

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"If the Federal Reserve loses its independence, the stability of our markets and the broader economy will suffer."
The US Department of Justice's decision to open a criminal investigation into Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell has ignited a major backlash that even has some Republican senators drawing a line in the sand.
Shortly after Powell released a video on Sunday accusing the Department of Justice (DOJ) of waging an "intimidation" campaign against him on behalf of President Donald Trump, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) blasted the administration, accusing them of trying to compromise the independence of America's central bank.
“If there were any remaining doubt whether advisers within the Trump administration are actively pushing to end the independence of the Federal Reserve, there should now be none,” said Tillis, who further vowed to "oppose the confirmation of any nominee for the Fed—including the upcoming Fed chair vacancy—until this legal matter is fully resolved."
On Monday, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) backed up Tillis' pledge to oppose any nominees for the Federal Reserve until the criminal probe of Powell, whose term as Fed chair is due to end in May, has been resolved.
Murkowski also revealed that she spoke with Powell and determined that "it’s clear the administration’s investigation is nothing more than an attempt at coercion" aimed at affecting his decisions on US monetary policy.
"The stakes are too high to look the other way," Murkowski emphasized. "If the Federal Reserve loses its independence, the stability of our markets and the broader economy will suffer."
Trump can only afford to lose the support of four Republican senators in a vote for a new Fed chair, which means Tillis and Murkowski's vows not to support any nominee until the case against Powell is resolved carry significant weight.
A bipartisan group of economists who have served under US presidents dating back to Ronald Reagan—including former Federal Reserve Chairs Alan Greenspan, Ben Bernanke, and Janet Yellin—released a joint statement on Monday denouncing what they described as an effort to strong-arm the Federal Reserve into doing the president's bidding.
"The reported criminal inquiry into Federal Reserve Chair Jay Powell is an unprecedented attempt to use prosecutorial attacks to undermine... independence," they wrote. "This is how monetary policy is made in emerging markets with weak institutions, with highly negative consequences for inflation and the functioning of their economies more broadly. It has no place in the United States, whose greatest strength is the rule of law, which is at the foundation of our economic success."
Trump, who nominated Powell to be Federal Reserve chairman in 2017, has been openly pressuring Powell for months to more aggressively cut interest rates in the face of a faltering jobs market.
Powell, however, has continued to take a more cautious approach, and has cited the price instability caused by Trump's tariffs as a reason to hold off on more aggressive rate cuts.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski was the deciding vote to pass Republicans' massive social safety net cuts through the Senate. She said she didn't like the bill, but voted for it anyway after getting Alaska exempted from some of its worst harms.
By the thinnest possible margin, the U.S. Senate voted Tuesday to pass a budget that includes the largest cuts to Medicaid and nutrition assistance in U.S. history while giving trillions of dollars of tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans.
The deciding vote was Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), who admitted she didn't like the bill. However, she voted for it regardless after securing relief for her home state from some of its most draconian cuts.
But in an interview immediately afterward, she acknowledged that the rest of the country, where millions are on track to lose their healthcare coverage and food assistance, would not be so lucky.
"Do I like this bill? No," Murkowski told a reporter for MSNBC. "I try to take care of Alaska's interests. I know that in many parts of the country there are Americans that are not going to be advantaged by this bill. I don't like that."
The 887-page bill includes more than $1 trillion in cuts to Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program over the next decade—cuts the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects will result in nearly 12 million people losing health coverage. The measure also takes an ax to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)—imperiling food aid for millions.
In recent days, Murkowski—a self-described "Medicaid moderate"—expressed hesitation about signing onto a list of such devastating cuts, calling the vote "agonizing". To get her on board, her Republican colleagues were willing to give her state some shelter from the coming storm.
As David Dayen explained in The American Prospect, Murkowski was able to secure a waiver that exempts Alaska from the newly implemented cost-sharing requirement that will force states to spend more of their budgets on SNAP.
In The New Republic, Robert McCoy described it as a "bribe."
Initially, Republicans attempted to simply write in a carve-out for Alaska and Hawaii. But after this was shot down by the Senate parliamentarian, they tried again with a measure that exempted the 10 states with the highest error rates.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) called it "the most absurd example of the hypocrisy of the Republican bill."
"They have now proposed delaying SNAP cuts FOR TWO YEARS ONLY FOR STATES with the highest error rates just to bury their help for Alaska," she said.
Murkowski also got a tax break for Alaskan fishing villages inserted into the bill. She attempted to have Alaska exempted from some Medicaid cuts as well, but the parliamentarian killed the measure.
"Did I get everything that I wanted? Absolutely not," she told reporters outside the Senate chamber.
