I specifically, you spoke
to it a little bit just a second
ago, but what conversations
have you had with Senator Johnson
about the bill as it's heading
towards the Senate?
Yeah, so, you know, I've
been following closely his comments
saying that
he will
only vote for something that does
not actually add to
the deficit in debt,
which by the way is why we
came up with an expedited process
called budget reconciliation.
The idea was that you
could, by a simple majority vote in
the Senate, pass legislation to
reduce the debt.
It would require the
typical 60 votes to
pass legislation that would
contribute to the debt.
But that was fundamentally
altered in the
last couple of decades.
And especially when it is
used for the purpose
of tax rewriting
of the tax code, it has
been contributing to our debt, as it
did in Trump's first term in
2017.
I remember when we were debating
that, and it looked like it would
add about three trillion.
I think it might have ended up
adding even more than that.
And again, tax breaks that
disproportionately impact and
benefit the wealthy and big
corporations.
So I was following
Senator Johnson's comments on
opposing the
bill, and frankly the
last conversation I had with him
last week was rather lighthearted.
said that I saw he was going to be a
no on the bill, and I welcomed that
news, even if it was for very
different reasons, that then
I would be opposing the
legislation.
But you know, on my side,
I have been holding
roundtable
discussions, similar to this on
the VA, but on Medicaid,
also on food security
and various USDA
and other.
Departmental policies that help
uh... People respond to
food insecurity uh...
And uh...
I i i believe that the impact that
the uh...
Bill would have as passed by the
house would be devastating on
the most vulnerable communities
uh...
Add uh...
Mightily to the deficit in debt
and again why so
that they can pay for uh...
More tax cuts for the very wealthy
and big corporations.
And we're speaking to
Wisconsin DHS this week
about Medicaid and food share
cuts and how that could impact
Wisconsinites.
State Republicans may not
backfill some of those
services and benefits.
What is your reaction to
the cuts that are proposed as they
are now and what they will do to
Wisconsin?
The health care Medicaid
cuts are estimated
to lead to about
220,000 Wisconsinites
losing their insurance.
That would be either their Medicaid
insurance or their
insurance through the
Affordable Care Act marketplace.
That's a massive disruption
and frankly, just in terms
of impact, you know,
not only will people who need health
care not have it.
And but
also all of
us will see costs go up if people
are forced to go to the
emergency room because they don't
have health care to maintain
their health with annual checkups
and preventative care.
So it's not going
to achieve the goals.
On the food stamp program
side of things, really this
is a Republican effort
in the Congress to
either see those programs
cut to the tune that
they're talking, or have the burden
shifted to the states.
And the states have varying
capacities to be able to
fill in that
hole.
And so combined,
this is going to mean suffering
for Wisconsinites,
most of whom are working
families just trying to get ahead.
You had mentioned earlier
that being on the
HHS Oversight Committee,
you're sort of getting Don't waltz a
bit, bye.
More than a bit.
More, uh, being polite,
by the VA secretary.
No, by the HHS.
I'm sorry, by HHS,
and they're not
telling you about, you
know, the cuts that are happening,
whether it's research grants or...
These scientists themselves.
Can you talk a little bit more about
what you have been hearing?
Yeah, so I'd say a combination of
things. One is that Secretary
Kennedy, who I've had before,
one or other of my committees twice
in the last two weeks,
the Health Committee two weeks ago,
the Health and Human Services
Appropriations Subcommittee last
week. And when,
you know, I asked him questions
that I had not gotten satisfactory
or any answers to.
Uh... When i had written the
department uh...
And in response
the you know if i don't
know sometimes which is worse but
it but he outright lied and
i there's he's purposely
misinforming the congress
or he doesn't know the answers
to the question
i'm not sure which one is worse
it's very very distressing
in that case and you may have
followed uh...
My questioning because that got a
lot of attention was on the.
The lead in the schools
at MPS,
and 1,800 students displaced
from their schools because of that
crisis.
And he has fired
everybody who works at the childhood
lead mitigation branch
of the CDC.
Everybody.
And he said to me, no,
we have a team in Milwaukee.
And then when they came back
around with
evidence that they didn't have a
team, he accused
me of misrepresenting the situation.
So we've had quite the back and
forth.
But this is not the way to do
business.
I have an oversight
role as a senator.
And when I write a letter,
I should get a response.
And that response should be thorough
and timely and truthful.
And right now, HHS
is just not answering the
letters.
And it was only because
Secretary Kennedy was
sent up to Capitol Hill to finally
take questions in the fifth
month of this administration that
we had that
exchange.
With regard to VA, since this was
a VA roundtable,
I've written several letters to
the Secretary of the
VA, Secretary Collins.
And I do not believe we've gotten
any substantive responses
to the letters.
Now, the letters we sent had
to do with the
firings of personnel and
the ramifications.
And I believe there was one other,
and I'm not remembering what it is
right now, but we can follow back
up. But it seems to be a
pattern throughout this
administration. And I don't know if
they are literally instructed
not to answer congressional
inquiries.
Whether there's another reason,
but we're not getting responses.
There's no sort of back and forth,
which there has been in every other
administration, including the first
Trump administration, and they
answered our letters.
And I think that's all we have time
for. Thank you.
Thank you!