The White House claimed in a news release that the party was opposed to every individual item in the “big, beautiful bill,” the broad-ranging tax and spending bill being proposed by US President Donald Trump, because it was “the party that opposed the legislation as a whole.”
Such a tactic is misleading, especially since the White House referenced measures in the bill that Democrats have supported to improve Americans’ lives and aren’t the justifications Democrats have used to justify their opposition to the “big beautiful bill.”
What the White House claims Democrats oppose is verified by this fact:
They oppose the most significant tax cut in history, which will result in a double-digit percent decrease in their tax bills. In fact, Americans earning between $30, 000 and $80, 000 will pay around 15% less in taxes”.
The tax bill’s specifics are still pending. According to analysis from the Tax Policy Center, it would reduce taxes for middle-class households by an average of 2.4 percent in its current form.
Although it receives a sizable tax cut, it is not the biggest tax cut ever. That was 2.9% in 1981 under Ronald Reagan.
It is accurate to say that tax bills will drop by a little more than 11 percent across all tax brackets, at least in the near future. The Non-Partisan Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that those making between $30, 000 and $80, 000 will receive 15% less.
They oppose NO TAX ON TIPS for law enforcement, nurses, and other workers in the service sector, as well as NO TAX ON OVERTIME for the millions of Americans who work in the industry.
Their opposition to Trump’s tax and spending bill is the only way to prove this.
The idea of no tips tax has been supported by both Democrats and Republicans. On the campaign trail, both Kamala Harris and Donald Trump made the pledge to do so. The No Tax on Tips Act, which was approved by the US Senate on May 20, was supported by Senate Democrats. The bill was co-sponsored by prominent Democrats, including Nevada Senator Jacky Rosen, and was unanimously approved by Republican Senator Ted Cruz of Texas.
They oppose historic tax cuts for seniors, they claim.
Democrats have generally opposed tax cuts for seniors outside of the “big beautiful bill.” Numerous Democrats have supported legislation that would increase seniors’ tax breaks. A Republican-led bill that would increase the standard deduction for adults over 65 would be co-sponsored by California’s Democratic Senator Jimmy Panetta.
The “You Earned It, You Keep It Act,” which would essentially eliminate taxes on social security benefits, was introduced by House Democrats in 2024. However, the bill has never been passed through the committee.
They oppose a tax credit increase for children, they claim.
Again, they oppose Trump’s “big beautiful bill,” not the child tax credit.
Democrats have long advocated for expanding the child tax credit. Senate Democrats introduced legislation to expand the child tax credit in April, including legislation introduced by Colorado’s Michael Bennett and Georgia’s Raphael Warnock. The proposed legislation would permanently increase the tax credit, from $2,000 to $6,000 for newborns, from $4,000 to $4,000 for children between the ages of one and six, and from $3,000 to $3,000 for children between the ages of six and seventeen.
The “big beautiful bill” would increase the child tax credit by only $500, which would start in 2028.
They oppose the creation of new savings accounts for infants and the possibility for children to grow naturally in America.
House Republicans created new children’s savings accounts in the “big beautiful bill.” For every child born between January 1st, 2025 and January 1st, 2029, the accounts would include a $1, 000 gift.
Famous Democrats have actually backed the idea of savings accounts for newborns, which is why they have been.
The American Opportunity Accounts Act, which would provide $1,000 to newborns and up to $2,000 in annual contributions, was introduced by Cory Booker of New Jersey in 2018. In 2023, he reintroduced the bill.
They oppose expanding access for hard-working American families to childcare.
This is a false statement. Child care access is not covered by the White House link, but rather the Paid Family and Medical Leave Credit. Employees who have worked a year and make $57,600 or less are eligible for up to 12 weeks of paid leave under Trump’s bill.
Democrats have focused on expanding access to child care, including universal pre-K, while doing so gives parents more time at home. Republicans fought a Democratic plan to keep open child care facilities that had been struggling during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2023.
In order to protect their communities, they are opposed to historic border security.
Trump reportedly increased Trump’s chances of winning in November 2024 by putting pressure on Republicans to vote against a bipartisan border security bill last year. Republicans’ plans to use US military installations for migrant detention have been criticized by Democrats as a waste of resources from the Department of Defense. Democrats have long opposed funding for the border wall, even during Trump’s first term.
A border wall would, according to a 2018 Stanford University analysis, only reduce migration by 0.6%. Despite this, the “big beautiful bill” allocates more than $50 billion to finish the wall and the maritime crossings, $45 billion to build and maintain detention facilities, and $ 14 billion to transport.
“They oppose expanded health savings accounts,” which give Americans more options and freedom of spending.
This is a bit accurate. Democrats have not been strong supporters of health savings accounts. The socioeconomically disadvantaged, who may not have the funds to contribute to the accounts, are not helped, according to the opinion. Democrats have voiced opposition to the bill’s potential $ 880 billion cut in funding for crucial government programs like Medicaid.
They oppose scholarships that let people choose the educational options that best suit their families, according to them.
The White House conflates the debate over school choice with scholarships in the proposed legislation. Republicans claim that by allowing students to have the opportunity to access a higher standard of education, funds that otherwise go to the public school system can be redirected to private institutions.
