When Congress passed the sweeping H.R. 1, dubbed the "One Big Beautiful Bill" (OBBB), in July 2025, it ignited a political firestorm from Oregon to Washington, D.C. The bill, a cornerstone of President Donald Trump’s legislative agenda, has drawn both fervent support and fierce criticism, laying bare deep divisions over the nation’s priorities in health care, immigration, and social policy.
Oregon’s lone Republican congressman, Rep. Cliff Bentz, found himself at the center of the debate after issuing a pointed statement on August 19, 2025. Bentz directly challenged Oregon Governor Tina Kotek’s condemnation of the bill, accusing her of misleading Oregonians and omitting what he sees as the bill’s substantial benefits. "While the Governor portrays (the bill) as a wholesale attack on children, families and working people, the reality is far different," Bentz declared, as reported by the Blue Mountain Eagle.
Kotek, along with a chorus of state and federal Democrats, has not minced words about what’s at stake. She warned that Oregon could lose more than $15 billion in federal funding for health care, food assistance, and other crucial programs in the coming years. The cuts, she argues, would hit the state’s most vulnerable residents hardest—especially the more than 200,000 Oregonians at risk of losing Medicaid coverage. "The Trump Administration and Republicans in Congress have betrayed American children and families, who will become sicker, hungrier, and less prosperous because of President Trump’s budget bill," Kotek said in a statement. "Oregonians will see less of their federal tax dollars coming back to our state for things they count on."
H.R. 1’s reach extends far beyond Oregon. According to the ACLU, the bill marks the largest cut to Medicaid since the program’s inception in the 1960s, threatening coverage for an estimated 70 million Americans, including 12 million people with disabilities and millions more with mental health or substance use disorders. Medicaid is a lifeline for children, seniors, and people with disabilities across the country, and critics argue that the bill’s new paperwork and eligibility requirements could cause millions to lose coverage due to bureaucratic red tape.
For many, these changes are not just numbers on a spreadsheet—they’re deeply personal. Martha Haythorn, a 25-year-old woman with Down syndrome from Georgia, told PBS Newshour, "I deserve to be there. Without these benefits, I can’t do that. Is it really worth taking away someone’s benefit, someone’s life, someone’s accommodation?" Courtney Leader of Missouri echoed these concerns in a letter to her senator, writing, "Without Medicaid, we would lose everything—our home, our vehicles and, eventually, our daughter." These stories, highlighted by the ACLU, underscore the human cost of the bill’s cuts.
Bentz, however, insists that the bill is a necessary step toward accountability and efficiency. He points to Oregon’s policy of providing more than two years of continuous Medicaid eligibility for most adults—even those whose incomes rise above federal thresholds—as a key example of waste. The OBBB, he notes, will require states to conduct eligibility reviews twice a year starting in 2027, supported by $250 million in system upgrades. "The bill protects Medicaid for those it was meant to serve: seniors, individuals with disabilities, and low-income families," Bentz said in his statement. "It slows unchecked spending and begins the process of fixing billion-dollar loopholes in Medicaid that states have exploited for years."
The debate over Medicaid is only one facet of the bill’s far-reaching impact. H.R. 1 also imposes new penalties on states with high error rates in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), commonly known as food stamps. In 2024, Oregon’s error rate exceeded 14%, and the bill now requires states with error rates above 5% to contribute up to 20% of SNAP benefit costs unless corrective action is taken. Bentz defends this approach as a way to "restore integrity" to the program, stating, "The only way to get a state’s attention is to levy a penalty when the state fails to do its job." Kotek, on the other hand, warns that these provisions will cost Oregon $3 billion in federal SNAP funding over the next few years, reducing access to food assistance for many families.
But the OBBB is not just about cuts. Bentz criticized Kotek for failing to acknowledge what he describes as "literally dozens of provisions in the bill beneficial to Oregonians," including $10 billion in tax cuts for farmers and ranchers, disaster relief funding, increased crop insurance support, higher wheat reference prices, and tax benefits for families and workers. Other provisions include increased military funding, completion of the border wall, expansion of the Border Patrol, and more support for energy development and manufacturing. "Silence on these important matters is one thing," Bentz said. "But pushing out misleading and fear-generating statements regarding the bill is quite another."
Yet, for many advocacy groups, the bill’s priorities are deeply troubling. The ACLU argues that H.R. 1 redirects money from health care to what it calls President Trump’s "anti-immigrant agenda," funneling billions more to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and expanding detention facilities. The bill, they say, supports a "police state" where families risk being separated and detained by an immigration force larger than most militaries worldwide. The budget includes $170 billion for immigration enforcement and detention, with $45 billion earmarked for private prison companies and mass tent cities. The ACLU warns that this could result in up to 750,000 people—children, immigrants with legal status, and other long-time residents—being held in detention camps, often with limited access to legal counsel.
Another flashpoint is reproductive health. H.R. 1 seeks to "defund" Planned Parenthood by banning Medicaid patients from using their insurance at its clinics, affecting access to birth control, cancer screenings, STI testing, and abortion services—even in states where abortion remains legal. Although a federal court has temporarily blocked this provision, the legal battle is ongoing, and advocates fear that hundreds of health centers could close if the ban is upheld. For patients like Jamie Benner-Clemons, who credits a Planned Parenthood cancer screening with saving her life, the stakes couldn’t be higher. "The urgency of the health center staff saved my life," she told Planned Parenthood, as reported by the ACLU.
The bill’s impact on rural communities is particularly acute. Medicaid and federal funds keep rural hospitals open, support medical training, and ensure access to care. Dr. John Cullen, a family physician in Valdez, Alaska, told The 19th that "already we’re seeing [pregnancy care] deserts that are increasing in size, and after the passage of this bill those are going to be markedly worse—where people are going to have to drive hundreds of miles before they can get prenatal care, much less delivery."
Public reaction has been swift and, according to the ACLU, overwhelmingly negative. Recent polling shows that 64 percent of Americans oppose H.R. 1. Across the country, constituents have confronted their representatives at town halls and district offices, demanding answers for what many see as an attack on health care, civil liberties, and the social safety net.
As the dust settles on this contentious legislative battle, the divide remains clear. Supporters like Bentz argue that H.R. 1 brings needed reforms, tax relief, and accountability, while opponents warn of devastating consequences for health care, reproductive rights, and immigrant communities. With legal challenges pending and the 2026 elections on the horizon, the fate of the "One Big Beautiful Bill"—and the millions it affects—remains uncertain.
