2026-07-12T10:30:25.488Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/07/12/politics/trump-big-beautiful-bill-midterms
唐纳德·特朗普总统于7月4日美国建国250周年纪念日发表演讲，吹捧股市大涨，敦促选举改革，并称赞美国对委内瑞拉和伊朗的军事干预。
但另一个周年纪念日却被明显忽略：正好一年前，特朗普签署生效的《超级宏伟法案》（One Big Beautiful Bill Act）获得通过。
在该法案隆重的签署仪式上，它似乎注定会成为共和党在11月选举中的标志性立法竞选议题。
但12个月后的今天，该法案对医疗补助计划和食品券等关键社会保障项目的削减引发了铺天盖地的批评，削弱了其推广民粹主义和亲商减税政策的努力。
尽管总统及其政党一直在极力宣传该法案最受欢迎的条款，甚至试图将其重新包装为“工薪家庭减税法案”，但民主党已将负面民调结果和共和党这次更名视作法案失败的证据。
如今，两大政党中哪一方能从该法案的通过中获益愈发不明朗，这项具有里程碑意义的政策套餐已成为竞争激烈的摇摆选区选举的主要影响因素，这些选区将决定众议院的控制权归属。
“我们知道这将是一场激烈的竞选活动，”寻求连任的密歇根州第七选区共和党众议员汤姆·巴雷特说道，“我代表的是全国重点关注的选区之一，我必须走出去宣传这项法案的优点。”
联邦医疗补助计划开支的历史性削减和资格要求的修改，很快成为该法案政治争议最大的部分。
根据国会预算办公室的数据，这部被简称为OBBBA的法案预计到2035年将为美国低收入人群的关键公共健康保险计划削减约1.2万亿美元开支，到2034年将使额外750万人失去医保。其中最引人注目的条款是为医疗补助计划增加联邦工作要求，这是共和党长期以来的目标。
全国各地的民主党人都在猛烈抨击共和党对该计划的全面改革。
例如，在加利福尼亚州竞争激烈的第二十二选区，民主党人兰迪·维列加斯将医疗补助计划削减带来的影响作为其挑战现任共和党众议员戴维·瓦拉达奥的竞选核心议题。
“我们是全国受影响最严重的地区，每三名选民中就有两人依赖医疗补助计划，”维列加斯告诉CNN。
“我们选区有近7万人可能会失去医保，”他补充道，他接触过的当地诊所都“担心可能会关门，无法为社区提供服务”。
瓦拉达奥则表示，OBBBA将长期保留医疗补助计划。
“我代表中央谷地区的目标之一，就是为那些最需要医疗补助的人群提供保障：老年人、弱势儿童和残疾美国人，”他上个月在给CNN的一份声明中说道。
在爱荷华州竞争激烈的美国参议院选举中，民主党人乔希·图雷克抨击共和党众议员阿什利·辛普森投票支持该法案及其改革，称这些改革给医疗服务提供者带来了压力。图雷克因脊柱裂无法行走，他的病因是父亲在越南战争期间接触过橙剂，他以自己在医疗体系中的经历来强调对这项改革的反对。
“我亲身经历过获得优质医疗服务的重要性，”他说道。
在该法案成为法律之前，该国农村地区的医疗影响就已经引发了担忧，包括温和派共和党人在内的许多人都表达了关切。作为妥协，最终版本的法案设立了500亿美元的“农村医疗转型计划”，旨在支持农村医疗事业。
辛普森及其盟友一直在向选民宣传该计划。全国共和党参议员委员会的一则广告指出，该计划将“为爱荷华州的农村医疗事业争取到超过2.09亿美元的资金”。
专家表示，该基金将为长期缺乏充足医疗服务的社区提供急需但暂时的投资。各州计划利用这些资金解决慢性病问题、扩充医疗 workforce、扩大远程医疗服务等。
但根据非营利健康政策组织KFF的数据，该计划远不足以弥补农村地区未来十年预计损失的1370亿美元联邦医疗补助资金。例如，爱荷华州预计在此期间将损失超过38亿美元的联邦医疗补助开支。
值得注意的是，医疗补助计划的工作要求和更频繁的资格审查预计会加剧压力，尤其是在农村地区，人们将因此失去医保。
“毫无疑问，500亿美元的农村医疗转型投资是有帮助的，”华盛顿大学公共卫生学院健康经济学教授蒂莫西·麦克布赖德说道，“但最终的净效应很可能是农村医疗系统的境况会更糟。”
威斯康星州第三选区是全国竞争最激烈的选区之一，该选区的共和党众议员德里克·范奥尔登表示，改革是必要的，旨在根除浪费和欺诈行为。
“工作并养活自己和家人是真正的尊严，这也是共和党试图还给美国民众的东西，”他补充道。
但民主党在医疗议题上历来拥有选民优势，他们正利用这一点开展中期选举宣传。一个名为“保护我们的医疗”的医疗倡导组织将在十多个关键州发起近500万美元的宣传活动，包括广告、市政厅会议和巴士巡回宣传，以突出医疗削减政策。
“众议院共和党人的整个立法议程都围绕着一项让工薪家庭生活更加艰难、更加拮据、开支更高的法案，”民主党国会竞选委员会发言人贾斯汀·切尔莫尔说道。他预测，该法案最终会成为“政治包袱，将拖累11月所有在摇摆选区参选的弱势共和党人”。
