To decrease the spending limit in President Donald Trump’s “One Big, Beautiful Bill” and secure its passage, House Republicans, led by Speaker Mike Johnson, must navigate a complex landscape of intraparty divisions, Senate resistance, and fiscal concerns.
The bill, which passed the House on May 22, 2025, by a narrow 215-214 vote, aims to extend Trump’s 2017 tax cuts, eliminate taxes on tips and overtime, fund border security and deportations, and raise the debt ceiling by $4 trillion, while proposing $1.5 trillion in spending cuts to offset costs.
However, conservative hardliners and some Senate Republicans argue these cuts are insufficient to address the deficit, with the Congressional Budget Office estimating the bill could add $3.8 trillion to the national debt over a decade.
Below are strategies Republicans could pursue to reduce the spending limit and advance the bill, based on the current political dynamics and available information.
Deepen and Accelerate Spending Cuts
Target Additional Domestic Programs
- The bill already includes significant cuts to Medicaid (hundreds of billions) and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), alongside rescinding clean energy tax credits from the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act.
- To satisfy fiscal hawks like Representatives Chip Roy, Ralph Norman, and Senators Ron Johnson and Rand Paul, Republicans could propose deeper cuts to other domestic programs, such as education, housing, or discretionary spending, while avoiding politically sensitive programs like Medicare and Social Security, which Speaker Johnson has pledged to protect.
For example, conservatives have pushed for reverting spending to pre-pandemic levels, which could yield additional savings beyond the current $1.5 trillion target.
Accelerate Medicaid Work Requirements
The bill’s Medicaid work requirements, currently set to begin in December 2026, were a sticking point for conservatives who wanted them implemented as early as 2027.
- Moving the timeline forward to 2026 or earlier could appease deficit hawks, though it risks alienating moderate Republicans concerned about voter backlash in 2026 midterms over reduced healthcare access for low-income constituents.
Eliminate More Tax Credits
- Expanding the rollback of clean energy subsidies (e.g., electric vehicle credits and renewable energy incentives) beyond the current plan to phase them out by 2028 could generate additional savings. This aligns with conservative priorities but may face resistance from Republicans in districts benefiting from green energy investments.
Compromise on the SALT Deduction
Cap or Limit SALT Increases
- The bill currently raises the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap from $10,000 to $40,000, a concession to blue-state Republicans like Rep. Nick LaLota, who represent high-tax districts. Fiscal conservatives oppose this increase due to its estimated $150 billion cost over a decade.
- Republicans could propose a lower cap (e.g., $20,000-$30,000) or make the increase temporary to reduce the bill’s overall price tag, balancing the demands of moderates and deficit hawks.
Trump has urged Republicans to defer SALT negotiations, which could allow for a lower spending limit by minimizing this costly provision.
Phase Out SALT Over Time
- To further cut costs, Republicans could structure the SALT increase to phase out after a few years, reducing long-term fiscal impact while still addressing immediate political pressure from blue-state Republicans. This would require careful negotiation to maintain support from moderates like Rep. Mike Lawler.
Streamline Tax Breaks
Make Tax Breaks Temporary or Targeted
The bill includes temporary tax exemptions for tips and overtime (2026-2028) and permanent extensions of the 2017 tax cuts, costing an estimated $3.8 trillion.
- To lower the spending limit, Republicans could shorten the duration of new tax breaks (e.g., tips and overtime exemptions to one year) or limit their scope (e.g., applying only to specific income brackets).
This would reduce revenue losses while still fulfilling Trump’s campaign promises.
Reevaluate MAGA Accounts
- The proposed “MAGA accounts” (tax-exempt trusts for younger Americans) add to the bill’s cost. Republicans could scale back the annual contribution limit (currently $5,000) or restrict eligibility to lower-income individuals, reducing the fiscal impact while maintaining the program’s appeal.
Negotiate with Senate Republicans
Align with Senate Priorities
Senate Republicans, including Ron Johnson and Rand Paul, have criticized the bill’s spending cuts as “wimpy” and insufficient, with Paul opposing the $4 trillion debt ceiling increase.
- House Republicans could work with Senate leaders like John Thune to incorporate deeper cuts or remove the debt ceiling hike, though this risks delaying action past the Treasury’s August 2025 deadline to avoid default.
- A conference committee could reconcile House and Senate versions, focusing on cuts acceptable to both chambers, such as stricter Medicaid eligibility or reduced foreign aid.
Limit Senate Modifications
Speaker Johnson has urged the Senate to minimize changes to preserve the House’s delicate coalition.
- House Republicans could pre-emptively adopt some Senate-preferred cuts (e.g., eliminating additional discretionary programs) to reduce the need for revisions, ensuring the bill’s passage without increasing its cost.
Leverage Trump’s Influence
Rally Conservative Holdouts
Trump’s direct engagement, including White House meetings and public pressure via Truth Social, has already swayed some Freedom Caucus members (e.g., Reps. Chip Roy and Ralph Norman) to support the bill. Continued pressure from Trump could convince remaining holdouts like Reps. Thomas Massie and Warren Davidson to accept a revised package with deeper cuts, avoiding further defections.
Frame Cuts as a Political Win
- Trump and Johnson could emphasize the $1.5 trillion in cuts as “the largest in 30 years,” as Johnson claimed, to counter criticism from fiscal hawks and build public support.
This narrative could help conservatives justify their votes while pushing for additional reductions in Senate negotiations.
Use Budget Reconciliation Strategically
Maximize Reconciliation Constraints
The bill is being advanced through budget reconciliation to bypass a Senate filibuster, requiring all provisions to comply with the Byrd Rule (i.e., directly affecting revenue or spending).
- Republicans could remove non-budgetary elements (e.g., certain immigration policies like the $1,000 asylum fee) to streamline the bill and focus on high-impact spending cuts, reducing costs while maintaining Senate passage feasibility.
Front-Load Savings
Conservative critics have noted that the bill’s tax cuts and spending are front-loaded, while savings are back-loaded.
- Republicans could restructure the bill to accelerate cuts (e.g., implementing SNAP reductions earlier) to demonstrate fiscal responsibility and appease deficit hawks.
Challenges and Risks
Balancing Factions
Deepening cuts risks losing moderate Republicans, who fear voter backlash in swing districts over reductions to Medicaid and SNAP. For example, Maine Sen. Susan Collins has already opposed steep Medicaid cuts. Republicans must carefully calibrate cuts to avoid alienating either camp.
Senate Resistance
Senate Republicans’ push for changes could unravel the House’s narrow coalition, especially if they demand cuts that moderates oppose. Johnson’s “delicate equilibrium” requires minimal Senate revisions to ensure final House approval.
Economic and Political Fallout
Aggressive cuts could exacerbate economic concerns, especially after Moody’s downgraded the U.S. credit rating, citing rising debt. Markets have shown instability, and further cuts could heighten perceptions of fiscal risk, though Johnson argues the bill’s pro-growth policies will offset this.
Final Analysis
To decrease the spending limit and pass the bill, Republicans should focus on deepening and accelerating cuts to domestic programs like Medicaid and SNAP, scaling back or phasing out costly tax provisions like SALT and MAGA accounts, and aligning with Senate priorities to minimize revisions.
Trump’s influence will be critical in unifying conservatives, while strategic use of reconciliation can keep the bill fiscally focused. However, Republicans must balance these cuts against the risk of losing moderate support and triggering economic or electoral backlash.
The bill’s fate hinges on Johnson’s ability to maintain his razor-thin majority and navigate Senate negotiations before the July 4, 2025, target for Trump’s signature.