Critics of the Big Beautiful Bill ‘Are Going to Be Wrong,’ Johnson Warns

For months, the bright lights have been on the House, capturing the made-for-TV drama of the Republicans’ Houdini-like wins. And while people have come to appreciate House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) as a sort of consensus whisperer, no one is quite sure what to make of his Senate counterpart. But now that Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) is in the reconciliation hot seat, America is about to see what Mitch McConnell’s replacement is made of. And as far as first tests go, this is a biggie.

Thune, who’s had a front-row seat for the House debate, knows that the job that awaits is no picnic. Like the speaker, he understands a thing or two about small margins. With just three votes to spare and 53 different opinions on next steps, corralling his caucus will require a mix of patience and thick skin. After listening to his caucus pick apart the draft passed by Johnson’s chamber, Thune’s early message is one of caution. “It’ll have to track very closely to the House bill,” he warned Monday, “because they’ve got a fragile majority and struck a very delicate balance.”

That in itself is a shift from earlier weeks, when Thune seemed to agree with the Republicans eager to make sweeping changes. Now, the South Dakotan says more reservedly, “[T]here are some things that senators want to add to the bill or things we’d do slightly differently.” Based on the soundbites coming out of his caucus, that’s putting it mildly. Goldilocks herself would go mad trying to find the sweet spot between the five factions of senators with competing goals.

There’s the group demanding more spending cuts (Ron Johnson, Wis.; Mike Lee, Utah; Rick Scott, Fla.), and another worried they go too deep (Susan Collins, Maine; Lisa Murkowski, Alaska). There are the pro-Medicaid reform Republicans and the not-so-pro-overhaul Republicans (Josh Hawley, Mo.; Murkowski; Jerry Moran, Kan.; and Jim Justice, W.Va.). While some cheer the end of Biden’s “clean energy credits,” others pan them (Murkowski; Moran; Thom Tillis, N.C.; John Curtis, Utah). While Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) rages against the debt ceiling hike, the more rural state senators are fighting the other chamber’s changes to health and supplemental nutrition programs (Chuck Grassley, Iowa). And remember the SALT caucus of the House? Well, Senator Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) admitted, “There’s not one Republican in the United States Senate” who cares about the state and local tax deduction cap.

And that’s to say nothing of the give-and-take on tax levels, ranges of defense and border spending, and a million other flashpoints tucked in the 1,100-page draft. Add that to the Byrd Bath, which will decide what belongs in reconciliation and what doesn’t, and you have the makings of four long, stress-filled weeks. “There’s always some who think it’s too hot, some [who] think it’s too cold,” observer Neil Bradley shook his head. “Where do you find the point where a majority think it’s just right?”

Great question — one that Thune will be losing his share of sleep over. In the end, he told reporters, “We’ve got to do what we can get 51 [votes] for.”

Johnson can sympathize. In his weekend sit-down with Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, he spoke knowingly. “… [A]s all our friends in the Senate know, it took us over a year to reach that equilibrium point in the House,” he said on Saturday’s “This Week on Capitol Hill.” The most important takeaway, the speaker reminds Thune’s disgruntled Republicans, is that “we’re going to achieve over $1.5 trillion in savings. … It’s the largest amount of savings of any government that would ever be achieved in the history of mankind. It’s a good start. It’s not enough, but it’s a good start. And I think the Senate’s got to recognize that.”

One of the greatest misunderstandings — even with people in Washington — is that the reconciliation package was never meant to be the vehicle for all of the president’s spending cuts. When Elon Musk and others complain that the bill doesn’t reduce the deficit, there’s a fundamental disconnect about several things, the speaker underscores. For starters, he reminded everyone, “This is just the beginning of a long process. We’re going to have another reconciliation bill, possibly two additional bills, coming up in the near future.”

Secondly — and just as importantly — “you have to remember how the process works,” the speaker stressed. When Americans (including Musk) wonder why there aren’t more Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) cuts in the “one, big, beautiful bill,” it’s simple. “There are two categories of federal spending,” Johnson pointed out. “One is mandatory spending, one is discretionary. The reconciliation package [deals] with the first category, not the latter. So it was not possible — literally, under the rules of the Senate — for us to put DOGE cuts in large measure in the reconciliation package. That has to be a separate instrument.”

And that “separate instrument” is what the White House is working on right now: a rescissions package to roll back discretionary spending that was already approved. Thanks to the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, presidents can permanently cancel funding to executive agencies if it’s within a 45-day window and if a simple majority of Congress approves. As we speak, Donald Trump is teeing up the first “of many” rescission proposals, worth about $9.4 billion of waste, fraud, and abuse.

That, Johnson reiterated, is what Congress has been waiting for. “I mean, there was no playbook for what Elon Musk and DOGE were doing. They didn’t have a set of procedures to follow. They had to create them as they went.” And now, he continued, Republicans are ready to make those recommendations a reality. Nothing that Musk’s team did will go to waste, the speaker assured Americans.

“The work will go forward and continue, because what he’s done is he’s brought a spotlight into these agencies — into these bureaucracies that we were never able to see. We got a perspective on it that Congress was never allowed because the bureaucracy was hiding so much data. I mean, we didn’t know, obviously, that Congress was funding transgender operas in Peru and all these other crazy things that were happening under USAID,” Johnson said, shaking his head. Elon found it because he cracked the code. He got inside the belly of the beast with his algorithms, and he uncovered it, and we’ve got to wipe it out.”

But the headlines that the House is adding to an already ballooning deficit are baloney, the speaker argued. “I sent a long text message to [Musk] to explain to him and make sure that he understands that he was looking at [an] analysis of the bill that was not accurate.” He pointed to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) analysis of the bill and emphasized, “CBO is historically inaccurate. It’s run by Democrats. … They’re not going to give us a fair score. But the important thing to remember about this is that they do not use dynamic scoring. They use static scoring. In layman’s terms, all that means is they don’t give us any credit for the growth. The Big Beautiful Bill is going to be jet fuel to the U.S. economy. It is a pro-growth economy builder. It’s going to lower tax rates, lower regulations, [and] incentivize U.S. manufacturing again. When that happens, we know what [the effect will be].”

Let’s not forget, the speaker reminded Perkins, “We already did this in the first Trump administration, [and we] had the greatest economy in the history of the world after the first two years, because we cut taxes and cut regulations. Now we’re doing it on steroids. So the tremendous growth that will be achieved by this is being totally discounted by CBO. They’re saying it will add to the deficit. It’s not true,” he declared. “By our calculations, we are going to reduce the deficit because of all the growth that we stimulated. Just watch and see that the critics are going to be wrong.”

AUTHOR

Suzanne Bowdey

Suzanne Bowdey serves as editorial director and senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Pressure Growing on Hill for CBO Reforms as Congressional Agency’s New Think Tank Rival Launches

FDA Chief ‘Committed’ to Investigating Abortion Pill

Fentanyl Seizures Plunge in Wake of Trump Border Policies

Anti-Semitic Attacks Spreading Fear among Jewish Members of Congress

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.