The One Big Beautiful Bill is going to face a major hurdle in the Senate, where Republicans hold a 53-47 majority, as Senator Rick Scott (R-FL) has reaffirmed he and several other Republicans will vote no on the bill.
Senator Scott says, “There’s not a chance” the bill will pass the Senate.
The House passed the budget reconciliation bill by a single vote on Thursday after months of debate.
President Trump has said he needs the budget reconciliation bill to pass in order to cut taxes for the working class, fund his secure border and mass deportation agenda, and follow through on creating the “Golden Age of America.” On Tuesday, President Trump delivered remarks to House Republicans on Capitol Hill, where he reportedly asked lawmakers to stop haggling over the bill and move it forward to his desk.
As The Gateway Pundit reported, Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) also said the One Big Beautiful Bill does not have the votes to pass the Senate on Sunday. “I think we have enough to stop the process until the President gets serious about the spending reduction and reducing the deficit,” he told CNN’s Jake Tapper.
Senator Scott told Charlie Kirl on Tuesday that he will “absolutely” vote no on the bill.
“there’s not a chance it would get to 51 votes,” he said.
Kirk: What is your take on the current status of the big, beautiful bill that’s passed the House? Will you be voting for it, or will you be advocating for some changes?
Scott: Look I think all the— Ron Johnson, Rand Paul, Mike Lee, all of us. We want a bill to pass. We want a good bill. We want a bill that securites the border. We want President Trump’s agenda. We want to make sure to plus up the military. We want to make sure all the DOGE opportunities to reduce costs are part of this bill, and then let’s build it to the extent we can. But guess what? The Democrats have increased the budget by over 50% in the last five years. The House Bill cuts the spending by less than 2% over the next ten years. It doesn’t balance the budget. It isn’t even close to balancing the budget. So, there’s a whole bunch of us— we are going to fight like hell to balance this budget. I mean, you know, we’ve got to get rid of the Green New Deal money. We’ve got to say, if you don’t want to work, why do you get free health care paid by somebody else? Why do poor states pay for the health care of citizens of richer states? I mean, there’s so many things that— there’s no common sense here. So, I think we’re all going to fight to make sure we pass a bill that’s put this in the process to balance the budget, and we can balance the budget quickly. You balance your budget. Part of it’s going to be through this reconciliation bill, but the mandatory part of it will be through the budget process in September, through discretionary spending, but we’re going to get this done.
Kirk: So, Senator, would you say, without any changes at its current composition, would you vote no?
Scott: Oh, absolutely, I’d vote no. This bill doesn’t have— if they brought to the floor right now, there’s not a, there’s not a chance it’ll get the 51 votes it needs. So, there’s— Look, we all know we have to balance the budget. Look, we know that it’s getting harder to sell our treasuries. We know interest rates are going up. We want to get interest rates down. We can get inflation under control. That means balance the budget. Guess what? I did it every year I was governor. You know, but these states supposedly balance their budgets? No, they balance your budget by doing the same thing the federal government does. They borrow money. I stopped that. I stopped the state borrowing more money every year, which had been doing for 40 years, and it paid off a third of the state debt while I was governor. So, that’s what we ought to be doing at the federal level. That’s how we’ll get interest rates down. That’s how we’ll get inflation under control. The poorest families in this state, in this country, are getting hurt by this massive inflation caused by reckless government spending. We’re spending tw,o Charlie, $2 trillion more than we take in, and we’re taking in plenty of money. It’s not like we don’t have high enough taxes. We have high– way higher spending than we need.
Kirk: That’s a big statement, and we want to see it passed. What can then be done? Because our audience is like, wait a second, I thought it passed the house. Are you saying that the Senate can change it? And then there’s a reconciliation between the House and the Senate, is that correct?
Scott: We’ll change it. We’ll have our own bill, and what will happen is it’ll go back through a conference, or it’ll just go back to the house, and they’ll pass our bill. But I believe we’re going to dramatically reduce mandatory spending to get this budget balanced in a short period of time, which is what we have to do. It’s what we promised. I just went through my election just like President Trump did. We all promise we are going to balance the budget. We are going to set the process to quickly balancing in this budget.
Kirk: Senator in closing here, let’s talk about the great elements of the bill, because there’s a lot of good stuff that I’m sure that you don’t want to gut: Energy independence, $1,000 Trump account for every new baby born, brill, baby, drill, border Security, ICE agents, border patrol, tax on remittances, no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, major middle class tax cut, and I’m just barely touching the surface. We’re starting to get to work requirements for Medicaid. But it needs to be even more dramatic, repealing a little bit back of the Inflation Reduction Act and that nonsense of Biden, so we don’t want to blow up the entire bill. And I’m sure that is your perspective, because what I just listed, are phenomenal wins. And if we can get serious spending cuts, then we have a historic accomplishment, Senator,
Scott: We will give historic spending cuts. I believe in it. We had a great conversation with the Republican Senate about how we can make sure— let’s take Medicaid as an example. Should we be spending more money for able bodied adults that don’t want to work or poor kids, which is the purpose of the original Medicaid program? I watched my brother not get health care when I was a kid because we didn’t have Medicaid back then. But now, guess what? The states have played the system through provider taxes and other things, so they spend way more money for able bodied adults, and these poor kids are left out in the cold, just like they were before Medicaid. Let’s get it back to its purpose. Take care of the chronically ill, take care of the disabled, take care of the poor kids that can’t afford health care. That’s what we should be doing, and that’s what I’m going to make sure happens with this.
Kirk: What would it look like to have a realistic win, because you’re not going to get everything you want. That’s politics. What would you say is the line of which you say we are willing to compromise? What is the 80% principle? What? What does that look like in practice?
Scott: Part of it will be through this bill, the reconciliation part will be the budget, but we, it looks like, will collect five and a half trillion dollars in revenues this year. So, this year we should not spend more than six and a half trillion. And then next year, ratchet down some more and hopefully have a revenues come up more as Trump rebuilds the economy. So, over about a three year period of time, we should be able to balance the budget. So, our goal is to get the spending down to about $6.5 trillion, which is reasonable.
Read the full article here
