Senate GOP tax bill includes largest cut to U.S. safety net in decades
Although the legislation is still estimated to cost more than $3 trillion over the next decade, the Senate GOP tax bill partially pays for its large price tag by slashing spending on Medicaid and food stamps, which congressional Republicans maintain are rife with fraud.
The tax bill centers on making permanent large tax cuts for individual taxpayers, extending the cuts that Republicans first enacted under President Donald Trump's first term. The bill includes an increase to the standard deduction claimed by most taxpayers, rate reductions for most U.S. households, and a partial version of Trump's plan to end taxes on tipped wages, among many other provisions.
But it offsets these expensive tax cuts in part through what several experts said may prove the most dramatic reductions in safety net spending in modern U.S. history. While last-minute changes to the bill text makes precise estimates impossible, the legislation appears on track to cut Medicaid by about 18 percent and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) by roughly 20 percent, according to estimates based on projections from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
Previously, the biggest recent cut to food stamps was a roughly 14 percent cut approved by Congress during President Bill Clinton's administration in the 1990s, according to Bobby Kogan, a senior policy analyst at the Center for American Progress, a center-left think tank. (Food stamp benefits also sharply increased, and then fell, after the expiration of covid benefits.) The biggest prior cut to Medicaid was during President Ronald Reagan's term in the 1980s, when Congress and the White House approved a roughly 5 percent reduction to the federal health insurance program that primarily benefits low-income households during his first two years in office, Kogan said.
The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the Senate tax bill will lead to roughly 12 million fewer people receiving Medicaid and more than 2 million fewer people receiving food stamps.
'This is not only the biggest ever — it's by a mile the biggest ever,' Kogan said. 'You can very safely say this is the biggest cut to programs for low-income Americans ever.'
The legislation achieves these steep reductions by imposing a slew of new requirements and restrictions on low-income Americans who rely on government assistance, although it includes some revisions sought by nonpartisan experts as well.
On Medicaid, the bill institutes new federal work reporting requirements for the first time in the program's history — forcing millions of people to regularly prove they are working at least 80 hours a month to keep their health insurance. The bill provides exemptions for certain groups of people, including those who are pregnant, some caretakers and those with disabilities. But it also imposes burdensome paperwork requirements that experts say states are ill-equipped to take on, and they warn that both those who are meeting the requirements and who qualify for exemptions could lose coverage because they will struggle to submit proper documentation.
The bill also mandates that people just above the federal poverty line begin paying out of pocket for Medicaid services, such as some doctor's visits or lab tests. States would be allowed to charge these enrollees up to 5 percent of their income in cost-sharing — a fee that could amount to hundreds of dollars annually. While Democratic-led states might opt for modest co-pays, Republican-led states could impose substantially higher fees, potentially pricing out many low-income residents, experts said. Although it's unclear if this measure will survive final passage, the legislation has also sought to crack down on loopholes that raise what the federal government is reimbursing hospitals for Medicaid services, said Marc Goldwein, senior vice president at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a nonpartisan group.
The changes to Medicaid could also force already struggling rural hospitals to close or significantly pare back their services, hospital groups have said. Between a rise in uncompensated care and smaller federal reimbursements through states because of changes to what is called the provider tax, hospitals are expected to take a significant hit.
'No question — this is definitely the biggest cut. It's the biggest rollback in federal support for health care ever,' said Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health policy at KFF.
On food stamps, the bill rolls back decades of long-standing policy by tightening work requirements. Parents of children have generally been exempt from work rules, but under the new proposal, single mothers of teenagers as young as 14 would be required to work or lose benefits. The bill also raises the upper age for able-bodied adults without dependents who are subject to work requirements from 49 to 64, sweeping in millions of older Americans previously shielded from the rules. Additionally, it would make it harder for states to waive work requirements during times of high unemployment, effectively limiting assistance unless a generationally severe recession hits.
The legislation also changes how poverty and household budgets are calculated for the purposes of food stamp eligibility, potentially reducing benefits for millions. Under President Joe Biden, internet access was recognized as a basic necessity for modern life and factored into cost-of-living calculations that help determine eligibility and benefit levels. The new bill reverses that.
Conservatives and Republicans have defended these changes as necessary to arrest the rising cost of safety net programs. Robert Rector, research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, said U.S. food stamps are rife with fraud, saying the federal government's spending on welfare programs has risen from about $1 trillion per year before the covid pandemic to $1.69 trillion now. Rector said stricter limits in particular made sense for the food stamps program.
'Welfare spending is out of control. Fraud is out of control,' Rector said. 'There's extensive massive fraud. There's massive fraud in food stamps in particular.'
Sen. Markywane Mullin (R-Oklahoma) on Sunday argued on 'Meet the Press' that the legislation was only 'getting out the ones that should never be' on Medicaid and was focused on 'able-bodied' individuals.
