The Budget Bill from Hell

Summary

Bulwark Takes: Episode Summary - "The Budget Bill from Hell"

Release Date: May 22, 2025
Host/Author: The Bulwark
Guests: John Avlon, Sam Stein

---

Introduction

In the "The Budget Bill from Hell" episode of Bulwark Takes, Sam Stein, Managing Editor at The Bulwark, engages in a candid discussion with political commentator John Avlon. The episode delves deep into the intricacies and controversies surrounding the recently passed Budget Bill, examining its implications, the legislative process behind it, and the broader fiscal policies of the Republican Party.

---

1. Unprecedented Legislative Process

Sam Stein begins by highlighting the chaotic and opaque process through which the Budget Bill was passed.

"[00:00] Sam Stein: [...] Altogether, at no point did we really actually see the legislative language until like a few minutes before the Rules Committee voted, and then like a few hours before the whole House voted to."

John Avlon concurs, describing the process as "abnormal," emphasizing the lack of transparency and the rapid, last-minute maneuvers that characterized the bill's passage.

"[01:09] John Avlon: Look, this bill's a shit show to the extent that nobody knew what was actually in it when they voted."

---

2. Content and Critique of the Budget Bill

The conversation shifts to dissect the contents of the Budget Bill, revealing significant cuts and fiscal ramifications.

Key Points Discussed:

• Massive Cuts to Social Programs: The bill includes automatic cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, and other essential services.

  "[01:09] John Avlon: [...] automatic Medicare cuts that are set in here in addition to the Medicaid cuts, the food stamps, and everything else."

• Deficit Implications: Contrary to Republican claims of fiscal responsibility, the bill is projected to "blow up the deficit hugely."

  "[01:09] John Avlon: And keeping in mind that like, 34% of people on Medicaid are kids. Right. And then it simultaneously blows up the deficit, which should codify for any, Anybody with any doubt who sends to get suckered."

• Triple B Bill: Avlon references Jillian Ted's column, explaining the bill's multifaceted negative impacts.

  "[01:09] John Avlon: Because, you know, I think, Jillian, Ted had a great column about this being called the Triple B bill, which is… [cuts off]"

• Downgrade Rating: The bill's fiscal irresponsibility has led to Downgrade Ratings, further undermining its credibility.

  "[02:14] Sam Stein: One of the three B's."
  "[02:16] John Avlon: Right, Exactly. Well, that's also the downgrade rating."

---

3. House Republicans and Moderates' Position

Sam Stein probes into the behavior of House Republicans, especially the moderates, questioning their lack of resistance against aggressive budget cuts.

"[03:17] Sam Stein: [...] were you surprised that the moderates in the House didn't take a stand on some of the other stuff?"

John Avlon explains that moderates believe the Senate will mitigate some of the bill's harsher provisions, though he criticizes the overall lack of principled stands within the party.

"[03:27] John Avlon: No, and I'm not, for two reasons. One, I think on, on the more painful measures, they think, or they can rationalize that the Senate's going to bail them out a bit."
"[04:48] John Avlon: [...] Everybody else foals, they speak a good game because of electoral anxiety, but at the end of the day, you know, they're Trumpers."

Avlon expresses disappointment in the center-right's lack of "spine," attributing it to the overwhelming influence of Trumpism and fear of primary challenges over general elections.

---

4. Senate's Role and Expected Modifications

The discussion transitions to the Senate's likely interventions to amend the Budget Bill.

Key Insights:

• Trimming Cuts: Avlon expects the Senate to reduce or delay some of the Medicare and Medicaid cuts.

  "[04:54] John Avlon: [...] trim back some of the Medicaid or Medicare cuts."

• Work Requirements: There might be delays in implementing work requirements for Medicaid, originally planned for 2026.

  "[05:09] John Avlon: [...] make it less of a, of an electoral two by four to the face."

• Legislative Tactics: Avlon anticipates further negotiations with the Senate Parliamentarian to curb overly aggressive fiscal measures.

  "[09:31] John Avlon: [...] it's a new baseline and it sets up a fight with the Senate parliamentarian that a lot of senators behind the scenes are, are worried about."