However, as Dayen wrote, "Murkowski decided that she could live with a bill that takes food and medicine from vulnerable people to fund tax cuts tilted toward the wealthy, as long as it didn't take quite as much food away from Alaskans."
Murkowski showed herself to be well aware of the harms the bill will cause. After voting to pass the bill, she said, "My hope is that the House is gonna look at this and recognize that we're not there yet."
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) called Murkowski's bargain "selfish," "cruel," and "expensive."
"Voting for the bill because [of] a carve-out for your state is open acknowledgement that people will get kicked off healthcare and will have to go to much more expensive emergency rooms," Jayapal wrote. "Clear you know it's a terrible bill for everyone."
If the Big Ugly Bill becomes law, over half of nursing homes say they will have to reduce staff, and a quarter say they will close.
Imagine learning that your grandmother’s nursing home is closing. The nearest one with room for her is a three-hour drive away. It doesn’t accept Medicaid, so if your grandmother is among the two-thirds of nursing home patients who are covered by Medicaid, she’s out of luck.
Your grandfather still lives at home. But the hospital near his house is closing, too. If he has a medical emergency, he’ll have to go to an overburdened hospital that’s 40 minutes away.
That’s what will happen if President Donald Trump’s so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill” becomes law. There’s nothing beautiful about this hideous betrayal of the American people. Unless you’re a billionaire who can hop in a helicopter to see your private doctor, it will make your health care worse. All to give that same billionaire a giant tax cut.
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) says Americans who are concerned about Medicaid should “get over it.” Sorry, Mitch. We refuse to “get over it,” and we’re not dying quietly.
The Big Ugly Bill cuts a trillion dollars from Medicaid. Even if you’re not on Medicaid, this will hurt you and your family. That’s because hospitals and nursing homes around the country rely on Medicaid for much of their funding.
If this bill becomes law, over half of nursing homes say they will have to reduce staff, and a quarter say they will close. At the nursing homes that remain open, seniors and people with disabilities will wait in agony for someone to take them to the bathroom or give them their pain medication.
Those whose nursing homes close will struggle to find another one with room for them, especially if they rely on Medicaid. If they manage to find one, it will likely be hours away from their loved ones.
This bill is a disaster for people who rely on Medicaid to pay for nursing homes and other long-term care. But it’s also a disaster even for those who don’t directly rely on Medicaid, because it will devastate the entire healthcare system. Rural areas will be hit hardest, but nowhere and no one (except for billionaires) is safe.
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) told Iowans concerned about the bill’s Medicaid cuts that “we all are going to die.” Many of us will die faster, including the hundreds of Iowans who will lose their nursing home beds.
In Iowa alone the impact is massive across the entire state and in each vulnerable Republican House District.
In Iowa’s 1st District, represented by Republican Mariannette Miller-Meeks, four nursing homes with a collective 280 beds will close: Aspire of Muscatine (46), Mississippi Valley Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center—Keokuk (83), Iowa City Rehab and Health Care Center—Iowa City (89), and Azria Health Prairie Ridge—Mediapolis (62).
In Iowa’s 2nd District, represented by Republican Ashley Hinson, two nursing homes with a collective 271 beds will close: Heritage Specialty Care—Cedar Rapids (201) and Cedar Falls Healthcare Center (70).
In Iowa’s 3rd District, represented by Republican Zach Nunn, two nursing homes with a collective 113 beds will close: Aspire of Perry (46) and Granger Nursing and Rehabilitation Center—Granger (67).
And this story repeats across the entire country. There is no place to hide from the tsunami being unleashed against nursing homes. Anyone who has dealt with the current system knows how bad it is now. It is about to be a whole lot worse. Nursing homes that don’t close outright will become death traps as the demand far outstrips the supply.
All of this needless death and chaos, just so some billionaires can get trillions in tax handouts that they don’t even need.
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) says Americans who are concerned about Medicaid should “get over it.” Sorry, Mitch. We refuse to “get over it,” and we’re not dying quietly.
Polling shows that Americans hate the Big Ugly Bill—if they know about what’s in it. The problem is that most of them don’t. Nearly half of Americans are completely unaware of the bill, and only 8% of them know it cuts Medicaid.
Talk to your friends and family members. Tell them that Republicans are about to cause a nursing home and hospital apocalypse—but it isn’t too late to stop it. The Senate is voting on the Big Ugly Bill very soon. Then, it goes back to the House of Representatives, where Republicans will try to rush the bill through before the public can learn about it.
Call your representative and both senators now at 202-224-3121. The key swing votes in the Senate include Susan Collins of Maine (the oldest, and most rural, state in the country) and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. If you know anyone in those states, urge them to call today and tell their senators to stop the nursing home apocalypse!