Senate Republicans try to get Trump's tax cuts over the line, setting aside cost concerns
They were set for a marathon session in which the minority Democrats are allowed to offer an unlimited number of votes, part of the arcane process Republicans are using to bypass Senate rules that normally require 60 of the chamber's 100 members to agree on legislation.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office released its assessment on Sunday of the bill's hit to the $36.2 trillion debt, figuring that it would add about $800 billion more than the version passed last month in the House of Representatives.
Many Republicans dispute that claim, contending that extending existing policy will not add to the debt. Nonetheless, international bond investors see incentives to diversify out of the U.S. Treasury market.
Democrats, meanwhile, hope the latest, eye-widening figure could stoke enough anxiety among fiscally minded conservatives to get them to buck their party, which controls both chambers of Congress.
'Republicans are doing something the Senate has never, never done before, deploying fake math and accounting gimmicks to hide the true cost of the bill," Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said on Sunday. "Republicans are about to pass the single most expensive bill in U.S. history to give tax breaks to billionaires while taking away Medicaid, SNAP benefits and good-paying jobs for millions of people."
The Senate narrowly advanced the tax-cut, immigration, border and military spending bill in a procedural vote late on Saturday, voting 51-49 to open debate on the 940-page megabill.
One powerful illustration of the Republican divide came on Sunday when Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina said he would not seek re-election, after Trump threatened to back a challenger to him in next year's midterm elections over his vote against the bill.
Trump on social media has hailed the progress as a "great victory" for his "great, big, beautiful bill." In a separate post on Sunday, he said: "We will make it all up, times 10, with GROWTH, more than ever before."
Trump wants the bill passed before the July 4 Independence Day holiday. While that deadline is one of choice, lawmakers will face a far more serious deadline later this summer when they must raise the nation's self-imposed debt ceiling or risk a devastating default.
If the Senate succeeds in passing the bill, it will then go to the House, where members are also divided, with some angry about its cost and others worried about cuts to the Medicaid program. Republicans can afford to lose no more than three votes in either chamber to pass a bill the Democrats are united in opposition to.
The legislation was the sole focus of a marathon weekend congressional session marked by political drama, division and lengthy delays as Democrats seek to slow the legislation's path to passage.
Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, the other Republican "no" vote, opposed the legislation because it would raise the federal borrowing limit by an additional $5 trillion.
The megabill would extend the 2017 tax cuts that were Trump's main legislative achievement during his first term as president, cut other taxes and boost spending on the military and border security.
Senate Republicans, who reject the CBO's estimates on the cost of the legislation, are set on using an alternative calculation method that does not factor in costs from extending the 2017 tax cuts. Outside tax experts, like Andrew Lautz from the nonpartisan think tank Bipartisan Policy Center, call it a "magic trick."
Using this calculation method, the Senate Republicans' budget bill appears to cost substantially less and seems to save $500 billion, according to the BPC analysis.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC News
25 minutes ago
- NBC News
Tariffs and weaker beer demand are weighing on Modelo owner Constellation Brands
Constellation Brands on Tuesday reported quarterly earnings and revenue that missed analysts' estimates as beer demand slid and tariffs on aluminum weighed on its profitability. Still, the brewer reiterated its forecast for fiscal 2026, showing confidence that it can hit its financial targets despite the weaker-than-expected quarterly performance and higher duties. Shares of the company fell less than 1% in extended trading on Tuesday evening but rose 3% during morning trading on Wednesday after the company's conference call. The stock has shed more than 20% of its value this year, fueled by concerns about how the higher duties imposed by President Donald Trump would affect demand for its beer. Here's what the company reported compared with what Wall Street was expecting, based on a survey of analysts by LSEG: Earnings per share: $3.22 adjusted