The 'Big, Beautiful Bill' May Be Hitting A Snag
30:56 Share

The spirit of innovation is deeply ingrained in America, and Google is helping Americans innovate in ways both big and small. The Department of Defense is working with Google to help secure America's digital defense systems, from establishing cloud-based zero-trust solutions...

to deploying the latest AI technology. This is a new era of American innovation. Find out more at g.co slash American innovation. The spirit of innovation is deeply ingrained in America, and Google is helping Americans innovate in ways both big and small.

Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority is using Google AI to create smarter tolling systems and improve traffic flow for Texans. This is a new era of American innovation. Find out more at g.co slash American innovation. I'm Ben Domenech. I'm Madison Allworth. I'm Stuart Varney. And this is the Fox News Rundown.

Thursday, June 19th, 2025. I'm Jessica Rosenthal. The big, beautiful bill may be hitting a snag over salt as passing the tax cut extensions by July 4th looks less and less likely. We have negotiated in good faith. We have recognized that, you know, we're not going to get unlimited salt, but we need to provide real tax relief to middle class and working class families.

I'm retired Staff Sergeant Joey Jones. First responders are regularly forced to make life and death decisions. But for snipers, those decisions come with the choice to take a life to save another. We have to realize that the whole reason that we're here is to save lives. So as a sniper and as a SWAT guy in general, our mission, we have a 100% mission success mandate. And I'm Dr. Ben Carson. I've got the final word on the Fox News Rundown. ♪

The House passed the big, beautiful reconciliation bill, but senators are now grappling with it. Senators like Josh Hawley of Missouri and Susan Collins of Maine have some issues with the changes made to Medicaid. There's concern certain changes could negatively impact rural hospitals. Senator Ron Johnson has said his concern is the debt and the real possibility this adds to it. But eventually this will have to go back to the House after the Senate tinkers with it.

And if it doesn't change the cap on state and local tax deductions by a whole lot, there could be a problem with some blue state Republicans. Senate Majority Leader John Thune acknowledged the tough spot they're in to Fox's Sean Hannity this week. The SALT is something that we will negotiate. We realize we've got to pass a bill through the House.

You're now in a, you know, live in a low tax state, Sean. So you might probably share the view that I do, that we shouldn't have low tax states subsidizing high tax states on the east and west coast. So that's kind of where the Senate is. But we know we got to get 218 in the House. So we're in the, you know, we're going to be negotiating this with our House colleagues. Wednesday, President Trump was asked about blue state Republicans balking at some aspects of the bill. The president said if it doesn't pass. There would be no money for the border. You know, we have.

Billions of dollars allocated to immigration, the border, keeping criminals out, getting criminals out too. If that doesn't pass, you'll get a 68% tax increase. And I would say this, any senator that votes against it,

and that includes Democrats, I think they'll be finished in politics. But now it appears the SALT caucus in the House, Republicans who demand lifting the cap on state and local tax deductions well above $10,000, are not going quietly along here. The House voted to raise the cap. The Senate version of the bill so far, however, keeps the cap where it has been. Well, look, this has obviously been an issue going back to 2017 when the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was passed. We've

We spoke to New York Republican Congressman Mike Lawler on Wednesday. The $10,000 cap was arbitrary and capricious, and it was used as a pay-for for other provisions of the tax bill. Obviously, back then, Republicans had a much wider majority and were able to jam it through, even without support from members in New York and California and other states that were impacted.

Fast forward to now, I've been very clear from the moment that I came to Washington that I would never support a tax bill that doesn't adequately lift the cap on salt. And we negotiated in good faith with House leadership and the president, the White House, to lift the cap to $40,000 and put an income cap of $500,000. And that is something that we negotiated and were able to pass through the House.

The Senate is trying to change that back to the $10,000 number. And I've been very clear that is a hard no. The bill is dead on arrival and there is zero chance that that will become law. So the Senate would be well advised to just leave the number as it was negotiated in the House with the White House and move forward on other things that they're focused on.

