On July 1, local time, the U.S. Senate narrowly approved President Trump’s core legislative agenda, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), with a vote of 51 in favor and 50 against. Following this, the House of Representatives, which had passed a different version of the bill in May, will reconsider the Senate’s version and work to reconcile the differences between the two chambers, aiming to complete all legislative procedures before Trump’s self-imposed deadline of July 4 — U.S. Independence Day — to get the bill to Trump for signing into law.
This marks another major legislative victory for Trump, following his recent success in the U.S. Supreme Court regarding the abolition of birthright citizenship.
Currently, the Republican and Democratic parties control 53 and 47 seats in the Senate, respectively. This means that if four Republican senators join the Democrats in voting against the One Big Beautiful Bill, the bill would fail in the Senate. Ultimately, three Republican senators joined all Democrats in voting against the bill — Thom Tillis of North Carolina, Susan Collins of Maine, and Rand Paul of Kentucky.
After all 100 senators voted, the result was a tie, 50-50. Ultimately, Vice President Vance, who also serves as Senate President, cast the tie-breaking vote, allowing the bill to narrowly pass in the first round of voting. To prepare for this potential outcome, Vance had been on standby in the Senate since early that morning. Earlier on May 22, the One Big Beautiful Bill had also narrowly passed the first round of voting in the House of Representatives, with a vote of 215 to 214.
This massive tax reduction and spending bill, spanning over 900 pages, covers nearly every policy area in the United States, focusing on Trump’s MAGA agenda of tax cuts, energy deregulation, and tightening immigration laws, while also addressing issues like Social Security, defense, gun control, and social diversity. The Senate made adjustments to details such as spending levels, timelines, and eligibility criteria based on the House version.
In the days leading up to the Senate vote, complex debates within the Republican Party over the extent of spending cuts and social welfare spending, such as Medicaid, had made the bill’s timely passage seem uncertain. However, after the Senate narrowly passed the key procedural vote to begin debate on the bill with a two-vote margin on June 28, the possibility of the bill facing significant hurdles in the Senate had significantly decreased.
Moderate conservative senators, especially those facing midterm elections in 2026, prioritized not reducing Medicaid spending too much. But a few fiscal conservatives, advocating for a “small government” approach, were unhappy with the bill’s lack of significant federal spending cuts, arguing that it would worsen the U.S. deficit over the next decade, particularly during Trump’s term from 2025 to 2029.
Among the three senators who voted against the bill, Thom Tillis, a North Carolina senator since 2015, shocked many by announcing after publicly opposing the One Big Beautiful Bill that he would not seek re-election in 2026. Trump had been critical of Tillis, labeling him a “talker and complainer.” Trump also threatened to meet with potential challengers in the 2026 midterm elections who might challenge Tillis.
Tillis issued a statement explaining that he did not support the Medicaid provisions in the bill because after the federal government reduces its funding, North Carolina would face an additional $30 billion in costs. He also criticized the lack of bipartisan cooperation in both parties and the failure of many politicians to understand how legislation would impact the lives of ordinary Americans.
Tillis stated that it was “not a difficult decision” to abandon his re-election bid. He also hinted that he might continue to publicly oppose the Republican majority and Trump during the remainder of his Senate term before the 2026 midterm elections.
Murkowski, the moderate conservative representative from Alaska, also voted in favor of the bill, but expressed that the vote was “painful.” Under Murkowski’s pressure, the Senate version of the bill included additional provisions for Alaska regarding food stamps, although she failed to secure more exemptions for the state regarding Medicaid reimbursements. Murkowski admitted she “didn’t get everything she wanted.”
Another senator, Rand Paul, opposed the bill mainly because of its impact on U.S. debt levels. On Murkowski’s crucial supportive vote, Paul openly criticized her, stating that while Alaska “got its protections,” the entire U.S. would have to bear the consequences.
Murkowski defended her stance, stating that her duty was to protect the people of Alaska, given the unique circumstances of the state.
Murkowski also criticized the U.S. Congress for accelerating the legislative process to meet the “artificial” July 4 deadline, instead of “really working to create the best laws for the country.”
