Breaking News from Pod Save America - Republican SLAMS Trump’s Agenda and QUITS in Disgust

Episode Date: June 30, 2025

Republican Senator Thom Tillis has come out against Trump’s “big, beautiful, bill.” Jon Lovett and Dan Pfeiffer break down the latest. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

I wrote a little song to remind you, Choice Hotels, get you more of the experiences you value. The Can Beah Hotels got it all. A rooftop bar, have a ball. Bring a date, your squad, or even your mom. Book direct at choiceotels.com. Hey, everybody. I'm here with Dan. Hi, Dan.

I love it. So some breaking news over the weekend. The Senate is debating Trump's big, beautiful bill. It has become a genuine and truly shocking monstrosity. We always knew it would be bad. It was awful when it came out of the House. It is surprising how much worse it's gotten in the Senate, even on the lowest bar of expecting Republicans to do something awful,

what it's done on health care, what it's done to raise electricity prices, what it's done on immigration, what it's done to increase the debt are all pretty bad. It's gotten so bad that Republican Senator Tom Tillis has come out pretty strongly against this bill in a speech where he goes after his colleagues and Trump directly.

Let's roll that clip. So what they told me is that, yeah, it's rough, but North Carolina's used the system. They're going to have to make it work. All right. So what do I tell 663,000 people in two years or three years? When President Trump breaks a,

this promise by pushing them off of Medicaid because the funding's not there anymore, guys. When the White House, the signatures advising the president are not telling him that the effect of this bill is to break a promise. Now, Republicans are about to make a mistake on health care and betraying a promise. Dan, what was your reaction to that? It's probably not ready to start with his outfit. but is it a bolot tie in a t-shirt? Is that where we have going on here? It's a bolotie and a polo shirt.

I think he had a polo shirt on. I'm not sure maybe he wasn't planning to go down throw on the bolotie to dress up the look. A fair place to start. I'd say a little bitchy, but I support it. Well, there's actually a political reason for why I hit here, which is I actually think his message is quite powerful. And it is helpful that in this video, in that bolotie,

he's very Republican coded. Right. So obviously you want, footage of Republicans talking bad about this bill to explain why it's bad to people and the fact that the guy doing it looks about as Republicans you can possibly look is helpful. But this is, this is it. This is the argument we're making. That could have been Brian Schatz, Hakeem Jeffries, any Democrat making the case for what

exactly Trump is doing, which is he is kicking people off of Medicaid to pay for tax cuts for the rich, full stop. So what he's specifically talking about there is what the bill will do. The details, I think, aren't as important as the consequences. They have pushed the date for when this would go into effect until after next year's midterms to protect themselves politically. But after next year's midterms, all of a sudden, a huge source of Medicaid funding will dry up. And hundreds and hundreds of thousands of people currently eligible for Medicaid because of that funding will suddenly discover that they are no longer. longer eligible. And so Dan, I'm wondering what we do with those politics because we're now

out there saying this is a bill to gut Medicaid. It is. And a lot of the effects will be pretty immediate. And we could see effects on rural hospitals. We could see effects on coverage. We could see people lose their coverage because of all these paperwork requirements. But some of these efforts, which I do think are fair to be described as an effort to dismantle a big part of Medicaid, don't go into effect right away. And I'm just curious what you think of the politics of that. I mean that for it's obvious why they did that it helps them it doesn't mean that it is a get out of jail free card for what they've done we have the ability to make the case that these are coming and talking about why they did it the fact that they did this to pay for tax

cuts for the rich is absolutely essential all the polling shows that but I also think Democrats should run on the fact that we're going to reverse these cuts elect us and we will reverse them so that we haven't it's not just the only terrible things the republicans said is we have a plan to fix it And obviously, we're running into a situation where best case scenario after 2026, we have the House of the Senate. But we then have some leverage to push Trump. But that is the foundations for then getting a Democratic president to do it. And so I think ultimately, if we want the, they are banking on the fact that most people will not know this happened. And those who know won't feel them.

And so we have to take that head on throughout the process. I was thinking about it this morning. I'm a little worried that we're doing a frog in boiling water thing. because we are rightfully describing these as Medicaid cuts. But as it has been modified in the Senate, the way in which it does these cuts has really become much more expansive. And I'm wondering if there's a way that we should be talking about this as a Medicaid dismantling bill,

a Medicaid, like a way in which we could be describing this as a package that is going to fundamentally change the health care system so that we can lay on them all the damage that happens over the next couple years because when people lose even private health insurance, when hospitals are not able to provide the same quality of care, even to people with private insurance or people who still do have Medicaid, when there's a bunch of cost increases across the board, it would be good if we could start now to make what I think is an accurate argument that this is a fundamental transformation of the health care system, and they own all the pain over the next couple of years.

