- 6/12/2025
On "Forbes Newsroom," Congresswoman Teresa Leger Fernández (D-NM) explained why she voted against President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill," as well as what impact the legislation could have on Americans.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Hi, everybody. I'm Brittany Lewis, a breaking news reporter here at Forbes. Joining me now
00:07is Congresswoman Teresa Ledger-Fernandez. Congresswoman, thank you so much for joining
00:11me. Thank you, Brittany, for having me. Looking forward to our conversation.
00:15Me too. It's a really important conversation. Last month, the House passed in a very narrow
00:21vote President Trump's self-described big, beautiful bill. It's now in the Senate,
00:26and this legislation is over a thousand pages. It holds his hallmark tax as well as immigration
00:32policies. You're dubbing it the bad billionaire budget. So to start off the conversation, I mean,
00:37what do you make of this budget? What do you make of the bill? So, you know, it's not really a budget.
00:43It's really a betrayal of working families of middle class Americans in favor of the wealthiest.
00:50And they are using this bill to give tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans. And the biggest benefits
00:59go to 0.1%. Now, what does that mean? If you're making more than $3 million a year, you're going
01:06to do fine on this bill. But my constituents don't make that money. My constituents depend on health
01:13care that this bill. This is the biggest cut to health care ever in history because it goes after
01:21Medicaid. It goes after Medicare, $530 billion taken from Medicaid. It goes after the chips. It
01:29destroys women's health care. So in so many different ways, it is not good for my constituents.
01:38The Affordable Care Act, so many people depend on that. It's going to kick people off of the
01:43Affordable Care Act. People don't want to see that. And that's why we're calling it a betrayal
01:47and a bad billionaire's bill. I want to talk about some numbers that stick out to me when I'm reading
01:53this bill. Raises the national debt by $2.4 trillion over the next 10 years. Changes to different social
02:00programs like SNAP as well as Medicaid mean that over 3 million people will lose food assistance
02:07programming and millions more could lose insurance in the next 10 years. I mean, what do you make of
02:13those numbers? How serious are they? Well, we know that the number you cited is actually bigger than
02:19that. The CBO and then all of the different reports say it's actually more like a $3 trillion
02:25increase. So if you care about fiscal responsibility, you should not vote for this bill. If you care about
02:33making sure that the children in your community are not hungry at school, you should vote against this
02:39bill. If you care about making sure that 16 million people don't lose their health care,
02:47their health insurance, vote against this bill. We were hoping that we would get four Republicans to
02:53vote against this bill, and we didn't get any. And we got a few, but they didn't vote against it for
02:58those reasons. They did not stand up for their constituents. I call it having courage. They need to
03:04have the courage to stand up for their constituents instead of rubber stamping Trump. And that's what
03:10we saw. It's a rubber stamp Republican Congress right now. And those are serious numbers. And remember
03:16that all of these numbers become intensified because when you shut down rural hospitals, like this bill will
03:25do, you're also impacting the local economy. If you do not have a rural hospital, we might lose five
03:34rural hospitals in New Mexico. If you don't have a rural hospital, people are not going to want to go
03:39and live in that community to work. So even people who have private insurance will no longer be able to
03:46get care in the community in which they live. I'm going to go visit two rural hospitals. I'm on a
03:52rural hospital tour in my big, beautiful district. Both of those rural hospitals are going to be at
03:59risk. And if they both close, or either one of them close, a pregnant woman will have to travel
04:07three and a half hours to deliver. She will have to travel three and a half hours to get care if she
04:17has any kind of pregnancy-related difficulties. I almost died during a pregnancy. The idea that I
04:22would not be able to go into an emergency room and get care. The idea that I'm going through
04:27contractions, and I'm worried that my baby is coming really fast, and I have to literally get
04:31on a road and drive for three hours. Imagine that. Think about that. Think about that. Time on the road
04:38just to get care. And having a baby, obviously, that's not something you can really hold in. I mean,
04:45sometimes time is of the essence when it comes to situations like that. And I've talked to Democrats,
04:50and they've all said people will die if millions of people are losing insurance coverage. And
04:57Republicans have countered that and have said, you know, Democrats are fear-mongering over this,
05:02and we're just trimming the waste, fraud, and abuse here. And we're also adding work requirements
05:07so more people join the workforce. I mean, what do you say to those arguments?
05:12So people will die. And, you know, Senator Ernst and her incredibly callous and careless remarks that
05:21she doubled down on in a cemetery, how insulting is that? Because if you believe in life, then you
05:28should not be passing legislation that is likely to lead to 52,000 more deaths a year. Now, these are
05:38not making up these numbers. They are calculations that are made by outside entities. That 52,000 comes
05:44from Yale University that did the calculations. The number of people that will get thrown off
05:51is the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. These are real numbers, and we need to take them
05:57seriously. We should not be passing laws that will lead to that many deaths.