'We don't pay people in this country to be lazy. We want to give them an opportunity, and when they're going through a hard time, we want to give them a helping hand,' Mullin said. 'That's what Medicaid was designed for, and it's unfortunately, it's been abused.'
But Republicans may face political blowback if the changes to the safety net programs result in significant reductions in benefits. The cuts also fly in the face of prior promises made by party leaders: Vice President JD Vance has long been critical of cuts to Medicaid, and Trump has repeatedly promised not to reduce benefits in the program. Even as the bill moves toward passage, some congressional Republicans from rural states have also expressed concern about the political impacts of cuts to Medicaid.
'Let's watch and be careful that we don't cut into bone, don't hurt our rural hospitals,' Sen. Jim Justice (R-West Virginia) said late last week. 'If we do that, it's going to be a bad day.'
Others had hoped large spending cuts would at least be used to reduce the nation's $36 trillion federal debt. Goldwein, of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said it is a shame that Republicans are using funding from spending cuts only to partially mitigate the more than $3 trillion cost of their tax bill.
'What bothers me is there are really hard savings to find in here. But all the money is being used not for deficit reduction, not to fully pay for tax cuts, but to reduce the amount of money we're borrowing,' Goldwein said. 'We're going in the wrong direction.'
Yasmeen Abutaleb and Jacob Bogage contributed to this report.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

USA Today
a few seconds ago
- USA Today
Byron Black executed for triple murder despite concerns of disabilities, heart device
The execution came after Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee declined requests, including from some Republicans, to intervene because of the inmate's intellectual disabilities and heart device. Tennessee has executed a man for the 1988 murder of his girlfriend and her two young daughters despite arguments he suffered from intellectual disabilities and concerns his heart device would shock him back to life during the lethal injection. The state executed Byron Black on Tuesday, Aug. 5, after Gov. Bill Lee declined requests from attorneys, advocacy groups and even some Republicans to intervene. He was pronounced dead at 10:43 a.m. CT. "This is hurting so bad," Black said during the execution, according to news media witnesses who saw him die. On March 28, 1988, Angela Clay and her eldest daughter, 9-year-old Latoya, were found shot dead in bed. Clay's other daughter, 6-year-old Lakeisha, was found dead on the floor in another bedroom with multiple gunshot wounds. Black became the 28th inmate executed in the U.S. this year, a 10-year high, with at least nine more executions scheduled. He's the second inmate to be put to death in Tennessee this year after a five-year break in executions in the state. Black's case stands out for two reasons. What his legal team said was an "undisputed intellectual disability" had many calling for a reprieve, including some Republicans. And his attorneys raised serious questions about whether Black's implanted heart device would cause "a prolonged and torturous execution" in violation of the U.S. Constitution. Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti told USA TODAY in a statement that expert testimony "refutes the suggestion that Black would suffer severe pain if executed" and that the state was seeking "to hold Black accountable for his horrific crimes." Here's what you need to know about the execution, the crime and the issues surrounding the case. What was Byron Black convicted of? Black was convicted of fatally shooting his girlfriend, Angela Clay, and her two daughters: 9-year-old Latoya and 6-year-old Lakeisha. They were murdered on March 27, 1988. At the time, Black had been on work release from prison for shooting Clay's estranged husband and her daughters' father, Bennie Clay, in 1986. Prosecutors told jurors at trial that Black killed Angela Clay because he was jealous of her ongoing relationship with her ex. Investigators believe that Angela Clay and Latoya were shot as they slept, while Lakeisha appeared to have tried to escape after being wounded in the chest and pelvis. Bennie Clay previously told The Tennessean, part of the USA TODAY Network, he believes Black killed the girls to spite him. "My kids, they were babies," he told the newspaper. "They were smart, they were gonna be something. They never got the chance." More recently, he told The Tennessean he planned to attend the execution, though he said he has forgiven Black. 'God has a plan for everything,' he told the newspaper. 'He had a plan when he took my girls. He needed them more than I did, I guess.' Judge ordered Byron Black's heart device removed before execution On July 22, a judge ordered that a heart device implanted in Black needed to be removed at a hospital the morning of his execution, a development that appeared to complicate matters as a Nashville hospital declined to participate. But the Tennessee Supreme Court overturned the judge's order, and the U.S. Supreme Court backed that up, clearing the way for Black to be executed despite the heart device. His attorneys argued that the device, designed to revive the heart, could lead to "a prolonged and torturous execution." "It's horrifying to think about this frail old man being shocked over and over as the device attempts to restore his heart's rhythm even as the State works to kill him," Henry said in a statement. The state argued that Black's heart device would not cause him pain. Robin, Maher, executive director of the nonprofit Death Penalty Information Center, told USA TODAY that an inmate being executed with a defibrillator implant was "a completely unprecedented issue." But, she added, "one I fear we will see again as states move toward executing aging prisoners on death row." A reporter for The Tennessean was among the witnesses to the execution and USA TODAY will update this story with her observations. Tennessee governor declined to intervene With their arguments over Black's heart device at the end of the legal road, his attorneys re-focused their attention on his intellectual disabilities during his final days and hours, calling on Republican Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee to