logo
Senate Republicans revise Trump's policy bill, scrounging for votes to pass it

Senate Republicans revise Trump's policy bill, scrounging for votes to pass it

Boston Globe15 hours ago

Get Starting Point
A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday.
Enter Email
Sign Up
Republican leaders in the Senate are rushing to shore up support for the legislation so they can quickly pass it and send it to the House for final approval in time to meet the July 4 deadline Trump has set. An initial vote in the Senate could come later Saturday.
Advertisement
Party leaders are trying to appease two flanks of their conference. Some, including Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, said they could not support it without greater reassurances that the Medicaid cuts it contains would not hurt rural hospitals in their states. And fiscal hawks, including Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, have said they do not want to back legislation that would only increase the deficit.
Advertisement
The core of the bill remains the same. It would extend tax cuts passed by Republicans in 2017 and add some new ones Trump campaigned on, while slashing spending on safety-net programs, including Medicaid and food assistance. The biggest tax cuts and the biggest changes to those anti-poverty programs remained intact. Taken together, the bill would likely increase federal debt by more than $3 trillion over the next decade, though lawmakers are still shaping the bill and waiting on an official estimate from the Congressional Budget Office.
With Trump demanding quick action, Republicans in Congress have intensified their efforts to push it through to enactment even as many of them — including several who voted for it in the House — have been open about their reservations about a measure they are concerned could be a political loser.
The revisions released early Saturday were designed to allay some of those concerns.
Senators, including Tillis and Susan Collins, R-Maine, had pressed for the inclusion of a rural hospital fund to help health care providers absorb the impact of a provision that would crack down on strategies that many states have developed to finance their Medicaid programs. Despite their pushback, that provider tax change remains in the bill, though lawmakers have delayed its implementation by one year.
It is unclear whether a $25 billion compensation fund will be enough to win their votes. Collins had suggested that she wanted to provide as much as $100 billion to ensure that rural hospitals, which operate on thin margins, were not adversely affected.
Advertisement
But it appeared to be enough to win over at least one Republican holdout who had expressed concern about the Medicaid cuts — Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri, who said he would vote for the bill and was confident that changes benefit his state at least in the short term.
A new provision allowing 'individuals in a noncontiguous state' to be exempt from enforcing new work requirements imposed on SNAP, formerly known as food stamps, appeared aimed at mollifying Murkowski of Alaska. Her state would be hit with billions of dollars in nutrition assistance costs as a result of the legislation, and she had cited the provision as one of her chief concerns. The bill also includes new health provisions designed to benefit Alaska, as well as new tax benefits for fishers in the state's waters.
Some of the changes were aimed at appealing to members of the House, where Republicans from high-tax states like New York have threatened to sink the bill if it does not include a substantial increase in the state and local tax deduction, currently capped at $10,000. Senate Republicans, skeptical of the deduction, still ultimately decided to match the House plan to lift the cap to $40,000. But while the House made the increase permanent, the Senate keeps it for only five years, allowing it to snap back to $10,000 in 2030.
The newest draft makes even sharper cuts to subsidies for wind and solar power, something that Trump and other conservatives had explicitly called for this past week. It remains to be seen whether those changes could cause friction with Republicans who have publicly supported green energy credits, including Tillis, Murkowski and Sen. John Curtis of Utah.
Advertisement
Previously, the Senate proposed allowing companies that were building wind and solar farms to claim a tax credit worth at least 30% of their costs if they started construction this year, with a phaseout over two years. But the revised bill would require companies place their projects 'in service' by the end of 2027 to claim the tax break.
The bill would also impose additional taxes on renewable energy projects that receive 'material assistance' from China, even if they don't qualify for the credit. Because China dominates global supply chains, those new fees could affect a large number of projects.
The new Senate measure would more quickly end tax credits for electric vehicles, doing away with them by Sept. 30. It would also slow the phaseout of a lucrative tax credit to make hydrogen fuels, allowing such projects to qualify if construction were started by the end of 2027, instead of by the end of this year.
The bill also includes a provision written by Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, to sell as much as 1.225 million acres of federal land across the American West in order to build housing. Earlier versions of that proposal that would have auctioned off even more acreage had drawn fierce opposition from conservative hunters and outdoorsmen, and Republican senators from Montana and Idaho had said they would not vote for it.
This article originally appeared in

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Rand Paul Takes Swipe at Elon Musk Over 'Big Not So Beautiful Bill'
Rand Paul Takes Swipe at Elon Musk Over 'Big Not So Beautiful Bill'