---

5. Impact on Deficit and Bond Market

A significant portion of the conversation focuses on the broader economic implications of the Budget Bill, particularly its effect on the U.S. deficit and the bond market's perception.

Key Points:

• Deficit and Debt: The bill's provisions are expected to significantly increase the national deficit, undermining long-term fiscal stability.

  "[06:04] John Avlon: [...] The bond market's not buying the, the unreality."

• Bond Market's Response: Avlon cites a metaphor attributed to James Carville, emphasizing the bond market as a critical indicator of fiscal health.

  "[06:11] John Avlon: [...] the bond market can intimidate any, everybody."

• Credit Ratings: Moody's and other rating agencies have downgraded the U.S. credit rating, reflecting decreased confidence.

  "[07:52] John Avlon: [...] we saw one of the earlier downgrades during the Tea Party era. Now Moody's got on board."

---

6. SALT Deductions: Politics and Impact

A significant segment addresses the State and Local Tax (SALT) deductions, exploring their political maneuvering and socioeconomic impacts.

Discussion Highlights:

• Historical Context: SALT deductions have been part of federal income tax law since 1913, aimed at preventing double taxation.

  "[11:00] John Avlon: [...] people's ability to deduct their state and local taxes has been part of the federal income tax law since 1913."

• Trump-Era Changes: In 2017, the Trump administration capped SALT deductions at $10,000, a move seen as partisan and detrimental to high-tax states.

  "[11:00] John Avlon: [...] under Trump in 2017. State, local tax deduction was taken from, you know, Open ended to 10K."
  "[11:45] Sam Stein: [...] So Trump, it's because the blue states have higher state taxes and they wanted to give it to the blue states. Yes, correct."

• Political Consequences: The cap has led to increased taxes for middle-class families in high-tax states and has been used politically to disadvantage "blue states."

  "[12:37] Sam Stein: They just expired."
  "[12:38] John Avlon: Right? 100% back. So anything short of that is still a whack in the face right now."

• Negotiations and Compromises: The final bill increased the SALT deduction cap to $40,000 for families earning over $500,000, up from the initial $30,000, though it's still seen as insufficient by many.

  "[14:43] Sam Stein: And what do you think the Senate's going to think? Senate's going to just do nothing, keep it at 10."
  "[14:36] John Avlon: I think this is better than 10, which is what they're 20."

---

7. Tax Policy Reforms and Revenue Generation

John Avlon outlines his vision for a more equitable and efficient tax system, emphasizing the need for revenue generation to balance the budget.

Recommendations:

• Closing Loopholes: Focus on eliminating tax loopholes, such as the carried interest loophole, to ensure fair taxation.

  "[15:27] John Avlon: [...] The first thing I would do is I would close loopholes. I'm a big fan actually of tax."

• Simplification: Advocate for a simplified tax code with fewer rates and clear deductions to reduce complexity and prevent exploitation.

  "[16:56] Sam Stein: So not an Elizabeth Warren surtax, actually just say if you want to raise the top rate back to 39. Top margin rate at a much higher level."
  "[17:00] John Avlon: Yeah, we should have tax simplification. We should have much more."

• Corporate Tax Adjustments: Suggest lowering corporate tax rates to enhance international competitiveness while closing loopholes to prevent abuse.

  "[15:33] John Avlon: [...] If you're going to lower rates, which you should do. Close loopholes."

• New Tax Brackets: Propose introducing new tax brackets for high earners (e.g., individuals making over $1 million) to ensure progressive taxation without stifling economic growth.

  "[16:46] Sam Stein: Yeah, no, in fact, there was a move."
  "[16:48] John Avlon: [...] make the top rate higher but make it for folks pulling in a million a year."

---

8. Future Outlook and Senate's Role

As the episode draws to a close, Stein and Avlon speculate on the Senate's role in amending the Budget Bill and the likelihood of passing a more balanced bill.

Key Takeaways:

• Likelihood of Passage: Both agree that while the current bill is flawed, the Senate is expected to modify it to create a more viable piece of legislation.

