SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
budget reconciliation
As Families Struggle to Afford Groceries, House GOP Approves Billions More for Illegal Iran War
"By voting for this budget resolution, Republicans are saying that this war is more important than lowering Americans’ costs."
Jul 23, 2026
House Republicans on Wednesday approved a $95 billion budget framework that would pump more money into US President Donald Trump's illegal Iran war and push states to adopt restrictions on voting rights, all while Americans struggle to afford groceries and other necessities.
Every present House Democrat and just three members of the GOP caucus—Reps. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, Warren Davidson of Ohio, and Kevin Kiley of California—voted against the budget measure, which would yet again set in motion the filibuster-proof reconciliation process that the Republican majority has used to ram through tax cuts for the rich, attacks on safety net programs, and other unpopular agenda items.
The new budget blueprint, which is seen as facing tougher prospects in the narrowly Republican-controlled Senate, would provide up to $73 billion in additional funding for the US military, mostly for the Iran war. The measure also includes $10 billion to prod states to adopt voter ID requirements, a top priority of the Trump administration ahead of the 2026 midterms.
Leor Tal, campaign director at the Unrig Our Economy coalition, said in response to Wednesday's vote that "once again, Republicans in Congress chose to put their unnecessary war in Iran over the American people."
"It is unconscionable that any member of Congress would vote to put a cent of taxpayer money towards this war that is raising Americans’ costs and costing servicemembers their lives," said Tal. "By voting for this budget resolution, Republicans are saying that this war is more important than lowering Americans’ costs. It’s time for Republicans in Congress to put an end to this seemingly endless war."
Analysts have placed the financial cost of the Iran war at roughly $1,100 per American household so far, accounting for higher prices for energy, groceries, and other essentials. With families across the country reeling from federal food aid cuts implemented under an earlier Republican budget package, a recent poll found that two-thirds of Americans say they would describe the cost of groceries as unaffordable—up from 45% prior to the US assault on Iran.
The budget measure that House Republicans adopted on Wednesday would do nothing to alleviate the nation's worsening cost-of-living crisis, which Trump has repeatedly dismissed as a hoax perpetrated by his political opponents.
"With grocery bills on the rise and skyrocketing gas prices at the pump, working families are struggling to make ends meet, and Republicans have no plan for them," Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.) said Wednesday. "Taxpayer dollars should be used to support the American people, not double down on this president’s failed agenda and foreign wars. Congress needs to cut off funding for the war before more Americans are killed, not write a multi-billion-dollar blank check to the Pentagon."
In a separate vote on Wednesday, House Republicans voted to authorize an unprecedented $1.15 trillion military budget for the coming fiscal year. Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), co-chairs of the Defense Spending Reduction Caucus, said in a joint statement that "while millions of Americans are struggling to afford basic necessities, Congress is choosing to authorize over $1 trillion for the Pentagon, once again funneling billions of taxpayer dollars to defense contractors instead of investing in the needs of working people."
"The American people are sick and tired of funding atrocities abroad and want this war with Iran to end," said Omar and Pocan. "Yet year after year, the Pentagon fails its audit with virtually no accountability, while Congress continues to increase military spending. We should be investing in affordable housing, healthcare, education, and good-paying jobs—not bankrolling defense contractors."
Keep ReadingShow Less
GOP Hatches Scheme to Evade Filibuster and Pass Trump's Assault on Voting Rights
House Speaker Mike Johnson said that “this time we’re going to try to put it on a reconciliation bill,” which “prevents the necessity of 60 votes in the Senate.”
Jun 29, 2026
With Senate Republicans appearing unwilling to nuke the filibuster to pass President Donald Trump's SAVE America Act, House Republican leaders are trying a new tactic to pressure states to enact the bill's severe voting rights restrictions without actually passing the bill itself.
The SAVE America Act has already passed the House multiple times. Trump has tried to hold a bipartisan housing bill hostage in order to pressure Senate Republicans to pass the bill without support from Democrats, but failed to get enough GOP senators on board.
On Sunday, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) told Fox Business that "we're going to try to pass it again, and this time we're going to try to put it on a reconciliation bill," which "prevents the necessity of 60 votes in the Senate."
Punchbowl reported on Monday that GOP leadership had expressed interest in creating a $4 billion grant program in order to incentivize states to enact parts of the bill, including requirements that voters re-register to vote with documents proving their citizenship and provide voter ID at the polls while outlawing mail-in ballots in most cases.
Johnson's plan is an alternative to the approach taken by Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.), and a group of other staunch Trump allies, who have threatened to torpedo the National Defense Authorization Act unless the full SAVE America Act is attached in a bid to force the Senate to pass it.
Luna has said that if her amendments are ruled out of order, she and her far-right colleagues will vote against procedural rules on other House bills to essentially grind the chamber to a halt.
Trump and other supporters of the legislation have said these measures are necessary to prevent noncitizens from voting, which is already illegal.
