More stories

  • in

    Elon Musk ‘Disappointed’ With Major Trump Policy Bill

    Elon Musk also said the Republican bill, which passed the House last week, would undermine the work of his DOGE group.Elon Musk criticized the far-reaching Republican bill intended to enact President Trump’s domestic policy agenda, saying it would undermine the administration’s own efforts to shrink federal spending.“I was disappointed to see the massive spending bill, frankly, which increases the budget deficit, not just decreases it,” Mr. Musk said in an excerpt from an interview with CBS’s “Sunday Morning” that was released late Tuesday.Mr. Musk added that the bill, which is headed to the Senate after squeaking through the House last week, would undermine the work of the Department of Government Efficiency, the White House effort to shrink the federal government that Mr. Trump tapped him to lead.Mr. Trump has urged swift passage of the bill — officially called the One Big, Beautiful Bill Act — which would slash taxes, providing the biggest savings to the wealthy, and steer more money to the military and immigration enforcement. As written, the legislation would cut health, nutrition, education and clean energy programs to cover part of the cost.But Mr. Musk said he was not sold on a bill that has emerged as the president’s top legislative priority. “I think a bill can be big or it can be beautiful,” Mr. Musk said. “But I don’t know if it can be both.”A combination of Mr. Trump’s lobbying and compromises struck by Speaker Mike Johnson managed to get the bill through the House, but it faces significant hurdles in the Senate. Republicans hold a only a slim margin in the chamber, and two fiscal conservatives have said they want significant changes on the grounds that the bill lacks concrete measures to reduce the national deficit.Mr. Musk — who spent more than $250 million to help Mr. Trump’s campaign — joined the White House as a “special government employee” to lead the DOGE effort, which Mr. Trump hailed as one of his biggest accomplishments. The effort, which set the lofty goal of slashing $1 trillion from the federal budget but has fallen far short of that goal, has led to clashes with cabinet secretaries and complaints from some lawmakers.Mr. Musk’s support for Mr. Trump has also caused sales to plummet at Tesla, his electric car company, and last week the billionaire said he would spend less time in Washington and more time running his companies. More

  • in

    La protesta de la CNTE paralizó el AICM en Ciudad de México

    El bloqueo reflejó cómo la presidenta de México, Claudia Sheinbaum, está sufriendo la presión de algunos sindicatos y movimientos sociales, mientras una economía débil limita su capacidad para mejorar las condiciones laborales.Una protesta organizada por un poderoso sindicato de maestros mexicanos interrumpió brevemente los vuelos en el principal aeropuerto internacional de la capital el viernes por la tarde. La manifestación en demanda de mejoras salariales provocó escenas de caos y retrasó el viaje de miles de pasajeros, mientras las fuerzas de seguridad se agolpaban en las terminales del aeropuerto en un intento de imponer el orden.La paralización en Ciudad de México comenzó hacia las 2:00 p. m., hora local, y duró unos 20 minutos, mientras cientos de sindicalistas marchaban hacia las entradas del aeropuerto. La protesta también colapsó el tráfico en las calles aledañas al aeropuerto, el cual se encuentra en una zona densamente poblada de la ciudad, y se vio a agentes de policía escoltando a viajeros varados hasta el aeropuerto en camionetas. También agentes antidisturbios fueron vistos dentro del aeropuerto.Aunque la interrupción fue breve, algunos vuelos internacionales que salían de Ciudad de México fueron cancelados o retrasados durante horas el viernes. En el aeropuerto, también conocido como Aeropuerto Internacional Benito Juárez, operan 21 aerolíneas, según su sitio web. El viernes, aerolíneas como Aeroméxico ofrecieron a sus clientes la posibilidad de reprogramar sus vuelos sin costo o pagando solo una pequeña diferencia de precio.La manifestación refleja cómo la presidenta de izquierda de México, Claudia Sheinbaum, está sufriendo la presión de algunos sindicatos y movimientos sociales, mientras una economía endeble y un enorme déficit presupuestario limitan su capacidad para aumentar los salarios y mejorar las condiciones de trabajo de muchos empleados públicos.“No hemos recibido esa atención ni ese respeto en la solución de las demandas, ni siquiera en las más mínimas, de parte del Ejecutivo federal”, dijo Eva Hinojosa Tera, dirigente sindical del estado de Michoacán, en una entrevista radiofónica el viernes.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    E.U. Offers Emergency Funding for Radio Free Europe After Trump Cuts

