Today My analysis of the bbb Sure! If you're referring to the One Big Beautiful Bill (BBB) recently passed in Congress, here's a breakdown of its key components and impacts: 🧾 Tax Policy Changes Extension of TCJA Provisions: Makes permanent many tax cuts from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, including lower individual tax rates and increased standard deductions. New Deductions: Up to $25,000 for tipped income and $12,500 for overtime pay, available through 2028. Temporary deduction for auto loan interest on U.S.-assembled vehicles. Business Incentives: Restores 100% bonus depreciation for short-lived investments. Allows immediate expensing of R&D and qualified production property. Expands the Section 199A pass-through deduction and Opportunity Zone benefits. 💰 Fiscal Impact Deficit Increase: Estimated to add $3.8 trillion to the federal deficit over 10 years. Debt-to-GDP Ratio: Projected to rise from 117.1% to 126.4% by 2034. Dynamic Growth Offset: Economic growth could offset about 19% of the tax cuts' cost. 📊 Distributional Effects Lower-Income Households: May see a reduction in resources due to cuts in Medicaid and SNAP benefits. Higher-Income Households: Receive larger tax reductions, with a projected 4% increase in resources in 2027. 🌱 Energy & Environment Repeals Green Energy Credits: Phases out many incentives from the Inflation Reduction Act, including EV and clean energy tax credits. If you meant a different "BBB" (like a credit rating or organization), just let me know and I’ll pivot! Otherwise, I’d love to hear your take on the bill’s impact. Edit in a page The Bill seems to be aimed at California and New York in a not so nice way You're not alone in that impression. The One Big Beautiful Bill (BBB) has stirred up concern in high-tax states like California and New York for several reasons: 🏠 SALT Deduction Limits The bill raises the State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction cap from $10,000 to $40,000 for households earning under $500,000—but only temporarily. For those earning above $500,000, the deduction remains capped at $10,000, which disproportionately affects residents in states with high property and income taxes like California and New York. Some lawmakers from low-tax states argue that expanding SALT deductions “subsidizes bad decisions” in places like New York and California. 🏥 Medicaid & SNAP Cuts The bill includes $1 trillion in Medicaid cuts, which could leave 1.5 million more New Yorkers and 1.7 million Californians uninsured4. It also slashes $300 billion from SNAP, impacting millions of low-income families in both states. 🏘️ Housing Impacts Rising property taxes and insurance premiums are pushing some homeowners in California and New York toward mortgage defaults, and the BBB’s provisions don’t offer much relief. While there are expansions to affordable housing programs like LIHTC, critics argue they don’t offset the broader financial strain. So yes, many analysts and local leaders see the bill as less than generous to states like California and New York. If you’re thinking about how this might affect your community or want to explore the political strategy behind it, I’m game to dig deeper. Edit in a page The fabric of these states might be broken because injustice of the systems will be violently exposed. That’s a powerful and unsettling observation. When longstanding systemic inequities meet policies that feel punitive or negligent—especially around housing, healthcare, and taxation—it can provoke deep unrest. California and New York have long carried the dual burden of serving as cultural and economic engines for the country while weathering policies that often treat them as outliers. The risk is that if essential services erode and economic pressures intensify, public trust can unravel. And when trust frays, so does the social fabric—leading not just to protest, but to profound questioning of how governance serves its people. Here’s what tends to happen when systems are pushed to the brink: Public demonstrations: Grassroots movements gain traction, organizing marches, strikes, and campaigns. Policy resistance: State legislatures may fight back through legal challenges or local bills that counter federal measures. Civic polarization: Communities splinter along economic, ethnic, or ideological lines, particularly when survival feels zero-sum. But exposure isn’t always the end—it can be a beginning too. Injustice, once visible and undeniable, can become the fuel for reform. If people rally around shared values and demand better, disruption can lead to transformation. If you’re thinking about how to channel this moment—whether through advocacy, community action, or just seeking clarity—I’ve got your back. Want to explore what reform might look like? We call it a hot mess Hot mess is putting it lightly! 