Even data from the right-wing Heritage Foundation, which has authored much of Trump's second-term agenda, shows that noncitizen voting is exceedingly rare: It has identified just 77 instances of noncitizen voting between 1999 and 2023.
Federal law already requires that voters provide their driver's license or the last four digits of their Social Security number when registering to vote, which allows election officials to verify their citizenship status.
But Republicans are hoping to replace this system with one that is far more burdensome, requiring voters to provide original copies of personal documents to prove their citizenship, such as a passport or birth certificate matching their legal name, and to present them in person at an election office, effectively banning online registration.
Critics have warned that millions of eligible voters could face cost burdens when attempting to exercise their right to vote as a result, as a passport costs $165 to acquire and tens of millions of Americans do not have access to the original copy of their birth certificate.
Many voters, especially in rural areas, also live several hours away from their election office, and around 69 million married women have different legal names than the ones on their birth certificates.
Only two states, Georgia and Arizona, have historically enforced laws requiring voters to prove their citizenship with documents. But according to the Center for American Progress, 12 more have enacted provisions similar to those in the SAVE America Act since 2024, though many cannot be applied to federal elections and some have been blocked by courts.
New Hampshire, Wyoming, South Dakota, Ohio, Utah, Louisiana, and Florida have enacted laws requiring voters to prove their citizenship using physical documentation. Kansas, Mississippi, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Indiana have enacted laws that can require certain voters flagged as potential noncitizens to present proof.
Following a 5-4 Supreme Court ruling on Monday in which two conservative justices joined the three liberals to rule that states can count mail ballots that arrive after Election Day as long as they are postmarked before, Trump put more pressure on Republican holdouts in the Senate.
"All Dumocrats, and our five Republican Senate Hold Outs, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins, Thom Tillis, Bill Cassidy, and Mitch McConnell must vote to SAVE OUR COUNTRY," he wrote on Truth Social.
Cassidy (R-La.) wrote in response, "Mr. President, I don’t know which version of the SAVE America Act you’re referring to, but I am a cosponsor and support the latest version. I don’t know which staffer misled you, but thank you for your attention to this matter!!"
"Btw, it’s irresponsible to postpone signing the Housing bill due to the SAVE Act. We need to start delivering relief to people for the high cost of housing ASAP!!" the senator added.
In the Oval Office, Trump told reporters that all other bills, including the housing bill and the defense spending bill, were "a big yawn" in comparison to the SAVE America Act.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said that "as the midterm elections approach, Trump and his allies are working overtime to silence Americans’ votes" and vowed that "Senate Democrats will continue to do everything we can to protect free and fair elections, where everyone’s voice is heard.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Demands Senate Fire Parliamentarian as GOP Drops $1 Billion for Ballroom From Bill
The president's tirade—which even the Senate majority leader called "concerning"—came as the GOP decided to exclude the funding from the package amid opposition from both Republican and Democratic senators.
May 20, 2026
As President Donald Trump on Wednesday publicly called for firing the Senate parliamentarian because she ruled against a GOP plan to include $1 billion in taxpayer dollars for the White House ballroom in the next budget reconciliation package, an upper chamber Republican confirmed that the proposal has been dropped from the bill.
"Shockingly, Republicans have kept the very important position of 'Parliamentarian' in the hands of a woman, Elizabeth MacDonough, who was appointed, long ago, by Barack Hussein Obama and a vicious Lunatic known as Senator Harry Reid, who ran the Senate for the Dumocrats with an 'iron fist,'" Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.
"Over the years, she has been brutal to Republicans, but not so to the Dumocrats—So why has she not been replaced? There are many fair people who would be qualified for that vital job," the president continued. "The Republicans play a very soft game compared to the Dumocrats. It is their single biggest disadvantage in politics. The Dumocrats cheat, lie, and steal, especially when it comes to Votes in Elections, but stick together, whereas the Republicans allow the Elizabeth MacDonoughs of the World to stay in power, and brutalize us. We need THE SAVE AMERICA ACT passed, and NOW—And, likewise, kill the Filibuster, which would give us everything! If we don’t pass at least one of these two provisions quickly, you will never see another Republican President again."
"The Dumocrats will end up with 2 additional States, DC and Puerto Rico, and all that entails, including 4 Senators, many Congressmen, and many additional Electoral Votes, and they will also get their dream of a packed United States Supreme Court with their most favorite number—21 Justices," he added. "The Dumocrats will eliminate the Filibuster on the First Day that they get an opportunity to do so. The Republicans aren't doing it because they say the Dumocrats will never do it, but the Republicans are WRONG. Get smart and tough Republicans, or you'll all be looking for a job much sooner than you thought possible!"
While former President Barack Obama was in office when MacDonough was appointed to her current role in 2012, that decision was made by then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). She has angered both parties with her decisions over the years.
