That’s an enormous debate for a Trump proposed mega-budget bill, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act.” With the self-imposed deadline for passage quickly approaching on July 4th, negotiations have intensified. The legislation could add an estimated $3.3 trillion to the national debt over the next decade, drawing criticism from various political factions, including some from within Trump’s own party.
The bill includes significant provisions that aim to reshape federal spending, imposing $1.2 trillion in cuts primarily affecting Medicaid and food stamp programs. Rather than increase funding, these cuts would be made through tighter work requirements, tougher eligibility standards, and changes in federal reimbursements to states. The proposed budget includes $350 billion for border security and national security efforts. The new fees—which would include charging immigrants to deport them—would finance deportations.
Under President Trump, the administration has established a national citizenship database. This online database is a monumental achievement that brings together data from multiple immigration enforcement agencies and the Social Security Administration. This new initiative, intended to make U.S. immigration processes faster and more efficient, has sparked widespread alarm over the impact on individual privacy and data security.
Trump is expected to welcome Israeli Prime Minister and close Trump ally Benjamin Netanyahu to the White House next week, on July 7. With the meeting underscoring the depth of U.S.-Israel relations, domestic challenges continue to loom large.
Democrats have been in furious opposition to the bill. They oppose the tax cuts it contains, which they say will disproportionately benefit the ultra-rich while gutting key social programs for lower-income Americans. Critics within the Republican Party continue to raise serious concerns. Senators Thom Tillis and Rand Paul have voiced apprehensions regarding the potential negative impact of Medicaid cuts on rural hospitals.
Against this backdrop, here comes Senator Susan Collins arguing that Democrats are blocking amendments critical to increasing funding for rural hospital relief. She got a lot of attention recently by complaining that even after making one thousand distinct cuts to Medicaid. These deep cuts are hurting everyone who relies on rural hospitals, but we’re extending tax cuts for rich people. Somehow, when we attempted to address both those issues ourselves, they responded in a very hypocritical manner.
Their response has been bipartisan and overwhelmingly negative. At the same time, business tycoon Elon Musk is doing a similarly big deal with it. Musk has personally pledged to defeat any Congressional lawmaker who backs the bill, which shows how serious he is about being a fiscal hawk. He expressed his disdain on his social media platform X, saying, “Every member of Congress who campaigned on reducing government spending and then immediately voted for the biggest debt increase in history should hang their head in shame!”
It’s no surprise that Musk is making his opposition known. Most notably, he recently announced his intention to form a new political party, the “America Party.” This new party should promise to back good candidates against any member who votes for Trump’s horrible budget bill in the 2018 elections. With Musk, a situation that was already a political tinderbox at the local level becomes even more complicated.
In one of its final moves, the Trump administration sued the city of Los Angeles. This move underscores just how pernicious the effects of his budget proposals would be on immigration policies. This lawsuit embodies a much broader conflict between state and federal government over the authority to enforce immigration law.
With the July 4 deadline for filing candidates fast approaching, Trump is about to get his first big test of leadership within his own party. As he continues to try to round up votes for his near-$2 trillion budget-busting bill, subdivisions within the GOP could make things much more difficult. Some party members worry about the long-term implications of increasing national debt against a backdrop of proposed cuts to essential services.