Only early days for Trump's budget: key Republicans would not vote on a final bill that impacts on Medicaid or SNAP
This is about the vote in the house to advance a budget resolution under reconciliation. The government can do at most three such bills a year, usually only one. The bill can only tackle mandatory funding - funding set in advance in law. The plus side is that Trump only needs a simple majority in both House and Senate. The democrats can’t filibuster it in the Senate.
The democrats can filibuster discretionary funding and so can force the Republicans to reuse the same budget as for Biden in 2024.
With the current divided house the only way Trump can achieve his hoped for $2 trillion savings is throguh mandatory funding. But this covers popular programs like Medicaid and Medicare. He needs these savings to continue the tax cuts that wealthy Americans currently enjoy beyond the end of this year.
That is why the leader of the House Mike Johnson is asking for a $880 billion cut in Health and Human Services spending.
The ones who voted for this budget resolution did it as a result of Trump’s reassurances that it wouldn't impact on their voters with Medicaid. But when it comes to the final version of the bill it's likely impossible to save so much without cutting Medicaid to people who need it. Or SNAP, food aid.
If so these same people will be a no vote for the final bill. They voted for this bill because it doesn't specifically mention SNAP or Medicaid and because Trump assured them he won't do anything that impacts on the health of the American people.
Nobody is even suggesting a cut to Medicare as far as I can tell.
Trump’s first reconciliation bill in his first term failed, the American Health Care Act which tried to repeal Obama Care and failed.
TEXT ON GRAPHIC:
We are here:
Currently here, House and Senate have to agree on the budget resolution.
This is where the details are worked out
Trump’s first reconciliation bill in his first term failed
David Valadao: “Today, I voted to advance the budget resolution… I will only support a final bill that protects essential resources like Medicaid or SNAP for Central Valley families.” - several other key votes were simlar
Then the Senate is very opposed to deep cuts in Medicaid. So now they need to find a bill that both the House and Senate agree to and it's the start of a very long process. Trump's American Health Care bill didn't get through in his first term in 2017. He did a tax cuts bill instead. https://www.facebook.com/groups/doomsdaydebunked/posts/2092955157799174/?comment_id=2092971604464196
Victoria Sparz who was a key vote said:
QUOTE STARTS
I appreciate President Trump’s personal commitment to save healthcare and make it better for physical and fiscal health for all Americans
He is the only person who is able to accomplish it and I trust his word. We will Make America Healthy Again! # MAHA
Therefore, I voted for these budget instructions to move forward.
If she'd voted against the bill would have failed.
But if the final bill does cut Medicaid for her constituents who need it then she would surely vote against it.
Politico has a list of some of the Republicans in districts most affected by Medicaid cuts if it happened.
Take for example David Valadao:
QUOTE Valadao’s central California district is perennially in play — Valadao is in his sixth term but lost one in the middle — and more than 3 in 5 of his constituents, more than 470,000 people, rely on Medicaid, according to NYU Langone Health’s estimate.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/24/medicaid-gop-cuts-republicans-congress-00205542
This is what he says explaining his vote for the bill. He makes it clear that he will NOT vote for a final bill that cuts Medicaid or SNAPS for eliigible Americans in his district:
Rep. David Valadao
@RepDavidValadao
TWEET STARTS
Today, I voted to advance the budget resolution—an important procedural step to keep the legislative process moving. To be clear, this resolution doesn’t include any specific policy provisions.
It’s simply the first step in the process before committees begin drafting legislation to determine priorities. I’ve made clear to House leadership that I will only support a final bill that protects essential resources like Medicaid or SNAP for Central Valley families.
https://x.com/RepDavidValadao/status/1894566287235219479
TRANSCRIPT OF SECOND HALF OF HIS VIDEO:
As a representative of one of the most agriculturally rich districts in the country, it's my constituents who are responsible for putting food on everyone's tables. My district also has one of the highest Medicaid populations in the nation. I have heard from countless constituents who tell me that the only way they can afford health care is through programs like Medicaid. And I will not support a final reconciliation bill that leaves them behind.