Trump's post followed reporting early this week that the president was pressuring US Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) to fire MacDonough for her weekend ruling. The Hill reported that when asked about the post on Wednesday, Thune said that "I didn't read it, so I need to look at it."
"Obviously, it's concerning when anybody gets targeted like that. But it's, I guess, his opinion," the Senate majority leader said. "We'll make sure everybody's got security around here."
The proposed $1 billion in taxpayer funding would go toward security-related enhancements to the ballroom project, which has already involved tearing down the East Wing of the White House and former first lady Jacqueline Kennedy's Rose Garden. Standing outside the construction site trying to promote the project on Tuesday, Trump bragged about a planned "drone empire" on the roof.
As Common Dreams exclusively reported earlier Wednesday, 50 state legislators condemned the GOP's attempt to spend $1 billion in taxpayer money on the project in a letter to the president. They called on him "to reject this $1 billion boondoggle and instead direct those resources toward the affordability crisis your policies have created."
Thune signaled Wednesday that GOP lacked the support needed to get the ballroom funding through, telling reporters that "there may be some issues related to the parliamentarian, but most of the issues we have here are votes. The things we're dealing with here is vote count."
He suggested that firing MacDonough "would create even more vote issues here if we were to try to do something like that."
Later Wednesday, Politico reported that after a GOP lunch meeting, Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said, "We were told that the ballroom money is out" of the proposal, and he would "like to read the text."
As the outlet noted: "Several GOP senators aired public concerns about including any ballroom funding in a bill otherwise dedicated to immigration enforcement. A larger swath of Republicans were privately opposed, with the mood souring further Tuesday amid anger over Trump's decision to endorse Ken Paxton over incumbent Sen. John Cornyn in the upcoming GOP primary runoff in Texas."
Keep ReadingShow Less
50 State Lawmakers Condemn $1 Billion From Taxpayers for Trump Ballroom as Families 'Squeezed' Nationwide
"Not one of your working constituents, not a nurse in Ohio, not a factory worker in Michigan, not a single mother in Arizona, will benefit from this ballroom."
May 20, 2026
Fifty state legislators across the country, from Maine and Missouri to Oklahoma and Oregon, are condemning President Donald Trump's attempt to spend $1 billion in taxpayer money on his White House ballroom project in a letter reported exclusively Wednesday by Common Dreams.
"Across America, families are being squeezed from every direction," the legislators wrote to the president. "Housing costs have put homeownership out of reach for millions. Healthcare premiums are skyrocketing after Republicans killed the Affordable Care Act's enhanced premium tax credits. Gas prices, groceries, utilities, and basic necessities cost more than ever."
"The affordability crisis is the defining challenge facing our constituents, and they sent us to our state capitals to fight for relief," the lawmakers stressed in the letter, organized by Defend American Action. "That is why we are appalled that you are demanding $1 billion in taxpayer money for a personal White House ballroom."
The ballroom is the feature of a project that has already involved "demolishing the historic East Wing and ripping out Jacqueline Kennedy's Rose Garden," as the letter notes. "It began as a privately funded $200 million proposal, ballooned to $400 million, and is now being billed to taxpayers at $1 billion."
The White House has claimed the $1 billion in taxpayer funding is necessary for security-related enhancements to the ballroom project, including a subterranean bunker. On Tuesday, standing outside the construction site, Trump said the roof of the new wing would be home to a "drone empire," an element not previously disclosed.
Trump's GOP narrowly controls both chambers of Congress and is trying to use the budget reconciliation process to secure the funding. After Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough ruled against Republicans' initial plan on Saturday, Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) pledged to try "a new approach," and is also reportedly under pressure from the president to fire MacDonough.
The president and his allies in Congress have ramped up their push for the ballroom project since a shooting last month at the White House Correspondents' Dinner in Washington, DC, for which a man has been charged with attempting to assassinate Trump.
"Your administration claims that your personal ballroom is a national security investment and a major priority. The reality is that it is a vanity project for the wealthiest man to ever occupy the Oval Office, and it will not put a single dollar back in the pockets of working families," the state legislators wrote to Trump. "A clear majority of Americans oppose it, by a two-to-one margin. Not one of your working constituents, not a nurse in Ohio, not a factory worker in Michigan, not a single mother in Arizona, will benefit from this ballroom. Only billionaire donors and well-connected insiders will ever stand inside."
By speaking out against Trump spending $1 billion on this project, Maryland state Del. Adrian Boafo (D-23) told Common Dreams, state legislators are sending a message that "we're trying to focus on how we actually help people live comfortably here in Maryland—and frankly, not just in Maryland, but all across the country."
"His actions have made life harder on everyday American people," Boafo said of Trump. The president's war on government employees has hit Maryland particularly hard, with residents of the state having lost an estimated 25,000 federal jobs.
