reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Republicans cheered after winning a Senate vote that will take away healthcare from around 17,000,000 people, give tax breaks to billionaires, and increase the national debt by $3.5 trillion. The bill is economically and morally bad, but the fight continues. Democrats were able to improve some aspects of the bill, such as removing the tax on solar and wind. The bill now goes to the House, where some Republicans are uneasy. In November 2026, those who voted for the bill will have to face voters and explain their actions. The fight continues because it is the right thing to do.

Conservatives in the House are worried the Senate will "jam" them with a bill different from what they passed on May 22. The Senate version of the bill is projected to increase the deficit with a debt ceiling increase of about $5 trillion, which is much higher than the House debt ceiling increase. It is believed they will hit the debt ceiling in early August, though the Congressional Budget Office estimates mid-August to maybe September. The deadline to pass the bill is July 4. Key features of the bill include new restrictions on Medicaid qualification.

This congress is allegedly intent on passing a heartless budget that would result in the largest cut in Medicaid in American history to partially pay for tax cuts for Donald Trump's billionaire best friends. Medicaid is described as a lifeline that this Republican majority is trying to rip away from millions of Americans. The speakers claim they will not let them get away with policies that are a matter of life and death to their constituents. They are allegedly here to fight for those who voted against the president, those who didn't vote, and those who voted for the president but dislike what they are seeing. Republicans in congress and this administration purportedly only care about billionaires that fund their campaigns and are willing to hurt everyone to help the wealthiest. The power of the people is allegedly greater than the people in power.

Speaker 0 states Republicans are concerned Medicaid work requirements will be cumbersome and force people off the rolls. Speaker 1 disagrees, asserting some Democrats infantilize the poor and that registering twice a year is not a burden. Speaker 1 says work requirements were popular under Presidents Clinton and Obama, and that the Democratic party blew out the deficit in 2020. They add that work requirements poll well with the median Democratic voter.

This is a Democrat trap that would end a Republican's career. It's a foolish bill that should not be signed. It involves massive amounts of money, billions and billions of dollars, going out of town. The situation at the border is extremely bad, one of the worst I've seen. Overall, this bill is one of the dumbest I've ever seen.

The speaker points out that the claim made by the White House about the impact of a bill on border patrol and veterans benefits is false, as the bill had no appropriations and the members of Congress who put it together vowed it wouldn't affect funding. The speaker questions whether voters can distinguish between truth and spin and finds it insulting to keep repeating false statements. The speaker then highlights that the bill touted by House Republicans would have eliminated 2,000 border patrol agents, causing obstruction in dealing with border issues. The speaker appreciates the bipartisan conversation with Senate Republicans and Democrats on the border, as House Republicans have hindered progress.

While Americans were celebrating Memorial Day, Washington was making another debt-increasing deal with no real changes. This bill has no cap on raising the debt and we don't know the exact number. It might cut $12 billion in year 1, but that's not worth the $4 trillion it adds. The bill keeps Biden's policies and spending intact, including the Green New Deal subsidies that could harm the electric grid. Republicans should not vote for this bill because it doesn't demand renegotiation and doesn't address the border issue. Democrats are supporting it because it doesn't change their policies or spending. Republicans should vote no and find a better deal.

