Trump's tax-and-spending bill passes Congress in major win for president
The 218-214 vote came after weeks of wrangling over the measure that Trump demanded be ready for his signature by Friday, the Independence Day holiday. Written by his Republican allies in Congress and unanimously rejected by Democrats, the bill traveled an uncertain road to passage that saw multiple all-night votes in the House and Senate and negotiations that lasted until the final hours before passage. Ultimately, Republicans who had objected to its cost and contents folded, and the bill passed with just two GOP defections: Thomas Massie, a rightwing Kentucky lawmaker, and Brian Fitzpatrick, who represents a Pennsylvania district that voted for Kamala Harris in last year's election.
'We've waited long enough, some of us have literally been up for days now, but this day – this day – is a hugely important one in the history of our nation,' the Republican House speaker, Mike Johnson, said, just before voting began.
'With one big, beautiful bill, we are going to make this country stronger, safer and more prosperous than ever before, and every American is going to benefit from that.'
The legislation is expected to speed up and expand Immigration and Customs Enforcement deportations, and will probably make Trump's longstanding desire for a wall along the border with Mexico a reality.
Related: How Trump's bill will supercharge mass deportations by funneling $170bn to Ice
It also strikes a blow against the US government's efforts to fight the climate crisis by phasing out tax incentives created under Joe Biden that were intended to spur investments in electric cars, wind and solar power and other green energy technologies.
The bill's centerpiece is a permanent extension of tax cuts made in 2017, during Trump's first term, as well as the creation of new, temporary exemptions for tips, overtime pay and car loan interest that the president promised voters during last year's campaign.
The government will lose trillions of dollars in revenue from those provisions, and to offset their costs, Republicans approved an array of cuts to Medicaid, the federal program providing health insurance coverage to poor and disabled Americans, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Snap).
Those changes are expected to cost millions of people their benefits, but the bill remains expensive, with the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) saying it will add $3.3tn to the country's debt through 2034.
Massie explained his decision to vote against the bill in a post on X, writing that 'it will significantly increase U.S. budget deficits in the near term, negatively impacting all Americans through sustained inflation and high interest rates'.
Fitzpatrick issued a statement saying 'it was the Senate's amendments to Medicaid, in addition to several other Senate provisions, that altered the analysis' for his district and made him vote no.
Democrats blasted the proposal as 'one big, ugly bill' that dismantles anti-poverty programs to fund tax breaks for the wealthy. Analyses have shown that high earners benefited most from Trump's tax policies.
The Democratic House minority leader, Hakeem Jeffries, made a last-ditch effort to halt the bill's passage by delivering a floor speech that lasted eight hours and 44 minutes, the longest ever.
'This is extraordinary. This assault on everyday Americans, assault on children, veterans, seniors, people with disabilities. It's incredible to me, all of this in this one, big, ugly bill,' Jeffries said.
'Ripping food out of the mouths of vulnerable Americans – that's extraordinary that that's what we're doing, extraordinary. And all of this is being done, this unprecedented assault on everyday Americans, is being unleashed on the American people, Mr Speaker, on the most vulnerable among us, all of this is being done to provide massive tax breaks to billionaire donors. Shame on this institution. If this bill passes, that's not America. We're better than this.'
Trump has described the bill as crucial to the success of his second term, and congressional Republicans made its passage their top priority. It was a tall task – the GOP won small majorities in both the House and Senate in last November's election, and could afford no more than three defections in either chamber.
The party's lawmakers broadly support Trump but were divided on a host of other issues. There were lawmakers who wanted big spending cuts, rapid phase-outs of green energy incentives and an expanded deduction that would mostly benefit taxpayers in Democratic-led states. Their demands butted against others who sought to moderate the bill, but over the course of weeks, Republicans leaders managed to forge a compromise.
Trump appears to have also offered some concessions to hard-line holdouts from the Republican House freedom caucus at a meeting at the White House on Wednesday and in subsequent discussions, as his advisers rushed to ensure the bill passed without returning to the Senate.
The details of Trump's concessions – possibly coming in the form of executive actions at a later date – were not immediately clear, and House freedom caucus chair Andy Harris declined to describe their discussions with Trump.
'When we looked at this entire package, the significant agreements we got with the administration in the last 24 hours made this package a much, much better package,' Harris told reporters after the vote. 'The agreement is with the president. If you want to know, ask the president.'