At the national level, Trump's tariffs and war on Iran have driven up prices of necessities, from gasoline to groceries, as working familes continue to feel the pain of the Republican Party's last budget reconciliation package—the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which gave more tax cuts to the rich while cutting healthcare and food assistance for Americans in need.
"Your budget reflects your values, and what you fight for reflects your values," said Boafo. "And clearly, all this president really cares about is himself and the cronies who are in his administration, and nobody else."
"Reject this $1 billion boondoggle and instead direct those resources toward the affordability crisis your policies have created. Govern for working families, Mr. President, not for yourself and your ultrawealthy donors."
The letter calls on Trump "to reject this $1 billion boondoggle and instead direct those resources toward the affordability crisis your policies have created. Govern for working families, Mr. President, not for yourself and your ultrawealthy donors."
The lawmakers also pointed out how the money could be better used:
That $1 billion could replace more than 200,000 lead pipes in America's drinking water supply, protecting millions of families from lead poisoning. It could fund home heating and cooling assistance for around 1.5 million American families struggling with utility bills. It could cover a full year of food assistance for more than 400,000 working people, low-income families, and disabled Americans. It could buy over 200 million free school lunches for lower-income children, or eliminate waiting lists for WIC food assistance to infants and pregnant women entirely.
Before joining the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, Rep. Arvind Venkat (D-30), another letter signatory, was an emergency physician at a Pittsburgh hospital. He told Common Dreams that he has two problems with spending $1 billion of taxpayer funds on the White House ballroom. "The first is that the White House is the people's house. It's not President Trump's to decide what the architecture or structure should be, and clearly, he disagrees with that—and I think that is very dangerous, in terms of what it means for our governance and democracy."
"The second is with all the challenges we have—and I'm a physician, and I've seen, here in Pennsylvania, over 150,000 people who've lost health insurance," he continued. "I don't think we should be spending $1 billion to put a congressional imprint on what is a vanity project, when that money could be used in so many more productive ways, including to help get people health insurance that they've lost."
While the letter is directed at Trump, with federal lawmakers considering whether to give the president $1 billion for the project, Venkat said that "congressional Republicans should grow a spine. It's not their job to simply be a rubber stamp for the president. It's their job to represent their communities and to be a separate co-equal branch of government. Unfortunately, the Senate Republicans and the House Republicans in DC don't seem to feel that way."
Boafo—one of the Democrats running for the seat currently held by retiring former US House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md)—also said that "the Republican Congress should do their job."
"This president hasn't done anything to try to raise wages, neither has the Congress. They have totally just turned their back on the American people. And instead, put all their effort into a foreign war in Iran, and put their effort into White House renovations," he added. "It is just ridiculous. And frankly, this letter and this message is kind of the message I think Democrats need as we head into the midterms in the next couple months."
Keep ReadingShow Less
For Maine Communities, Congress Must Fund Defenders, Not Detention and Deportation
Having experienced firsthand the terrors of the Trump administration’s detention and deportation agenda, Maine has already paid the price of this cruelty. We cannot afford one additional dollar of public investment in immigration operations.
May 17, 2026
In recent weeks, Congress passed a budget proposal seeking additional billions to fund federal immigration operations. Despite widespread public opposition to the inhuman actions of the Trump administration’s immigration agencies, Congress is moving forward with these budget plans that would further harm the stability and well-being of Maine’s families and immigrant communities. As the budget reconciliation process continues, Sens. Susan Collins and Angus King and our representatives must reject these dangerous proposals and instead fund real solutions to protect families and our constitutional rights.
On top of the $170 billion that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was granted last year, the proposal passed by the House and the Senate would give $70 billion in additional funding for harmful immigration operations, with no strings attached. Having experienced firsthand the terrors of the Trump administration’s detention and deportation agenda, Maine has already paid the price of this cruelty. We cannot afford one additional dollar of public investment in immigration operations.
Over the last 15 months, DHS has used its billions to send federal agents into Maine and other communities to abduct people from courtrooms, workplaces, and homes, tearing them from their right to a fair day in court. This has led to unprecedented Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention rates, an ever-increasing death toll in detention, thousands of family separations, and growing numbers of removals without due process.
According to an analysis by our organization, ICE apprehensions in Maine increased 37% when comparing all of 2024 and the first 10.5 months of 2025. ICE predominantly targeted Black and brown individuals without any criminal charges. ICE relies on categorizing people as having “Pending Criminal Charges” or “Other.” They targeted working-age men, disproportionately from African and Latin American countries, robbing families of their breadwinners.
Instead of attacking families and their constitutional rights, our federal funds should be used to support families and uphold due process.
Immigrants are integral to our state. More than 19,000 children in Maine have at least one immigrant parent. Over 56,000 immigrants live in Maine—and though they make up only 4% of the population, immigrant workers account for nearly 5% of the labor force. In 2025 alone, Maine’s immigrant residents paid 625.8 million in taxes.
