LLMs (aka AI, though they are not intelligent) burn through the environment, end entire careers, turn human communication into a can of soup, fill our minds with junk, and lie confidently.
They do not represent the same type of revolution that occurred when robots, for example, replaced human bodily capabilities in factories. While I agree it is foolish to separate our minds from our bodies (what a fine example of the Western capitalistic brainwashing that reality is an assembly of disconnected entities awaiting monetization), it is useful to understand that LLMs are attempting to replace human minds or human thinking. Without thinking, we are animals blindly reacting to fear and desire. Good luck with that.
Given my ongoing state of general horror in response to the destruction of everything I’ve held dear for a few decades, it seemed fitting to use Google Notebook to unpack whatever atrocities might be hidden inside the most recent monster emerging from the Trump-led attack on every core value, norm, law, procedure, and vision of the United States: H.R.1 – One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
If there was one use of AI that piqued most of my interest, analyzing huge piles of data for interesting tidbits would be it.
Here’s the prompt I used for Google NotebookLM (I get better results when I suggest a certain type of person or role, and add an edge of opinion to the task): Pretend you are an investigative journalist analyzing this budget proposal. Please find the elements of the budget that provide unusual benefits to certain constituencies, change the ability of institutions like the courts to function, or impose severe costs on poor people.
Here are the results, none of which I have verified, and which I also converted into a podcast using the same tool:
Here’s a breakdown of findings based solely on the provided text:
Severe Costs Imposed on Poor People and Vulnerable Populations
Examining the sections related to nutrition and healthcare, several changes appear likely to disproportionately impact low-income Americans:
- Caps on SNAP Benefit Calculations: The bill fundamentally alters how the cost of the Thrifty Food Plan (TFP)—the basis for calculating Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) allotments—is determined. While the cost will still be adjusted annually for inflation (CPI for All Urban Consumers), the Secretary is prohibited from increasing the cost of the thrifty food plan based on a reevaluation or update to the methodology or market basket. This means that if future studies show the TFP diet is insufficient or outdated, SNAP benefits cannot be increased to reflect those findings, only general price inflation. This raises concerns that benefit levels could erode over time in their ability to provide an adequate diet, effectively imposing a cost by limiting potential future increases needed to match actual food costs or nutritional needs beyond basic inflation.
- Elimination of CHIP for Individuals Without Verified Immigration Status: The proposal explicitly repeals the provision of CHIP for individuals without verified citizenship, nationality, or satisfactory immigration status, applicable to applications made on or after October 1, 2026. This directly removes access to children’s health insurance for a specific vulnerable population.
- Increased Medicaid Eligibility Redeterminations: Beginning October 1, 2027, States would be required to redetermine the eligibility of certain individuals enrolled under the Medicaid expansion (specifically, those eligible under section 1902(a)(10)(A)(i)(VIII)) once every 6 months, rather than potentially annually. More frequent redeterminations significantly increase the administrative burden on both states and enrollees and are known to lead to higher rates of procedural disenrollment, where eligible individuals lose coverage due to missed paperwork or communication issues, not because they are no longer eligible.
- Mandatory Medicaid Community Engagement Requirements: The bill mandates that States establish Medicaid community engagement requirements for certain individuals. While details on the specific requirements would be set by states, failure to comply could result in denial of applications or termination of eligibility. These requirements apply primarily to the Medicaid expansion population, with specific exceptions. This adds a significant hurdle to maintaining coverage for potentially millions of low-income adults.
- Required Medicaid Cost Sharing for Expansion Individuals: Beginning October 1, 2028, State Medicaid plans shall provide for the imposition of deductions, cost sharing, or similar charges determined appropriate by the State (in an amount greater than $0) for specified individuals enrolled under the expansion. While there are limitations (e.g., exempting emergency services, family planning, and preventative services) and aggregate caps based on income, this mandates out-of-pocket costs that could serve as a barrier to accessing necessary care for this low-income population.
- Prohibition on Medicaid Coverage for Specific Gender Transition Procedures for Minors: The bill states that no payment shall be made under the Medicaid program for any amount expended for “specified gender transition procedures” furnished to an individual under 18 years of age. This restricts access to specific medical care for a particular age group within the Medicaid population.
