
MAGA showdown looming as conservative senators rage at parts of Trump bill: ‘It's immoral, it's wrong, it has to stop'
Donald Trump 's 'big, beautiful bill' passed the House of Representatives last week, but faces a still-uncertain future in the Senate.
With the House Republican budget package now on its way to the upper chamber after a marathon journey through the Rules Committee and House floor this past week, Senate Majority Leader John Thune is taking a look at what it will require to pass Trump's bill through the upper chamber, where it's already facing heavy resistance.
On Sunday, two Republican senators hit the Sunday show circuit to voice objections from the conservative side — objections that House Speaker Mike Johnson is familiar with after last week's vote. Sens. Rand Paul and Ron Johnson derided the bill's deficit spending measures, which despite the GOP's $1.5trn cuts to Medicaid, food stamps and other programs are still set to increase the federal budget deficit by $3.8trn over a decade, thanks to one of the GOP's main priorities: the extension of the 2017 Trump tax cuts.
The bill does that, and more — a late game deal between Johnson and the SALT caucus, a coalition of Republicans from blue states, secured a provision in the legislation that would raise the cap on deductions for state and local taxes (SALT) from $10,000 to $40,000 for American households earning under $500,000 annually.
Johnson, of Wisconsin, told CNN's Jake Tapper on State of the Union this Sunday that Republicans would be responsible for 'mortgaging our children's future' by adding so much to the federal debt, which currently sits at $36trn.
"It's immoral. It's wrong. It has to stop,' Johnson said. 'This is our moment. We've witnessed an unprecedented level of increased spending.'
'58% since 2019,' the senator continued. 'This is our only chance to reset that to a reasonable, pre-pandemic level of spending.'
Paul, a staunch fiscal conservative and member of the party's libertarian wing, outlined similar concerns to Shannon Bream on Fox News Sunday: "Somebody has to stand up and yell, 'the emperor has no clothes.''
'Everybody is falling in lockstep on this,' said the Kentucky Republican senator. ''Pass the big beautiful bill. Don't question anything.' Well, conservatives do need to stand up ... if we don't stand up on it, I really fear the direction the country is going."
The debt increase fears were raised repeatedly by conservatives on the House Freedom Caucus before the bill's final passage on Thursday. But every member of the caucus voted for the bill, save chairman Andy Harris, who voted 'present'. Two other Republican members of the House, Warren Davidson (who was expelled from the Freedom Caucus last year) and Thomas Massie, voted against the bill.
But John Thune 's troubles do not end there.
The Hill separately reported last week that a group of roughly a half dozen Republican senators was privately meeting with the Senate majority leader to discuss a different angle of concern: the bill's plans to change Medicaid by limiting state provider taxes (which allow state governments to claw back some Medicaid funding).
While the GOP 'big, beautiful' budget plan does impose new work requirements and more frequent eligibility checks on Medicaid recipients, it avoided some of the larger cuts to the program which conservatives were hoping to include. Even so, an analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) found that it would still kick millions off of Medicaid and other health care plans obtained through the Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplace system.
'There's probably five, six, seven of us who, if you do anything that cuts into benefits, you're going to have a real problem. The leader is aware of that,' one Republican senator, who was not named, told The Hill this past week.
A number of other senators, including Republicans from states with large rural populations, are publicly skeptical about aspects of the plan that could endanger or financially ruin rural hospitals, which rely in large part on Medicaid funding to survive.
By making too many changes to the bill, Thune risks leaving it in a state that cannot be re-passed by the House. But the Senate leader also has his own caucus to worry about, as well as Donald Trump's continued demand for the bill to remain in one piece, rather than be split up. The president (and many of his allies) believe that passage of one bill will be more politically achievable for the GOP caucuses in the House and Senate, where in both chambers the party has narrow margins over Democrats.
The bill is a mish-mash of a number of the Trump administration's year-one priorities, including a surge in funding for border security measures, an extension of the president's signature tax plan, and a boost in military spending.
Ron Johnson threw cold water on even that basic strategy on Thursday, in a gaggle with reporters.
'We have to split it up,' he said. 'Break it up. Break it up and focus on the areas of agreement.'