It does seem like this is the hill you're dying on. I think you posted the gif of Joaquin Phoenix and Gladiator giving the thumbs down. Really awesome use of that, by the way. Why is it such a motivator for you and your district?

Well, we live in one of the highest taxed areas in the country. And this isn't just an issue of bad blue state governance. We can all agree Kathy Hochul is terrible and Gavin Newsom is terrible out in California. But the reality is that the cap on salt has impacted...

everybody across the country, 29 states blew past the $10,000 cap in their state and local tax burden on an average basis. So this is an issue not just about blue states, it's about the middle class, it is about providing real tax relief for people who are getting squeezed by high property taxes, which by the way, a state like Texas has extremely high property taxes.

And a state like New York, where you have both high property taxes and high state income taxes, you should not be double taxed. You should not be penalized simply because you live in a high tax state. This was in effect for over 100 years. People were able to fully deduct their state and local taxes.

So we're trying to provide some fairness. And obviously, when you look at the margins in the House, you know, it's the SALT district members that gave us the majority. We're the ones that won and flipped Democratic districts. And so, you know, we're fighting for our constituents. We're fighting for our districts. And we've all been very clear and transparent about this. Nobody has misled anybody. We've been very upfront that if they did not fix this in the bill, we could not support the bill.

And to that point, your district went for Vice President Harris in the 2024 election. So that does seem significant. What did the president say to you about this last month? Like, have you guys spoken since? And what did he what did he say about all this? Well, when the president came in to see us in conference, he talked quite extensively about SALT. He referred to me by name numerous times and really encouraging us to take the deal that was under control.

the House Ways and Means Committee language. And, you know, we respectfully declined and negotiated further with the White House and the House leadership and came to an agreement. And I saw the president last week at the White House for the congressional picnic. And we talked briefly about SALT. And I encouraged him again about the need to keep this at the 40,000. He said he's

spoken to the Senate and knows there's some angst on their end about it, but that everybody's working to get this done. And look, we want to get a bill done. There's no question. Nobody is trying to be an impediment to getting a bill passed. But I made very clear where I was from the very beginning on this and

and what needed to get done. We have negotiated in good faith. We have recognized that we're not gonna get unlimited salt, but we need to provide real tax relief to middle-class and working class families. And that's what this negotiation was about.

Other things I want to get your thoughts on, you know, given your constituency, I assume you're hearing from people about Israel and Iran. There are plenty of President Trump supporters who are basically saying, you know, they do not support the U.S. joining Israel and attacking Iran. In your mind, when you speak to people, is there a line? Like help with taking out nuclear facilities is different from boots on the ground or is it all lumped together from what you hear?

Look, no question. I don't think anybody is advocating for boots on the ground in Iran. I don't think anybody is advocating for the U.S. to lead a regime change effort. The fact is, you know,

War today is different than it was 20 years ago during the Iraq war. But there is no question that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon and presidents from both parties for decades have made that clear. We are at a point where Iran not only is close to achieving it, but has shown through their actions, through the use of ballistic missiles, through the funding of terror proxies,

that they are hell-bent on eradicating the state of Israel and the United States. And you have to remember, we not only have 40,000 troops in the region, there's over 700,000 Americans who are dual citizens in Israel and live there at least part-time, if not full-time. So this is not just an Israel problem. They didn't create this situation. Iran is the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world. And they want to use a nuke to

to eliminate Israel, period. So this is a fight that is about good versus evil. There is no moral equivalency here. Ilhan Omar said yesterday that this is Israel's war. They started this. No,

Iran has been funding terrorism for decades. They have been killing Jews for decades. They funded and supported Hamas's attack on October 7th. They have launched hundreds of ballistic missiles at civilian populations intent on killing Jews. So this is a fight for freedom. This is a fight to ensure that Iran does not become a nuclear power. And ultimately, if the Iranian people

no longer under the fear of a nuclear Iran, are able to rise up

Great. If we can see a change in the Middle East and a more peaceful Middle East, that's great. Obviously, we have seen the decimation of Hamas and Hezbollah. We've seen the collapse of Assad's regime in Syria and obviously a weakened Iran with their air defenses down and their nuclear program close to being eliminated. That is a positive step forward for the Middle East and the world.

