Senator Rand Paul reinforced his opposition to President Trump’s House-approved “big, beautiful bill” on Tuesday, continuing his sharp criticism despite Trump’s public rebuke earlier in the day.
Paul reiterated that he is firmly against raising the debt ceiling, a move the current legislation proposes by $4 trillion. Lawmakers and analysts have warned this could potentially lead to a $30 trillion surge in national debt over the next decade.
In a post on X, Paul stated that while he supports making Trump’s 2017 tax cuts permanent, he cannot back a package that adds an estimated $5 trillion to the national debt. He added that at least four senators share his concerns, naming himself along with Senators Ron Johnson, Rick Scott, and Mike Lee, who have all advocated for scaling back spending in the bill.
He argued that the numbers simply don’t make sense, calling out what he sees as fiscal irresponsibility. In a follow-up post, Paul declared he would not support legislation that sustains Biden-era spending levels while piling on more debt.
Trump fired back in a Truth Social post, criticizing Paul’s pattern of opposition without offering what Trump called “practical or constructive ideas.” The former president dismissed Paul’s views as “crazy” and suggested he is out of step with voters in Kentucky, touting the bill instead as a major growth initiative.
Undeterred, Paul appeared on Fox News later in the day to defend his stance. He maintained that he’s among the few being honest about the long-term economic risks, warning of troubling signs in the bond market and weak demand for government debt. He noted that the ratio of bid-to-buy orders is slipping, suggesting weakening investor confidence.
Paul also predicted that concerns could intensify if second-quarter economic growth falls short. He said a disappointing growth report would likely spark broader anxiety over Trump’s tariffs and the lack of action on spending and deficit reduction.
He concluded by emphasizing that his constituents expect him to fight what he called “reckless debt,” framing his resistance not as obstruction but as a principled stand on fiscal discipline.