- Limits on Accessing Health Coverage Through ACA Exchanges:
- For plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2026, the Secretary may not require an Exchange to provide for a special enrollment period for an individual based on the relationship of the income of such individual to the poverty line. This removes a pathway for individuals experiencing income changes to enroll in coverage outside the annual open enrollment period.
- Beginning January 1, 2027, the amount of advance premium tax credits for certain individuals reenrolled in Exchange plans shall be reduced by $5 (or more) per month if the subsidy would otherwise reduce their premium to $0. This increases the net premium cost for some low-income individuals receiving subsidies.
- The bill prohibits coverage of “specified gender transition procedures” as an essential health benefit (EHB) under plans offered by Exchanges. This restricts the scope of required benefits in plans sold on the marketplace, potentially limiting access to this care for those who rely on Exchange coverage.
- Potential Increase in Immigration Fees: The bill removes the statutory fee caps previously limiting fees for the Immigration Examinations Fee Account and explicitly allows the Attorney General to set additional adjudication and naturalization fees. This grants USCIS increased authority to raise fees, which could make immigration applications, including those for naturalization, significantly more expensive, disproportionately impacting low-income immigrants.
- Filing Fee for BLM Protests: A requirement to collect a filing fee from protestors of Bureau of Land Management actions based on the length of their submission. While not exclusively impacting the poor, this fee could discourage participation and access to the protest process for individuals and grassroots groups with limited financial resources.
Changes to the Ability of Institutions Like the Courts to Function
The bill contains several provisions that alter standard governmental procedures, oversight mechanisms, and even access to administrative and judicial review:
- Limitations on the Secretary of Education’s Regulatory Authority: A new section places severe restrictions on the Secretary of Education’s ability to propose or issue regulations and executive actions. Draft regulations deemed “economically significant” cannot proceed if they would result in an increase in subsidy costs. Furthermore, proposed or final regulations and executive actions cannot be issued if they are determined to “adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities”. This language grants broad power to block regulations based on potential impacts, potentially hamstringing the department’s ability to implement policy.
- Filing Fee for Merit Systems Protection Board Claims: The bill introduces a filing fee for claims and appeals before the Merit Systems Protection Board. The MSPB is an independent agency that protects federal employees against prohibited personnel practices. Imposing a fee could create a barrier to accessing this forum for employees challenging adverse actions.
- Limitations on Judicial Review for Environmental Assessments: For environmental assessments (EAs) or environmental impact statements (EISs) where a fee is paid for expedited review by the project sponsor, there shall be no administrative or judicial review. This provision removes a crucial avenue for public oversight and legal challenges to environmental reviews associated with certain projects, potentially weakening environmental protections.
- Prohibition on Implementing Specific BLM Resource Management Plans: The bill specifically prohibits the Secretary of the Interior from implementing, administering, or enforcing several recently published Resource Management Plans (RMPs) for various BLM field offices in Wyoming, Montana, and North Dakota. This is an unusual legislative intervention overriding specific, completed administrative planning processes.
- Changes to the Congressional Review Act (CRA) Process:
- New reporting requirements are added for agencies submitting rules under the CRA, including analyses of budgetary effects, costs, and job impacts.
- Major rules that increase revenue cannot take effect unless Congress passes a joint resolution of approval. This introduces a new legislative hurdle for revenue-generating regulations.
- The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is funded to conduct de novo analysis of the costs of compliance for rules and use this analysis to determine if a rule is major. This centralizes and potentially increases OMB’s power in classifying and scrutinizing agency regulations.
- Restrictions on Settlement Agreements: Government officials or agents are prohibited from entering into settlement agreements that require donations to non-governmental third parties. This changes how federal litigation outcomes can be structured and enforced.
- Medicaid Waiver (Section 1115) Budget Neutrality: The bill mandates that the Secretary may not approve, renew, or amend Medicaid demonstration projects (Section 1115 waivers) unless certifying budget neutrality. It also requires states to reimburse the federal government if a project exceeds budget neutrality over an approval period. This imposes a strict financial constraint on state-led innovation and flexibility within Medicaid.