vs. $3.31 expected Revenue: $2.52 billion vs. $2.55 billion expected The report, which covers the three months ended May 31, includes the start of Trump's tariffs on canned beer imports in early April. He also hiked trade duties on aluminum to 25% in mid-March and to 50% in early June. Both imported beer and aluminum are crucial to Constellation's beer business, which accounts for roughly 80% of the company's overall revenue. Constellation's beer portfolio only includes Mexican imports, like Corona, Pacifico and Modelo Especial, which overtook Bud Light as the top-selling beer brand in the U.S. two years ago. Constellation reported fiscal first-quarter net income of $516.1 million, or $2.90 per share, down from $877 million, or $4.78 per share, a year earlier. Constellation's operating margin fell 150 basis points, or 1.5%, in the quarter, in part driven by higher aluminum costs. Excluding items, the brewer earned $3.22 per share. Net sales dropped 5.8% to $2.52 billion, fueled by weaker demand for its beer and the company's divestiture of Svedka vodka. Constellation is still facing softer consumer demand, CEO Bill Newlands said in a statement. He attributed the weaker sales to 'non-structural socioeconomic factors.' Constellation's beer business saw shipment volumes fall 3.3%, caused by weaker consumer demand. Last quarter, Newlands said Hispanic consumers were buying less of the company's beer because of fears over Trump's immigration policy. Roughly half of Constellation's beer sales come from Hispanic consumers, according to the company. But on Wednesday, Newlands demurred when asked about Hispanic consumer sentiment, saying that all shoppers are concerned about higher prices. 'When you see a fair amount of change, both Hispanic and non-Hispanic consumers are concerned about inflation and about cost structure,' Newlands said. He added that consumers aren't going out to eat as much and hosting fewer social occasions, which means they are drinking less beer. Still, he maintained that consumer interest in drinking beer hasn't waned; while shoppers' overall spending on beer has fallen, their relative spend on beer compared with their total grocery bill has held steady. For fiscal 2026, Constellation continues to expect comparable earnings per share of $12.60 to $12.90. The company is projecting that organic net sales will range from declining 2% to rising 1%.
NBC News
25 minutes ago
- NBC News
Jan. 6 defendant sentenced to life in prison for plotting to kill FBI special agents who investigated him
WASHINGTON — A Jan. 6 defendant who plotted to murder FBI special agents who investigated him over his actions at the Capitol was sentenced to life in prison on Wednesday. Edward Kelley was convicted in November of conspiracy to murder employees of the United States; solicitation to commit a crime of violence; and influencing or retaliating against federal officials by threat. President Donald Trump pardoned Kelley, alongside roughly 1,500 other Jan. 6 defendants, in January. Kelley's team argued that Trump's pardon should apply to his conduct in the murder plot. While the Justice Department had argued that the pardons should apply to separate gun cases against other Jan. 6 defendants, they said the pardon did not apply to Kelley's conduct. A federal judge ruled that Trump's pardon did not apply to the murder plot. Federal prosecutors sought life in prison for Kelley, calling him 'remorseless" and writing that he had "shown neither a capacity nor desire" to rehabilitate. "On the contrary, Kelley not only believes the actions for which he was convicted were justified but that his duty as a self-styled 'patriot' compelled him to target East Tennessee law enforcement for assassination,' federal prosecutors wrote in a sentencing memo. Kelley, prosecutors wrote, "committed crimes that are serious, violent, and all designed to achieve the same end: the murder of federal, state, and local law enforcement." Kelley "formed a self-styled militia to attack the FBI," and "conducted combat drills to realize his plan," they wrote. He "strategized ways to bomb the FBI Knoxville office" and "identified a 'hornet's nest' at which to store his various weapons at 'arms' reach.'" Kelley also "devised a kill list of individual agents to be targeted" and then "gave the go-ahead command — 'start it' — to his confederates, noting that 'every hit has to hurt.'" Kelley's lawyer wrote that "no individual was directly threatened with harm or violence by Kelley, and no one was injured" and that "Kelley does not deserve the same sentence as an actual 'terrorist' who injured or killed hundreds or thousands" of Americans. Austin Carter, who admitted that he conspired with Kelley in the murder plot and pleaded guilty, is scheduled to be sentenced next month.