In the face of escalating raids, in partnership with Presente!ME and their People’s Coalition on Safety and Justice, Maine Immigrants Rights' Coalition launched an Immigrant Defense Hotline and Resource Hub in October 2025 as “Community Watch” to record ICE sightings and offer legal support. Because there is no public defender system in immigration court, our services have been a critical last line of defense. But up against chaotic federal agencies with unlimited funding, this has not been enough.
Instead of attacking families and their constitutional rights, our federal funds should be used to support families and uphold due process. Research, including a recent three-year randomized study by the Vera Institute of Justice, consistently shows that people with a lawyer are far more likely to obtain the legal relief they are entitled to—allowing them to return to their jobs, communities, and families. When our rights and communities are threatened, we must fund defenders, not the detention and deportation machine.
As a diverse network of over 100 organizations, my partners and I are committed to defending due process and holding the government accountable. Just as we work every day to hold DHS accountable in the courtroom, Congress must do the same in Washington and reject this unnecessary and harmful infusion of funding for immigration detention and operations. Congress should invest in less costly, more supportive services like legal representation that uphold the right to due process and help people navigate the immigration system without disrupting our communities.
As Maine’s congressional leaders move forward with their budget reconciliation proposals, we urge them to remember that the stability, rights, and well-being of our communities are in their hands. We send you to Washington to invest in solutions that give every Mainer a fair shot at building a safe, stable, and dignified life in this nation they call home.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump’s Big Ugly Bill Is Fascism in Writing
It establishes an anti-immigrant police state in America, replete with a standing army of ICE agents and a gulag of detention facilities, and it was passed by a narrow margin despite popular opinion.
Jul 03, 2025
President Donald Trump’s 940-page Big Ugly Bill was passed today by the House and is now on the way to the White House for Trump’s signature.
It is a disgrace. It takes more than $1 trillion out of Medicaid—leaving about 12 million Americans without insurance by 2034—and slashes Food Stamps, all to give a giant tax cut to wealthy Americans.
It establishes an anti-immigrant police state in America, replete with a standing army of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and a gulag of detention facilities that will transform ICE into the most heavily funded law enforcement agency in the government.
The best analogy isn’t to Lyndon Johnson. It’s to the “strongmen” of the 1930s—Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, and Franco.
It will increase the already-bloated deficit by $3.4 trillion.
It’s also disgraceful because of how it came to be.
Trump was elected with only a plurality of American voters, not a majority. He eked out his win by a margin of only 1.5%.
His Big Ugly Bill squeaked by in the Senate by one vote, supplied by Vice President JD Vance, and by just two votes in the House. No Democrat in either chamber voted for it.
Polls show most Americans oppose it.
It was passed nevertheless—within an artificial deadline set by Trump—because of Trump’s total grip on the Republican Party.
Republican lawmakers feared that Trump would go after defectors with public attacks or endorsements of primary challengers.
They also feared withering blowback from conservative media, “MAGA” diehards, and Trump himself on social media.
After North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis announced his opposition to the bill, Trump posted on Truth Social, “Tillis is a talker and complainer, NOT A DOER! He’s even worse than Rand ‘Fauci’ Paul!”
Then Trump pledged to back a primary challenger to Tillis, and Tillis announced he would not seek reelection. Trump called that “good news,” and threatened primary challenges against other Republican fiscal conservatives standing in the way of the bill’s passage.
Other presidents in my lifetime have been able to summon majorities of lawmakers for unpopular causes—I think of Lyndon Johnson and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965—but none with the retributive threats, social media fury, and potentially violent base of supporters that Trump is now wielding.
Needless to say, the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts made America more inclusive. Trump’s Big Ugly Bill makes America crueler.
The best analogy isn’t to Lyndon Johnson. It’s to the “strongmen” of the 1930s—Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, and Franco.
That such a regressive, dangerous, gargantuan, and unpopular piece of legislation could get through Congress shows how far Trump has dragged America into modern fascism.
Keep ReadingShow Less
With Its ‘Big Betrayal Bill,’ the GOP Is Waging War Against Working Class Americans
While Republicans prioritize tax breaks for billionaires, they’re simultaneously stripping away basic healthcare and support systems from those who need them most.
Jul 02, 2025
With U.S. President Donald Trump’s July 4 deadline looming, Senate Republicans just sold out working class families by passing Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill”—all to please their billionaire backers. Inside this devastating bill are a host of tax cuts for the ultra-wealthy, paid for with cuts to Medicaid, SNAP, and other essential programs. It would also effectively eliminate the middle class in America as we know it.
To Republicans, and even some Democrats, in Congress these programs are just a line item on a budget. To myself, communities of color, and millions of Americans at risk, they are the difference between having healthcare and living in fear of sickness or injury because we couldn’t afford the care we needed to survive.