Medicaid cuts are deeply unpopular with American families who sent us here to deliver on Trump's agenda. I understand that Medicaid is not explicitly named in this bill but achieving $880 billion within NC's jurisidiction is not an easy task.
So I ask ledership to remain committed to working with my colleagues and I to produce a final product that strengthens critical programs like Medicaid and SNAP and ensures that our constituents are not left behind.
The one vote No is Thomas Massie who voted against because the budget on the rosiest assumptions would add $20 trillion to the national debt in 10 years.
So he has the ones who don't think the spending cuts are deep enough and the ones who will not accept any cuts that affect their constituents that rely on SNAP or Medicaid.
Trump can’t change Social Security with Reconciliation by the Byrd rule.
Even if he ended all the other funding, Medicare, Income Security, Medicaid and Veterans Benefits are the biggest figures, he couldn’t save $2 trillion.
These are 2019 figures sorry can’t find the latest but gives the idea:
TEXT ON GRAPHIC
All except Social Security can be changed in a big budget bill with a simple majority in both chambers (reconciliation)
But all are popular programs that centrist Republicans are reluctant to cut significantly
Social Security can be filibustered.
File:Mandatory Spending.jpg - Wikipedia
See also United States federal budget - Wikipedia
By the Byrd rule, the Republicans can't change Social Security through Reconciliation.
This means the Democrats can filibuster any changes in Social Security payments.
Screenshot from: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/rl/rl30862 The Budget Reconciliation Process: The Senate’s “Byrd Rule” (Congressional Research Service)
As for the other ones, they are all popular programs that Republicans are reluctant to cut. Many Republicans do think that shrinking Medicaid will make it a better program - though the arguments they use are not very sound scientifically. They look at evidence that supports their view and not the evidence against it.
Anyway that's what they think. But getting it across the line is far harder than proposing ideas because a few moderate Republicans are sure to push back.
It’s one of these fixes politicians sometimes get into where they promise something that’s impossible.
In this quote, the Energy and Commerce Committee also covers public health
QUOTE STARTS
The House budget would require the Energy and Commerce Committee to cut at least $880 billion; the Agriculture Committee to cut at least $230 billion; the Education and Workforce Committee to cut at least $330 billion; and other committees to also cut programs to reach a cumulative target of at least $1.5 trillion in cuts through 2034. The magnitude of these reductions would force congressional committees to make enormous cuts in Medicaid, SNAP, student loan assistance and other vital sources of support when they develop the “reconciliation” spending and tax bill that follows the budget resolution.
But as massive as these cuts are, they don’t show the full picture of the overall program cuts that the House budget may generate. The committee targets are minimums or “floors” — meaning the committees must cut at least that amount and may cut more. And a provision included by the House Budget Committee during its consideration of the resolution pushes the committees to cut more, by requiring the overall level of program cuts to reach $2 trillion to retain the full $4.5 trillion in tax cuts.
Then the Senate is very opposed to deep cuts in Medicaid. So now they need to find a bill that both the House and Senate agree to and it's the start of a very long process. Trump's American Health Care bill didn't get through in his first term in 2017. He did a tax cuts bill instead.
Also if the final bill does cut Medicaid, this is breaking Trump's election pledges.
According to 538 Tump''s net approval has fallen from over 8.1% on Jan 24th to 0.7% on Feb 26th (margin between approval and disapproval)
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/approval/donald-trump/
That’s 37 days and he stil has net approval if marginally.
It took him 15 days to move to a negative net approval in his first term.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/
So his approval has held up longer this time but moving swiftly towards net disapproval.
It took Biden through to Sept 2 of 2021 to reach a net disapproval rating
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/approval/joe-biden/
The first special elections are in April.
These particular ones are not that likely to flip as they are 2 : 1 majorities of Republican to Democrat, safe Republican seats but they will send a message if they are significantly lower majorities.