Newsweek

time24 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

Rand Paul Takes Swipe at Elon Musk Over 'Big Not So Beautiful Bill'

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Republican Senator Rand Paul took a swipe at Elon Musk's large family over President Donald Trump's top legislative proposal, which he is calling the "Big not so beautiful bill." Both Musk and Paul have expressed frustration with the bill as it stands, with Paul's dislike being focused on its impact on government debt. Paul posted on X: "The legislation, as currently written, would pay someone like Elon Musk $1000 per child, and we know how prolific he is . . . No offense, Elon, but Is [sic.] that a wise use of our $$?" How about this: tweak the Big not so beautiful bill so it doesn't add so much to the debt? The legislation, as currently written, would pay someone like Elon Musk $1000 per child, and we know how prolific he is . . . No offense, Elon, but Is that a wise use of our $$? — Rand Paul (@RandPaul) June 28, 2025 Paul did not expand on this post. The budget bill as it stands brings the Child Tax Credit (CTC) up to $2,200. This is not directly paying people to have children but is a tax incentive for people making under $200,000 a year. The libertarian senator from Kentucky may also have been referring to the children's savings program portion of the bill, which would give every child born in America between 2025 to 2028 $1,000 in an investment account. This is putting money directly to a child's account, not to their parents, so would not necessarily benefit Musk, who is father to at least 14 children, directly. Newsweek has contacted Paul via email for comment outside of working hours. From left, Senator Rand Paul talks with reporters in Russell building on Tuesday, June 17, 2025, Washington DC; Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk speaks at the SATELLITE Conference and Exhibition, March 9, 2020, in... From left, Senator Rand Paul talks with reporters in Russell building on Tuesday, June 17, 2025, Washington DC; Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk speaks at the SATELLITE Conference and Exhibition, March 9, 2020, in Washington DC. More Left: Tom Williams, Right: Susan Walsh, File/Left: CQ Roll Call via AP Images, Right: AP Photo Why It Matters Paul and Musk have been reposting each other's comments about the impact of the bill on national debt, so Paul's comment on X may have been an effort to highlight how the bill would add billions to the national debt, rather than an insult. The bill as it stands is not popular with American voters. According to a poll conducted by The Tarrance Group, which Paul has also shared, 58 percent of people agree with Musk's assertion that the budget is a "pork-filled spending bill that will massively increase the budget deficit and burden American citizens with crushingly unsustainable debt." The Trump administration says the bill is needed to address voter priorities. It seeks to permanently extend $3.8 trillion in expiring benefits while funding Trump's mass deportation efforts with $350 billion in national security spending. Not that we should govern by poll, but it is very clear people don't want this extreme amount of debt and reckless spending — Rand Paul (@RandPaul) June 28, 2025 What To Know Senator Rand Paul has been one of the most outspoken Republican voices against the "Big Beautiful Bill," as it stands. The bill passed a procedural vote in the Senate on June 28, with Paul and another Republican senator, Thom Tillis, voting against it. Paul has said he would be open to voting for the bill if it did not increase the debt, but it currently stands to add over $4 trillion, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. Tax cuts in the budget bill are also expected to provide more tax benefits to the rich than the working or middle class. It will extend Trump's 2017 tax cuts that resulted in reducing taxes significantly more for the top 0.1 percent, per analysis by the Tax Policy Center, Urban Institute, and Brookings Institution. The White House says that the bill "delivers for the American worker" and will deliver a "Blue-Collar BOOM." It highlights measures such as a 15 percent tax cut for Americans earning between $30,000 and $80,000 per year, and no taxes on overtime or tips. Trump has also said that revenue generated from global tariffs will offset the reduction in tax revenue. The tax cuts in the bill as it stands are expected to add $4.6 trillion in debt, and tariffs are expected to generate up to $3.1 trillion, according to the Tax Policy Center, the Tax Foundation, and the Yale Budget Lab. Another Republican and libertarian legislator, Representative Thomas Massie, has criticized the "omnibus" nature of the bill, as it contains everything from tax credits to AI regulation in one package. Paul has agreed with this sentiment, saying on X: "Break up the bills so we can vote on individual matters, not a bunch of things at once." What People Are Saying Senator Rand Paul on X: "I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I'm willing to negotiate if the White House strips the massive $5 TRILLION, long-term debt ceiling increase and replaces it with short-term extensions tied to real spending reforms. Fiscal responsibility isn't a talking point. It's a principle." I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I'm willing to negotiate if the White House strips the massive $5 TRILLION, long-term debt ceiling increase and replaces it with short-term extensions tied to real spending reforms. Fiscal responsibility isn't a talking point. It's a… — Rand Paul (@RandPaul) June 16, 2025 Daniel Hornung, former President Joe Biden's deputy director of the National Economic Council, told The Guardian: "It's really striking that this bill is both as fiscally irresponsible as it is and regressive. People making less than $50,000 a year will actually see their incomes go down, and it's really to finance tax cuts for largely high-income people." The White House, in a June 24 statement: "President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill lowers tax rates to keep more money in Americans' pockets—PREVENTING THE LARGEST TAX HIKE IN HISTORY." What Happens Next The budget bill just passed a procedural vote in the Senate without a single Democrat vote, or Senators Paul or Tillis. It still needs to pass another simple majority vote in the Senate, with Vice President JD Vance potentially needed as a tiebreaker. Then, it will return to the House for a final vote before it can be approved by the president.

