logo
No overnight vote-a-rama

No overnight vote-a-rama

Politicoa day ago

Senate Republicans are on the cusp of formally adopting a controversial accounting tactic to zero out much of the cost of their massive domestic policy bill.
The matter came to a head on the Senate floor Sunday afternoon, when Democrats sought to prevent the use of the current policy baseline, as the tactic is known. Minority Leader Chuck Schumer objected to the maneuver and accused Republicans of setting a new precedent with the 'budgetary gimmick.'
The Senate is set to vote on Schumer's objection later Sunday or Monday, but Republicans believe their members will back up Senate Majority Leader John Thune and Senate Budget Chair Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).
That's in part because they were able to sidestep a situation where senators would be asked to overrule Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough on the baseline question. Instead, Republicans are asserting that Graham has the ability to establish which baseline is used under the 1974 law governing the budget process, rather than having MacDonough issue a formal ruling.
'There is nothing to debate and we consider this matter settled,' Graham spokesperson Taylor Reidy said.
The revised baseline allows Republicans to essentially write off the $3.8 trillion cost of extending tax cuts passed in 2017 that are set to expire at the end of the year. The effect on the megabill's bottom line is profound as a pair of new Congressional Budget Office reports show.
One, released late Saturday night using the current policy baseline, showed the legislation would reduce the deficit by $508 billion. The other, released Sunday morning using the traditional method accounting for expiring provisions, showed the megabill would increase the deficit by $3.25 trillion.
'Things have never, never worked this way where one party so egregiously ignores precedent, process and the parliamentarian, and does that all in order to wipe away trillions of dollars in costs,' Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) said during a speech on the Senate floor Sunday.
The maneuver came as little surprise. The GOP plan has been quietly in the works for months, and Thune had suggested they would reprise the no-formal-ruling strategy they'd used earlier in the process of passing the megabill.
'As we did on the budget resolution, we believe the law is clear that the budget committee chairman can determine the baseline we use,' Thune told reporters. Graham on Sunday embraced the CBO ruling showing the deficit savings — and his own authority to make the accounting change: 'I've decided to use current policy when it comes to cutting taxes,' he said. 'If you use current policy, they never expire.'
The baseline change is crucial for Senate Republicans because under the budget blueprint they adopted earlier this year, the Finance Committee provisions in the bill can only increase the deficit by a maximum of $1.5 trillion. The bill now under consideration wouldn't comply under the old accounting method.
Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden , the top Finance Democrat, called it 'budget math as fake as Donald Trump's tan,' and said the GOP amounted to a 'nuclear' choice that would weaken the chamber's 60-vote filibuster.
'We're now operating in a world where the filibuster applies to Democrats but not to Republicans, and that's simply unsustainable given the triage that'll be required whenever the Trump era finally ends,' he said.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

‘Big beautiful' AI rule means feds must act NOW to stop Big Tech's abuses
‘Big beautiful' AI rule means feds must act NOW to stop Big Tech's abuses

