Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Therein lies the challenge that is facing House Republicans right now as they try to find a path forward on budget reconciliation to achieve the legislative objectives of President Trump, which includes steep tax cuts, making permanent his twenty seventeen tax cuts, specifically energy and border policy, which they're trying in the House to roll all into one bill. And
we got the budget outline yesterday's right. It seems things are changing though as they mark things up, with the Budget Chair Jody Errington now saying if they can't reach two trillion dollars in tax cuts the maximum allowed or two tucks in spending cuts, rather the maximum allowed in tax cuts would be four trillion dollars. The problem is just renewing the twenty seventeen tax cuts is expected to cost a bit more.
Than that, so the math is difficult here. And that's where Congressman Ralph Norman comes in. I'm glad that we have the opportunity to bring in a member of the aforementioned House Budget Committee representing South Carolina's fifth district with his own point of view here, and we're told Congressman welcome back to Bloomberg TV and Radio. That you're one of two potential knows with the numbers that we're hearing.
So let's we'll update that.
Let's say it's at least two trillion in spending cuts, four and a half trillion dollar camp on tax cuts, a four trillion dollar extension of the debt limit.
Would you vote yes on a bill like that?
Well, first of all, what we started out with was we could not continue the path of unsustained spending. Spending is a problem for inflation. Inflation, it's not income, it's spending the base budget. I voted to get out of committee. We had the timeline to meet, which is today for the markup, which we're doing. To be honest, I'm confident that we're going to have the amendments in place that
will get the job done. And as you mentioned, we've got one point five trillion and baseline number with an aspiration of two the tax cuts four trillion, four and a half, and then with three hundred billion four or defense and homeland security, and I think we're going to get there. I think supported for us to get our own version out. I know the Senate is working on one, but you know, all the House is responsible for the
purse strange. So I'm confident we'll get it out. It's going to be a long day, but we expected that a lot of amendments, a lot of Democrat amendments, and we'll have our own that I'm confident will add to the value.
Well, obviously, Congressman, getting it out of committee is one hurdle, but getting a package that can actually pass on the House floor with what is assumed to be zero Democratic votes is another thing. Entirely with this structure, are you confident the requisite votes would be there?
Here's what I'm confident of.
When it goes to the floor, there will be a total explanation of.
Every cut every committee comes up with. I think where it's coming from. Is it going to be easy? No, it's not going to be.
But every dollar in Congress that's spent has got an advocate for it, and they're coming out in full force as I speak to you right now, Kayley. But yeah, I'm confident, and I'm confident because of this it will make sense. Everybody agrees that we can't continue the path. But I tell you what's got to happen. President Trump, who's got a sixty five sixty nine percent approval rating.
He's going to have to get involved.
Anybody that at the end of the day when he goes to the floor that doesn't agree with it or has issues, I think he will directly get involved, as he has, and he's done a brilliant job of doing that and explaining why the tax cuts. We've got to get this out because it's gonna be a tax it's going to be a tax increase for over twenty eight to thirty five percent for all Americans. We can't let
that happen. The prosperity that happened under his reign. We've got to continue and I think at the end of the day, I think we'll pass it.
Well, we know, Congressman, that President Trump is not above picking up the phone when it's time to weigh in on things. As I'm sure we all recall from the most recent Speakers vote.
Are you hungry for the President to weigh in here?
Absolutely, he's got away in because we can't afford to stumble on this. I mean, you know, it's it's interesting every politician every four hundred, well five hundred and thirty five members of Congress campaign on conservatism cutting the depths that we know it's not sustainable. Now when it actually comes down to it, that's where he comes into the picture and does it put Does it make sense to put work requirements on Medicaid?
I think it does.
Does it make sense to, you know, to go down the line and let block grants, let states handle some of that funding. It's not a cut in Medicaid as one example. But yeah, I mean, I think he's going to have to get involved and he will to pass what he considers this is a lynch pin for his whole four years in office. Is great to start it. Now, look what he's done on the Dove's Commission, and so I'm I'm I'm anxious, and I think he's going to pass and I'm optimistic.
