Written by Mary Clare Joel
Washington (AP) A day ahead of the deadline he set for July 4, the House passed a comprehensive tax and spending cuts package that President Donald Trump called brilliant.
Related Articles
-
Here s what to know about clean energy in Republican megabill headed to Trump
-
Maura Healey: Trump administration won t release $108 million meant for Mass. schools
-
EPA puts on leave 139 employees who spoke out against policies under Trump
-
Medicaid, food aid recipients worry about safety net cuts in bill sent to Trump
-
What s in Trump s big bill that passed Congress and will soon become law
Spending cuts, tax incentives, military spending, deportation funding, and other longstanding GOP priorities like Medicaid and renewable energy program cuts are all included in the 887-page plan. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the plan would result in 3 million more Americans losing their eligibility for food stamps, often known as SNAP benefits, and 11.8 million more Americans going without insurance by 2034.
The following are some lessons to be learned from Trump’s large, stunning bill and the route Republicans took to enact it:
The bill proceeded quickly by congressional standards, arriving to Trump’s desk less than six months into his administration. That was only made feasible by Trump’s pressure on Republican lawmakers to complete it by imposing a strict deadline of July 4.
Since the majority of Trump’s Republican opponents had retired or lost their reelection, few were left to oppose him. Republicans in the House and Senate, who have always been faithful, quickly made his priority their top priority.
Additionally, Republican members are aware that dissenting will have negative political repercussions. Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina, one of those who did, abruptly declared on Sunday that he would retire the next year, just one day after stating that he would reject the proposal because to its cuts to health care services.
Trump commented about Tillis on X, saying that he is a talker and complainer rather than a doer.
Tillis voted against the bill in the Senate along with Republican Senators Rand Paul of Kentucky and Susan Collins of Maine. The only Republicans who voted against it in the House were Representatives Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania.
Trump’s anger has also been directed at Massie. Trump wrote last month, “Massie is weak, ineffective, and votes NO on virtually everything put before him.”
The GOP’s election sweep, which gave them the White House and majority in the House and Senate, directly led to the passing of the measure. Republicans were determined that the so-called trifecta of power, which only comes around seldom, would not be wasted.
Importantly, Republicans were able to use a budget mechanism that bypasses the Senate filibuster and enables the majority to pass legislation with just 51 votes because they controlled both chambers of Congress. Therefore, they never had to include the Democrats in the process and no support from them was required.
When faced with a similar trifecta over the years, both parties have used the budget mechanism to pass priorities. Republicans passed tax cuts during Trump’s first term in 2017, Democrats passed the Affordable Care Act under President Barack Obama in 2010, and Democrats passed President Joe Biden’s health care, tax, and environment package in 2022.
For House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., who both had extremely slim majorities to work with and wanted to demonstrate to Trump that they could pass his legislation, the bill was a significant test.
At first, the two couldn’t agree on how to proceed. Though Thune wanted two bills and Johnson wanted one, they ultimately came to an agreement and collaborated with Trump to bring the bill through all the challenging stages and secure enough support.
Regarding the actual content of the measure, Trump seemed to be largely accommodating as he pushed the GOP leaders for a significant victory on July 4. In order to get the votes, Johnson and Thune made care to keep almost all Republicans on board by listening to members from a variety of ideological backgrounds and making necessary changes to the measure.
The leaders crammed the bill with personal priorities for some of their most dubious members in order to garner that much support. A higher cap on state and local tax deductions was won by New York House Republicans. Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri secured long-sought funding for individuals affected by nuclear testing and development. Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska gained a number of concessions, such as food stamp and Medicaid carve-outs, to aid her expansive state.
Within hours after Thune’s vow to support it, votes were in motion, and Murkowski was the Senate’s final holdout.
He stated a month ago that failure is not an option. We must reach number fifty-one.
House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., have consistently opposed the bill and think that its cutbacks to food stamps and Medicaid might give them additional seats—possibly even a majority—in the upcoming midterm elections.
Following the Senate’s passage of the package, Schumer declared, “This vote will haunt our Republican colleagues for years to come.” Tens of millions will no longer have health insurance as a result of this bill. There will be millions of job losses. People will become ill and pass away.
Sen. Brian Schatz of Hawaii wrote on X Wednesday night that if the bill passes, it is very feasible that we will win the Senate.
Schatz wrote, “I hope this bill fails, but if it does, they will pay a heavy political price.”
Democrats used the authority they did have to impose lengthy delays as Republicans approached passage of the package because they had no other option.
With a speech critiquing the bill and sharing accounts of people impacted by Medicaid and other program cuts, Jeffries occupied the House floor for nearly nine hours just as Republicans were securing the votes, postponing their significant victory and members’ flights out of town for the July 4 holiday. According to Jeffries, this is not who we are.
In addition to delaying Senate passage, Schumer made Senate clerks read the whole 887-page bill—a step that leaders typically agree to omit. Nearly sixteen hours passed.
The fact that the law raises the national debt ceiling by $5 trillion to permit further borrowing to settle outstanding debts is a significant victory for Republicans. By including that clause, Republicans were able to avoid both the possibility of a U.S. default and the need to enact the debt limit increase separately, which would have required 60 Senate votes and Democratic backing.
After weeks of intense discussions between the Democratic Senate, the Republican House, and President Biden, Congress last increased the debt ceiling in 2023.
The bill caused serious worries for many Republicans. In any case, nearly all of them cast ballots in favor of it.
Despite their harsh criticism of the Medicaid cuts, Hawley and Murkowski supported the bill after it included some of their state goals. Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin had previously referred to the bill as obscene and immoral, claiming that it would increase deficits. However, he supported it as well.
Legislators from New York were dissatisfied when the Senate only agreed to a five-year extension rather than a ten-year one, despite their efforts to double the state and local tax deduction threshold to $40,000 in the House-passed bill. However, they ultimately came to terms with the shift.
Representative Nick LaLota, R-N.Y., stated, “I can’t be a yes on that.” He was, however, when the roll was called.
When he was the decisive vote in 2017, the late Senator John McCain, R-Ariz., famously put an end to Trump’s attempt to dismantle Obamacare. Any Republican might have equally sabotaged this effort, with slim margins in both chambers.
In the last hours before the Senate vote, Murkowski was the lone senator who had not yet made up his mind. Like McCain, he had voted against the Republican health care initiative in 2017. She described the decision as difficult, but in the end, she agreed with it.
This item was written by Kevin Freking of the Associated Press.