I have to get your thoughts before I let you go on the mayor's race. The New York Times coming out with an op-ed against Soren Mamdani. He's getting a lot of support, though, from people like AOC and Bernie Sanders. We have this arrest of Brandon Lander after he linked arms with a person ICE was trying to detain inside a federal building. What do you make of this race, particularly on, of course, the Democratic side, even though you're a Republican, with watching Andrew Cuomo try to make a political comeback? There's a lot happening here.

Well, the fact that Andrew Cuomo is in a position to win speaks volumes to how bad the options are. You know, I think obviously Zoran is somebody who is an avowed socialist, somebody who has supported very loudly and clearly the defund the police movement, no matter how much he tries to clean that up now. He does not support the state of Israel. And so, you know, obviously he would be a singular destructive force as mayor.

and frankly make Bill de Blasio look moderate by comparison. But this is a real challenge. New York City has been horribly run since Mike Bloomberg left office.

And there have been real consequences to that, both in terms of public safety, as well as, frankly, the loss of businesses and people. People are leaving New York in droves, businesses leaving Wall Street, moving to other parts of the country. It's created a real catastrophe. And obviously, you look at

this race coming up on Tuesday. It's gonna be fascinating to see. I think New York City certainly has moved further to the left. It has become more progressive. There's no question about that. There is growing resistance, if you will, but it will be a fascinating finish, especially with ranked choice voting.

I think Zoran, you know, he certainly has a personality, is charismatic and is appealing to a broad swath, especially in comparison to Cuomo, you know, who's, you know, frankly, just not likable. And it ultimately it's going to be a fascinating fight to the finish here. Yeah, well, I'll be watching Republican Congressman Mike Lawler of the 17th District of New York. Thank you so much for joining us. Thank you. Appreciate it.

Feeling a little stalled in the bedroom? Through HIMS, you can get some gas back in the tank with personalized ED treatment options that are accessible without ever stepping foot into a doctor's office. With hundreds of thousands of trusted subscribers, HIMS can help you find the ED option that works for you.

Hymns provides access to a range of doctor-trusted ED treatments like chewable tablets, Viagra and Cialis, and their generics for up to 95% less. No insurance is needed, and one low price covers everything from treatments to ongoing care. Just fill out an intake form on their site, and a medical provider will determine the right treatment option. If prescribed, your medication ships directly to you for free. Start with your free online prescription.

visit today at HIMSS.com slash rundown. That's H-I-M-S dot com slash rundown for your personalized ED treatment options. HIMSS.com slash rundown. The featured products include compounded products which are not approved nor verified for safety, effectiveness, or quality by the FDA. Prescription required. See website for details, restrictions, and important safety information. Price varies based on product and subscription plan.

This week on the Repair Podcast, my all-star panel weighs in on the top stories at home and abroad with Francesca Chambers, Fox News senior political analyst Juan Williams, and host of The Big Ben Show podcast, Ben Domenech. Listen and follow now at foxnewspodcast.com. This is Dr. Ben Carson with your Fox News commentary coming up.

Fox News Podcasts presents Great Americans on the Fox News Rundown. SWAT team members come from diverse backgrounds. Some are military veterans, while others start out as a civilian. Tommy Worrell grew up hunting and was an avid shooter. He eventually became a police officer in Baltimore County, but transferred to the Hartford County Sheriff's Office in pursuit of becoming a full-time SWAT team member and eventually a sniper.

