logo
Senate Republicans scramble to resolve tense divisions as Trump ramps up pressure to pass his big bill

Senate Republicans scramble to resolve tense divisions as Trump ramps up pressure to pass his big bill

NBC News9 hours ago

WASHINGTON — The Senate bill's Medicaid cuts are too aggressive for politically vulnerable Republicans.
Its clean energy funding cuts are too tame for conservative House Republicans, who are threatening to sink the legislation.
And the $10,000 cap on state and local tax deductions is a nonstarter for key blue-state House Republicans.
The GOP-led Congress is barreling toward its own deadline for passage of the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act,' and it's getting messy in the final stretch as President Donald Trump ramps up the pressure on lawmakers to put it on his desk by July 4.
'To my friends in the Senate, lock yourself in a room if you must, don't go home, and GET THE DEAL DONE THIS WEEK,' Trump wrote Tuesday on Truth Social. 'Work with the House so they can pick it up, and pass it, IMMEDIATELY. NO ONE GOES ON VACATION UNTIL IT'S DONE.'
Passing the party-line bill through the House and Senate, where Republicans have three votes to spare in each chamber, will be a daunting task that requires bridging acrimonious divides. The toughest part will be settling on a final product that can unify Senate GOP moderates, like Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, with the far-right House Freedom Caucus. Those two factions have tended to drive the hardest bargain.
After a conference lunch meeting, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., told reporters his chamber's goal is to get the bill 'across the finish line by the end of the week,' with the goal of crafting a package that can win 51 votes in the Senate.
'Hopefully when push comes to shove and everybody has to say yes or no, we'll get the number of votes we need,' Thune said.
A significant source of consternation is the steeper Medicaid cuts in the Senate bill, which include lowering provider taxes that are used to fund the program, and limiting payments to states.
Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who faces re-election in a battleground state next year, warned his party during a Tuesday meeting that they will lose the 2026 midterm elections if they push ahead on proposed Medicaid cuts. He compared the situation to the heavy losses Democrats suffered in the 2014 midterms after a rocky Obamacare rollout, according to one source in the room.
The meeting came one day after Tillis circulated a document with estimates of how much Medicaid money states would lose if the Senate bill passes, including $38.9 billion in losses for North Carolina, $16 billion for Tennessee and $6.1 billion for Missouri.
Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., said the current version of the bill — which also extends the 2017 Trump tax cuts — doesn't have enough votes and would harm rural hospitals in his state.
'Senate leadership now needs to fix this. They're the ones who have invented this new rural hospital defund scheme that the House says they can't pass, that's going to close rural hospitals,' he said. 'It was a bad idea on their part to fool around with it.'
Republicans are looking at creating a new fund to protect rural hospitals from the negative consequences of their bill. Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., said only a small portion of Medicaid funds go to those institutions, but he argued that 'having a fund specifically for rural hospitals is a targeted way to help ensure their viability.'
Senate GOP leaders want to include the Medicaid cuts to limit the bill's red ink. The version the House passed is projected by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office to add $2.4 trillion to the debt over the next 10 years.
On Tuesday, 16 House Republicans — almost all representing competitive districts — sent a letter rebelling against the Senate's Medicaid cuts. They fretted that those policies would 'place additional burdens on hospitals,' among other things.
'Protecting Medicaid is essential for the vulnerable constituents we were elected to represent. Therefore, we cannot support a final bill that threatens access to coverage or jeopardizes the stability of our hospitals and providers,' wrote the House Republicans, led by Rep. David Valadao, R-Calif., whose district has one of the highest shares of Medicaid recipients in the country.
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spokesperson Justin Chermol responded quickly to the letter, questioning the sincerity of the Republicans' opposition to Medicaid cuts.
'Spare us the performative bulls---,' he said in a statement. 'These so-called moderates already voted for the largest cut to Medicaid in American history — and when the time comes, they'll cave to their D.C. party bosses once again to give their billionaire donors a massive tax break.'
On the other hand, the Senate bill pares back some of the clean energy cuts, a move that House conservatives say is unacceptable. That's because much of the green tax credits and funding goes to red states, and Republican senators are reluctant to take it away.
Rep. Andy Harris, R-Md., the chair of the Freedom Caucus, said the Senate bill 'backtracks' on clean energy cuts and threatened to vote against it. Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, who voted for the House bill, has also objected to the energy provisions and vowed to oppose the current Senate bill.
Roy also warned GOP leaders not to use the July 4 deadline to try and force members to swallow a bill that isn't palatable to them.
'Rumor is Senate plans to jam the House with its weaker, unacceptable [One Big Beautiful Bill] before 7/4. This is not a surprise but it would be a mistake,' Roy said on X. 'The bill in its current Senate form would increase deficits, continue most Green New Scam subsidies, & otherwise fail even a basic smell test... I would not vote for it as it is.'
Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., pointed to another reason the process is slow: the bill is still being vetted by the parliamentarian to make sure it complies with Senate rules limiting the bill's provisions to budget matters, a process known as the 'Byrd bath.'
'There's only so much you can pre-negotiate, because the bill is still changing over here as a result of a Byrd bath. I think we're almost done with the Byrd bath. We're making progress in terms of talking through it, but I think we're headed toward the bill hitting the floor sometime toward the end of the week,' Kennedy said. 'And then will everybody be happy? No. But everybody will have a chance to offer an amendment or two.'
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who attended Tuesday's Senate Republican meeting, said afterward that he expects a solution on the state and local deduction "in the next 24-48 hours."
A decisive group of House Republicans from states like New York and California is threatening to sink the entire bill unless the SALT cap is at least $40,000 per tax filer. But Senate Republicans have no interest is raising the cap to that level in because none of them represent blue states where the deduction is a big issue.
Bessent added that the U.S. "getting close to the warning track" on the debt limit, which he has urged Congress to raise before August in order to prevent a default by that month's deadline.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Israel-Iran live: Iran executes three men accused of spying for Israel - as Trump rejects US intel on nuclear sites
Israel-Iran live: Iran executes three men accused of spying for Israel - as Trump rejects US intel on nuclear sites