Unusual Benefits Provided to Certain Constituencies
The bill appears to provide targeted advantages or financial benefits to specific industries or groups:
- Increased Government Contribution for Privatized Military Housing: The percentage of the government’s contribution to privatized military housing projects is increased from prior rates (33 1/3% and 45%) to 60 percent. This increases the federal subsidy for developers involved in these projects.
- Reduced Oil and Gas Royalty Rates: Minimum royalty rates for oil and gas leases on Federal lands are reduced from “not less than 16 2/3 percent” to “not less than 12.5 percent“. This lowers the amount companies are required to pay the government for extracting resources on public lands.
- Shift in ANWR Revenue to Alaska: Beginning in fiscal year 2035, the bill redirects a significant portion of receipts from oil and gas leasing in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). Instead of all receipts going to the US Treasury, 90 percent shall be paid to the State of Alaska, with only 10 percent going to the Treasury. This provides a substantial long-term revenue shift to the state.
- Specific Low Rental Fee for a Right-of-Way: For a particular right-of-way on Federal land in Alaska needed for a specific project, the rental fee for “the Applicant” is set at a fixed, relatively low rate of $500,000 per year for fiscal years 2025 through 2034. Without knowing the context of the project or market rates, a fixed, potentially below-market rate for a specific entity could be considered an unusual benefit.
- Expansion of Orphan Drug Exclusion from Price Negotiation: The definition of “orphan drug” for purposes of exclusion from drug price negotiation is expanded to include drugs for “one or more rare diseases or conditions,” rather than “only one”. This allows drugs approved for multiple rare conditions to potentially avoid price negotiation, benefiting pharmaceutical companies that develop such drugs and potentially limiting cost savings for the government and patients.
- Extension of 100% Bonus Depreciation: The deadline for eligibility for 100% bonus depreciation is extended from property placed in service before January 1, 2027, to before January 1, 2030. This allows businesses to immediately deduct the full cost of eligible investments for an additional three years, providing a significant tax benefit.
- Reinstatement of Domestic R&D Expensing: The requirement to amortize (deduct over several years) domestic research and experimental expenditures is suspended for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2024, and before January 1, 2030, effectively reinstating the ability for businesses to immediately deduct these costs. This is a substantial tax benefit for companies investing in domestic R&D.
- Reversion of 1099-K Reporting Threshold: The reporting requirement for third party network transactions (e.g., payments via apps like Venmo, PayPal, or online marketplaces) is reverted to the higher threshold in effect before the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, requiring reporting only if aggregate transactions exceed $20,000 AND 200 transactions. The prior threshold was $600 with no transaction minimum. This significantly reduces the reporting burden for individuals and small businesses conducting peer-to-peer payments or low-volume online sales.
- Exclusion of Interest on Rural/Agricultural Loans: Interest income from loans secured by rural or agricultural real property is newly excluded from gross income. This provides a tax benefit to lenders holding such loans and could potentially lower borrowing costs for rural and agricultural borrowers.
- Expensing for Sound Recording Productions: Businesses can now elect to expense (immediately deduct) certain costs related to qualified sound recording productions, similar to film and live theatrical productions, up to a $150,000 annual limit. This provides a tax benefit to the sound recording industry.
- Expansion of Rural Emergency Hospital Eligibility: The definition of facilities eligible to become Rural Emergency Hospitals under Medicare is expanded to include certain hospitals that previously operated as critical access hospitals or small rural hospitals but were not enrolled as of a specific date. This provides a pathway for specific struggling rural hospitals to convert and receive new Medicare payments.
These are some of the most salient points within the provided excerpts that align with your request to identify unusual benefits, changes to institutional function, or severe costs on the poor. A full analysis would require examining the complete bill and comparing these provisions against existing law and their potential real-world impacts.
There you go. A list of starting points for journalists trying to understand the impact of this beast barely passed by the House of Representatives. That’s useful, right?
But how much CO2 did I dump into the atmosphere as a result? How many jobs got torched? And the real question: If public leaders no longer feel shame and suffer no consequences for lawless and disgusting behavior, then do stories even play a role in shaping public policy?