今年早些时候，特朗普曾不准确地声称该法案包含美国历史上规模最大的减税政策，“包括没有小费税、没有加班费税、为我们伟大的老年人免除社会保障税”。
作为2024年竞选的标志性承诺，它已成为2026年面临选举的议员们的核心宣传点。
在密歇根州、威斯康星州和宾夕法尼亚州的制造业心脏地带的摇摆选区，季节性劳工和计时工人是关键选民群体，共和党人一直在小企业和建筑工地上巡回宣传，介绍该法案中的多项税收条款。
“我去了选区里的一个道路铺设工地，那里的工人对加班费免税的政策非常兴奋，”密歇根州议员巴雷特说道，“他们中的许多人，由于密歇根州道路铺设的季节性特点，在铺设季节会加班加点工作，而在非铺设季节工作时间较少，所以这对他们来说非常重要。”
范奥尔登也提到了鼓励商业投资的条款。“我今天刚和两家不同的制造商见过面，他们都在利用这个项目，”他说道。
对于民主党来说，他们的批评更为细致入微。苏珊·李众议员正在内华达州竞争激烈的第三选区寻求连任，该选区涵盖拉斯维加斯南部，这里“小费免税”的口号对大量服务业从业人员具有很强的号召力。
李曾投票反对OBBBA，她表示支持对小费和加班费减税。但“你为最富有的美国人提供了永久减税政策，而这项减税政策却在2028年到期，这在我看来有点不公平，”她说道。
李还认为，无论减税政策为工薪美国人带来多少好处，都被她归咎于特朗普政府的生活成本上涨所抵消。
“你知道，我认识塔西亚，她是一名33岁的女服务员。她拿到了2500美元的退税，但她不得不把这笔钱花在医疗上，因为她负担不起医疗保险，而且一直没有投保，”李说道。
总体而言，该法案中的税收措施，包括将个人所得税条款永久化以及2017年的一项重大企业减税政策，对富人的帮助不成比例。根据无党派的城市-布鲁金斯税收政策中心的数据，2026年约85%的纳税人将获得减税。但收入最低的五分之一人群的税后收入仅增长0.8%，而收入最高的五分之一人群则增长3.4%。
该中心高级研究员约瑟夫·罗森伯格表示，许多临时扣除项目——包括为老年人增加的扣除额和汽车贷款利息税收减免——主要惠及中产阶级和中上层纳税人。
但让选民钱包鼓起来是共和党强有力的宣传点。
“选民清楚地知道，哪个政党让他们保留更多自己赚来的钱，哪个政党却不断要求他们为激进的社会主义议程支付更多费用，这种选择在选举日将一目了然，”全国共和党国会委员会发言人迈克·马里内拉说道。
收益与成本
民主党押注，与税收减免和经济刺激相比，该法案对医疗补助计划和食品券等社会保障项目的改革对选民来说更为重要。
除了对医疗补助计划的重大调整外，国会预算办公室的数据显示，OBBBA预计将在十年内削减近1870亿美元的联邦食品券支持——倡导者称这是该项目历史上最大规模的削减。据国会预算办公室称，已经实施的扩大工作要求预计将使补充营养援助计划（即SNAP，食品券项目）的月度平均参保人数减少240万。
在亚利桑那州势均力敌的第六选区，挑战共和党众议员胡安·西斯科马尼的民主党人乔安娜·门多萨正在以弱势社区成员将失去支持为竞选议题。
门多萨在依靠食品券的家庭中长大，她说，她接触到的选民都表示，为餐桌上摆上食物的压力越来越大。“我们需要确保夫妻小店能够维持下去，确保家庭有足够的能力养活孩子，”她说道。
根据左倾的预算与政策优先中心对美国农业部和州数据的分析，2025年7月至2026年3月期间，SNAP的参保人数骤降了400多万人。这种下降在很大程度上可能是因为各州实施了文件要求和工作要求，以及扩大了对移民的资格限制。
“人们正面临行政壁垒，”预算与政策优先中心食品援助研究高级主任约瑟夫·略布雷拉说道。
范奥尔登表示，这种批评是错误的。“如果SNAP项目的资金减少，那不是因为共和党试图削减福利，而是因为经济在改善，人们按照计划退出了该项目，或者他们一直在欺诈，”这位威斯康星州共和党人说道。
巴雷特则表示，他收到了选民的反馈，称他们从OBBBA中“获得了明显增加的退税和纳税申报返还”。
根据财政部的数据，在刚刚过去的纳税申报季，平均退税金额跃升了11%，超过3400美元。
“这是非常直接的影响，人们确实能感受到。我喜欢这样描述：在经济中最努力工作的人，从我们提出的这项税收提案中获得的好处最大，”巴雷特说道。
然而，法案通过后不久，特朗普就承认了宣传上的困境。去年8月，他就已经在寻找更好的品牌名称。“我不会再用‘伟大、宏伟、美丽’这个词了，这个词在推动法案通过时很管用，但用来向人们解释法案的全部内容就不合适了，”特朗普说道。
一年来，受战争、通胀和层出不穷的争议事件分心，特朗普一直没能当好这项标志性立法成就的宣传使者——这正是民主党正在抓住的机会。
“他们甚至不再称其为《超级宏伟法案》，这就是事实证明它有多不受欢迎，”内华达州的李说道。
It was supposed to be Trump’s big legislative achievement. It could be a weapon for Democrats to win in the midterms
