The ‘big, beautiful bill’ could get ugly for Republicans

Congressional Republicans may soon discover that President Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” is not so “beautiful” for their hopes of retaining both chambers of Congress in next year’s midterm elections. 

Indeed, multiple polls have underscored the negative impact the bill may have on Republicans, potentially putting their House and Senate majorities in jeopardy. 

A mid-June poll from Fox News revealed that 59 percent of voters opposed the bill, versus just 38 percent who approved.

Similarly, a more recent Quinnipiac poll also found the bill considerably underwater, with 55 percent opposed compared to 29 percent in support. Among independents, the numbers are even worse. Roughly two-thirds 65 percent of political independents opposed the bill, with just one-fifth in favor, according to Quinnipiac.  

That’s hardly reassuring for a bill Trump has made his signature piece of legislation.  

To be sure, the bill’s divisiveness was reflected in its extremely narrow passage. In the Senate, Vice President JD Vance had to deliver the tiebreaking vote, despite Republicans having a three-seat majority.  

And in the House, it took significant arm twisting by Trump and Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) to pass the Senate’s version of the bill. 

Complicating matters for congressional Republicans is that they found themselves between a rock and a hard place. Voting against the bill risked drawing Trump’s ire and a potential primary challenger. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) found this out when he voted against the bill, then announced his retirement after Trump threatened to back a primary challenger. 

On the other hand, voting for it, particularly for Republicans from purple districts, may anger voters who find their federal benefits gutted.

To that end, Republicans’ recent gains with lower-income, working-class voters presents a unique political challenge. 

Fifteen years ago, Republicans represented just 26 of the 100 lowest-income House districts. As of 2023, that had more than doubled to 56, according to an analysis by the Wall Street Journal.  

What that means is that Republicans now have significantly more constituents dependent on federal programs like Medicaid, which is due for a cut between $800 million and $1 trillion under the bill, potentially costing 8-10 million people medical coverage, per the Congressional Budget Office.

Notably, opposition by Republicans, including self-described “MAGA Republicans,” grows significantly when they learn that the bill would decrease funding for local hospitals and take health insurance away from millions of people.

Polling by the Kaiser Family Foundation shows that while 61 percent of Republicans and 72 percent of “MAGA Republicans” initially support the bill, that drops massively after they are told more about the bill.

When told that funding for local hospitals would decrease under the bill, almost two-thirds (64 percent) of Republicans and a majority (55 percent) of MAGA Republicans view the bill “unfavorably.”

A similar effect occurs when respondents learned that roughly 10 million people will lose health coverage. After hearing that, nearly 6 in 10 (59 percent) of Republicans and 52 percent of MAGA Republicans have an unfavorable view of the legislation.  

Interestingly, concern over cutbacks to federal benefits is not the only hurdle Republicans face in trying to make their case to constituents.  

As Elon Musk and other fiscal hawks have argued, the bill calls for a drastic increase in the national debt.  

There are legitimate arguments on both sides over just how much the bill would add to the deficit, but the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates a bit more than $3 trillion over 10 years. 

To that end, Democrats are already gearing up to take advantage of widespread discontent over the bill. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee recently released a memo detailing how to hammer Republicans in next year’s midterms. 

The bill’s largesse also gives Democrats a number of attack angles. Whether it’s concerns surrounding spending, or arguments that Trump is giving tax cuts to the rich while cutting federal assistance for lower-income Americans, even a Democratic Party struggling to form a coherent message should have an easy time.

For their part, Republicans seem aware of the vulnerabilities exposed by the bill. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) promised that once voters hear all of the provisions, they will come around. And other Republican officials have tried portraying Democrats as being in favor of “increasing taxes on hardworking Americans” by opposing the extension of Trump’s 2017 tax cuts.

One problem Republicans have with this messaging, however, is that most Americans may not even recognize the tax benefits. Given that this bill extends existing tax cuts, most voters will see negligible changes to what they pay.

Republicans will argue that the extended tax cuts and deregulation that the bill includes will spur economic growth, which the administration believes will offset the impact on the deficit. Moreover, efforts to reduce waste or fraud in federal programs could be well received, along with increased funding for defense and border security. 

However, by cramming so many priorities into one bill — Trump’s preference — and choosing to pass it by reconciliation, Republicans were forced to take a hatchet to programs relied on by millions of Americans, including their own voters. 

As Edward Luce noted in the Financial Times, Republicans have been down this road before. In 2005, former President Bush wanted to privatize Social Security, and the ensuing anger contributed to Democrats gaining 31 seats in the House and five in the Senate in the 2006 midterms.

However, the consequences for Republicans may be even more pronounced this time compared to 20 years ago. Bush’s effort was eventually scrapped, but this bill has already been signed. 

Ultimately, the precise impact of the “big, beautiful bill” will only be revealed in full next November. But right now, it does not augur well for Republicans. If millions of Americans fall through the social safety net, it stands to reason that they will take their anger out on the party that pushed for such an outcome. 

Douglas E. Schoen and Carly Cooperman are pollsters and partners with the public opinion company Schoen Cooperman Research based in New York. They are co-authors of the book, “America: Unite or Die.”