Chip Roy

The Senate's going to have to stand up, work with us to actually embrace additional spending restraint.

So, first of all, we can absolutely balance the budget with a combination of all of those things, right? The president is correct that we must have economic growth. We must have spending restraint, which I think the president has agreed. He said we must have cuts that will eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse. He talks about repealing the massive subsidies under the Inflation Reduction Act.

So, first of all, we can absolutely balance the budget with a combination of all of those things, right? The president is correct that we must have economic growth. We must have spending restraint, which I think the president has agreed. He said we must have cuts that will eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse. He talks about repealing the massive subsidies under the Inflation Reduction Act.

Those things are absolutely true. We also need to get rid of the regulatory state that is constraining economic growth, right? And those things that are impeding Americans from being able to go produce wealth. But what I would say to this is we have an obligation and a duty to reform Medicaid. Why?

Those things are absolutely true. We also need to get rid of the regulatory state that is constraining economic growth, right? And those things that are impeding Americans from being able to go produce wealth. But what I would say to this is we have an obligation and a duty to reform Medicaid. Why?

Because it was designed as a program to help those who are disabled and, frankly, the people who are not able-bodied, right? That's how it was designed. We have a duty to the extent tax dollars are gonna be committed to that end. Then we have a duty to make sure that's what's done.

Because it was designed as a program to help those who are disabled and, frankly, the people who are not able-bodied, right? That's how it was designed. We have a duty to the extent tax dollars are gonna be committed to that end. Then we have a duty to make sure that's what's done.

Most Americans don't know that after Obamacare, able-bodied Americans were given a higher federal matching rate, a higher rate, 90%, The dollars that go from the feds to go say, we're going to go fund Medicaid, a higher rate for the able-bodied expansion population on Obamacare. I think that's wrong. It is being gamed by California.

Most Americans don't know that after Obamacare, able-bodied Americans were given a higher federal matching rate, a higher rate, 90%, The dollars that go from the feds to go say, we're going to go fund Medicaid, a higher rate for the able-bodied expansion population on Obamacare. I think that's wrong. It is being gamed by California.

It is being gamed by other states for basically to funnel money so they can get federal money while they overly expand the population. Whereas other states like Texas that didn't expand, we don't have as high of a number. Fascinating. So we've got to fix it. We've got to make sure that only the able-bodied aren't on it and that illegal aliens aren't on it.

It is being gamed by other states for basically to funnel money so they can get federal money while they overly expand the population. Whereas other states like Texas that didn't expand, we don't have as high of a number. Fascinating. So we've got to fix it. We've got to make sure that only the able-bodied aren't on it and that illegal aliens aren't on it.

And that would be the reforms we need to put in place. And we can do it.

And that would be the reforms we need to put in place. And we can do it.

Well, the Senate's going to have to now look at our product. They've sent a version over, their version, which was a skinnier one to deal with border and defense. They're going to look at ours. They're going to try to figure out what they're going to do. My guess is they're going to try to expand the tax side of it, make them more permanent. I support that, however, provided...

Well, the Senate's going to have to now look at our product. They've sent a version over, their version, which was a skinnier one to deal with border and defense. They're going to look at ours. They're going to try to figure out what they're going to do. My guess is they're going to try to expand the tax side of it, make them more permanent. I support that, however, provided...

They also expand the spending restraint side. We've got to do our part. We've got to be honest. We've got to do math. And the singular objective should be to reduce deficits immediately, not based on some future promises. And our budget yesterday was only a step. It didn't get the job done. We have more work to do.

They also expand the spending restraint side. We've got to do our part. We've got to be honest. We've got to do math. And the singular objective should be to reduce deficits immediately, not based on some future promises. And our budget yesterday was only a step. It didn't get the job done. We have more work to do.

Just enacting your agenda and looking for waste is now something that requires a nationwide injunction to stop. Congress has got to step in on this nationwide injunction issue. I think that should be, that's like right up there with election integrity.

Just enacting your agenda and looking for waste is now something that requires a nationwide injunction to stop. Congress has got to step in on this nationwide injunction issue. I think that should be, that's like right up there with election integrity.

Just enacting your agenda and looking for waste is now something that requires a nationwide injunction to stop. Congress has got to step in on this nationwide injunction issue. I think that should be, that's like right up there with election integrity.