2026-07-12T10:30:25.488Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/07/12/politics/trump-big-beautiful-bill-midterms
President Donald Trump marked the 250th anniversary of the nation’s founding on July Fourth with a speech touting a roaring stock market, urging election reforms, and hailing military interventions in Venezuela and Iran.
But another anniversary went conspicuously unmarked: the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed into law by Trump exactly one year earlier.
At its ceremonious signing, the act seemed poised to be a defining legislative achievement for Republicans to run on in November.
But 12 months later, the law’s cutbacks to key safety-net programs such as Medicaid and food stamps have fueled a chorus of criticism, challenging the effort to promote its populist and business-friendly tax cuts.
While the president and his party have sought to play up the law’s most popular provisions, even attempting to recast it as a “Working Families Tax Cut Bill,” Democrats have seized on negative polling and the Republican rebrand as evidence of its failures.
Today, it looks increasingly uncertain which party will benefit from the law’s passage, as the landmark policy package has become a major factor in competitive battleground races that could decide control of the House of Representatives.
“We know that it’s going to be a robust campaign,” said Rep. Tom Barrett, a Republican seeking reelection in Michigan’s 7th District. “I represent one of the top targeted districts in the entire country, and it’s on me to go out and sell the merits of this.”
Historic reductions to federal Medicaid spending and changes to eligibility requirements quickly emerged as the most politically fraught component of the legislation.
The law, known as OBBBA, is projected to slash roughly $1.2 trillion from the key public health insurance program for lower-income Americans through 2035, leaving 7.5 million more people without coverage by 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The most notable provision adds a federal work requirement to Medicaid, a longtime GOP goal.