The bill is only able to affect revenue, spending and the debt limit, under the rules of budget reconciliation that allowed the GOP to avoid a filibuster by Democrats in the Senate. Under Biden, Congress's then Democratic majority had used the same procedure to pass legislation to spur the economy's recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic and curb US carbon emissions.
Related: What's in Trump's major tax bill? Extended cuts, deportations and more
Trump's bill allocates $45bn for Ice detention facilities, $14bn for deportation operations and billions of dollars more to hire 10,000 new agents by 2029. An additional $50bn will go towards the border wall and other fortifications.
Enrollees of Medicaid and Snap will face new work requirements, and states will be forced to share part of the cost of the latter program for the first time ever. The CBO estimates the bill's Medicaid changes could cost as many as 11.8 million people their healthcare, and the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities forecasts about 8 million people, or one in five recipients, may lose their Snap benefits.
The legislation also forces changes to provider taxes, which states use to finance their share of Medicaid spending. That is expected to further increase the financial stress of hospitals in rural areas, and when the bill was in the Senate, a $50bn fund was added to support those facilities.
Some in the GOP were openly nervous about the cuts to safety net programs that their constituents rely on. Thom Tillis, a senator who represents swing state North Carolina, refused to support the bill for those reasons, leading Trump to announce he would support a primary challenger when he stands for re-election next year. Tillis then made public his plans to retire, a potential boost for Democrats' hopes of claiming his seat.
'It is inescapable this bill will betray the promise Donald Trump made,' Tillis said on the Senate floor.
'What do I tell 663,000 people in two years or three years when President Trump breaks his promise by pushing them off of Medicaid because the funding's not there any more, guys?'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'Send them home': To promote tougher policies, report claims Spokane's homeless aren't from here
Jul. 5—Half of the homeless people in Spokane aren't from here and should be given bus tickets home, more strictly enforced by police and cut off from long-term services, according to a recent report released by the Spokane Business Association, a prominent political advocacy group funded by businessman Larry Stone. A week after the report's release, the association proposed an amendment to the city's charter, which if approved by voters would reshape the city's homelessness laws and force Spokane to shift funding away from affordable housing, firefighting equipment and other priorities to fund emergency shelters, more visible police patrols and other policies recommended in the report. Critics in City Hall have dismissed the report as unscientific, unhelpful and politically motivated ahead of the November elections, when several seats currently or recently occupied by progressives are being challenged by candidates more in line with the Spokane Business Association's policy goals. But the report's author and the organization sponsoring the survey argue the data is concrete proof that Spokane's homelessness policies aren't only not helping people get off the streets, they're attracting people from elsewhere who are drawn to the city by lax law enforcement. Just over 50% of the roughly 230 homeless people surveyed for the association said they moved to the city after becoming homeless. This contradicts the federally mandated "point-in-time" counts, annual standardized surveys that try to reach every homeless person living on the streets or in a shelter. The point-in-time counts have their own flaws, as the authors of Spokane County's 2024 report readily acknowledged. But of the 2,021 people surveyed in last year's point-in-time count, roughly 80% said they lived in Spokane County before becoming homeless. Robert Marbut, President Donald Trump's "homeless czar" from 2019 to 2021 and the consultant contracted to conduct the survey, argues his data is more accurate because he also asked where people were born, went to high school and whether they have family in Spokane. It is not clear why these additional questions would sway the data by 30 points, but Marbut's recommendations for dealing with this influx are clearer, and consistent with the "Velvet Hammer" approach he has pitched cities across the country for at least a decade: Spokane has to get tougher with the homeless, pressuring them into treatment or departure. Gavin Cooley, an executive of the Spokane Business Association, argued Marbut's expertise lent the report more authority than it lost from a lack of cited sources, and dismissed as "deeply political" a recent article from Range Media that turned to an expert in homeless research to pick apart the report's methodology and conclusions. Cooley believes the media and politicians are overly focused on attacking the data and not paying enough attention to the conclusions Marbut reaches with that data. "You can certainly note the deficiencies as you see them ... but I think it'd be a pity to miss the higher level order of what's being recommended," Cooley said. Every effort should be made to send people back where they came from, particularly if they've been in Spokane for less than 90 days, according to the report. Those who stay should be cut off from long-term services, which should be reserved only for those with longstanding ties to Spokane. For those who are from Spokane, the report recommends