Alaska Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski was slammed after she claimed that President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill is "not there yet" despite casting the deciding vote to narrowly pass it before sending it back to the House.
In a marathon voting session, the Senate narrowly passed the legislation in a 51-50 vote, with Vice President JD Vance casting the tie-breaking vote after three Republicans joined all Democrats in opposition.
Murkowski, who had voiced consistent concerns about the bill’s cuts to social safety net programs, ultimately voted yes, saying she "struggled mightily." She outlined the concessions she secured for Alaska, including tribal exemptions from new work requirements for SNAP recipients, as well as a temporary exemption from SNAP cuts for Alaska and several other states with high error rates in benefit distribution.
But in a statement afterward, she criticized the "awful process" and urged the House to revise the Senate's version:
“We do not have a perfect bill by any stretch of the imagination. My hope is that House is going to look at this and recognize that we’re not there yet.”
In a separate interview with NBC News correspondent Ryan Noble, she said:
“Do I like this bill? No. But I tried to take care of Alaska’s interests.”
You can hear what she said in the video below.
Asked why she supported the bill despite its flaws, Murkowski said that voting against it would have effectively killed the legislation:
"Kill it and it's gone. There is a tax impact coming forward. That's gonna hurt the people in my state."
But that reasoning doesn't make sense, according to MSNBC producer and political commentator Steve Benen, who said her position is "quite odd, even by congressional standards":
"Murkowski is apparently under the impression that the Senate’s version of the inaptly named One Big Beautiful Bill Act is simply the latest iteration in an ongoing series, and that the package will continue to evolve in the coming days. By this reasoning, the Alaskan’s vote was less of an endorsement of this specific proposal and more of a way to keep the process going."
"But that’s a difficult position to take seriously. For one thing, if she’d joined the bipartisan minority that opposed this bill, it wouldn’t have “killed” the legislation; it would’ve opened the door to a new round of negotiations in the Senate — where Murkowski could’ve exercised enormous influence."
"While giving up her leverage, she’s apparently hoping to see House members do the work she could’ve been involved in directly. ... but as far as the White House and GOP leaders are concerned, the negotiations are over."
"There’s nothing left to talk about. The bill is done. The House’s job is to approve it, as is, quickly and with as little fuss as possible."
Many have called out her hypocrisy, saying she "sold out" the country.
The House has already taken steps to move the legislation to a floor vote and, in a statement, Speaker Mike Johnson and his leadership team said the plan is to have the bill approved by Independence Day, stressing "we intend to deliver without delay."
Even so, Republicans can afford to lose only three votes in the House. An earlier version passed by a razor-thin margin, and the Senate’s revisions have sparked backlash among some GOP lawmakers.
According to Florida Democratic Representative Maxwell Frost, “about 20 Republicans” currently oppose the measure. While negotiations are ongoing with both moderates and far-right members who’ve voiced objections to various provisions, Frost added that Republicans on both ends of the spectrum “always fold.”
