
Decision time on the One Big Beautiful Bill
You're reading the Prompt 2025 newsletter. Sign up to get it in your inbox.
On Monday, the Senate is voting on amendments to its version of the One Big Beautiful Bill. Leaders seem confident it will pass despite some expected 'no' votes and arguments over last-minute changes. It's a behemoth of a bill: headlined by an extension of President Donald Trump's 2017 tax cuts, steep cuts to health care coverage, and a potpourri of additional items that includes everything from a senior-citizen tax deduction to a new benefit for Alaskan whalers. Despite some popular provisions, the bill's overall polling is poor; it has also drawn bipartisan criticism over budget gimmicks that downplay its cost.
I'm joined by my colleagues Ramesh Ponnuru and Catherine Rampell to discuss what's going down on Capitol Hill.
— Benjy Sarlin, assignment editor
💬 💬 💬
Benjy Sarlin What's the one-paragraph summary you'd give to a voter trying to figure out what this bill means for them?
Ramesh Ponnuru This bill extends the tax cuts that passed during Trump's first term, so you will avoid a tax increase. It also makes some spending cuts, importantly including changes to Medicaid that will result in fewer people having health insurance coverage. And because the spending cuts are not nearly as large as the tax cuts, it widens an already large deficit with consequences that are unknown but seem unlikely to be happy.
Catherine Rampell Less access to health care. Less access to food assistance. More expensive energy. Bigger debt, which you or your grandkids will eventually have to pay back.
Story continues below advertisement
Benjy Let's talk about the health care part. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-North Carolina) announced he was opposing the bill. Trump threatened him with a primary challenge, and now the senator is not running for reelection. Tillis gave a speech warning that Trump was betraying the Medicaid recipients he had promised not to harm. Is he right? And is this a bellwether for political problems to come in the midterms?
Ramesh First, a minor point: Some of the Medicaid recipients who will 'lose coverage' under the bill are people who don't have Medicaid now, but who the Congressional Budget Office thinks might get it in the future if the bill doesn't pass. That effect matters but may not be what people are thinking when they see the quoted numbers. Then the bigger point: This bill polls terribly and is unlikely to get better. And even without the bill there are reasons to think the midterms will go poorly for Republicans — as they usually do for the party in power. But they might go even worse if Republicans let taxes rise as they are scheduled to.
Catherine Tillis is correct. Trump and congressional Republicans have portrayed this bill as not kicking anyone off insurance, or only kicking off supposedly undeserving freeloaders — not, of course, any of their hardworking voters. In reality, nearly 12 million Americans will lose insurance. And many will be Trump voters. (Fun fact: About half of Medicaid recipients voted for Trump in 2024.) However, many of the significant changes don't start right away. So it's possible the actual harm to voters — and GOP candidates — arrives after the midterms.
Ramesh There's an odd House-Senate dynamic here too. The House has assumed that its narrow margin gave it the whip hand in negotiations. The Senate seems to be largely dismissing that idea. I think the net effect of Tillis's decision not to run for reelection will be to strengthen Trump's hand within the GOP — even if his poll numbers continue to be lackluster.
Benjy To that point: I'm a little surprised by the process on this bill. Going in, moderate Republicans sounded worried about the House's cuts to health care and energy; conservatives sounded worried about the deficit. The Senate bill somehow hits health care and energy even harder and adds even more to the debt. How did the talks end up here?
Catherine I think the reason we got a more expensive bill with even bigger Medicaid cuts is related to these slim majorities. Senate leadership is trying to give some concessions to Republicans who might stray, and that's resulted in a bill that's even worse on many dimensions.
Ramesh And yet they shrank the child tax credit increase!
Catherine What's that line that Joe Biden used to use — show me your budget, and I'll tell you what your values are?
Story continues below advertisement
Advertisement
Benjy So, you've both been very critical of the procedural tricks around this bill, especially asking budget scorekeepers to ignore the cost of making existing tax cuts permanent. What do you think the implications will be for future Senates, beyond just the short-term hit to deficits?
