What New ‘Big Beautiful Bill' Proposals Mean for Medicaid, SALT
Senate Republicans have revealed new proposals to modify President Donald Trump's "Big, Beautiful Bill," which would result in further changes being made to Medicaid, and a lower deduction of state and local taxes (SALT).
On Monday, the GOP unveiled its recommended adjustments to Trump's bill, which included having work requirements for Medicaid enrollees who are parents of teens, and changing a previously updated $40,000 cap for SALT back to its current $10,000 deduction.
The proposed changes have reportedly angered a number of House Representatives, according to Reuters, and lawmakers' opposing views on the legislation could make passing Trump's bill more complicated as the self-set deadline in July draws closer.
Potential changes to the Medicaid system under Trump's bill have been sparking significant concern in recent months, such as the rolling back of Affordable Care Act (ACA) expansions and implementing work requirements.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that as many as 13.7 million Americans would be left without health coverage by 2034 because of various new policies being brought in to transform the federal program.
Meanwhile, the SALT cap deduction allows taxpayers who itemize when filing federal taxes to deduct certain taxes paid to state and local governments, which the 2018 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) capped at $10,000 per year for those filing jointly and $5,000 for single filers. This includes property taxes plus state income or sales taxes, but not both, according to the Tax Foundation.
The proposals enhance the changes being made to Medicaid eligibility, which are being implemented as a major part of the legislation's cost-saving strategy.
Previously, the House had exempted parents of dependents from Medicaid work requirements, but Senate Republicans are pushing for parents of children older than 14 to still fulfill the new expectations, of working a minimum of 80 hours a month.
Work requirements have been divisive in both the House and Senate. Critics warn they will substantially weaken the Medicaid system, the largest public health insurance program in the country, by forcing millions off the service, while supporters of the plan argue that work requirements foster employment, reduce fraudulent claims, and improve personal responsibility.
Senate Republicans are also proposing to maintain the $10,000 deduction cap, but that the amount is subject to continuing negotiations.
This suggestion has allegedly drawn significant hit-back from House Republicans whose constituents would have benefited from the higher deduction, Reuters reported.
"We have been crystal clear that the SALT deal we negotiated in good faith with the Speaker and the White House must remain in the final bill," the co-chairs of the House SALT caucus, Republican Representatives Young Kim and Andrew Garbarino said in a joint statement Monday.
Republican Representative Nicole Malliotakis of New York posted on X, formerly Twitter, that the $10,000 cap in the Senate bill was not only insulting, but a "slap in the face to the Republican districts that delivered our majority and trifecta" with the White House.
U.S. Senator for Maryland Chris Van Hollen wrote in a post on X: "The House version of Trump's so-called "Big, Beautiful Bill" cut $800B from Medicaid—and the Senate version is even worse. There's nothing "beautiful" about kicking millions off their health care. And to pay for billionaire tax cuts? We must fight this with everything we've got."
U.S. Senator for Massachusetts Elizabeth Warren, wrote in a post on X: "House Republicans voted to kick 16 MILLION people off their healthcare. Today, Senate Republicans proposed BIGGER CUTS to Medicaid, just to fund bigger tax cuts for giant corporations. Call your senator."
Republicans plan to bring the bill to a committee vote in the coming weeks, with a current scheduled deadline of July 4.
This article contains reporting from The Associated Press.