On the Democratic side, Democrats, who have been comprehensively suppressed in the U.S. political arena, delayed the vote by reading the entire 940-page bill aloud before debating the bill. This took over 10 hours. Afterward, amendments to the bill text were proposed and voted on, which took another 26 hours. By the time the vote finally took place, senators had endured several days and nights of marathon work in the U.S. Capitol.
After the One Big Beautiful Bill was approved by the House over a month ago, many believed that the Senate would push for further reductions in spending and deficits, following principles of fiscal discipline. However, in the current versions of the two chambers, the House version raises the U.S. debt ceiling to $40 trillion, while the Senate version raises it to $50 trillion. The House may have to negotiate and compromise further on issues such as Medicaid spending before approving the Senate’s version of the bill.
The U.S. Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reported on June 29 that the House version would increase the U.S. deficit by an additional $2.4 trillion over the next decade, while the Senate version would increase it by $3.3 trillion.
The core provision of the bill is the reduction of corporate taxes. The House version only extends the tax cuts from 2025 to 2029, which coincides with the end of Trump’s presidency, while the Senate version makes the tax cuts permanent.
One of the most contentious spending items — Medicaid spending — was further reduced in the Senate version. The CBO predicts that 10.9 million people will lose Medicaid coverage under the House version by 2034, and 11.8 million under the Senate version. The Senate version also raises the reporting requirements for insurers, cutting the state-imposed tax rate caps for Medicaid providers by almost half. Under these adjustments, federal spending on Medicaid, Medicare, and the Affordable Care Act is expected to be reduced by about $1.1 trillion over the next decade compared to the House version.
In terms of pressure on elite American institutions, the Senate version was more moderate, but this also meant that the federal government’s revenue increase was less than that of the House version. Currently, many U.S. universities’ investment income is taxed at 1.4%, and the House version raises this rate to 21%, while the Senate version reduces it to 8%.
On immigration enforcement, the differences between the House and Senate versions are minimal. Both allocated $46.5 billion to continue building the U.S.-Mexico border wall, increase hiring and training for U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers, and build more detention facilities for illegal immigrants.
In the energy sector, the House version will repeal Biden’s $7,500 tax credit for purchasing electric vehicles by December 2025, while the Senate version will repeal it earlier, by September 2025. The House version will phase out tax credits for solar and other clean energy projects by 2028, while the Senate version will end these incentives by 2027 and impose additional taxes on projects related to wind and solar energy if their supply chains are linked to China.
Near the time of the vote, Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who had kept a relatively low profile since his public fallout with Trump in early June, began a new round of public exchanges with Trump online. Musk criticized the bill as “super stupid and destructive,” arguing it would destroy “sunrise industries,” lead to the loss of millions of American jobs, and cause “huge strategic damage.” Musk also criticized the spending bill for turning the U.S. into a “debt slave” and vowed to make every congressman who supports the bill lose their next election.
Trump quickly countered, claiming that Musk had received “more government subsidies than anyone in history.” In a response to reporters, Trump threatened to “consider” whether to expel Musk from the U.S.
Senate Republican Leader John Thune, who had just become Senate Majority Leader in January 2025, faced his first major legislative challenge with the One Big Beautiful Bill. In the past few weeks, Thune had been mediating and balancing the different factions within the Republican Party. Unlike House Speaker Johnson, Thune remained more low-key, but after the Senate passed the bill, he said, “In the end, we got the job done.”
Upon hearing the news that the bill had successfully passed in the Senate, Trump, who was in Florida attending a public event about detaining illegal immigrants, remarked that the news “sounded like music to my ears.”
Trump also quickly posted a lengthy message on social media, congratulating the Senate for passing the bill. He claimed that everyone in America would benefit from the bill and that the tax cuts would trigger “huge growth” in the U.S. economy. He also urged House Republicans to stay united and approve the Senate’s version as soon as possible, then send it to the White House for his signature.
However, according to multiple public opinion polls conducted in June by Pew, Quinnipiac, The Washington Post, and Fox News, 49%, 53%, 42%, and 59% of Americans opposed the spending bill championed by Trump, with approval ratings of only 29%, 27%, 23%, and 38%, respectively.