Democrats on Capitol Hill have spent plenty of time over the last couple of weeks shining a spotlight on what they say are the destructive effects of President Donald Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill.”
You will not be surprised to learn that U.S. Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., has been among the most vocal critics of the deficit-shattering mega-bill, which some experts say shreds social safety net programs to pay for trillions of dollars in tax cuts, mainly for the wealthiest Americans.
Markey and other Democrats have tried to peel off Republican support on their side of Capitol Hill by driving home the bill’s impact on Red States.
One biggie: The $793 billion in Medicaid cuts envisioned by the bill would hit rural Americans and the small hospitals that serve them. And they’re mainly represented by Republicans.
In Massachusetts, the cuts could cost the state’s health care system $1.75 billion, affecting 250,000 people, according to the Healey administration.
Last week, Markey and other Democratic lawmakers put some numbers behind that story, rolling out a raft of data revealing that more than 300 rural hospitals are at a “disproportionate” risk of closing or seeing service reductions because of the legislation, making an existing problem even worse.
They sent those findings to President Donald Trump, U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D.
“In 2023, there were 50 fewer rural hospitals than in 2017, and lack of health care access in rural America is contributing to worse health outcomes,” Markey said during a news conference on Capitol Hill.
“We all know what happens when you kick millions of people off their health insurance coverage. Rural hospitals will not get paid for the services which they provide,” he continued. “And the results of these Medicaid cuts are undeniable, which is why they are so unconscionable.”
For instance, 33 hospitals in Louisiana, 35 hospitals in Kentucky and 21 hospitals in Oklahoma could be affected because of the large number of Medicaid patients they serve, according to the lawmakers.
Other states represented by Republicans that also could be affected include Alabama, Alaska, Tennessee and West Virginia, the lawmakers said.
“For new mothers and families and addiction care and mental health, and even emergency room care, some hospitals may have to convert to clinics or standalone emergency centers, or even close altogether,” Markey said. “If rural hospitals close, it means that someone having a heart attack will have to wait longer for an EMS, someone giving birth would have to travel farther to get care.”
U.S. Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., who joined Markey at that news conference, focused on the broader impact the bill would have on the nation’s health care system.
“ Well, by now, everybody knows that the big ugly bill that the Republicans are pushing would decimate our health care system. Certainly Medicaid, but also people [who receive coverage through the Affordable Care Act], also, people who have private insurance, and now Medicare as well,” Schumer asserted.
“It would rip away coverage from 16 million people, send health care costs for 22 million through the roof, cut 2 million jobs and gut funding for hospitals, nursing homes and other crucial health care providers,” he continued.
Some Republicans, including U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley, D-Mo., appear receptive to that message. And it’s widely known that the Senate will amend the bill before it sends it back to the House.
In a New York Times op-Ed, Hawley accused the party’s “Wall Street Wing” of prioritizing “corporate giveaways,” and “preferences for capital” ahead of Trump’s promise to protect “working-class social insurance” programs such as Medicaid.
“This wing of the party wants Republicans to build our big, beautiful bill around slashing health insurance for the working poor,” Hawley said. “But that argument is both morally wrong and politically suicidal.”
During their news conference last week, Markey and Schumer put the ball firmly in the GOP’s court.
For Republicans, it’s a balancing act, with polling showing that a majority of Americans oppose the legislation, even as support among the base remains strong.
“It’s not too late to stop these cuts,” Schumer said. “It’s not too late. The Republicans are trying to put together their bill in the Finance Committee. The bill isn’t done yet. Republicans should make their voices heard.”
Republicans are aiming to put a finished bill on Trump’s desk by the July 4 holiday. That means there’s still time for GOP dissenters to voice their concerns — but not a lot of it.
U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., pressed U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on whether he believed the Trump White House’s domestic policy mega-bill would blow up the deficit, which most projections show it would.
“Every credible, independent expert agrees that Trump and the Republicans’ ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ will add trillions to the national debt and would not even come close to paying for itself,” Warren said during a meeting of the Senate Finance Committee last week “Even Elon Musk and the Wall Street Journal are criticizing the bill for ballooning the national debt.”
Bessent teased Warren for agreeing with Musk, whom she’s publicly pilloried for his work with the quasi-governmental Department of Government Efficiency.
“You’re no more shocked than I am,” she joked.
Bessent conceded that the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office had projected that the bill would add $2.4 trillion to the deficit, though “I don’t agree with their methodology.”