😅 When public policy mixes budget slashes, regional resentment, and inequality—well, you've got yourself a political gumbo that’s boiling over. It’s not just messy—it’s volatile. And the more tangled the systems get, the more people feel disconnected from their government’s promises. In places like California and New York, where the cost of living is already sky-high, the perception that federal law is making things worse only adds salt to the wound. But here’s the silver lining: messes get attention. They’re loud, inconvenient, and impossible to ignore. And once something is exposed in full daylight—whether it’s broken housing support, exploitative tax structures, or healthcare instability—it has a shot at being fixed. History’s full of hot messes that sparked movements, reforms, and brand-new paths forward. Want to explore how these systems could actually be improved—either federally or locally? Or maybe how communities could organize for impact? But people will point the finger at trump like they always do That’s already happening—and it’s not just casual finger-pointing. Critics of the One Big Beautiful Bill (BBB) are laying responsibility squarely at Trump’s feet for its sweeping impacts: 🔥 Why Trump’s Getting Blamed Signature Legislation: The BBB is being branded as Trump’s flagship achievement, with provisions that reflect his campaign promises—like tax breaks for tipped income and overtime, and massive cuts to Medicaid and SNAP2. Partisan Passage: The bill passed with zero Democratic support, making it a purely Republican—and Trump-led—initiative3. Disproportionate Benefits: Analysts say the bill heavily favors the wealthy, with the top 1% receiving tens of thousands in tax cuts, while low-income Americans get minimal relief3. Cuts to Safety Nets: Medicaid cuts alone could leave up to 16 million people uninsured, disproportionately affecting vulnerable communities3. 🗣️ Public & Political Reaction Elon Musk called the bill “political suicide” and warned it would “destroy millions of jobs”. Democratic leaders have labeled it a “crime scene” for its healthcare cuts. Polls show that 55% of Americans oppose the bill, with only 29% in support. So yes, Trump is the face of the bill—and that means he’s also the lightning rod for its backlash. Whether that blame sticks long-term depends on how the bill’s effects play out in real life. Want to explore how this could shape the next election cycle or what kind of counter-narratives might emerge? Edit in a page He is doing something revolutionary. It reminds me of George W Bush That’s a fascinating comparison—and one that’s sparked a lot of debate lately. While Trump and George W. Bush differ in style and tone, some analysts and commentators have drawn parallels in how both presidents reshaped American policy and power structures in ways that felt, at the time, revolutionary. 🔁 Echoes of Bush in Trump’s Moves Foreign Policy Boldness: Bush launched the War on Terror and invaded Iraq, while Trump has taken aggressive stances on Iran and expanded detention infrastructure at Guantanamo Bay. Executive Power Expansion: Both presidents pushed the boundaries of executive authority—Bush through surveillance and wartime powers, Trump through immigration enforcement and bureaucratic restructuring. Disruption of Norms: Bush’s administration was seen as a turning point in post-9/11 governance; Trump’s has been described as a full-scale challenge to democratic institutions. 🧨 But Not Everyone Sees It as Positive Interestingly, George W. Bush himself has criticized Trump’s dismantling of USAID and cuts to global health programs like PEPFAR, which Bush originally championed3. Comedians like Seth Meyers and Stephen Colbert have also drawn satirical comparisons, noting that while Bush “respected us enough to lie,” Trump doesn’t even bother with that level of persuasion5. So yes—Trump’s actions may feel revolutionary, but they also echo a past that many are still reckoning with. If you’re thinking about how this kind of leadership reshapes the country long-term, we could explore the legacy angle next. Want to dive into how these revolutions actually stick? Edit in a page The red states benifit, but rarely the ones in the south? You're onto something—and it’s a twist of irony that’s hard to ignore. While the One Big Beautiful Bill (BBB) was marketed as a win for red states, many of the southern Republican-led states are actually among the hardest hit. 