Democrats across the country have ripped into the GOP over the sweeping changes.
In California’s battleground 22nd District, for example, Democrat Randy Villegas has made fallout from the Medicaid cuts a centerpiece of his campaign against incumbent GOP Rep. David Valadao.
“We’re the most impacted in the entire country, where two out of every three of our constituents rely on Medicaid,” Villegas told CNN.
“Almost 70,000 people stand to lose healthcare in our district,” he said, adding that local clinics he’s spoken to are “worried about the possibility of shutting down and not being able to provide services to our community.”
Valadao has said that OBBBA will preserve Medicaid long term.
“One of my goals representing the Central Valley is to protect Medicaid for those who truly need it the most: seniors, vulnerable children, and disabled Americans,” he said in a statement to CNN last month.
In Iowa’s competitive US Senate race, Democrat Josh Turek has hammered Republican Rep. Ashley Hinson over her vote for the legislation and its reforms, which have stressed healthcare providers. Turek — who uses a wheelchair because of his spina bifida, attributed to his father’s exposure to Agent Orange during the Vietnam War — references his own experience navigating the healthcare system to underscore his opposition to the changes.
“I certainly know firsthand the importance of access to quality healthcare,” he has said.
The effect on healthcare in rural parts of the country was a subject of concern before the bill became law, including among moderate Republicans. As a concession, the final package created a $50 billion Rural Health Transformation Program designed to buttress rural healthcare.
Hinson and her allies have touted the program to voters. An ad from the National Republican Senatorial Committee pointed out that it secures “more than $209 million for rural healthcare in Iowa.”
The fund should provide a much-needed, though temporary, investment in communities that have long lacked adequate healthcare services, experts said. States plan to use the funds to address chronic disease, beef up workforces and expand telehealth services, among other uses.
But the program doesn’t come close to replacing the estimated $137 billion in federal Medicaid funding that rural areas are projected to lose over a decade, according to nonprofit health policy group KFF. Iowa, for instance, is expected to lose more than $3.8 billion in federal Medicaid spending during that period.
Notably, the work mandate and more frequent eligibility checks in Medicaid are expected to increase the strain, particularly in rural areas, as people lose coverage.
“There’s no doubt that the $50 billion investment for rural health transformation is helpful,” said Timothy McBride, a health economics professor at Washington University’s School of Public Health. “But the net effect is probably going to be that the rural health systems will be worse off.”
Republican Rep. Derrick Van Orden, who represents Wisconsin’s 3rd District — among the most competitive in the country — said the reforms were necessary to root out waste and fraud.
And “there’s truly dignity in working and supporting yourself and your family, and that’s what Republicans are trying to return to Americans,” he added.
But Democrats have historically enjoyed an advantage with voters on healthcare issues, and it’s one they are pressing in the midterms. One healthcare advocacy group, Protect Our Care, is launching a nearly $5 million campaign in more than a dozen key states that will include ads, town halls and a bus tour to highlight the healthcare cuts.
“House Republicans built their entire legislative agenda around a bill that made life measurably harder, hungrier, and more expensive for working families,” said Justin Chermol, a spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. The law would prove to be “a political loser that will drag down every vulnerable Republican running in a swing seat this November,” he predicted.
Earlier this year, Trump claimed, inaccurately,that the law contained the largest tax cuts in American history, “including no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, no tax on Social Security for our great seniors.”
A signature 2024 campaign promise, it’s been an emphatic talking point for members facing election in 2026.
In battleground races in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, in the country’s manufacturing heartlands — where seasonal laborers and hourly workers represent key constituencies — Republicans have been making the rounds to small businesses and construction crews to highlight the multitude of tax provisions in the law.
“I took a trip out to a road paving site in my district, and the workers there were very excited about no taxes on overtime,” said Barrett, the Michigan lawmaker. “A lot of them, because of the seasonal nature of road paving in Michigan, work a lot of overtime hours during the paving season and work less during the non-paving season, so this was a really critical thing for them.”
Van Orden also pointed to provisions to encourage business investment. “I was just with two different manufacturers today, and they’re both utilizing this program,” he said.
