Senate Republicans are in a sprint on Trump's big bill after a weekend of setbacks
Get Starting Point
A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday.
Enter Email
Sign Up
The hours ahead will be pivotal for the Republicans, who have control of the Congress and are racing against Trump's Fourth of July deadline to wrap up work. The 940-page 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act,' as it is now formally titled, has consumed the Congress as its shared priority with the president, with no room politically to fail, even as not all Republicans are on board.
Advertisement
A new analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office found that 11.8 million more Americans would become uninsured by 2034 if the bill became law. It also said the package would increase the deficit by nearly $3.3 trillion over the decade.
Advertisement
House Speaker Mike Johnson's leadership team has recalled lawmakers back to Washington for voting in the House as soon as Wednesday, if the legislation can first clear the Senate.
But the outcome remains uncertain, especially after a weekend of work in the Senate that brought less visible progress on securing enough Republican support, over Democratic opposition, for passage.
Senators to watch
Few Republicans appear fully satisfied as the final package emerges. GOP Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who announced Sunday he would not seek reelection after Trump badgered him over his opposition to the package, said he has the same goals as Trump, cutting taxes and spending.
But Tillis said this package is a betrayal of the president's promises not to kick people off health care, especially if rural hospitals close.
'We could take the time to get this right,' he thundered.
At the same time, some loosely aligned conservative Senate Republicans — Rick Scott of Florida, Mike Lee of Utah, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming — have pushed for steeper cuts, particularly to health care, drawing their own warning from Trump.
'Don't go too crazy!' the president posted on social media. 'REMEMBER, you still have to get reelected.'
GOP leaders barely secured enough support to muscle the legislation past a procedural Saturday night hurdle in a tense scene. A handful of Republican holdouts revolted, and it took phone calls from Trump and a visit from Vice President JD Vance to keep it on track.
As Saturday's vote tally teetered, attention turned to Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, who was surrounded by GOP leaders in intense conversation. She voted 'yes.'
Advertisement
Several provisions in the package including a higher tax deduction for native whalers and potential waivers from food stamps or Medicaid changes are being called the 'Polar Payoff' designed for her state. But some were found to be out of compliance with the rules by the Senate parliamentarian.
What's in the big bill
All told, the Senate bill includes some $4 trillion in tax cuts, making permanent Trump's 2017 rates, which would expire at the end of the year if Congress fails to act, while adding the new ones he campaigned on, including no taxes on tips.
The Senate package would roll back billions of dollars in green energy tax credits that Democrats warn will wipe out wind and solar investments nationwide and impose $1.2 trillion in cuts, largely to Medicaid and food stamps, by imposing work requirements, making sign-up eligibility more stringent and changing federal reimbursements to states.
Additionally, the bill would provide a $350 billion infusion for border and national security, including for deportations, some of it paid for with new fees charged to immigrants.
Democrats ready to fight
Unable to stop the march toward passage, the Democrats as the minority party in Congress are using the tools at their disposal to delay and drag out the process.
Democrats forced a full reading of the text, which took 16 hours. Then Democratic senators took over Sunday's debate, filling the chamber with speeches, while Republicans largely stood aside.
'Reckless and irresponsible,' said Sen. Gary Peters, a Democrat from Michigan.
'A gift to the billionaire class,' said Vermont's Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent who caucuses with Democrats.
'Follow what the Bible teaches us: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you,' said Sen. Ben Ray Lujan, D-N.M., as Sunday's debate pushed past midnight.
Advertisement
Sen. Patty Murray of Washington, the ranking Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, raised particular concern about the accounting method being used by the Republicans, which says the tax breaks from Trump's first term are now 'current policy' and the cost of extending them should not be counted toward deficits.
'In my 33 years here in the United States Senate, things have never — never — worked this way,' said Murray, the longest-serving Democrat on the Budget Committee.
She said that kind of 'magic math' won't fly with Americans trying to balance their own household books.