06:03I want to read some things and some points that the White House is highlighting about this will,
06:08because this is what the White House's rapid response team posted, that the big, beautiful bill
06:15will, quote, make the Trump tax cuts permanent, raise take-home pay for the average family by as
06:20much as $13,300, increase the average worker's wages by as much as $11,600, no tax on tips, no tax on
06:29over time, and support made in America. What do you make about those points that they're highlighting?
06:34Well, look at how they talk about that. They say the average. Well, the reason they get to that
06:39average is because they are taking the tax benefits that primarily go to the wealthiest Americans. I
06:47use the $3 million. If you earn $3 million or more a year, you're going to make a lot of money. Your
06:53benefits are going to be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. But if you are a working
06:58family, you might get $1 a day versus they're going to get about $700 a day in tax benefits.
07:06That is not fair. Now, if you average that out, that's what you come to. But if you're a working
07:10class family, if you're a middle class family, you are not seeing that. Indeed, because of the way
07:16they're changing the child tax credit, because of the way they're changing and kicking people off
07:21of the Affordable Care Act, of Medicare, the impacts to middle class Americans and working
07:31families are negative. They're actually going to see, in many instances, a tax increase. And those
07:39things like the no tax on tips, they're actually very limited and they're not permanent. They're
07:44very temporary. Well, they are making the tax cuts for the wealthy and the biggest corporations
07:49permanent. Once again, a budget reflects your morals. And this is an amoral budget. It does not
07:57reflect my faith tradition, which says that you should care for the poor, you should care for the
08:05least of us. Indeed, my archbishop in New Mexico said the church must stand in opposition to this,
08:12because if we believe in the teachings of Jesus Christ and the teachings of the church,
08:16we must stand in opposition to this bill. So that kind of shows you that if you actually have
08:22an archbishop of the Catholic Church carrying on and saying, this is not right, this is not
08:27consistent with our values, it tells you what this bill is really about and who it favors. Yes, it gives
08:34tax cuts, but it's sending them to the wealthiest Americans. The richest man in the world also took
08:41issue with this bill. He was opposed to it before he got in or after he got rather in that back and
08:47forth with President Trump on social media. Now he says he regrets some of his messaging, but he did
08:52call this bill a disgusting abomination. He also called it pork filled. And that really opened the
08:58floodgates. It seemed to some of your Republican colleagues really criticizing this bill. Congresswoman
09:04Marjorie Taylor Greene said she missed a part on one of the pages of the bill regarding AI and states
09:10being able to enforce it. Also, members of the House Freedom Caucus spoke against it, said that they
09:15were trying to raise the alarms. But these were people who voted for the legislation when the House
09:20was voting for it. So what do you make of that maybe perhaps Monday morning quarterbacking
09:26from your colleagues, Republicans who did initially support this bill?
09:30So the oops caucus, you mean? The people who said, oh, I didn't know what was in there. You voted for
09:36it. And I need to remind people that 101 Democrats came before the rules committee. I sit on the rules
09:42committee. I sat there for two nights. You know, I showed up. We worked through the night all the next
09:49day and all the next night where we heard Democrats show up and offer amendments to the bill. We wet it.
09:56We knew all the bad things that were in it. We opposed it. They didn't even show up. The Republicans
10:01on the rules committee didn't even show up for most of the hearing or they fell asleep at the hearing.
10:05If you would have read that bill, you would have known everything that was bad. If you would have
10:09just listened to us, you would have known everything was bad. And that oops caucus that after the fact
10:14said, oh, we wouldn't have voted for it. If we would have known it had a $3 trillion increase to the
10:21deficit. Well, guess what? We gave them another opportunity. We didn't give them. The Republicans,
10:26we just voted on a rule in the House floor that was a do-over that allowed them, if they had a
10:34problem with the bill, they could have voted against the rule that we just passed a couple of hours ago
10:40because that rule brought the bill back up again and made changes. It didn't address the things that
10:48Marjorie Taylor Greene said she had a problem with. So your statement that you would have voted
10:53against the bill if you would have known it was in, well, guess what? You just voted for the bill
10:57twice. We had 12 Republicans ask the Senate to take out the cuts to the energy tax credits
11:06because those will hurt their districts. They voted for the bill again. So when they say those things,
11:13it doesn't matter. You can't send a CYA letter that said, I wouldn't have voted for it if I would
11:19have known and then vote for it again. We need to make sure that the American public knows that
11:25Republicans continue to vote for a bill that they know is wrong. And they say in tweets and they say
11:31in letters, this bill has things I don't like and I would have voted against it. But then they had a
11:38chance for a do-over and they still did do wrong. I think one of the only things really Republicans
11:44and Democrats can agree on when it comes to this legislation is that there are going to be some
11:49changes in the Senate and the Senate has a tough road here trying to pass this. And some major points
11:55of contention, it seems, with some Republican holdouts in the Senate seem to be cuts to the
11:59energy tax credits, as you said, the increase in the deficit by trillions, the increase to the debt
12:05ceiling by trillions, as well as it cuts to Medicaid. I mean, what changes do you think
12:11we're going to see come out of the Senate? Well, it all depends on whether the senators
12:16actually pay attention to their constituents in the hoods. Those energy tax credits, for example,
12:22they bring down the cost of energy because they are deploying renewable energy that Americans want to
12:30see. If you have a lot of sun, a lot of wind in your state, like New Mexico does, but mostly
12:36Republican states have all of these great resources, you want to see this deployed because it brings down
12:43the cost of electricity. And what they're doing is they're eliminating that immediately. I had
12:48an energy company come to me today that does, it's a cooperative, a cooperative, it serves rural areas,
12:56it serves Republican states and Democrat states. And they said, if the bill passes as it is,
13:02they've already entered into contracts based on America's promise that we'd have these tax credits.