  "[18:09] John Avlon: Ultimately they'll pass something. But that's sort of like, you know, you know, it's not quite saying the sun's going to rise in the morning."

• Legislative Realities: The pressing need to address the debt ceiling and the impending fiscal deadlines will likely compel lawmakers to negotiate and pass a revised bill, albeit with significant changes.

  "[19:03] Sam Stein: [...] It was like hours. They just put up a manager's amendment, and then within hours, they were expected to vote on it in the middle of the night."
  "[19:50] John Avlon: [...] Something. But I. When I say we don't know what'll be in it yet, I mean, no one should act like."

• Bond Market Influence: The ongoing economic indicators, particularly the bond market's response, may pressure lawmakers to adopt more fiscally responsible measures.

  "[20:00] Sam Stein: Yeah, well, and you got to watch the bond market because if it keeps going the way it goes, that does impact the way that these lawmakers think."
  "[20:07] John Avlon: [...] the bond market's kind of not going to buy the bs, Nor should it."

---

Conclusion

"The Budget Bill from Hell" provides a comprehensive critique of the current Republican-led Fiscal Policies, highlighting the discrepancies between claimed fiscal responsibility and actual legislative outcomes. John Avlon emphasizes the need for transparency, equitable tax reforms, and genuine bipartisan efforts to address the nation's financial challenges. As the Budget Bill heads to the Senate, the anticipation builds around the potential for significant amendments that could steer the U.S. towards a more sustainable fiscal future.

---

For more insightful discussions and detailed analyses, subscribe to Bulwark Takes and stay informed with the latest from The Bulwark team.

Transcript

[Sam Stein]

Hey, guys, it's me, Sam Stein, managing editor at the Bulwark. I'm joined by John Avlon. This is fun.

[John Avlon]

Hey, man, how you doing?

[Sam Stein]

I'm good. For those who don't know, you should know by now. John hired me at the Daily Beast. Back together. Really appreciate it. John's going to talk about the budget, the beautiful budget Bill, Salt, everything involved. All he wants to talk about, really. But before we get into that, subscribe to the feed, click that button. Very important. All right, so, John, we've been, like, trying to schedule this thing for like, a day and a half now because it's such a moving target. We didn't know we did.

[John Avlon]

Right. Because now we. I know.

[Sam Stein]

Now we know, but it was just sort of like watching it unfold. I was just. It was. What I was struck by was how crazed the entire process felt. At no point did we really actually see the legislative language until like, a few minutes before the Rules Committee voted, and then like a few hours before the whole House voted to. Totally abnormal stuff. But beyond the process, I'm curious what your. You ran for office last cycle. You're in the mix. You know this stuff. Like, what is your takeaway about what the House Republicans, especially the frontliners, decided to do here?

[John Avlon]

Look, this bill's a shit show to the extent that nobody knew what was actually in it when they voted. And it manages to simultaneously have massive cuts that will hurt real people where they live there. I mean, they're automatic Medicare cuts that are set in here in addition to the Medicaid cuts, the food stamps, and everything else. Else. But it still blows up the deficit hugely. And so those are the big factors. In some ways, it's the worst of all worlds. Yes, they passed it barely, narrowly, but the fact that it simultaneously guts people who need it most, it shreds the safety net. And keeping in mind that like, 34% of people on Medicaid are kids. Right. And then it simultaneously blows up the deficit, which should codify for any. Anybody with any doubt who sends to get suckered. Beyond the idea that Republicans stand for fiscal responsibility. We got 40 years of test case here. Republicans only care about the deficit, the debt, when Democrats are president. But, you know, I think, Jillian, Ted had a great column about this being called the Triple B bill, which is.

[Sam Stein]

One of the three B's.

[John Avlon]

Right, Exactly. Well, that's also the downgrade rating.

[Sam Stein]

Okay.

[John Avlon]

And, you know, so. So this is, you know, and look, it's going to get changed a lot.