New York Post

time25 minutes ago

  • New York Post

‘Big beautiful' AI rule means feds must act NOW to stop Big Tech's abuses

Deep within President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act — the major spending legislation he wants to see by July 4 — is a rule that holds enormous implications for the rapidly developing artificial intelligence sector. The Senate is debating a provision that would prevent state governments from regulating the AI industry for years. Supporters claim this moratorium would stop a patchwork of conflicting state laws from slowing AI's rocketing development. But without subsequent federal action, a moratorium on state regulation risks making the AI industry a law-free zone, where Big Tech companies can essentially do whatever they want with an untested, sometimes exploitative new technology. We've needed federal regulation on AI companies for some time, but if this new moratorium passes, it will become even more urgent for Congress to act. If the AI industry is going to grow sustainably and responsibly, we need legislation to provide guardrails and clear rules about how to protect the creators of content that AI tools use — publishers, authors, journalists, artists, musicians and creatives of all types. Right now, those content creators are AI's victims. Big Tech and AI companies scrape vast amounts of content to build and operate their generative AI products, which turn content into GenAI outputs for users. Sometimes they just reproduce content creators' passages word for word — without credit or compensation. AI companies admit these unfair and un-American tactics are fundamental to their businesses, but they refuse to pay because it's cheaper to steal. Even worse, this predatory behavior lets AI models act as information gatekeepers. If Big Tech is left to its own devices, Americans will have less access to accurate information, and certainly no one to hold accountable for errors and mistakes. Reporting on stories that Americans need to know will dwindle as the AI companies undermine the business models of publishers, opening the door to viewpoint suppression and creating opportunities for foreign propagandists. How dire these problems will become is a matter of guesswork — because AI development is currently a black box. Developers do not share information on whether or how they are obtaining consent for using publisher content. (News reports suggest that when they do share information about these methods, it is sometimes misleading.) Publishers must hire experts to reverse-engineer how their content has been taken, a costly process that overburdens small publishers and can't always identify all works that were used in training the models. This lack of transparency hinders the enforcement of intellectual property rights and distorts regulatory decisions, business development and more. Federal legislation could address these issues by requiring recordkeeping and full disclosure. AI companies must let publishers know whether a generative AI model was trained on their work — and must also explain whether certain publications have been specifically excluded from AI models, so that the public can judge any bias. Further, AI companies must disclose the sources they use to keep their models' responses current. Start your day with all you need to know Morning Report delivers the latest news, videos, photos and more. Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters Simple rules such as these will prompt commercial GenAI developers to enter agreements with publishers to use their content — agreements that will likely block AI companies and foreign actors from distorting the news that the public receives. The benefits will be widespread. These rules would strengthen America's position in the AI race by making its products more trustworthy and preserving the journalism that lies at its foundation. Protecting intellectual property and homegrown content is what gives American AI companies an international competitive edge. Strong federal rules will also keep many small media businesses viable, and protecting thousands of workers and their communities. The White House blueprint for AI wisely recognizes that AI development must be responsible and aligned with American values, including respect for intellectual property and the rule of law. If Congress is going to act, as it appears it might, to limit the ability of states to enact these important regulations, then it's up to the House and Senate to fill that gap — and set this growing but potentially dangerous industry on a solid foundation. Danielle Coffey is president and CEO of the News/Media Alliance, which represents more than 2,200 publishers nationwide.

Wall Street could see big moves with Trump's new bill
Wall Street could see big moves with Trump's new bill

Yahoo

time30 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Wall Street could see big moves with Trump's new bill

Wall Street could see big moves with Trump's new bill originally appeared on TheStreet. Senate Republicans are advancing a broad-based tax package to extend the 2017 Trump-era tax cuts by deploying a controversial 'current policy' accounting gimmick that waives the $3.8 trillion price tag from the official estimate. Republicans are employing a controversial accounting method to erase the $3.8 trillion cost of extending Trump-era tax cuts, trying to sell the bill to fiscal conservatives despite warnings that it will exacerbate the national debt. Democrats are referring to it as "magic math," while others believe it sets a precedent for hiding future costs and dragging the United States into record deficits, as per a June 30 Bloomberg report. Republicans, however, have another plan! GOPs say that embracing this accounting system would let them add further tax cuts to Trump's "One Big, Beautiful Bill." Especially, John Thune has been leading the efforts to pass the bill. The move allows the GOP to get around budget rules and make an appeal to deficit hawks. The bill includes a section (Section 899) that would give the Treasury the ability to retaliate against unfair foreign tax measures affecting U.S. individuals or firms, in line with President Trump's trade deals. This could be reflected as a measure to push forward President Trump's crypto-forward movement. A new amendment from Senator Cynthia Lummis aims to address this gap with significant upgrades to the taxation of digital assets. The bill will also protect foreign investors who utilize U.S. staking services and clarify that crypto loans are not subject to taxation. The bill could be more precise definitions, especially those related to staking, stablecoins, NFTs, and borrowing fees, to work well in practice, as per experts. Many analysts believe that the One Big, Beautiful Bill (OBBB) could have significant positive consequences for financial markets and push Bitcoin to the forefront. Bitcoin has surged by nearly 75% in the past year, which some view as a response to accelerating deficits and the adoption of aggressive fiscal policies. Gold, an equally conventional hedge, is up 41% over the same time frame — and, even with the higher yields on bonds, that suggests nervousness about monetary stability is getting more, not less acute. Join the discussion with CryptoWendyO on. For its part, the dollar is down to three-year lows with the DXY Index gapping down at the open on Monday, a sign that confidence in the greenback's long-term prospects is slowly eroding. Yields on long-term government debt are also up, steepening the yield curve and sending a signal that bond markets continue to be skeptical that the Federal Reserve will join Trump in pushing for rate cuts. The rise in borrowing costs reflects investor unease about both persistent inflation and the sustainability of U.S. fiscal policy. Wall Street could see big moves with Trump's new bill first appeared on TheStreet on Jun 30, 2025 This story was originally reported by TheStreet on Jun 30, 2025, where it first appeared.

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