Understanding the Big Beautiful Bill and the Laws That Surround It

The Big Beautiful Bill is still complicated, and I think it’s getting more and more perplexing because many people believe it’s being confusing to their advantage. So let’s try to drill down into the details and try to type out the details.

Let’s take a look at it once more and figure out the details because Stephen Miller has tweeted an argument a few times, apparently with much success.

On the Big Beautiful Bill, I’ve seen a couple claims that are getting the press and need modification.

The first is that it doesn’t” define the DOGE breaks.” A healing act, which is a budget costs that receives 50 seats, is only allowed to have “mandatory” spending, such as…

— Stephen Miller ( @StephenM ) May 25, 2025

Here’s the whole word, to which I’ll get referring quite a bit.

On the Big Beautiful Bill, I’ve seen a couple claims that are getting the press and need modification.

The first is that it doesn’t” define the DOGE breaks.” A healing act, which is a budget bill that receives 50 votes, is only allowed to have “mandatory” spending, such as Medicaid and Food Stamps, under Senate guidelines. The republic laws prevent it from cutting “discretionary” saving — example the Department of Education or federal offers. The DOGE slashes are largely voluntary and not required. The act includes the largest welfare reform ever, saving more than 1.6 trillion in necessary spending. A remarkable progress.

I’ve also heard that the costs will increase the gap. Based on a CBO finance fad, this lay is. Income tax rates from the 2017 tax reduce are set to expire in September. They were constantly anticipated to have a long history. According to the CBO, maintaining current rates increases the gap, but by definition leaving these income tax rates intact cannot increase the gap by a single cent. The president’s spending slashes REDUCE the gap against the current law foundation, which is the only appropriate benchmark to use.

Another incredibly false say is that the act spends trillions of dollars. This is simply fully invented out of the blue. This is not a ten year resources bill—it doesn’t “fund” virtually any functions of state, which are funded in the monthly budget payments ( which this is not ). In other words, there would be no government money if this bill was passed but the monthly budget bill did not. If a one-paragraph peace bill that reduced just 50 billion in food stamp spending was passed, critics may claim that it “added” billion in saving and debt because they are counting ALL the projected national spending that is completely outside the purview of this policy, which is of course absurd. The only money in the act is for the President’s borders and defence priorities, while enacting a gross spending cut of over 1.6 TRILLION dollars.

A significant tax cut and a significant saving reduce are two macroeconomic components of the costs.

There are some life facts that he attempts to explain in detail, but he won’t because, well, it’s only a message.

So here are the facts of life:

• A healing act, the Big Beautiful Bill.
• Reconciliation costs benefit from the fact that they can’t get filibustered; a simple majority does the work.
• … but that doesn’t mean vetoes aren’t an issue in the whole approach
• One of the biggest limitations on healing is that the reconciliation bill’s prohibition on all other things is imposed by law, and what constitutes required spending is even established by law.
• Healing costs are not spending expenses. They establish a budget, or consider a expenditure, but the real saving may be established in a bill that starts in the House. a distinct law.
• The Congressional Budget Office sets various restrictions and assigns conciliation costs to be scored.
• Both the limitations on a healing costs and on CBO’s ranking are established by law, but if you want to change them, you run into that senate monster again.

So many of the people who are yelling at the BBB for never codifying the DOGE reduces are either naive or gullible to you. By law, the BBB didn’t define the DOGE reductions. Keep that in mind as we go through the information.

The CBO rating should be the first thing to look at, because many of the more overt deceiving on all sides is caused by people who ostensibly do not understand what the CBO is required to do. That phrase will likely appear frequently and will always be in bold because it seems to be the hardest thing to comprehend or the hardest thing to disregard, and by God, it will always be that way.

Therefore, let’s dive in. Because this is buried in a myriad various laws, rules, and accounting terms of art that don’t really mean what you think they mean, I’m going to quote my research associate Grok quite frequently.

CBO Ranking: &nbsp,

The Congressional Budget Office— which is going to be” the CBO” from here on out — was established by law. ( That link is to Grok’s summary; you may argue that there is a problem with it. ) However, get ready to give references.

]The ] Congressional Budget Office ( CBO ) was established by the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 ( Public Law 93-344 ). The CBO was established as a result of the Big Beautiful Bill ( #BBB ) Act’s creation and provides Congress with objective, nonpartisan analysis of budgetary and economic issues, including cost estimates and deficit projections.

We’ll glance at those particulars, I promise, but there are many more to come. But one of them is this: By rules — the same rules —the CBO may create their baseline budget projections based on the law as it stands, it&nbsp, does not alter the baseline to accommodate coming changes to the law — like the ones in the BBB. &nbsp,

Miller’s first point is therefore generally true: the BBB doesn’t codify most of the DOGE cuts because it cannot by law. The DOGE cuts are almost exclusively to discretionary spending, and the distinction between mandatory and discretionary spending is established, you guessed it, by law. In fact, that same law.