Hashtags

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


The Guardian
14 minutes ago
- The Guardian
‘We're not afraid of you': LA protesters, enraged by Trump, flood the streets
Thousands of Angelenos enraged by Donald Trump's decision to commandeer their state national guard swamped the streets around city hall and the federal courthouse on Sunday, bringing a major freeway to a standstill on Sunday. The demonstrators were met by law enforcement. But the national guard, hemmed in by the protesters and by dozens of Los Angeles police cruisers, played almost no role in any of it. A vocal, boisterous but largely peaceful sea of protesters engulfed the north-eastern corner of downtown Los Angeles, hurling insults at Trump and at the immigration enforcement teams who had conducted mass arrests of undocumented migrants in the area on Friday. They converged on the Metropolitan detention center, the federal lockup where many protesters arrested over the previous 48 hours were being held, and an adjacent loading dock that about 50 national guardsmen, in battle gear with riot shields and semi-automatic weapons, were using as their staging ground. The protesters did not hesitate to walk right up to the heavily armed me. 'We're not afraid of you!' one organiser with a bullhorn, John Parker, yelled. One of the many banners on display read: 'National Guard LOL.' Every building and wall in the immediate vicinity was covered in profane graffiti, the most common being 'Fuck ICE', 'LAPD can suck it' and 'Kill all cops.' Shortly after noon, the guardsmen, flanked by armed officers with Department of Homeland Security insignia, fired teargas into the growing crowd so a caravan of DHS and Border Patrol vehicles could push its way through. People backed off briefly and donned masks, only to come back in larger numbers within a few minutes. That was the extent of the national guard's involvement. Within a couple of hours, the crowd had swollen to several thousand, as marchers from earlier protests – one in Boyle Heights, east of downtown, and the other at city hall – moved on the federal complex from different directions, spilling so broadly into the surrounding streets that it brought traffic to a standstill. Several drivers caught in the snarl-up honked enthusiastically to show their support. At first, the Los Angeles police department issued orders to disperse and threatened to arrest anyone who did not comply. Dozens of patrol cars tore through downtown, forming a barricade just north of the protest and slowly pushing the crowd in the opposite direction. LAPD riot officers sprinted down the sidewalks and fired several rounds of flash-bangs, which alarmed the crowd but did not appear to harm anyone. Soon, the LAPD patrol cars had – whether by design or by accident – hemmed the national guardsmen into their staging area, making it impossible for them to make their own attempt at crowd control even if they had wanted to. The crowd, meanwhile, had split into two, with one group clustered so thickly along Alameda and Temple Streets that the police soon gave up on attempting to move them further. The other group sprinted down freeway off-ramps leading to the 101 freeway, bringing traffic on the major artery to a standstill. Police fired round after round of flash-bangs in an attempt to push the protesters back up the off-ramps. Thick clusters of onlookers gathered on the bridges above the action, shouting 'shame, shame!' at the police as well as profanity-laced slogans – in English and Spanish – directed at Trump and his immigration enforcement efforts. Unlike the national guardsmen, the LAPD appeared reluctant to resort to teargas. Unlike the county sheriff's department, who shot a news photographer in the leg on Saturday with a so-called 'less lethal' round, the city police also shied away from more drastic crowd control measures. California leaders including the governor Gavin Newsom and the Los Angeles mayor Karen Bass have accused Trump of compounding the problems caused by his immigration raids by taking the unorthodox step of requisitioning the state national guard. By mid-afternoon Newsom was urging the president to rescind the order. 'We didn't have a problem until Trump got involved,' Newsom said. 'This is a serious breach of state sovereignty – inflaming tensions while pulling resources from where they're actually needed.' Some of those frustrations showed on the street, as LAPD officers – even as they appeared determined not to inflame the crowds further – had to endure loud insults and a flurry of empty plastic water bottles thrown whenever they made an attempt to take control of the crowd. In isolated incidents, LAPD riot officers manhandled or arrested protesters who threw fists at them or beat on police cars. At one point, a black police cruiser moved through the crowd at high speed and was reported to have injured a bicyclist knocked to the ground. There were isolated episodes of vandalism – graffiti sprayed on buildings and vehicles, a Waymo driverless car seen with a smashed windshield, one protester who damaged the side mirror of a parked car he passed. But the vast majority of protesters seemed determined to vent their anger through slogans and placards only. 'People experiencing oppression are expressing their first amendment rights,' said a protest organiser who wanted to be identified only as Angelica R for fear of government reprisals 'This is not the making of a dictatorship,' she said of Trump's immigration crackdowns. 'This is the description of a dictatorship.' It was not clear what plan, if any, the national guard had going into Sunday. Newsom said about 300 guardsmen had deployed to the LA area – far short of the 2,000 requisitioned by the president. As the day began, two dozen of them appeared to news crews outside the federal complex as though intent only on posing for photographs. They had the visors of their helmets up, and many wore shades, even though the day started out cloudy. Mayor Bass, speaking to the Los Angeles Times, accused them of 'posturing'. Maxine Waters, the veteran congresswoman from south LA, taunted them by asking: 'Who are you going to shoot?' It was only as the crowds grew thicker that they donned riot shields and turned to face the street, not the television cameras. The size of the protests appeared to take everyone by surprise. LAPD squad cars tore towards city hall at one point, only to spin in circles and head back to the federal complex moments later. One protest organiser outside the Metropolitan detention center yelled at one point: 'This is only a distraction! We need to go to city hall!' But as soon as people started heeding her call, they ran into a sea of several thousand protesters moving in the opposite direction.


