Posted on 02/25/2025 8:08:31 PM PST by SeekAndFind
President Donald J. Trump's big, beautiful bill just mounted its first hurdle. Tuesday evening, the Congressional Budget Resolution (H. Con. Res. 14) establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2025 and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2026 through 2034 passed on a largely party-line vote of 217 to 215.
According to Punchbowl News, the budget resolution with $4.5 trillion for tax cuts and $1.5 trillion-plus in spending cuts was satisfactory to President Trump. There were several holdouts earlier in the evening, including Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN), Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-IN), and Rep. Warren Davidson (R-OH). Because of this, the vote was suspended at first. Once House Speaker Mike Johnson and President Trump whipped them to convert their votes to YES, the vote was re-upped, with Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) being the sole Republican to vote NO.
in my 15+ years covering congress, i've never seen the leadership cancel a vote, send lawmakers home and then abruptly switch course and put the vote up. all within the course of about 10 minutes.— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) February 26, 2025
Big, Beautiful Budget Resolution Passes US Senate
Mike Johnson Is Ready for That 'Big, Beautiful' Reconciliation Bill (AUDIO)
On Friday, the Republican majority in the Senate passed their own budget resolution in two parts, the antithesis to what the House just approved.
The Senate passed its budget resolution early on Friday, which acts as a framework to implement President Trump's legislative agenda. It would provide $175 billion for border security and $150 billion in military funding.
The Senate's adoption is an early step in the process, which requires detailed work by committees to work out the details of spending, as well as of any offsets to help pay for the additional funds.
The budget resolution is at odds with the House's approach, and both chambers ultimately have to be on the same page to get the legislation across the finish line.
Despite the competing pair of bills from the Republican-controlled Senate, it appears that the path forward for the GOP is the House bill, which is what President Donald Trump called for initially. However, the Senate plan now effectively serves as a backup if the two chambers can't come together on a reconciliation bill.
Editor's Note: This article was updated post-publication for clarity.
SOURCE:
[EXCERPT]
The budget measure calls for $4.5 trillion in tax cuts and a goal of $2 trillion in spending cuts. It includes more than $100 billion in new spending on immigration enforcement and the military.
It also requires the House Energy and Commerce Committee to find $880 billion in cuts to federal programs, and Republicans say some of that will come from reducing spending on Medicaid. And it raises the debt limit by $4 trillion.
Only one congressman crossed party lines
All Democrats voted against the measure, along with lone Republican rebel Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., who was concerned about its effect on the national deficit.
In the Senate, we have Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins.
In the house we have Tom Massie.
MORE HERE:
[EXCERPT]
The House passed a budget resolution on Tuesday evening in advance of the March 14 deadline to avoid a government shutdown.
The bill passed in a 217-215 vote with all but Republicans except Thomas Massie (Kentucky) voting in favor. Leading up to the vote, some swing-district Republicans expressed concerns about possible cuts to social programs, while others were hesitant about the potential to balloon the deficit.
Trump has dubbed the resolution, which would extend tax cuts from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and remove taxes on overtime wages, tips and Social Security benefits, a “big, beautiful bill.”
With the passage of the bill, a reconciliation process will start where House committees will cut or increase spending while trying to offset the trillions of dollars that tax cuts are predicted to add to the national debt. The process also restricts amendments and avoids a Senate filibuster from Democrats.
MORE HERE:
[EXCERPT]
The House passed a budget resolution on Tuesday evening in advance of the March 14 deadline to avoid a government shutdown.
The bill passed in a 217-215 vote with all but Republicans except Thomas Massie (Kentucky) voting in favor. Leading up to the vote, some swing-district Republicans expressed concerns about possible cuts to social programs, while others were hesitant about the potential to balloon the deficit.
Trump has dubbed the resolution, which would extend tax cuts from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and remove taxes on overtime wages, tips and Social Security benefits, a “big, beautiful bill.”
With the passage of the bill, a reconciliation process will start where House committees will cut or increase spending while trying to offset the trillions of dollars that tax cuts are predicted to add to the national debt. The process also restricts amendments and avoids a Senate filibuster from Democrats.
Senate Republicans are bound to F this up. Trump was able to get the house in line…but Senate will surely screw it up…Murkowski, Collins, the Turtle, Lindsey Grahmanesty.