'Go back home,' she said, 'and try that game with your constituents.'
___
Associated Press writers Ali Swenson, Fatima Hussein and Michelle L. Price contributed to this report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Hunters Now Have a Real Chance to Defeat the Public Land Sales Bill. Here's Why
As Backcountry Hunters & Anglers mobilizes a nationwide 'Flood the Lines' day on Wednesday, June 25, and as Western congressmen and women come home to cranky neighbors, the movement to kill the provision to sell public lands has hit high gear. Political insiders now say there's a real chance the intense opposition to the bill that requires the sale of 3 million acres of federal land in the West could result in it being pulled. Or, it could threaten to tank President Trump's entire One Big Beautiful Bill in which the president has invested so much political capital. Contained inside the massive budget bill, which will influence national priorities for health care, taxation, agricultural policy, and defense spending, is a provision that would require the U.S. government to sell between 2 and 3 million acres of federal land over the next five years to help fill the budget hole created by tax breaks. It's one of the first times since the Homestead Act that public-lands issues have had such influence over national politics. Killing the bill is the fight of a lifetime for advocates of public land, but victory is hardly guaranteed. 'This is the biggest threat to public lands and public land access in my lifetime,' says Randy Newberg, the influential podcaster whose Fresh Tracks platforms have been a rallying point for opponents of the land-sale bill. 'But I'm encouraged that if we can change the minds of at least four Republican congressmen, that we might be able to stop this thing.' Newberg spent most of the last week in Washington, D.C., visiting Senators and the staff of many Western representatives, and he says the consensus on Capitol Hill is that no public lands issue in recent memory has resulted in as many phone calls, emails, and letters as the current proposal that could sell off hunting, fishing, hiking, and off-road lands to the highest bidder. The author of the land-sale provision is Utah's senior senator, Republican Mike Lee, who has for years argued that the federal government is an 'absentee landowner' that was never intended to own and control so much land across the West. As the influential chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, which is responsible for the budget of the Interior Department, Lee proposed the bill that he says is intended to allow fast-growing Western communities to buy 'underutilized' federal land that's constraining their growth. The surplussed BLM lands would be primarily used for affordable housing, he says in a video promoting his bill. But public-lands advocates quickly noted that the language of the bill would enable a wide range of purposes of the disposed public lands, including enlarging private ranches, building data centers, and potentially privatizing entire mountain ranges. A map that shows the millions of acres of BLM and Forest Service lands in 11 Western states that would be eligible for sale has been circulated widely over the past week and has inflamed users of those lands. Newberg was in Washington as the news of the implications of Lee's bill grew and spread, and he says it caused a palpable change on Capitol Hill. 'The tone changed almost 180 degrees in just a couple days,' Newberg said on the Outdoor Life Podcast. 'A lot of Senators and congresspeople are completely blown away by the blowback this has created. I had gone to Washington with a warning [to congressional delegations], that you are not reading the landscape correctly if you don't think this could blow up, and I was told early in the week that I was making something out of nothing. 'I left D.C. so excited about how motivated and engaged our community of hunters and public-land users is over this, but that extends to RV'ers and ATV'ers and the travel-trailer industry and backcountry skiers — people who seldom work together.' To understand the pathway to victory for public-land advocates, which could be measured in either a withdrawal of the Lee amendment or a revision that drastically limits its scope, it's important to understand the political moment. A smaller-scale land-sale provision originated in the House version of the budget bill. It was ultimately withdrawn after Montana Congressman Ryan Zinke (R) declared he wouldn't vote for the budget bill if it contained the land-sale amendment. After the lands portion was removed, the budget passed the House by a single vote. The full bill is now in the Senate, where Lee's amendment was added as it passed his committee. In order to become law, the budget must pass the full Senate, then return to the House of Representatives for what's called concurrence, or working out any differences between the two versions. If the amended bill passes the House, it would go to the president for approval. President Donald Trump has indicated that he wants to sign the budget bill by July 4. Knowing the fate of the land-sale amendment depends upon the House, Lee exempted Montana's federal land from his bill, and according to sources, in hopes that by sidelining Montana's influential senator Steve Daines (R), his bill might have a better chance of passage in the Senate. The Republicans have a 3-vote majority in the Senate, which means Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S. Dakota) can't afford to lose many defectors. But Western Republican Senators, hearing from their constituents about their dislike for federal-land sales, are starting to squirm. Here's the first line of defense, says Newberg. Call your state's two senators, whether you live in the West or not, and whether they're Republicans or Democrats. 