mandatory treatment services in order to receive housing, which city officials claim would violate state and federal law. Marbut has spoken out for at least a decade against policies he believes are "enabling" the homeless with "goodies," including Housing First policies that have been the national standard since 2013, in which homeless people are given stable housing upfront to enable them to then address addiction, mental health and social reintegration. Attempts to relocate the homeless en masse are even older. The phrase "Greyhound therapy" has been used to describe the practice since the 1970s and has been criticized by researchers for just as long for redistributing the social costs of homelessness rather than improving them. Many of America's largest cities have, at one point or another, attempted similar policies; between 2011 and 2017, the Guardian tracked over 20,000 homeless people given bus tickets out of and sometimes between 16 U.S. cities. Proponents, including the Spokane Business Association, argue that such programs reconnect people to families and friends and can lead to a long-term improvement in their situation. Spokane's homeless service providers have engaged in the practice for years, however. If a homeless person requests a bus ticket, and a friend or family member declares they can take them in, they will be provided a ticket. Julie Garcia, who runs the homeless services organization Jewels Helping Hands, which manages several of the city's homeless shelters, estimated her organization hands out around 250 tickets a year. There appears to be little academic research into whether these programs lead to long-term reductions of homelessness or just move it elsewhere. The Guardian reported that, of the thousands being bused from San Francisco through the Homeward Bound program between 2010 and 2015, the city had records of following up with only three people after they reached their destinations. But the Spokane Business Association report goes further to suggest that the city should cut off people who decline these tickets from long-term homeless services and even emergency shelters after 21 days. While much of the study copies nearly verbatim a similar report on King County that Marbut was commissioned to write for the Discovery Institute, Marbut claims that Spokane is unusual in one regard: Homeless people aren't coming to Spokane for its quality services, but for its lax enforcement. "What we got on the street was generally, they treat me nice here, they don't hassle me," Marbut said. "It wasn't that they came here because of the services — many communities I go to, it's, 'Oh, they have great services' — but here it was, 'They sort of let me be.' " This picture notably doesn't match what many homeless people on Spokane's streets have told The Spokesman-Review in recent years, who described being pushed from place to place throughout the day by law enforcement, security guards and business owners. "We literally don't get to sit down like this," said Amber, a 32-year-old homeless woman interviewed under an overpass in August. "We are moving constantly. ... So many people have cracked feet and heels." Cooley dismissed this type of enforcement as an "occasional blow of the horn," and wants to see tougher laws and stricter enforcement — not because he wants them to go to jail, which he says would be ineffective and expensive — but to force people to change their lives. Cooley acknowledged that Washington's involuntary treatment laws are not extensive enough to force a homeless person into drug or mental health treatment. Instead, he argued, the city should use its tougher homelessness laws to offer them a choice: either go to jail, or enter "voluntary" treatment. Or they could leave, Cooley noted. "If you find that a great number of people have no connection to Spokane at all, and you suddenly begin to say you cannot use fentanyl in this community unfettered ... how many of those folks will stick around?" Cooley asked. In an interview, Mayor Lisa Brown dismissed the report as misinformed, arguing many of the report's claims about the city's policies were untrue and some of its recommendations were already standard practice. "I believe this is really about the political campaigns in November," Brown said, noting Stone's longstanding funding of candidates opposing progressive policies and production of high-dollar videos to encourage tougher homelessness policies. "I also believe that, with the resources they are apparently able to mobilize, it would be great if, as a show of good faith, they put them into an actual solution, rather than a propaganda campaign against the city and the majority on the city council," Brown added. But Cooley believes the evidence was clear, regardless of the survey's findings, that what the city is doing is failing to have a significant impact on the city's visible homeless population or its soaring overdose deaths. "I know Seattle really damn well, and I can't believe the rapid turnaround as it relates to enforcement," Cooley said. "And what I don't know is where those people are ... but I know they've made a visible turn in on-street homelessness." The report has started to leak into the broader public conversation on Spokane's homelessness policies. Wendy Fishburne, vice president of the East Spokane Business Association, appeared to quote parts of it verbatim Monday before the Spokane City Council voted to reform its homelessness laws. "Research shows that people do better recovering from addiction when they're surrounded by their families of origin," Fishburne said. "Find out where people actually come from and compassionately send them home ... so that our resources could be used for our folks."
