Latest news with #socialsafety
Yahoo
21-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
I Asked ChatGPT To Explain Trump's ‘Big Beautiful Bill' To Me Like I'm 12 — Here's What It Said
I'm no stranger to sweeping legislation. I have 30 years of combined experience covering politics and state government, advocating for healthcare and education nonprofits, and negotiating policy from both sides of the table. Discover More: Try This: However, when President Donald Trump unveiled his 'Big Beautiful Bill,' even I had to pause. What exactly is in it? What's at stake for everyday people now and in the future? I asked ChatGPT to cut through the noise and condense sprawling policy documents to provide me with a clear, emotionally neutral summary. In other words, I asked ChatGPT to explain it in a way that I would understand, as if I were a 12-year-old. Here's what it said. It's All In the Branding There's no official legislation called the 'Big Beautiful Bill.' According to ChatGPT, it's a branding phrase Trump used to signal his agenda. It includes tax cuts, deep rollbacks, and restructuring of social safety nets, carrying significant implications for energy, education, and public debt. Read Now: What Does It Mean for Average Americans? One of my first questions while reviewing any public policy, including Trump's budget bill, is how it would affect regular citizens. Same with ChatGPT. I asked how Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' would affect average Americans. It said that workers could see slightly larger paychecks if payroll taxes are reduced. However, there's a catch. 'Those same payroll taxes fund programs like Social Security and Medicare, and without a replacement funding mechanism, the long-term stability of those benefits could be in jeopardy,' ChatGPT said. 'We've seen versions of this play out before: short-term relief, long-term risk.' Healthcare on the Chopping Block For those who rely on the Affordable Care Act, it could bring significant disruption. According to ChatGPT, 'Trump has repeatedly signaled interest in dismantling parts of the ACA. That could mean higher premiums, fewer protections for people with preexisting conditions, and a market-wide ripple effect for anyone who buys insurance independently or through the exchanges.' While the bill doesn't eliminate the ACA outright, it lays the groundwork for targeted rollbacks that could weaken coverage and affordability. For millions of Americans, especially gig workers, freelancers, and early retirees, this isn't just a policy; it's a potential threat to their health and finances. Student Debt Relief Could Disappear Tucked into the Big Beautiful Bill are provisions that would unwind key aspects of the Biden administration's student debt relief efforts. While not framed explicitly as an attack on borrowers, the bill signals a sharp policy reversal, one that could shut down or restrict forgiveness programs and income-driven repayment options. According to ChatGPT, 'If you have student loans or are counting on forgiveness programs, they could disappear overnight. The bill includes a rollback of debt relief efforts and the potential return of higher interest rates for federal loans. And if you're a parent planning for college, the financial aid landscape could shift beneath your feet.' Social Security Is Fine Until It Isn't While the Big Beautiful Bill doesn't explicitly cut Social Security, its structural changes to payroll taxes and entitlement spending raise serious questions about long-term funding. By lowering or eliminating certain employer-employee tax obligations, the bill could weaken the primary revenue stream that supports Social Security's solvency. ChatGPT explained: 'Reducing payroll taxes without a clear replacement funding mechanism puts pressure on programs like Social Security and Medicare. Even if benefits aren't cut immediately, the financial sustainability of those programs becomes more fragile.' For retirees and future beneficiaries alike, this isn't just theoretical. A weakened Social Security trust fund could lead to delayed payments, reduced benefits, or increased retirement age, all of which disproportionately affect low-income earners and workers with physically demanding jobs. The Real Power Play From an AI and systems-thinking perspective, the 'Big Beautiful Bill' revealed something deeper: it's not just about the policies; it's about who benefits from speed and opacity. According to ChatGPT: 'Wealthy donors and corporate lobbyists can plan for these changes before they hit. They have access, leverage, and legal teams. The average worker? They're just trying to make rent and keep the lights on.' With a degree of self-awareness, ChatGPT said. 'While AI can help decode the structure, it can't shield anyone from the real-world consequences. That's why clarity, accountability, and deliberate scrutiny still matter. Because in a system where speed favors power, the rest of us need time to see clearly, before the ground shifts beneath our feet.' More From GOBankingRates 4 Housing Markets That Have Plummeted in Value Over the Past 5 Years This article originally appeared on I Asked ChatGPT To Explain Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' To Me Like I'm 12 — Here's What It Said