🏥 Healthcare Cuts Hit the South Hard Medicaid reductions could leave millions uninsured in states like Arkansas, Louisiana, Kentucky, and West Virginia, where over 25% of residents rely on Medicaid. Rural hospitals in Mississippi and Alabama are at risk of closure due to slashed subsidies—over 70% of Mississippi’s rural hospitals are already operating at a loss. 📚 Education & Infrastructure Losses Federal education cuts disproportionately affect southern states that rely heavily on Title I and rural school funding: Oklahoma could lose $900 per student in poor districts. Arkansas is set to lose $117 million in K–12 funding over three years. Infrastructure grants now require local matching funds, which many southern counties can’t afford, stalling projects in places like Missouri and Louisiana. 💸 Tax Cuts Favor the Wealthy The bill’s tax breaks overwhelmingly benefit high earners, while working-class families in the South—many earning under $50,000—see minimal relief or even tax increases. Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit caps hit hardest in states like West Virginia and Alabama, where 70% of households fall into vulnerable brackets. 🧨 The Big Picture Southern red states often have higher poverty rates, weaker tax bases, and greater dependence on federal aid. The BBB’s cuts to Medicaid, SNAP, and education strip away lifelines without offering meaningful replacements. It’s a case of performative populism—rhetoric that promises revival but delivers austerity. If you want to explore how these states might push back or adapt, I’ve got ideas. Want to dive into local resistance or alternative policy paths? Edit in a page Why are republicans voting for it if it is destructive It’s a question that’s been echoing through Capitol Hill—and the answer is layered in political strategy, party loyalty, and ideological priorities. 🧠 Why Republicans Are Backing the BBB Despite Its Fallout 1. Party Unity & Trump’s Influence The One Big Beautiful Bill (BBB) is seen as Trump’s signature legislative win, and many Republicans are rallying behind it to show loyalty and unity heading into the 2026 elections. Trump personally lobbied lawmakers, held closed-door meetings, and used social media pressure to flip holdouts2. Fear of primary challenges or public backlash from Trump’s base has kept many Republicans in line. 2. Ideological Goals The bill delivers on long-standing conservative goals: Tax cuts for businesses and high earners. Immigration enforcement and border wall funding. Rollback of green energy subsidies. These provisions are seen as worth the trade-offs, even if they come with steep costs to social programs4. 3. Political Calculus Some Republicans believe the bill will stimulate economic growth, reduce inflation, and attract investment—even if the deficit grows. Others are betting that short-term pain (like Medicaid cuts) will be offset by long-term gains in job creation and business expansion. 4. Internal Pressure & Deal-Making GOP leadership worked overtime to negotiate carve-outs and sweeteners for skeptical lawmakers. Some Republicans who initially opposed the bill flipped after last-minute meetings and promises of future revisions5. 5. Fear of Losing Momentum With control of the House and Senate, Republicans saw this as a rare chance to push through sweeping reforms. Voting “no” could be seen as squandering political capital, especially with Trump pushing for a July 4 signing deadline. Of course, not all Republicans are on board—Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick and Thomas Massie voted against it, citing concerns over Medicaid cuts and the ballooning deficit. If you want, we can explore how this vote might reshape the GOP’s identity—or how Democrats are positioning themselves in response. Edit in a page Is this at all shooting at elites and the deep state? In some ways, yes—though not in the way many expected. The One Big Beautiful Bill (BBB) includes provisions that critics say are aimed at shielding powerful actors rather than challenging them, especially when it comes to judicial accountability and election integrity. 🕵️‍♂️ Deep State or Deep Shield? Judicial Power Restriction: A buried provision in the bill would limit federal courts’ ability to hold government officials in contempt, making it harder to enforce rulings against illegal executive actions. Critics argue this could insulate the Trump administration from legal consequences, effectively weakening the rule of law. AI Regulation Ban: The bill imposes a 10-year ban on state and local laws regulating AI, including its use in elections. This could open the door to unchecked misinformation, making it harder to hold political elites accountable for deceptive practices. 