13:09When they have to cancel those contracts, they can't cancel them, they're on the hook,
13:14because we said we'd give them the tax credit. They will result in about a 30% increase in cost.
13:20Working families, utilities are almost always like the second largest bill that they have to pay.
13:29Are they going to be able to pay 30% more on the utilities? That's what Republicans are doing.
13:37And they're doing this because they hate anything that has to do with renewable energy,
13:43because they are tied to the fossil fuels. And we know that fossil fuels for electricity generation
13:49is some of the most expensive electricity generation there. So if you want to save
13:55your community money, go for the renewable energy, use all of the resources that we have.
14:02And they seem to turn an eye to that. You know, even if you're not going to pay attention to the
14:08climate crisis that the fossil fuel does, at least pay attention to the cost to your community.
14:14And remember, if we don't address the climate crisis, your community is going to pay a lot more
14:21for home insurance, for business insurance, to deal with the disasters, whether it's droughts or
14:28flooding or heat deaths or wildfires. Those are real costs that Americans are seeing. We know,
14:36my constituents know, and across America, they know that the climate is creating disasters.
14:44And Republicans seem to not care. And they're going to make it worse with this bill.
14:50There's a self-imposed July 4th deadline to get this to President Trump's desk so he can sign it.
14:57So GOP lawmakers really are up against the clock here, as we are in mid-June right now.
15:02Are Democrat members of Congress like yourself, are you guys talking with Republican senators at all
15:09who might seem to be on the fence about this bill, talking about changes? I mean,
15:13what are you all trying to do to get your changes implemented in the Senate?
15:18So I just came from the Senate a few hours ago, where I'm the chair of the Democratic Women's
15:25caucus, and together with Fripp Clark and Senator Klobuchar and the women senators, we had held a
15:35hearing on the portrayal of women in this bill, because we wanted to be able to call out those
15:42impacts on women. We had moving stories by women who were dependent on Medicaid, who were working
15:48three jobs and still needed food stamps, needed the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program to help
15:57pay for food at the end of the month, right? We're tired of all the paperwork they always have to fill
16:06out. We're caring for their parents, for their children, needed Medicaid to make sure their child
16:11did not die. And we were telling those stories because we were hoping that some of the senators who have
16:18voiced their concerns about these provisions would listen to those stories. And so we are working with
16:25senators, especially on the way in which this bill betrays women, especially because so many women depend on
16:33Medicare. Women are overrepresented in nursing homes. The cuts to Medicaid would hurt people
16:41in nursing homes. 40% of the births in the United States are paid for by Medicaid. So if you believe
16:49in family values, you believe in making sure we have healthy babies, vote against this bill. And that's
16:54what we are seeing if we could get four Republicans to vote against this bill, whether you hate it because
17:00of the $3 trillion deficit, if you care about fiscal responsibility, vote against this bill, or if you
17:06actually care about the lives of your constituents, vote against this bill. A little thing about this
17:12fiscal responsibility issue. In the Rules Committee, I keep pulling up this chart because they all say,
17:19oh, we need to have our fiscal house in order. That's why we're having all these cuts. The reality
17:24is under Democrats, we always seem to bring down the debt and Republicans increase the debt. So,
17:33Clinton was the last balanced budget. And then it went up in Bush. Obama brought it down. It went up
17:41in the first Trump. Biden actually brought it down. And now it's going to soar again over Trump. So stop
17:50telling the American people that we need to tighten our belts. We know how to tighten our belts. Democrats
17:56know how to tighten our belts. It stopped giving those tax cuts to the wealthiest corporations. And that's
18:02how we bring down the deficit. That's a really interesting data point. And I'm curious,
18:07do you think that Democrats have a messaging problem when it comes to being a deficit hawk?