There, he routinely found himself in high-stakes situations, such as learning that fellow police officers had been shot or that a child was being held hostage. In scenarios where the use of lethal force was necessary to save lives, those split-second decisions to neutralize the threat can take a toll, creating stress that is hard to overcome without the camaraderie and support of other team members.

I spoke to Tommy for my new book, Behind the Badge, about his dedication to keeping his community safe, the trauma that comes with his job, and how he helps others cope with their high-stress profession. Last week, I had 25 years in law enforcement, and I've spent the last 14 years assigned to our SWAT team as a counter-sniper.

I'm currently the counter sniper team leader for our tactical element. Tommy Worrell is a senior deputy at the Hartford County Sheriff's Office and a member of their sniper team. Most people associate, yeah, the SWAT guys with the helmets and all that stuff and the gear going down a hallway and a stack and all that. That's certainly part of it. So once you get selected and you go, you make the team, you're on the SWAT team as an assaulter. So basically you're an entry operator that's permitted to go

inside on a high-risk drug rate or high-risk barricade situations, things like that. Once you get on the team and you kind of got your feet wet for a while and your CQB skills look good, your shooting is good, you're able to pass everything without any issues, then we can start looking at guys and kind of figure out where they want to go. You're kind of going into a specialized area within the law enforcement tactical community and kind of figure out what your niche is on the team.

Once you become a sniper, it seems like the job is a whole lot different from the other jobs in policing than a lot of people think about it. I mean, I don't want to be too crass, but I think you'll smooth it out for me. I don't think you wake up wanting to pull the trigger, but...

If you get into anything, pulling the trigger is your job in a way. And you may clarify this, but it's got to be a completely different mindset. Back in the late 60s and early 70s, the whole reason they were developed is to save lives. They were started to resolve active shooter situations and hostage rescue operations. Now, SWAT teams have evolved tremendously since the 80s and 90s. They're nowhere near what they were back in those days.

But we have to realize that the whole reason that we're here is to save lives. So as a sniper and as a SWAT guy in general, our mission, we have a 100 percent mission success mandate. So everything that we do is calculated to make sure that we have the highest percentage of mitigating a threat while saving the lives of the folks involved. And that includes the suspect as well.

99% of my job as a sniper is to provide operational intelligence to the assault team so they can figure out what their plan of action is going to be. Really only, I would say less than 1% does a SWAT sniper actually have to neutralize a suspect, a threat. It certainly does happen, but that's certainly not the norm. We're there to try to facilitate a safe surrender. When you're looking through optics and you're looking at a bad guy that's doing something bad,

And how does that process play out to where do you decide when it's time to pull the trigger? Do you decide when it's time to neutralize a suspect? How does that discernment process work for you? There's no green light. So that's all Hollywood that's in the movies. There's no situation where anyone's ever going to tell me,

Or any of the guys on the team to shoot somebody. Now, we may have information provided that would warrant lethal use of force, but the decision to take a firearm, to take a weapon and point it at someone and take the safety off and press the trigger, neutralizing a threat, that decision is based solely on the totality of the incident and the facts that are known at the time. And what we have is what we call the priorities of life.

So we have at the very top, we have hostages and innocent people. So a police officer could and should risk his life and his personal safety for hostages and innocent people, active shooter situations, known or implied IEDs, things of that nature. Then we get down to police. So the citizens come before our safety. Then after that, we have the suspect.

And lastly is evidence. So we're not going to we're not going to bash down a door and run in on a high risk search warrant and risk, you know, potentially having a lethal engagement with a suspect who doesn't know where the police department. Right. We need to mitigate that. We're instead of forcing a gunfight. We want to.

A lot of times we'll surround the house and we'll try to call them out to us to try to mitigate any type of use of force. When you're in a situation where the bad actor is obviously not, they've taken a hostage, they're endangering people's lives, and you're in a position to take a shot and you say, hey, that's 100% on me. It's my decision.