Late Virginia lawmaker's former chief of staff wins Democratic primary to replace him
Late Virginia lawmaker's former chief of staff wins Democratic primary to replace him

The Hill

timean hour ago

  • The Hill

Late Virginia lawmaker's former chief of staff wins Democratic primary to replace him

Fairfax County Supervisor James Walkinshaw (D) has won the Democratic primary in Virginia's special election race to fill the late Rep. Gerry Connolly's (D-Va.) seat in Congress, Decision Desk HQ projects. Walkinshaw, who worked as Connolly's chief of staff for more than a decade before serving as county supervisor, emerged on Saturday from a crowded field of candidates vying for the 11th Congressional District seat. He had announced a bid to replace his former boss this spring after Connolly decided he would not seek reelection amid a battle with cancer, setting off a scramble on both sides of the aisle. The longtime lawmaker died just weeks later after endorsing Walkinshaw as his successor. 'This is not a moment for on-the-job training. We need a strong representative, experienced in addressing national issues that affect our community, who can stand up to Trump and lead from day one. I believe James Walkinshaw is that leader,' Connolly said in early May. As early voting kicked off in Old Dominion earlier this week, social media accounts for the late congressman urged Democrats to vote for Walkinshaw, calling the election 'our first chance to stand up for our workers, our schools, our democracy, and everything Gerry fought for.' The move drew some criticism online. 2024 Election Coverage Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) set a July 11 deadline for parties to pick their nominees, who will advance from Saturday's contest to square off in a Sept. 9 special election. Ten candidates were running on the Democratic side, including state Sen. Stella Pekarsky (D), state Del. Irene Shin (D), Fairfax County planning commissioner Candice Bennett, retired Navy officer Joshua Aisen, attorney Amy Roma, and attorney Leo Martinez. Seven candidates Republicans were jostling on the GOP side. The heavily Democratic district, which includes Fairfax City and much of Fairfax County in northern Virginia, went to former Vice President Kamala Harris by 34 points in the 2024 presidential election. Connolly won reelection by 34 points.

Prophecy, not politics, may also shape America's clash with Iran
Prophecy, not politics, may also shape America's clash with Iran

