Return to Transcripts main page
Inside Politics
Speaker Johnson Vows Now Cuts To Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security; House, Senate Republicans At Odds Over How To Move Forward On Competing Plans For Trump Agenda; Financial Times: Trump Admin Pushed For Release Of Tate Brothers, According To Sources; WSJ: Some Trump Staffers Getting Paid By Private Clients Too. Aired 12:30-1p ET
Aired February 27, 2025 - 12:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[12:31:34]
DANA BASH, CNN ANCHOR: Read my lips, no cuts to Medicaid, that was President Trump's promise reaffirmed by House Speaker Mike Johnson on CNN last night, as Republicans look for spending cuts to pay for their sweeping tax, energy, and border package.
(BEGIN VIDEOCLIP)
REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R), HOUSE SPEAKER: He doesn't want to cut Medicaid benefits for anybody, and we don't either. I don't either. We're not going to do that. We're going to cut the fraud, waste, and abuse out of Medicaid, and that's where we're going to get part of the savings to accomplish this mission.
(END VIDEOCLIP)
BASH: So how can Republicans pay for trillions of dollars in tax cuts, among other priorities? Joining me now to discuss this and more is Congressman Steve Womack, a Republican from Arkansas who serves on the House Appropriations Committee. Thank you so much for being here, sir.
Let's start with what you just heard from Mike Johnson. Medicaid won't be touched in the spending package. You, in the past, have supported cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid with the goal of balancing the budget.
You've been pretty -- no?
REP. STEVE WOMACK (R), ARKANSAS: Now, wait a minute, Dana.
BASH: Yes, go ahead.
WOMACK: A longtime friend of mine, many years ago, said one of the most unsanitary things you can do is put words in someone else's mouth.
BASH: Go for it. WOMACK: Now, I've not said that. What I've said is we need to create a sustainable social safety net program for this country, because we know that about two-thirds of government spending is on the entitlement side.
BASH: Exactly.
WOMACK: And that if you're going to have a meaningful effort to balance the budget of the United States of America, which all of us would love to be able to do, you can't do it by simply targeting discretionary spending. You have to go into the entitlement programs. And if your goal is to sustain those going forward, then you're going to have to put all the options on the table.
Now, some of that is waste, fraud, and abuse. I agree with the speaker on that, but some of that are some reforms that are going to have to take place. Don't -- hey, don't shoot the messenger. I'm just telling you that there are --
BASH: Yes, no, I --
WOMACK: -- that is a large sum of money that's sitting over there --
BASH: I --
WOMACK: -- that's going out every year, and totally on autopilot. So --
BASH: Well, I was going to quote you.
WOMACK: -- if we don't deal with those, then we can't get to the ultimate objective.
BASH: Yes, and I was going to quote you saying effectively that, back when you were budget chair, 2018, you said, any attempt to balance the books of the federal government without addressing entitlement reform is unrealistic.
WOMACK: So, Dana, do you remember?
BASH: Yes.
WOMACK: Back then, when I produced the FY19 budget, that we got through the budget committee, I did make one tweak to the social safety net program, where I adjusted the age of eligibility on Medicare from 65 to 67.
Now, that budget never made it to the floor because we actually did something to Medicare. But I did that on purpose, because I wanted to test the will of Congress to see if they are willing to do the reforms necessary to make Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security sustainable going forward --
BASH: Yes.
WOMACK: -- because they are on a collision course right now in the 2030s to have very severe --
BASH: Yes.
WOMACK: -- draconian cuts to those programs.
BASH: And, Congressman, I guess that's sort of my bigger point here, which is what you said is just facts. I mean, I'm not a math whiz, but I can see that there is discretionary spending, which, as you said, is a pretty small percentage of the budget, and stuff, as you said, that just goes out the door, entitlements, that's really where the trouble is with regard to balancing the budget.
[12:35:06]
And on that note, let's talk about the now, which is $880 billion in cuts. That is the package that is going to be voted on, or you already voted to approve the broad parameters of that package. But how do you get to the details of that without cutting benefits to Medicaid, as the speaker and the president have promised?
WOMACK: Well, the budget resolution, as you know, has been kind of a pinata this week in Congress, and we did pass it, 217-215, on Tuesday. And all that is, you know, some people would liken it to a first down in football.
Let me tell you what it actually is. It's a successful exchange between the center and the quarterback who's handing it off. And so we've handed that off to the Senate now, and they're going to have an opportunity to tweak the parameters of this thing. And then we'll come to some agreement.
And then eventually, the relevant committees, Energy and Commerce, the $880 billion you talk about, mainly health care programs, Energy and Commerce is going to have an opportunity to look at those. There will be reforms in the SNAP program, so under USDA, so the Ag Committee is going to have a role in this thing.