stop the execution and prevent "a grotesque spectacle." Citing Fetal Alcohol Syndrome and exposure to toxic lead, Black's attorneys said mental impairments meant that he always had to live with and rely on family. More recently on death row, his attorneys said that other inmates had to "do his everyday tasks for him, including cleaning his cell, doing his laundry, and microwaving his food." "If ever a case called for the Governor to grant clemency or, at the very least, a reprieve, it is this one," Henry said in a statement. The director of Tennessee Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty said that she supports accountability for people who commit heinous crimes, but "the law is clear that we do not execute people with intellectual disability." "Governor Lee can insist on accountability while ensuring that the law is also followed. A situation such as this is exactly why governors have clemency power," Jasmine Woodson said in a statement. "Mr. Black has spent over three decades in prison for this crime and will never be released. As a conservative, I believe that he should remain behind bars, but he should not be executed." Lee's office did not respond to repeated requests for comment from USA TODAY. In his statement to USA TODAY, Attorney General Skrmetti pushed back at findings that Black was intellectually disabled and said that "over the decades, courts have uniformly denied Black's eleven distinct attempts to overturn his murder convictions and death sentence." Angela Clay's family long sought justice Earlier this year, Angela Clay's sister, Linette Bell, told The Tennessean she and her family were frustrated with years of delays, court hearings, and uncertainty: "He needs to pay for what he did." Angela Clay's mother, Marie Bell, told The Tennessean she had been waiting far too long. "I'm 88 years old and I just want to see it before I leave this Earth," she said. Outside the prison ahead of the execution on Tuesday, Angela Clay's niece, Nicoule Davis, told The Tennessean "it's time for a celebration." "It's time for a celebration," Davis said. "We've been waiting for years and years." Family members, some of whom witnessed the execution, were expected to address reporters afterward, and this story will be updated with their comments. What was Byron Black's last meal? Black's last meal was pizza with mushrooms and sausage, donuts, and butter pecan ice cream. Byron Black's execution is second in the state this year Black is the second inmate to be executed in Tennessee this year following a five-year break in the death penalty in the state. The break followed an independent review that found the Tennessee Department of Corrections was not consistently testing execution drugs for potency and purity. Nationwide, nine more executions are scheduled for this year, with more expected to be carried out as governors sign more death warrants. The next execution is Kayle Barrington Bates in Florida on Aug. 19 for the 1982 stabbing death of a 24-year-old woman named Janet White, who was kidnapped from her office and taken to the woods before Bates beat her, tried to rape her and ultimately killed her. Contributing: Kelly Puente, The Tennessean Amanda Lee Myers is a senior crime reporter for USA TODAY. Follow her on X at @amandaleeusat.

Associated Press
a few seconds ago
- Associated Press
The Trump administration dismisses most on a federal board overseeing Puerto Rico's finances
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) — The Trump administration has dismissed five out of seven members on Puerto Rico's federal control board that oversees the U.S. territory's finances, sparking concern about the future of the island's fragile economy. The five fired are all Democrats. A White House official told The Associated Press on Tuesday that the board 'has been run inefficiently and ineffectively by its governing members for far too long and it's time to restore common sense leadership.' Those fired are board chairman Arthur Gonzalez, along with Cameron McKenzie, Betty Rosa, Juan Sabater and Luis Ubiñas. The board's two remaining members — Andrew G. Biggs and John E. Nixon — are Republicans. Sylvette Santiago, a spokesperson for the board, said none of those fired had received notifications ahead of their dismissal. The board was created in 2016 under the Obama administration, a year after Puerto Rico's government declared it was unable to pay its more than $70 billion public debt load and later filed for the biggest municipal bankruptcy in U.S. history. In remarks to the AP, the White House official claimed the board had operated ineffectively and in secret and said it 'shelled out huge sums to law, consulting and lobbying firms.' The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the subject, also accused the board's staff of receiving 'exorbitant salaries.' The board spokesperson did not return a message seeking additional comment. Puerto Rico is struggling to restructure more than $9 billion in debt held by the state's Electric Power Authority, with officials holding bitter mediations with creditors demanding full payment. It's the only Puerto Rico government debt pending a restructuring, with the White House official accusing the board of preferring to 'extend the bankruptcy.' In February, the board's executive director, Robert Mujica Jr., said it was 'impossible' for Puerto Rico to pay the $8.5 billion that bondholders are demanding. He instead unveiled a new fiscal plan that proposed a $2.6 billion payment for creditors. The plan does not call for any rate increases for an island that has one of the highest power bills in any U.S. jurisdiction as chronic power outages persist, given the grid's weak infrastructure. Alvin Velázquez, a bankruptcy law professor at Indiana University, said he worries the dismissal of the board members could spark another crisis in Puerto Rico. 'This is really about getting a deal out of (the power company) that is not sustainable for the rate payers of Puerto Rico,' he said. Velázquez, former chair for the unsecured creditors committee during the bankruptcy proceedings, also questioned if the dismissals are legal, since board members can only be removed for just cause. 'What's the cause?' he said. 'What you're going to see is another instance in which the Trump administration is taking on and testing the courts.' The dismissals were first reported by the Breitbart News Network, a conservative news site.