Elise Stefanik 62% : 38% [will be vacated when she is appointed ambassador]
Democrat through to 2012
Redistricting in 2010, 2020 and again in 2024
Matt Gaetz: 66% : 34%
Republican with large majorities back to at least 2000
Michael Waltz 66.5% : 33.5%
Republican with large majorities back to at least 2000
It will be an extraordinary turnover for any of those. However, he could easily have a dozen or so more special elections to come based on the typical yearly turnover in the very large House of Representatives.
The numbers in previous years from 2016, based on counting the figures in the Wikipedia list are:
2017 - 2018 (115th Congress): 14, 3 flips to D
2019-20 (116th Congress): 6, 1 flip to R
2021-2022 (117th Congress): 15, 1 flip to R, 1 flip to D
2023-2024 (118th Congress): 11, 1 flip to D.
Typically we get a dozen or so special elections in a 2 year Congress and if three of those flip, as did in 2017-8 the House will flip. He also lost one Senate seat in 2017-8 before his first mid terms.
https://ballotpedia.org/Special_elections_to_the_115th_United_States_Congress_(2017-2018)
With such a narrow House margin the Representatives know they could lose the majority with unpopular measures even before the mid terms. Then unpopular measures could lead to many of them losing their seats in the mid terms
So - they depend on their constituents for their seats and they also are voted to represent them in Congress.
With such a tight margin Trump will need to convince them that the budget will not impact significantly on their constituents who depend on Medicaid and SNAP.
He can only really save $8 billion and that’s by cuts that presidents are not likely to want to make.
TEXT ON GRAPHIC:
Why Trump can make only minor reductions in expenses without Congress:
- only $8 billion savings in easy control of the president
Trump has some ability to remove funding from programs he doesn't like and can of course eliminate fraud and wastage.
However all the money freed up in this way has to be spent on the same program he freed it from.
He can only reduce funding after doing this with support from Congress
Mandatory funding: Fixed amount set in law
- Can be reduced by simple majority in both chambers (reconciliation) but
- tend to be popular with significant Republican support
Discretionary funding: Must be renewed every year
- Reductions can be stopped by Democrat filibuster in Senate
- Previous year's funding used if filibustered
Net interest: 2/3 of the interest is paid to Americans, e.g. pension funds
By impoundment control act,
- president has to spend all this money
~0.13% of savings by executive without Congress
Many other ways to balance budget in 2030s:
- raise retirement age
- increase immigration (including young entrepreneurs like Musk was)
- save on budget
- save on tax fraud
- VAT
In 2020s priority is to boost economy which needs funding.
. File:2023-federal-budget-breakdown.png - Wikimedia Commons
See also
See also my:
Remote chance of a constitutional crisis - certainty of legal cases - US remains a democracy - voters respond in special elections and mid terms - and legislators speak for constituents
Whatever happens the US remains a democracy and your vote still counts. Also, there is no risk to the rule of law which helps order your lives and keep you safe. The many legal cases against Trump are continuing also.
also
Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency is advisory only and ends July 4th - Can't stop funding from Congress - $2 trillion of saving is impossible - and a president can't close departments
Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency can’t be a body with real teeth without Congress’s support which Trump is highly unlikely to ever get. Also, it can’t be a body with real teeth because if it was Elon Musk couldn’t lead it.
also
Numerous legal cases against Trumps first executive orders and other executive actions - he will likely lose most of them - some already paused
There are going to be dozens of legal cases and since much of what Trump is trying to do is illegal to a very unusual degree much of what he's doing will be stopped.
CONTACT ME VIA PM OR ON FACEBOOK OR EMAIL
You can Direct Message me on Substack - but I check this rarely. Or better, email me at support@robertinventor.com
Or best of all Direct Message me on Facebook if you are okay joining Facebook. My Facebook profile is here:. Robert Walker I usually get Facebook messages much faster than on the other platforms as I spend most of my day there.
