Congressman Mike Lawler joined me today to discuss why any Republican should support him in 2026 after he signed the discharge petition on a 3-year extension of Oamacare Covid-era subsidies:

Audio:

12-19hhs-lawler

Transcript:

HH: Joined by Congressman Mike Lawler. Mike Lawler represents New York’s 17th Congressional district. He won in 2022. He won in 2024. He’s been on the program before. I get along with him really well. I like him a lot. But I think I’m going to have to support his Democratic opponent in 2026, and I wanted to talk to him about that. And he was kind enough to come on. Congressman, welcome back. I’m very upset about the discharge petition.

ML: Yeah.

HH: And I don’t want to talk about the merits. I want to talk about what you did to my party that I’ve spent my life building, which has put all of your colleagues in a terrible position. Why should I overlook that?

ML: Well, respectfully, Hugh, this is a situation where Democrats shut the government down for 43 days. They made the issue of the enhanced premium tax credit the “reason” for the shutdown. And as I did during the shutdown, I went and exposed Leader Jeffries’ hypocrisy on that, showing full well that that really was not A) the issue, and B) they had no interest in solving it. When the government reopened, we sat down, a bipartisan group of us, to actually come up with a plan to reform the system. It would do a two-year extension, but it would actually start to make changes that conservatives have wanted to make to Obamacare for years – income limits, insurance reforms, rooting out fraud in the system, eliminating these zero premium plans and actually requiring a payment from the individual, PBM reform, HAS expansion. We worked, then, the group of us on the Republican side, worked with House Republican leadership to force a vote. We wanted to put the bill on the floor, and frankly, let the Democrats vote yay or nay. And I suspicion was going to be that if there was a zero plan elimination in there, most of the Democrats would vote no. And we worked through this. We tried to get it to the floor. Ultimately, we could not reach an agreement for various reasons. There was disagreement within our conference on a few fronts. But this is something that I felt very strongly about, both from a political standpoint, but also from a policy standpoint. Doing nothing was not a solution. The fact is that for the 7% of people who rely on the enhanced premium tax credit, they are going to see an exponential spike. And we have been pushing leadership for months to say okay, we need a Republican plan. We need to address the issue of healthcare affordability. It’s not enough to just say Obamacare bad, and we hate Obamacare. We all know Obamacare doesn’t work, and certainly not the way Democrats said it would work in terms of reducing costs. But we are in the majority, and we have a responsibility to govern and to address these issues. What I suspect with the discharge, what’s going to happen when we come back in January, it’ll pass the House. It’ll go to the Senate…

HH: Wait, wait. Stop. Stop. Stop, stop, stop. What’ll happen is all of the Republicans except the four will vote against that discharge petition, because it’s bad law. Am I right?

ML: No, I think there will be more than the four voting in favor of moving…

HH: Not if I’ve got anything to do with it, because it is such a bad idea. But go, I just want to stay on the discharge petition.

ML: Not, but Hugh…but Hugh…

HH: I’ll debate Obamacare with you for three hours.

ML: Yeah, no, nobody’s…

HH: But the discharge petition…

ML: Nobody’s defending the three-year. I said, even as recent as yesterday, the three-year is not acceptable policy. The problem is we need a vehicle to actually get reforms done. When the three-year passes, the discharge will be voted on, on January 6th. When the three-year extension passes the House, the Senate will not pass that. They’ve already shown they won’t pass that. And Leader Thune said that again…

HH: Okay, now Congressman, all due respect, it’s not the Senate. We’re not going to filibuster. I’m focused on one thing, which is you threw a hand grenade into my party that I’ve spent my life defending, and 213, or 212 of them are going to have to vote against what looks like it’s a good idea, and that’s going to be an ad against all of them. And if you can’t get David Joyce, you can’t get the most reasonable guy in the House. And he’s my Congressman from Ohio, if I were still living in Ohio. You threw all your guys overboard. A minute to the break, and then we’ll keep going.

ML: Well, respectfully, many of my colleagues have actually thanked us for doing it, because we need to have a vote and actually advance bipartisan legislation that includes reforms to Obamacare. So the fact is, Hugh, this is my party, too. I’ve spent my career electing Republicans and conservatives across this country and in New York. But we have a responsibility to govern, and I’m not going to shirk in that responsibility because there’s a dispute within the House.

HH: Pause for a moment. We’ll go off and then we’ll come back on. Stay right there, Congressman.

— – – – —

HH: I’m back with Mike Lawler. Congressman, I supported you when you used your leverage on the SALT deduction. I understand your district. I understand it’s difficult. But when you sign a discharge petition and the leadership says don’t do it, you are exposing, can I at least get you to admit, it’s going to be an ad in every marginal district in 2026 that they voted against extending Obamacare subsidies. It’ll be a lie, but it’ll be an ad, and they’ll be voting against them?

