176 Comments
User's avatar
Beth Kephart's avatar

I am roaring!

Expand full comment
Madam Geoffrin's avatar

In numbers too big to ignore!!!

Expand full comment
Michael G Baer's avatar

and you got some brothers in the chorus, sister

Expand full comment
kitkatmia's avatar

sent blistering email to rep salazar.

Expand full comment
Karen Meneghin's avatar

I emailed Senator Murkowski before and after the vote to let her know not to fail the American people. I find her public “confessional display” of angst over her vote as calculated stage drama as ingenuine in supporting the BBB. Taking a deal for Alaska is not a good governance for America, but a sub-level of isolationist policy

Expand full comment
Catherine Giovannoni's avatar

She could have done well by Alaskans just by voting "No" on the bill. Her vote was an attempt to save herself from Trump's wrath by pretending to do something for her state.

Expand full comment
Karen Meneghin's avatar

Key Concessions for Alaska:

Tax benefits for Alaskans: The bill includes a new tax exemption for Community Development Quota fishing groups and a significant increase in the federal tax deduction for Alaska whaling captains.

Icebreaker Funding: The budget allocates over $7 billion for Coast Guard icebreakers, with $300 million specifically dedicated to homeporting a newly acquired civilian icebreaker in Juneau, Alaska.

Increased Oil and Gas Production: The legislation includes mandates for new oil and gas leases, demonstrating support for increasing oil and gas production in the state.

Infrastructure Investments: The bill targets over $4 billion for "investments in shore facilities," including the $300 million for the polar icebreaker homeporting mentioned above.

Healthcare Support:

While there are proposed cuts to healthcare, the bill includes an increase in the federal share of Medicaid costs for Alaska (by 25%).

Alaska will also share in a $50 billion rural hospital fund, which could provide roughly $300 million per year to the state to help prevent hospital closures.

SNAP Exemptions: Alaska and Hawaii are given a two-year exemption from paying a higher share of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) expenses, which could potentially be extended if Alaska reduces its error rate in SNAP applications.

Exemptions from SNAP work requirements: Certain individuals in Alaska, including Alaska Natives and those medically certified as unable to work, will be exempt from the new SNAP work requirements.

Expand full comment
Susan Dieterlen's avatar

Thanks for posting this list, disgusting though it is. Alaska must have a ton of federal employees, public land and Native-related stuff and all. I can't believe this ends up a net win for Alaskans. Especially because I'll be shocked if she actually gets all of these special deals. Trump never pays his bills, y'know?

Expand full comment
Leu2500's avatar

Alaska is heavily, heavily dependent on federal money.

Expand full comment
Susan Dieterlen's avatar

It has to be, right?

Expand full comment
Lisa Iannucci's avatar

Well isn't that speeecccial! UGH.

Expand full comment
Leu2500's avatar

I’m convinced that Senate Republican leadership orchestrated this.

They’d lost Tillis & Paul. They could lose 1 more vote, have Vance break the tie, & still pass the bill.

Collins is up for election in 2026. She’s faced some decent opposition the last 2 times, & Dems have proven that they will fully fund her opponent. She needed to vote ‘no” to make reelection easier. Murkowski doesn’t face voters until 2028, so Thune could order her to vote “yes” so the bill passed, the issue was off the table for Collin's, & hopefully Alaskans will have forgotten this by 2028.

Expand full comment
Karen Meneghin's avatar

Of course they were working with Murkowski

Expand full comment
Leslie's avatar

This!

Expand full comment
Michael G Baer's avatar

I called her after hours and left voice mail that her public statement was an absolute disgrace and shame on you. Its a new low for the GOP and right up there with Joni Ernst. Do your F*ing job next time if this comes back to you.

Expand full comment
Karen Meneghin's avatar

By all appearances, States should SUE for treating ALASKA favorably to win Murkowski's vote. Look at the Healthcare and SNAP? Should all be treated equally with respect to populaltions?

Expand full comment
Leu2500's avatar

Rather states (it will only be states with Dem AGs) should sue for the bill violating the Equal Protection clause.

Expand full comment
Lisa Iannucci's avatar

That's a good idea! Emailing the AG right now.

