Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill' pits Senate GOP moderates against conservatives
Senate Republicans are deeply divided over President Trump's 'big, beautiful bill,' which the House passed by a single vote last week, setting up a battle in the upper chamber between moderates and conservatives that is likely to drag on well into July.
GOP senators are vowing to rewrite the bill, but they're still weeks away from putting together a package that can muster the 51 votes it needs to pass, according to GOP senators and aides.
The more senators change the legislation, the more difficult it will be to pass again through the House — where Republicans control a slim 220-to-212-seat majority. Identical legislation must be approved by both chambers before it can go to Trump for his signature.
Centrist GOP Sens. Susan Collins (Maine), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Thom Tillis (N.C.) are facing off against conservatives such as Sens. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Rick Scott (R-Fla.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah) over potential cuts to Medicaid benefits, the phase-out of renewable energy incentives and other deficit-reduction measures that conservatives say don't go far enough.
The Medicaid cuts also divide conservatives, with Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) warning they could be bad policy and politically suicidal.
It has all left observers skeptical the debate in the Senate will end in June.
'I would be shocked if it did not go past July 4,' said a Senate Republican aide. 'There are going to be a lot more twists and turns in this road, but we're going to get it done.'
Looming over the debate is the memory of what happened in 2017, Trump's first year in office, to a House-passed bill to repeal the Affordable Care Act.
The repeal measure narrowly passed the House in May of that year only to fall apart on the Senate floor when Collins, Murkowski and the late Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) voted no.
Two of those players, Collins and Murkowski, will have a big say over the fate of Trump's big, beautiful bill this summer.
Collins is worried about the bill's impact on rural hospitals, and Murkowski is conscious of potential benefit cuts to tribes in Alaska.
American Hospital Association President Rick Pollack warns the House-passed bill will impact patients 'especially in rural and underserved areas' and could lead to longer wait times to receive care and more crowded emergency departments.
The House-passed legislation includes an exemption for American Indian and Alaska Natives from Medicaid work requirements, according to the National Indian Health Board.
But that exemption and others could be under scrutiny as conservatives look for additional ways to save money.
'I've been focusing on spending, spending, spending, spending,' said Johnson, the Wisconsin senator who previously criticized the House bill for delaying implementation of Medicaid work requirements.
'Somebody's got to be the dad who says, 'I know you all want to go to Disney World, but we can't afford it.' I guess I'm going to be that guy,' Johnson said.
Meanwhile, Tillis is warning that an abrupt termination of renewable energy incentives will hit domestic companies like a bomb blast. He's keeping close track of the billions of dollars of low-carbon energy investments in North Carolina.
Tillis argues that investors are still reluctant to back oil pipeline projects in the United States because former President Biden suddenly killed the Keystone XL Pipeline after coming to office in 2021.
And Murkowski is sympathetic to that argument. She signed on to a letter with Tillis earlier this year warning that 'wholesale repeal, or the termination of individual credits, would create uncertainty, jeopardizing capital allocation, long-term project planning.'
Ron Bonjean, a Republican strategist and former Senate leadership aide, says Collins, Murkowski and Tillis probably have more leverage than their conservative colleagues in shaping the bill.
A big reason for that is that both Collins and Tillis are top Democratic targets for 2026. Their successful reelections would go a long way in ensuring Republicans keep control of the Senate for years to come.
With their reelections potentially riding on how the bill impacts their constituents, Collins and Tillis are likely to drive a hard bargain, whether on Medicaid reforms or green energy incentives.
'These senators have been around for a long time, and they've been involved in other serious pieces of legislation and know how to take negotiating positions,' he said.
Bonjean said these GOP senators are less likely to succumb to pressure from Trump than their House counterparts, who voted for the bill last week after the president dropped the f-bomb in a private meeting and told them to get in line.
Also in the mix are Hawley, a populist conservative concerned that higher copays for medical services will hit working-class Missourians, and Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), a mainstream pragmatic Republican who is worried about rural hospitals going out of business.
