Bulwark Takes - Rep. Brendan Boyle Blasts New GOP Budget Trick

Episode Date: July 1, 2025

Sam Stein interviews Rep. Brendan Boyle about the GOP’s new budget maneuver, what it means for Medicaid, and how Republicans are breaking decades of precedent to push tax cuts for the wealthy.

Hey guys, it's me Sam Stein managing editor at the Bullwork and I'm joined by Congressman Brandon Boyle of the great state of Pennsylvania, the great city of Philadelphia. I don't I have my thoughts about Philadelphia. I'll save them for a different podcast. He's here to talk about the budget, the big, beautiful bill, whatever you want to call it. And then a very interesting procedural move that Republicans made that may open

the floodgates for Democrats like him in the future when it comes to scoring bills. We'll get into all that wonky stuff but subscribe to the feed first. Congressman, thanks so much for doing this. I just want to set the table for people who are watching this because this is you know takes time to edit these videos. We're recording it's like 10 45 a.m. on Tuesday. The Senate has been in session like all night basically trying to get the final vote for passage of this bill it comes down to essentially as I read at least in Murkowski Center from Alaska and Essentially whether or not they can insulate Alaska from the worst parts of this bill is

How I read this they're trying to basically make sure that some of the Medicaid cuts some some of the snap cuts just don't hit Alaska. And it's shocking to me that a senator will be like, well, if my state is saved by this bill, it's fine if all the other 49 are. And it's even more shocking because Murkowski had the same thing happen with the Obamacare appeal in 2017. And she didn't take the deal. She said, no, we need there should be universal standard here. So I'm just sort of curious knowing that we don't know if the bills actually gonna pass Seems like it's gonna pass in the Senate. What do you make of just what happened overnight? Yeah, so first Sam Philadelphia is the birthplace of the nation and the home of the Super Bowl champions So I do have to defend my people should have triggered you I should

I mean I will avoid going further on this topic, but that'll be a different podcast. In all seriousness though, I wish that the stakes weren't so damn high. It is the healthcare of 17 million Americans that's at stake, but it's actually even more than that because if we see hospitals close in rural America and urban America, it'll actually be the rest of us who may not have Medicaid or may not be on the ACA exchanges who will also have our healthcare impacted.

And I think that second part, that probably, that part of the story probably hasn't gotten out as much as it should. I mean, we should believe these providers when they are openly telling us that they will close. I mean, I have hospitals in my district in Philadelphia, Einstein Hospital is a great example, this Temple University Hospital, they Medicaid populations over 80%. So when Medicaid is cut by $1 trillion, the largest Medicaid cut in American history, four times larger than any previous Medicaid cut ever to happen, I mean, what do you think is going to happen? Hospitals were closed.

Bingo. And so now, suddenly my constituents, including myself included, suddenly won't have hospital to go to. So those are the stakes. I mean, this is not a game, and this is not abstract. Now in terms of where things stand at the moment, as we're recording this, it looks like the Senate is in the last hour of its debate. And if the rumors are true that Murkowski has folded, then it looks like that would give them the 50 votes and JD Vance would be able to break the tie.

And then things will move over to the House. Supposed to be testifying in front of rules committee in exactly an hour from now. Not going to happen. It looks like that would be delayed. What I've been told is that at the moment the Senate passes this rules can convene in an hour. I would be testifying because as ranking member of the budget committee, I'm first up actually

to talk about this big ugly bill that in the end after all has been said and done it's basically this. Cutting health care for millions and millions of Americans to partially subsidize tax cuts that mostly go to the top 1% the other way of paying for the tax cuts is running up our national debt. That's the bottom line. And you know a non insubstantial amount of money for ICE, which is what Vice President J.D. Bantz was talking about this morning, he was up on the hill.

Quickly, before we get to the current baseline budget policy that I wanna talk about, I just kinda wanna get your sense of what the politics are in the House when or if this bill goes back there. We've seen a lot of Freedom Caucus members say, well, we don't like this because it doesn't fit in the house when or if this bill goes back there. We've seen a lot of Freedom Caucus members say, well, we don't like this because it doesn't fit

the framework that we had agreed to. But frankly, we've also seen them say things like this before and then get in line. So I don't know what, I couldn't tell you what the actual temperature is there, but maybe you have a better sense. Yeah, the Freedom Caucus and folks who are part of it, with the exception of Tom Nassie, by the way, I will give him credit.

