, that the House
could change it until the Senate take it or leave it.

Speaker 2 (42:11):
Well, and then we remind ourselves this is a self
imposed July Foard deadline. We spoke earlier with Congressman Greg
Murphy who saw no problem in letting this go another
week or so that would allow for changes to be made,
it to go back to the Senate Schoolhouse rock eventually
the President signs the bill.

Speaker 11 (42:26):
So let's get the latest read now from inside the
Republican conference and turn to Congressman Jim Jordan, the Republican
from Ohio and also chair of the House Judiciary Committee,
is live with us on Bloomberg TV and Radio.

Speaker 10 (42:36):
Congressman, thank you so.

Speaker 11 (42:38):
Much for your time, knowing you're going to be running
to the floor shortly to continue these votes. But as
you see it right now, does the rule have the
votes to pass.

Speaker 4 (42:47):
Now?

Speaker 10 (42:50):
And it sounds like we're still working on that connection.

Speaker 11 (42:52):
But if you've asked, We've asked this question to a
number of lawmakers as of our colleagues on the Hill today,
and at least many of them are suggesting that no,
the answer the rules may not time they.

Speaker 2 (43:03):
Do not, and in that world it could go back
to the Rules committee, which could be another fraud conversation.

Speaker 3 (43:09):
They went for hours.

Speaker 2 (43:11):
Arguing about this yesterday Kyley and late into the night.
Whether this can get to the floor otherwise remains a question.
We also don't know if he has the votes. If
you can't pass the rule, you might not be able
to pass the bills. So these procedural votes tell us
a lot more about what could happen with the final products.
If that's the case, it's hard to imagine that lawmakers
get home though leadership has been clear, the President's been clear,

(43:33):
you're working through the holiday well, and.

Speaker 11 (43:34):
The President probably reiterated that once again when he met
with members of Congress and the House Freedom Gaga specifically
at the White House. The head honcho has gotten involved.
The question is is his arm twisting actually adequate to
get these current.

Speaker 10 (43:49):
Holdouts in line.

Speaker 11 (43:51):
So I believe we have our connection established with Congressman
Jim Jordan, now again Republican from Ohio, chair of the
House Judiciary Committee, here with us on balance of power. Congressman,
is this rule vote about to fail shortly?

Speaker 4 (44:04):
Yeah?

Speaker 14 (44:04):
I hope it passes. We've got the rule vote coming up,
and I hope it passes. I think it will, and frankly,
I think it should because this is a good piece
of legislation. I always say, you know, it's a good
piece of legislation because the Democrats hated so much. They
don't like it, because it actually empowers families by, you know,
letting them keep more of their money, giving them school choice,
making sure our border stays secure, and making able bodied

(44:24):
people in our welfare system now have to work if
they're going to get your tax dollar. So I think
it just I think it's a good bill.

Speaker 3 (44:30):
I hope it passes.

Speaker 2 (44:32):
I know that congressmen obviously Democrats tell us that they
hate the bill, and they've not been part of this process.
But what is your message to Republicans who are on
the fence. We spoke earlier with Congressman Greg Murphy, for instance,
he's really worried about changes to Medicaid having a detrimental
impacts on some low income people in his districts in
North Carolina. There are others like him, This needs to

(44:54):
be worked out in the family. What do you tell
your colleague from North Carolina in a moment like.

Speaker 14 (44:58):
This, Yeah, I mean, look, it was a fifty to
fifty vote in the Senate, the Vice President had to
come break the tie. I don't know how many other
changes we can make with that kind of a balance.
It seems to me we're there and it's time to
pass this legislation. The other thing I know is politics
is a lot like athletics, a lot like sport. Momentum matters,

(45:21):
and right now all the momentum is on our side.
I mean, We've got a secure border that's taking place
under President Trump's leadership. We had the success successful operation,
and Iran president goes to the NATO summit and gets
all the NATO countries do anty up more money five
percent for our defense over there. I mean, we're on
a good roll, and now we're gonna stop this bill

(45:42):
with such a small majority of both the House and
the Senate, seems to me it's now time to pass it, particularly,
as I pointed out, because it does the things that
actually empower families. I think it's a good bill. Let's
get it done. Let's move on to the next type.

Speaker 11 (45:57):
Well, President Trump certainly would like to see this done,
like to see it done in the next few days. Congressmen,
do you see anything that the President could promise your
colleagues who are not yet hard. Yes, is on this
bill that could assuage them. Aside from changing the legislation itself,
I think you.

Speaker 14 (46:13):
Just point out what I just talked about, talk about
how good the bill is, the key things in it.

Speaker 11 (46:17):
I mean again, pursuing another reconciliation package or executive.

Speaker 10 (46:23):
Orders to address some of their concerns.

Speaker 14 (46:25):
That all that's fine, and we can get to that
in the future. But I think you focus on what's
in this Like any one single item in this bill,
if you pulled it out and voted as a standalone bill,
you'd vote for it. I mean, are we for cutting taxes,
making sure taxes don't go up on the families who
represent Yes. Are you saying no tax on tips? We
campaigned on that. Yes, we're for that. Does it make

(46:45):
sense for people who are able body who are getting
your tax money in our welfare system? Does it make
sense that they now have to work? There's a work
requirement for able body people. Yes, that makes sense. Standalone,
you would vote for that all these items. Would you
vote for a traditional resources to make sure our borders
stays secure after what we went through under Joe Biden?
Of course you'd vote for that. So, but you put
them all together in some big bill and some people

(47:07):
are like, well, we didn't cut it up spending. I agree,
but it's still a good piece of legislation with all
those things in it. I think you vote for it
because it's consistent with what we told the voters we
were going to do when they put us in office
on November fifth.