They both have warned colleagues they will not vote for Medicaid reforms that cut benefits or imperil the financial health of rural hospitals.
Conservatives led by Scott, a former health care CEO, argue that Medicaid has drifted from its original purpose of covering poor kids and disabled adults and spends far too much money on 'able-bodied' adults.
He and other conservatives argue the renewable energy incentives enacted under Biden should be repealed entirely.
'We should completely eliminate the Green New Deal. That's No. 1,' he said. 'No. 2 is Medicaid ought to go back and do what it was set up to do. It was set up to take care of poor children and the chronically ill, and that's what the focus should be.'
Lee, the senator from Utah, said the House bill needs to do more to limit 'the extent to which persons unlawfully present in the United States could receive federal benefits, including Medicaid.'
He said House negotiators 'inexplicably made a bunch of that stuff available, still, to persons unlawfully present in the United States — that's a problem.'
GOP senators are also divided over whether to let stand the compromise Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) negotiated with blue-state House Republicans from New York, New Jersey and California to raise the cap on state and local tax (SALT) deductions.
'The SALT thing's going to come up. It's going to be an issue,' Lee said.
Other GOP senators say, however, they want to leave Johnson's deal with House colleagues on SALT alone because they don't want to hurt the bill's chances of passing the lower chamber again after the Senate makes its changes.
Johnson urged GOP senators at a meeting earlier this month to tread carefully on rewriting the House bill or otherwise risk derailing it.
Another point of disagreement is whether to score the extension of the expiring 2017 Trump tax cuts as a continuation of current policy, which would allow them to be enacted permanently but would also add trillions of dollars to the debt beyond 2034.
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) says he's keeping a close eye on interest rates and doesn't want the bill to make the nation's debt situation even worse.
He and Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.) have raised concerns about scoring the extension of the 2017 tax cuts as a matter of current policy if the bill doesn't find a way to somehow offset the future impact on the deficit.
Cassidy noted in a Senate floor speech last month that 'current policy has never been used as [a] baseline involving this much money in a reconciliation bill' and warned that it 'establishes a dangerous precedent.'
He said he wants to make sure in the Senate debate over the bill 'that we are truly addressing the national debt.'
The stakes of the debate in the Senate are high. If Congress does not approve some kind of extension of the 2017 tax cuts, taxes will rise on U.S. households in 2026.
Treasury Department Secretary Scott Bessent has also warned Congress it will need to raise the debt ceiling in July if the government is to meet its fiduciary obligations.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Politico
36 minutes ago
- Politico
The tax break that even fiscal hawks don't want to end
Presented by Editor's note: Morning Money is a free version of POLITICO Pro Financial Services morning newsletter, which is delivered to our subscribers each morning at 5:15 a.m. The POLITICO Pro platform combines the news you need with tools you can use to take action on the day's biggest stories. Act on the news with POLITICO Pro. Quick Fix As Senate fiscal hawks prepare to blow up the House GOP's 'big beautiful bill' for fueling the deficit, there's one item they won't touch: a politically popular business tax deduction that has been widely criticized for lacking broad economic benefit. The deduction for qualified 'pass-through' business income, which is not subject to corporate taxes but instead individual income tax, was included in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The vast majority of businesses in the U.S. are pass-through entities — sole proprietorships, partnerships, and LLCs among others — and it's estimated that 43 percent of the workforce was employed by them, as of 2021. The House megabill would slightly increase the so-called Section 199a deduction, which is set to expire at the end of the year, and make it permanent. But doing so would amount to a fairly significant government revenue hit –– almost $820 billion over 10 years, according to the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation. The resistance to ending the deduction illustrates how difficult it will be to scale back the megabill while negotiations take place over the 1,000-page reconciliation package, even for an item that critics say offers few economic gains. Tax policy experts and economists argue that the program primarily rewards the wealthiest business owners. But even for the most fiscally minded Republicans, the political stakes are too high to consider a world without the deduction. