Members of the conservative faction in the House are expressing concerns about potential modifications to the bill, which reflects many of President Trump’s priorities and has caught the attention of Senate Republicans. A crucial decision moment may soon be upon them.
Under significant pressure from Trump and his base, GOP spending conservatives reluctantly voted last month to advance the bill to the House, anticipating that the Senate might prioritize deficit neutrality.
However, the opposite is now expected, as moderate GOP Senators seek to eliminate Medicaid cuts and reinstate green energy subsidies, striving to restore some benefits. With only a narrow Senate majority, GOP leader John Tune (SD) needs the backing of moderates to move the bill forward.
This scenario would force House conservatives into difficult choices.
If they adhere to their principles and reject a bill focused on deficit issues, they risk derailing legislation that encapsulates almost all of Trump’s domestic policy objectives, including immigration enforcement and significant tax cuts, which are critical for Republicans.
If they support the package to deliver a considerable win for Trump, they would be endorsing an increase in the very deficit spending they have labeled an existential threat to the nation’s future.
When the bill reached the Senate, Rep. Keith Self (R-Texas) stated he felt compelled to back it, saying, “The bill was extremely important and tax cuts had to go through,” while acknowledging the risk of deficit spending leading to trillions in debt in upcoming years.
“The deficit will at least remain where it is, I believe – and unless we achieve considerable growth from this bill, we could be facing between $36 trillion to $56 trillion,” he warned.
“However, the consequences of this bill will add to the debt; failing to manage the bond market will result in significant costs,” he added.
Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), known for being conservative on spending, reinforced this stance, stating that the House “cannot unravel what we’ve accomplished.”
“And there will be red lines,” he cautioned.
Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), leader of the far-right Freedom Caucus, expressed concerns about the House bill’s emphasis on higher deficit spending in the initial five years, deferring deeper cuts to the latter half of the 10-year spending plan. He likened this to Congress withholding difficult decisions for the future, a sentiment echoed by Elon Musk, who spearheaded Trump’s early spending cuts.
“I align with Musk’s concerns regarding the short-term negative effects on the federal deficit,” Harris mentioned. I posted on platform X last week, emphasizing that the debt market remains apprehensive about the nation’s total debt and annual deficit.
Following that, criticisms have intensified. Musk, reflecting on his brief stint in the White House, criticized the bill on Tuesday, labeling it “unpleasant hatred.”
“I’m sorry, but I’m at my limit. I feel embarrassed for those who supported it. Deep down, you know it was wrong,” he said.
Rep. Thomas Massie (Ky.), one of the two Republicans who opposed the bill, supported Musk’s stance, stating, “He’s right.”
Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) attempted to mitigate concerns within his party on Tuesday, asserting that the projections from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) regarding the House bill increasing the fiscal deficit by trillions over a decade were highly inaccurate. He argued that accounting for economic growth tied to tax cuts would actually lead to a reduction in the deficit.
“CBOs get forecasts right sometimes, but they always miss the mark when projecting economic growth,” Johnson remarked on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
However, many economists have long disputed the belief that tax cuts pay for themselves, and conservative members like Roy have departed from their leadership to assert otherwise. These advocates blame both parties for contributing to national debt.
“We need growth; we hope that growth will occur,” Self added.
It remains uncertain whether the spending hawks will establish their own limits regarding deficit spending. Several have indicated that party unity may take precedence.
Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC) expressed his unease with Republicans accumulating trillions in debt, but ultimately concluded that the tax cuts were too vital to let lapse, stating he didn’t want to allow Democrats to prevail.
“That was the right thing,” he declared as the bill moved to the Senate. “At the end of the day, if you’re aligned with the left, you’re with a socialist faction that undermines this country, to be honest.”
As the Senate contemplates “big and beautiful bills,” they’re weighing options against the backdrop of House deficit hawks, focusing on potential adjustments Republicans may approve or reject upon the bill’s return.
The discussions mirror the divisions seen in House debates: hardliners demand stricter spending cuts, while centrists resist changes to Medicaid.
Johnson has publicly urged Senate colleagues to limit modifications to the bill, emphasizing the need to preserve fragile support within the House.
However, Trump indicated last month, “I want senators to make the changes they deem necessary. It’s back home, and let’s see if we can get them.”
“In some instances, the changes might align with my views. Honestly,” he added. “I think we will reach an agreement. …Some changes may be minor, while others could be significant.”
Meanwhile, the deficit hawks have shifted their focus to reclaiming billions in federal funding, marking the Chamber of Commerce’s initial attempt to solidify the cuts implemented by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). The White House introduced a $9.4 billion measure (often referred to as a retirement package) this past Tuesday.
The package targets the U.S. International Development Agency and public broadcasting entities that support NPR and PBS, all of which were influenced by DOGE. Johnson is expected to expedite passage through the chamber.
Deficit hawks, particularly those within the Conservative Freedom Caucus, have labeled the legislation as a “critical” step. However, the price tag of over $9 billion pales in comparison to the billions required for Trump’s agenda, underscoring the distance from addressing deficits effectively.
Despite ongoing debates, Johnson continues to advocate for the bill’s benefits.
“We must pass this legislation,” Johnson asserted on Tuesday. “The Senate is doing thorough, thoughtful work at present. We look forward to advancing the process, and the President eagerly anticipates signing the law by Independence Day.”
Source: thehill.com