    The European Union said it would provide short-term financing for Radio Free Europe, but the amount falls short of what the news outlet says it needs to stay afloat.The European Union said Tuesday that it was stepping in to provide emergency funding to Radio Free Europe, though the promised amount fell far short of what the news organization said it needed to stay afloat after the Trump administration froze federal support.Kaja Kallas, the European Union’s top diplomat, announced that the bloc would provide 5.5 million euros ($6.2 million) to support Radio Free Europe, which provides independent reporting in countries with limited press freedoms.“In a time of growing, unfiltered content, independent journalism is more important than ever,” Ms. Kallas said. But she added that the funding would be for the short term and that the European Union could not make up the news outlet’s entire shortfall.Since taking office in January, President Trump has ordered the dismantling of Radio Free Europe’s parent organization, the U.S. Agency for Global Media, which provides the broadcaster with $12 million in congressional funding each month. A U.S. District Court judge initially paused Mr. Trump’s termination of the congressional grants, but this month a federal appeals court ruled that the Trump administration could continue to withhold the funds.Stephen Capus, the president of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, said on Tuesday that he was grateful for the emergency E.U. funding to keep the operation running “for a short while longer.” He said that the news organization was continuing to fight in court for the release of congressionally appropriated funds.“RFE/RL’s survival remains at risk as long as those funds are withheld,” he said in a statement.The news organization on Tuesday filed an emergency petition in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia seeking its May funding. Radio Free Europe said last week that it had received its April funding from Congress, though it came six weeks later than scheduled, forcing the news organization to reduce programming and staff.Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, which has been funded by Congress since it began broadcasting during the Cold War, reports on human rights and corruption in several countries run by authoritarian governments. In the 1980s, it reported on the aftermath of the Chernobyl nuclear accident, details of which the Soviet authorities had obscured.Today, it broadcasts in 23 countries, including Russia, Ukraine, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan, as well as nations in Central Asia and the Caucasus. More

  • in

    House Republicans Will Vote Again on President Trump’s Legislative Agenda

    A group of fiscal hard-liners on the Budget Committee blocked the bill Friday morning. The group will try again to pass the president’s megabill out of committee Sunday night.The House Budget Committee will meet late Sunday night to try once again to advance President Trump’s domestic policy bill toward a floor vote after a handful of fiscally conservative Republicans blocked the measure on Friday over concerns about the ballooning national deficit.The remarkable revolt among hard-right lawmakers has threatened to upend Republicans’ goal of approving the legislation before the Memorial Day recess. G.O.P. leaders have been searching for a way to pacify the holdouts.Five Republican representatives — Chip Roy of Texas, Ralph Norman of South Carolina, Josh Brecheen of Oklahoma, Andrew Clyde of Georgia, and Lloyd Smucker of Pennsylvania — joined Democrats to block the legislation on Friday. The vote was 16 to 21 on a motion to advance the bill.“This bill falls profoundly short,” Mr. Roy said.Mr. Smucker, who changed his “yes” vote to a “no” at the last minute, said he did so for procedural reasons. Because he voted against the bill, he will be able to ask to call the legislation back up for consideration.But it was unclear what changes Speaker Mike Johnson and his leadership team could come up with to win enough votes.Without the support of Republican hard-liners, the bill cannot advance. Any changes to win their backing could alienate the more moderate Republicans whose votes will also be needed to pass the measure on the House floor.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Republican Revolt Reflects a Core Party Divide Over Spending and Debt

    Whether the ultraconservatives dig in and force big changes to the megabill carrying President Trump’s agenda or capitulate, as they have in the past, will determine the fate of their party’s signature legislation.To a small but crucial group of hard-right House Republicans, the tax and spending cut package produced by their colleagues to deliver what President Trump calls the “big, beautiful bill” was nothing more than a homely cop-out.The handful of lawmakers who blocked their own party’s sprawling domestic policy measure from advancing out of a key committee on Friday acted out of a fundamentally different view of federal spending and debt than the rest of the G.O.P. They are single-mindedly focused on slashing deficits by restructuring the government to dramatically scale back social programs, whatever the political consequences.With their party in control of the House, Senate and White House, they view their fellow Republicans as timid, squandering a golden opportunity to turn the government’s finances around in a long overdue course correction. Instead, they see Republican leaders, catering to swing district members worried about their re-election, delivering a half-measure that, as far as the hard-liners are concerned, falls woefully short on cuts — and the ones it did make were gimmicky.“I’m not going to sit here and say that everything is hunky-dory,” Representative Chip Roy, Republican of Texas and one of the leading evangelists of deep spending cuts, said on Friday as he tore into his own party’s legislation. “This is the Budget Committee. We are supposed to do something to actually result in balanced budgets, but we’re not doing it.”It remains to be seen whether the anti-deficit fundamentalists are really dug in against the legislation or shopping for concessions that could allow them to claim a partial victory against deficit spending and still ultimately fall in line behind Mr. Trump. They have earned a reputation both for revolting against their own party at crucial moments and for backing down before their intransigence actually kills a top Republican priority — often without achieving what they initially demanded.But for a few days at least, the recalcitrance of Mr. Roy and his fellow deficit hawks, and their willingness to challenge a majority of their own party, has tied down the entire Republican legislative agenda.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Republicans Writing Trump’s ‘Big, Beautiful Bill’ Face Risks on Medicaid