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), one of the Senate's most vocal critics of the House GOP megabill, said he's not concerned about the federal revenue decrease the deduction is estimated to cause. 'I've said repeatedly I would just extend current tax law, because had we been smart enough back in 2017 to use current policy, none of this would have expired already, and we need to return that kind of certainty,' said Johnson, who pushed for the deduction in the original TCJA. Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, another Republican who has been critical of the megabill, said he still supports the small business deduction. And Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) said the deduction 'is a very important part of the bill' that he believes will be included when it's passed and would be part of 'a major win.' The House bill would allow individuals, trusts and estates to deduct up to 23 percent of qualified business income from taxable income, up from the current 20 percent threshold. Tax policy experts said they expect Congress to make the measure permanent but were surprised at the increase in the deduction. The White House is also backing it. And the small business lobby is confident the deduction will be enshrined in a final reconciliation bill. Even with overwhelming political support, critics across the small business and economic policy universe say the provision is costly, susceptible to tax avoidance, and won't stimulate the economy. 'Frankly, to me, it sort of just seems like an extra tax break for certain types of taxpayers that doesn't seem particularly warranted from a policy perspective,' said Miles Johnson, a senior attorney adviser at the Tax Law Center at NYU Law. Samantha Jacoby, the deputy director of federal tax policy at the nonpartisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said there aren't any advantages to increasing and making permanent the pass-through deduction. The policy has 'created a big wedge' between business owners and employees who are now paying a higher tax rate than their employers. 'Despite being almost universally panned by economists and other tax policy experts,' the influence of politically powerful businesses located in every district is part of the reason the provision is popular and pervasive among Republicans, Jacoby said. Economic growth is one of the main arguments for proponents of the deduction, but policy experts disagree. Economists say there's a lack of evidence from the original deduction that there was any boost to real economic activity or employment that came from the pass-through business rate cut. 'I would categorize 199A as a business tax cut that is not pro-growth,' said Kyle Pomerleau, a federal tax policy senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. 'It is a policy that I think generally loses a lot of revenue for no good reason.' IT'S THURSDAY — Any small business, insurance or financial services tips please send to your MM host at khapgood@ And, as always, send your tips, suggestions and personnel moves to Sam at ssutton@ Driving the day The SEC's Investment Management Division hosts a conference on 'Emerging Trends in Asset Management' with speakers including Commissioner Hester Peirce beginning at 9 a.m. … The SEC meets at 10 a.m. … House Small Business holds a hearing on 'How Private Equity Empowers Main Street' at 10 a.m. … House Financial Services holds a hearing on data privacy at 10 a.m. … Fed Governor Adriana Kugler speaks at the Economic Club of New York at noon.. The Urban Institute holds a virtual discussion on 'rent reporting as a pathway to credit building' at 12:30 p.m. … The Peterson Institute for International Economics holds a virtual discussion on industrial policy for Asia and the Pacific at 5 p.m. … In The Economy First in MM: New research from the Committee on Capital Markets Regulation, which has members in the finance, business, law, accounting and academic worlds, found no effect on consumer prices across sectors from having competing firms with common investors. The study looked at 52 industries, representing the majority of GDP, over a 24-year period (2000-2023), per our Victoria Guida. The finding comes as some Republican state attorneys general are alleging in a lawsuit that Vanguard, BlackRock and State Street have violated antitrust laws by colluding to reduce coal production. The market's mixed — Bonds rallied and stocks finished mixed after weak economic data boosted investors' confidence that the Federal Reserve will cut interest rates in the coming months. Services