Republicans rally past the Democrats' delays to push Trump's tax bill through the Senate
Republicans are using their majorities in Congress to push aside Democratic opposition, but they have run into a series of political and policy setbacks. Not all GOP lawmakers are on board with proposals to reduce spending on Medicaid, food stamps and other programs as a way to help cover the cost of extending some $3.8 trillion in Trump tax breaks.
Trump had lashed out against holdouts, threatening to campaign against one Republican, Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who had announced he could not support the bill because of Medicaid cuts that he worried would leave many without health care in his state. A new analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said the Senate version of the bill would increase by 11.8 million the number of people without health insurance in 2034.
Tillis and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., voted 'no.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CTV News
41 minutes ago
- CTV News
Senate Republicans are in a sprint on Trump's big bill after a weekend of setbacks
The Capitol is seen is seen as Senate Republicans work to pass President Donald Trump's bill of tax breaks and spending cuts by his July Fourth deadline, in Washington, Sunday, June 29, 2025. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite) WASHINGTON — After a weekend of setbacks, the Senate will try to sprint ahead Monday on U.S. President Donald Trump's big bill of tax breaks and spending cuts despite a series of challenges, including the sudden announcement from one GOP senator that he won't run for reelection after opposing the package over its Medicaid health care cuts. An all-night session to consider an endless stream of proposed amendments to the package, in what's called a vote-a-rama, was abruptly postponed, and it's now scheduled to launch as soon as the Senate gavels open. With Democrats united against the Republican president's legislation and eagerly lined up to challenge it, the voting could take all day. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said the 'hardest choices' for Republicans are still to come. His side plans to bring 'amendment after amendment after amendment to the floor, so Republicans can defend their billionaire tax cuts and so they can try to explain their massive cuts to Medicaid to people back home.' 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. 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. 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.' 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. 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.' Lisa Mascaro, Kevin Freking And Joey Cappelletti, The Associated Press Associated Press writers Ali Swenson, Fatima Hussein and Michelle L. Price contributed to this report.
Winnipeg Free Press
43 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Supreme Court throws out appellate rulings in favor of transgender people in 4 states
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Monday threw out appellate rulings in favor of transgender people in four states following the justices' recent decision upholding a Tennessee ban on certain medical treatment for transgender youths. But the justices took no action in cases from Arizona, Idaho and West Virginia involving the participation of transgender students on school sports teams. The court could say as soon as Thursday whether it will take up the issue in its next term. The high court ordered appellate judges to reexamine cases from Idaho, North Carolina, Oklahoma and West Virginia involving access to medical care and birth certificates. The action was unsurprising because the court had set the cases aside until after it decided the Tennessee case, as typically happens when the same legal issue is being considered. The rulings all included findings that the restrictions on transgender people imposed by the states violate the Constitution's equal protection clause. In the Tennessee case, the Supreme Court ruled that there was no constitutional violation in a state law prohibiting puberty blockers and hormone therapy to treat gender dysphoria in people younger than 18. The justices ordered the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, to review its decision that West Virginia's and North Carolina's refusal to cover certain health care for transgender people with government-sponsored insurance is discriminatory. The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will get back a case from Idaho stemming from the state's ban on certain surgical procedures for Medicaid recipients. The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver will review its ruling blocking an Oklahoma ban on people changing their gender on birth certificates. In one other case, from Kentucky, the justices rejected the appeal of transgender minors and their families challenging that state's ban on gender-affirming care. ___ Follow the AP's coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court at
Winnipeg Free Press
an hour ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
States brace for impact as Trump's big bill nears completion in Congress