The Guardian
19 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Los Angeles protesters demonstrate against Ice raids
US national guard troops and LA police clashed with demonstrators on Sunday, as teargas and pepper spray were used to disperse the crowds who had been protesting against the raids by immigration authorities which began Friday afternoon


Daily Mail
27 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Trans military colonel issues defiant message after being booted from post as Trump ban takes effect
One of the military's highest ranking transgender officials is speaking out after being placed on administrative leave as part of the Trump administration's ban on trans troops. Colonel Bree Fram, who came out as transgender in 2016 when the initial ban on trans troops was lifted, was an astronautical engineer in the US Space Force and was the Pentagon 's division chief for requirements integration. She posted to Instagram Friday saying 'I have been officially placed on administrative leave, effective tomorrow, pending separation' after the Supreme Court ruled the ban could go ahead. Fram - whose profile picture on the social media app is an LGBT rainbow version of the Space Force logo - defiantly spoke of sobbing as she pinned medals on three of 'my folks' in her last official act in service. 'The last salute broke my heart in two and the tears flowed freely even as I have so much to be thankful for and so many amazing memories.' Fram detailed the day she came out in 2016, telling a story of how her teammates responded to the announcement by shaking her hand and, one by one, saying: 'It's an honor to serve with you.' She also spoke about a similar experience last week, when she announced at a joint staff meeting that she was leaving and that she no longer met 'the current standard for military excellence and readiness.' 'A room full of senior leaders, admirals and generals, walked over to me and the scene from 2016 repeated. They offered those same words, now tinged with the sadness of past tense: 'It's been an honor to serve with you',' she said. She added that she walked away with tears in her eyes because Fram felt that it had been her honor all along. 'It has been the honor of a lifetime to serve this nation and defend the freedoms and opportunities we have as Americans. My wildest dreams came true wearing this uniform.' In the past six months, Fram had been posting photos of her fellow transgender troops on Instagram listing their accomplishment with the tagline: 'Happens to Be Trans.' Fram told Stars and Stripes that, most recently, her work had been focused on 'defining the future capabilities that we're going to need to win wars far into the future.' She added that her Instagram post was an attempt to speak on behalf of her fellow transgender soldiers. 'It is almost a duty and an obligation to speak on their behalf because it is my privilege to do so and to hopefully represent transgender service members well that do not have the privilege that comes along with the rank and the experience that I do,' she said. 'If I don't speak for them and they are unable to speak for themselves, who will speak for them?' In early May, the Supreme Court ruled that Donald Trump 's ban on troops with gender dysphoria can stand. The Supreme Court's ruling lifts a lower court's decision to pause Trump's policy, which the administration called 'dramatic and facially unfair.' The order allows the Department of Defense to continue removing transgender service members from the military and denying enlistment while lawsuits continue in the lower courts.. On January 20, President Trump signed an executive order ordering Hegseth to enact a ban on 'individuals with gender dysphoria' serving in the U.S. military. District Judge Benjamin Settle in Washington state ruled that the ban violated the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection and barred the government from enforcing Trump's policy. The Trump administration appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit but it was rejected, prompting them to appeal to the Supreme Court. Trump's lawyers argued that the ruling was 'contrary to military readiness and the Nation's interests.' The liberal justices - Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson - would have decided against Trump, they indicated in the filing, but the Supreme Court ruling was not signed. The ruling was an emergency appeal prompting an unusually swift ruling from the Supreme Court justices, although they can rule on the merits of the case at a later date. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt celebrated the news in a statement. 'Another MASSIVE victory in the Supreme Court!' she wrote. 'President Trump and Secretary Pete Hegseth are restoring a military that is focused on readiness and lethality – not DEI or woke gender ideology.' The ban enacted by the Department of Defense on February 26 detailed that 'the medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on individuals who have a current diagnosis or history of, or exhibit symptoms with, gender dysphoria are incompatible with the high mental and physical standards necessary for military service.' The level challenge to the order was filed by Commander Emily Shilling, together with six other current transgender service members and one transgender person who wants to join the military. Schilling appeared at the LGBT Community Center dinner on April 10 to be honored for the legal fight against the president and his administration. 'I swore an oath to support and defend the onstitution,' Schilling said. 'That oath requires obedience to lawful orders. But when an order undermines the very principles I swore to uphold, I have the responsibility to challenge it.' Shortly after he was inaugurated in 2021, President Joe Biden signed an executive order overturning Trump's initial ban on service of transgender individuals in the military. After Trump was inaugurated he ordered the ban to be reinstated. Trump and Hegseth view the extra care required for transgender service members to be a distraction to military readiness. In February, Hegseth ordered a pause on gender-transitioning medical procedures for active duty service members. 'Effective immediately, all new accessions for individuals with a history of gender dysphoria are paused, and all unscheduled, scheduled, or planned medical procedures associated with affirming or facilitating a gender transition for Service members are paused,' his memo said.