Related Articles
Trump's Medicaid Cuts May Lead to Over 16,500 Deaths, New Study PredictsPennsylvanians Could Lose Access To Weight Loss Drugs Amid Medicaid ChangesMedicaid Expands Access for Tribes Across 6 StatesTrump Administration Shares Medicaid Data With Deportation Officials: Report
2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
22 minutes ago
Lawmakers aim to stop U.S. from joining Israel's military campaign against Iran
As Israel and Iran continue to trade strikes in the Middle East, lawmakers are set to introduce bills and resolution aimed at preventing the United States from getting involved in Israel's military campaign against Iran. While the efforts are in their early stages, the legislation is unlikely to garner sufficient support to override the will of President Donald Trump and his supportive Republican majorities in both chambers of Congress. Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Monday introduced a resolution he says will "prevent war with Iran" as he expresses concern at the idea that the U.S may get involved in Israel's campaign against Iran. 'It is not in our national security interest to get into a war with Iran unless that war is absolutely necessary to defend the United States. I am deeply concerned that the recent escalation of hostilities between Israel and Iran could quickly pull the United States into another endless conflict,' Kaine, D-Va., said. 'The American people have no interest in sending service members to fight another forever war in the Middle East. This resolution will ensure that if we decide to place our nation's men and women in uniform into harm's way, we will have a debate and vote on it in Congress.' Separately, Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders introduced the No War Against Iran Act on Monday to "prohibit the use of federal funds for any use of military force in or against Iran absent specific Congressional authorization." Sanders has several co-sponsors including Democratic Sens. Peter Welch of Vermont, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Jeff Merkley of Oregon, Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, Ed Markey of Massachusetts, Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, and Tina Smith of Minnesota. '[Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu's reckless and illegal attacks violate international law and risk igniting a regional war. Congress must make it clear that the United States will not be dragged into Netanyahu's war of choice,' Sanders wrote in a statement. 'Our Founding Fathers entrusted the power of war and peace exclusively to the people's elected representatives in Congress, and it is imperative that we make clear that the President has no authority to embark on another costly war without explicit authorization by Congress.' Senate Majority Leader John Thune avoided saying whether he would put Kaine's resolution on the Senate floor when asked on Tuesday. He said that any action on the matter would be 'getting the cart ahead of the horse,' but that there could be a more 'fulsome discussion' later on what the role of Congress should be amid the conflict. 'This is something that's happened the last few days. I think the President is perfectly within his authority in the steps that he has taken. You know clearly, if this thing were to extend for some period of time, there could be a more fulsome discussion about what the role of Congress should be, and and and whether or not we need to take action,' Thune said. A resolution is a statement or expression of a sentiment that, if passed, has no legal authority. An act has legal authority, but even if passed by the Republican-controlled Congress, it would have to be signed into law by Trump. In the House, Kentucky Republican Thomas Massie joined California Democrat Ro Khanna to introduce a bipartisan War Powers resolution on Tuesday meant to ensure that Congress asserts its constitutional authority to declare war under 50 U.S. Code Ch. 33. "This is not our war. But if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution," Massie said. "I'm introducing a bipartisan War Powers Resolution tomorrow to prohibit our involvement. I invite all members of Congress to cosponsor this resolution." Khanna, one of the bill's initial cosponsors, quote tweeted Massie's post, calling for "No war in Iran," and equating the current situation in Iran to Operation Iraqi Freedom, the 2003 invasion of Iraq. "No war in Iran. It's time for every member to go on record. Are you with the neocons who led us into Iraq or do you stand with the American people?" Khanna posted. "I am proud to co-lead this bipartisan War Powers Resolution with Rep. Massie that is privileged and must receive a vote," Shortly after Massie's and Khanna's posts, New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and fellow Squad member Rashida Tlaib of Michigan expressed their support for the effort. Ocasio-Cortez, in a reply to Massie, said that she would be "signing on," to the resolution. In her post, Tlaib, said that the American people wouldn't fall for "it" again, contrasting today's debate on Iran's nuclear capabilities to October of 2002, when Congress approved a bipartisan Authorization for the Use of Military Force ahead of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. "I look forward to supporting this War Powers Resolution. The American people aren't falling for it again," Tlaib said. "We were lied to about "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq that killed millions (plus) forever changed lives. It's (unconstitutional) for Trump to go to war without a vote in Congress."