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Seatless Poilievre rustles up leadership support among Stampede faithful
He may have been rejected by voters in his own Ottawa riding but a Saturday evening Stampede week audience seemed ready to put Pierre Poilievre back in the Conservative leadership saddle. The sold-out barbecue crowd courted by Poilievre at Heritage Park ended a day of political glad-handing among urban cowpokes by all the federal leaders and their provincial counterparts. In a campaign-style speech not unlike those he delivered last April ahead of the federal election lost by his Conservatives, Poilievre made his argument that he remains his party's best hope at the helm — and the 1,200 who gathered for beef and politics seemed receptive. 'We don't back down and we don't run away when things get hard — we dust ourselves and get back in the saddle,' he told his supporters who delivered two standing ovations. Poilievre wasted little time in taking shots at his nemesis, Prime Minister Mark Carney, by noting his shakiness earlier in the day flipping pancakes at a Stampede breakfast. 'He couldn't figure out whether his elbows were up or down,' said Poilievre, digging on accusations Carney's decision to honour a demand by U.S. President Donald Trump that Canada drop a digital service tax. 'With his great talks with Trump, he's had much experience flip-flopping.' Poilievre avoided any words directly sympathetic to a separatist movement in Alberta but did suggest Albertans disillusioned with Ottawa have reason to be. 'I'll use the platform of leader of the opposition to amplify the legitimate demands of western Canada to end the unfair treatment,' he said. 'The era of Ottawa telling Alberta to pay up and shut up must end once and for all.' Poilievre is bidding for a return to Parliament as he campaigns in a byelection in the solidly Tory seat of Battle River-Crowfoot, which will be held Aug. 18. While he's expected to easily prevail there, his standing in the rest of the country is far less certain. A Nanos Research poll conducted in late June suggests the ruling Liberals under new PM Carney lead the Conservatives by 14 percentage points. Carney's lead as a preferred leader is even more pronounced in the survey with respondents choosing him over Poilievre by 29 points. The knives among party operatives aren't yet out publicly for Poilievre but that could change if he continues to badly trail Carney in the fall, said Mount Royal University political scientist Duane Bratt. And the Alberta byelection widely considered a shoo-in to return Poilievre to the House of Commons promises to be a political minefield in a national context, he said. The one-time Tory leader will be walking a tightrope where the path he navigates could alienate party supporters with separatist leanings in Alberta and elsewhere, said Bratt. 'What matters is not so much the election result, it's going to be his campaign that's happening during a debate about Alberta's place in Canada,' he said. 'How does he not hurt himself in the rest of the country, what's his views on greater taxation powers for Alberta, on immigration in Alberta and on constitutional change?' In effect Poilievre, he said, will be spending much of his summer campaigning for both a seat in Parliament and his own job as Conservative leader. And his running in one of the safest Conservative seats in the country — won last April with 83 per cent of the vote by Tory Damien Kurek, who's since signed on with a government relations and lobbying firm — produce optics of weakness, said Bratt. But some of those who attended the Conservative party barbecue fundraiser said they don't foresee Poilievre being replaced by anyone else. 'I can't see the party dumping him — he's been successful in a strange political environment,' said former conservative radio talk-show host Dave Rutherford. He noted that despite the electoral loss the party under Poilievre increased its vote count by 2.5 million and added 25 seats to its caucus. But he agreed Poilievre will have to balance his required support for a united Canada with an often separatist-leaning Conservative base in Alberta. 'It's part of the whole UCP culture,' said Rutherford, referring to the provincial conservative party largely allied to their federal cousins. In introducing Poilievre at the barbecue, Kurek said he gladly relinquished his seat to advance the Conservative movement 'as quickly as possible.' On Saturday morning, Carney flipped flapjacks at a Stampede breakfast in the city's northeast and admitted his skills were rusty. 'I'm here all day until I get it right,' said Carney. Premier Danielle Smith also attended the breakfast and playfully chided Carney on his pancake-handling technique. She also told him she would soon be signing a memo of understanding with Ontario Premier Doug Ford on energy, priorities and trade. 