When I gave birth to my first child, I lost Medicaid coverage not long after she was born. This meant that in the critical months of my child’s early life, I was not able to see a doctor if something went wrong. It wasn’t until I found a job that offered me healthcare that this changed. In the wealthiest nation in the world, tying critical moments of need in someone’s life, such as postpartum care, to their employment status is unconscionable. Medicaid coverage has since expanded to cover postpartum care for a longer period of time, but this bill would be taking a massive step backward from ensuring all people have access to the care they need.
The GOP has made one thing clear: If they are left in charge, working class families will always come last.
Medicaid covers 41% of all births and nearly half of children with special healthcare needs. The cuts proposed in the newest version of the bill that Republican Senators just passed will push mothers out of postpartum care, shut down rural hospitals, and leave families uninsured. That pain will hardly go unnoticed by people in blue and red states alike, and leaders who support these cuts put the lives of their constituents, as well as their own political futures, at risk. Mothering Justice is committed to fighting against anyone who might support this horrendous bill—regardless of party.
If passed into law, this bill would cut over $1 trillion from Medicaid—the largest cut to Medicaid in history. That is $1 trillion that has been going to healthcare for America’ most vulnerable families sacrificed for the sake of tax cuts for billionaires. In Michigan alone, the Citizen’s Research Council of Michigan estimates that over 200,000 people will lose direct insurance coverage, and the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates nearly 12 million Americans will lose their coverage over the next decade. Even those with private insurance could lose access to services when hospitals and providers struggle to stay open following cuts to Medicaid. The results are not just devastating, they’re catastrophic.
Health insurance isn’t the only program on the Republicans’ chopping block. SNAP keeps 4.5 million young children fed, and the proposed cuts will deepen food insecurity, especially in Black and Latino households already facing hunger at 2-3 times the national rate. In Michigan alone, SNAP cuts would create a $467 million hole in our economy. If this bill goes through, Trump will still accept luxury planes and lawmakers will still fly in private jets paid for with foreign money, but children will lose access to pediatric care and families will lose their only grocery options, deepening poverty in this country instead of fighting it.
Also buried in the “big, beautiful bill” are work requirements and red tape that deny qualified applicants access to essential programs. Historically, when work requirements for Medicaid recipients have been implemented at the state level, many working recipients lose their insurance due to the administrative hurdles of proving their employment. Republicans’ proposals would bury families in paperwork and procedural hurdles that disproportionately harm single moms, people with disabilities, and those without internet or stable housing. They are not efficiency measures—they are systemic tools of exclusion.
And cuts to SNAP and Medicaid don’t just hurt the people who rely on the program to feed their families. Small businesses, grocers, and local economies rely on SNAP dollars to thrive and support the community. The proposed changes will likely raise costs for states and taxpayers around the country, all for the sake of lining billionaire’s pockets. Under the guise of reducing federal spending, the bill’s proposal burdens states with millions of additional, unnecessary administrative costs, forcing state governments to allocate funds to consulting fees and enforcement of work requirements rather than healthcare.
While Republicans prioritize tax breaks for billionaires, they’re simultaneously stripping away basic healthcare and support systems from those who need them most. Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” should actually be called the “Big Betrayal Bill”—because if it’s passed into law the wealth gap in this country will widen to astronomical levels. Mothers of color and working families across the country did not elect their representatives to protect the ultra-wealthy. The GOP has made one thing clear: If they are left in charge, working class families will always come last.
Now, as the bill goes back to the House, Mothering Justice is committed to fighting against anyone who might support this horrendous bill—regardless of party. Now is the time to call your member of Congress and let them know you will not stand for the federal government stealing money from working class families. Tell those we elected to power that they must use every tool at their disposal to stop this bill from being passed into law.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump's Big Bill Is Not-So-Beautiful for Small Businesses
In a recent survey of 574 small business owners, 7 of 10 opposed the spending cuts in H.R. 1.
Jun 30, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act, H.R. 1, is a dream of tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy. However, the same bill now on the floor of the Senate is also a loaded gun of healthcare spending cuts aimed at the American people, 11.8 million of whom could lose their coverage by 2034, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
Some of these Americans are mom-and-pop entrepreneurs. Dr. Alexia McClerkin owns The Wellness Doc in Houston, Texam. She can't afford to buy herself health insurance and relies on Medicaid for her three sons' coverage. Dr. McClerkin has a bird's-eye view of how her patients cope with paying their healthcare bills.
Doug Scheffel is president of ETM Manufacturing in Littleton, Massachusetts. Two of his employees rely on state health exchanges. Other employees of Scheffel are care providers for family members receiving Medicaid.
Over half, or 52%, of responding small business owners stated that climbing healthcare insurance harms their bottom lines.
In a recent survey of 574 small business owners, 7 of 10 opposed the spending cuts in H.R. 1 that seeks to extend the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. According to this Small Business for America's Future (SBAF) survey, 27% support the healthcare cuts in H.R. 1, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, and 5% are not sure.