New York Times
09-07-2025
- Health
- New York Times
Why 1.5 Million New Yorkers Could Lose Health Insurance Under Trump Bill
President Trump's domestic policy law, which extends federal tax cuts and slashes the social safety net, is expected to have a seismic effect on health insurance and health care in New York, with more than one million people in the state losing benefits, experts say. In one key respect, the law's impact will be felt more keenly in New York than in any other state — and it has nothing to do with Medicaid. Instead, it is the result of an obscure federal funding mechanism that sends billions of dollars a year to New York and nothing to most states. That money, which started flowing as a result of the Affordable Care Act, will be reduced dramatically under the new law, beginning next year. That change is expected to leave more than 200,000 people statewide without insurance over the next two years. But in the long run, it could be eclipsed by other health care-related provisions in the law, known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which Mr. Trump signed on Friday. The law adds limits and reductions to Medicaid and other government health insurance programs. 'The only thing we're cutting is waste, fraud and abuse,' Mr. Trump has said. State estimates show that the law could eventually strip health insurance from 1.5 million people enrolled in Medicaid and other health coverage plans in New York, about 7.5 percent of the state population. Overall, the state could absorb a $10 billion hit annually because of the policy law. That reflects a combination of increased state expenditures and cuts in federal subsidies that support health insurance and health care for people with lower incomes. Those cuts will reduce revenue for hospitals, with some responding by charging higher prices to middle class and wealthy patients, who are covered by private insurance, according to the president of the hospital industry's main trade association in New York. Other hospitals might close. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Washington Post
09-07-2025
- Business
- Washington Post
What Trump's big tax law could mean for the youngest Americans
WASHINGTON — The impact of the massive spending bill that President Donald Trump signed into law on Independence Day is expected to filter down to infants and toddlers — a segment of the population that is particularly vulnerable to cuts to the federal social safety net. Many middle-class and wealthy families will see benefits from the new legislation, but programs that help low-income families keep babies healthy have been cut back. While state money funds public schools and preschool in some cases, programs supporting the youngest children are largely backed by the federal government.
Associated Press
09-07-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
What Trump's big tax law could mean for the youngest Americans
WASHINGTON (AP) — The impact of the massive spending bill that President Donald Trump signed into law on Independence Day is expected to filter down to infants and toddlers — a segment of the population that is particularly vulnerable to cuts to the federal social safety net. Many middle-class and wealthy families will see benefits from the new legislation, but programs that help low-income families keep babies healthy have been cut back. While state money funds public schools and preschool in some cases, programs supporting the youngest children are largely backed by the federal government. The law extends tax cuts that Trump passed during his first term in office and pours billions more into border security as the president seeks to broaden his crackdown on immigration. To pay for these initiatives, the law cuts Medicaid and food stamps — programs relied upon by poor households with children — by more than $1 trillion. The legislation Republicans called Trump's 'big beautiful bill' is set to deliver some gains for families with children. It increases tax credits, including one that now allows parents to deduct up to $2,200 per child from their tax bills. And it introduces investment accounts for newborns dubbed 'Trump Accounts,' each seeded with $1,000 from the government. Still, advocates say they do not make up for what children are likely to lose under the new law. And they fear what comes next, as the next Trump budget proposes more cuts to programs that help parents and babies. Medicaid cuts could add to strains on families Over 10 million Americans rely on Medicaid for health care. About 40% of births are covered by Medicaid. Newborns, too, qualify for it when their mothers have it. The new law doesn't take little kids or their parents off Medicaid. It institutes Medicaid work requirements for childless adults and adults with children over the age of 13. But pediatricians warn the cuts will be felt broadly, even by those who do not use Medicaid. The Medicaid cuts are expected to put a financial strain on health care providers, forcing them to cut their least profitable services. That's often pediatrics, where young patients are more likely to use Medicaid, said Lisa Costello, a West Virginia pediatrician who chairs the federal policy committee for the American Association of Pediatrics. The ripple effects could exacerbate an existing shortage of pediatricians and hospital beds for children. 