Speaker 2 (47:21):
I have to admit, Congressman, I still find it hard
to believe that many Republicans are going to vote no
and have at tax hike hanging around their next when
they go to run for reelection.

Speaker 3 (47:31):
I guess to your point.

Speaker 2 (47:33):
We heard from the former Speaker of the House, Kevin
McCarthy was with us this morning on Bloomberg's surveillance, speaking
specifically to the holdouts.

Speaker 3 (47:40):
On the Freedom Caucus.

Speaker 2 (47:41):
And you know who I'm talking about, the Chip Royce
Ralph Normans of the world who say that they are
a no and they want to send the bill back
to the Senate with more changes.

Speaker 3 (47:49):
Here's what he told us.

Speaker 15 (47:50):
What they want to do is get the attention they
always crave. So they talk about that now. But how
many times can you cry wolf and say you're not
going to vote for something and in twenty four hours,
vote for it. They have done this numerous times. They
want the president's attention. They say this so they can
go down to the Oval Office and see the president,
then go back home and say they saw the president.

Speaker 3 (48:12):
Is that how you see this? Congressman.

Speaker 2 (48:14):
Everybody's a big shot until it's time to actually vote
on the floor.

Speaker 14 (48:17):
No, I mean, I think they have genuine concerns. I
just think, as I pointed out, this is overall a
good piece of legislation and we should support it. It
is I always say, we make the job way too complicated.
The job's pretty simple. What'd you tell the voters you
were going to do when you put your name on
the ballot and you got elected, Go do what you
told them you were going to do. And we said,

(48:39):
we're going to make sure your taxes don't go up,
we're going to work for work requirements, We're for all
those things that are in this legislation. So they want
additional cuts. I get it. We got huge deficits. We're
running on an annual basis. We've now piled up thirty
seven trillion dollars in debt. That's a problem.

Speaker 3 (48:52):
I get that.

Speaker 14 (48:53):
I wish we had cut more, but we got a
handful of seats that we could give us the majority
in the House. They got a three seat majority in
the Senate, but it's as tight as it gets, so
you have to kind of figure out how we get
the votes moderates and conservatives working together. I think we've
done that, and by the fact that it was fifty
to fifty in the Senate, I just feel like, Okay,

(49:13):
there's no more wiggle room.

Speaker 12 (49:14):
It was fifty to fifty.

Speaker 14 (49:16):
We're gonna have to pass this thing and then look
for other opportunities down the road to do some additional
things relative to the deficits.

Speaker 10 (49:23):
And the debt.

Speaker 11 (49:25):
Well, sir, as we just heard from former Speaker Kevin McCarthy.
We remember how his speakership ended, and it was with
his own conference upset about some of his choices around
fiscal matters. Do you see any risk to Mike Johnson's
job as a result of what happens in the coming days.

Speaker 4 (49:42):
No.

Speaker 14 (49:42):
I think the focus is on doing what we told
the voters were going to do. I think what happened
to Kevin was wrong, but I don't see any concern
with Speaker Johnson. I think Mike has done a good
job and navigated through this as best as anyone could
with again a small majority in the House and a
small majority in the Senate. But this is it's time
to pay in my judgment, and I hope it happens today.

Speaker 2 (50:03):
Well, we do understand where you are, and I wonder
how likely that is to happen. Congressman, just give us
the state of play. We've got a couple procedural votes here.
You need to pass a rule Yeah. Do you think
this gets to the floor tonight? Are you going to
find yourself here cooking hamburger on the fourth of July
getting ready to vote.

Speaker 14 (50:19):
We're going to know, and I think we're going to
know in the next hour. The rule boat's the key vote.
If we can pass the rule bote, then I think
we're going to pass it on the floor. If we
don't pass the rule vote, then you know, we'll have
to see. But I got to head to the floor
right now and vote for the I think we're on
the previous question, and then there's an amendment and then
there's the rule vote. So we got three votes that
are happening on the floor. Now I got to head
to the floor and vote. But if we get past
the rule, I think we're going to be fine, okay,

(50:40):
and we'll.

Speaker 11 (50:41):
Let you, mister chairman, go to the floor in vote.
Just one more question for you. As the head of
the FHFA, Bill Poulti today suggested that Congress should investigate
the Chair of the Federal Reserve, Jerome Powell, in part
for what he said was recent testimony to the Senate
about the Central Banks planned renovations to its headquarters.

Speaker 10 (50:59):
Do you intend to open such an investigation.

Speaker 14 (51:03):
Where everything's on the table. We haven't discussed that specifically.
We'll take a look at that. You know, part of
our constitutional duties to do oversight of the executive branch,
and our committee we do over sight of the judicial
branch as well, so we'll take a look at all that.
But yeah, all thesit's an important part of our again,
constitutional responsibilities. Members of the United States Congress, don't let us.

Speaker 3 (51:26):
Make you late for work. Congressman Jim Jordan, Republican from Ohio.

Speaker 2 (51:29):
He chairs the House Judiciary Committee, now headed back to
the floor to take part in the procedural votes that
will lead to the rule vote.

Speaker 3 (51:36):
This is going to be the big one.

Speaker 2 (51:37):
Kayale's Jim Jordan just mentioned that's going to give us
a good sense of where we stand here, likely in
the next hour or so, with a floor vote for
the so called big beautiful Bill to follow that could
presumably happen tonight, tomorrow, and I guess theoretically on the
fourth of July.

Speaker 3 (51:52):
Unless they're going to be here for the weekend, we'll
find out.

Speaker 2 (51:57):
Thanks for listening to the Balance of Power podcast. Make
sure to subscribe if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify,
or wherever you get your podcasts, and you can find
us live every weekday from Washington, d C.

Speaker 3 (52:08):
At noontime Eastern at Bloomberg dot com.