Telegraph
30 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Washington has crushed Trump's Maga revolution
New presidential administrations often spur talk of revolution in Washington, and that goes double for Donald Trump. Supporters promise an end to the old politics; opponents warn of the end of America as we've known it. But the minute anything needs to be done through Congress, the forces of politics as usual reassert themselves. So it is with the 'One Big Beautiful Bill'. The gigantic tax and budget bill isn't just the centrepiece of Trump's legislative agenda. Given the narrow Republican majorities in both houses of Congress, the power of the Senate filibuster to block party-line bills outside of the tax and budget context, and the disinterest of all sides in forging bipartisan compromise, the bill is likely to be Trump's entire legislative agenda for 2025-26. There was a lot of talk about how the bill would do big, dramatic things and break with Republican policies of the past in favour of a new, populist agenda. Perhaps, Trump suggested, Republicans would raise taxes on the wealthy. There was fierce lobbying to undo some provisions of the 2017 Trump tax bill. But the forces of political gravity are not so easily defied. From the beginning, Republicans understood that this was a must-pass bill. Without it, not only would many of the 2017 tax cuts expire, but the GOP would likely miss the opportunity to satisfy priorities such as funding more immigration enforcement. In the end, the bill passed the House by just one vote, 215-214 (with two Republicans voting no and three others absent or abstaining), and did the same in the Senate, with vice-president JD Vance casting the 51-50 tiebreaker (with three Republicans voting no). The bill's passage followed a 'vote-a-thon' of record length in the Senate, as Senators voted down one amendment after another. When a must-pass bill needs every single yes vote to pass, that's a lot of people who have to be appeased or outright paid off. If the House baulks at the Senate's changes, the same dynamic is apt to repeat itself. So, the broad outlines of the bill look a lot more like traditional conservative policymaking with some Trump flavouring. Tax cuts for businesses and the wealthy are preserved, and coupled with working-class tax relief such as eliminating taxes on tips, overtime, and car loans. There's more money for warships and other weapons, and also for the tools of border enforcement (a wall, more agents, and more detention facilities). Poverty programmes such as Medicaid are subjected to work requirements, tightened eligibility rules, and restrictions on benefits for immigrants. The bill cuts back on subsidies for student-loan repayments and green energy. Republican moderates got their own concessions. The deduction for state and local taxes, which effectively subsidises high-tax blue states, was raised from $10,000 to $40,000 (at significant cost to the budget deficit) to secure a few votes from blue-state Republicans, mainly in the northeast. The child tax credit was expanded, which amounts to a payout to many lower-income taxpayers. Alaska was given more generous treatment in some benefits programmes once Senator Lisa Murkowski's vote became a must-have. Hospital and nursing-home lobbies made out like bandits. Fiscal hawks who wanted deeper spending cuts are instead presented with a bill that does nothing to alter the debt-ridden nation's grim fiscal trajectory. Other conservative ambitions were scaled back or ended on the cutting room floor. Abortion giant Planned Parenthood was defunded from the Medicaid programme – a long-time goal of pro-lifers – but the Senate cut the duration of that defunding to one year. The Senate version also cut out plans to ban Medicaid funding for gender transitions, sell public lands in the West, tax third-party funding of lawsuits, or prevent states from regulating artificial intelligence or giving state-funded healthcare to illegal immigrants. A Senate effort to reduce the federal subsidy for Obamacare health insurance plans was scrapped. The end result is a bill nobody likes – which is how lawmaking in Washington usually works. Among Republicans, only the handful of purist fiscal conservatives casting 'no' votes are truly at peace with their votes. Trump and Vance can doubtless sell the deal to Maga diehards as a necessity, and the donor class will be pleased. Democrats are back in their happy place, complaining that Republicans are cutting taxes on the rich and paying for it with welfare cuts for the poor – a hymn they've been singing since the 1930s. Voters instinctively dislike the bill because it's huge and messy, but that's precisely why they're unlikely to remember much about it a year and a half from now at midterm election time other than the Medicaid cuts, which Democrats aim to make the centrepiece of their campaigns. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