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — President Donald Trump's big bill to cut taxes and reduce federal spending on some social safety net programs could have large implications for states, but for many it's too late to do much about it this year. Tuesday marks the start of a new budget year in 46 states. Though some legislatures are still working, most already have adjourned and finalized their spending plans without knowing whether federal funding will be cut and, if so, by how much. 'The ebb and flow of rumors and reality have created great uncertainty and some anxiety in state governments,' said David Adkins, executive director of The Council of State Governments. Several states have taken preemptive steps, setting aside money in reserves or tasking committees to monitor the impact of federal funding reductions. Others are tentatively planning to return in special sessions this year to account for potential funding cuts to joint federal-state programs such as Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. Others will have to wait until their legislatures are back in session next year. What's at stake for states? 'If there are significant cuts, states wouldn't be able to fully absorb those,' said Brian Sigritz, director of state fiscal studies at the National Association of State Budget Officers. Nationally, the Medicaid health care program for lower-income residents accounts for 30% of total state expenditures, according to the health policy research organization KFF. That makes it the costliest program in many states, ahead of even K-12 education. The bulk of Medicaid money comes from the federal government, meaning any changes in federal policy can create big ripples for states. Legislation pending in Congress would affect Medicaid in several ways. New work requirements are expected to reduce enrollment by millions of people, while other proposed changes also could reduce federal payments to states. Until now the federal government also has covered the full cost of SNAP benefits and half the administrative costs. Trump's bill would shift more of those costs to states, leaving them to either divert money from other purposes or trim back their food assistance programs. The Medicaid and SNAP changes are just the latest in a series of Trump policies affecting state finances, including the rollback of grants for transportation and high-speed internet projects and attempts to withhold federal funds from sanctuary jurisdictions that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities. Some legislatures are stocking up on savings A surge in federal aid and state tax revenue during the coronavirus pandemic led to booming budgets and historic cash surpluses in many states. As revenues slow and those surpluses get spent, some states now are trying to guard against federal funding reductions. New Mexico enacted a law this year creating a Medicaid trust fund gradually stocked with up to $2 billion that can be tapped to prop up the program if federal funding cuts would otherwise cause a reduction in coverage or benefits. Hawaii lawmakers, in crafting the state's budget, left an extra $200 million in the general fund as a contingency against federal funding uncertainty. They plan to return for a special session. And Vermont's budget sets aside up to $110 million in case federal funding is cut. That includes $50 million that can be spent while the Legislature is not in session and up to $60 million that could be appropriated in the future to address federal funding shortfalls. Though not necessarily tied to federal cuts, Florida lawmakers approved a proposed constitutional amendment that would set aside $750 million a year — or an amount equal to up to 25% of the state's general revenue, whichever is less — in a reserve fund that lawmakers could use for emergencies. That measure still must go before voters. Some governors are cutting back on spending Because of legislative deadlines, some state lawmakers had to craft budgets well before the details of Trump's bill took shape. Virginia lawmakers passed a budget in February for their fiscal year that starts Tuesday. Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin announced several dozen line-item vetoes in May with the goal of creating a roughly $900 million financial cushion. 'There are some short-term risks as President Trump resets both fiscal spending in Washington and trade policies that require us to be prudent and not spend all of the projected surplus before we bank it,' Youngkin said in a statement. Other states also have left money unspent, even though it has not always been touted as a buffer against federal cuts. States are 'enacting really cautious budgets, knowing that they may have to kind of revise them in special sessions or address changes in next year's sessions,' said Erica MacKellar, a fiscal affairs program principal at the National Conference of State Legislatures. Some are taking a wait-and-see approach Monday Mornings The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week. Before adjourning their sessions, some state legislatures established procedures to monitor federal funding cuts and recommend budgetary changes. Montana's budget includes $50,000 for an analysis of the financial implications of federal actions, but that spending kicks in only upon the cancellation of at least $50 million of previously approved federal funding or the anticipated loss of at least $100 million of future revenue. If federal funding to Maryland decreases by at least $1 billion, a provision approved by lawmakers requires the state budget office to submit a report to the General Assembly with proposed actions and potential spending reductions. The spending plan passed by Connecticut lawmakers also requires the state budget office to respond quickly to federal reductions by identifying state funds that could be used to preserve programs, particularly those providing health care, food assistance, education and other priorities. North Dakota lawmakers left room for more work. They adjourned their biennial session six days shy of their 80-day limit, allowing time to reconvene if needed.