activity unexpectedly contracted in May, according to the Institute for Supply Management purchasing managers index, while ADP data showed 37,000 jobs were created, the slowest pace of private-sector hiring in more than two years, the Wall Street Journal reports. Department of Labor staffing shortage raises CPI concerns — Some economists are beginning to question the accuracy of recent U.S. inflation data after the federal government said staffing shortages hampered its ability to conduct a massive monthly survey, the Journal reports. What small businesses are saying — As the Senate mulls changes to the 'big, beautiful bill,' small businesses are raising red flags about the uncertainty pertaining to both taxes and trade. More than 90 percent said that certainty and predictability in the federal tax code are important to their financial planning, according to the latest Goldman Sachs 10,000 Small Businesses Voices survey. More than 35 percent said they were feeling negative effects from tariffs and another 38 percent said they expect to feel the effects of those policies in the future. Fifty-one percent said they would be unable to take out a loan at current interest rates. TRADE CORNER More Carney-Trump negotiations on steel and aluminum — Ontario Premier Doug Ford is urging Canada's prime minister to retaliate against the United States after it doubled tariffs on steel and aluminum imports. But Prime Minister Mark Carney is holding off, arguing that he's close to striking a new trade deal with President Donald Trump, Mickey Djuric reports. On The Hill Senate Banking's planned megabill cuts — Senate Banking Committee Republicans are preparing to propose provisions that would change Federal Reserve employees' pay scale and zero out the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's funding as part of the Senate version of the GOP megabill, according to a committee staff memo obtained by POLITICO, Jasper Goodman reports. The big, beautiful national debt — Trump is pursuing an agenda that would add trillions of dollars to the soaring national debt, ignoring warnings from Wall Street, Republican deficit hawks and his outgoing cost-cutting champion, The Post reports. CRYPTO CORNER JP Morgan to take crypto as collateral — JPMorgan Chase & Co. plans to let trading and wealth management clients use some cryptocurrency-linked assets as collateral for loans, a major step by the largest U.S. bank to make inroads into an industry that Trump has pledged to support, Bloomberg reports. Pro-crypto dems look to delay market structure markup — House Financial Services Democrats who are open to backing GOP-led cryptocurrency legislation are pressing committee Chair French Hill (R-Ark.) to delay a vote on his sweeping market structure bill, saying they need more time to negotiate changes, Jasper reports. At the regulators SEC opens the door — The SEC is weighing an overhaul to decades-old rules outlining what types of foreign companies trading in the U.S. should be subject to a lighter-touch reporting regime, our Declan Harty reports. Fed's top bank cop gets confirmed — The Senate on Wednesday confirmed Trump's pick to serve as the Fed's top official overseeing banks, installing a key regulator who is poised to advance the administration's financial deregulatory agenda, per Michael Stratford. Senators voted 48-46, along party lines, to confirm Fed Gov. Michelle Bowman as the central bank's vice chair for supervision. Atkins eyes long-time trading executive for SEC — Chair Paul Atkins is eyeing Jamie Selway, a former Wall Street executive who has advised cryptocurrency firms, to lead his trading and markets division, according to two people familiar with the matter who were granted anonymity to discuss the still-private deliberations, Declan reports. The AIC's private credit pitch — The American Investment Council released a new report by EY that estimates private credit investments have supported companies with more than 811,000 employees — more than 200,000 of whom are in the manufacturing sector. Jobs report Rustin Finkler joined Early Warning Services as a director for public affairs communications this week. Prior to joining EWS, Rustin was a managing director at Vision360 Partners, a public relations firm, where he worked on public affairs and communication plans for clients like the Consumer Bankers Association. He is also a Penta Group alum. Kari Heerman will join the Brookings Institution's economic studies program as a senior fellow and director of trade and economic statecraft on Aug. 11. Heerman, who was previously acting chief economist at the State Department, will lead a new effort to expand and coordinate cross-program work already being done at Brookings.


New York Times
38 minutes ago
- New York Times
How Hard Will Musk Fight Republicans' Budget Bill?
