Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

The Big Beautiful Bill Reflects the Trump Administration’s Priorities, Not America’s

Opinion

Former President Donald Trump

While the 870-page bill covers a whole host of issues and federal programs, there are four big takeaways from the BBB.

The Washington Post/Getty Images

If a budget is a mirror of values, what does the “Big Beautiful Bill” (BBB) say about America?

On July 4, President Donald Trump signed into law Congressional Republicans’ “Big Beautiful Bill.” If you held up the bill to a mirror, most Americans would probably say that what they saw in the reflection was anything but beautiful.


A budget is much more than numbers. It is a representation of one’s values and priorities. So goes for the federal budget and our nation’s ideals.

The BBB prioritizes immigration, deportation, and tax cuts for the wealthy, while cutting Medicaid and food stamp programs, and with no regard to fiscal responsibility.

While the 870-page bill covers a whole host of issues and federal programs, there are four big takeaways from the BBB: an exponential explosion on the amount spent on Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), giving tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans, and wide-sweeping cuts to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), all with the backdrop of adding $3 trillion to the federal deficit, piling on to a national debt that is already out of control.

The Republican-led Congress set aside roughly $170 billion for immigration enforcement and border security efforts through the legislation, including $45 billion to ICE to expand its detention system over the next four years.

ICE will have more funding than the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI); the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA); the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF); the U.S. Marshals Service; and the Bureau of Prisons combined.

The bill marks the largest investment in detention and deportation in U.S. history, and scholars have even noted that ICE will become the largest federal law enforcement agency "in the history of the nation.”

In comparison, the FBI's fiscal year 2024 budget was approximately $11.4 billion.

While most Americans will see a small tax benefit as well as the addition to some new tax breaks, such as no taxes on tips up to $25,000 and a “senior deduction” that will allow more people over 65 to avoid Social Security taxes, the Tax Policy Center notes that the tax measure in the bill is regressive, which means it distributes most of its benefits to high-income households. They report that the bill’s revenue provisions would cut 2026 taxes on average by about $2,900.

The biggest beneficiaries would be households making between $460,000 and $1.1 million (the 95th-99th income percentile), who would get an average tax cut of $21,000, raising their after-tax incomes by 4.4 percent.

The monetary cuts, in contrast, will likely affect the most vulnerable Americans. The legislation includes an estimated $863 billion in budget cuts for Medicaid and $295 billion in cuts for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) for fiscal years 2025 to 2034. The combined cuts exceed $1 trillion.

The KFF, which was formerly known as The Kaiser Family Foundation, reports that the cuts to Medicaid represent 29% of state Medicaid spending per resident and are likely to lead to reduced access to care, increased uninsurance rates, and potential strain on state budgets and healthcare systems.

SNAP currently provides basic food assistance to more than 40 million people, including children, seniors, and non-elderly adults with disabilities, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a nonpartisan research and policy institute.

These newly enacted changes to SNAP may cause 22.3 million families to lose some or all of their benefits, according to research from the Urban Institute.

Currently, many individuals are limited to three months of SNAP benefits every three years unless they are working for 20 hours per week or qualify for an exemption. The new legislation

expands work reporting requirements for adults from an upper limit of age 54 to age 64 and lowers the age limit for dependent children from 18 to 7.

Finally, the bill shows that Republicans no longer value fiscal responsibility as the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates the bill could add $3.3 trillion to federal deficits over the next 10 years.

The federal deficit is the annual shortfall between the U.S. government's revenue, primarily through taxes, and its spending in a given fiscal year. To pay for a deficit, the federal government borrows money by selling Treasury bonds, bills, and other securities.

The national debt, on the other hand, is the total national debt owed by the federal government of the U.S. to treasury security holders. As of this writing, the United States’ national debt is well over $36 trillion.

The reflection of the “Big Beautiful Bill Act” in the country’s moral compass mirror is downright ugly.


Lynn Schmidt is a columnist and Editorial Board member with the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. She holds a master's of science in political science as well as a bachelor's of science in nursing.


Read More

US Capitol building
The United States Capitol building with its white dome against a blue sky

Would Congressional Term Limits Make Congress Better—or Worse?

Starting in the 1990’s, the idea of putting term limits on members of Congress became a recurring idea to reform the institution and improve democracy. The idea was born out of the theory that replacing the current crop of legislators with a new batch would produce a better Congress. More than 30 years later we now have quantitative and qualitative data showing the impact of term limits.

Twenty-one state legislatures have enacted some kind of term limit on legislators since 1990. Since then, dozens of academic studies have examined the impact on such factors as: complexity of legislation, influence of lobbyists and staff on legislative outcomes, and interactions with constituent. Here are some key findings.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand points to the word tax on a screen

Data calculations

Getty Images

Inconvenient Numbers Are a Sign the System Works

Earlier in October, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that consumer prices rose 3.7 percent over the past year, a little higher than the month before, with gasoline accounting for more than half of September's increase. Rising prices are the kind of news no incumbent politician wants weeks before an election. The report was published anyway, on schedule. That is the quiet discipline of a trustworthy statistical system. It tells us what is true even when the number is unwelcome to whoever holds power.

So, do Americans trust government data? We do. But that trust is incomplete, and it has room to grow.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

jimfeng/Getty Images

Pennsylvania’s Bipartisan Exchange Is Rebuilding Trust in Governance

The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics has nearly 40 years of experience working with legislators from different political parties, and it is building on this history by drawing on lessons from the successful American Congressional Exchange model, begun in 2018 at the Bipartisan Policy Center, and from state exchanges now underway in Minnesota and Michigan. The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics, in collaboration with the Bridge Alliance, has launched the Pennsylvania Legislative Exchange.

This state-based, systematic approach is designed to foster better relationships and build trust across the political aisle with the following guiding principles:

Keep ReadingShow less
An empty grocery cart in a market.

NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani proposes five city-run grocery stores. See the arguments for and against, from food deserts to bodega concerns and the $70M cost.

Getty Images, Kwangmoozaa

Government-Owned Grocery Stores: Accessible Nutrition or Government Overreach?

Issue Introduction

Over the past few years, affordability has become the most central issue affecting Americans and the quality of life in the United States. The prices of groceries and basic necessities have risen 25-30% since the COVID-19 pandemic and are projected to rise another 3.2% in 2026. At the same time, the exodus of grocery chains from rural and low-income areas has scattered food deserts throughout individual states. Recent mass closures include Grocery Outlet’s shuttering of 36 stores and continued shut-downs of many Albertsons locations. These factors have led politicians to make affordability a major campaign issue.

During his progressive campaign for mayor of New York City, Zohran Mamdani raised the idea of opening grocery stores owned and operated by the city government to provide New Yorkers with affordable groceries. In his April 2026 public address that marked his first 100 days in office, Mayor Mamdani announced plans for the first of five city-run grocery stores. Mamdani’s proposed initiative will use $70 million in capital funding to build five city-owned municipal stores–one in each borough–and place them under control of the New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC). NYCEDC will then select third-party operating staff in accordance with city standards for affordability and proper labor practices. Public opinion following the announcement continues to be divided between uproar and support.

Keep ReadingShow less