No one likes it, yet it insists on continuing: Why can't Trump's 'Big and Beautiful Plan' be stopped?

Author: Jess Bidgood & Catie Edmondson

Compiled by: Deep Tide TechFlow

Original Title: Trump's "Big and Beautiful Bill": Presidential Authority Overwhelming Voting

"President Trump's 'super bill' has left many Republicans uneasy, but it may not be enough to stop it from becoming law."

Trump referred to his signature domestic legislation as "One Big Beautiful Bill," but its path to advancement has not been smooth.

This bill aims to extend the tax cuts from 2017 and fund these tax cuts by reducing social safety net funding.

In the House of Representatives, the bill barely passed; in the Senate, it was significantly amended. In recent days, a key official in the Senate vetoed several provisions of the bill, an official whose job is to ensure that lawmakers adhere to the rules of the budget bill, forcing senators to rush to reintroduce some of the content.

Furthermore, as my colleagues Carl Hulse and Catie Edmondson wrote today, no one really likes this bill.

But this is Washington under Trump. Here, "small issues" like not knowing the specifics of a bill or lacking enthusiasm for it may not be enough to stop Senate Republicans from voting in support of it — and they may even complete the vote by this weekend.

I asked Katie about the convoluted history of this bill—how it turned into a policy "hodgepodge," why it makes many Republicans uneasy, and why these issues might not have much impact on its prospects of becoming law.

Republicans are working to save parts of the Senate's procedural rules that they believe violate the budget law. You have reported on congressional affairs since Trump's first term, witnessing many legislative "making processes." Is this chaotic situation normal?

To some extent, this is indeed a common phenomenon in the legislative process, as both parties have faced similar challenges in the past. For example, when the Democrats used the budget reconciliation process to pass President Biden's Inflation Reduction Act and the COVID-19 stimulus plan, lawmakers also rejected important provisions within them, including the proposal to raise the federal minimum wage.

On the other hand, I do believe that this back-and-forth tug-of-war reflects that this legislation has turned into a "policy hodgepodge," with some of its content having little to do with the budget.

This bill includes tax cuts, reductions in funding for Medicaid and nutrition assistance programs, but also contains provisions that prohibit states from regulating artificial intelligence, relax certain gun laws, and sell public land.

What role is Trump playing? Have his actions – or inactions – exacerbated the chaos?

Yesterday, President Trump sought support for the bill at the White House, but we have not yet seen him deeply engage in the lobbying effort. The "game plan" on Capitol Hill is usually to have him make an appearance at the last stages of key votes to persuade those final dissenters.

At the same time, a recurring dynamic is also taking place here: those legislators who have reservations about the bill will call the president, hoping he will support their position. President Trump usually tells them that he agrees with their views.

This situation makes it harder for lawmakers to figure out what he really wants, as his position may change with these conversations.

Currently, this situation is particularly reflected in the issues surrounding Medicaid. Some senators believe that the Senate's plan cuts Medicaid too severely. This includes Missouri Senator Josh Hawley, who, along with several other senators, brought this concern to the president. Upon returning, Hawley stated that Trump told them he preferred the House's plan because it retained more Medicaid programs.

The debate over Medicaid is one of several struggles within the Republican Party surrounding this legislation. What other internal divisions have been exposed?

The issue of Medicaid is part of a broader debate about federal spending cuts. In the early stages of this process, some fiscal conservatives in the House and Senate indicated their reluctance to vote for any legislation that would increase the deficit, and thus, they hoped to offset the loss of revenue caused by tax cuts through new spending reductions.

However, this situation did not occur in the House or the Senate. Both chambers' plans would increase the deficit by trillions of dollars. This is clearly not the policy path that these fiscal conservatives wish to take while controlling Congress and the White House.

Does anyone really like this bill?

Republicans believe they must pass this legislation because if the 2017 tax cuts are not extended, everyone's tax burden will increase.

This bill also includes new tax deductions for tips and overtime, which Trump promised to do during his campaign.

But aside from that, they are basically continuing the status quo—namely, the tax reduction policy established in 2017—while significantly cutting back on some very popular social welfare programs.

If you are preparing to run for re-election in a politically neutral state or district, you would know that the Democrats will certainly attack you fiercely regarding the content of this bill to cut Medicaid and food assistance programs. Many Republican lawmakers have already heard voters express their concerns about this in town hall meetings.

So, will the issues we discussed—the various reasons Republicans dislike this bill and their challenges in maintaining its integrity—actually threaten its chances of passing?

I don't think so, although it may complicate their timeline and possibly change the specifics of the final bill. Since the House passed its version, this bill seems inevitable.

They might do so through a bill that brings significant political risks but is unpopular with everyone. Why?

This is a vote that may carry political risks, but it is not meant to serve some grand political ideology, which makes it different from some difficult votes that both parties have faced in the past. But this is what Trump is asking for.

I believe that there is a widespread feeling within the Republican Party that they may lose the majority in the House of Representatives in the midterm elections—historically speaking, this is very likely—which means that their time to pass significant legislation is limited.

Moreover, they do feel a sense of ideological urgency to continue the tax reduction policies of 2017.

All these factors, combined with the fact that this bill is essentially a simple vote of approval or disapproval of the president's agenda, make the likelihood of this bill failing utterly negligible.