By Matt Underwood Tillis becomes the third GOP senator to voice opposition to this massive bill that’s been making waves, or perhaps more accurately, causing a lot of consternation. It seems like there’s a real push to get this thing rammed through before the public can even fully grasp what’s in it. Many believe the primary motivation behind this urgency is to get those 2017 tax cuts, the ones that everyone knows are unsustainable, locked in for the long term. This also means they’re looking to raid essential programs like Medicaid and food assistance to make the numbers work – quite the political balancing act, right?
The general consensus seems to be that this is all just political theater, a carefully choreographed performance designed to create the illusion of dissent. The theory goes that a few senators will be allowed to publicly oppose the bill, offering a semblance of a fight, but in the end, they’ll fall in line. The implication is that the final vote will inevitably favor the bill. It’s also theorized that the bill’s passage is connected to Trump’s ego. The deadline of July 4th, set to coincide with the American holiday, suggests that Trump is using this to bolster his reputation.
Now, Susan Collins of Maine has also expressed some reservations, stating she might vote against the bill if it’s not changed. This highlights a pattern in this situation, where there’s a game being played, where no means “maybe later.” The fear is that when the rubber meets the road, these senators will simply follow the party line. The idea is that they will vote in favor of the bill, after making it appear as though they are not.
There’s also a strong sense of skepticism towards the Republican party’s commitment to fiscal responsibility. Many perceive the bill as a giveaway to the wealthy, especially if taxes are raised on the poor to accomplish it. Furthermore, there’s a lot of doubt that Republicans will actually hold firm, given their historical pattern of giving in under pressure.
It’s also been mentioned that the timing of this bill’s push coincides with a recent loss of life in the Senate and House of Representatives, which might facilitate the vote. This has the appearance of being opportunistic, to get it pushed through without too much public scrutiny. It seems the public is being shut out.
The concern is that these elected officials are not representing their constituents and are prioritizing their own political goals. While some claim that the bill isn’t harmful enough, others claim that it’s too cruel, but regardless, it seems there is a clear consensus that the bill will likely pass.
Finally, the number of dissenters seems to have increased, with more and more names being tossed in the ring, namely Rand Paul, Tom Tillis, and Josh Hawley. Given this, it seems more and more likely that this will pass.