CNN

timean hour ago

  • CNN

Prophecy, not politics, may also shape America's clash with Iran

When most people contemplate the future of America's conflict with Iran, they hunt for clues in grainy satellite photos, statements from military analysts and President Trump's social media posts. But when scholar Diana Butler Bass considers what could happen next, her thoughts turn toward another group she says is now thinking more about prophecy than politics. She recalls warnings from her childhood about the rise of an Antichrist, stories about weeping mothers clutching their empty blankets after their babies were suddenly 'Raptured' to heaven and paintings of an angry Jesus leading armies of angels to an Armageddon-like, final battle in modern-day Israel. Those stories terrified and thrilled Bass when she heard them growing up in a White evangelical church in the 1970s. It was a time when the end always seemed near, and books like the bestseller 'The Late Great Planet Earth' warned Christians to gird their loins for a period of Great Tribulation and prepare for Jesus' triumphant return to Jerusalem. Bass, a prominent, progressive religious author who hosts a popular Substack newsletter called 'The Cottage,' no longer believes those stories. Yet when she considers why the US struck three nuclear facilities in Iran this month and what could happen next, she now offers a prophecy of her own: Bombing Iran will reinforce Trump's status as God's 'Chosen One' and Israel as His chosen nation among many of the President's White evangelical supporters. Many of these supporters dismiss the dangers of a larger war, she tells CNN, because such a clash would mean the world is approaching the 'end times' — a series of cataclysmic events ushering in the Second Coming of Christ and the rise of Israel as the fulfillment of biblical prophecies. 'There's almost a kind of spiritual eagerness for a war in the Middle East,' says Bass, describing attitudes among some White evangelicals. 'They believe a war is going to set off a series of events that will result in Jesus returning.' Trump's decision to bomb Iran has so far been examined almost exclusively through the lens of politics or military strategy. Yet there is a religious dimension to his decision – and what could happen next – that's been underexplored. America's approach to Iran and Israel may not just be driven by sober assessment of geopolitics. Bass and other religious scholars say US policy in the Middle East is also influenced by the controversial teachings of a pugnacious 19th century Anglo-Irish clergyman and a series of lurid, 'Left Behind' doomsday Christian books and films. This is dangerous, says Jemar Tisby, a historian and best-selling author of 'Stories of the Spirit of Justice.' 'Trump's action underscores how these theological beliefs are not abstract; they have direct, dangerous, and deadly consequences,' Tisby wrote recently in his 'Footnotes' newsletter. He elaborated in an interview this week with CNN, saying that that apocalyptic visions from the Bible should not influence America's policy in Israel or Iran in any way. 'You layer on this prophecy about the rise of Israel and now all of a sudden you have this very literalistic interpretation of the Bible informing US foreign policy,' he says. White evangelicals who see America's conflict with Iran as primarily a spiritual battle instead of a political one tend to be motivated by several beliefs. One belief is that Trump is God's 'chosen one,' saved from assassination last year to do God's work and protect Israel. He is, to borrow from the parlance of evangelical subculture, called 'for such a time as this.' This belief is reflected in a text message to Trump from Mike Huckabee, the prominent evangelical and former Arkansas governor who was appointed by Trump to be US ambassador to Israel. In the text, which was shared by Trump, Huckabee alluded to the two assassination attempts Trump survived last year in saying that God spared him 'to be the most consequential President in a century—maybe ever.' He added, 'I trust your instincts,' because 'I believe you hear from heaven,' and that 'You did not seek this moment. This moment sought YOU!' Huckabee's ambassadorship to Israel is not surprising. Many White evangelicals believe the church is obligated by the Bible to provide unwavering support to Israel. They view the ancient Israel described in the Bible as the same as the modern nation-state of Israel, which was created in 1948. Trump reinforced this view during his first term when he broke from decades of American policy to move the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and recognize Jerusalem as the Israeli capital. The move thrilled many White evangelical leaders, two of whom attended a ceremony marking the occasion. There is a long history of White evangelical leaders urging American presidents and politicians to treat Israel as a divinely favored nation. Many White evangelicals believe Israel's existence is a fulfillment of biblical prophecies that would usher in Jesus' return. Some cite a scripture from Genesis 12:3, which recounts God saying, 'I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you, I will curse.' That passage depicts God addressing Abraham, the Jewish patriarch and 'father of all nations.' But some White evangelicals say that passage also refers to Israel — both then and now. Republican Sen. Ted Cruz alluded to that scripture when he defended his support of Israel's war with Iran in a recent interview. 'Growing up in Sunday School, I was taught from the Bible that those who bless Israel will be blessed and those who curse Israel will be cursed,' he said. Other evangelical leaders have made similar claims. Pastor John Hagee, a prominent evangelical leader, has said that supporting Israel is not a political issue — it's a biblical one. Hagee is the founder and chairman of Christians United for Israel, which boasts 10 million members and bills itself as the largest pro-Israel organization in the US. 