Rep. Greg Landsman

So, yeah, let me start at the end. I do think that there were people on the other side of the aisle that are more conflicted than they were. And I don't know how this is going to end. We don't know because it's now in the Senate and it may come back differently. In fact, it will likely come back differently. And I do think the 26 hours straight of hammering in a very compelling way

didn't change their votes in that first instance. But over time, I still think it's a question. Now, what we did was we started organizing meeting early.

didn't change their votes in that first instance. But over time, I still think it's a question. Now, what we did was we started organizing meeting early.

didn't change their votes in that first instance. But over time, I still think it's a question. Now, what we did was we started organizing meeting early.

And, you know, Frank Pallone chairs that committee, and he and his staff have been incredible about getting us in a room, working through what we expected to be the policy, and then what we knew would be or talk through what we thought would be the most compelling arguments to make. And that was something we worked on for weeks, if not months, together as a committee.

And, you know, Frank Pallone chairs that committee, and he and his staff have been incredible about getting us in a room, working through what we expected to be the policy, and then what we knew would be or talk through what we thought would be the most compelling arguments to make. And that was something we worked on for weeks, if not months, together as a committee.

And, you know, Frank Pallone chairs that committee, and he and his staff have been incredible about getting us in a room, working through what we expected to be the policy, and then what we knew would be or talk through what we thought would be the most compelling arguments to make. And that was something we worked on for weeks, if not months, together as a committee.

And then, you know, we get an opportunity, we're in the minority, to use the power that we do have, which is to procedurally hold them in a room for 26 straight hours, offering amendment after amendment after amendment after amendment. And they weren't joke amendments. They weren't messaging amendments. They were real amendments.

And then, you know, we get an opportunity, we're in the minority, to use the power that we do have, which is to procedurally hold them in a room for 26 straight hours, offering amendment after amendment after amendment after amendment. And they weren't joke amendments. They weren't messaging amendments. They were real amendments.

And then, you know, we get an opportunity, we're in the minority, to use the power that we do have, which is to procedurally hold them in a room for 26 straight hours, offering amendment after amendment after amendment after amendment. And they weren't joke amendments. They weren't messaging amendments. They were real amendments.

For example, one of my amendments was to get rid of this new fee that they're going to charge low-income families to get certain procedures, most procedures. And there's no argument for it other than they're trying to generate more money for – tax cuts, and they need the numbers of people who are using Medicaid to go down.

For example, one of my amendments was to get rid of this new fee that they're going to charge low-income families to get certain procedures, most procedures. And there's no argument for it other than they're trying to generate more money for – tax cuts, and they need the numbers of people who are using Medicaid to go down.

For example, one of my amendments was to get rid of this new fee that they're going to charge low-income families to get certain procedures, most procedures. And there's no argument for it other than they're trying to generate more money for – tax cuts, and they need the numbers of people who are using Medicaid to go down.

And so they're finding all of these ways to kick people off, or as one member on the other side said, clean up the rolls. So in any event, it was – they were all very compelling amendments and they voted against every single one of them.

And so they're finding all of these ways to kick people off, or as one member on the other side said, clean up the rolls. So in any event, it was – they were all very compelling amendments and they voted against every single one of them.

And so they're finding all of these ways to kick people off, or as one member on the other side said, clean up the rolls. So in any event, it was – they were all very compelling amendments and they voted against every single one of them.

But the people who sat in the room, I mean they came up to me afterwards and they would say like that was really compelling or you made a really good argument or one who – who I do believe is struggling with this. I think a lot of them are struggling with this. This is not, as I said in my sort of closing arguments, this is not the assignment they wanted.

But the people who sat in the room, I mean they came up to me afterwards and they would say like that was really compelling or you made a really good argument or one who – who I do believe is struggling with this. I think a lot of them are struggling with this. This is not, as I said in my sort of closing arguments, this is not the assignment they wanted.

But the people who sat in the room, I mean they came up to me afterwards and they would say like that was really compelling or you made a really good argument or one who – who I do believe is struggling with this. I think a lot of them are struggling with this. This is not, as I said in my sort of closing arguments, this is not the assignment they wanted.

If they had been told, hey, guys, we want to do tax cuts and provide tax relief for working people, the middle class, farmers, and small businesses, that's it. We don't. You know, we want to clean up fraud, waste and abuse. So work with the Democrats and follow the GAO reports, which lay out all the fraud, waste and abuse. But we don't want to add any more to the deficit.