He is the one person who has a backbone on the other side. But the Freedom Caucus types, the people who will say their no on the Republican side, they'll huff on a Monday, they'll puff on a Tuesday, and by Wednesday they have folded. And that has been the entire history of that crowd as it relates to Trump. And I hope this time is different, but I would not hold my breath and I sure as hell wouldn't bet my healthcare, let alone the healthcare of my family, where millions of Americans are. Let's talk about current baseline.

So basically, and I don't want to like bore the viewer. No, I don't think it's going to bore the viewer. I'm not going to, you know what? I take that back. They can have their veggies too. So basically what Republicans did in the Senate is they said these expiring Trump tax cuts, which have always been set to expire, we're going to pretend like they're not expiring, that they're just going to continue on indefinitely.

And because if we do that, that means that when we extend these tax cuts, it would just be counted as a continuation of policy and it won't cost us anything. This is, correct me if I'm wrong, the first time this has been done as a budgetary matter? Yeah. So first, I give you credit by covering current policy baseline. No one will accuse you of engaging in clickbait. Hey, wait to see the metrics on this video. Okay. Yeah. Um, so look, current policy baseline gives us, gives it a patina of official soundingness.

Um, it's total unadulterated bullshit. It is. I bought and had a donut this morning for breakfast. According to current policy baseline, now tomorrow and the next day and every day for the rest of my life, when I buy a donut, that will cost me $0. That's current policy baseline. It is nonsense. It is BS. And this is truly a new precedent. I mean, I can't, you get this, but a lot of people out there may not. This is a new precedent and we'll have we will look back I think decades from now and recognize the ramifications of what is so that's what I want to get to what are the ramifications because I you know I

hear a lot of people saying well if Republicans do this Democrats are gonna have to respond and do what and you know the sort of more far-reaching dreamlike scenarios for liberals is like well we'll do Medicaid for all and just pass it for one year and then extend it indefinitely after that year because technically it costs nothing. I don't really foresee something that dramatic, but I guess intellectually kind of opened the floodgates for that. Yeah, so just to back up for a second, ever since 19... The whole rules around budget, the creation of the House Budget Committee on which I serve as the lead Democrat, Senate Budget Committee, the creation

of the Congressional Budget Office, our budget process, it all dates back to 1974. The Budget and Empowerment Control Act of 74, Democratic Congress passes it, kind of forces it on Richard Nixon, interestingly, a few months before he's about to resign. That was revolutionary. I mean, that created the whole modern budget system that we just kind of take for granted as the way it's always been. Ever since then, the rule has been you need to get a score from the Congressional Budget Office, things need to be paid for within a 10 year window. This is changing that. This is the current law since 74 has been something called

the current law baseline. So the tax cuts are set to expire at the end of this year. You wanna extend them fine, but you have to pay for them with offsetting cuts or raising revenues some other way. This is changing that. It's saying, well, because this is the current policy, even though we didn't account for paying for it beyond this, because it's the current policy,

we're gonna pretend it's paid for and voila magic, it's deemed paid for. So now that this becomes the new normal, why wouldn't, and look, I think this is a horrible practice. It's phony. It's total BS as I've, I've very bluntly described. That said, I'm no sucker. Okay. Republicans are doing this. Congratulations, Republicans. You've just figured out the way that we're going to pay for Medicare for all. You really, really, really push Medicare for all yes, I a hundred percent believe that Democrats will use this precedent

This will become the new normal moving forward and the only thing that will govern us moving forward on deficit and debt I believe are the markets that if the interest rate on the 10-year Becomes so high mortgage rates now are hovering in the high sixes. That will become the real speed limit, so to speak. But this will be gone. This is a 51 year precedent and norm and frankly law that is being ignored. By the way, there is one other thing that is being missed that is a new, and I've been talking about this. I have a number of friends who served with me in the House and are now in the U.S. Senate, all on the Democratic side. And I've been talking about this.

