The Rumor Mill: Proposed Changes, Pushback, and PA Impacts
Summary
What Senate Republicans Want Changed in the ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’”
Last week, we discussed the tax codes that are subject to change under the “One Big, Beautiful Bill Act”. It might, in fact, be easier to list the things that are not changing as a result of the bill—but we have to remember that it hasn’t passed yet. As the Senate deliberates on the mechanics and fine print of the bill, we’re going to break down what you might be hearing in the press about where the bill is headed.
Every reconciliation package comes with its fair share of markups. As the Senate prepares to debate the House-passed “One Big, Beautiful Bill Act” next week, senators are circling back on several controversial provisions within the text.
First, a review of the process:
Budget reconciliation is a special process Congress employs to pass large spending or tax changes with a simple majority (51 votes) instead of the usual 60-vote threshold.
Right now, the House has passed its version of the “One Big, Beautiful Bill Act”. The Senate will mark it up (propose changes) to the bill the week of June 16th.
In short, the Senate is ironing out the details before a final vote—and the Trump-imposed July 4 deadline—and the rumors about what might be changed are starting.
Clean-Energy Credit Tweaks
Republicans reportedly want to soften a “cliff” that would suddenly end clean-energy tax credits, just two months after the bill becomes law. Thirteen House Republicans who backed the bill are now urging Senate leaders to ease the abrupt phase-out on clean-energy tax credits—arguing that the proposed two-month sunset would strand projects currently under construction.
Senator Shelley More Capito (R-W.Va.) is drafting amendments to loosen the construction-start deadlines without a full rewrite—hopefully giving developers more runway. Similarly, Senator Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) says there’s a “general consensus" amongst the GOP to exempt active projects from the across-the-board phase-out that’s planned.
For PA: Changes to the timeline could extend current development windows and prevent tax credits from vanishing overnight, giving businesses more time to finish projects and still qualify for savings.
Deep Cut, or Protecting Investments?
Senators like Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Rick Scott (R-Fla.) reportedly want “trillions” in new rescissions to offset the projected $5 trillion deficit hit, going so far as to threaten to sink the package. The debt increase remains a sticking point for much of the GOP.
A few more moderate Republicans—Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) among them—are recommending splitting the bill into pieces, so current clean-energy and healthcare investments stay intact.
For PA: Splitting up the bill means that new incentives for upcoming projects could be delayed. Companies and local governments planning green-energy investments could see their timelines pushed back, directly impacting jobs and growth.
Medicaid Work Requirements & Provider Taxes
It seems that not everyone is totally on board with imposing work requirements on adults, fearing it could reduce coverage. Members of the GOP have also raised alarms about the proposed freeze of state provider taxes, warning that rural hospitals could be affected.
For PA: The One Big Beautiful Bill Act: Medicaid and Medicare Under the Microscope
Debt-Ceiling Strategy
Some Republicans are proposing carving out the $4 trillion debt-limit increase into its own bill so the party can revisit the offsets and strategize later. Senator Johnson, in particular, favors a staged approach: raise the ceiling now and negotiate for deeper cuts down the line.
For PA: Delaying a debt-ceiling increase (the debt ceiling is raised in response to the government’s borrowing needs as they arise) risks a default, which would cause a spike in interest rates nationwide. The debt ceiling was suspended back in 2023, allowing borrowing without a specific limit, but eventually the suspension expires, as it did in January of 2025. The everyday impact of a higher debt and potential subsequent default could mean higher interest rates on mortgages, car loans, and credit cards.
SNAP State-Contribution Requirement
As it stands now, beginning in 2028, the bill would require states to share the cost of SNAP benefits with the federal government. Senators from rural states—like John Boozman (R-Ark.) and Jim Justice (R-W.Va.)—are already demanding carve-outs to protect their own state budgets. As it stands, the legislation passed with the House provisions is projected to cut $295 billion of federal spending from SNAP over the next 10 years, with approximately half of those savings coming from shifting the burden to the states.
For PA: Pennsylvania budgets millions every year for matching Medicaid funds, and adding SNAP contributions has the potential to strain the budget or force some fund reshuffling, potentially reducing other integral services funded by the state.
Byrd Rule Red Flags
The Senate budget process has a number of regulations—the Byrd Rule is one of them. In short, the Byrd Rule allows the Senate to strike provisions considered “extraneous” to the budget, meaning they don’t have a direct budgetary effect. This, ideally, forces lawmakers to stay within the confines of fiscal matters and avoid pushing their own policy agendas. The Byrd Rule is the Senate’s “delete all” button, and a number of news outlets have flagged non-budget related items in the bill that may violate the rule, including AI regulation, judicial-contempt curbs, Planned Parenthood defunding, silencer-tax repeal, and faster fossil fuel permitting.
For PA: Governor Josh Shapiro just landed the largest private-sector investment in Commonwealth history: Amazon will build multiple AI/data-center campuses in PA, investing $20 billion and creating at least 1,250 high-tech jobs around Luzerne and Bucks county. The AI provision in the “One Big, Beautiful Bill Act” includes a ten-year moratorium on state AI regulations, in an effort to keep a uniform federal floor on AI innovation. But—this provision could be subject to the Byrd Rule for being non-budget related. If it’s struck from the bill, then states could move forward with their own AI guardrails without waiting for federal government guidelines. The main concern with this moratorium is that it would prevent states from addressing the evolving harms of AI, including job displacement and deepfakes. The moratorium has the potential to strip individual states of their ability to institute protections quickly and efficiently.
On one hand, a 10-year moratorium creates a uniform floor, with no state able to unilaterally ban or over-regulate AI, giving companies moving into the space confidence that they won’t have to pivot mid-build or mid-growth. On the other hand, if the Byrd Rule nixes the pause, Pennsylvania could write its own AI regulations, meaning fast-track permitting and allowing companies like Amazon to break ground almost immediately without waiting for guidelines from the federal government.
Media Watch
This week, TIME reported Elon Musk’s public push to “kill the bill” over deficit concerns, highlighting potential party fractures. At the POLITICO Energy Summit, Senator John Curtis (R-Utah) called Trump's July 4 deadline “false” and “far too aggressive.”
What to Watch Next
The Senate’s first markup of the bill is next week, and we’ll watch for amendments that make these rumors into real changes. We’ll keep you posted on the changes and help you understand the impact on Pennsylvania’s organizations, communities, and projects. Have questions or need a deeper dive for your Pennsylvania-based operations? Just hit reply and shoot us a message.
Read More