18:12Because when you think of lawmakers who position themselves and talk about themselves and message
18:18themselves as deficit hawks, you almost only exclusively think of Republicans.
18:22So, in the Rules Committee last night, we had a representative, Alderholt, who wrote an op-ed that
18:31I pulled up and said, remember this op-ed you wrote where you were complaining about the deficit?
18:36Where do you stand now? And they just hem and haw, because once again, they're rubber stamping what
18:41Trump gives them. So even if they have spoken against the deficit, they're rubber stamping a deficit
18:47explosion. And they did it under the first Trump administration. They're doing it under this one
18:52now. And Democrats speak about it. I speak about it all the time. We need to make sure that people
18:57like you ask those questions so we can get that word out.
19:02And I do not want to switch gears just for the final moments that I have you. I want to talk about
19:07the rescissions package. The White House is asking Congress for $9.4 billion back after Congress
19:14appropriated that money and $8.3 billion would be cut from foreign aid and $1.1 billion would be cut
19:20from public broadcast. What do you make of that ask?
19:24So, once again, in the Rules Committee last night, we hit them on this really hard because think about
19:30the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. The public radio is often the most important source of
19:38information during disasters. In rural areas, it is essential. It's how people get information about
19:46the weather, about local programming. You get a lot of local programming in public radio. And then the
19:54issues around, you know, the children's programming, the educational programming that you get on PBS.
19:59What Republicans said is, oh, that's all right. Sesame Street will be fine because it's going to be
20:04streamed on Netflix. Netflix costs money. So, this is another example of how they are saying, well,
20:12private corporations can make a lot of money and we're going to just make it more expensive for
20:17working families. And then we take away this essential service that Americans depend on and support.
20:24And I also pointed out that Republicans used to support public broadcasting. They changed their mind
20:31after Trump tweeted that they tell lies, right? He doesn't like the fact that these news outlets
20:41are honest and they explain and they always bring both sides. But that is not good enough for him,
20:49right? And so, he tweeted out something. And so, all these Republicans that used to support, and in fact,
20:55once again, Alabama, the representative Alderhock from Alabama said, oh, my Alabama public broadcast
21:04need is marvelous. I'd like to save him. He just said, well, vote against this bill, right? But he didn't.
21:10And across states, you have Republicans who don't believe in this, will say something,
21:19but then they always cave. So, there's the taco Trump. But the other thing that's always happening
21:25is those Republicans are always caving as well. And then the last thing on that rescission is, remember,
21:33the cuts that they are making internationally are going to come back and hurt us. Because when you cut
21:39access to healthcare and health research and communicable diseases, COVID did not start
21:49in the United States. It came over here and you are cutting the money that will keep us safe. You're
21:55cutting the money that helped keep America's interests alive and well across this country. And they are
22:02cutting the money for Ukraine specifically. So, it's really awful the number of babies that will die
22:10across the world because of Republicans' cruel cuts.
22:15I'm not poo-pooing $9 billion. I'm not saying $9 billion isn't a big deal. But when you're looking
22:21at the national debt, that's really just a drop in the bucket. I was speaking with your colleague,
22:27Congressman Schweikert, and he said that that's less than a day and a half worth of all borrowing.
22:33So, when you're cutting things like Sesame Street, when you're cutting things like foreign aid,
22:36when you're cutting things like public broadcasting, things that are relatively popular amongst the
22:41American people, I mean, what are your Republican colleagues saying? Is this a popular idea amongst
22:47Republicans?
22:49Well, I think it's, once again, they are rubber stamping whatever Trump tells them to do. They
22:54do not have the courage to stand up for their constituents. And it is, I called it a molecule
23:00last night. It's not a drop in the bucket. It's a molecule. It's, you know, less than 1%, less than,
23:05you know, zero something 0.3%. It's very, very little. And remember, it is also that we spent
23:13over $100 billion on Doge in just six months, like $135 billion or so on Doge. They cost the American,
23:24if they would have just never come into existence, we could have saved, you know, all that money and
23:31kept public broadcasting. If, you know, they have about, I don't know, maybe $34 billion or so in
23:40contracts to Musk. Well, let's just cut some of those contracts to Musk, right? There is a lot of
23:48corruption that we are seeing in this administration. If you cut out that fraud, you know, the fraud of
23:55where you actually have Trump's net worth growing by $2.9 billion in the six months since he took
24:03office. Well, let's cut out that kind of fraud. And then you could actually pay for public broadcasting.
24:11Congresswoman, I really appreciate the time today. I appreciate your insight here. You are welcome
24:17back anytime. Thank you for joining me. Well, thank you so much. It's been wonderful to be on with you and
24:23with all of your viewers. Muchísimas gracias.