That's interesting as a way to think about it. The challenge for Democrats here is what we've probably been underselling this is that Medicaid is incredibly popular. There's an AP poll out just in the last couple weeks. It shows that 50% of people think that Medicaid is underfunded, only I think it's less and a quarter of voters think it should actually be cut. Like something like 80% think it's either underfunded or has the right amount of funding. And so you don't want to lose that the Medicaid part of it.

But there are some, like there is a way that we probably should be talking about the whole thing, right? Not just the healthcare, but the whole thing. Like this is the greatest transfer of wealth from poor people to rich people in the history of this country and possibly the history of the world. The bottom 40% of Americans in terms of income are going to have their costs go up between health care costs, energy costs and food costs if the base between both Trump's tariffs and the reductions in food assistance. And so I think there's a, like, if we just talk about this in terms of cuts, we are probably over,

where we're probably underselling the tremendous damages. And then I'm even talking about the fact that we are jacking up the debt at the time when the debt is most expensive to pay interest on, which is going to have huge consequences down the line for Medicare and Social Security. It's truly like shocking. And on even their own terms, the spell is like a spectacular failure. Obviously, we find this abhorrent. But the fact that there's still a chance that they're going to get Rand Paul's vote for this thing,

even though it's one of the biggest increases to the debt. It will be the largest increase to the debt ever, ever passed by Congress. Is surprising to me that they are still able to get all these people, even if they lose TILUS, even if they lose TILUS, even if they lose. Collins or Murkowski. You know, there was a bunch of debate about whether or not Murkowski would still be on board because the parliamentarian took out some stuff that was meant to basically buy her vote in Alaska. I mean, we're like we are recording this there in a series of votes in the Senate right now. There's a lot of attention on this bill. There's a lot of negative attention on this bill. Is there any chance at this point that we think this can be stopped today? It's hard to know. Like, you're not going to make a lot of money, but in the political courage,

you have a bunch of Republican centers. The reporter is sort of in the know, right? The Jake Sherman's, the political, the punch bowl people, all of that. They are writing that this bill is on the glide path to passage. So their insight knowledge tells them that. But I still think that we should do everything we can over whatever this period of time is to raise pressure on them,

raise attention to it. Because if you believe what they're saying, and maybe that's a mistake, most of them should be voting for this bill, right? It is not like, why is Collins voting for it? Why is why would Murkowski vote for it? I mean, Josh Hawley's already said he's voting for it, even though it does the exact thing he said he would never, ever do. So just like we only need one more essentially if you believe that Collins and

Rekowski may not do it. And so trying to find that person, I think it's worth it. Like there's no point in giving up now. Right. Yeah. The way, the reason they're going to be able to get this through if they do is because they're just lying about it. Here's Trump's spokesperson, Carolyn Leavitt, no relation, talking about what Tilla said. On the reconciliation bill, Senator Tillis from the floor yesterday seemed to suggest President Trump was getting bad counsel on the effects of the bill. Is President Trump aware of the analyses, and there are several of these that suggest if rural hospitals potentially close, if there are Medicaid patients in the millions that become ineligible for that? Yes, and that claim is just simply untrue. rural hospitals comprise 7% of all hospitals spending on Medicaid,

and that illustrates that they have not benefited from the massive increase of waste, fraud, and abuse under the Biden administration. So this bill strengthens Medicaid. It will protect those benefits that hardworking Americans need, and that's why the president wants this bill to pass. The senator was wrong. The president put out a truth social post addressing it, and then the senator announced he's no longer running for office anymore. So I think that case has been closed and that White House is continuing to focus on getting this legislation to the president's desk for his signature.

