Tag Archives: Big Beautiful Bill

A Practical Approach

Posted on by

I love the idea of my Social Security not being taxed. Before 1984 Social Security payments were not taxed. The law that taxed Social Security benefits allowed 50% of benefits to be taxable for individuals with income above certain thresholds [income above $25,000 (single) or $32,000 (couple)]. In 1993, the taxation level was increased to 85% for higher-income beneficiaries [$34,000 (single) or $44,000 (couple)].  In today’s dollars, $44,000 is about $98,000.00. These totals were not indexed for inflation. This is another example of the government using inflation to increase its tax revenue as Americans struggle to pay for things.

The Big Beautiful Bill did not directly end the tax on Social Security. What it did do was to increase the standard deduction for Americans over the age of 65. This not only avoids a mess of paperwork, but will automatically provide more benefit to low-income Americans. The downside is that the more people who don’t have to pay taxes, the fewer people care if taxes are raised. Everyone needs skin in the game.

This is a chart of the changes made by the Big Beautiful Bill:

Changing the tax laws in this manner will save a lot of people a lot of paperwork (and receipt searching) and make it easier for people over the age of 65 to file their income taxes. I pray for the day that the tax form is a postcard-size piece of paper that takes five minutes to fill out. Our tax code is a tribute to the power of lobbyists, and that needs to change. Let’s go to a flat tax or a national sales tax. What we have no is expensive in both time and money.

The Big Beautiful Bill Has Passed The Senate

Posted on by

Breitbart reported on Tuesday that the Big Beautiful Bill has passed the Senate. Vice-President J.D. Vance cast the tie-breaking vote. The bill now goes back to the House of Representatives where the first procedural vote is expected to happen on Wednesday.

The article reports:

The bill includes an enormous assemblage of Trump’s campaign promises on border security, energy, national security, spending cuts, and taxes. The bill also includes Medicaid reforms and an increase in defense spending.

It didn’t come easy.

“Tensions have been high at times, but we’re at the end now,” Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC), the Budget Committee Chairman, said with enthusiasm through bloodshot eyes during the final vote series.

…At 10:12 am EST, Senators were instructed to make their way to the Floor and plan to be in their seats in 15 minutes. Over an hour later, a large group of Senators was still huddled at the dais negotiating with the help of Senate staff, including Senate parliamentarian Elizabeth McDonough.

Eventually an agreement was reached, and the Senate, anxious to end the marathon session, breezed through the final votes.

Sens. Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Rand Paul (R-KY), who voted against proceeding to the bill, voted against its passage. They were joined by Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), whose amendment to raise taxes on billionaires to pay for a fund for rural hospitals was soundly defeated – her amendment received a bipartisan smattering of 22 votes.

Sen. Lisa Murkowksi (R-AK) required a last minute agreement on a Medicaid carveout for her state after the Senate parliamentarian ruled the prior agreement violated the much ballyhooed Byrd rule which governs what can be included in reconciliation bills.

The article concludes:

The path ahead is arduous.

The big, beautiful bill now heads to the House, where a handful of moderates have protested the Medicaid reforms, and a large block of spending hawks, mostly consisting of House Freedom Caucus members, want more spending cuts in line with the version of the bill the House sent to the Senate.

The first procedural vote is expected Wednesday morning at 9 am.

Yet Trump’s July 4 deadline remains in reach. And Trump is likely to lobby, cajole, threaten, and twist arms – or whatever else is necessary – to secure his signature legislative achievement.

This is not a perfect bill, but it is a beginning. Now it’s time for Congress to start voting on spending cuts.

H.R.4 – Rescissions Act of 2025 has already passed the house. This bill rescinds $9.4 billion in unobligated funds that were provided to the Department of State, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), various independent and related agencies, and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

The rescissions were proposed by the President under procedures included in the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974. Under current law, the President may propose rescissions to Congress using specified procedures, and the rescissions must be enacted into law to take effect.

For further information on this bill, go to Congress.gov and put “H.R.4” in the search engine.

It is possible to cut spending–we just need a Congress willing to do it.

