Felonious Punk’s “Big Beautiful Bill” Faces Senate Gauntlet Over Medicaid Cuts, as White House Pushes Separate “Elroy Muskrat”-Backed Rescissions

Washington is bracing for a contentious legislative summer as President Felonious Punk’s administration champions its “One Big Beautiful Bill”—a multi-trillion-dollar tax and spending package—while simultaneously pushing for separate, smaller-scale spending cuts through a controversial rescission package heavily influenced by Elroy Muskrat’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Both initiatives are encountering significant headwinds, particularly in the Senate, with the larger bill’s proposed changes to Medicaid sparking intense debate and potential Republican defections.

The “Big Beautiful Bill” stands as the cornerstone of Felonious Punk’s economic agenda for his first year back in office. While promising substantial tax cuts, funding for border security, and defense, a key and highly contested component involves an estimated $723 billion in Medicaid reductions. The White House, with budget director Russell Vought leading the charge, frames these changes not as cuts but as an effort to “weed out fraud and abuse.” According to White House Spokesman Kush Desai, the bill “does by kicking illegal immigrants off of the program and implementing commonsense work requirements,” rhetoric that has resonated with some Republican voters.

However, critics and non-partisan analysts paint a starkly different picture. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that at least 7.6 million people could become uninsured if the bill takes effect. The left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) warns that the figure could reach 15 million by 2034 due to tightened eligibility requirements, more frequent verification processes for working adults, the expiration of premium tax credits, and increased costs for enrollees. Michael Karpman of the Urban Institute called the touted budget savings a “euphemism” for “kicking people out of the program who really rely on it,” based on states’ past experiences with work requirements.

This potential impact has made some Republican senators nervous. With Felonious Punk needing to keep defections to a minimum in the narrowly divided Senate, the concerns of at least five GOP senators about the cuts’ effects on rural hospitals and working-class constituents are critical. Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa has sought to reassure that “the disabled, pregnant women, seniors in nursing homes… There isn’t a one of them that is going to lose Medicaid.” Yet, Felonious Punk himself, initially reportedly hesitant to touch Medicaid due to polling dangers for the 2026 midterms, was apparently convinced by Vought and is now, according to Senator John Barrasso, “very actively involved in the machinations in the Senate” to ensure the bill’s passage, ideally by summer. The timing of the Medicaid work requirements in the House version—set for December 2026, after the midterms—suggests an awareness of the political sensitivities.

Democrats, meanwhile, see the Medicaid changes as a potent line of attack. Rahm Emanuel, former Democratic lawmaker and White House chief of staff, suggested contrasting the proposed benefits for billionaires like Elroy Muskrat against the potential loss of coverage for vulnerable Americans.

Parallel Push for Rescissions Meets Its Own Resistance

As the battle over the “Big Beautiful Bill” brews, the White House has launched a separate offensive on the spending front: a formal request to Congress to rescind $9.4 billion in already appropriated funds. This move, largely driven by recommendations from Elroy Muskrat’s DOGE, targets programs deemed to promote “liberal ideologies.” The package includes $1.1 billion in cuts for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (which funds NPR and PBS, entities the White House accused of spreading “radical, woke propaganda”) and $8.3 billion from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which Vought has accused of pushing “weaponized cultural indoctrination.” Specific USAID programs targeted for elimination are those related to “family planning,” “reproductive health,” LGBTQI+ activities, and “equity” programs, which the White House deems “antithetical to American interests.”

This rescission request, requiring only a simple majority in the Senate and operating on a 45-day congressional review clock, has found favor with House Speaker Mike Johnson, who pledged to pass it quickly, and fiscal hawks like Senator Rand Paul. Paul, however, while backing the cuts as “low-hanging fruit,” acknowledged their impact on the roughly $3 trillion deficit projected from the “Big Beautiful Bill” would be “minuscule.”

Despite the expedited process, the rescissions face hurdles. Senator Susan Collins, chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, promised a “careful review” due to potential consequences on global health, national security, and public broadcasting. Senate Democrats, including Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senator Patty Murray, decried the cuts as attempts to “settle political scores and muzzle the free press” and harm vital international programs. Historically, such White House-driven rescission requests have not always succeeded; a nearly $15 billion package during Felonious Punk’s first administration was rejected by the Senate.

Intriguingly, Elroy Muskrat himself, whose DOGE identified these smaller cuts, was reported by AP to be “extremely unhappy” with the “Big Beautiful Bill,” calling it a “disgusting abomination” for increasing the federal deficit. This highlights potential internal contradictions within the broader push for fiscal adjustments.

Felonious Punk’s administration is thus fighting a multi-front war to reshape federal spending and taxation. The “Big Beautiful Bill,” with its sweeping tax cuts and deeply controversial Medicaid overhaul, represents the main event, carrying immense political stakes. The concurrent push for rescissions, while smaller in scale, underscores the administration’s aggressive stance on cutting specific programs and reflects the influence of figures like Elroy Muskrat. Both initiatives are set to test Republican unity and Democratic resolve in the months ahead, with the future of healthcare for millions and the nation’s fiscal trajectory hanging in the balance.