Boston Globe
a few seconds ago
- Boston Globe
What's the deal with all the redistricting talk? A simple guide.
Advertisement It's a lot to untangle, but we'll attempt to do so. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Let's start with the basics. What is redistricting and what's happening in Texas? Per the US Constitution, every 10 years after the census, states must redraw congressional districts to reflect population changes. These districts must be proportional, contiguous, and under federal law, must not be drawn to dilute the voting power of racial groups, but otherwise how they're drawn is up to each state. (Fun fact: Before 1840 some states including Massachusetts didn't have Congressional districts but had every House candidate run at-large.) What's less settled is whether states can redraw districts mid-decade. Some states allow it. Others don't. Texas, which has the second-largest congressional delegation in the country with 38 representatives, is one of the states that does. With Republicans controlling state government, Trump recently urged Texas to redraw its congressional map to give the GOP more right-leaning seats heading into the midterms. Advertisement Texas already had a special legislative session scheduled for August. Republicans used the opportunity to add redistricting to the agenda with a proposed map that would likely net them five additional seats on top of the 25 they currently hold. In response, Texas Democrats did the only thing they could to block the move: They fled the state to blue states—including some The special session ends in two weeks. For now, Texas is at a standstill. So what's going on in California? Once it became clear Texas Republicans were moving forward, California Governor Gavin Newsom and state Democrats responded in kind. If Texas draws five new Republican seats, Newsom said, California would aim to draw five new Democratic ones. But doing this in California is far more complicated. The state currently uses an independent redistricting commission. To override it, lawmakers would need to eliminate the commission through a special session, and then place the measure on a statewide ballot. Newsom said he's open to doing both, including holding a special election in November to let voters decide. Is this just a Texas–California battle? Far from it. Fifteen states are now considering mid-decade redistricting—some inspired by the Texas–California showdown, others acting under court orders. In New York, Governor Kathy Hochul declared, 'This is war. We're at war,' and promised aggressive action on redistricting. But the state constitution limits what Democrats can do. A redistricting change would require passage in two consecutive legislative sessions, followed by voter approval on the ballot. So it's impossible to do ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. Advertisement Ohio, meanwhile, is redrawing its map due to a court order, which could lead to Republican gains. Other states considering changes include Florida, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, Oregon, and Washington. There is also a report that Vice President JD Vance may What about New England? Every US House member from New England is a Democrat. The only state where redistricting has surfaced is New Hampshire, where Republicans control the Legislature. They could redraw the line between the state's two House districts to make one more favorable for the GOP. But Republican Governor Kelly Ayotte said in December that the So what does this mean for the midterms? It all hinges on whether Texas acts. If it does, a domino effect could follow. If it doesn't, most other changes will be limited to court-ordered redistricting. Historically, the party out of power makes big gains in the first midterm election of a new president's term. Democrats currently need to flip four seats to regain the House majority in 2026. Under various discussed maps, they could instead need to flip seven—or in Democrats' worst-case scenario—twelve. Republicans flipped nine seats in the last midterms, giving them a margin so slim it doomed their speaker. In 2018, Democrats gained 40 seats. Advertisement Wait… what does Massachusetts have to do with this? In a CNBC interview on Tuesday morning, Trump denied that he initiated the current redistricting push. 'They did it to us, the blue states you were talking about,' Trump said, after the host referenced California's plans. 'Somebody gave a good example. In Massachusetts, I got, I think, 41 percent of the vote, a very blue state, and yet [Democrats] got 100 percent of Congress. One hundred percent. I got 40, 41 percent or something, and yet 100 percent of Congress in Massachusetts? No, it shouldn't be that way.' (For the record: Trump received 36% of the vote in Massachusetts in 2024.) James Pindell is a Globe political reporter who reports and analyzes American politics, especially in New England.