Can Musk kill the budget bill? Elon Musk hasn't stopped criticizing the budget bill that he has called a 'disgusting abomination.' In fact, he appears to be just getting started. The debate in Washington now is how far Musk will go to try to defeat a bill that — by the assessment of Musk, several Republicans and now nonpartisan watchdogs — will vastly add to the federal debt. 'KILL THE BILL,' Musk posted on X on Wednesday, a message he urged followers to press with members of Congress. He has turned a majority of his feed into a stream of reposts of content criticizing the legislation and denouncing its effect on the nation's $36 trillion debt load. A string of assessments suggest that the bill will add to the debt. The most consequential, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, estimated that the House version of the plan would add $2.4 trillion over the next decade, given both the roughly $3.8 trillion tax cut at its core and additional spending. (Other estimates are even higher, including the Penn Wharton Budget Model's: $2.8 trillion.) A Republican counter: Attack the messenger. The Trump administration advanced hard-to-believe claims about C.B.O. staff members' partisanship, and arguments that its analysis ignores projected economic growth. That said, a previous nonpartisan analysis of the House bill found that the tax cuts would generate nearly no additional economic growth, and even conservatives found the budget office's analysis credible. 'When all the models are in unison,' Erica York, the vice president for federal tax policy at the Tax Foundation, told The Times, 'it really doesn't make sense to triple down on the strategy to blame the scorekeeper.' Want all of The Times? Subscribe.


The Hill
38 minutes ago
- The Hill
The parade of presidential pardons is a perversion of justice
There are all sorts of checks and balances baked into the Constitution. But one power sits above the law, untouched by Congress, immune to the courts and utterly unaccountable: the presidential pardon. It is the kind of absolute authority you'd expect in a monarchy, not a democracy. The Founding Fathers thought they were building a system of justice with a human touch — where a president, guided by conscience and compassion, could offer mercy to someone wrongfully convicted or genuinely reformed. The pardon was supposed to heal wounds, not reward political allies or well-heeled donors. Nice idea. Too bad it hasn't always worked out that way. Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon after Watergate to help the country move on. It was controversial, sure, but Ford was acting on principle, not personal gain. Contrast that with Bill Clinton, who — on his way out the door — pardoned Marc Rich, a fugitive tax cheat whose ex-wife just happened to be a generous Clinton donor. That wasn't mercy. That was transactional politics. Joe Biden used his final hours in office to pardon his son, Hunter, and other family members — along with a few preemptive pardons aimed at blunting potential charges from a future Trump administration. That's not justice. That's insurance. And then there's Donald Trump. Where to begin? Trump opened his second term — on the first day, no less — by pardoning about 1,500 people involved in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. Among them were thugs who assaulted police officers. Then came the pardon parade: Reality television fraudsters Todd and Julie Chrisley. Former Rep. Michael Grimm (R-N.Y.), who lied on his taxes. A corrupt sheriff in Virginia. A Nevada politician who pocketed money meant for fallen police officers — and used it to pay for plastic surgery. A nursing home operator who stiffed the IRS out of $10 million. Trump even tossed a pardon to former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D) — the same Blagojevich who tried to sell off Barack Obama's Senate seat like it was a used car on Craigslist. Blago, by the way, was also a contestant on Trump's 'Celebrity Apprentice' show. Imagine that. Trump's pardon lawyer — yes, he has one of those now — summed it up with a slogan that belongs on a bumper sticker: 'No MAGA left behind.' That's not a legal doctrine. That's a loyalty program. When presidents start handing out pardons like party favors to friends, donors or political cronies, it's not only the opposite of what the Founding Fathers had it mind, but it also sends a very loud and dangerous message — that the law doesn't apply equally. That who you know matters more than what you did. That justice is just another game for the powerful to rig. And when Biden pardons his own son and Trump pardons his loyal foot soldiers, what are we left with? A pardoning arms race, a perversion of justice that turns the most sacred executive power into a blunt instrument of politics and payback. So why should we care? Because once the ideals put forth in the Constitution become tainted by raw politics — once they're bent, twisted and ignored by the very people sworn to uphold those ideals — the entire democratic experiment begins to buckle. The presidential pardon was meant to show mercy, not mock the law. But in the hands of men more interested in self-preservation and political payback than in public service, it becomes just another tool for corruption. And telling ourselves that 'both sides do it' doesn't make it any less sleazy. Bernard Goldberg is an Emmy and an Alfred I. duPont-Columbia University award-winning writer and journalist. He is the author of five books and publishes exclusive weekly columns, audio commentaries and Q&As on his Substack page. Follow him @BernardGoldberg.