FOR MORE HELP
To find a debunk see: List of articles in my Debunking Doomsday blog to date See also my Short debunks
Scared and want a story debunked? Post to our Facebook group. Please look over the group rules before posting or commenting as they help the group to run smoothly
Facebook group Doomsday Debunked
Also do join our facebook group if you can help with fact checking or to help scared people who are panicking.
SEARCH LIST OF DEBUNKS
You can search by title and there’s also an option to search the content of the blog using a google search.
CLICK HERE TO SEARCH: List of articles in my Debunking Doomsday blog to date
NEW SHORT DEBUNKS
I do many more fact checks and debunks on our facebook group than I could ever write up as blog posts. They are shorter and less polished but there is a good chance you may find a short debunk for some recent concern.
I often write them up as “short debunks”
See Latest short debunks for new short debunks
I also tweet the debunks and short debunks to my Blue Sky page here:
I do the short debunks more often but they are less polished - they are copies of my longer replies to scared people in the Facebook group.
I go through phases when I do lots of short debunks. Recently I’ve taken to converting comments in the group into posts in the group that resemble short debunks and most of those haven’t yet been copied over to the wiki.
TIPS FOR DEALING WITH DOOMSDAY FEARS
If suicidal or helping someone suicidal see my:
BLOG: Supporting someone who is suicidal
If you have got scared by any of this, health professionals can help. Many of those affected do get help and find it makes a big difference.
They can’t do fact checking, don’t expect that of them. But they can do a huge amount to help with the panic, anxiety, maladaptive responses to fear and so on.
Also do remember that therapy is not like physical medicine. The only way a therapist can diagnose or indeed treat you is by talking to you and listening to you. If this dialogue isn’t working for whatever reason do remember you can always ask to change to another therapist and it doesn’t reflect badly on your current therapist to do this.
Also check out my Seven tips for dealing with doomsday fears based on things that help those scared, including a section about ways that health professionals can help you.
I know that sadly many of the people we help can’t access therapy for one reason or another - usually long waiting lists or the costs.
There is much you can do to help yourself. As well as those seven tips, see my:
BLOG: Breathe in and out slowly and deeply and other ways to calm a panic attack
BLOG: Tips from CBT
— might help some of you to deal with doomsday anxieties
PLEASE DON’T COMMENT HERE WITH POTENTIALLY SCARY QUESTIONS ABOUT OTHER TOPICS - INSTEAD COMMENT ON POST SET UP FOR IT
If you have potentially scary questions about any other topic please post here: https://robertinventor.substack.com/p/post-to-comment-on-with-off-topic-29a Post to comment on, with off topic potentially scary comments - or send me a private message - or use our group on Facebook
The reason is I often aren't able to respond to comments for some time and the unanswered comment can scare people who come to this post for help on something else
Also even when answered the comment may scare them because they see it first.
It works much better to put comments on other topics on a special post for them.
It is absolutely fine to digress and go off topic in conversations here - this is specifically about things you want help with that might scare people.
PLEASE DON’T TELL A SCARED PERSON THAT THE THING THEY ARE SCARED OF IS TRUE WITHOUT A VERY RELIABLE SOURCE OR IF YOU ARE A VERY RELIABLE SOURCE YOURSELF - AND RESPOND WITH CARE
This is not like a typical post on substack. It is specifically to help people who are very scared with voluntary fact checking. Please no politically motivated exaggerations here. And please be careful, be aware of the context.
We have a rule in the facebook group and it is the same here.
If you are scared and need help it is absolutely fine to comment about anything to do with the topic ofo the post that scares you.
But if you are not scared or don’t want help with my voluntary fact checking please don’t comment with any scary material.
If you respond to scared people here please be careful with your sources. Don’t tell them that something they are scared of is true without excellent reliable sources, or if you are a reliable source yourself.
It also matters a lot exactly HOW you respond. E.g. if someone is in an area with a potential for earthquakes there’s a big difference between a reply that talks about the largest earthquake that’s possible there even when based on reliable sources, and says nothing about how to protect themselves and the same reply with a summary and link to measures to take to protect yourself in an earthquake.
Thanks!