[Sam Stein]

So that's what I wanted to ask you about. So I had a theory. I mean, I always thought that they would pass something because I think the desire to not. First of all, this is their only big bill, right? Like, they're not doing any of that. So that combined with Trump's hold over the party, combined with the impending expiration of the tax cuts and the debt ceiling, I thought those factors were enough that they would pass something. But for a brief moment, for a brief moment, I kind of got a little bit squishy on that because it was very evident to me that the Senate said they were going to change it no matter what. So if you're a frontline House Republican and you're voting and you know that whatever you vote for, the Senate's going to change, that's a tough one to swallow, especially the way you laid it out. Were you surprised that the moderates in the House didn't take a stand on some of the other stuff? I know they did on salt, and we can get into that.

[John Avlon]

We'll get there.

[Sam Stein]

But, but were you surprised by the fact that they didn't go demand further, for instance, less, less aggressive cuts to Medicaid, for instance?

[John Avlon]

No, and I'm not, for two reasons. One, I think on, on the more painful measures, the, the, the, the cruel measures, I think they think, or they can rationalize that the Senate's going to bail them out a bit.

[Sam Stein]

Yeah, but they still took the vote, right?

[John Avlon]

They still took the vote, and the vote will hurt them. But here's the other thing. I think just again, looking at any sense of perspective, the center right always caves at the end of the day. I got a lot of respect for people like Don Bacon on a lot of fronts. Okay? But he's an outlier in that he's sort of more principled among what's left of, you know, the credible center right. Everybody else foals, they speak a good game because of electoral anxiety, but at the end of the day, you know, they're Trumpers. You know, they'll make different mouth noises around election time if they think it interests them, but they're still enthralled. They're more afraid of a primary than they are of losing a general election. Even if they're in swing districts and their followers, they will always cave. And that's why there's no spine left on the center right. So, no, I'm not. I think now, of course, the real action is what happens in the Senate and whether that'll gut some of the provisions, including salt, that these folks fought for. And all signs point to.

[Sam Stein]

Yes, you think that. So I was going to ask you, what are your expectations for how the Senate changes this bill?

[John Avlon]

Look, I think they'll probably trim back some of the Medicaid or Medicare cuts. I think, you know, work requirements, probably not, you know, but, but they'll, they'll, they'll make it less of a, of an electoral two by four to the face. That said, the Senates in some ways.

[Sam Stein]

So just to be clear, like the work requirements, they were supposed to go in in 2029. The concession to conservatives was to start them in 2026, right after the midterms, I should say. But that would be a problem theoretically politically in 2028. And so perhaps the Senate's like, you know what, let's go back to 2009.

[John Avlon]

Yeah. Or let's put it, put it up in 27 or something like that, right?

[Sam Stein]

Something like that. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

[John Avlon]

I mean I, I think there's, there's likely to be, be some, some delays, you know, of some of the more painful provisions. You know, you might see. You know, you don't pass this bill or anything like it. First of all, there's a lot of magical thinking. So in terms of the impact on the deficit and the debt right there, you know, Lindsey Graham is trying to, you know, look for the Senate parliamentarian to be a weird, nerdy, but really important fight around this stuff because it's a question of what you can, can, can make a baseline. But the bond market's not buying the, the unreality.

[Sam Stein]

Yeah, talk about that. What been following it from afar. Obviously they don't have faith that the US is a good place to invest.

[John Avlon]

But what's going on, okay, this is what really matters. And it's not just there's a famous James Carville quote from decades ago in the 90s about it. You know, when he was growing up, he wanted to be a home run hitter or president or Pope. But now when he grows up, he wants to be the bond market. Because the bond market can intimidate any, everybody.

[Sam Stein]

Is that real? Is that a real James Car? I'm a real James Car.

[John Avlon]

Real quick.

[Sam Stein]

Said in a little bit different accent.

[John Avlon]

But yes, yes, it is. Yeah, fair enough. But the point is that the bond market is a financial assessment of the stability of the United States fiscally and politically. And the bond market has been really sending mess to the Trump administration. Like the US does not look like a stable long term investment, by the way. I mean a trillion owned by the Japanese, almost a trillion by the Chinese. So that can be used as a weapon against us. That's a rational argument why too much debt is. Is dangerous, in addition to the fact that ultimately the payments on the debt end up crowding out discretionary spending. But the bond market has been sending the message since the Trump administration that the confidence in the full faith and credit and stability of decision making in the United States is going down. And this is a result of the extortionary politics. We saw one of the earlier downgrades during the Tea Party era. Now Moody's got on board. So all these things make it more expensive to finance our debt. And the bond market is sort of undercutting this. They're sending a very clear message. The US does not look like it's built on bedrock now. It does not look like a stable giant and a beacon of freedom and responsibility and liberty and stability.

