- We The 66
- Posts
- 🌊 The Big Beautiful Strategy
🌊 The Big Beautiful Strategy
Economists have blasted the bill; Republicans have said they’re missing the point
Did someone forward you this? Subscribe here free!
By Max Frost
When Scott Bessent, a leading hedge fund manager, was campaigning to become President Trump’s treasury secretary, he went on War Room, the podcast of MAGA thought leader Steve Bannon.
Bannon is both an ardent populist and a vocal critic of American deficit spending, warning that excessive debt risks destroying the fabric of American prosperity. In his episode with Bessent, the duo saw eye to eye. In fact, Bessent said he had decided to join Trump’s campaign because of his concerns about the debt:
“I could see that the way the Biden Administration was racking up the debt during their four years…there's a tipping point where you cannot grow your way out of it,” Bessent said. “There's a tipping point where you're too heavy to ever get on the treadmill, you're gonna have a heart attack.”
With Bannon’s backing, Bessent won the role and became the treasury secretary, tasked with overseeing the US government’s finances.
Last week, Bessent returned to War Room as the House was in the act of giving the Big Beautiful Bill Congress’ final approval. On its face, the bill – projected to add $4.1T to the federal debt by 2034 – was the antithesis of why Bessent had moved to Washington, DC.
But Bessent said it wasn’t that simple.
“As I said last year, I was really worried that the economy, the Democrats were tying the economy down,” he began on the podcast appearance. “And the more they did, the more they regulated, we were never going to be able to grow our way out of this.”
He said the solution was to “re-privatize the economy” – and that the Big Beautiful Bill accomplishes that. In today’s deep-dive, we look at what that means.
Bessent – an openly gay colleague of George Soros who formerly helped Al Gore campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination – does not fit the MAGA stereotype. Nevertheless, he’s become one of America’s most influential policymakers.
In his role, he hasn’t just advocated for tweaking the US tax code. Instead, he says that the country needs to rethink the government’s role in the economy in order to let Americans prosper. We’ll first look at Bessent’s logic, then at how that manifests in the Big Beautiful Bill, and finally at the debate around his positions.
The rest of this report is for paid subscribers, who fund our journalism. If you start a two-week free trial today, you’ll be automatically entered to win a free year. Once you sign up, you can access all of our articles here!
Editor’s Note
We’ll be back tomorrow with a deep-dive on Trump’s immigration crackdown, including Alligator Alcatraz and the BBB’s $178B in ICE Funding. Until then, send us your thoughts on the bill: Is it something you’re more optimistic or concerned about? One day, this debt will have to be paid. Who will pay it? Let us know your thoughts here.
And find our recent stories — including parts 1 and 2 of the BBB series — below:
Thanks to those who wrote in yesterday — we had an interesting mix of replies. Sharing a couple below:
Zach wrote:
I would be so curious to hear someone articulate why the Medicaid cuts are unreasonable. When I heard about work requirements, my immediate thoughts were for disabled people or students from lower income backgrounds pursuing higher education. But it sounds like both of these will be covered even with the new restrictions, as well as any stay-at-home mothers, another group who would be in need. Truly, what excuse could you have to need a government-funded health care, while refusing to work, volunteer, or study as a childless, able-bodied person. These are some extremely common-sense requirements, and if they truly save the predicted 1 trillion, that would be a win in and of itself in my opinion.
And Mary wrote:
Thank you so much for your series on the Big Beautiful Bill, I have been really trying to find a fair and factual look at what exactly the bill is. As for my thoughts – I am currently a fourth-year medical student in Louisiana at a hospital with a very high population of Medicaid-dependent patients. In my opinion, it seems like they may be underestimating how much the limitations to Medicaid will cost hospitals around the country. What people don’t think about is that patients will still show up to the emergency room and we will still treat them if needed because we have a moral obligation to do so (and I wouldn’t have it any other way). However, someone will still have to foot the bill, except now it will be the hospitals that are already underpaying their nurses and struggling to find adequate staff to keep the place running. I truly understand why people think you should have work requirements for Medicaid, and I agree in some cases, but I cannot help but think about all of the patients I have treated who were living on the streets and not working. I struggle to see how their lack of work means that they do not the most basic medical care that we can provide.
Being a medical student, I also have opinions on the loan caps but I’ll save those for another time!
Truly thank y’all for what you do.
Thanks for reading, and keep the replies coming. See you tomorrow.
—Max and Max