ML: Well, the ads were already written about allowing it to expire, and that’s the fundamental problem. That’s why I said this is political malpractice not to have a solution to this issue coupled with the larger reforms that we passed yesterday in the House that every Democrat voted against. I voted for our Speaker’s plan, because we do want to address the larger issue of healthcare. But to just dismiss the 7% and say oh, it’s okay, their healthcare premiums can go up, I’m not okay with that. And I know many of my colleagues, even…

HH: It is not dismissing them. It is not dismissing them.

ML: Yeah, but Hugh, you have to have…

HH: It is saying that…

ML: You have to have a plan.

HH: Go ahead, sir.

ML: And you have to have a plan, and we didn’t have one in time with the expiration of these premium tax credits. And by the way, we didn’t just raise this issue because Democrats raised it. Members brought this up earlier this year in May when we were negotiating the One Big Beautiful Bill. We brought it up in September before the shutdown. This was something that’s been discussed within our conference for months. And so it’s not like people were shocked that this was an issue we had to deal with.

HH: No, but it’s the discharge petition. I’m really being focused here. I’m being focused.

ML: Yup.

HH: I might agree with you. I’ve been arguing for tax credits that are targeted for people who are 200% of the poverty line and are stuck in the state exchanges. There’s a big debate to be had. There’s plenty of time to do it afterwards. But the three-year extension is bad law, it is inflationary law. It will never pass. It’s a complete showboat.

ML: No.

HH: And what I’m really, I don’t even mind that. I mind the fact that you probably cost seats to the Republican Party, because they have to vote on the discharge petition. And it’s like voting on a hand grenade.

ML: I disagree with you. Doing nothing will cost us seats. And what we did, and I just have a fundamental difference of opinion on the discharge. And many of my colleagues have signed discharge petitions, especially in recent years, including on conservative issues. The discharge petition is a tool of every member. It’s not just a tool of the minority. And sometimes, like we saw back with John Boehner was speaker, and the far right did not want the Ex-Im Bank to move forward, John Boehner did the wink and the nod, and said go sign the discharge so we can move the bill.

HH: And I do not object to the discharge petition.

ML: It’s a vehicle that…

HH: I object, that’s filibustering, I object to this one at this time when the country believes that the Obamacare three-year extension has a prayer. And you have already admitted it doesn’t have a prayer. It will never pass.

ML: Oh, I’ve said, I’ve said it will not pass, but we needed a vehicle, okay, to get an actual bill passed. And so what’s going to happen, the three-year will pass the House, the Senate will not pass it. They’ve already voted it down. They did it last week when Chuck Schumer brought it up, and I slammed Schumer for just doing a hyper-partisan three-year bill. I slammed Leader Jeffries for just doing the hyper-partisan three-year bill and not supporting the compromise bill that we negotiated. But we needed a vehicle that could get to 218 so that we could actually have a vote.

HH: But the compromise bill passed. I’ll come back on the other side. The compromise bill did pass, did it not?

ML: I’m sorry, did pass what?

HH: The compromise bill, the House bill did pass.

— – – – –

HH: Friends can disagree, and sometimes, they have falling outs, and I’m having one with Michael Lawler, because we’re not, we’re talking past each other. Congressman, the GOP healthcare plan in the House did pass, did it not?

ML: Oh, I’m sorry, yes.

HH: Yeah.

ML: The GOP plan that we moved forward, yes.

HH: So there is a vehicle that will go to the Senate. That vehicle will not get 60 votes. So if there’s going to be a resolution, it’s going to be done in the Senate, because the House can’t do anything by majority, but it takes 60 votes in the Senate. So you didn’t need to sign the discharge bill to get a vehicle. You’re making a facetious argument. You did that, I don’t know why you did it. I think you’re smart. You know what you’re doing. You’ve used leverage before. Why would you put your members, your colleagues, your friends, the party in the peril that you did? And why shouldn’t I be this pissed off?

ML: Look, I disagree with you about us putting our majority in peril. Doing nothing on the issue that Democrats weaponized during the shutdown, and that the media has tried to explain to voters is the reason their healthcare premiums are going up when you and I both know Obamacare itself is the reason. It has failed to actually reduce costs. But doing nothing on this was the wrong decision. And we had an internal battle over this. And four of us signed the discharge, but I’m telling you, there are a lot more A) that were willing to sign it, and B) that want something done on this. And so we are going to get a resolution come January, and force a vote so that we can actually get a compromise bill.