[Sam Stein]

Now, is this mostly related to debt, debt and deficit concerns, or is it a combination of that? The tariffs, the erratic political culture, things like that?

[John Avlon]

All of the above. This is not just deficit and debt. We've sustained growing deficit and debt. That's not great. But a certain amount is reasonable, particularly for the world reserve currency. It's the political instability that's the new new, the tariffs adding to economic, a sense of economic irresponsibility. And that's incredibly dangerous. We have lived in a world they've taken for granted, the US of the world reserve currency, because we have the safest harbor. The markets are sending the message that's no longer the case. And it's directly the result of this sort of hijacking of our politics by hyper partisans, particularly on the Trumpist wing of the far right. And so this budget just compounds that stuff, right?

[Sam Stein]

This budget, just to be clear, I think, what are the estimates? Like 3. What was the trillion? 3 trillion. 3 to 5 trillion added to the deficit. They. With respect to taxes, you mentioned how they're going to play cute with the baseline. What they're essentially saying is let's just assume that, you know, we're not, you know, that these taxes aren't set to expire. This is baseline. So we don't have to count it as adding to the, to the debt and deficit.

[John Avlon]

That's.

[Sam Stein]

It's crazy because let's say, yeah, yeah, because if I were, if Democrats tomorrow were to pass a, you know, enhanced child tax credit but made only one year, they could then say, well, if we just extend it 20 more years, it doesn't count anything because the baseline is now the enhanced child tax Credit. It's just no real way to do actual fiscally responsible budget.

[John Avlon]

The entire way that the last math worked is that it's sunset in 25. Exactly, I. E. This year. So now they're saying, no, no, no, no, no, no. This was always going to go on forever. It's a new baseline and it sets up a fight with the Senate parliamentarian that a lot of senators behind the scenes are, are worried about. Because if you start under, if you start overruling the Senate parliamentarian on things, you're living in a lawless universe.

[Sam Stein]

Well, they just, they just did it yesterday on the California emissions stuff. So there is press overruled the parliamentarian. So there is some scary precedent here, I think, around. Watch out. Yeah, exactly. All right, let's get to taxes because we'll talk salt and I want to talk about high income earners because there was a period where Steve Bannon and his ilk were saying Trump should be thinking about actually raising the rates on. I think. I forget I'm going to mangle it. But no, over 500 or something like that. Yeah, something like that. To 40% for those making over 500,000 individually or by family, whatever it is. Point is, he wanted to raise high, high rates and Trump balked, basically. I mean, he flirted with it but then said, no, thanks. Look, and then the SALT stuff happens and, you know, they wanted to extend the reduction, the deduction. Sorry. But ultimately we got to a place, I think, where this is somewhat of a conservative tax bill. But I'm curious from your perspective as someone who's in a SALT state, who's run in a SALT state. Give us your pitch as to why the SALT caucus did not get the job done here. If you think that's the case.

[John Avlon]

It absolutely is the case. Because if we had done nothing, state, local tax deduction would have been returned. Now, keep in mind, people's ability to deduct their state and local taxes has been part of the federal income tax law since 1913, since it was kicked off. Right. So this is of long standing precedent. This is not like a newfangled idea given. And the idea is in part double taxation. Right. You're being taxed twice, in effect, so you should be able to deduct that. But it was done under Trump in 2017. State, local tax deduction was taken from, you know, Open ended to 10K. Right. Per individual on a basis that was basically just, it was purely partisan.

[Sam Stein]

So Trump, it's because the blue states have higher state taxes and they wanted to give it to the blue states. Yes, correct.