22 minutes ago
Ohio lawmakers to introduce bill banning abortion, criminalizing the procedure
Republican lawmakers in Ohio are planning on introducing a bill on Wednesday that would ban almost all abortions and criminalize the procedure. The " Ohio Prenatal Equal Protection Act" would overturn the amendment to the Ohio constitution, voted on in 2023, that establishes "an individual right to one's own reproductive medical treatment, including but not limited to abortion" before viability. Reproductive medical treatment includes contraception, fertility treatments and miscarriage care. Abortions are currently allowed up to 20 weeks since fertilization, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that studies sexual and reproductive rights. "[It] is a very, very simple and beautiful piece of legislation in that all it does is identify all human beings as persons deserving equal protection of the law, both born humans and pre-born humans," anti-abortion advocate Austin Beigel, with End Abortion Ohio, told ABC News. "So, it identifies those personhood rights starting at the moment of fertilization, when the new distinct organism is formed, the new human life that being that person now has equal protection under the law." Kellie Copeland, executive director of Abortion Forward, which helped pass the 2023 amendment in Ohio, said the bill goes against the will of voters. "This is the most extreme and anti-life legislation that you can imagine," she told ABC News. "It would strip Ohioans of their constitutionally guaranteed right to bodily autonomy, and that's the goal of this legislation." When Beigel was asked if he was concerned that the bill may go against the will of the voters, he said he was not because "the will of the voters was evil." "In many times in our country's history, the majority of people have desired evil things. We have discriminated horribly against the Black man and woman, and people wanted that," he continued. "So, I have no qualms about saying I oppose the majority of the will of the people when the people desire something that is evil." Copeland replied that "subjecting people to the loss of bodily autonomy, taking basic human rights away from Ohioans is the real evil that we're talking about here." Beigel said he has been working with Republican state Reps. Levi Dean and Jonathan Newman on the bill, which uses the U.S. Constitution's equal protection clause -- part of the Fourteenth Amendment -- to override Ohio's constitutional amendment. Beigel said the co-sponsors will be announced on Wednesday. Dean's and Newman's offices did not immediately return ABC News' request for comment. The bill would ban abortion with no exceptions for rape or incest. The only exceptions would be for a spontaneous miscarriage or to save the life of the pregnant woman. The bill would also criminalize those who have abortions, not just the providers who perform the procedure. Copeland she is worried the bill could lead to attacks on people who support abortion rights or who underwent abortions. "When people equate reproductive health care with murder, that kind of rhetoric invites violence," Copeland said. "It invites violence that we have seen at abortion clinics that we have seen perpetrated against abortion providers." Beigel said the bill does not outlaw contraception and is not designed to outlaw in-vitro fertilization (IVF). However, he did say that IVF may not be able to function the way that it does now if the bill is passed because it would apply equal protection to "pre-born humans." "The courts are going to have to debate the implications of this," he said. "Is it actually moral to freeze a young human being in a cryochamber and preserve them at the age they are and not let them grow?" Ohio's history of abortion bills In 2019, Ohio lawmakers passed a so-called heartbeat bill that bans abortions after cardiac activity can be detected, which occurs as early as six weeks of pregnancy, before many women know they're pregnant. It was signed into law by Gov. Mike DeWine. The ban had no exceptions for rape or incest. The only exceptions were cases of ectopic pregnancies and to prevent the mother's death or impairment of a major bodily function. A federal judge blocked the ban in 2019, but it was reinstated just hours after the Supreme Court decision to overrule Roe v. Wade. In September 2022, an Ohio lower court granted a temporary restraining order before granting a preliminary injunction a few weeks later. In December 2023, the state's Supreme Court dismissed the state's appeal and sent the case back to the lower courts. In November 2023, 57% of voters approved the passing of the amendment, adding abortion protections to the state constitution. Much of the six-week ban was rendered unconstitutional after the amendment went into effect in December 2023, Ohio's Attorney General Dave Yost said earlier this year. However, some lawmakers have tried to maintain other parts of the ban, including reporting requirements and a 24-hour waiting period before an abortion can be administered. An Ohio judge in August 2024.
Newsweek
23 minutes ago
- Newsweek
All the Signs Trump Is Preparing for a US Attack on Iran
Based on factual reporting, incorporates the expertise of the journalist and may offer interpretations and conclusions. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. As an unprecedented conflict between Israel and Iran dragged on into a fifth day, President Donald Trump has increasingly indicated that he was seriously considering a direct intervention in the fight. And while the Pentagon has thus far maintained that U.S. forces were operating in a purely "defensive posture," while also assisting Israeli interceptions of Iranian missiles, evidence is mounting that the White House is marching toward military action against the Islamic Republic. Trump's Threats Intensify Just prior to Israel launching its large-scale campaign on Thursday, Trump had signaled a willingness to continue nuclear negotiations with Iran, the sixth round of which had been scheduled to be held in Oman last Sunday. Even after the initial Israeli strikes began, Trump called on Tehran to double down on efforts to reach an agreement. As of Monday, however, Trump has adopted a notably more ominous tone. Shortly