'Any cuts to that program are going to trickle down and impact children, whether that's pediatric practices who depend on Medicaid to be able to stay open or children's hospitals,' Costello said. States also use Medicaid to pay for programs that go beyond conventional medical care, including therapies for young children with disabilities. Under the new law, states will foot a greater portion of the bill for Medicaid, meaning optional programs are at risk of getting cut. Advocates worry that if an adult loses Medicaid coverage, it could ratchet up household stress and make it more difficult for parents to make ends meet, both of which can negatively impact youngsters. And parents who lose their health insurance are less likely to take their children to the doctor. 'When parents lose their health insurance, they often think that their children also are no longer eligible, even if that's not the case,' said Cynthia Osborne, a professor of early education and the executive director of the Prenatal-to-3 Policy Impact Center at Vanderbilt University. The law increases tax credits for parents who qualify The law increases the child tax credit to $2,200 per child, up from $2,000. But parents who don't earn enough to pay income tax will still not see the benefit, and many will only see a partial benefit. The measure also contains two provisions intended to help families pay for child care, which in many places costs more than a mortgage. First, it boosts the tax credit parents receive for spending money on child care. The bill also expands a program that gives companies tax credits for providing child care for their employees. Both measures have faced criticism for generally benefiting larger companies and wealthier households. 'It's a corporate business tax break,' said Bruce Lesley, president of the advocacy group First Focus on Children. 'It makes their child care dependent upon working for an employer who has the credit.' 'Trump Accounts' will be opened with $1,000 for newborns The law launches a program that creates investment accounts for newborn children. The 'Trump Accounts' are to be seeded with $1,000 from the government, and children will be able to use the money when they become adults to start a new business, put the money toward a house or go to school. Unlike other baby bond programs, which generally target disadvantaged groups, the federal program will be available to families of all incomes. The program's backers have pitched the accounts as a way to give young people a boost as they reach adulthood and teach them about the benefits of investing. Critics have argued that families in poverty have more immediate needs and that their children should receive a larger endowment if the goal is to help level the playing field. A food assistance program faces cuts The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) faces the largest cut in its history under the law. It will, for the first time, require parents to work to qualify for the benefit if their children are 14 or older. But even households with younger children could feel the impact. The law kicks some immigrants — including those with legal status — off food assistance. It makes it more difficult for individuals to qualify by changing how it considers their utility bills. SNAP has historically been funded by the federal government, but under the new law, states will have to shoulder some of the financial burden. Cash-strapped governments could decide to implement new requirements that would make it more difficult for people to qualify, said Katie Bergh, a senior policy analyst with the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Some states may decide to exit the program altogether. 'When young children lose access to that healthy nutrition, it impacts them for the rest of their lives,' Bergh said. 'This bill fundamentally walks away from a long-standing nationwide commitment to making sure that low-income children in every state can receive the food assistance that they need.' ___ The Associated Press' education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
Yahoo
09-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Many ‘Big Beautiful' Losses Won't Be Felt Til After Midterms, And That's Intentional