[John Avlon]

So, and, and, and they've, and so this was always a political stunt designed to hurt blue states, designed to sort of rub the salt in their wounds. But it ended up creating net tax increases, for example, here on Long island, particularly in Suffolk County. But, but all, all throughout. And, and, and so this is a huge freaking deal. But Republicans have found ways to benefit politically. Right. People will move to red states for lower state taxes and then those congressional seats are gerrymandered just outright. No, you know, no debate with any juice about, you know, fairness or equity, anything like that. Okay, so a lot of the Republicans from New York have been saying we're going to restore stall. Now keep in mind it would have been 100% back if these tax cuts had just expired.

[Sam Stein]

They just expired.

[John Avlon]

Right? 100% back. So anything short of that is still a whack in the face right now.

[Sam Stein]

The critical. Sorry, go ahead, you finish first, I'll do the pushback.

[John Avlon]

They're able to say, look, we were able to get it to 40 family and that's an improvement for a lot of folks. It phases out at 500. Yes, that's high. But the regional economy's in place. The real deal is that a Trump said he was going to eliminate the state and locals tax deduction at a campaign stop in the fall of 24. That was always BS and now it's going to meet the Senate and the Senate doesn't give a damn about this stuff because there basically are no, I mean, two or three blue state, you know, Republican senators. So this is all the things they gave up, you know, pretending like they weren't going to sign off on a sacking of Medicaid or you know, cuts to Medicare that they're settled with, all of that. And this thing probably doesn't even have a life expectancy worth buying, you know, how to let us for.

[Sam Stein]

So it's 40% at 500k for the new salt under the House bill, which is obviously higher than 10%. The initial offer was 30%, not, not percent.

[John Avlon]

Thousand.

[Sam Stein]

Sorry, sorry. Yes, sorry. Thousand. Yeah, they got it up to 40k. It was the initial offer, 30k. So that's what they got in the negotiation process. The pushback on this is that, well, these, this is only going to impact incredibly high net worth individuals. Right. And your response, which I think is valid, is that in fact, you know, this is a, you know, what we're talking about. New York, California, New Jersey, this is going to actually hit a lot of people with high costs where they live in high cost neighborhoods where, you know, prices are astronomical. And this will have a really big impact and it won't just be high net worth individuals, it'll be middle class. And you think even at 40k that's a problem?

[John Avlon]

Look, I think this is a, this is better than 10, which is what they're 20.

[Sam Stein]

Mathematically it is better than 10.

[John Avlon]

And so let's not, let's. But don't take this to the bank until we see what the Senate does.

[Sam Stein]

And what do you think the Senate's going to think? Senate's going to just do nothing, keep it at 10.

[John Avlon]

I don't know what the zone is going to do, but I know they're not well disposed to.

[Sam Stein]

I will say you're right about Trump. He flew up completely on this. He promised to get rid of it entirely. He did. And he said he would work with Democratic governors to get rid of it entirely.

[John Avlon]

And this was always transparent bs. Who are you going to trust to get rid of it? The person who took it away.

[Sam Stein]

Right.

[John Avlon]

Who lies all the time or folks have been saying from the beginning that this is absolutely unjust and unsustainable.

[Sam Stein]

So how would you get the revenues? Because I think you were with me that you do need to raise tax revenues. Right? You have to raise them. If you want a balanced budget, where would you look?

[John Avlon]

All right, first thing I would do is I would close loopholes. I'm a big fan actually of tax.

[Sam Stein]

Simplification, carried interest loopholes, things like that.

[John Avlon]

Carried interest is one of them. But I'd actually look at like. So let's start with corporate, right? You know, we had a corporate tax that was too high in the United States. If you look at international competitiveness, and you do need to look at international competitiveness, we do need pro growth policies. Fine. But if in the Trump and the last Trump bill they lowered them lower than what CEOs were asking for, which is 26%, and they didn't close a single damn loophole. If you're going to lower rates, which you should do. Close loopholes. Right? Close loopholes, create simplification R and D all day long. We want people to invest in long term value creation, but not stock buybacks. Right? I mean, you know, it's just one example. So I'm actually very much in favor of leaner, cleaner rates. But you got to do simplification to do it. And that raises rates. The other thing I think you need to do is recognize that there's a lot of variability in regional economies and it makes no sense to give someone who's a member of the upper middle class, the working wealthy regionally, the same tax rate as someone who's the 0.0001%, especially if they can game the system, as often occurs. I think if you were to make the top rate higher but make it for folks pulling in a million a year, it'd be hard to see politically how you could fight against that millionaire.

