Senator Eric Schmitt

If we actually vote on them and vote them down, then they become law where the next president can't reinstate them. It's a huge cost savings. I mean, I feel like we could probably be somewhere, and this is what Elon and I were talking about, somewhere around $250 billion to $500 billion in cuts right there. And it's simple. It's very easy for us to do. It's a conversation we're having. So

If we actually vote on them and vote them down, then they become law where the next president can't reinstate them. It's a huge cost savings. I mean, I feel like we could probably be somewhere, and this is what Elon and I were talking about, somewhere around $250 billion to $500 billion in cuts right there. And it's simple. It's very easy for us to do. It's a conversation we're having. So

We can have cuts in that, in the rescission. We can have cuts in the reconciliation package. And then you're also going to have cuts in FY26.

We can have cuts in that, in the rescission. We can have cuts in the reconciliation package. And then you're also going to have cuts in FY26.

Well, that's part of the programs. A lot of these programs that the PPP and the COVID money was never technically authorized by Congress. What we did is we gave the administration a big clump of money, and we allowed them to set up these programs that we never authorized. They actually set up extra departments, too, that we never authorized.

Well, that's part of the programs. A lot of these programs that the PPP and the COVID money was never technically authorized by Congress. What we did is we gave the administration a big clump of money, and we allowed them to set up these programs that we never authorized. They actually set up extra departments, too, that we never authorized.

Every single one of those can come out through rescission.

Every single one of those can come out through rescission.

So the courts can't tie up anything that goes through the rescission. Nothing. Anything that is outside of rescission, technically they can, but it's tough for them to make the argument because most of the cuts are coming from unappropriated funds because Congress, because we bundle, we don't do line out of appropriations. We bundle and give to these agencies.

So the courts can't tie up anything that goes through the rescission. Nothing. Anything that is outside of rescission, technically they can, but it's tough for them to make the argument because most of the cuts are coming from unappropriated funds because Congress, because we bundle, we don't do line out of appropriations. We bundle and give to these agencies.

Most of it can be said it's not directly been authorized or funded by government through appropriations. And so what the courts are saying is it has been.

Most of it can be said it's not directly been authorized or funded by government through appropriations. And so what the courts are saying is it has been.

As it goes through the court system against the Supreme Court, you're going to see more and more of the lower courts being overturned by the Supreme Court because they're – in the most cases – there's been one case they wasn't because it was actually appropriated. Most of these other cases were not appropriated. It was simply designed and put out by OBM by the Biden administration.

As it goes through the court system against the Supreme Court, you're going to see more and more of the lower courts being overturned by the Supreme Court because they're – in the most cases – there's been one case they wasn't because it was actually appropriated. Most of these other cases were not appropriated. It was simply designed and put out by OBM by the Biden administration.

Tax increases, absolutely not. Not on the table. What was said, is it theoretically possible? Yes. Is it something that we're going to be able to do? Probably not. The reason why we're in this debt is because it takes a whole lot of us to agree on what we're going to cut to get it passed. And when you start cutting, you start paying attention to this, it starts affecting everybody's state.

Tax increases, absolutely not. Not on the table. What was said, is it theoretically possible? Yes. Is it something that we're going to be able to do? Probably not. The reason why we're in this debt is because it takes a whole lot of us to agree on what we're going to cut to get it passed. And when you start cutting, you start paying attention to this, it starts affecting everybody's state.

I mean, right now, what Doge is doing, I support a thousand percent, but I'm getting a ton of phone calls every single day because of things that are being cut and because it's federal employees. I mean, the biggest employer we have in the United States is, Right.

I mean, right now, what Doge is doing, I support a thousand percent, but I'm getting a ton of phone calls every single day because of things that are being cut and because it's federal employees. I mean, the biggest employer we have in the United States is, Right.

And you start talking just generically speaking, 50 percent of everybody out there, half of everybody out there is either directly or indirectly financially benefiting from some type of federal program. Now, you can say, well, I don't get any of those programs. Well, your contract that your company is working on is paying your salary. So you can keep going down the line. It goes on.

And you start talking just generically speaking, 50 percent of everybody out there, half of everybody out there is either directly or indirectly financially benefiting from some type of federal program. Now, you can say, well, I don't get any of those programs. Well, your contract that your company is working on is paying your salary. So you can keep going down the line. It goes on.