House Democrats have shifted to a new messaging strategy now that their Republican colleagues have given in to President Trump's wishes and passed the devastating 'big, beautiful' bill despite many Republicans' supposed concerns about the legislation. A sneaky, midterms-proofing provision is baked in to many of the unpopular impending cuts to social safety net programs — specifically, they're not going to inflict pain on the electorate until after the midterms. The new Medicaid work requirements, for example — which are expected to kick some 9 to 14 million Americans off their health care coverage over the course of the next decade — won't begin until 2027, and some states might qualify for extensions. The requirement for Medicaid recipients who are not disabled and who are between the ages of 19 and 64 to begin reporting 80 hours a month of work to keep their enrollment won't kick in until after November 2026. Similarly, the cuts to Medicaid provider taxes that states use to cover the costs of the program won't take place until 2028. There are some cuts that will be felt more quickly. Some of them fall into the bucket of culture war red meat — politically targeted stuff that goes after Obamacare, Planned Parenthood and non-citizens' access to health care coverage. Per Axios: Obamacare premiums would increase by more than 75% on average for enrollees next year without the enhanced subsidies. … Medicaid funding of Planned Parenthood will also be cut off for next year under the bill — a change the family planning organization said could result in the closure of nearly 200 clinics. Restrictions on which lawfully residing immigrants can access Medicaid will go into effect on Oct. 1, 2026. … As the minority party in both chambers, Democrats were not ultimately able to block the bill's passage in either chamber, but they have built up some messaging points about its reverse Robin Hood qualities: taking from America's low-income and working class in order to extend tax cuts for the wealthy. Republicans have tried to bore the public with the details of the cuts they are pushing through in an attempt to (minorly) reduce the cost of the bill, speaking about the Medicaid and SNAP cuts in language of 'reforms' and 'common sense' work requirements. Because of that obfuscation, and because many of the most damaging impacts of the legislation won't be felt until after people have voted in the midterms next year, Democratic leadership is revving up its messaging this week while Congress is out to make that point explicit. Per the Washington Post: House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-New York), in an interview on 'The View,' noted that Republicans' massive tax and immigration package, which President Donald Trump signed into law last week, 'has several provisions in the legislation that will not take effect until after the 2026 midterm election.' Some could be rolled back if Democrats take back the House next year, Jeffries said. You may recall the uproar a few months back when President Trump attempted to fire Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden and replace her with one of his closest allies, in an acting capacity. At the time, even some Republicans acknowledged they weren't sure of the legality of the Trump administration's move, as the Library of Congress is a legislative branch agency and under Congress' purview. It was just one of a series of actions the Trump executive branch was taking at the time to lawlessly flex power over the other branches of government. The Associated Press was first to report on Hayden's new position: The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation exclusively told The Associated Press that Carla Hayden will join the humanities grantmaker Monday as a senior fellow whose duties will include advising on efforts to advance public knowledge through libraries and archives. The year-long post places Hayden back at the center of the very debates over American culture that surrounded her dismissal. The White House ousted Hayden, the first woman and the first African American to hold the title, after she was accused of promoting 'radical' literary material by a conservative advocacy group seeking to squash Trump opposition within the federal government. The House rubber-stamped the White House's request for $9.4 billion in federal spending cuts to NPR, PBS and foreign aid programs earlier this summer, but it appears some Republicans in the Senate aren't exactly salivating to do the same. The upper chamber has until July 18 to pass the measure — a rescissions package sent over from the executive branch that includes a fraction of the federal spending that Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency slashed during that rampage earlier this year. The package officially rescinds Congress' allocation of those funds before the Trump administration is forced to spend it as Congress allocated it. According to new reporting in Politico, it appears some Senate Republicans want to draft their own rescissions package rather than passing another constitutionally backwards spending cut demanded — and in some ways already implemented — by the White House, trampling on Congress' authority to determine spending. Frustrated Judge Struggles In The Quicksand Of The Abrego Garcia Case On Not Losing Perspective In The Trump II Madness NEW from Josh Kovensky over the holiday weekend: Congress Throws More Money at Removing Immigrants than Most Countries Spend on Their Armies Critical Read About the BBB, Federalism and the Future of American Democracy How a Show About Truly Terrible People Became the Defining American Sitcom Conservative Arizona Supreme Court Justice Clint Bolick has a warning for America Are We About to Have Labor Camps in the United States of America?
