Loading the Elevenlabs Text to Speech AudioNative Player...

One big beautiful bill or two smaller but more manageable ones? That’s the question congressional Republicans asked when President Donald Trump laid out his plan for government funding, tax breaks, and the rest of the commander-in-chief’s admittedly ambitious legislative agenda.

The one-bill faction seemed to win the debate, and a framework was eventually agreed upon. Now, however, GOP congressmen are struggling to agree on much of anything about the big beautiful bill – which, in their hands, might be called more of a bungled boondoggle.

There is no shortage of points upon which Republicans might disagree with one another, but the most time-sensitive seems to be the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. It expires this year, and, without renewal, personal income taxes will go up. In crafting the reconciliation bill that would fund the government for another year, most of the GOP is onboard with at least a partial renewal. The difference, however, lies in just what parts.

That idea certainly has its GOP supporters. However, it has its opposition, as well. The Republican Party has traditionally been against tax hikes for anyone, and some won’t waver from that position.

Liberty Nation depends on the support of our readers. Donate now!

Other options include a debt limit increase and an overhaul of the Medicaid system. That last point is about as controversial as the potential tax increase. Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-KY), chair of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, suggested Thursday, as lawmakers left the Capitol for the weekend, that there was no consensus on whether to cap Medicaid spending. The committee is tasked with finding $880 billion to cut, a tall order without touching Medicaid.

There are, apparently, some discussions of potential “per capita” caps as a sort of middle ground between the moderates who don’t want to touch Medicaid at all and those who would prefer to slash spending there. Despite the apparent lack of cohesion, the committee is scheduled to begin markup on the bill as early as Tuesday afternoon.

Moderate Republicans in the House hope to lift the SALT (state and local tax) cap from $10,000 to $30,000 to grant constituents in higher-taxed states more relief. Some lawmakers in the SALT caucus, however – namely Reps. Elise Stefanik, Andrew Garbarino, Nick LaLota, and Mike Lawler – call the $30,000 proposal a nonstarter – it’s simply not enough.

“We’ve negotiated in good faith on SALT from the start – fighting for the taxpayers we represent in New York. Yet with no notice or agreement, the Speaker and the House Ways and Means Committee unilaterally proposed a flat $30,000 SALT cap – an amount they already knew would fall short of earning our support,” the group wrote in a statement. “It’s not just insulting – it risks derailing President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill.”

On top of the division in these three individual issues, some in the House GOP refuse to sign off on anything they think won’t pass the Senate. It’s a waste of time, they argue, and an insult to the work they do and the legislative process. But what happens the next time the various groups of House Republicans can’t agree on the particulars? How long will the stalemate last? It’s enough to make anyone reconsider the wisdom of shooting for one big beautiful bill instead of the Senate’s original proposal of two, each of which would, in theory, be easier to pass individually. Still, with so many points of contention, it would be a Herculean task to draft legislation that a sufficient number of Republicans across both houses can get behind.

So, how does one craft a bill that cuts federal spending without adding to the deficit, increasing taxes for anyone, or cutting into Medicaid, and all the while pleasing enough of the party to get a sufficient majority to pull it off? If you figure that one out, make sure to let the GOP know.