The Possible vs The Impossible

Posted on by

 Author:  R. Alan Harrop, Ph.D.

We are currently observing the realities of the legislative process in a true representative republic. President Trump’s so-called “Big Beautiful Bill” has been a tedious process, but an absolutely crucial one. Our country has been so influenced by the Biden administration’s and the Democrat Party’s Marxist policies, that something drastic and comprehensive is needed if we are to reverse course and return to the traditional conservative values and policies that built this country.

 The first problem is that Congress has increasing gotten themselves into the habit of drafting very large, overly complicated bills instead of smaller bills ideally focusing on a single issue rather than a multiplicity of issues. The Big Beautiful Bill contains over 1900 pages and took over 16 hours to be read out loud on the floor of the Senate. While reading the bill out loud seems to make sense, the hypocritical Democrat senators who insisted on this did not even attend the reading! Just another effort to block the passage of the bill. One of the primary reasons that large multiple issue bills have become the standard is they allow congressman to attach issues that would likely never be approved if voted on individually. It also makes it very difficult, if not impossible, for the average citizen to understand what is actually in the bill and thereby evaluate whether their congressman is doing what they promised while campaigning.

 The second problem is the power and influence of big donors. Political campaigns are increasingly costly, requiring millions of dollars. While campaigns funded by the voters reflecting their wishes would be ideal, congressman are increasingly reliant on donors (like big pharmaceutical companies, and political action committees) for campaign funding. These big donors obviously expect to receive something for their investment which can unduly influence bill drafting and congressional voting.

The third problem is the grand standers. Senators like Rand Paul and, more locally, Thom Tillis have shown that making personal statements is more important than what is best for the country. All congressman should vote the wishes of their constituents if they truly believe in representative democracy. They are elected to vote for the what their voters want, not crusade for something they want. This is especially clear with Senator Tillis who states that he will vote with the Democrats and the hell with the Republican voters who elected him. This arrogance and violation of his duty to his constituents is typical of him. In fact, in June 2023, Senator Tillis was censured by the North Carolina Republican Party convention for supporting typical Democrat Party issues like LGBTQ rights, illegal immigration, and restricting citizens gun rights. He also voted for the Democrat so-called Inflation Reduction Act, which was in reality, a major funding of green energy scams. Facing a likely primary battle in the next election, instead of bowing out gracefully, he thumbs his nose at his constituents and President Trump by announcing he would join Senator Rand Paul and vote against the Big Beautiful Bill. I say good riddance to him.

The fourth problem is how large multi-issue bills will always contain items that individual congressmen oppose. How should they deal with this reality? All decision making in the real world includes pros and cons. Very rarely is a major issue without things we would prefer be different. The symbol of a two-sided scale works well here. We typically have to balance the good with the bad. The possible with the impossible. Given the realities of these multiple issue bills, accepting this reality is critical. Personally, I would have preferred more cuts to federal spending and regulations as well as downsizing government agencies. However, a good start was made in this direction and should be recognized. This bill represents the possible and deserves support as does President Trump.

Sorting Through The Lies

Posted on by

On Friday, Breitbart posted an article about some of the current lies being told about the ‘Bid Beautiful Bill.’ The bill is not perfect, but considering the parameters the Republicans had to work with, it is generally a good bill.

The article reports:

Democrats opposing the bill have asserted that it benefits the rich, but they have done so by fudging the numbers, largely relying on the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) analysis to fuel their criticisms. But as Breitbart News reported, the CBO — created to act as a nonpartisan advisory body — has its performance as well as personnel’s political history bringing that into question:

But the CBO’s extensive history of overestimating benefits for Americans from public health care, underestimating costs of Democrat policies on taxpayers, and stacking the deck against Republican policies reveals a deeply partisan agency influencing lawmakers in order to further left-wing causes.

In addition to its history of unreliable projections propping up Democrats, according to FEC records, of the nearly $17,000 donated to candidates and committees from CBO employees since 1986, only $250 went to Republican candidates — a single donation to George W. Bush in 2000.

