Senate Republicans are expressing concerns about a bill crafted by the House to support President Trump’s legislative agenda, labeling it as problematic. They are now considering breaking it into smaller parts in hopes of advancing some of his controversial priorities before the fall.
Even if Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) manages to push Trump’s agenda through the House, significant hurdles await in the Senate. Many moderate Republicans are against proposals to reduce Medicaid, while fiscal conservatives argue that these measures don’t go far enough to close budget gaps.
A Republican senator, who requested anonymity to discuss the matter, mentioned, “There are still many issues.” This reflects the ongoing internal discussions among Senate GOP members regarding the budget adjustment bill.
Reports indicate that while cuts to Medicaid are facing strong pushback in the Senate, GOP negotiators haven’t focused much on potential reforms for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which is also under scrutiny for cuts from conservatives.
Lawmakers are already brainstorming potential alternatives should the bill fail to pass in the House or encounter difficulties in the Senate.
Trump’s ambitious “one big beautiful bill” hit a snag Friday after a faction of the House Budget Committee voted against moving it forward. This necessitated a last-minute meeting of the committee on Sunday evening, just ahead of a self-imposed deadline for legislative advancement.
While some speakers affirm that the bill remains on track, a growing number of Senate Republicans are expressing doubt regarding the plan.
Several Republican senators believe that breaking the bill into two or three segments may be the best way to facilitate the elements of Trump’s agenda that resonate more with Congress.
This idea, initially brought up by Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) back in December, was later set aside in favor of bundling all proposals into a single package for perceived efficiency.
“If the bill faces issues here, we can always split it,” remarked another anonymous GOP senator, highlighting Thune’s early suggestion of separating it into multiple packages.
This senator is pressing for fellow Republicans to allocate substantial funds—hundreds of billions—towards border security.
“We’ve heard from the Border Patrol chief saying, ‘We need this and other things, and we needed it yesterday,'” the senator noted.
Another senator cautioned that discussions around tax and spending could extend into the summer.
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) hasn’t ruled out breaking the bill apart due to its controversial components surrounding tax and Medicaid issues, which might enable quicker passage of border security funds and possibly a permanent extension of Trump’s 2017 tax cuts.
Crapo commented, “Two or billing strategies? I didn’t measure it [earlier this year] And I’m not getting heavy about it now.”
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) has been vocal about wanting a comprehensive bill, but he’s now advocating for it to be split into smaller segments. He expressed skepticism over the spending cuts proposed in the House bill, labeling them as “fake.” Johnson urged colleagues to pass less controversial elements swiftly and to take more time to address complex policies properly.
Johnson hopes to see prompt action on the proposed $175 billion for border security and the $150 billion defense budget, alongside extending the 2017 tax cuts.
He and other Senate Republicans feel that breaking the package down could expedite its passage through both chambers and onto Trump’s desk before the July 4 recess.
“That’s why you do multiple steps and you understand that you agree. Leave the hard ones for later. The problem with lumping it all together is what you see right now,” he stated.
Johnson mentioned wanting to secure the $880 billion in savings identified from Medicare and SNAP reforms, but acknowledged that such proposals would require support from GOP colleagues wary of dwindling Medicaid funds and impacts on local hospitals.
He, along with Senators Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Rick Scott (R-Fla.), plan to oppose the current draft of the House Republican settlement bill.
“Talking to Mike Lee and Rick Scott. We’re not going to pass the Senate. That’s just not accurate. They need to recognize that,” Johnson noted.
Yet Johnson, a prominent fiscal hawk, said that Thune and other Senate GOP leaders are essentially rethinking the House proposal and starting anew.
“When I mention a multi-stage process, they often insist, ‘The ship has sailed,'” Johnson recounted regarding his discussions with Senate leaders.
He added, “Well, I’d say, ‘Let it go back to port.'” This reflects the urgency felt by financial conservatives in both chambers to advocate for deeper budget cuts, especially after a recent Moody’s downgrade of the nation’s credit rating.
The Moody report pointed to the federal deficit potentially hitting nearly 9% of GDP by 2035, in addition to high debt interest payments and rising spending on qualifying programs.
Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) remarked that “part of the problem” lies in the complexity of this “big, beautiful thing.”
He emphasized that navigating the balance between limiting impacts on U.S. debt while seeking new tax cuts and trying to trim Medicaid is inherently challenging.
“We should have had a bill to extend tax cuts and address border security and defense. It should be straightforward, yet here we are still discussing the same issues,” he pointed out.
Thune expressed confidence on Tuesday about Republicans’ ability to pass Trump’s agenda as a singular package, stating, “We coordinate very closely with our House counterparts at the committee and leadership level.” He concluded with, “I feel very good about where we are and ultimately where we’re headed.”