HH: You could repack, A) I want to go through your objections. Doing nothing, the Republicans didn’t do nothing. They passed an alternative. And as we’ve just let the audience know, it passed. Number two…

ML: That you just pointed out, that you just pointed out, is not going to become law, because it won’t get the Democrats votes in the Senate.

HH: Just like the discharge petition. So we have something to put in the Senate’s lap so that they can begin the negotiations. It didn’t have to be the discharge petition. But as you just pointed out, the media has been framing this to hurt Republicans, because the media is left-wing. You fed into that narrative. And no matter how many people came up and whispered to you, ‘way to go, Mike,’ four of you signed it. Four of you sent it to the floor, and it’s going to force a vote where 214 Republicans are going to have to say no. Maybe it’ll be 212, and that, because of the media that we just discussed, is going to be the ad that sinks them. So I don’t know how you can walk away from the car crash when you were driving and saying I’ve got nothing to do with that, it wasn’t me?

ML: Again, we’re just going to disagree, because the reality is the ads were already written about the expiration of the tax credits.

HH: They’ll get worse.

ML: We are seeking to do a two-pronged solution. Number one, having an answer on the enhanced premium tax credit with reforms. Number two, addressing the larger issues within the health care system, which you and I are in full agreement is a broken system under Obamacare. Healthcare premiums have risen 96%, and meanwhile, insurance profits are up over 2,000% because Obamacare was written by the insurance companies for the insurance companies. That system needs to be reformed. And we had a plan that actually will start to reform the system. And that’s what we’re seeking to get across the finish line. You know this better than anybody.

HH: I’ve got two questions before we run out of time. One, can you take your name off the discharge petition?

ML: No, it’s already active. It’s 218.

HH: Will you, you can, however, apologize for it and reconsider and say I made a mistake. Will you think about doing that between now and January so that you vote against the petition you forced onto the floor?

ML: Look, I am comfortable with my decision, and the decision I made. I didn’t make it lightly, and I made it after exhausting every single option we had before us within our House Republican conference. We worked tirelessly to get a deal with leadership, and unfortunately, as the Speaker said, we just couldn’t solve this Rubik’s Cube. There were a lot of reasons why. And ultimately, this is the decision I made.

HH: So Congressman, did you or did you not win on the SALT cap? You won on the SALT cap.

ML: We did.

HH: Yeah. So the party has been good for you. The party did what you needed done. The party, Mike Lawler got what he needed. So I’m listening to an ungrateful guy in a marginal district who wants the NRCC to support him, and people like me to do it, and you’re ungrateful. I really, I’m just furious that you did this. Do you understand that?

ML: Respectfully, yeah, respectfully, Hugh, I’m not ungrateful in the least. But I know this. My seat is one of only three seats in the country that Kamala Harris won, that a Republican represents. We’re at 220. If we lose those seats, we’re out of the majority. It’s that simple. And I am fighting to represent my district, to represent my constituents, and to give us the majority and keep Speaker Johnson in the Speaker’s chair and keep the gavel. So it’s not about being ungrateful, all right? I’ve eaten a lot of votes this year on things that I don’t necessarily agree with. There’s people on the other side of the conference that have eaten votes on SALT that they don’t necessarily agree with. That’s what happens when you have a small majority. Everybody’s got to give and take.

HH: Do you listen when you’re out in the district if enough people come up to you and say I heard the Hewitt, and Hewitt’s right, and you should apologize and vote against your discharge petition, will you listen to them? Because I think you’re a smart guy who made a mistake. And that shouldn’t end your career. You should win, but there are people like me who are just going to say you’re more trouble than you’re worth. We’ll win the majority somewhere else, because if you stab in the back, you’ll stab me in the front. And this was a real backstab, Mike.

ML: Yeah, Hugh, number one, I do listen to my constituents. I’m out every single day meeting with constituents when I’m not in D.C. I do dozens of events every week in my district, so I talk to everybody across the spectrum. Number two, I’m very blunt and direct. I don’t hide. I don’t mince words.

HH: I’m not being, I’m not being very subtle here, either.

ML: No, no. But my point is I’m not backstabbing anybody. I was very clear with the Speaker what was going to happen if we couldn’t figure this out. And so there was no backstabbing. It was straightforward. And I’ve owned my decision, and I’ve explained it. And people have every right to disagree with it, but it’s not backstabbing. It’s very straightforward.

HH: Okay, I’m going to pray for a Christmas miracle. I know you’re Catholic. Maybe on Midnight Mass, you realize you should apologize for this. I hope so. Mike, and by the way, thank you for coming on. You knew it was going to be a rough go, and I appreciate that you found the time to do it. Merry Christmas to you, Congressman. Talk to you in the New Year.

End of interview.