In some ways, Democrats are essentially equivocating taking away tax-funded benefits for illegal immigrants as taking benefits away from the poor. But that in itself is completely disingenuous.

The Ways and Means Committee is correcting the record, warning the American people not to fall for the same lies the Democrat touted to discredit the 2017 Trump tax cut’s benefits for the working class. All in all, the GOP says the numbers are clear, showing that the measure benefits working class Americans.

A fact sheet presented by the Ways and Means Committee shows that not only does the measure halt a $1,700 tax increase, but it provides an additional $1,300 in tax cuts for families of four taking in less than $100,000.

American can have either an economic safety net or open borders. We cannot do both.

The article concludes:

“The facts speak for themselves,” Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-MO) said in a statement. “After passage of the 2017 Trump tax cuts, we saw a booming economy that raised wages by nearly five percent, with those in the bottom 10 percent seeing 50 percent more wage growth than those in the top ten percent.”

“The top one percent of earners paid more in taxes after its passage. The One, Big, Beautiful Bill builds on that success and delivers even greater tax relief, higher wages, and better economic growth – all of which will primarily benefit working families as will President Trump’s priorities of no tax on tips, overtime, and auto loan interest plus tax relief for seniors,” he said, adding, “The legislation doubles down on pro-growth, pro-family policies that directly benefit low- and middle-income families.”

Ultimately, he said the bill is a “win” for the working class.

Those of us in the working class appreciate the bill.

Forcing Congress To Do Its Job

Posted on by

On Tuesday, updated Wednesday, Just the News posted an article about the REINS (Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny) Act. This Act would begin to move a large part of responsibility for making laws away from the Executive Branch (bureaucratic regulations) and into the Legislative Branch (Congress actually passing laws).

The article reports:

When the House of Representatives last week passed Trump’s “Big, Beautiful Bill,” there was a poison pill for the regulatory state buried within: the long-lingering REINS (Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny) Act that proponents have been trying to send to the Oval Office for signature for 16 years. The implications of such a bureaucratic dressing-down would reverberate throughout all of U.S. industry and consumerism.

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin told Just The News, No Noise TV show that his hope is that it gets over the finish line and once it does, a cascade of other burden-easing improvements can take place. “As you look forward with the legislative agenda, there will be other opportunities to get permanent reform done, NEPA (National Environamental Policy Act) reform to make it easier to invest in America at less cost, taking less time and having more certainty,” he said. 

It was originally introduced in 2009 by then-Rep. Geoff Davis, R-Ky., with the goal of increasing congressional oversight of federal agency rule-making. The current version of the bill stipulates that agency rules with an annual economic impact of $100 million or more, significant cost or price increases for consumers or industries, or substantial adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or US competitiveness, would require explicit approval from both the House and Senate via a joint resolution and then be signed by the president before taking effect.

The article notes:

A wide range of industries would likely see a tectonic shift, including energy, healthcare, pharmaceuticals, financial services, manufacturing and construction, transportation, agriculture and food safety. 

Phil Kerpen, who serves as president of American Commitment, referred to it as “unfinished business from the Tea Party era” and told Just The News that this could be the most significant aspect of the bill because it “would be a massive, positive change, and stop this pendulum from swinging wildly back and forth with the party in the White House. We’d have a lot more policy stability.”

In addition to concrete steps towards regulatory overhaul and passing Trump’s “Big, Beautiful Bill,” if Republicans remain committed to the issues upon which they were elected, they could quite possibly remain in the majority, thus granting Trump two more years to govern without obstructionist Democratic Party constraints. 

The REINS Act would definitely bring us closer to the government our Founding Fathers envisioned.

Exactly What Are The Medicaid Cuts Cutting?

Posted on by

On Monday, The Epoch Times posted an article about the fraud and waste found in Medicaid.

The article reports:

Dr. Mehmet Oz, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) administrator, said his agency and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) have identified at least $14 billion in fraud, waste, and abuse.

