Why is the Senate version of the Great Beauty Act highly controversial in the House of Representatives? The Great Beauty Act was narrowly passed by the House of Representatives' procedural vote, and there will be a formal vote tonight, which is quite concerning. The difference between the version passed by the Senate last week and the version passed by the House of Representatives on May 22nd is that: 1. Future deficit estimates: Senate 3.25 trillion vs House 2.41 trillion (CBO assessment caliber). 2. Revenue and expenditure structure: The Senate will reduce taxes by 4.5 trillion yuan and expenditures by 1.2 trillion yuan, while the House of Representatives will reduce taxes by 4 trillion yuan and expenditures by 1.5 trillion yuan, with an increase in tax cuts and a decrease in expenditures. 3. Popular terms: raising the debt ceiling by $5 trillion (House of Representatives $4 trillion), removing clause 899 (capital tax), tightening SALT deductions (agreeing to raise the ceiling to $40000, but only until 2029). The Republican Party in the House of Representatives has three major dissatisfaction with the Senate version: 1) The social security expenditure has been cut too harshly. The Senate has cut even more, especially in the area of medical subsidies, and has also lowered the threshold for healthcare service taxes, which may affect hospital operations. 2) The debt ceiling has been raised too much. The Senate version allows more debt ceiling increases, which makes conservatives worried about treasury bond. 3) The 'permanence' of tax reform will increase future deficits. The Senate version wants to make Trump's corporate tax cuts permanent. This approach is to adjust the accounting baseline to make Congress appear to be spending less money, but in reality, it is allowing the long-term deficit to widen The ultra conservative Republicans in the House of Representatives are most concerned about deficits and debt, while the moderate Republicans oppose cutting Medicaid too harshly. So it's stuck here. Looking at the situation of illegal voting tonight, I hope it can be approved without any new modifications. Because once there are modified parts, even if the House of Representatives passes the bill, it will have to go to the Senate for a new vote, which prolongs the time period. Of course, the bill will ultimately be passed, depending on the degree of compromise within the Republican Party and the timing of its passage.