A separate CBO analysis, he added, had shown that the White House’s tariff regime would raise $2.8 trillion, meaning the nation would come out $400 billion to the good.
Warren did not agree.
“ So let me make sure I understand this … you admit [it] will increase the deficit by $2.4 trillion,” she said. “But you think there will be another bill and another set of agreements that somehow materialize, haven’t materialized so far?”
“ I want to use all the … CBO scoring and you can’t take one without the other,” Bessent argued.
You can watch the video of the full exchange here.
A majority of voters (53%) in three New England states — Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Rhode Island — have given the thumbs-down to the Trump administration’s hardline immigration policies.
That’s the bottom line from a Suffolk University/Boston Globe regional poll that dropped last week. The survey of 1,000 registered voters was conducted between June 1 and June 5, before anti-immigration protests broke out in Los Angeles and other cities.
All told, 41% of respondents supported the White House’s mass deportation policy. Although the margin was closer among white voters, with 43% supporting it, compared to 52% who opposed it.
Opposition grew to 61% among Black and Hispanic respondents, with 30% supporting the policy, according to the poll.
In New Hampshire, where more than 90% of registered voters are white, 54% supported deportations, compared to 38% who opposed them.
Three-quarters of respondents (76%) said they were “very” or “somewhat” sympathetic to migrants who came to New England. And nearly 6 in 10 (58%) said they strongly disapproved of the arrest and detention of Tufts University graduate student Rümeysa Öztürk.
Some other numbers in the poll:
46%: The percentage of New England voters who ranked the U.S. economy as only “fair.”
28%: The percentage of regional voters who ranked the U.S. economy as “poor.”
68%: The percentage of respondents who said the country is headed in the wrong direction.
57%: The percentage of respondents who said they “strongly disapproved” of Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s handling of arrests and deportations.
74%: The percentage of respondents who said the U.S. should not end “birthright citizenship” for the children of people who entered the country illegally.
The poll had an overall margin of error of 3.1% and 3.6% for a separate sample of 740 respondents from Massachusetts.
“The shield law is something we worked on with the attorney general starting in November, because we were really concerned about what was going to happen. So while Steering and Policy is looking at a number of bills that we think are reactions to what the government does … this one was prime. It was ready.”
— State Sen. Cynthia Friedman, D-4th Middlesex, on legislation bolstering a 2022 law that shields reproductive and transgender care providers from out-of-state and federal threats, according to State House News Service. The legislation received a favorable report from the Senate members of the Joint Committee on the Judiciary last week. Friedman is also the chairperson of the Senate’s Steering and Policy Committee, which is coordinating the majority-Democrat chamber’s response to the Trump administration.
Shoppers, mark your calendars. State lawmakers last week tapped Aug. 9 and Aug. 10 as this year’s sales tax-free weekend. That means the state’s 6.25% sales tax is suspended for most retail items that cost less than $2,500, according to MASSterList.
The music world lost a legend last week with the death of Beach Boys founder Brian Wilson, aged 82. Full disclosure: I think “Pet Sounds,” the band’s 1966 magnum opus, is the greatest pop record ever made. And I was lucky enough to see Wilson when he toured behind the rejiggered “SMILE” LP in 2004. It’s still one of the best shows I’ve ever seen.
So we’ll go with an iconic “Pet Sounds” track this week — but not in the way you might think. Here’s the instrumental backing track for “Wouldn’t It Be Nice.” It is, indeed, as Wilson might have said (of SMILE), a “teenage symphony to God.” Rest in peace.
Here’s an appropriately beachy/summery item to follow Brian Wilson and The Beach Boys.
Surfer magazine has the story of California-based Hog Island Oyster Company, whose founder and CEO, John Finger, started the company 40 years ago with $500 in his pocket and a small plot of five acres.
The company now farms 160 acres, and it’s emerged as an example of how ocean farming can help solve some very modern sustainability issues, the magazine reported.
Here’s the germane bit:
“Since 1983 John and friends have been hard at work in Tomales Bay and the fruits of their labor show just how much the ocean can provide when the goal isn’t just to extract but to also regenerate. While they have been harvesting oysters for decades, they recently received the first permit in California to harvest Nori, a naturally occurring seaweed that grows on their oyster cages. Nori, along with other sea-based plants like kelp, are not only essential to the health of marine ecosystems-they could open up immense opportunities for new foods, fuel and innovative products (like seaweed-based plastics) all of which would greatly benefit our economy.”