“There’s about $14 billion we’ve identified with DOGE, of folks who are duly enrolled wrongly in multiple states for Medicaid,” Oz told Fox News’s “Sunday Morning Futures.”

As an example, Oz said: “You live in New Jersey, but you move to Pennsylvania, and which state gets your Medicaid? Turns out both states collect money from the federal government.”

There are other areas, he said, that constitute abuse of the federal health care system. He said some people who are eligible to get a job or seek education are receiving Medicaid. Oz echoed statements made by GOP lawmakers, including House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.)., who in recent days said that able-bodied individuals and illegal immigrants have received Medicaid benefits.

Oz urged that Medicaid be cleaned up so that it can provide services to individuals such as people with disabilities and others, suggesting that Republicans keep a work requirement to be eligible for the program.

“I think there’s a moral hazard if we don’t, because you’ve got people who are not working who could work, who should work, and it’s better for them and better for the country if they do,” he said, referring to Republicans’ having added work requirements to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that passed in the House of Representatives on May 22.

The article notes:

The bill, which is now in the hands of the Senate, would impose work requirements for low-income adults to receive Medicaid health insurance and would increase those requirements for food assistance. Supporters of the bill say the moves will save money, root out waste, and encourage personal responsibility.

Starting next year, many able-bodied Medicaid enrollees under age 65 would be required to show that they work, volunteer, or go to school in exchange for the health insurance coverage under the measure. Only Arkansas has had a work requirement that kicks people off for noncompliance.

It’s time for everyone who can to get out and help pull the wagon rather than sitting in the wagon and expecting everyone else to pull it.

The Big Beautiful Bill Advances Slowly

Posted on by

On May 19th, NewsMax posted an article about the passage through the House Budget Committee last night on its way to the House Rules Committee. All of the members of Congress need to remember that if this bill is not passed, almost all Americans will see a major income tax increase next year.

The article reports:

House Speaker Mike Johnson took a “historical” active role in seeing that legislation passed the chamber’s Budget Committee, Rep. Jack Bergman, R-Mich., told Newsmax on Monday.

Johnson, Bergman, and other members of the committee worked late Sunday night to advance the chamber’s massive tax cut and border security package.

“I think as a as a historical note, I believe that the attendance of the speaker of the House at pre-meeting, last-minute, backroom negotiations was a first for a current speaker of the House to be attending a budget committee markup,” Bergman said on “Wake Up America.” “So that’s one historical data point.”

Bergman credited Johnson and committee Chair Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, with agreeing to “some compromises.”

“This is all about moving a logical, if not perfect … remember, we’re trying to create a more perfect union here, not a perfect union with our with our form of government … but to move that big bill forward, to get it into rules, make the necessary changes and … to get it voted on the House floor sooner rather than later to meet those timelines that we’ve agreed to get President [Donald] Trump’s agenda, especially one of the first fiscal base parts of that agenda in play here by around the 4th of July,” Bergman said.

The article concludes:

Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) said he voted “present” for the bill to advance “out of respect for the Republican Conference and the President,” conceding that it needs improvements. In a statement on X, he also objected to the bill’s provisions around green energy tax credits and Medicaid.

“Tonight, after a great deal of work and engagement over the weekend, the Budget Committee advanced a reconciliation bill that lays the foundation for much needed tax relief, border security, and important spending reductions and reforms,” he wrote. “Importantly the bill now will move Medicaid work requirements forward and reduces the availability of future subsidies under the green new scam.”

“But, the bill does not yet meet the moment – leaving almost half of the green new scam subsidies continuing. More, it fails to end the Medicaid money laundering scam and perverse funding structure that provides seven times more federal dollars for each dollar of state spending for the able-bodied relative to the vulnerable,” he added. “This all ultimately increases the likelihood of continuing deficits and non-Obamacare-expansion states like Texas expanding in the future. We can and must do better before we pass the final product.”

I met Representative Bergman when he was a Marine Corps General stationed in New Orleans. I am thrilled that he is a Congressman. He represents the integrity, ability, and intelligence that our Founding Fathers hoped would be found in our elected officials.