And all of the other relevant committees, some will increase spending, some will have significant cuts. But we're just in the early stages of this reconciliation -- the first steps of the reconciliation road, as I call it.
BASH: You have been, and as we were discussing at the beginning of our conversation, you've been an honest broker when it comes to the realities of budgeting and trying to get the deficit down and having a balanced budget.
Do you see a world in which whether or not the quarterback has handed off the ball or whether or not we're already in the end zone, whether or not that can happen in a way that doesn't allow for or force cuts in entitlements, including and especially Medicaid?
WOMACK: Well, that's a great question. I would say that there are so many input factors into the answer to that question. But right now, Dana, we're in divided government. We have a one-seat majority in the House. Soon that will go to two or three. And then we have a three- seat majority in the Senate.
And as you know, on anything substantial outside of reconciliation, you need 60 votes to avoid a filibuster. So in divided government, what it tells me is that anything that we're going to be able to move across the finish line is likely going to have to have some kind of bipartisan support. So both sides are going to have to weigh in.
And that's clearly evident in the Senate --
BASH: But Congressman, you say divided --
WOMACK: -- when you need 60 votes.
BASH: Sure. You say divided government, but you do control all three branches, the House and the Senate and the White House. And the whole point of passing it the way you did is so that you don't need a supermajority in the Senate.
WOMACK: Dana, look, like a lot of people, you know, we did. We had a very successful election in November. We retained the House. We won the Senate. We won the White House. But I think it's inaccurate to continue to parrot the idea that we control everything.
Because, remember, outside of reconciliation, where you have expedited procedures, you still need 60 votes in the Senate. So the majority in the Senate does not necessarily control all things. There are going to be issues that are going to have to come up outside of reconciliation that on the Senate side is going to have to be able to sustain a filibuster. And that's going to require 60 votes.
BASH: Yes.
WOMACK: And we don't have 60.
BASH: Yes.
WOMACK: So I think it's a bit disingenuous to continue to, you know, trumpet the fact that we control everything because we simply don't.
BASH: Well, you do control the calendar and you have the gavel and so you technically --
WOMACK: That is true.
BASH: -- control. I understand that you don't have the 60 votes in the Senate. I really want to continue -- we're out of time now, but I want to continue this conversation. Please come back.
WOMACK: Look forward to it, Dana. Thank you, as always.
BASH: Thanks, Congressman.
And moments ago, the U.K. Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, did arrive at the White House to meet with President Trump. Their focus, Ukraine and Russia's invasion. They will hold a joint news conference later today. We'll be right back. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[12:44:03]
BASH: Accused sex traffickers and right-wing media personalities Andrew Tate and his brother Tristan are back in the United States. The Tates left Romania on a private jet early this morning and landed in Florida moments ago.
Authorities in Romania banned them from leaving the country, where they are facing criminal charges for human trafficking, rape of a minor, money laundering and launching an organized crime group. They have denied wrongdoing.
The Financial Times is reporting that the Trump administration pushed for their travel ban to be lifted while awaiting their trial and that Trump special envoy Richard Grenell brought the brothers up when talking to the Romanian foreign minister earlier this month.
Now, Romania's foreign minister denied that he came under pressure from the Trump administration. Grenell told the Financial Times he did not have a substantive conversation with the foreign minister, but he did say, quote, "I support the Tate brothers as evident by my publicly available tweets".
[12:45:02]
The brothers rose to international fame on their social media platforms for rants about men's superiority and the submission of women.
(BEGIN VIDEOCLIP)
ANDREW TATE, SOCIAL MEDIA PERSONALITY: She belongs to her man now. They're married. They're happy. They're in love. They have a child.
The saddest, most miserable women of the world are women who are sluts. All of them. They are unhappy.
Arranged marriage all works out perfectly. Let's go to Saudi. We need to bring it back.
Where the 19-year-old might have had one guy from high school just broke up. She's fresh, and I could put my imprint on her.
(END VIDEOCLIP)
BASH: CNN's Chief Media Analyst Brian Stelter joins me now. Brian, the Tates are very well known in the so-called manosphere. Why is that overlapping right now --
BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: Right.
BASH: -- with MAGA world?
STELTER: It's a reaction of feminism. It's a celebration of far-right ideology. It's in some ways an attempt to make America misogynistic again. If you think about the MAGA slogan, Make America Great Again, this effort by these podcasters, these online influencers in the so- called manosphere is an attempt to drag the country and drag the world back to norms from many decades ago.
And it has been embraced and sanitized by some figures in MAGA media. Tucker Carlson, for example, traveled to Romania to interview Andrew Tate while Tate was under house arrest. And he really sanitized and minimized the charges against Tate.