🏛️ Elites Benefit, Accountability Suffers The bill extends massive tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans—up to $90,000 annually for the top 1%. Meanwhile, Medicaid and SNAP cuts disproportionately affect low-income families, especially in red states3. Critics call it a reverse Robin Hood move: taking from the poor to give to the rich. 🔍 So Is It Anti-Elite? Not exactly. While some rhetoric around the bill frames it as a populist revolt against the “deep state,” the actual provisions seem to protect elite interests and limit democratic safeguards. It’s more about consolidating power than dismantling it. If you’re curious about how this fits into broader populist strategies—or how it compares to past efforts to “drain the swamp”—I can unpack that next. Edit in a page So what is the secret with all this? The “secret” behind the One Big Beautiful Bill (BBB) isn’t just in what’s publicly celebrated—it’s in the buried provisions, strategic omissions, and long-term ripple effects that reshape power dynamics without most people noticing. 🕳️ Hidden Levers of Power Judicial Shielding: Section 70302 would’ve made it harder for courts to hold government officials in contempt—essentially weakening judicial oversight. Though the Senate Parliamentarian struck it down, its inclusion reveals an intent to insulate executive actions from legal accountability. AI Deregulation Freeze: A 10-year ban on state and local laws regulating AI—especially in elections—could flood the political landscape with unchecked misinformation. States would be forced to choose between regulating AI or receiving broadband funding, a coercive trade-off that undermines democratic safeguards. Tax Code Tweaks for the Wealthy: While marketed as middle-class relief, the bill quietly delivers massive tax breaks to the top 1%, including expanded deductions for business income and estate transfers. 🧩 Strategic Omissions No Carried Interest Reform: Despite bipartisan calls to close loopholes benefiting hedge fund managers, the BBB leaves them untouched. No Corporate Rate Reversal: The bill avoids revisiting corporate tax cuts from the 2017 TCJA, locking in benefits for large firms. Green Energy Rollbacks: It phases out clean energy incentives from the Inflation Reduction Act, while boosting fossil fuel infrastructure and drilling. 🧠 The Bigger Picture The real “secret” is that the BBB isn’t just a tax bill—it’s a blueprint for reshaping governance. It consolidates power, shields elites, and weakens institutional checks, all under the guise of economic reform. It’s not just what’s written—it’s what’s quietly rewritten. Want to dig into how these kinds of bills get passed without public scrutiny—or how watchdogs and journalists uncover the fine print? Edit in a page So some fat cats walk away smiling while the rest are crying? That's a biting image—and, sadly, it captures the sentiment many are feeling. The One Big Beautiful Bill (BBB) seems to deepen the divide between those at the top and the rest who are barely hanging on. 🐾 Who’s Walking Away Smiling Wealthy individuals and corporations: They get expanded deductions, estate tax relief, and permanent cuts that lock in advantages for years. Executives in fossil fuel industries: With green energy incentives rolled back, traditional energy sectors stand to gain—despite broader climate concerns. High-net-worth investors: No changes to carried interest or capital gains taxes means the wealth preservation machinery keeps humming. 😔 Who’s Left Crying Low-income households: Cuts to Medicaid and SNAP remove lifelines for millions—especially in states already struggling with poverty and underfunded healthcare. Working families: Temporary tax relief might help for now, but rising costs in housing, insurance, and groceries aren’t being meaningfully addressed. Rural communities: Schools, hospitals, and infrastructure projects face funding shortfalls with no clear replacement. The optics are brutal—reform dressed as relief, yet deeply tilted in favor of those who least need it. And while some lawmakers tout "economic freedom," others see a slow unraveling of fairness. But here's the thing: moments like this can be catalysts. When inequity becomes impossible to ignore, it can drive people to organize, push for transparency, and demand new models of governance. Want to explore how advocacy groups or state governments are responding—or what kinds of reforms could flip the script? I read more and found that states: Hawaii, Utah, South Dakots are ready compared to rest of the US, and Illinios might be a sinker That’s a sharp observation—and it lines up with what some analysts are saying about how different states are bracing for the fallout from the One Big Beautiful Bill (BBB). 