- The speakers criticize a new funding bill as a bloated, bipartisan package totaling over $1.7 trillion, arguing it represents a “middle finger” to American taxpayers and funds more than merely keeping the lights on. They claim both parties supported it, eliminating any real fiscal fight. - They highlight a provision referred to as health care extenders on page 772, noting that temporary pandemic expansions in health and welfare programs are now baked in as permanent costs for taxpayers. This is presented as evidence that eligibility expansions for Medicare are being locked in. - They point to Israel-related spending buried within the bill, noting provisions allocating hundreds of millions of dollars for Israeli missile defense programs, including the Iron Dome, on page 101 of the 1,059-page bill. They argue that funding the U.S. government is linked to funding a foreign defense system, and that this represents corporate welfare for well-connected interests in Washington. - The discussion asserts that Ukraine-related funding is not explicitly in the bill as written, but that money may still be funneled through contractors or other channels. They question whether there will be a final victory lap on supposedly winding down Ukraine aid, suggesting money remains flowing covertly. - They discuss the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and USAID, noting that money for NED remained in the bill despite amendments to cut funding. They describe NED as a non-partisan tool that has supported regime-change activities, including actions in Iran and Venezuela, and criticize both parties for preserving this funding. - They critique the consolidation of aid into the State Department, specifically via USAID under Marco Rubio, arguing that oversight has weakened and that funding is redirected for various foreign policy aims (e.g., Venezuela, Cuba, Iran). They discuss the influence of Rubio on where funds go and describe the arrangement as increasing executive-led control with limited transparency. - They argue that the bill reflects a broader pattern of government spending: a so-called “uni-party” consensus that avoids reducing government size, with both parties acting in lockstep on foreign and domestic priorities. - The conversation touches on public opinion, citing a Gallup poll that suggests younger generations despise both major parties, and they link this to perceived bipartisan over-spending and interventionism. - Throughout, the viewers criticize what they see as a routine of declaring emergencies and then normalizing permanent programs, suggesting that emergency measures become permanent and that the political system uses crisis rhetoric to justify ongoing expenditure. - The discussion ends with remarks on political leadership, labeling Speaker Johnson as a weak figure and coining a proposed “fuck it party” as a first-principles anti-war alternative, with participants noting they would join or support it. Daniel McAdams provided expert commentary throughout.

Republicans are proposing additional coronavirus relief to protect jobs, safely return kids and teachers to classrooms, and fund treatments and vaccines. Democrats are objecting, claiming the Republican bill doesn't spend enough. Republicans acknowledge this bill isn't the final expenditure but targets priorities like small businesses, testing, treatment, and vaccines. Democrats' $3 trillion proposal is considered unrealistic and irresponsible, potentially leading to a Greek-style financial disaster due to the nation's debt. A trillion-dollar slush fund for states is criticized, especially since existing CARES Act funds remain unspent. The Democratic bill includes items unrelated to the virus, such as cannabis industry diversity studies, soil health studies, federalizing elections, and tax cuts for millionaires. The bill mentions "cannabis" more than "job." Republicans claim Democrats rejected compromise from the start, insisting on their bill or no bill. Republicans believe Democrats prioritize keeping coronavirus alive as a political issue over providing relief. Democrats filibustered a police reform bill, prioritizing political advantage over addressing violence in cities. Republicans will continue offering opportunities for Democrats to collaborate on coronavirus relief.

The speaker opposes attaching the SAVE Act to the continuing resolution (CR), calling it a repetitive tactic that results in a clean CR after Senate removal. Passing the SAVE Act would lead to excessive spending: $6.3 billion a day, $3 billion in interest, and $77,000 per second, increasing the $36 trillion debt. Interest payments could exceed the annual national defense spending. The CR also restricts new military programs. The speaker notes that 73% of appropriations have passed, with 27% remaining. The speaker questions the point of passing the SAVE Act if the Senate won't consider it or HR 2 to secure the borders. The speaker claims adding debt will cause inflation, harming the middle and lower classes. The speaker is willing to shut down the government or the border to protect elections.

The reconciliation bill is considered a "turbo boost" for the economy, with "big developments" coming together soon. A Republican congressman states the bill aims to prevent America from going bankrupt due to problems caused by Democrats. He says Republicans must fix these issues. Democrats claim the bill will hurt children, families, women, seniors, people with disabilities, close hospitals and nursing homes, and cause deaths. The congressman refutes this, stating that the country collapsing under debt will kill people. He says the bill is the first step to balancing the budget. The congressman says that universities should be responsible for student debt if they give loans to students for degrees that they may not be able to pay back. A Democratic congressman introduced seven articles of impeachment against President Trump for defying a unanimous Supreme Court ruling. The Republican congressman believes Democrats are in a "clown show competition" to see who can run as far to the left as they can.