But today, Dana, there's a real severe divide on the right about the Tates coming home to the U.S. A few moments ago, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis said the Tates are not welcome in Florida. And I'm seeing real arguments on X among MAGA media influencers about whether to embrace or condemn the Tates because of their alleged behavior.
You know, the pair also faced sex offense charges in Britain, which they have denied. I'm curious to see if Keir Starmer is asked about this later today. Women there in the U.K. have charged Andrew Tate with rape, coercive control and other trauma. But even if you believe his denials, just watch his videos and see what he has claimed in his own words.
Look at his tweets and his video history. He has bragged about choking, strangulating, abusing, beating women, manipulating and controlling them. This is a portrayal of masculinity that most men not only don't recognize, they would never want to talk about.
But there's this phenomenon on the Internet of rubbernecking, where people slow down and they look at this crash. They look at this accident. They want to see what he's talking about. And that is why, Dana, these men have gained millions of followers.
BASH: Really, really stunning. And in November, we did see Tristan Tate brag on X about his brother's role in helping Trump win in 2024. He said --
STELTER: Yes.
BASH: -- "Millions of young men in Europe and the USA have a healthy right-wing approach to politics that they would not have if Andrew Tate had never appeared on their phone screens. His role in this cannot be overlooked. He literally raised a generation of Republicans".
That's part of what's going on here with this connection, despite the fact that as you said --
STELTER: And there is a part of that. Yes.
BASH: There's a divide right now.
STELTER: Yes, it's not about country called Republicans, you know, but there is a new young hyper online reactionary brand of MAGA supporting man that has been influenced by this so-called war on feminism. And frankly, in some cases, it embraced a misogyny. It's an attempt to pull America backwards.
And the Tates have bragged about their power. As you just quoted, they have bragged about their influence on the right. So today and in the coming days, a really interesting test for the conservative movement in the U.S.
What will Trump say about this? Will Starmer be asked about it? What will online influencers say? Will they embrace Tate? Will the Tates be at Mar-a-Lago a few days from now? Or will they be rejected in the U.S.? We're going to find out.
BASH: Brian, thank you so much. Really appreciate your insight and reporting.
STELTER: Thanks.
BASH: Coming up, who will give the Democratic response to President Trump's address to Congress next week? We've got an answer next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[12:53:11]
BASH: Just in, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer says Senator Elissa Slotkin, new senator from Michigan, will deliver the Democratic response to President Trump's joint address to Congress on Tuesday. Schumer called the freshman senator and former CIA analyst a rising star in the party.
These days, it is not uncommon to work multiple jobs. What is uncommon, or at least used to be, holding an influential role in a president's administration while simultaneously working with private sector companies that could benefit from that access.
Josh Dawsey has a piece in The Wall Street Journal delving into potential special conflicts for these so-called special government employees. Josh, they're getting paid by private clients, and they're getting paid temporarily by taxpayers. And you write about the fact that there is --
JOSH DAWSEY, POLITICAL INVESTIGATIONS REPORTER, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL: Yes.
BASH: -- some conflict there.
DAWSEY: Yes, and a lot of them aren't even getting paid by taxpayers. A lot of them are just getting paid by their private clients. So let's take, for example, Katie Miller --
BASH: OK.
DAWSEY: -- who was sort of the main person in the piece. Katie Miller works for a big consulting firm in Washington, right? She's married to Stephen Miller, who's one of Trump's top advisers. And meanwhile, while she's in the administration, she's working as a top aide to Elon Musk. But who's paying her is this firm where she works for Apple and all sorts of other Fortune 100 clients. So they're asking her for advice about the administration. She's certainly making a lot more money in that job than she would ever make in the government.
So what's interesting about this current moment in Washington is Trump has appointed a number of people, Steve Witkoff, who's handling his peace talks in the Middle East --
BASH: Yes, and we have -- there you go, on the screen, you see a number of them --
DAWSEY: Russia and Ukraine --
BASH: -- we talk about.
DAWSEY: -- where you have the guy who's leading his AI and crypto policy, kept his private interest in the technology firm.
[12:55:02]
Trump has appointed a lot of senior people in his White House who are not divesting from their private interest. So what you --
BASH: Which they don't have to as special --
DAWSEY: Right, as special government employees, they don't have to, that's right. Most famous of them is Elon Musk, who's still helming all of these companies while deciding what agencies do with cuts. A lot of his companies, particularly his space company, huge government contracts that, you know, he would seem to benefit from.
BASH: And so that's key. Some of -- I mean, some of these people, many of them here are billionaires, and they don't really need to get paid by the taxpayer --
DAWSEY: Right.
BASH: -- but it's the access that they have and the influence that they have.
DAWSEY: Extraordinary access, yes.
BASH: Josh, thank you so much.
DAWSEY: Thank you.
BASH: Appreciate it.
Thank you for joining Inside Politics. CNN News Central starts after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