Expand full comment
Michael G Baer's avatar

ditto

Expand full comment
Laura Lowery's avatar

Self report: called the Washington and local office of my rep, Sheri Biggs, telling her to vote NO. Also our local Democratic Party is collecting and hand delivering letters to our local elected reps today telling them we oppose this bill and asking them to vote NO.

Expand full comment
Madam Geoffrin's avatar

I will call Mikie Sherrill, my representative, to thank her for her social media presence not only opposing the Big Ugly Farce, but linking her opponent Jack Ciattarelli to it. Gloves off in Jersey.

Expand full comment
Deborah Potter's avatar

BTW, Diane Romino @dianer847378 is working with Mikie Sherrill on a resolution for NJ-11.

Expand full comment
Lisa Iannucci's avatar

That's fantastic!

Expand full comment
Art B.'s avatar

Senator Murkowski's selling out to party over country is reprehensible. Bribery is nothing short of disguising spineless cowardice by bending a knee to her GOP colleagues. There are profound consequences of a politician accepting obsequiousness. Let me explain.

The act of casting a vote is, in its purest form, a sacred civic duty, a cornerstone of democratic governance. It is meant to be a deliberate, conscience-driven decision, made with the collective good of the nation at its heart. To accept a bribe in exchange for prioritizing party over country, however, is to fundamentally corrupt this process, embedding consequences that ripple far beyond the immediate transaction, ultimately eroding the very foundations of a just and functional society.

Firstly, such an act shatters the public's trust in the electoral system and, by extension, in government itself. When votes are perceived as commodities to be bought and sold, the legitimacy of elected officials diminishes. Citizens become cynical, believing that their voices are irrelevant compared to the influence of money. This cynicism can lead to widespread apathy, discouraging participation in future elections and weakening the democratic spirit. A populace that believes its leaders are beholden to private interests rather than public service is a populace disengaged and disillusioned, ripe for instability.

Secondly, prioritizing party over country, especially under duress of a bribe, inevitably leads to policies that serve narrow, partisan agendas rather than the broader national interest. Decisions on critical issues—be it economic policy, healthcare, education, or foreign relations—become skewed, designed to benefit a specific faction or donor rather than the entire citizenry. This can result in short-sighted, inefficient, or even harmful legislation. For instance, a bribe might lead to the approval of a project that is environmentally damaging but profitable for a specific company, or the rejection of a much-needed social program because it doesn't align with a party's strict ideology, regardless of its benefit to the people. The long-term health and prosperity of the nation are sacrificed for immediate, illicit gain.

Furthermore, the acceptance of bribes fosters a culture of corruption that permeates all levels of governance. If one vote can be bought, why not others? This creates a dangerous precedent, incentivizing more illicit transactions and making it increasingly difficult for ethical individuals to operate within the system. It normalizes unethical behavior, making it harder to distinguish between legitimate political contributions and outright bribery. This insidious spread of corruption diverts resources, stifles innovation, and ultimately undermines the rule of law, as those who uphold it may themselves become compromised.

In conclusion, accepting a bribe to vote party first and country second is not merely a personal moral failing; it is an act of profound civic betrayal. It corrodes public trust, distorts policy-making, and cultivates a pervasive culture of corruption. The embedded consequences are a weakened democracy, a disillusioned populace, and a nation whose future is mortgaged for the fleeting gain of a few. The true cost of such a vote is the slow, steady unraveling of the social contract and the collective aspiration for a just and prosperous society.

Expand full comment
Art B.'s avatar

Thanks to all for reading my comment. As my mother used to say “Press on!”

Expand full comment
Bison Doc's avatar

Well thought-out and expressed. It seems this is exactly the intent of the current administration.

Expand full comment
Art B.'s avatar

Yes. And thanks for taking time to read my comments this morning. Our voting booths await us ! 🤞

Expand full comment
Mark's avatar

Called my Republican Congressman’s office today and reminded them that he said 2 weeks ago that he would probably vote against the reconciliation bill if it meant more deficit spending. I pointed out that the bill raised the debt limit by five trillion with a t dollars and would add OVER three trillion to the deficit, and I wanted him to do what he said he would two weeks ago.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/burchett-says-probably-no-trump-032351356.html

The woman was trying to get rid of me. I asked if anyone was actually calling and saying to vote for this thing. She said they had calls on both sides. I asked how the calls were leaning. She said they were getting a variety of positions.

