During a heated session of the Committee on Financial Services, Democratic Representative Joyce Beatty from Ohio got into a tense exchange with U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. Beatty, known for her progressive stance, spent nearly two minutes launching accusations at Bessent, criticizing him for not supporting her long-running push to feature Harriet Tubman on the $20 bill.
The May 7, 2025, hearing began with a discussion about foreign businesses and their filing responsibilities with federal authorities. Beatty kicked off the conversation with a question about how the Treasury was addressing the issue of foreign companies and their involvement in illicit activities like money laundering and drug trafficking. She seemed to suggest that Bessent wasn’t taking enough action to stop criminal organizations from taking advantage of the system.
Bessent, however, remained composed and clarified that the law was designed to target foreign entities and not American small businesses. His calm and factual response caught Beatty off guard, and she quickly tried to turn the conversation in a different direction, focusing on the issue of Harriet Tubman’s image on the $20 bill. When Bessent did not engage with her question, Beatty became more frustrated, attempting to regain control of the discussion.
As the hearing continued, Beatty’s tone became more confrontational, with her accusing Bessent of failing to take responsibility for issues like human trafficking and cartel activity. Despite her attempt to steer the conversation toward her own political agenda, Bessent maintained a professional stance, offering a brief reply that he could not provide an update on the Tubman bill but promised to have his staff follow up.
The exchange ended with Beatty attempting to cut Bessent off, demanding her next question. But Bessent remained unfazed, refusing to be drawn into the distraction, leaving Beatty visibly irritated.
This encounter highlights the growing tension between progressive politicians, like Beatty, and conservative figures in government, particularly when political agendas clash with substantive policy discussions.