'The Senate remains a very polite, deliberative body, almost the opposite from the performative politics of the House,' says Newberg. 'There's an unwritten rule in the Senate that you don't embarrass a committee chair, and so there's (likely) not going to be a floor vote over Lee's bill. Instead, it's going to be a quiet process where influential senators go to Thune and tell him that they can't vote for the budget if it contains the land-sale language. 'These Senators, they're going to be telling Thune, 'Do you really want President Trump's bill to be slowed down and screwed up by some little fringe issue that only one senator cares about' – this hill that Mike Lee is willing to die on?'' Here's where national politics is likely to intrude on the issue. Thune has committed to Trump and his advisors that he will produce a budget that contains items crucial to the MAGA wing of the Republican Party. In order to do that, he might be willing to cut a deal with Western senators to scale back Lee's land-sale provision. That compromise might look like a small-scale land-sale of clearly defined lands around fast-growing Western cities. It could expand on the successful Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act, in which designated BLM lands around Las Vegas can be sold, revenue from which goes to buy higher-value public lands nearby. 'Maybe a compromise applies this to St. George and Cedar City [Utah] or Carson City [Nevada], or other places that can satisfy Lee' but also keep off the auction block cherished parcels of public lands, says Newberg. But Newberg says there's another line of defense that public-land users need to exercise. 'The action is not just in the Senate, it's in the House, too,' he says. The reason is the conference committee to reconcile differences between the Senate and House versions of the budget bill. Say the Senate fails to amend Lee's proposal to sell off big swaths of the western United States. House Republicans also have only a 3-vote margin, and with Zinke and Idaho's Mike Simpson (R) both on the record as opposing the land-sale, the revised budget bill containing Lee's language could die in the House. That's because the BLM and Forest Service lands most at risk of sale are in congressional districts held by vulnerable Republicans. 'We have to flip four Republicans, and there are some very attractive congressional districts that could come to our side,' says Newberg. 'Let's say you're freshman Congressman [Jeff] Hurd from Grand Junction, Colorado, the mountain-biking, rock-climbing, hunting capital of Colorado. Would you want to vote to sell these public lands? If so, you'd better polish up your resume,' says Newberg. 'If you're the congressman from Elkhart, Indiana [Rudy Yakym], the RV manufacturing capital of the world, where the overwhelming majority of your constituents are employed in the travel-trailer, motorhome, RV industry, and where the association that represents these industries issued a statement this week saying they do not support this, how are you going to vote?' The wave of opposition to Lee's bill extends from Western hunting groups to rock-climbing and overlanding groups. A consortium of firearms, optics, and ammunition companies is also preparing a statement opposing the Senate's land-sale language. Newberg says vulnerable Republicans in districts around the country are likely to be signaling to Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) their unwillingness to pass a land-sale package in the House. 'I fully expect Johnson to go to Thune and tell him that Mike Lee's dream that the political planets have aligned to let him pull off what he's wanted his entire political career might just have been a mirage,' says Newberg. 'And that's my goal. That should be the goal of everyone in this fight.' The way to win, says Newberg, is to redouble contacts with congressional delegations, to include both senators and representatives. 'You do it by being professional, persistent, and polite, and by not being partisan,' he says. 'You win with strategy, relationships, and by showing up, which our community has been doing over the past week.' Backcountry Hunters & Anglers is planning to amplify that contact on Wednesday, June 25. It's the 'Flood the Lines Day' in which BHA is calling on 25,000 people to take action by calling and emailing senators directly from BHA's website. 'The math is simple,' says BHA in a statement. '60 seconds. One message. 25,000 voices.'