Catherine I think this is effectively the end of any attempt at honest accounting. Politicians often use gimmicks to make their expensive goodies look cheaper — gaming the budget window, claiming gangbusters growth, etc. But this time, they're not even pretending to care anymore. I do wonder how much attention the bond market is paying to this. U.S. Treasury bonds have long been considered the safest assets to invest in. This is despite the fact that we've run big deficits before — people continued to lend to us because the dollar is the world's reserve currency and we were trusted to pay debts back. Now we are signaling we're not really attempting to keep track of how much debt we're adding.
Ramesh To the extent some Trump administration officials have wanted to see the dollar weaken — or other currencies strengthen, as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent put it — they seem to be succeeding. It will be interesting to see if this bill has any effect there, too.
Benjy This bill also challenges some political assumptions about these big policy bills. Elon Musk and others on the tech right are currently railing against it for not only cutting energy subsidies, but adding new taxes on wind and solar. Biden's idea behind passing those subsidies was that they'd get too much buy-in from businesses to be repealed. Yet even the top 2024 GOP donor is helpless to protect them. What's up there?
Ramesh Culture war trumps all.
Catherine It was a reasonable assumption, under any presidency other than Trump's. He has astonishing control over his party. There are so many Trump policies that I would have expected the business community to loudly object to (tariffs, immigration policy, general uncertainty), yet they have been astonishingly meek. Why should energy policy be different?
Story continues below advertisement
Advertisement
Benjy It sounds like you're both expecting this bill to reach the president's desk in some form. Are there any last twists you expect on the Senate or House side, or do you think this is mostly what we should expect to see become law?
Ramesh It will probably pass, but I expect there to be some drama before it does. That margin in the House is still very narrow.
Catherine I think we know directionally what the bill will look like, but specifics may change. Will Medicaid cuts get more heartless? How much more red ink will they ultimately decide to spill? I agree with Ramesh that we'll probably have some continued drama over these details, but eventually everyone will cave.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
8 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Popular Salt Product Under Fire As Claims of 'Improper Levels of Heavy Metals' Mount
Another day, another class action lawsuit in the food world. A lawsuit initially filed in February by the California Federal Court claims that Fine Ground Celtic Sea Salt and Light Grey Celtic Sea Salt (both products of Celtic Ocean International LLC) are "contaminated with lead and arsenic." According to the public filing from ClassAction, heavy metal testing has been performed and tested positive for 460 ppb (parts per billion) of lead and 140 ppb of arsenic. For reference, in bottled water, the FDA currently allows a maximum of 5 ppb of lead, while the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency allows for 15 ppb of lead in public drinking water (such as tap water from the pipes).The Plaintiff, Mark Gonzalez of Los Angeles County, is filing the claim individually and "on behalf of all others similarly situated." The suit is claiming that "no level of lead exposure is safe," and that the Good Manufacturing Practice Quality Product label, among other packaging details, insinuates that the sea salts are "healthy." The lawsuit alleges that Celtic Ocean International LLC has failed to warn consumers and is exposing them to unlawful lead contamination, which could lead to damage in the organs, negatively impact the cardiovascular system, and accumulate over time, leaving chronic exposure. RELATED: "Once inside the human body, lead may travel to different tissues and organs, including the liver and kidneys, where it can cause damage to cells and tissues," the lawsuit said. Celtic Sea Salt is currently available at Amazon and Walmart. Considering that similar lawsuits have come to light, like General Mill's Cocoa Puffs being accused of having high levels of lead for $5 million back in 2024, the FDA is actively working on the Closer to Zero campaign. This initiative is meant to reduce childhood exposure to contaminants from foods by "developing new and improved testing methods to measure lower levels of contaminants in food." In the same vein, Ziploc was just accused of deceptive labeling. The lawsuit argues that the labeling "microwave safe" and "freezer safe" ignore that microplastics may seep into your Salt Product Under Fire As Claims of 'Improper Levels of Heavy Metals' Mount first appeared on Men's Journal on Jun 26, 2025

Associated Press
12 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Philadelphia city workers strike after contract talks fail