Sky News

time22 minutes ago

  • Sky News

Israel-Iran live: Iran executes three men accused of spying for Israel - as Trump rejects US intel on nuclear sites

Explained: Where are Iran's nuclear facilities? Donald Trump has been praising US strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities - but intelligence suggests the destruction may not have been emphatic as he claims. In fact, the attacks may have just set the programme back by months, rather than eliminated it entirely - see our post at 21.16. As a reminder, this map shows the key nuclear locations - and we'll be going through each one. For context, we use the term nuclear proliferation a lot below, so here's the definition: The spread of nuclear weapons, and, more generally, the spread of nuclear technology and knowledge that might be put to military use. Nuclear proliferation is controlled by the Nuclear Non‐proliferation Treaty, which recognises five nuclear states: the US, the UK, Russia, China and France. Oxford Reference Natanz One of Iran's principal uranium enrichment complexes lies on a plain adjacent to mountains outside the Shiite Muslim holy city of Qom, south of Tehran. Natanz houses facilities including two enrichment plants: the vast, underground Fuel Enrichment Plant and the above-ground Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant. It was revealed in 2002 that Iran was secretly building the facility, which is said to be three floors underground. Fordow Another enrichment site can be found at Fordow - one that is extremely well protected, given that it's thought to be dug into the side of a mountain. Isfahan Iran's second-biggest city is home to a large nuclear technology centre, which includes a Fuel Plate Fabrication Plant and a uranium conversion facility. There is equipment at Isfahan to make uranium metal, a process that is particularly proliferation-sensitive since it can be used to create the core of a nuclear bomb. Khondab In Khondab lies a partially built heavy-water research reactor. These pose a nuclear proliferation risk because they can produce plutonium which, like enriched uranium, can be used to make the core of an atom bomb. Iran has informed the International Atomic Energy Agency that it plans to bring the reactor online in 2026, with a previous 2015 deal seeing the reactor's core removed and filled with concrete to make it unusable. Tehran Iran's nuclear research facilities in its capital Tehran include a research reactor. Bushehr Iran's only operating nuclear power plant lies in the Bushehr area on the Gulf coast. The facility uses Russian fuel that Moscow then takes back when it is spent, therefore reducing the proliferation risk.

