Following the narrow passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act in the House — 215 to 214, with two Republicans voting no — the legislation now heads to the Senate, where new objections center on its failure to address deficit spending for the current fiscal year.
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) said the bill must reduce the deficit, which is projected at $1.87 trillion for this fiscal year. “There should be a goal... to reduce the deficit, not increase it,” Johnson said. At least four Senate Republicans reportedly oppose the bill for this reason.
That mirrors concerns in the House. U.S. Reps. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) voted no over the deficit, and Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) voted “present,” citing the need for further deficit reduction. Reps. David Schweikert (R-Ariz.) and Andrew Garbarino (R-N.Y.) missed the vote but intended to support the bill, indicating the House margin was slightly wider than the final tally suggests.
Should the Senate demand more spending cuts, that could actually bolster House support from fiscal hawks like Harris and Davidson.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) will need to navigate a range of red lines. Former President Donald Trump has said Social Security and Medicare are off-limits, and budget rules prevent changes to trust fund revenues anyway. More recently, Trump also opposed cuts to Medicaid, aiming to shield blue state Republicans from political blowback.
For some GOP House members, support hinged on raising the cap on the state and local tax (SALT) deduction to $40,000. That cap expires with the 2017 Trump tax cuts on Dec. 31, meaning doing nothing could lift it entirely — limiting how much it can be pared back without losing votes.
Tax cuts, typically scored by the Congressional Budget Office as deficit increases, require offsetting spending cuts or tax hikes to stay deficit-neutral. That gives fiscal conservatives leverage, as deeper cuts enable more tax relief without worsening the official deficit score.
But meaningful cuts are hard to find. Without any legislative changes, the deficit is expected to grow from $1.87 trillion in 2025 to $2.2 trillion by 2034. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are the biggest drivers. By 2034, Social Security is projected to cost $2.4 trillion annually, Medicare $1.76 trillion, and Medicaid nearly $1 trillion. Trump’s opposition to touching these programs further limits options.
The bill does include enforcement measures expected to remove 1.4 million non-citizens from Medicaid rolls, potentially saving money. But even that has limited long-term effect, and rejecting the bill won’t reverse those broader trends.
Crucially, the bill does not address the insolvency of Social Security and Medicare trust funds, projected to run dry in 2035 and 2036. That’s because it doesn’t alter payroll taxes, which fund those programs — and those taxes can’t be changed via budget reconciliation.
Meanwhile, the national debt, now over $36 trillion, has grown an average of 8% per year since 1980, factoring in wars and recessions. At that pace, debt will hit $74 trillion by 2034 and $100 trillion by 2038, while the economy is projected to grow only 5.5% annually, with debt eventually exceeding 200% of GDP.
This debt growth may continue regardless of the bill’s passage. The core issue isn’t revenue — taxes are high — but demographics. The U.S. fertility rate has dropped from 3.65 babies per woman in 1960 to 1.6 today. That shrinking base of taxpayers, combined with more than 900,000 Baby Boomers retiring annually, means the tax pool is thinning just as benefit costs rise.
The House bill includes baby savings accounts with $1,000 deposits as a pronatalist policy, but it’s unlikely to significantly boost birthrates.
Thus, the push for spending cuts faces steep limits. Entitlement reform is effectively off the table in a partisan reconciliation package focused on tax cuts. Serious deficit reduction would require bipartisan cooperation or targeted agency cuts — for example, the $170 billion in savings identified by the White House’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
Thune’s challenge in the Senate now mirrors what House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) faced. Both chambers must balance competing priorities — tax relief, spending restraint, political realities — without undermining final passage.
Ultimately, the debate boils down to whether Congress can extend the Trump tax cuts and still control the deficit. Without a broader breakthrough on entitlements or stronger incentives for family formation, the structural drivers of the deficit will remain.
Compromise, as ever, will be essential.
Robert Romano is the Executive Director at Americans for Limited Government.
.png)