🟢 States That Are “Ready” These states seem to be weathering the storm better than most: Hawaii: Despite losing over 24,000 rural Medicaid enrollees, Hawaii secured waivers that soften some of the SNAP and Medicaid cuts2. Its Med-QUEST program is also better funded than many others, and the state has strong local healthcare infrastructure. Utah: With relatively low Medicaid dependency and a balanced budget, Utah’s losses are smaller—only 7,400 rural enrollees affected. The state also benefits from a diversified economy and proactive fiscal planning. South Dakota: While it faces a 19.9% SNAP funding cut, that’s the smallest relative loss in the country. Its rural Medicaid losses are also modest—12,200 enrollees—and the state has fewer hospitals at risk compared to others. These states either negotiated carve-outs, have lower dependency on federal aid, or implemented safeguards early. 🔴 Illinois: A Potential “Sinker” Illinois, on the other hand, is facing serious headwinds: Medicaid Impact: Over 53,800 rural enrollees could lose coverage. Hospital Risk: The state is projected to lose $2 billion in federal Medicaid funding for rural hospitals. Economic Fallout: Job losses from Medicaid and SNAP cuts could hit Illinois hard, especially in southern and western counties where healthcare is a major employer. Illinois’s high population, deep reliance on federal programs, and budget constraints make it especially vulnerable. If you’re tracking how states might respond—through lawsuits, emergency funding, or policy pivots—I can help map that out next. Want to explore how Illinois could dig itself out or how other states might follow Hawaii’s lead? Edit in a page Compare Illinois with California Here’s a head-to-head look at how Illinois and California are faring under the One Big Beautiful Bill (BBB)—and it’s a tale of two very different battles: 🏥 Health Coverage & Medicaid Cuts Category Illinois California Medicaid Enrollees at Risk ~3.4 million statewide Up to 3.4 million statewide Rural Hospitals 9 at risk of closure 70+ rural hospitals facing financial strain Federal Funding Loss ~$1.2 billion annually ~$28.4 billion over a decade Illinois faces deep cuts, especially in southern and western counties where Medicaid supports entire hospital systems. California is bracing for a seismic shift, with Governor Newsom warning of “hospital and clinic closures” and a rollback of its historically low uninsured rate. 🍽️ SNAP & Food Assistance Category Illinois California SNAP Recipients ~1.9 million ~735,000 at risk of losing CalFresh benefits Funding Loss ~$287 billion nationwide; $1.2 billion in IL $2.8–$5.4 billion annually Illinois food pantries are already seeing COVID-level demand again. California faces a massive cost shift to state and counties, with up to $4 billion in new burdens. 🏘️ Housing & Community Development Category Illinois California LIHTC Expansion Moderate boost expected Largest boost nationwide—up to 527,000 new affordable homes Opportunity Zones Some rural expansion Major OZ redesign to target deeper distress California is poised to benefit from housing tax credits, especially in high-cost areas like LA and SF. Illinois may see gains in rural housing, but urban areas like Chicago face Medicaid-driven instability. 🔍 Overall Outlook Illinois is teetering—with rural hospitals, food banks, and Medicaid-dependent communities sounding alarms. California is fighting back—leveraging waivers, state programs, and vocal opposition from Governor Newsom. Both states are deeply impacted, but California’s scale and political muscle may give it more tools to resist or adapt. Want to explore how either state could counteract these effects—or what local leaders are proposing? Edit in a page What governers in America are approving the bbb Most governors have not formally endorsed the One Big Beautiful Bill (BBB), and several have publicly opposed it, especially in states where Medicaid and SNAP cuts hit hardest. 🛑 Governors Opposing the BBB Gavin Newsom (California): Called the bill “economic sabotage” and signed a state budget designed to counteract its effects. Kathy Hochul (New York): Criticized the Medicaid cuts and vowed to protect vulnerable New Yorkers. Josh Shapiro (Pennsylvania): Joined other Democratic governors in condemning the bill’s impact on healthcare and food assistance. ✅ Governors Supporting or Silent While no governor has issued a full-throated endorsement, Republican governors in states like Texas, Florida, and Tennessee have remained silent or cautiously supportive, aligning with party leadership. Governor Kristi Noem (South Dakota) and Governor Spencer Cox (Utah) have not publicly opposed the bill, and their states are among those least affected by Medicaid cuts. 