This SBAF survey found that 58% of small businesses have owners, employees, or family members who rely on Medicaid, healthcare that covers the disabled, elderly, and low-income Americans, or Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP coverage), low-cost or free care for kids in families whose annual income disqualifies them from Medicaid, an alternative to unaffordable private healthcare insurance.
According to the SBAF survey, 56% of respondents themselves, their employees, or family members use Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplace coverage with premium tax credits set to expire that are not extended in the H.R. 1 legislation. Over half, or 52%, of responding small business owners stated that climbing healthcare insurance harms their bottom lines.
"Small businesses cannot afford to be shut out of access to affordable healthcare. Medicaid, CHIP, SNAP, and enhanced ACA premium tax credits are lifelines for small business, their families, and their workers," said Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) in a written statement. "If Republicans gut these programs or allow them to expire, healthcare costs for small businesses and their families will skyrocket, employees will lose coverage, and entrepreneurs will be stifled. We must expand access to health coverage for all, especially small businesses."
A policy alternative for universal health coverage is Medicare for All. However, passing such legislation through Congress for the president to sign faces stiff opposition from the healthcare industry. It has been successful in blocking Medicare for All.
"Small business owners have been crying out for relief from crushing healthcare costs for years, and Congress' response is to make it worse," said SBAF co-chair Walt Rowen, owner of Susquehanna Glass Company in Columbia, Pennsylvania, in a statement. "These cuts don't solve problems—they shift costs from government programs onto the businesses least able to absorb them, all while extending tax breaks for corporations that already pay lower effective rates than the corner store."
Keep ReadingShow Less
The Republican Nursing Home Apocalypse
If the Big Ugly Bill becomes law, over half of nursing homes say they will have to reduce staff, and a quarter say they will close.
Jun 30, 2025
Imagine learning that your grandmother’s nursing home is closing. The nearest one with room for her is a three-hour drive away. It doesn’t accept Medicaid, so if your grandmother is among the two-thirds of nursing home patients who are covered by Medicaid, she’s out of luck.
Your grandfather still lives at home. But the hospital near his house is closing, too. If he has a medical emergency, he’ll have to go to an overburdened hospital that’s 40 minutes away.
That’s what will happen if President Donald Trump’s so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill” becomes law. There’s nothing beautiful about this hideous betrayal of the American people. Unless you’re a billionaire who can hop in a helicopter to see your private doctor, it will make your health care worse. All to give that same billionaire a giant tax cut.
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) says Americans who are concerned about Medicaid should “get over it.” Sorry, Mitch. We refuse to “get over it,” and we’re not dying quietly.
The Big Ugly Bill cuts a trillion dollars from Medicaid. Even if you’re not on Medicaid, this will hurt you and your family. That’s because hospitals and nursing homes around the country rely on Medicaid for much of their funding.
If this bill becomes law, over half of nursing homes say they will have to reduce staff, and a quarter say they will close. At the nursing homes that remain open, seniors and people with disabilities will wait in agony for someone to take them to the bathroom or give them their pain medication.
Those whose nursing homes close will struggle to find another one with room for them, especially if they rely on Medicaid. If they manage to find one, it will likely be hours away from their loved ones.
This bill is a disaster for people who rely on Medicaid to pay for nursing homes and other long-term care. But it’s also a disaster even for those who don’t directly rely on Medicaid, because it will devastate the entire healthcare system. Rural areas will be hit hardest, but nowhere and no one (except for billionaires) is safe.
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) told Iowans concerned about the bill’s Medicaid cuts that “we all are going to die.” Many of us will die faster, including the hundreds of Iowans who will lose their nursing home beds.
In Iowa alone the impact is massive across the entire state and in each vulnerable Republican House District.
In Iowa’s 1st District, represented by Republican Mariannette Miller-Meeks, four nursing homes with a collective 280 beds will close: Aspire of Muscatine (46), Mississippi Valley Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center—Keokuk (83), Iowa City Rehab and Health Care Center—Iowa City (89), and Azria Health Prairie Ridge—Mediapolis (62).
In Iowa’s 2nd District, represented by Republican Ashley Hinson, two nursing homes with a collective 271 beds will close: Heritage Specialty Care—Cedar Rapids (201) and Cedar Falls Healthcare Center (70).
In Iowa’s 3rd District, represented by Republican Zach Nunn, two nursing homes with a collective 113 beds will close: Aspire of Perry (46) and Granger Nursing and Rehabilitation Center—Granger (67).
And this story repeats across the entire country. There is no place to hide from the tsunami being unleashed against nursing homes. Anyone who has dealt with the current system knows how bad it is now. It is about to be a whole lot worse. Nursing homes that don’t close outright will become death traps as the demand far outstrips the supply.
All of this needless death and chaos, just so some billionaires can get trillions in tax handouts that they don’t even need.