The filibuster is done because what the Republicans have shown, the way they've gotten around this in order to avoid and ignore current law baseline and move to current policy is you don't have to worry about the parliamentarian ruling against you if you don't allow her to enter the room and you don't allow. Oh yeah. Okay. So let's back up. What happened was, just so I understand, the Democrats filed a point of order of some sort with the parliamentarian to get her to weigh in on whether this idea of following current policy baseline

fit into the rules around reconciliation, which is how they're passing this bill. And Republicans just refuse to meet with her. Correct. So because of that, because I mean, there's no question the parliamentarian would rule against. Sure. But they argue that Lindsey Graham, who chairs the Budget Committee has the jurisdiction to decide what baseline to use. Well, I mean, if they're so confident in that argument, why wouldn't they allow a ruling on this from the Senate parliamentarian? They're not. And so it's rather a rather convenient phony argument for them.

I mean, they're so confident they won't allow her in the room and won't even allow a meeting. So essentially, the new precedent moving forward is if you're using reconciliation, and you have something you want to pass by simple majority, and you're afraid it won't comply with the rules, just don't allow for a meeting. So I don't see why. And by the way, I mean, what a fool Kristen Sinema was. Can you imagine laying down your entire Senate career on a Senate procedure that Republicans basically just did away with six months after you left? Now, she would argue that there's been some measures

that have been hit by the filibuster proof in the Senate since she's gone, but I get your point that this is a backdoor way to do a fairly substantial piece of legislation. So I think that moving forward, Democrats will be foolish not to follow these two new precedents that Republicans have established. Let me just, two last things. So back to the state of the bill, we talked about the about house freedom caucus and whether or not they'll stand up.

It's my reading of your interpretation is that you don't think they will and that ultimately this thing will pass if it gets back to the house. I if you've bet on house republicans folding the trump. Americans folding the Trump. You have won every single time. Okay. I just wanted to make sure. I would be, listen, I would be very happy to be proven wrong on this. But I will go based on what has happened 100% of the time so far, rather than thinking this is going to be new.

What I mean, what you could see perhaps is maybe the July 4th deadline would slip and there would be, you know, 24 or 48 hours of suspense. But then otherwise, ultimately old and they came because ultimately they are still so afraid of Donald Trump in weighing in in their primary. All right. And then the last question, it's a little bit sort of a sensitive one for you because it's in house, but you have been somewhat critical of the man on Twitter or at least retweeted some articles about your Senate colleague in Pennsylvania, John Fetterman. He had something to say yesterday. I just want your reaction to it where he said, I,

you know, missing some vacation time. We all know how this is going to go. We don't need to do this. And it really ticked off a lot of people, frankly, who, as you know, have their livelihoods, their medical needs dependent on this bill. I know that Federman's been in the spotlight. There's a lot of questions about just sort of his future in the party. I think Democrats openly welcome him because God knows you'd rather have a senator in your party than Not but what did you make of that statement? And what would you say to him if you had the chance to talk to him about it?

So first, I mean the the sacrifices that members of Congress make especially those of us who have Families with young children. I mean those are real. I mean I my wife and daughter right now I mean, I just left them even though I had long promised them that I would be with them this week. So I don't minimize that. That said, it is an honor and a privilege to be here. There are, and my daughter is 11. I explained this to her last night when I had to leave and drive down to DC. I said, you know, this week we'll determine whether or not

millions and millions of Americans still get to keep their health care. It was only 11. She got that. And, you know, to me, I think this is one of the most important things I will ever do. Full stop. There is no place I would rather be than right here, right now. And if I can make a difference and stop this bill from happening, I will do whatever it takes, stay up for 48 straight hours, 72 straight hours, do whatever it takes to block this bill from becoming law. And that should be the attitude, frankly, of every Democratic member of the House and Senate. If you are here, you're damn lucky and you're privileged to be here.

You should want to be here. If you don't want to be here, leave. Can't say better than that. All right. Representative Brandon Boyle, a ranking member of the House Budget Committee, expert on current baseline and our current policy baseline should say and set to go testify before the rules committee. I don't know, maybe a couple hours

or so. Thank you so much. Really appreciate it, man. Really do appreciate the insights. Thank you guys for watching this interview. Appreciate that as well. Subscribe to the feed and we'll talk later.