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Mike Lee Shoves Another Bad Land Sale Provision into the Senate's Final Budget Bill
UPDATE: Facing overwhelming opposition from all Democrats and a growing number in his own party, Utah Republican Senator Mike Lee tonight withdrew his proposal to sell millions of acres of public land to help balance the federal budget. Universally reviled legislation that will sell up to 1.25 million acres of BLM land around the West starting this fall has been placed in the Senate's final budget bill which will face floor votes as early as today. Utah Sen. Mike Lee (R), chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee that oversees the Interior Department's budget, released new language Friday night that doubles down on his longstanding desire to reduce the federal estate, using veiled language that justifies land sales to alleviate housing shortages in fast-growing Western cities. The bill's latest draft tightens problematic language of earlier versions that risked being flagged by the Senate parliamentarian as non-conforming for a reconciliation bill, say sources who reviewed Lee's draft late last night. But it contains the most unacceptable provisions to public-land advocates, and could open some of the West's most remote and cherished public lands for sale. Because it now includes unallocated mineral leases, it could also balloon the amount of land eligible for sale. Specifically, the final draft expands the definition of eligible BLM land, which Lee says is designed to promote affordable housing and urban infrastructure, by prioritizing federal land sales within five miles of the border of 'population centers.' Instead of using the commonly accepted definition of a population center as a municipality of 2,500 or more people, the new draft defines a population center as 'a census-designated place or incorporated municipality with a population of not less than 1,000 persons.' This provision greatly expands the eligibility of BLM land that could be sold surrounding unincorporated rural communities. Last night's draft also now allows leasing of some previously protected lands, omitting national preserves, national seashores, lakeshores, national historic sites, and national memorials and battlefields from the categories of land that could not be considered for sale. It includes unallocated subsurface mineral leasing as a qualifying covenant for land sales, along with earlier drafts that omit active surface uses and BLM land with active livestock-grazing leases from sale consideration. This allowance of unsubscribed mineral rights could greatly increase the number of eligible acres for sale to something over 3 million, say sources. That's because the BLM administers subsurface mineral rights on some 700 million onshore and offshore acres. If millions of those acres now qualify for sale because of Lee's new language 'we could be talking about the sale of way more than 1.25 million acres,' says a land-use expert who was still researching the question as of this morning. 'We could be talking 3 million and more, depending on the answer to the question of whether the BLM owns those rights or simply administers them.' Lee's latest draft also changes the definition of who can bid on this 'surplused' public land. Nominations for tracts can come from what Lee defines as 'qualified bidders.' That term is not defined in the bill. The bill extends the mandatory sale deadline from five to 10 years and increases the amount of federal money that will be used to execute these sales from $5 million to $15 million. But what's especially galling to critics of the bill, who note the many loopholes that allow disposal of federal land for purposes other than affordable housing, is that the new draft adds criteria for disposal of our most valuable lands to include a mechanism for consolidating large ranches and for including 'isolated tracts that are difficult to manage.' That last provision could list for sale some of the most valuable hunting and fishing acreage in the West. Sources noted, with rising alarm, that Lee's latest draft appears to be calibrated to make it through Senate parliamentary scrutiny. 'This appears to be an effort to try and survive parliamentarian review,' says David Willms, associate vice president for public lands for the National Wildlife Federation. 'Adding a priority of selling the highest value lands, and including subsurface rights along with the surface rights seems to be an effort to sell the provision as one with primarily budget impacts, which is necessary to survive the Byrd Rule' that requires items in reconciliation bills to have budgetary, rather than policy, implications. 