Well, and with this structure you already mentioned potential cuts to medicate here. But essentially what this structure will mean is that if the cost of Trump's tax cuts go higher, if we're adding on things like no tax on tips or overtime or social Security, lifting the salt cap, perhaps more spending cuts have to come into place. So what else is going to have to go on the chopping block? If Donald Trump the president is to get everything he wants here.
Well, first of all, it's not cuts to Medicaid. We're not doing that.
Is it a reallocation yes. Is it getting people off the rows of a healthy Yes. And that's what he can sell to anybody who is feeling a lot of pressure, which I understand.
But you've got to consider the growth rate.
I think we've got a two point five percent growth in the economy of GDP. I think that'll happen. That'll make some of the difference up. But it's not going to be easy, but it never is.
But I think we'll get there.
And the alternative of letting the tax cuts his fire and give Americans that kind of a tax increase is not a pretty picture, and we're not gonna let that happen.
I'm wondering where you are on the timeline here, Congressman, and just how much time there is to work all of this out. We've got a funding deadline twenty nine days out. Would you support a continuing resolution to keep the lights on if negotiations we're moving in the right direction.
Yeah, And I don't like CRS. I think it needs to be a kind of a modified CR. As example of the ones that get hit the most of the military. I think Pete Hexstath will weigh in on what he needs. I think Tom Holman will weigh in with what he needs. But yeah, I would vote for a CR depending on what the final conditions are as part of it. But you've got to allow the continuation of what particularly the military is doing. And every contract, every lease extension is
affected by a CR. In a negative, we will have to do some carveouts and they will have to tell us.
What they need.
We finally got people in office that they know it. Pete Hexteth knows the military, he knows where the money ought to go. The same thing with Tom Holman. He's got this deportation down, but the agency is at the end of the day, the appropriations are going to have to come up.
With the money.
And that's where Donald Trump comes in to make the case. And I think there's no one better they can do it, that can present the case than he can.
Do.
Democrats come in somewhere, Congressman, on this when we're talking about just keeping the government funded beyond March specifically.
They don't come into the solution. I mean, we're not gonna have to deal with them hopefully. I mean.
Some of the things that we've heard they're going to ask for, like the elimination of Elon Musk, like the end to deportation.
It's ludicrous.
People are excited about what Elon Musk is doing, and if you have to deal with them, they're so it's just two.
Different universes with them today.
And I mean, look at the demonstrations they've done on I guess what Elon Musk is doing. He's not getting paid. He's an investigator. He's supplying the numbers that we should have had years ago. So no, I don't think we'll have to deal with them, and I don't think we'll need their vote.
At the end of the day, they're not going to vote with us.
When you watch the hearings and the budget committee, I don't think any of them going to vote for this budget.
And we've got a good budget and I think we'll pass it.
Realizing you support the spirit of Elon Musk's mission here, Congressman, as a lawmaker in the House of Representatives, do you worry when we talk about exing out entire agencies without the approval of Congress.
Absolutely not let the money flow, which has never been discovered. People are asking, maybe why didn't Congress discover these abuses of where.
Our money goes? The reason is we couldn't get to it.
He's the only one that had the brain power and the bandwidth to get to where to follow the checks to where they actually ended up.
Money is one thing, though, but the actual existence of the agency just just if they blow them out. You don't think Congress should have a saying that.
I think when yeah, at the end of the day, we'll have to vote on it. But through his executive powers and through the Constitution, he can cut the funding off, which he's doing. And you know, if let's say an agency that has some good parts in it, President Trump is will recognize those that need to be continued. But it's the money is where it all ends up showing
whether an agency should continue. It shouldn't go overseas. It shouldn't go for Sesame Street books for the tune to twenty million, It shouldn't go on to sixteen million, to Vietnam for inclusion, things like that. We the people are going to weigh in on and they already have. But some agents will need to be modified, Some agencies will need to be scaled down. Department of Education is one
of them. Social Security is another one. When you find out from what I'm hearing, people are getting four and five checks. He's investigating all that and let the American people decide. It's not their money, it's the facts payer's money.
All right, Congressman, thanks very much for joining us live today from Capitol Hill. That's Republican Congressman Ralph Norman of South Carolina. Of course, member of the House Budget Committee. Is that markup is still underway.