    Representatives from swing districts face tough votes as soon as next week, when key House panels are scheduled to consider legislation that would cut popular programs to pay for President Trump’s agenda.Gabe Evans, then a Republican state lawmaker in Colorado, defeated a Democratic member of Congress in November by less than 1 percentage point — just 2,449 votes — writing his ticket to Washington.Now Mr. Evans, 39, is helping to write legislation that could cement his own ticket back home.The first-term congressman, whose swing district just north of Denver includes 151,749 Medicaid recipients, sits on the Energy and Commerce Committee. The Republican budget resolution that lays the groundwork for sweeping legislation to enact President Trump’s domestic agenda instructs the panel, which has jurisdiction over Medicaid, to slash spending by $880 billion over the next decade to help pay for a large tax cut. That number is impossible to reach without substantially reducing the cost of Medicaid, the government program that provides health insurance for lower-income Americans.As Republicans in Congress struggle to coalesce around the core pieces of what Mr. Trump calls his “one big, beautiful bill,” Mr. Evans and other G.O.P. lawmakers from some of the most competitive districts in the country are facing committee votes next week to approve cuts to popular programs that could come back to haunt them politically.And Democrats are gleeful at the prospect of Republican incumbents going on the record supporting the effort.“These members of Congress won with fewer votes than the number of people in their district on Medicaid,” said Jesse Ferguson, a veteran Democratic strategist and a former spokesman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “Voting for this is like being the captain of the Titanic and deciding to intentionally hit the iceberg.”The group includes Representative Mariannette Miller-Meeks, Republican of Iowa, who also sits on the Energy and Commerce Committee and is on even shakier ground than Mr. Evans, despite having warded off a challenger multiple times. Last year, Ms. Miller-Meeks, who represents 132,148 Medicaid recipients, won her seat by 0.2 percent, or 799 votes. Her local office in Davenport has been besieged by demonstrators concerned about spending cuts.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Someone Should Tell Trump He’s About to Make the Trade Deficit Worse

    There are many reasons President Trump should not be pushing Congress to pass huge tax cuts, but here’s one you may not have heard: Budget deficits and trade deficits are twins. When the former go up, so, generally, do the latter. So at the same moment Mr. Trump is upending the global economy in a feckless attempt to eliminate America’s trade deficit, he’s essentially pressuring Congress to increase it.Here’s how it happens. The United States buys a lot of goods from other countries, and we pay for the goods with dollars. But those dollars are no good abroad, so the countries we buy from invest them here. Some of the money goes, directly or indirectly, into businesses that are raising cash to build new data centers or expand natural gas facilities or construct new apartment complexes. Other dollars go into Treasury bonds or bills, which the federal government uses to fund our large budget deficit. (The same thing happens in reverse when other countries buy from the United States — but to a lesser degree, since our imports are larger than our exports.)If the budget deficit rises, American investors could theoretically cover the shortfall, but that would mean putting their money in Treasury securities rather than businesses and their capital needs. The other option is that foreign countries amass more dollars and plow them back into the U.S. economy. How would they get those additional dollars? From all the German cars and Chinese electronics and imported beer that Americans will buy with the money from their tax cuts.More generally, a larger budget deficit will require the government to borrow more money, which drives up interest rates. Higher interest rates mean a stronger dollar, which makes it more expensive for people in other countries to buy our products, cheaper for us to buy theirs, and thus the trade deficit widens.So cutting taxes, as Mr. Trump has told Congress to do, will drive up the budget deficit — and the trade deficit. All of this may seem counterintuitive, but it’s one of the few things that economists agree about.The budget deficit is already worryingly high and the tax cuts Mr. Trump is seeking would make it even larger. Last year the United States ran a $1.8 trillion budget deficit, or 6 percent of the gross domestic product — higher than at any other time except during World War II, the late-2000s financial crisis and the Covid-19 pandemic — despite strong economic growth and no unusual emergencies.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    White House Eyes Overhaul of Federal Housing Aid to the Poor

    The White House is considering deep cuts to federal housing programs, including a sweeping overhaul of aid to low-income families, in a reconfiguration that could jeopardize millions of Americans’ continued access to rental assistance funds.The potential changes primarily concern federal housing vouchers, including those more commonly known as Section 8. The aid generally helps the poorest tenants cover the monthly costs of apartments, town homes and single-family residences.Administration officials recently discussed cutting or canceling out the vouchers and other rental assistance programs and potentially replacing them with a more limited system of housing grants, perhaps sent to states, according to three people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the confidential discussions. The overhaul would be included in President Trump’s new budget, which is expected to be sent to Capitol Hill in the coming weeks.The exact design and cost of the retooled program is unclear, and any such change is likely to require approval from Congress, as White House budgets on their own do not carry the force of law.But people familiar with the administration’s thinking said the overhaul under discussion would most likely amount to more than just a technical change, resulting in fewer federal dollars for low-income families on top of additional cuts planned for the rest of the Department of Housing and Urban Development.Federal voucher programs currently provide assistance to about 2.3 million low-income families, according to the government’s estimates, who enroll through their local public-housing authorities. The aid is part of a broader universe of rental assistance programs that are set to exceed $54 billion this fiscal year. But the annual demand for these subsidies is far greater than the available funds, creating a sizable wait list as rents are rising nationally.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More