Just before 7:00 a.m. on May 22, the US House of Representatives passed the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” by a 215–214 vote. The sweeping tax and spending legislation massively expands funding for the border Gestapo and military, delivers enormous tax cuts to the wealthy, and slashes essential social programs, including Medicaid, Medicare and food assistance relied on by millions.
The bill would engineer the most significant transfers of wealth from the working class to the ruling oligarchy in recent memory. Analyses by the Penn Wharton Budget Model, the Tax Policy Center, and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) all found that the legislation overwhelmingly benefits the rich while increasing the burden on the working class.
In a May 20 letter, the CBO wrote: “The agency estimates that in general, resources would decrease for households in the lowest decile of the income distribution, whereas resources would increase for households in the highest decile.”
Thursday’s vote followed a marathon committee session conducted through the evening. The rushed process prevented the CBO from issuing an updated analysis of the bill’s latest cuts to Medicaid. However, a prior CBO estimate projected that imposing work requirements and excluding immigrants from eligibility would strip at least 8.6 million people of health insurance.
Two Republicans—Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Warren Davidson of Ohio—voted against the bill, arguing it did not go far enough in cutting spending. Representative Andy Harris of Maryland voted “present.” All House Democrats voted against the bill.
The bill is advancing through Congress via a process known as reconciliation, which prevents a filibuster in the Senate and allows passage with a simple majority rather than the usual 60 votes. While the bill is not expected to pass the Senate in its current form, Republicans hold a three-seat majority and have indicated they hope to send it to Trump’s desk by July 4.
As currently written, the measure is expected to add between $3.8 trillion and $5 trillion to the US deficit while eviscerating what remains of the social safety net for millions. The most significant cuts target Medicaid—the primary insurer for the elderly and poor—and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the main food assistance program in the US. The CBO estimates that over ten years, cuts to these programs will total $698 billion and $267 billion, respectively.
Previous versions of the bill delayed the implementation of Medicaid work requirements and SNAP cuts until 2029. However, to secure support from the ultra-right House Freedom Caucus, the latest version moves up these provisions to 2026.
Medicaid work requirements have already been implemented in states like Arkansas and Georgia. Even when residents meet the criteria, many are removed from the program due to bureaucratic obstacles deliberately designed to deny access.
The bill passed Thursday mandates a 30 percent cut to federal funding for SNAP, the program that provided food assistance to nearly 17 million children in 2023. About 81 percent of SNAP recipients live below the poverty line.
The legislation is expected to increase the federal debt, which will trigger a process known as “sequestration,” requiring mandatory budget cuts. The CBO estimated that cuts to Medicare due to sequestration could reach as high as 4 percent, or $490 billion over 10 years.
All of this is aimed at enriching the ultra-wealthy. According to Penn Wharton’s Budget Model, the top 1 percent—those making more than $1 million annually—would receive an average after-tax windfall of $44,190, amounting to a 2 percent boost in their income.
The top 0.1 percent—those making more than $5 million a year—would receive a 3 percent tax cut, translating to an average gain of $390,000. In stark contrast, the poorest 10 percent of the population would see their incomes drop by an average of $940.
The assault on workers’ social and economic rights is matched by an attack on core democratic rights. Buried in the over 1,000-page bill is a provision that would effectively bar federal courts from holding government officials in contempt when they violate court orders—a tactic the Trump administration has increasingly employed over the past 123 days.
The provision reads:
No court of the United States may use appropriated funds to enforce a contempt citation for failure to comply with an injunction or temporary restraining order if no security was given when the injunction or order was issued pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(c), whether issued prior to, on, or subsequent to the date of enactment of this section.
In practice, this provision means that if a court issues a temporary injunction—such as to stop the Trump administration from deporting immigrants to foreign gulags without due process—it cannot enforce its own order unless a bond was posted at the time. This imposes a class-based barrier to even accessing the courts and would make it nearly impossible to enforce rulings against the federal government or major corporations.
University of California, Berkeley law professor Erwin Chemerinsky noted in a comment on the provision that federal courts “rarely require that a bond be posted by those who are restraining unconstitutional federal, state, or local government actions. Those seeking such court orders generally do not have the resources to post a bond, and insisting on it would immunize unconstitutional government conduct from judicial review.” This, of course, is precisely the purpose.
The bill also greatly expands the border Gestapo, providing over $70 billion in funding to carry out mass deportations and mass incarceration. For the first time in US history, the bill imposes a fee—a staggering $1,000—on those applying for asylum. If a family member or friend wants to sponsor an unaccompanied child who arrives at the border, the fee is $3,500.
In touting nearly 20 regressive fees on immigrants and those applying for work permits in the US, Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee gloated, “We’re shifting the cost of adjudication in the immigration system from the American taxpayer to aliens.”
As the bill makes its way to the Senate, at least one Republican—Rand Paul of Kentucky—has already indicated he will vote against it due to the projected increase in the national debt. The version passed on Thursday includes a $4 trillion increase to the debt ceiling, while the version advancing through the Senate proposes raising the limit by an even larger $5 trillion.
In a perfunctory statement released after the passage of the bill, Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries claimed Democrats “will continue to use every tool at our disposal” to stop passage of the bill.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer—who less than two months ago rallied Democratic support to pass a spending bill that kept the government open while the Trump administration continued laying off federal workers, slashing budgets, and disappearing immigrants and students—released a video statement in which he promised Senate Democrats would fight the bill “tooth and nail.”
The Democrats in fact are doing nothing to stop passage of the bill, involving either tooth or nail. They are opposed to any mobilization of the working class against the actions of the Trump administration and in fact share the basic aim of paying for war and the bailout of the rich through the escalating assault on social programs.