Tim Burtchett is working on a bill to defund the Taliban, which has been in progress for over a year. Democrats have proposed four amendments. According to Burtchett, three of the amendments are acceptable, but one would undermine the bill's purpose. The outcome is uncertain, but he will provide updates. He believes the bill is based on common sense but suggests that common sense is lacking in the current environment.

Republicans should not cut Medicare or Social Security to pay for Biden's spending. Biden has wasted trillions on the Green New Deal and opened our borders to migrants from prisons and mental institutions. Our border is now the worst in the world. Instead of burdening American families and seniors, we should cut spending on corrupt foreign countries, mass releases of illegal aliens, left-wing gender programs in the military, climate extremism, and waste fraud and abuse. We must save Social Security and not let the Democrats destroy it.

I challenge anyone to search for Medicaid in the resolution we passed. It's not there. That's not part of this. We aim to find efficiencies in every program without cutting benefits for those who deserve them. Public opinion supports work requirements for Medicaid. The program is intended for single mothers with small children, not for able-bodied individuals who are not working. We're going to find those individuals and encourage them to return to work. Everyone supports this. Republicans support this. We believe there is dignity in work, and it will be beneficial for everyone involved.

parliamentarian ruled that sections of it were outside of the process that they're using to get this through. Do you think that senators should respect the decisions of the parliamentarian? And what have you personally done in the last forty eight hours to try and get Republican senators who are against the bill to a yes? 'If it's not approved, your taxes will go up by 68%. Think of that. 68, a record, the highest in the history.' 'The Democrats won't approve it only because, politically, it's so good for the Republicans.' 'They're not approving border security.' 'We've done a great job at the border, but we have to add some wall.' 'We have no money for that.' 'But if the Democrats it'll be interesting to see if we get any Democrat votes. We should.' 'If I were a Democrat, I would vote for this bill all day long because it's tax cuts and so many other things that are common sense.'

Republican Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massey said he could vote yes on President Trump's "big beautiful bill" if a "skinny version" materializes, as he believes the current bill doesn't cut government spending enough. Massey's opposition has led to threats of primary challenges from Trump allies and AIPAC. Massey suggested splitting the bill into two, focusing on border security and extending the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. He would also want a repeal of Green New Deal subsidies. Massey is using a shorter window to score the bill's impact on the deficit, looking at three to four years instead of the typical ten. He alleges the House is "treading water" while awaiting the Senate's version. An ad criticizing Massey claims he voted against Trump's policies, including banning sex changes on minors. Massey says the bill allows funding for sex changes for minors. He says the bill does not prohibit welfare for illegal aliens, stop funding sex changes for kids, end registration of suppressors, defund Planned Parenthood for 10, implement the RAINS Act, or reduce the deficit.

We filed the continued resolution on Saturday, but the House Democrats leadership team released a statement on Friday panning a bill they hadn't even seen yet. They claimed it would cut funding for healthcare, nutritional assistance, and veterans benefits. But every single word of that is a lie. The clean CR contains no policy riders at all, no cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security, and no cuts to veterans benefits. In fact, we plus up the accounts for veterans. I'm asking reporters to call out Democrats for making these intentionally false claims. The American people deserve clarity from our press corps.

The speaker addresses concerns about Medicaid cuts, arguing that many proposed cuts are sensible. The first cut limits federal health program eligibility based on citizenship status, affecting those here illegally. The second eliminates Medicare coverage of bad debt, which is unpaid debt after insurance pays. Currently, taxpayers cover up to 65% of Medicaid bad debt, incentivizing hospitals to inflate prices. The proposed change would stop this practice. The third is Medicare site neutrality, ensuring Medicare and Medicaid patients are charged the same prices as those with private insurance or cash. The speaker claims these three cuts alone amount to over $200 billion in savings and suggests that people would agree with these cuts if they researched them.