Has there ever been a time where you didn't pull the trigger and you wish you had of or where you pulled the trigger and you thought, I hope that was okay? As far as regret, I

I don't know that regret is the right word. You never want to have to use force. But all the times that I've done it, I've looked back and said, OK, that was the right decision at the time. There was really no other outlet that was the appropriate selection of force at the time based on the facts I had for that particular operation. However, the other side of that is there's been numerous operations we've had where officers could have used force and chose not to.

You might be able to justify shooting someone. They had something in their hand. I thought it was a gun. I thought my life was in jeopardy, etc. But then when you really peel back the layers and look at it closer, we say...

Was it really necessary? An example of that would be bashing the door in and running inside to try to retrieve evidence from a known drug dealer who's got a whole bunch of guns when the question is going to be asked, was there another way to do this? And the answer is yes, because at the end of the day, we want that guy to come out to us so we can facilitate a safe surrender rather than doing something that escalates the situation so there is a use of force. That's when you see the regret.

You know, you've been involved in some incidents I know from our conversations with the book. Some that turned out good, some that turned out bad. You've done this for a long time. Does it take its toll? And how do you deal with that? Well, it's called faith and family. So this job, even though I can't see myself doing anything else, and I'm probably on the shorter timeline of my career,

coming down the home stretch here i can't really see myself doing anything else and i'm not not quite ready to leave yet i don't know that that emotionally i'll ever be ready to leave this team but with that being said if you don't have a if you don't have a strong family support system at home uh and that includes the kids the wife you know in-laws everybody's pulling together to support you doing the job you know maybe as i said in the book maybe if you're in your early 20s and you have no ancillary responsibilities then you can kind of just you know

run on you know adrenaline and no sleep you know maybe but for for the the average person that that's all police are they're just average people out there trying to make a difference right for the average person

You have to have a strong support system at home with folks that are able to pick up the slack. I mean, I've left many times. I've left the whole cart of groceries, you know, at the counter and had to run out of there. Or my wife and I drive separate because if I get called out, I've got to leave there. She's been with me through multiple police shootings. She's been with me through co-workers being murdered, right, and seen the violence and the riots and all that stuff. So she understands a little bit, a little glimpse into our world of what we're dealing with.

And, you know, she's there for me as well as my boys are. My oldest is just getting old enough now to start really realizing that, you know, the world is not such an innocent place. And he's starting to understand that side of it as well. You know, to wrap this up, I'll ask you this question. You're on the back 40, I guess, is the term of your career. Getting close to wrapping it up, but not there yet. But you're in a moment where you might can have some introspection, some retrospection, and look back and see, you know,

The career you've had, the amazing and heroic things you've done, and the tough days, the good days. When you look back on your career, what do you think you're, I always say, be mindful of your wake, the wake you leave behind you. What is Tommy Whirl's wake? I think my wake on this team is, I think, our capabilities. So when I first came on the SWAT team,

Over 14 years ago, I had mentioned earlier that SWAT is way different than it was in the 80s and 90s. There's been a tremendous uptick in the skills and capabilities of a SWAT team in America. And since I've come on, the 14 years I've been here, I think the...

Increasing amount of skills and capabilities that the men are able to execute on demand is really mind-blowing. And I would like to think a lot of that is in part because of some of the things I've brought to this team, whether it be navigation or tactical rappelling or some firearm skills or a covert entry, whatever the skill is. Everybody pulling together and bringing stuff from different areas is a giant culmination of our capabilities.

and what we're able to do in support of the mission, which is to save lives. So I think some small part, my goal years ago was when I leave this team, whenever that day comes, I want to leave it better than I found it. And I think there's the guys that are there now are more than capable of kind of carrying the torch when some of the older guys won't, you know, when we end our career. You know, I think it speaks to the selflessness. You didn't give me a top five moments where you saved lives. You gave me

what you've done for others on the team. And I think that really speaks to the mindset and the culture that you're a part of and have helped create. And it's the type of people we need in this world that there probably aren't enough of them. I'm going to leave it here, man. I can't thank you enough for what you've done for your community and our country. Thanks for being a friend. And thanks for joining us today. Yeah, thank you very much for having me on. I'll talk to you soon, brother. For more interviews highlighting great Americans, go to foxnewsrundown.com.