before his abrupt exit from the G7 meeting being held in Canada, he called on residents of Tehran, home to nearly 10 million people, to immediately evacuate, and later met with top national security officials at the White House Situation Room. The president further hardened his language on Tuesday, claiming on his Truth Social platform that "we have complete and total control of the skies over Iran," appearing to suggest the U.S. was already a party to the conflict. He even alleged to know the exact location of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, referring to the top Iranian authority as "an easy target," though, "we are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now." "But we don't want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers," Trump continued. "Our patience is wearing thin. Thank you for your attention to this matter!" He then called for "UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!" in a follow-up post apparently aimed at Iran. Two U.S. Navy F/A-18 Super Hornets fly in formation over an undisclosed location in the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility, on April 5, 2025. Two U.S. Navy F/A-18 Super Hornets fly in formation over an undisclosed location in the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility, on April 5, 2025. Staff Sergeant Gerald R. Willis US Builds Up Regional Footprint Over the weekend, aviation watchers noticed dozens of U.S. air tankers being deployed to Europe. Such aircraft are necessary to refuel warplanes conducting forward operations from afar and reports later tied their movement to tensions building in the Middle East. Then, on Monday, the USS Nimitz aircraft carrier diverted from the South China Sea to the Middle East, where it would join the USS Carl Vinson carrier strike group that entered the Arabian Sea in April. If the U.S. were to conduct a strike on Iran's heavily fortified underground Fordow nuclear enrichment facility, the weapon most widely believed to be involved would be the GBU 57/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator. The only aircraft certified to carry the 15-ton bomb is the B2 stealth bomber, capable of delivering strikes from bases 6,000 miles away. The closest base to Fordow is the U.S. Naval Facility Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. Meanwhile, other U.S. staff and family members that could potentially be exposed to hostile fire on the ground have reportedly been authorized to leave posts in Bahrain, Iraq and Kuwait since last week, in the lead up to Israel's opening strikes. U.S. Central Command is estimated to have roughly 40,000 personnel in the Middle East. State Department Forms Task Force As for other U.S. citizens looking to leave the region, they are being asked to contact a new task force announced Tuesday by State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce. "The task force is a group of people who are working taking the calls of people, of American citizens around the world, making sure that they get connected with what they may need that region," Bruce said. Such an initiative she said, "is something that the State Department does when there's a situation that requires it, and this is one of those times." Before taking questions, Bruce said it would be a "little bit of a different day for the briefing," as "there will be less than I can answer for you because of the circumstances that we're dealing with around the world." Throughout the press conference, she declined to "characterize what President Trump says or tweets," including whether or not he sought to support Israel's strikes against Fordow, or even sought to pursue regime change in Iran. A general view of The White House as U.S. President Donald Trump returns from the G7 Leaders' Summit on June 17, 2025 in Washington, DC. A general view of The White House as U.S. President Donald Trump returns from the G7 Leaders' Summit on June 17, 2025 in Washington, Fades Bruce also would neither confirm nor deny whether or not the U.S. remained open to diplomacy with Iran at this stage. Neither the U.S. nor Iran has announced any new diplomatic overtures since Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi announced the suspension of nuclear talks over Israel's sweeping campaign of strikes against sites and personnel tied to Iran's military and nuclear program. Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty, however, did hold separate conversations on Tuesday with Araghchi and Trump's special envoy for the Middle East Steve Witkoff. A readout of the conversation did not mention any messages passed between the U.S. and Iranian diplomats but contained an urgent plea from Abdelatty to avoid further escalation. Vance's New Tone Vice President JD Vance is often viewed as one of the most senior advocates of restraint in the Trump administration. Like Trump, he has criticized past administration for becoming mired in foreign conflicts, a key voter message he hammered on the campaign trail last year. Back in March, Vance was among the few senior officials to initially doubt the utility of the decision to begin launching strikes against Iran's Yemeni ally, Ansar Allah, also known as the Houthi movement, according to Signal chats leaked by The Atlantic. On Tuesday, as Trump ramped up his rhetoric against Iran, Vance issued a lengthy personal appeal in defense of the president's decision-making process on X, formerly Twitter. Look, I'm seeing this from the inside, and am admittedly biased towards our president (and my friend), but there's a lot of crazy stuff on social media, so I wanted to address some things directly on the Iran issue: First, POTUS has been amazingly consistent, over 10 years, that… — JD Vance (@JDVance) June 17, 2025 He said the president "may decide he needs to take further action to end Iranian enrichment," while acknowledging that "people are right to be worried about foreign entanglement after the last 25 years of idiotic foreign policy." "But I believe the president has earned some trust on this issue. And having seen this up close and personal, I can assure you that he is only interested in using the American military to accomplish the American people's goals," Vance continued. "Whatever he does, that is his focus."
