‘Absolute Disaster:' Senate Dems Take Aim At Trump's Tax Bill
Senate Democrats laid into President Donald Trump's sweeping tax bill on Sunday, emphasizing the impact it is poised to make on millions of Americans on Medicaid.
'This Republican budget bill is an absolute disaster for the country, in particular for middle-class and poor people,' Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) said in an interview on CNN's State of the Union, noting that it seeks to pay for tax cuts by curbing spending on social programs.
Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-GA) echoed these concerns in an interview on NBC News's Meet the Press, stressing that 'Republicans are trying to push forward this big ugly bill that's going to literally cut as many as seven million Americans off of their healthcare.'
Murphy and Warnock's statements come as Republicans' massive tax and spending bill heads to the Senate, where it's likely to face staunch Democratic opposition as well as GOP dissent. The bill slashes spending on social programs like SNAP and Medicaid, while proposing trillions in tax cuts and billions in investments to strengthen border security. According to an initial analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, it would push 7.6 million people off Medicaid, in part by making it more difficult to qualify for the program.
One way it does so is by imposing a new work requirement, which would force many able-bodied recipients to prove that they've worked, volunteered or attended a training program to obtain Medicaid coverage.
Warnock stressed that a similar policy in Georgia has added new barriers for people in need of healthcare. This 'work reporting requirement is very good at kicking people off of their health care,' he said. 'It's not very good at incentivizing work at all.'
Earlier this May, House Republicans narrowly passed the bill by just one vote. It'll take a simple majority – which Republicans have – to advance again in the Senate, though some GOP lawmakers have said they'd like to make changes of their own to tax and Medicaid provisions.
GOP Senators like Rick Scott (R-FL) have also raised concerns about how the bill could add to the federal debt, an issue Murphy alluded to as well on Sunday.
'It's just unreal the amount of gaslighting this administration is doing,' Murphy said, while referring to the White House's claims that the legislation won't alter the deficit at all.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Epoch Times
16 minutes ago
- Epoch Times
Iowa Democrat Announces Senate Run to Unseat Republican Joni Ernst
Iowa state Rep. J.D. Scholten has launched a campaign to unseat Republican U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst, citing recent comments Ernst made about Medicaid as a tipping point. Scholten, a Democrat representing parts of Sioux City, confirmed his candidacy to multiple Iowa news outlets on Monday, just days after
CBS News
19 minutes ago
- CBS News
Senate forges ahead with tight timeline to approve Trump's "big beautiful bill"
Washington — The Senate is forging ahead this week on President Trump's "one big beautiful bill," facing a tight, self-imposed deadline to get the legislation to his desk ahead of the July 4 holiday. "It's going to be a busy month — we have a lot to get done," Senate Majority Leader John Thune said on the Senate floor Monday, adding that the upper chamber's "biggest focus" will be on getting the president's agenda passed. In a razor-thin vote last month, the House passed the legislation, which addresses the president's tax, defense and energy priorities. The vote came after weeks of intraparty disagreement over a number of provisions, like Medicaid restrictions. That bill has now made its way to the Senate, where some of the same tensions exist — and new dynamics have begun to take shape. Thune, a South Dakota Republican, outlined to reporters Monday that the process is underway, saying "I think we're on track — I hope, at least — to be able to produce something that we can pass through the Senate, send back to the House, have them pass and put on the president's desk by the Fourth of July." But Thune can only afford to lose three Republican votes on the bill, with all Democrats expected to vote against it. A handful of Senate Republicans have already expressed opposition to the House-passed bill. GOP leaders will be focused on uniting the conference around the bill, and possible changes, in the days ahead. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a Republican from South Dakota, speaks to members of the media at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Monday, June 2, 2025. Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images The majority leader acknowledged the delicate balance on Monday, telling reporters that the Senate bill will "have to be tracked fairly closely, obviously, with the House bill," citing its "fragile majority." Thune said the House "struck a very delicate balance in getting it passed in the House in the first place." "But there are some things that senators want, you know, added to the bill, or, you know, things that we would do slightly differently," Thune said. Meanwhile, the president took an active role in the process as the Senate returned to Washington from recess on Monday. He met with Thune and spoke with a handful of key Senate Republicans, including Sens. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Josh Hawley of Missouri, who have expressed opposition to some of the bill's components. Johnson, along with Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, has been among the leading voices in the upper chamber calling for deeper spending cuts in the bill, which aims at present to cut $1.5 trillion, while also advocating for separating a debt ceiling increase from the legislation. The Wisconsin Republican said he had a "very respectful conversation" with Mr. Trump, telling reporters that he and the president "by and large share the same goal," but have a "difference in opinion in terms of how to do it." Paul has pledged to oppose the bill due to its debt ceiling increase. Mr. Trump again called out the Kentucky Republican on Truth Social on Tuesday, saying Paul "votes NO on everything, but never has any practical or constructive ideas." Beyond concern about spending cuts, other Senate Republicans have voiced concern for Medicaid restrictions, including Hawley. The Missouri Republican told reporters Monday that the president told him when they spoke that there should be "no Medicaid benefit cuts," adding that he told Mr. Trump that they are "singing from the same hymnbook." But Hawley remains concerned about changes to provider taxes and copay requirements in the legislation. The president also weighed in on Truth Social on Monday, urging Senate Republicans to work quickly on the bill. "With the Senate coming back to Washington today, I call on all of my Republican friends in the Senate and House to work as fast as they can to get this Bill to MY DESK before the Fourth of JULY," Mr. Trump wrote. Further complicating matters, the Senate also has to contend with strict limits on the reconciliation process, which governs the legislation. Though the process allows the Senate to bypass a 60-vote threshold required to advance most legislation, it also comes with its own hurdles. Under what's known as the Byrd rule, all provisions in the legislation must have direct budgetary consequences. And senators may challenge any portion of the bill that they say doesn't deal with taxes, spending or the debt limit and ask the Senate parliamentarian to resolve the dispute. Thune said "Byrd conversations" have been going on for the last week and would continue this week and next. And when asked whether Senate Republicans would rule out overruling the parliamentarian, he told reporters "we're not going there." and contributed to this report.