'Obviously, to anyone that cares about public lands, however, that's simply a smokescreen to sell an area more than twice the size of Rocky Mountain National Park to an as-yet-undefined 'qualified bidder,'' says Willms. 'But it's also an indication of the sloppy and haphazard nature of this latest bill.' Lee's new draft is so contrary to and tone-deaf to the hundreds of thousands of calls, letters, and emails to congressional offices over the past week that some critics of the bill suggest that it's designed to fail in full Senate voting that starts today. In an Instagram reel, New Mexico Sen. Martin Heinrich (D) noted that the groundswell of calls to congressional offices is the 'broadest and deepest coalition that I have ever seen for public lands in my life. Keep it up. We are winning.' View this post on Instagram A post shared by Senator Martin Heinrich (@senatormartinheinrich) Fellow Republican Senators, including Montana's Steve Daines and Tim Sheehy and Idaho's Mike Crapo and Jim Risch, have publicly stated their opposition to the bill. The news site NOTUS yesterday reported that Daines has the votes to kill Lee's draft in the budget reconciliation process. That's the expedited process that requires only a simple majority in both the House and Senate for passage. Republicans hold a 3-vote majority in both chambers. At least five Republicans in the House of Representatives have said they won't vote for any version of the budget bill that contains the land-sale provision. They include Montana's Ryan Zinke, Mike Simpson from Idaho, Dan Newhouse from Washington, Oregon's Cliff Bentz, and David Valadao from California — all Westerners with large public-land holdings in their congressional districts. 'At the end of the day, I would bet on this [bill language] getting kicked out, but it's gonna be a slog,' says a public-land advocate who asked not to be named as they were still reviewing the bill draft. 'I'm still wondering if, in the long run, Lee is doing more to help public lands, by inspiring so much advocacy, than to hurt them.' Land Tawney, whose group American Hunters and Anglers has been a vocal opponent of the land-sale legislation, says the latest draft confirms Lee's inability to read the national mood. Read Next: Silencer Deregulation Plan Fails in the Senate 'Regardless of how Mike Lee polishes his public lands sell off proposal, it's still a piece of shit,' says Tawney. 'Not a square inch of our public lands should be used to pay off tax breaks for billionaires.'
CBS News
16 minutes ago
- CBS News
How will "big, beautiful bill" impact Medicare, Medicaid in Massachusetts?
Republican senators are trying to pass the "big, beautiful bill," which will cut Medicaid for millions of Americans across the country. Here's how the bill could change healthcare coverage in Massachusetts. "If the current version of the bill becomes law, then about 250,000 people members of Massachusetts could lose access to their healthcare," says Jennifer Obadia. Obadia works at Project Bread, a non-profit working to end hunger in Boston. She says that the cuts in the bill will also impact food assistance programs. "Many people across the state of Massachusetts face trade-offs, whether it's between food and their medicine or their rent. So our programs exist to help try alleviate that burden. What's currently being voted on in the Senate would fundamentally strip away a lot of ability to do that work," she explained. But Obadia says that if the bill passes, Project Bread will continue to fight for the people who need their help. "It will continue with advocacy at the state level, advocacy at the federal level, and programs to bring those policy changes to people across the state." Bill will close rural hospital in Greenfield Senator Ed Markey has been outspoken about his opposition to the "big, beautiful bill." He spoke on the Senate floor on Monday and said that slashing programs like Medicaid and SNAP will put millions at risk. "This is a huge issue for hospitals and for individuals that are dependent upon these federal programs to take care of their families, to keep their families healthy," Markey explained. The cuts would also result in the closing of several hospitals, including one in Greenfield. "If one of our rural hospitals closed down, for example, in Greenfield, the ambulance ride is much longer. Access to treatment will take much more time. The emergency room won't be as close. So all of this is central to the well-being of the community," Markey explained. President Trump has encouraged Republican senators to pass the bill by July 4. Senators continue to debate the bill.