Uh huh.

😂

Expand full comment
WA's avatar

Self report WI… we’re on vacation with poor internet connection but I made my calls this AM and have txt friends to call Van Orden to demand a no vote. I’ll make another call this afternoon. Thanks for all your work, Simon.

Expand full comment
Dianne Chrestopoulos's avatar

Already called Congressman Luttrell's office insisting he vote NO on this horrible heinous bill. I also asked his aide to be sure to let him know that if he does vote for it (which I am sure he will) that I will do everything in my power to see that he is not re-elected. Our voices matter! Call your MOC.

Expand full comment
Barbara Moschner's avatar

I called my Republican Congressman Tony Gonzales and urged him to vote NO for the bill from the Senate.

Expand full comment
Veronica's avatar

Called Rep. de la Cruz and told her to do the right thing THIS TIME and vote "NO."

Expand full comment
Kathleen Gaige's avatar

It is a testament to the extreme gerrymandering in Ohio that not 1 of the 10 R held districts in OH is on the list of possibly persuadable congress members re: the reconciliation bill.

Expand full comment
Randy Schutt's avatar

Indivisible's target list includes OH-14, Rep. David Joyce in the northeast corner of Ohio (from Willowick, Willoughby, and Bainbridge to the Pennsylvania border and down to Warren and Kent. If you know anyone in that district (which includes Chardon, Painesville, Chester, Russell/South Russell, and Ashtabula) please contact them.

Expand full comment
Kathleen Gaige's avatar

Done

Expand full comment
Kathleen Gaige's avatar

Contacted Rep Rulli’s office ( OH 6 ) to encourage no vote. He will vote Y - safe R district.

Expand full comment
Ltmuirssi@gmail.com's avatar

Having heard the Rev. Senator Warnock’s sermon from the floor of the Senate chamber calling out the immorality and cruelty of the Republican’s Big, Ugly Bill, I have begun to think of them as “Sinner-tors”!

Expand full comment
Dan Keefe's avatar

Outrageous and appalling! A cult of greedy hypocrites hiding behind religious righteousness.

Expand full comment
John Payne's avatar

Hi all -- I'm on the road a lot today but will do what I can.

The Bee did have an article on the protest outside Kiley's office led by nurses, and it quoted me. Hope it gets the attention of people who say they "support the troops."

[link had a paywall, here’s what it said]:

John Payne, a Fair Oaks resident who served in the army from 1980 and 1984, emphasized that veterans may have VA benefits, “but a lot of them depend on Medicaid for long-term healthcare.” He held a rolled American flag close to his person to avoid knocking over the protesters that crowded the sidewalk.

“There are people who took an oath and made sacrifices for our country,” he said. “They deserve our support.”

As the protesters marched back toward Kiley’s office, Payne unfurled his flag and raised it high.

[Here’s a link that might work]

Nurses, Rocklin residents protest Medicaid cuts at Kiley's office

https://eedition.sacbee.com/shortcode/LMCSAC/edition/270723a4-cb4d-455b-ae75-d26d48f6163c?page=2fea4ec9-564b-9936-d299-2a91a1b9aec4

Expand full comment
Michael G Baer's avatar

Congratulations on the presser, John. I got stopped by a paywall.

Expand full comment
John Payne's avatar

Hmm tried another link does it work? Also put the quote in the post. She made me sound a lot more coherent than I think I was managing.

Expand full comment
Susan Dieterlen's avatar

Love this!! Thank you, John

Expand full comment
Elizabeth T.'s avatar

I texted my cousin in VA whose mom lives in a nursing home largely funded by Medicaid and told her that VA has filial responsibility laws, meaning she'll be responsible for her mom's care should the nursing home close. I told her to call her GOP MOC and supplied the phone number. My cousin voted for Trump but regrets it because she's a VA nurse and sees the fallout of her vote.

I called Tillis to thank him and to tell him to start truth telling, Budd to excoriate him, and my Democratic rep to let her know that the people are pissed.

Expand full comment