So it's just worth on the facts. Like that 7% figure, whether or not it's true, I don't trust anything. She says it's sort of beside the point. The issue is not what share of Medicaid funding goes to rural hospitals. The issue is there's a number of rural hospitals that depend predominantly on Medicaid funding. And it is simply not possible for this bill to cut. the amount they're claiming it cuts without decimating and causing to close a number of rural hospitals, no matter what they say, which is why in the Senate they've been debating ways to

basically try to mitigate that damage with some kind of a fund, which Josh Hawley came out against and described correctly as a kind of band-aid on a crisis they will have created before he gave an interview where he said, I don't want to cut Medicaid, we shouldn't be cutting Medicaid, we should be a party of the working class. It's a huge bummer. I'm a yes. It's just, it's absolutely, it's like these clips, right, Holly saying that, Tilly's saying that. This is the stuff that will be, uh, hopefully blanketing, uh, the air and being in people's

phones heading into the midterms. Yeah. In North Carolina is going to be really interesting because as you point out, Tillis has, has retired and it will not now not be on the ballot and what is one of the best Democratic pick up opportunities, good chance that the Republican on the ballot is a House member who voted yes, right? So you will be able to use that. Just the idea that what we're so, such a hard on for kicking people off of Medicaid that instead of just letting people stay on Medicaid, we're going to create a bailout fund for hospital systems to do that. I mean,

it's just like, it's like truly at most as backwards policymaking you could possibly do. Yeah. And again, like it doesn't. As always, they can't resolve the contradictions. Look, they campaign on a bunch of lies and misinformation. Then they are elected. They are governing. They can't resolve these tensions. You can't cut a trillion dollars from Medicaid and then fix the problem with a much smaller

fund to go to the places that have been negatively impacted. The math doesn't work. If you're not replacing the money, the money isn't replaced. It comes down to math. You know, it's, it's interesting because Tillis, over the weekend, Trump was saying he's going to meet with challengers to Tillis. Then Tillis says he's not going to run. And then he gives this speech. It's, look, I'm glad he's saying this.

And I don't like Tim Tillis's views on a whole range of stuff. But it is, it is telling that he didn't feel comfortable giving this kind of speech while also seeking re-election in Trump's Republican Party. And then on top of that, he sort of does this post where he, uh, post where he, uh, tweets at Trump saying something like, let's not make, basically let's not make the same mistake we did last time when they went up, when they did that Mark Robinson guy who got his ass kicked. But what it sounds like is Tom Tillis is having this moment of political honesty, telling people how bad this bill is.

Then he's going to retire because he doesn't want to face the blowback and the political consequences of it or and seek reelection. But it sure sounds like his next plan will be to campaign to elect somebody that wouldn't show the same courage he did. Yes, 100%. And he will probably become a lobbyist or work at a law firm and will, and I'm sure he would say if the election, if Trump was on the ballot again, I'd vote for him again. Right. It's like, this is just what they do.

And he, the reason he's quitting is like with all due respect to him is because he thinks he's going to lose. Right. He either lose the primary or he loses general. It's not like he doesn't, it's not like he thinks I just can't bring myself to be in this party anymore. It's just no, this party won't have me. So I'm going to, I'm going to leave before I get kicked out. And I want to land on this. it's a little bit wonky.

But I thought it was, you know, everybody has pulled, I think, the most important moments from what Tillis said, which is basically about Trump. As always, Trump, even for someone like Tillis in this moment, Trump can't fail. He can only be failed, right? So it's not that Trump is coming out in favor of massive Medicaid cuts. It's because he's not getting the right information from his advisors. And the fact that 600, over 600,000 people in North Carolina might lose their Medicaid. But in the actual speech, he went into a lot of detail.

This clip you're about to see, it comes after he describes what he did when he was the Speaker of the North Carolina House doing a bunch of budget cuts to try to balance the budget in a way that required going through every budget line by line and trying to be careful. Now, I'm sure Democrats in North Carolina would say these were stupid and bad cuts, but he's describing governing and taking seriously his responsibility to govern. And here's what he said as to how it compares to what the Congress is doing right now. The Medicaid proposal in this bill bears no resemblance to that kind of discipline and due diligence. It has no insights into how these provider tax cuts are going to be absorbed without harming people on Medicare. And even worse, most of my colleagues do not even understand on either side of the aisle, the interplay of state directive payments and the devastating. consequences of the funding flows that are going to be before.

I want to include that only because it's not the kind of thing that's going to get a lot of attention. It's very in the weeds. It's a lot of detail and acronyms. But it does describe what's happening and what makes this different even than what the Bush administration did, even what they did to some extent in the first Trump term, which is they've abandoned any pretense of actually seriously government. by understanding the implications of the policies.