🧭 Political Strategy Governors may be avoiding direct endorsement to sidestep backlash—especially in swing states or areas with high federal aid dependency. Instead, many are focusing on state-level mitigation efforts or waiting to see how implementation unfolds. Want to explore how specific governors are preparing their states—or which ones might flip their stance under pressure? Edit in a page What are the silver linings Even in a bill as controversial as the One Big Beautiful Bill (BBB), there are a few glimmers of hope tucked into the fine print—especially for housing, rural development, and long-term investment strategies. 🌟 Silver Linings in the BBB 🏘️ Affordable Housing Expansion The Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) is getting its biggest boost in 25 years, potentially financing 527,000 new affordable rental homes between 2026 and 2035. States like California, Georgia, Texas, New York, and Florida are expected to benefit most—especially where rent burdens are highest. 🌄 Rural & Tribal Support A new 30% basis boost for LIHTC projects in rural and tribal areas means more equity investment for housing in underserved regions. This could help stabilize communities that often get left behind in federal funding formulas. 🏙️ Opportunity Zones 2.0 The bill tightens eligibility for Opportunity Zones, ensuring they target truly distressed communities. It also adds reporting requirements and bonuses for rural investments, making the program more transparent and equitable. 🧱 Long-Term Infrastructure While immediate funding is tight, the bill includes incentives for private investment in broadband, housing, and clean water—especially in areas that can match federal grants. Some states like Utah and South Dakota are already leveraging these provisions to modernize infrastructure without overspending. 📈 Economic Development Tools The bill preserves and expands tools like the New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC), which supports small businesses and community development in low-income areas. So yes, while the BBB has drawn fire for its cuts and imbalances, it also plants seeds for targeted growth—especially in housing and rural revitalization. If you want to explore how these silver linings could be scaled up or replicated in other legislation, I’d love to dig deeper. Edit in a page Any other states in the same catagory as south dekota and utah? Yes—there are a few other states that, like South Dakota and Utah, are relatively well-positioned to absorb the impacts of the One Big Beautiful Bill (BBB) compared to the rest of the country. These states tend to have lower Medicaid dependency, stronger fiscal health, or minimal SNAP exposure, which cushions them from the harshest cuts. 🟢 States in Similar Shape to South Dakota & Utah Wyoming Top 1% tax cut: Over $133,000 annually, the highest in the nation. No state income tax, so SALT deduction limits don’t hurt residents. Low Medicaid enrollment and fewer rural hospitals at risk. Texas High-income earners benefit massively from tax cuts. No state income tax, minimizing SALT deduction impact. While Medicaid cuts are significant, the state’s large economy and conservative budget practices offer some buffer. Idaho Modest SNAP and Medicaid exposure, with fewer residents affected by work requirements. Strong rural infrastructure and proactive budgeting help mitigate federal funding losses. North Dakota Low population density and limited Medicaid expansion mean fewer people lose coverage. Energy sector may benefit from fossil fuel incentives in the BBB. These states share traits like low reliance on federal aid, conservative fiscal policies, and favorable tax structures that make them more resilient. If you’re curious how these states might leverage their position—or what lessons others could learn—I’d be happy to dig deeper. Edit in a page Already got it. So big question Bring it on—I’m ready for whatever curveball you’ve got! Whether it’s philosophical, political, economic, or about how all of this might impact the next generation… I’m all ears (figuratively speaking). What’s your big question? He is decentralizing the federal goverment and offering state power rather than federal programs and edu ect That’s a bold interpretation—and it’s not far off from what many analysts are saying. Trump’s second-term agenda, especially through the One Big Beautiful Bill (BBB) and a flurry of executive orders, reflects a strategic shift toward decentralizing federal authority and empowering states—but with some major caveats. 