'It is not possible to say, 'I believe in the Bible' and not support Israel and the Jewish people,' he once declared. Trump won the support of about 8 out of 10 White evangelical Christian voters in the 2024 presidential election. And in a CNN poll after the airstrikes on Iran, 87% of Republicans said they trust Trump to make the right decisions about US' use of force against the country. Franklin Graham, son of the late evangelical leader Billy Graham, said on X after the bombing of Iran 'that the world is in a much safer place.' The Rev. Robert Jeffress, a prominent evangelical leader, suggested last week that opposition to Israel is rebellion against God. While delivering a Sunday sermon praising Trump's decision, Jeffress sermon was interrupted by applause and a standing ovation from his congregation. 'Those who oppose Israel are always on the wrong side of history, and most importantly, they are on the wrong side of God,' Jeffress said. 'And I thank God we finally have a president who understands that truth in Donald Trump.' Such unconditional support of Israel might make spiritual sense to evangelicals. But some scholars say it's a risky stance for a multiracial and multireligious democracy like the US to take. Americans' support for Israel had dropped to historic lows before the US' use of force in Iran. Tisby, the religious historian, tells CNN that the Israel depicted in the Bible is not the same as the modern-day country. 'If you conflate the two, you end up supporting all kinds of actions that hurt people in the name of politics,' Tisby says. 'It leads to the reluctance to recognize the rights of Palestinians. It blinds us to the human rights and justice issues that are at stake in the Middle East.' Tisby and other religion scholars say America's bombing of Iran is also influenced by another source: a form of Christianity pioneered in the 19th century by John Nelson Darby, an Anglo-Irish pastor. Darby looked at certain passages in the Bibe's book of Revelations and devised the concept of 'dispensationalism.' It divides history into distinct 'dispensations,' or periods through which God interacts with humanity differently. Many adherents to this tradition believe in a fiery apocalypse and the 'Rapture' — a moment when Christians are suddenly lifted to heaven before a period of tribulation on Earth. Darby's views were amplified a century later by the popular 'Left Behind' novels and films of the 1990s and 2000s, which reached millions of evangelicals with apocalyptic visions of the end times. The book series, inspired by Rapture theology and gory scenes in the Book of Revelation, has sold more than 65 million copies. The 'Left Behind' books were marketed as fiction, but they were treated as biblical truth by many evangelicals. Views of dispensationalism were taught in many evangelical churches, youth camps and Sunday schools, bringing them into the mainstream. Central to dispensationalism is the role of Israel in the last days. Its adherents believe that the establishment of the modern state of Israel marks the beginning of the end times — heralding the Second Coming of Christ. Israel's geopolitical success and security are seen as necessary preconditions for Christ's return, Tisby says. Dispensationalism has permeated White evangelical culture so much that many evangelicals today have adopted its tenets without being familiar with the term, Tisby says. 'Just because you don't have the name doesn't mean you're not actually adhering to the beliefs,' he says. 'It's so common now that it doesn't need to be named anymore.' Prophecies about angelic armies battling demonic armies in an apocalyptic Middle East sound implausible to many, but such beliefs gripped many of the White evangelical pastors and families she grew up with, says Bass, author of 'Freeing Jesus.' She recalls evangelical pastors preaching that whenever Israel gained more territory, it was God's will. Some pastors condemned Iran as evil. Jews, they said, would finally accept Jesus as their savior. But Jesus' return would be preceded by a series of cataclysmic events like the sudden disappearance of God's faithful and those 'left behind' — the non-believers who didn't accept Jesus. The belief that Christians could be teleported to heaven in the twinkle of an eye traumatized many young people at the time, she says. 'I had friends who would literally wake up in the middle of the night. And if their house was really quiet they would get very frightened and they'd sneak into their parents' bedroom to make sure their parents were still in their house,' she says. Most mainstream biblical scholars say the word 'rapture' does not appear in most translations of the Bible or the Book of Revelation. Many mainstream Biblical scholars say the Book of Revelation does not depict the literal end of the world: It's an anti-Roman tract that used coded language to tell Christians that God would destroy Rome's evil empire. Bass calls belief in the Rapture a 'completely invented theology' and 'one of the most wildly successful heresies in the history of Christianity.' A belief system that says God will end the world through violence offers no incentive for a political or religious leader to avoid war — or backtrack when events spiral out of control, she says. 'In the framework of this 'end times' theology, destruction is always a sign that God is working and is about to return,' Bass says. 'In this theology, the worse things become, the closer it is to the end. There is no motivation to do good, care for the poor, make sure that wars don't happen, and care for the planet.' Apocalyptic visions about the end of the world are common in many religions. And it's not unusual for a political leader to invoke God before going to war. But when citizens in a democracy believe political leaders are divinely appointed and driven by prophecies, it leaves no room for debate, Tisby says. 'There's a sort of fundamentalism to it all,' he says. 'It's unbending, unchanging and it can't be critiqued because its divine. Who are we to question? 'Any uncritical, unyielding support of a political actor, no matter what the conflict, is dangerous,' he says. If this is part of the dynamic that guides the US' future actions in the Middle East, it could lead to another final question. Many critics of Iran say it is a theocracy led by someone who reduces the world to a clash between good and evil and whose foreign policy is driven by apocalyptic religious myths. What if America's clash with Iran is driven in part by some of the same religious forces? John Blake is a CNN senior writer and author of the award-winning memoir, 'More Than I Imagined: What a Black Man Discovered About the White Mother He Never Knew.'

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