Here's how our liberal "Republican" Senators screwed us on the Big Bloated Bill:

Changes to phase-outs of clean energy tax credits in the bill remained central to the final hours of debate among Republicans, as hard-line conservatives have called for strict, swift cuts and more centrist lawmakers pushed for extended wind-downs to avoid major market and investment disruptions.

The now-passed Senate bill includes steep cuts for these tax credits, ending incentives for wind and solar projects placed in service, meaning operational and plugged into the grid, by the end of 2027.

Moderates were able to squeeze in a carve-out allowing projects that begin construction less than one year after the bill is enacted to claim the credit. Any projects that start construction after that time frame must be operational and in service by 2027 to be eligible.

This is a fake cut: they have rigged these "cuts" so that no money will be cut at all.

Senate fails to terminate Green New Scam

The Senate bill *looks like* it has a 2027 "placed in service" cutoff for new solar/wind subsidies.

But one last-minute paragraph makes it worthless--because projects making a recoverable 5% investment in the next 12 months are exempt!

The idea of a 2027 "placed in service" cutoff was that new subsidies would actually end during the Trump administration.

But under the last-minute carveout, Big Green has 12 months to initiate as many subsidized projects as it wants using the insanely-easy-to-meet "construction" threshold. (All you need to do is commit 5% of expected project cost to buying re-sellable assets like solar panels.)

Once they declare "construction"--e.g., in July 2026--they'll have 4 years (e.g., July 2030) to "place in service." And then some of those projects, e.g., most wind projects, will get 10 years of subsidies.

So we'll still have wind subsidies on Donald Trump's 94th birthday!

Here's how much worse the Senate bill just got:

* Two days ago: "Placed in service" by 12-31-27--with new subsidized solar/wind projects stopping very quickly, and Trump being able to let subsidies truly end.

* Today: "Placed in service" by JULY 2030--with new subsidized solar/wind projects absolutely spamming the rid and ripping off taxpayers like never before, and Trump having no control over whether the subsidies end.

The current Senate bill is arguably worse than the original Senate Finance one. At least that bill decreased solar/wind subsidies starting in 2026 to 60%. The current bill just increased them to 100%.

The current bill is a solar/wind lobbyist's dream. It does not terminate the Green New Scam in any way, shape or form. It absolutely perpetuates it. And offensively so, I might add, by keeping the "placed in service" cutoff language so many people courageously fought for, then totally undoing it with a single last-minute paragraph that makes it worthless.

If the Senate wanted to extend the Green New Scam it should have said so, not insulted our intelligence by trying to bury the extension in one sneaky little paragraph.

PS Several Senators have already told me they didn't know about or understand this last-minute paragraph. If that's the case they should do whatever they can to fix the situation.

An unnamed Republican congressman sounds off about the "shit sandwich" the Senate RINOs are trying to force on the House.

But unfortunately he's not calling for more cuts, but for fewer. He objects to the Senate cutting Medicaid.

Reese Gorman
@reesejgorman

Vibe check in the House from one GOP member:

"The Senate took a bill that had a year's worth of work in it - and in a month turned it into a shit sandwich. They're trying to jam the House, because they think they're this sacred body. In reality they're sending back a bill that members of my Congress can't defend because they don't understand Medicaid like they need to."

The Hill talks about the Medicaid cuts in the Senate version of the Big Bloated Bill.

Senate Republicans on Tuesday passed the largest cuts to Medicaid since the program began in the 1960s, a move that would erode the social safety net and cause a spike in the number of uninsured Americans over the next decade.

The tax and spending bill is projected to cost more than $3 trillion during that time, but it would be partially paid for with about $1 trillion in cuts to Medicaid.

Almost 12 million lower-income Americans would lose their health insurance by 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

It still needs to pass the House again, where some moderate Republicans have expressed concerns about the cuts.

The Washington Examiner's fact check says that Medicaid isn't being cut, only the rate of growth is being slowed. But it does impose work requirements on able-bodied adults without children who were allowed to enroll in Medicaid by Obama.

Senate Republicans are defending their changes to federal Medicaid spending in their final push to pass President Donald Trump's budget reconciliation bill before Independence Day, arguing that the bill does not technically cut the health insurance program for disabled and low-income people.

Republican leadership has insisted for weeks that the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is not primarily a healthcare reform package, but reductions in Medicaid spending have been a crucial piece to recoup some of the costs from the sweeping tax cuts that take center stage in the legislation.

...

Democrats have waged a multimonth campaign against what Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has called the "big ugly betrayal" by saying that the bill will decimate coverage for low-income people.

...

"We are fiscally making Medicaid more sound," Marshall said. "It's only in Washington, D.C., that you increase spending at a rate faster than inflation and you call it a cut."

Sen. Ted Budd (R-NC) posted on X on Sunday evening that Medicaid spending has increased by more than 200% since 2008 and by roughly 51% since 2019, largely due to increases in enrollment from the Medicaid expansion population of able-bodied adults without dependents.

The Congressional Budget Office's projected federal spending on Medicaid and Obamacare increased by $1.9 trillion, increasing 25% from 2021 to 2025, according to conservative think tank the Paragon Health Institute.

Robing Rudowitz, vice president at the healthcare think tank KFF and Medicaid policy specialist, told the Washington Examiner that the CBO's analysis of the most up-to-date version of the bill "will reduce federal Medicaid spending over the next ten years by about $1 trillion relative to expected federal spending without the legislation."

Much of the spending cuts come from imposing work requirements on able-bodied adults without dependents and changing federal reimbursement rates for the Medicaid expansion population.

Medicaid eligibility was extended to able-bodied adults without dependents under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, better known as Obamacare.

No wonder that craven RINO congressman spoke anonymously, and to the left-leaning The Hill.

Unrelated: What's a Cuck Chair?

What's a cuck chair? You might have seen the term online, often in jokes about hotel rooms. But is there more to it?

A "cuck chair" is a slang term for a chair facing a bed, linked to the idea of passivity. The word "cuck" comes from "cuckold," an old term for a man with an unfaithful wife.

In this post, you'll learn the history behind the term, its cultural impact, and why the meme continues to spread.

...
The term "cuck chair" has an unusual yet fascinating history, deeply rooted in language evolution, cultural shifts, and internet meme culture. While it may seem like a recent phenomenon, its origins trace back centuries to the words "cuck" and "cuckold."

...

In contemporary online debates, the term often symbolizes perceived emasculation or powerlessness, particularly in discussions surrounding masculinity and vulnerability. This usage appears frequently in social media, forums, and satirical commentary.

Design Features of a Cuck Chair

Traditional Design

Historically, cuck chairs were designed for practicality and affordability, often found in homes of the less affluent. Their defining characteristics include:

Armless Design A simple structure without armrests, making it easier to move and reposition.

Low-Seated Typically sits lower than standard chairs, emphasizing a subtle, passive seating posture.

Portable & Lightweight Designed for convenience rather than comfort, allowing for easy relocation.

You'll want it light so you can move it to the closet at your convenience.

These features made cuck chairs affordable and functional. They were often used as secondary seating, not meant for extended relaxation but rather temporary use in different settings.