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) says Americans who are concerned about Medicaid should “get over it.” Sorry, Mitch. We refuse to “get over it,” and we’re not dying quietly.
Polling shows that Americans hate the Big Ugly Bill—if they know about what’s in it. The problem is that most of them don’t. Nearly half of Americans are completely unaware of the bill, and only 8% of them know it cuts Medicaid.
Talk to your friends and family members. Tell them that Republicans are about to cause a nursing home and hospital apocalypse—but it isn’t too late to stop it. The Senate is voting on the Big Ugly Bill very soon. Then, it goes back to the House of Representatives, where Republicans will try to rush the bill through before the public can learn about it.
Call your representative and both senators now at 202-224-3121. The key swing votes in the Senate include Susan Collins of Maine (the oldest, and most rural, state in the country) and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. If you know anyone in those states, urge them to call today and tell their senators to stop the nursing home apocalypse!
Keep ReadingShow Less
It’s Not Too Late for Senate Republicans to Ditch Their Historically Harmful Bill
It shocks the conscience that Senate Republican leaders saw the impacts of the House bill—16 million more people uninsured and millions losing help buying groceries, including families with children—and chose to double down.
Jun 30, 2025
The Senate is barreling toward a vote on a still-not-finished bill that would take away health coverage and food assistance from millions of people who need it, raise families’ costs, and make a large share of people in our nation worse off—all in service to tax cuts that are heavily skewed toward the wealthy and corporations. But there is still time for senators to say no to this bill.
Senate Republican leaders are tinkering with the bill to try to secure votes, but their changes won’t alter the bottom line: This bill would cause serious harm. It would increase poverty, hunger, and preventable deaths. This agenda would cause about 16 million more people to be uninsured and make healthcare unaffordable for millions more.
The bill’s proponents tout their tax package. But the tax package extends and even increases tax cuts for millionaires, billionaires, and wealthy heirs, while leaving out the one expiring tax cut that helps roughly 22 million people with low and middle incomes afford healthcare.
The president and Senate Republican leaders are pressing toward an immediate vote on the bill even as poll after poll shows a clear majority of people across the U.S. oppose it.
None of this harm has anything to do with fiscal responsibility: Our deficits and debts would soar under this bill. If enacted it will stand alone in history—a reconciliation bill that drives up poverty and the number of people uninsured, while increasing deficits and debt.
And, given that they are still writing the bill, Senate Republicans don’t even know what it costs, though its price tag is surely trillions of dollars, as Congressional Budget Office estimates of earlier drafts made clear.
Still, the president and Senate Republican leaders are pressing toward an immediate vote on the bill even as poll after poll shows a clear majority of people across the U.S. oppose it.
Proponents of this destructive agenda have tried every trick in the book to claim falsely that the deep and harmful cuts to food assistance and health coverage would somehow not hurt people. They’ve done all they can to portray the people it would hurt as anything but who they are—people in communities throughout the country who need help to afford the basics, most of whom work or are children, seniors, or people with disabilities.
Despite obfuscation, the truth is clear—this bill will hurt people in every state if enacted. Senators who vote for it are responsible for its impact:
- Taking health coverage away from about 16 million people and raising costs for millions more through deep cuts to Medicaid and to Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplace coverage, and its failure to extend the enhanced premium tax credits. This will cause many to lose access to life-saving medical care, accrue unaffordable medical debt, and have poorer health. The bill will lead to avoidable deaths, more uncompensated care, and more rural hospital closures.
- Taking basic food assistance through SNAP from millions of people and cutting it for millions more. The bill’s still massive, unaffordable cost-shift to states could lead some states to end their SNAP programs entirely. Over the last 50 years, SNAP’s nationwide availability has largely eliminated severe hunger and malnutrition throughout the United States. This bill walks away from the long-standing, bipartisan, and national commitment to food assistance that made that possible.
- Singling out for especially harsh treatment people who are immigrants living and working in the U.S. lawfully. The bill takes federal Medicaid, Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), Medicare, ACA marketplace coverage, and SNAP food assistance away from people who are in the country lawfully, including refugees, people granted asylum, and certain survivors of domestic violence or labor or sex trafficking, among others—people who have proven that they have faced persecution or survived violence and exploitation. Because people without a documented status are already ineligible for these supports, the federal savings come from taking help away from people here lawfully.
Add in the president’s tariffs and this agenda would make all but the highest-income 20% of households worse off. The agenda directs harm on the very people the president and many Republicans say they are trying to help.
It shocks the conscience that Senate Republican leaders saw the impacts of the House bill—16 million more people uninsured and millions losing help buying groceries, including families with children—and chose to double down.
Faced with similar, catastrophic projected health coverage losses in 2017 and a deeply unpopular bill, a small group of Republican senators, along with Democrats, had the courage to defeat the disastrous ACA repeal effort. There is still time for Republican senators to find their courage and do the same again.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy