Following its passage by the House of Representatives, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBB)—the budget reconciliation package aimed at implementing President Donald Trump’s agenda—is facing scrutiny in the Senate.
Several concerns regarding the House-passed package—including its potential impact on the deficit, its increase to the debt ceiling, and others—remain. The Senate is expected to make substantial changes to the House’s version of the bill, leaving the ultimate shape of the package uncertain.
Because the legislation is being considered under the reconciliation process, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) will only need a simple majority to pass the final version he brings to the floor. That means he can spare no more than three defections in his 53-seat conference.
However, as it stands, the House’s bill has faced skepticism from several key players in the Senate, and senators say it would fail if brought to the floor in its current form.
“I think there are four of us at this point,” Sen. Rand Paul said during a June 1 appearance on CBS News’ “Face the Nation” when asked by anchor Margaret Brennan whether other senators shared his objections to the bill.
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), another critic, has said the same.
Here are the senators to watch as the process moves forward.
Paul
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a longtime budget hawk, has been outspoken in his opposition to the legislation in its current state.
Paul said his primary issues with the current bill are its provisions to raise the debt ceiling by $5 trillion—the planned Senate modification to the House’s proposed $4 trillion increase.
“I’ve told them, if you take the debt ceiling off the bill, in all likelihood, I can vote for whatever the agreement is on the rest of the bill,” Paul said.
He added in a post on social media platform X, “I’m all for making Trump’s tax cuts permanent, but not if we keep spending like drunken sailors. The House GOP budget doesn’t go nearly far enough. We need real cuts, real reform, and real courage to fix this debt crisis.”
He also told CBS’s “Face the Nation” that he stands with four Republicans in opposition to the bill without changes.
“I would be very surprised if the bill at least is not modified in a good direction,” he said.
Johnson
Johnson has been one of the staunchest opponents of the legislation in its current state in the upper chamber, insisting that Republicans must use this moment to change course on the deficit.
“This is our moment: We have faced an unprecedented moment of increased spending—58 percent—since 2019. … This is our only chance to reset that to reasonable, pre-pandemic spending,” Johnson previously told CNN.
During a June 1 appearance on “Sunday Morning Futures,” Johnson said that he also had reservations about the debt ceiling increase, saying he would prefer a one-year extension rather than a blanket cash amount increase.
He pointed out that the United States was on track for a deficit of as much as $2.2 trillion.
“That’s completely unsustainable,” Johnson said.
Murkowski, Tillis, Curtis
Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), and John Curtis (R-Utah), who are often described as moderates, have also given indications that they’re unhappy with at least one major aspect of the House Republican plan.
Namely, the House’s version of the bill moves to phase out clean energy tax credits initially included in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act by 2028—a core demand made by House conservatives.
In an April letter to Thune, the three senators said that retracting these credits would be a mistake.
“The United States produces some of the cleanest and most efficient energy in the world, and an all-of-the-above approach—including support for traditional and renewable energy sources—has long been a hallmark of our energy strategy,” the senators wrote.
Curtis’s colleague Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), meanwhile, has expressed opposition to the Inflation Reduction Act in its entirety, and particularly to its energy credits.
Hawley, Collins
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who’s long shown a pro-working-class streak in his politics, has expressed reservations about the bill’s efforts to change Medicaid, describing this issue as the crux of a Republican “identity crisis.”
The House plan imposes stricter work and volunteer requirements on able-bodied adults and would increase states’ burden in funding Medicaid.
In a May 12 op-ed for The New York Times titled “Don’t Cut Medicaid,” Hawley said that a “Wall Street wing” of the party “wants Republicans to build our big, beautiful bill around slashing health insurance for the working poor.”
“But that argument is both morally wrong and politically suicidal,” he said.
“If Congress cuts funding for Medicaid benefits, Missouri workers and their children will lose their health care. And hospitals will close. It’s that simple. And that pattern will be replicated in states across the country.”
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), facing a potentially difficult reelection campaign in 2026, has also expressed caution toward the bill’s changes to Medicaid.
“I am looking very carefully at the Medicaid provisions in particular,” Collins told local Maine-based outlet WABI.
Recent Comments