'It'd be so great if we didn't have (carbon) net-zero rules,' she told the prime minister, who walked the Stampede grounds Friday evening. In an interview with Postmedia, Carney said he's confident in his government's ability to collaborate with Alberta and other provinces in ways that'll foster unity. 'I think, from a federal government perspective, from my responsibilities, we're going to make Canada work. We're going to build. We're going to build together,' he said. 'There's a big intangible and cultural and value-based element to being Canadian and I firmly believe in those.' Poilievre showed up at the same morning breakfast but waited until Carney had left to greet onlookers. Federal NDP leader Don Davies was also in Calgary Saturday attending Stampede-themed functions. — with files from Chris Varcoe BKaufmann@ X: @BillKaufmannjrn
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
NASA IV&V in Fairmont faces drastic funding cut
Jul. 5—dbeard @ MORGANTOWN — NASA's Katherine Johnson Independent Verification & Validation Facility in Fairmont could see a drastic budget cut under President Trump's Fiscal Year 2026 Discretionary Budget Request. But members of West Virginia's Congressional delegation are working to prevent it As part of an overall proposed NASA budget cut, Johnson IV &V would see its funding fall from its current $43.3 million (from FY 2024) to $13.8 million in FY 2026 — just one third of the current budget. NASA is working on answers to questions from The Dominion Post about the ramifications of the cut and will provide those next week. In its 2026 Budget Technical Supplement, the agency says, "In FY 2026, NASA plans to significantly reduce and restructure both the NASA Engineering and Safety Center and Independent Verification and Validation program as part of the effort to consolidate the overall Agency Technical Authority program. In FY 2026, NASA will allocate $9.9 million for IV &V to ensure the program can provide software assurance support to the future Moon to Mars programs." The Dominion Post reached out to Sens. Shelley Moore Capito and Jim Justice, and Rep. Riley Moore for comments on the proposal. Capito spokeswoman Kelley Moore (no relation) said Capito "is aware of the proposed cuts to NASA that would impact the mission and the facility at Katherine Johnson IV &V." She has been in contact with leadership at the facility, Goddard Space Flight Center, which oversees the work at IV &V, and NASA Headquarters. "It has also been conveyed to NASA and to the Senate Appropriations Committee that Sen. Capito will oppose any cuts to this facility that would impact workforce or its mission, " Moore said. Moore noted that since NASA does not have an administrator or a nominee at this time, there has not been a budget hearing where this topic could be raised. "Regardless, Sen. Capito is working hard to protect this facility that she so proudly helped name around this time in 2019." Justice did not respond to several requests for comment. Moore said, "I am closely tracking the proposed cuts to NASA's Fairmont facility. I have been in constant communication with the appropriations subcommittee chairman who oversees its funding, and will use my position on the Appropriations Committee to fight for the important work being done there." Here's a breakdown of the numbers that factor into IV &V's budget — with several layers of authority above IV &V. IV &V overall falls under NASA's Safety, Security and Mission Services. That budget was cut from $3.131 billion in FY 2024 to $3.092 billion in FY 2025 and will fall to $2.118 billion in FY 2026 the federal fiscal year begins Oct. 1). Under SS &MS, is Engineering Safety & Operations. Its budget will fall from $1.088 billion in FY 2024 to $620.3million in FY 2026 and $446.5 million in FY 2027. And under ES &O, the Agency Technical Authority funding will fall from $196.1 million in FY 2024 to $69.6 million in FY 2026. "The Agency Technical Authority program protects the health and safety of NASA's workforce by evaluating programs, projects, and operations to ensure safe and successful completion. ATA capabilities provide expert technical excellence, mission assurance, and technical authority agency wide." IV &V falls directly under the Agency Technical Authority, with funding from several accounts. Funding from the Safety, Security and Mission Services account will be cut from $39.2 million to $9.9 million — for software assurance support for Moon and Mars programs, as mentioned above. Funding from the Exploration account will go from $3.3 million to $2 million. Funding from the Space Operations account will go from $800, 000 to $700, 000. One account source will see an increase: Science account funding will go from $0 in FY 2024 to $1.2 million for FY 2026. A footnote hints at some flexibility: "The IV &V program will work with Mission Directorate to adjust FY 2026 allocations as the FY 2026 operating plan is developed." Some information provided to The Dominion Post noted that cuts to IV &V have been proposed in the past, but not to this extent.