And that's what happened with Doge. That's what's happening with their refusal to be honest or even to allow to be properly counted the impact on various budgets and the impact on the deficit of this bill. That's why, as we speak, they're refusing to meet with the Senate parliamentarian to talk about the actual cost impact, that they are so focused on passing. this no matter what, and they are so feckless, that Tom Tillis, someone who we disagree with on basically everything, someone who is far more conservative, even than Republicans from a few decades ago, even for him, this party has gone too far and no longer cares about the impact about

what they're doing. You can be serious or you can be a Republican in Congress, but you can't be both. And the serious people keep leaving for this exact reason. I see like Senator Schaerner nots talking about this. It's like, we knew that they would come after clean energy. I'm surprised that they are going to tax into oblivion already existing clean energy projects. It's a wanton and stupid. Look, we knew that they would try to cut health care. I'm actually surprised that they're going to phase out the Medicaid match two years

from now, kind of sneak it through. Like, that is, I think, further than we thought that they'd be willing to go. It's further than the House was willing to go. Like, that is, that is, this is, I don't, it is really not, I think, clear to people just how devastating this bill is going to be. It is one of the most devastating, one of the cruelest, one of the most immoral, and frankly, one of the stupidest pieces of legislation ever passed. No one is asking for this.

It solves no problem. The only problem you can. say it potentially addresses is the fact that because they passed the last tax cut the most asked backward way possible that tax cuts were expiring this year so it prevents a tax increase but all the rest of the summit these republics didn't campaign on it trump didn't campaign on it it actually makes all the things that they say they want to address worse they're worried about the budget so they jack up deficits they're worried about china they build up a bunch of debt the chinese are going to buy making giving them more leverage on us and give the and then gut all the projects in green

energy, which is the fundamental race we're in with China. It doesn't grow the economy. It makes a recession more likely at the exact moment that it's cutting the entire safety net we need in a recession. It's a, it made like honestly, it's one of the most illogical things we have ever done as a country. And we're just doing it for the sake of doing it. And no one has stopped to answer why or what happens when you do it. And without any real like hard, like, there's no group of senators that are so desperate to pass as it does feel like a zombo-fied piece of legislation passing to give Donald Trump a win. And you have Josh Hawley on Medicaid. You have Tillis now. You have Elon Musk going after all of these provisions. You have the trade unions coming out against us talking about this as killing

I think it was several thousand. It's the equivalent of several thousand shutting down several thousand Keystone pipelines, which Brian Schottes was talking about, all to do a massive tax cut for the rich. The one the one upshot of this is the way they are doing this in the Senate, it does mean that if Democrats were to gain power, they have given us a path to pass without getting rid of the filibuster, a dramatic, we could pass Medicare for all, and claim it costs a tenth of what it does because of the same budget rules that they're using, that we could do it with 50 because of the way that they're abusing the system. So I hope that Democrats are taking note of the ways in which we could use reconciliation in the future to undo a lot of this and also go

further. So there's hope in that. Dan, thank you for jumping in. So good to see you. I'm going to be here, Jen. Good to see you. Are you, what are your plans for the fourth? We have a bunch of friends coming to stay with us. We'll be pretty relaxing. Some barbecuing, some swimming. Nothing big. You? I don't think I'm going to do anything. She's going to celebrate America. Yeah, I think we're actually going to have our Fourth of July barbecue is going to be Mexican. Yeah, that's right. Take that. Take that, Donald. Trump. And if you're seeing this, I hope one part of your Fourth of July plan is clicking subscribe to this channel. We're declaring our independence from what? Right wing media, Dan.

And we need people to subscribe. Get this channel to a fucking million. I am sick of seeing this nine, followed by five zeros. That's ridiculous. Yeah, we're at 900 something. Oh, wow. That's exciting. No, it isn't. No, it isn't. I felt like we're 899 for for an eternity. Soft bigotry of low expectations. We're getting this channel to a million. Help us do that. Help us get pro-democracy, anti-fascist, patriotic content in front of people. But thanks for watching.

Bye, everyone. Think Verizon is expensive? Think again. Anyone can bring their AT&T or T-Mobile bill to a Verizon store today and we'll give you a better deal. So bring us your bill. Walk in, run in, hoagos-stick in, teleport if you can. Right on the back of the...

rollerblading yak or flying on the wings of a majestic falcon. Any way you can, bring your AT&T or T-Mobile bill to a Verizon store today, and we'll give you a better deal on the best network. Based on Route Metrics, Best Overall Mobile Network Performance, U.S. second half, 2025, all right reserved. Must provide very recent postpaid consumer mobile bill in the name of the person redeeming the deal. Additional terms, conditions, and restrictions supply.