Boston Globe
20 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Republican push for proof of citizenship to vote proves a tough sell in the states
Advertisement 'The bill authors failed spectacularly to explain how this bill would be implemented and how it would be able to be implemented without inconveniencing a ton of voters,' said Anthony Gutierrez, director of the voting rights group Common Cause Texas. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Voting by noncitizens is rare Voting by noncitizens is already illegal and punishable as a felony, potentially leading to deportation, but Trump and his allies have pressed for a proof-of-citizenship mandate by arguing it would improve public confidence in elections. Before his win last year, Trump falsely claimed noncitizens might vote in large enough numbers to sway the outcome. Although noncitizen voting does occur, research and reviews of state cases has shown it to be rare and more often a mistake. Advertisement Voting rights groups say the various proposals seeking to require proof-of-citizenship are overly burdensome and threaten to disenfranchise millions of Americans. Many do not have easy access to their birth certificates, have not gotten a U.S. passport or have a name that no longer matches the one on their birth certificate — such as women who changed their last name when they married. Married women who changed names are a particular concern The number of states considering bills related to proof of citizenship for voting tripled from 2023 to this year, said Liz Avore, senior policy adviser with the Voting Rights Lab, an advocacy group that tracks election legislation in the states. That hasn't resulted in many new laws, at least so far. Republicans in Wyoming passed their own proof-of-citizenship legislation, but similar measures have stalled or failed in multiple GOP-led states, including Florida, Missouri, Texas and Utah. A proposal remains active in Ohio, although Gov. Mike DeWine, a Republican, has said he doesn't want to sign any more bills that make it harder to vote. In Texas, the legislation swiftly passed the state Senate after it was introduced in March but never made it to a floor vote in the House. It was unclear why legislation that was such a priority for Senate Republicans – every one of them co-authored the bill -- ended up faltering. 'I just think people realized, as flawed as this playbook has been in other states, Texas didn't need to make this mistake,' said Rep. John Bucy, a Democrat who serves as vice chair of the House elections committee. Bucy pointed to specific concerns about married women who changed their last name. This surfaced in local elections earlier this year in New Hampshire, which passed a proof-of-citizenship requirement last year. Advertisement Similar laws have created confusion Other states that previously sought to add such a requirement have faced lawsuits and complications when trying to implement it. In Arizona, a state audit found that problems with the way data was handled had affected the tracking and verification of residents' citizenship status. It came after officials had identified some 200,000 voters who were thought to have provided proof of their citizenship but had not. A proof-of-citizenship requirement was in effect for three years in Kansas before it was overturned by federal courts. The state's own expert estimated that almost all of the roughly 30,000 people who were prevented from registering to vote while it was in effect were U.S. citizens who otherwise had been eligible. In Missouri, legislation seeking to add a proof-of-citizenship requirement cleared a Senate committee but never came to a vote in the Republican-led chamber. Republican state Sen. Ben Brown had promoted the legislation as a follow-up to a constitutional amendment stating that only U.S. citizens can vote, which Missouri voters overwhelmingly approved last November. He said there were several factors that led to the bill not advancing this year. Due to the session's limited schedule, he chose to prioritize another elections bill banning foreign contributions in state ballot measure campaigns. 'Our legislative session ending mid-May means a lot of things die at the finish line because you simply run out of time,' Brown said, noting he also took time to research concerns raised by local election officials and plans to reintroduce the proof-of-citizenship bill next year. Complications prompt states to focus on other issues The Republican-controlled Legislature in Utah also prioritized other election changes, adding voter ID requirements and requiring people to opt in to receive their ballots in the mail. Before Gov. Spencer Cox signed the bill into law, Utah was the only Republican-controlled state that allowed all elections to be conducted by mail without a need to opt in. Advertisement Under the Florida bill that has failed to advance, voter registration applications wouldn't be considered valid until state officials had verified citizenship, either by confirming a previous voting history, checking the applicant's status in state and federal databases, or verifying documents they provided. The bill would have required voters to prove their citizenship even when updating their registration to change their address or party affiliation. Its sponsor, Republican state Rep. Jenna Persons-Mulicka, said it was meant to follow through on Trump's executive order: 'This bill fully answers the president's call,' she said. Cassidy reported from Atlanta. Associated Press writers Mead Gruver in Cheyenne, Wyoming; David A. Lieb in Jefferson City, Missouri; Kate Payne in Tallahassee, Florida; Hannah Schoenbaum in Salt Lake City; Julie Carr Smyth in Columbus, Ohio; and Isabella Volmert in Lansing, Michigan, contributed to this report.