What’s the difference, you wonder? Simply, mandatory spending is spending that is required by law under separate legislation — think Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Everything else that is covered by the annual budgetary process is covered by discretionary spending, as is usual. Miller strays a little bit in his discussion at this point because he claims that” The senate rules prevent it from cutting’discretionary’ spending.” It’s a tiny quibble, perhaps, but this is a discussion that is characterized on all sides by tiny quibbles made to emphasize someone’s own goals and interests.

The only thing that bothers me is that you can’t do it in the BBB because that is irrelevant to the bill’s purpose. That contradicts a Senate rule known as the” Byrd Rule,” which is named for Robert C. Byrd (D-W. V. ), the late former lion or rather Exalted Cyclops of the Senate. That link will lead to a full summary of the Byrd Rule, but the important point right now is that to do anything that the Byrd Rule would forbid, you have to get 60 votes in the Senate. However, what is required is established by law. How is that law enforced in the Senate is known as the Byrd Rule.

Now, let’s just answer the inevitable comments:” Well, duh, just change the law”. You’re correct, that might be desirable, but you can’t change the law without passing a filibuster. Because that’s not relevant to the purpose of the bill, you can’t do it in the BBB.

( I say “possibly desirable” because it’s another place where some actual thought ought to be given to whether it really is desirable. However, I’ll just give you a brief reference to the Lesson of Robespierre because it will already be too long.

Effect on the Deficit

So on to Miller’s next point.

I’ve also heard that the bill will increase the deficit. Based on a CBO accounting gimmick, this lie is. Income tax rates from the 2017 tax cut are set to expire in September. They were always anticipated to have a long history.

It is exaggerating to call this a lie. Remember that by law ( there it is again ), the CBO is forced to work from current law, and the current law says the 2017 tax cuts expire on December 31, 2025. Therefore, extending the tax cuts lowers the expected tax revenue at that time. Miller claims that this is an “accounting gimmick,” but the law mandates that it be used as an accounting gimmick.

So, on to the next point: The BBB increases the 10-year deficit, by CBO scoring, by$ 3.8 trillion.

This is yet another example of gaslighting because the BBB doesn’t actually change the deficit, and presumably because the BBB doesn’t spend any money.

Money is spent on appropriation bills. The most the BBB can do is fiddle around with mandatory spending, which it does, and realizes about$ 1.6 trillion in real spending reductions by limiting who gets the money from mandatory spending. This is a first approximation, as shown by the fact that this bill reduces some spending by a small amount by manipulating required spending.

Next up on the list is confusion: the deficit is not increased by the BBB. Why? The deficit will increase by$ 3.8 trillion over ten years, or about$ 30 billion annually, because the deficit comes from what is actually being spent, and all the BBB’s CBO ratings indicate that nothing else will change. ( It’s not really a straight line, but it’s close enough for, as they say, government work. )

At this point, it’s worth remembering that, again by law, the effect of the DOGE cuts isn’t taken into account in the CBO estimates. The DOGE cuts that have already been implemented amount to about$ 175 billion, which may seem trivial in comparison to$ 3.8 trillion, but remember that these are permanent savings. That’s$ 1.75 trillion, or$ 1.75 trillion annually, which represents a decrease of about 46 % over the course of ten years.

It’s only been 136 days since Trump was inaugurated. That’s not bad at 46 percent.

Conclusion of Miller:

A significant tax cut and a significant saving reduce are two macroeconomic components of the costs.

And that’s the bottom line, and it’s correct. The BBB does lower taxes in comparison to the CBO’s expectation and current law, or, to be honest, it lowers taxes to prevent taxes — your taxes. The phrase” tax cuts on billionaires” is absurd. Actual spending in the actual next year is actually cut.

The issue here is that a lot of the gaslighting is coming from both sides, and it’s all caused by ignorance or duplicity, which is an ongoing issue. Yes, Rand, I’m gazing at you. Chip Roy, you too. and include every Senate Democratic member. Elon has gotten rich by ignoring people who tell him something can’t be done, so I’ll give him some slack because he’s made himself the richest man in the world. But sometimes, they’re telling you something can’t be done because it just can’t be done.

However, the Big Beautiful Bill reduces spending by$ 1.6 trillion this year.

There is a final point to be made here. To do any of this stuff, the Big Beautiful Bill must pass! It might be able to reduce the SALT deduction for the time being. However, that receives some significant votes, keep in mind that the House passed 215 to 214 in the end.

Without those votes, it fails. Take your medication because it may be bitter but it’s good for you.

Source credit