This episode is brought to you by Amazon's Blink Video Doorbell. Get more at your door with the easy-to-install Blink Video Doorbell. Get more connections. Hey, I'm here for our first date. More deliveries. Hi, I have tacos for two. Oh, thanks. We'll be right down. And more memories. Alan, I have a surprise. All new Blink Video Doorbell with two-year battery, head-to-toe HD view, and simple setup. Shop now at Amazon.com slash Blink for just $69.99.

I'm Dana Perino. This week on Perino on Politics, I'm joined by the Senior Vice President of CRC Advisors, Matt Whitlock. Listen and follow now at foxnewspodcast.com. Must listen to podcasts from Fox News Audio. Subscribe to this podcast at foxnewspodcast.com.

It's time for your Fox News commentary. Dr. Ben Carson. What's on your mind? Just over five years ago, our nation faced a moment that felt more like fiction than reality. A global pandemic brought on by a virus we had never seen before.

Faced with fear and uncertainty, Americans turned to our frontline healthcare workers, public health leaders, and scientists to help guide us through. And we trusted them because historically, we've had good reason to. But as the weeks turned into months, something began to shift. Decisions that lacked consistency and transparency started to erode that trust.

As a member of President Trump's White House Coronavirus Task Force, I witnessed firsthand the difference of opinion among health experts. But rather than welcome those scientific debates, some dismiss them outright, labeling thoughtful disagreement as anti-science. That kind of dismissiveness damages the very credibility that public institutions depend on.

Today we are seeing the consequences of that breakdown in trust. Perhaps nowhere is it more evident than in a growing skepticism about vaccinations. After years of mixed messaging and politicized public health decisions,

We're watching long-held confidence in vaccines waver. This mistrust has even begun to shape legislation, with several states considering laws that would further weaken immunization efforts. The established guidelines for routine vaccinations have long provided a foundation of safe and effective protection against serious diseases.

While that trust must be restored, it must go hand in hand with a renewed respect for parental choice and individual responsibility. Trust is not built through mandates. It's earned through transparency, consistency, and respect for personal responsibility. It is time for a reset. We need to move past the confusion and division of the COVID era.

we must acknowledge what went wrong, not assign blame, but to build what's been lost, trust. President Donald Trump's team at the Department of Health and Human Services and the Food and Drug Administration now has the opportunity to lead with clarity, competence, and a renewed focus on serving the American people. We recently saw very significant personnel changes at ACIP, a panel central to vaccine policy.

This committee plays a vital role in protecting families and guiding national readiness. It's important in our quest for change that we pursue reform that's thoughtful, apolitical, and fair.

Safeguarding credibility is key to advancing the President's broader mission. Let us remember that public health is not just about data. It's about people. It's about protecting families, preserving life, and earning trust through honesty and integrity. We've all learned important lessons from a difficult time. Let's carry those lessons forward and finally close the chapter on the COVID era.

Benjamin S. Carson, Sr., M.D., 17th Secretary of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. ♪♪♪ You've been listening to the Fox News Rundown. And now, stay up to date by subscribing to this podcast at foxnewspodcasts.com. Listen ad-free on Fox News Podcasts Plus on Apple Podcasts. And Prime members can listen to the show ad-free on Amazon Music. And for up-to-the-minute news, go to foxnews.com. ♪♪♪

Hey, I'm Trey Gowdy, host of the Trey Gowdy Podcast. I hope you will join me every Tuesday and Thursday as we navigate life together and hopefully find ourselves a little bit better on the other side. Listen and follow now at foxnewspodcast.com.