[Sam Stein]

Yeah, no, in fact, there was a move.

[John Avlon]

Not a surtax, actually just say if you want to raise the top rate back to 39. Top margin rate at a much higher level.

[Sam Stein]

So not an Elizabeth Warren surtax, but an actual new bracket that says, okay, gotcha.

[John Avlon]

Yeah, we should have tax simplification. We should have much more. A simplified tax system with five rates that's really clear and with some basic deductibility. Child tax credit, state and local tax deduction, charitable. But keep it simple and make it harder to game. Make it just. And I think I would actually. That would be a relief for folks. Oh yeah, they've been talking about this forever.

[Sam Stein]

They've been talking about comprehensive tax from forever. It's just not because you got a.

[John Avlon]

System that's larded up with lobbyists. And this is where small businesses get screwed too. You can't navigate a system that you can't afford to buy on a phalanx of lawyers and accountants. And that's where a lot of righteous frustration comes in. So we've got a simpler system with, with clear deductions that doesn't penalize small businesses and middle class and upper middle class folks.

[Sam Stein]

All right, last question for you because now it goes to the Senate. We know it's going to get changed, this bill. You have some suspicions about salt. I have some suspicions about what they're going to do with Medicaid. Either way, it's going to be a different bill. Are you with me? That ultimately they'll pass something. They just have to.

[John Avlon]

Ultimately they'll pass something. But that's sort of like, you know, you know, it's not quite saying the sun's going to rise in the morning. They got to pass something, right?

[Sam Stein]

Did it? I mean, look, they did not pass the ACA repeal. Like they've had histories of not passing.

[John Avlon]

But, but that was, that was a one off. That was sort of politically, politically difficult. I don't think this is the same. I mean, you got a debt ceiling coming down the pike. You got to do something. And you're right. All the ambitious things they were talking about doing are things that could have been considered silver linings, you know, in this circumstance. Doesn't. No one's talking about, you know, immigration reform. They're just talking about more money for the border, for example. Right. Yes, they will pass something, I would imagine, but it's going to look a lot different than what just passed by two votes. And. And so, you know, just like no one who voted on this knew. Knew what was in it. Let's be real clear about that.

[Sam Stein]

It's really crazy. It. Honestly, so crazy. It was like hours. They just put up a manager's amendment, and then within hours, they were expected to vote on it in the middle of the night.

[John Avlon]

Right.

[Sam Stein]

Remember, at that point it was like 4am so does that count as night or early morning?

[John Avlon]

Look, it's dark. Very. Remember the whole thing. Very little good happens between midnight and.

[Sam Stein]

5Am I always disagreed with that. I always thought good stuff happened.

[John Avlon]

I'm like, you know, sunlight, you know, outside your own home, Sam. How about that? You know, you gotta. I mean, you know, if the sunlight's the best disinfectant, if you're trying to push things, you know, big bills through in the middle of the night, you know, you're trying to.

[Sam Stein]

All right, so back on, Joe. I'm pulling this back in. You think they'll pass something. You think they'll pass something.

[John Avlon]

Something. But I. When I say we don't know what'll be in it yet, I mean, no one should act like. And this. This is. This is some kind of baseline, but barely.

[Sam Stein]

Yeah, well, and you got to watch the bond market because if it keeps going the way it goes, that does impact the way that these lawmakers think.

[John Avlon]

It should, but I don't know that it will. You can't spin the bond market. We have a policy of unreality. Right. We have a political party that accepts unreality as a litmus test for loyalty. And the bond market's kind of not going to buy the bs, Nor should it.

[Sam Stein]

Avalon, it's always a pleasure, buddy.

[John Avlon]

You too, brother.

[Sam Stein]

Talk to you later, guys. Subscribe to the feed to get this stuff later.