PHILADELPHIA (AP) — Nearly 10,000 city workers in Philadelphia who collect trash, answer 911 calls, maintain city pools and perform other jobs went on strike Tuesday after contract negotiations broke down. District Council 33 President Greg Boulware said the city hadn't agreed to a high enough wage increase, WPVI-TV reported. Mayor Cherelle Parker said the city would suspend residential trash collection, close some city pools and shorten recreation center hours, but vowed to keep the city running. Police and firefighters are not on strike. Parker, a pro-labor Democrat, promised that Fourth of July celebrations in the nation's birthplace would go on as usual. 'Keep your holiday plans. Don't leave the city,' she said at a Monday afternoon news conference that followed hours of last-minute negotiations. City officials urged residents to be patient and not hang up should they need to call either 911 or the city's non-emergency helpline. They said they would open drop-off sites for residential trash. Parker said she had offered raises that amount to 13% over her four-year term and added a fifth step to the pay scale to align with other unionized workers. District Council 33 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees is the largest of four unions representing city workers. 'We believe it's a fair offer and still fiscally responsible for the people of this city,' said Parker, who took office last year. Union leaders, in their initial contract proposal, asked for 8% annual raises each year of the three-year contract, along with cost-of-living hikes and bonuses of up to $5,000 for those who worked through the pandemic. The union also asked the city to pay the full cost of employee health care, or $1,700 per person per month. 'District Council 33's members contribute as much blood, sweat and tears as does anyone else,' they said in a demand letter. 'We all make the city work. Our contract must reflect that reality.' In November, the city transit system averted a strike when the parties agreed to a one-year contract with 5% raises.
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Study Warns Trump's Plan for US Aid Cuts Risks 14 Million Additional Deaths
(Bloomberg) -- Deep cuts to the US Agency for International Development and its potential dismantling under President Donald Trump could result in about 14 million additional deaths by 2030, according to a study released in a prominent medical journal. Struggling Downtowns Are Looking to Lure New Crowds Philadelphia Transit System Votes to Cut Service by 45%, Hike Fares Squeezed by Crowds, the Roads of Central Park Are Being Reimagined Sao Paulo Pushes Out Favela Residents, Drug Users to Revive Its City Center Sprawl Is Still Not the Answer The report published Monday in The Lancet, which analyzed data from 133 low- and middle-income countries from 2001 to 2023, estimates that USAID-funded programs helped prevent more than 91 million deaths over the past two decades, including 30 million among children. If the cuts continue, researchers project 1.8 million excess deaths in 2025 alone, with a total of 14 million by 2030 — including 4.5 million children under age five. 'US aid cuts — along with the probable ripple effects on other international donors — threaten to abruptly halt and reverse one of the most important periods of progress in human development,' the study said. 'This crisis would stem from a conscious and avoidable policy choice — one whose burden would fall disproportionately on children and younger populations, and whose consequences could reverberate for decades,' it said. The analysis follows Trump's Jan. 20 executive order suspending most foreign aid programs. The dismantling of USAID was among the administration's first major moves after Trump tapped Elon Musk to lead a broad effort to reduce government spending. Nearly all of the agency's 10,000 staffers have since been forced out. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has defended the cuts as necessary to fix past failures and root out progressive ideology. In 2023, the US accounted for 43% of all government humanitarian funding worldwide, up from 39% a decade earlier. USAID managed more than $35 billion in foreign assistance in fiscal 2024, while its operating budget — including salaries and overhead — was about $2 billion. The study found that countries receiving higher levels of USAID support saw a 15% drop in overall mortality and a 32% decline in child mortality. Disease-specific improvements included a 65% reduction in HIV/AIDS deaths, 51% in malaria and 50% in neglected tropical diseases. Though best known for its health initiatives, USAID also funds education, water and sanitation, nutrition and poverty programs. The study noted that these investments have long-term health impacts. For example, improved sanitation alone can reduce child mortality by 17%. Shutting down USAID could cost more than $6 billion, including hundreds of millions in legal fees tied to lawsuits over layoffs and program cancellations, according to a draft State Department assessment. America's Top Consumer-Sentiment Economist Is Worried How to Steal a House SNAP Cuts in Big Tax Bill Will Hit a Lot of Trump Voters Too Pistachios Are Everywhere Right Now, Not Just in Dubai Chocolate Inside Gap's Last-Ditch, Tariff-Addled Turnaround Push ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data