Republicans of the House of Representatives face a fundamental problem when they reach a critical phase to elaborate their “great and beautiful bill” to promulgate the agenda of President Trump. They want to cut federal programs deeply without recognizing that they are doing significant damage to their constituents or states.
This irritating situation arises from the natural tension between the conservative determination to reverse the federal expenditure and the trend of politicians to want to maintain their work. Doing the first can work against the second.
That explains the verbal gymnastics that Republicans are doing this week to affirm that their legislation would really not remove anything from Americans who are supposed to obtain it. They need, essentially, to find a way to cut large sums of Medicaid without seeming to criticize an ax for the government’s health program for the poor.
Not only are their own future politicians and chamber control at risk, but they don’t want to antagonize President Trump either. He has made it clear that he does not want to see a headline that says: “Trump, Republicans cut Medicaid”, although Hey Alsey Barrera, and expensive, legislation that encapsulates his agenda or cuts taxes.
To meet these competitive demands, Republicans insist that they will ensure that only “legitimate” beneficiaries of assistance of programs such as Medicaid and nutritional assistance continue to receive them, thought that “legitimate” can be a subjective term. His medical proposal published on Sunday night avoids some of the most drastic cuts, and easily attacked, while imposing new requirements and costs on the beneficiaries that the Conget office said it would eliminate federal authentication for Nastiem for millions more.
Republicans say that federal aid programs will underpin, ending “waste, fraud and abuse”, verifying eligibility with more care and making sure that little concentrated immigrants are not helped to prevent Albli -wood from cutting. In addition, body recipients must go to work.
The goal, as Mike Johnson speech said in a recently CNN interview, is to make sure Medicaid is not going to “29 -year -old men sitting on his sofas playing video games.”
“This is not a topic of conversation,” Johnson told reporters last week. “Republicans have a position to do this in a way in which no one loses their coverage.”
The defect in the republican party’s argument is that the scope cuts that the party is contemplating will surely result in the benefits and services that are denied to some eligible beneficiaries, particularly if Congress drives more response to the states.
Democrats are not about to let that result go unnoticed or let the republican statements are not consulted, regardless of how aggressively they argue that no American deserves are denied help. The Democrats and their political allies immediately attacked the new proposal proposal as “horrible”, regardless of how Republicans characterize the plan.
“For months, Republicans have tried to baffle themselves on their agenda with a totally cut magical conversation of reality,” Senator Chuck Schumer, a Democrat of New York and the minority leader, said last week. “Republicans say they want billion tax gifts for the rich, billions in expenses, but somehow claim that drastic thesis changes won the average Americans damaged.”
“Cut Medicaid,” they say, “but no one will lose the benefits,” he added. “That is totally illogical.”
With reality, sinking that deep cuts could cause a deep reaction, Republicans have begun to reduce their aspirations of $ 2 billion in general cuts. Political anxiety is also part of the reason why the most difficult deliberations to gather the project of republican law have been postponed until this week, since legislators have remained divided on how to achieve their savings.
Now, the decision time is coming as the Energy and Commerce Committee, the Agriculture Committee and the forms of Tax Deed and the Media Committee must present its parts of the General Plan on Tuesday.
All exercise is frustrating to right -wing conservatives who say they have no qualms about gutting federal programs and accepting consequences, since they believe that is what voters sent to Washington to do. They think that Republicans should hug the cuts instead of trying to minimize them and see their republican colleagues as cowards when it comes to making difficult decisions about spending.
“They simply have no guts,” said representative Tim Burchett, Republican of Tennessee. “Congresss never has guts.”
Representative Jodey C. Arrington, Texas Republican who runs the Budget Committee and has pressed for deep expenses cuts to avoid what he sees as an upcoming economic cataclysm, expressed a similar opinion, although more diplomatic.
“What we lack in Washington, perhaps among others, such as common sense and common decency, is courage,” Arrington said last week. “Courage to do what is necessary. Courage to do what each generation of US leaders has done when they face such an epic crisis that in fact could leave the United States damaged irreparably.”
Of course, there is another approach to Republicans who wish to avoid expense cuts, but still wish to extend billions of taxes in tax exemptions without accumulating costs with federal debt: they could increase income through higher taxes.
Trump has coquetized with the idea of increasing taxes on very high winners in recent days, although he so that he could be a political loser for his party. But if there is something that Republicans in Congress because less than one holder about the reduction of Medicaid, is one that says that “Republicans increase taxes.”
As the three committees advance this week, it will be much clearer what is in the cutting block and if the Republicans can sell their claim that has the right to federal aid will continue to obtain it. Mr. Johnson believes they can.
“There will be many savings for the American people,” he said. “I think it will be very popular when we do.”