For Democrats, the criticism here is nuanced. Rep. Susie Lee is seeking reelection in the highly competitive 3rd District of Nevada, covering southern Las Vegas, where calls for “no taxes on tips” resonated with the large population employed in the services industry.
Lee, who voted against OBBBA, said she supports cutting taxes on tips and overtime. But “the fact that this expires in ’28 when you’re giving the wealthiest Americans tax cuts that never expire seems a little unfair to me,” she said.
Lee also argued that whatever benefits the tax cuts provided for working Americans have been offset by cost-of-living increases she blames on the Trump administration.
“You know, I have Tasia, she’s a 33-year-old waitress. She received a $2,500 refund, but she had to turn around and spend it on medical care, because she couldn’t afford health insurance, and had foregone purchasing insurance,” Lee said.
Overall, the tax measures in the law, including making permanent individual income tax provisions and a major business tax break from 2017, disproportionately help the wealthy. About 85% of filers will receive a tax cut in 2026. But those in the bottom fifth of the income ladder will see only a 0.8% uptick in after-tax income, while those in the top fifth get a 3.4% boost, according to the nonpartisan Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.
And many of the temporary deductions — including an enhanced deduction for senior citizens and a tax break on auto loan interest — primarily benefit middle-class and upper-middle-class taxpayers, said Joseph Rosenberg, a senior fellow at the center.
But more money in voters’ pockets is a powerful argument for Republicans.
“Voters know the difference between a party that lets them keep more of what they earn and one that keeps asking them to pay more for their radical socialist agenda, and that choice will be crystal clear on Election Day,” said Mike Marinella, a spokesperson for the National Republican Congressional Committee.
Savings and costs
Democrats are betting that the bill’s changes to safety-net programs like Medicaid and food stamps will matter more to voters than the tax savings and economic stimulus.
On top of the major changes to Medicaid, the OBBBA is projected to slash federal support for food stamps by nearly $187 billion over a decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office — the largest cut in the program’s history, advocates say. Expanded work requirements, which have already kicked in, are forecast to reduce enrollment in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, by 2.4 million people a month, on average, according to CBO.
JoAnna Mendoza, the Democrat challenging GOP Rep. Juan Ciscomani in Arizona’s toss-up 6th District, is campaigning on the loss of support for vulnerable community members.
Voters she talked to described growing pressure to put food on the table, said Mendoza, who grew up in a family that relied on food stamps. “We need to make sure mom-and-pops are able to stay up, that families have what they need to make sure that they’re able to feed their kids,” she said.
SNAP enrollment has plummeted by more than 4 million people between July 2025 and March 2026, according to an analysis of US Department of Agriculture and state data by the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Much of the decline likely stems from states implementing documentation and work requirements, as well as expanded limits on immigrants’ eligibility.
“People are hitting an administrative wall,” said Joseph Llobrera, senior director of research for food assistance at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
Van Orden said the criticism is misguided. “If there’s less money going into the SNAP program, it’s not because Republicans are trying to cut benefits. It’s because the economy is improving and people are getting off the program as designed, or they’ve been committing fraud,” the Wisconsin Republican said.
And Barrett said he heard from constituents who “had a noticeable increase in their tax refund and tax return” from OBBBA.
Refunds jumped 11% to more than $3,400, on average, this past tax filing season, according to the Treasury Department.
“It’s a very direct thing, and it is felt by people. As I like to describe it, the people working the hardest out in the economy have the greatest benefit under this tax proposal that we put forward,” Barrett said.
Yet Trump, almost as soon as the bill was passed, acknowledged the messaging challenge. Last August, he was already casting about for better branding. “I’m not going to use the term ‘great, big, beautiful,’ that was good for getting it approved, but it’s not good for explaining to people what it’s all about,” Trump said.
In the year since, distracted by war, inflation and steady streams of controversy, the president has been an uneven messenger for his signature legislative accomplishment — an opening that Democrats are seizing.
“The proof is in the pudding by the fact that they don’t even call it the One Big Beautiful Bill anymore,” said Lee of Nevada. “That’s how vastly unpopular it is.”