19 Comments
User's avatar
Vince's avatar

What is the actual mechanism in which a provision was inserted into the bill that “nobody knows where it came from?” I mean, obvious someone inserted it but is unwilling to admit to it because it proved unpopular, but how did it mechanically get added? Doesn’t it need to be an amendment to add things like that? Is there no “track changes” with who suggested what, or what was added by what amendment? How does that even happen?

Expand full comment
Images of Broken Light's avatar

As a factual matter, it is not accurate to call Chip Roy or Ralph Normal "conservatives". It would be better to call them "far-right extremists".

Expand full comment
Mollie's avatar

If she didn't like that much, why did she vote Yes? What a coward.

Expand full comment
Therese Schroeder-Sheker's avatar

Thank you for excellent synopsis Gabe, however painful and demoralizing. You do great work.

Expand full comment
Michael Cunningham's avatar

This should be concerning to all American tax payers. The debt attributed to Trump's first term was: $7.9 trillion. The CBO estimate is that the "One Big Beautiful Bill" will add $3.3 trillion. Making the total Trump-attributed debt $11.2 trillion out of a project total U.S. debt of $38 trillion which means 29.5% of ALL U.S. debt will have been accumulated under President Trump’s policies! Six Trump-owned hotels and casinos declared corporate bankruptcy due to Trump’s management. Let’s hope the U.S. isn’t heading to bankruptcy under his presidency.

Expand full comment
Douglas's avatar

Isn’t it interesting the Senate just voted to hire some 10,000 ICE agents while the White House has gutted the ranks of the IRS. Which action would do more for our country?

Expand full comment
Cheryl's avatar

If the bill should fail to pass in the House, what happens next?

Expand full comment
Images of Broken Light's avatar

It won't simply "fail to pass", but it might require changes before the House will pass it. In that case, the revised version goes back to the Senate for another vote.

Expand full comment
Terry Feinberg's avatar

A few things I haven’t heard people talking about on the mega bill:

The tax cuts provisions remove the sunset, but are not “permanent”. They exist until another congress changes them.

On the taxes on tips issue, nobody is talking about the inequities this creates to other people making comparable wages that do not receive tips. And that’s a huge portion of the working population.

Also on taxes and tips, if the tip income isn’t taxed, the income won’t count towards workers’ social security earnings, reducing their social security benefits when they start collecting.

Expand full comment
Images of Broken Light's avatar

"The tax cuts provisions remove the sunset, but are not 'permanent'. They exist until another congress changes them."

But that's really what "permanent" means in regard to legislation. There is no law that Congress could pass that a later Congress couldn't change. Even Constitutional amendments aren't truly "permanent" in your sense; they can be revised or undone any time Congress and three-fourths of the state legislatures agree to do so. So if a law contains no sunset provision, it's normally referred to as "permanent".

Expand full comment
Barbara Fox's avatar

Like Lawrence o Donnell said lap dancers in Vegas will not have to pay taxes on tips …..teachers don’t get tips or overtime.

Expand full comment
Jason Rand's avatar

The GOP megabill's passage in the Senate raises important questions about its potential impact on the country. As someone interested in exploring the intersection of politics and economics, I think it's crucial to analyze the bill's provisions, such as the extension of Trump's 2017 tax cuts and the changes to Medicaid and food stamps. I'd love to discuss this further and explore potential implications. Check out my sub, Post-socialist Press: https://posocap.com, and let's consider a guest post or collaboration on this topic.

Expand full comment
Michael Kupperburg's avatar

Have a lot to disagree with in the OBBB, but if they want it passed, more easily, why don't they just reduce it, in time, to running through 30, June, 2030. It would lower the deficit, and might pass with more votes. Just asking.

Expand full comment
Rosemary Ford's avatar

Tipping will fade away as it should.

Expand full comment
Barbara Fox's avatar

Murkowski is a coward and a joke

Expand full comment
susanus's avatar

Your expectations are unrealistic. Murkowski is not out to be a political hero and certainly not a liberal political hero. She just focuses on Alaska. She got a lot of shiny balls so she fell in line.

Expand full comment
Danie Hulett's avatar

Just to give all of us a taste of where you have just been, here's a short video just released from Aspen Institute about it 75th anniversary:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=war11_ffmr4

Hoping your experience there been a support? Hoping there support out there somewhere?

Expand full comment
Timothy Moore's avatar

Will the bill increase the national deficit or national debt by $3.1 trillion?

Expand full comment
Timothy Moore's avatar

Sorry, $3.4 trillion.

Expand full comment