Number of Brits who see US as a global threat doubles since Donald Trump came to power
Number of Brits who see US as a global threat doubles since Donald Trump came to power

The Independent

time24 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Number of Brits who see US as a global threat doubles since Donald Trump came to power

The number of Britons who see the US as a serious threat to global security has skyrocketed since Donald Trump entered the White House in January, new research shows. Even before the president bombed Iran at the weekend, almost three quarters of those asked — 72 per cent — named the US as a threat to world peace in the next decade. Researchers said the figure, which has doubled since last autumn, when it was just 36 per cent, was an 'all time high'. And it rivals China, on 69 per cent, Israel, on 73 per cent, and North Korea, on 77 per cent, although the highest was Russia on 90 per cent. In recent months, Trump has alarmed the international community on a number of occassions, including when he raised doubts about his willingness to defend European countries and when held a televised showdown with Ukrainian President Zelensky in the Oval Office. The latest British Social Attitudes (BSA) report, by the National Centre for Social Research, shows fears over the US' role in the world is split along political party lines. Labour and Green supporters are more likely — by 81 and 96 per cent — than those who back the Conservatives or Reform UK — 68 and 41 per cent — to consider the US a serious threat. The survey also shows that increased public concern over potential threats has led to a significant increase in support for defence spending. Almost one in ten — 9 per cent — believe defence should be the top priority for extra government spending, the highest figure ever recorded in the survey. Again, however, there are marked differences by party, with Conservative and Reform supporters more likely to be in favour than those who back Labour or the Greens. Gianfranco Addario, research director at the National Centre for Social Research (NatCen), told The Independent the research did not go into the reasons why those who took part believe the US to be a significant threat, but said 'that would be very interesting to explore'. He added: 'The escalation of recent international conflicts is clearly reflected in the attitudes of the British population, who have never been so supportive of military spending and so concerned about serious security threats since the British Social Attitudes survey first addressed the subject in 1985. 'Perception of the US as a security threat has increased since the 2024 presidential elections and the first 100 days of the Trump administration, reaching an all-time high. 'The Labour government's approach to addressing these concerns, particularly in navigating internal party divisions while aligning with public sentiment, will be crucial in determining its success in managing the country's security and defence policies.' The British Social Attitudes survey has been conducted every year since 1983.

Britain to buy 12 nuclear-carrying F-35A warplanes worth £700,000,000
Britain to buy 12 nuclear-carrying F-35A warplanes worth £700,000,000

Metro

time26 minutes ago

  • Metro

Britain to buy 12 nuclear-carrying F-35A warplanes worth £700,000,000

Britain will buy a dozen F-35A warplanes – all capable of carrying nuclear weapons – from the US, following criticism from Donald Trump that Nato members are not spending enough on defence. Today, Sir Keir Starmer will tell a summit of Nato allies in The Hague that the new squadron will join an alliance mission that can be armed with US nuclear weapons. The prime minister is expected tp say: 'The UK's commitment to Nato is unquestionable, as is the alliance's contribution to keeping the UK safe and secure. 'But we must all step up to protect the Euro-Atlantic area for generations to come.' Downing Street Biggest hailed the purchase as the 'biggest strengthening of the UK's nuclear posture in a generation'. All eyes are now on Russia and China who will undoubtedly see this as an escalatory move. More Trending The jets, a variant of the F35Bs the UK already uses, can carry conventional weapons, but can also be equipped with nuclear bombs. Each F-35A plane costs around £60 million for the latest production lots, so a dozen could set the UK back an estimated £700 million. The full details of the deal with the US were not immediately clear. Sir Keir said: 'Russia, not Ukraine, should pay the price for Putin's barbaric and illegal war, so it is only right we use the proceeds from seized Russian assets to ensure Ukraine has the air defence it needs.' Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page. MORE: Trump has a meltdown over 'failed' strikes on Iran that did not destroy nuclear sites MORE: 'Living Nostradamus' issues chilling warning on Trump's Israel-Iran ceasefire MORE: Experts reveal real risk of WW3 — and what's at stake for anywhere that gets dragged in

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store