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) was the lone Republican holdout. He had indicated earlier in the day that he would vote no.
“If the Republican plan passes, under the rosiest assumptions, which aren’t even true, we’re going to add $328 billion to the deficit this year, we’re going to add $295 billion to the deficit the year after that, $242 billion to the deficit after that,” Massie said. “Why would I vote for that?”
It shows at least that a budget can be adopted. That hasn’t happened for a very long time.
What universe is he living in where this budget would add one cent to the deficit?
If you want a better budget you need more MAGA people in Congress.
In the meantime, this is the best we can do.
“If you want a better budget you need more MAGA people in Congress. In the meantime, this is the best we can do.”
Agreed...it’s much better than pork laden and graft enabled continuing resolutions.
It’s that voodoo budgeting. There are $1.5T in spending cuts. The voodoo is counting tax cuts as expenditures.
We know from proven history that tax cuts equal increased revenue to the government. It has worked that way and always will. Watch those deficits melt away after one year. Plus, DOGE cuts are yet to come.
EC
It’s a mixed bag, but it’s a start.
On the tax side, there are several things that should be rethought — and doing so would significantly improve the package both in deficit reduction and basic tax fairness. Eliminating income tax on tips, overtime pay and Social Security is wrong on all counts.
The tip income is chump change, although compensation norms will adjust to take advantage of a major new loophole. I told my dentist just last week that I would be happy to switch over to a tip based compensation model. He has his head screwed on straight; he grinned and said he’d be all-in.
Social Security? In a fair tax system, all income should be treated equally. Social Security is an intergenerational transfer scheme, not a savings based program. Of course Social Security benefits should be taxed — as should all welfare payments of any kind. Genuinely low income people will be below the zero bracket amount and, in the end, not have a tax due, but they should at least have to sum it all up and report once a year like the rest of us do. It would have an important educative effect, and it would help screen out the scammers.
Eliminating taxation on overtime wages is disastrously wrongheaded. Given the ongoing changes in the nature of work, the evolving work from home option, lifestyle changes, etc., we clearly need much greater flexibility in labor markets. A great many people would happily trade lower wages for reduced hours and greater flexibility, and if this were enabled, the effect would be to increase the number of jobs available to those seeking employment. Making overtime pay tax exempt will induce a preference for overtime, which will appeal especially to young people not yet saddled with family responsibilities. Want a tax change that sabotages family formation? There ‘ya go. I’m all for letting people make their own choices, but why should we create a huge new preference for worker drones who prioritize ever-longer hours? Why boost unemployment to create legions of people in their 20’s and 30’s who will be bribed to prefer 60 hour weeks?
Since these three categories of income are currently taxable, just leave them alone. That is not raising taxes on anyone. Take the existing revenue streams from which Trump wants to walk away and apply those funds to deficit reduction. Or give them back to taxpayers in ways that increase fairness and broader social objectives: cut our excessively high marginal tax rates in the higher brackets; expand the child tax credit for married families with children.
Yes to the spending cuts and reductions in the scope of overreaching government. No to an ill-thought tax package that was the product of naked pandering in the campaign. That can still be done, very easily, at this stage. Listen to the deficit hawks, the supply side economists who want to grow the economy by lowering marginal tax rates, those seeking to encourage a marriage culture and children. Why work Americans to the bone, and make up for our below-replacement level fertility rates through high immigration? Elon Muck — an immigrant himself with 12 children, most illegitimate, scattered among multiple baby mommas (worse than most NBA players) — thinks this is a good idea, but as useful as they may be on some issues, I wouldn’t take Donald Trump’s or Elon Musk’s guidance on marriage and family.
Why can’t we have a part of taxes go directly to the debt? I’m talking principle. Why not add a dollar to all entertainment events like concerts, football games, cruises, Disney, etc that must go towards the principle of the debt. Yes it’d be chump change but it’s better than what we’ve been doing which is nothing. An annual debt campaign where rich donors give donations to the principle of the debt. There are so many things we could do, but nobody ever thinks about it.
Nice try. And that’s not derogatory.
It’s a nice try.
But . . . as you suspected, chump change.
Mathematics doesn’t care about admirable gestures. A dollar per taxpayer is overwhelmed by about a week of interest on the debt.
Massie is right.
There is no virtue in pretense.
I totally agree. But even a week of interest is better than our current mess.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.