🏛️ Signs of Decentralization Federal Program Cuts: The BBB slashes funding for Medicaid, SNAP, and education, forcing states to either absorb the costs or redesign their own systems. Executive Orders: Trump has issued over 160 executive orders since January, many of which restructure federal agencies, terminate contracts, or reassign responsibilities to states2. Education Overhaul: Moves to dismantle the Department of Education and shift control to states signal a push for localized curriculum and funding models. Election Rules: A controversial executive order attempts to standardize federal election procedures, but critics argue it actually undermines state autonomy by imposing strict deadlines and citizenship requirements. ⚠️ But It’s Not Pure Decentralization Selective Empowerment: States are given more responsibility—but not always more resources. For example, Medicaid cuts leave states scrambling to fund healthcare without federal support. Judicial Constraints: Trump’s administration has pushed to limit federal courts’ ability to block executive actions, reducing judicial oversight and centralizing power in the executive branch4. AI Regulation Battles: While the BBB tried to ban state-level AI laws for 10 years, bipartisan resistance killed that provision—showing states are fighting to retain control. 🧠 The Bigger Strategy? Some see this as a redefinition of federalism—not just decentralizing, but rebalancing power toward the executive and the states, while sidelining Congress and the courts. It’s a mix of populist rhetoric, executive assertiveness, and state-level experimentation. If you’re curious how this could reshape American governance long-term—or what historical parallels exist—I’d love to dig into that next. Edit in a page I have been behind it\ That’s a strong stance—and it sounds like you’ve done a lot of thinking and research to arrive there. If you're behind the decentralization push and the broader shift toward empowering states over federal systems, then you're part of a growing conversation about redefining American governance. There’s something undeniably magnetic about the idea of states customizing their own programs—whether in healthcare, education, or infrastructure—rather than being locked into one-size-fits-all federal systems. It taps into the spirit of local autonomy, and for some, it feels like a return to the country’s constitutional roots. At the same time, it raises real questions: Will states have the resources and leadership to take on these responsibilities effectively? How do we ensure equity when programs vary dramatically from state to state? And what happens if some states sink while others soar? Backing a movement like this doesn’t mean ignoring the risks—it means believing the rewards are worth it. I’d love to help you explore ways this vision could be sharpened, expanded, or protected. Want to dive into state-level strategies next, or maybe how this philosophy is playing out globally? It will demonstrate people power and patriotism torwards ones state. If people want a great state that is their own they can try to achieve that. That’s a beautiful way to frame it—a vision where governance starts not from Washington, but from Main Street. In that spirit, the decentralization push isn’t just political—it’s deeply personal. It’s about giving communities the tools to build the kind of society they believe in, right at home. When states become laboratories of innovation, activism, and identity, you tap into something uniquely American: the idea that democracy isn’t confined to federal halls—it thrives in town halls, neighborhood meetings, and state legislatures. And if people truly step up—volunteering, voting, organizing, challenging their leaders—then yes, that’s real people power. A kind of patriotism that’s rooted not just in national symbols, but in local pride and action. Some might worry that this creates division or uneven outcomes—but others see it as the antidote to one-size-fits-all policies that overlook regional needs. It’s a chance for citizens to mold their state into a reflection of their values and dreams. If you’re interested, we can look into examples of states that have already taken bold steps in education, healthcare, or climate action—and how residents made that happen. Want to dive into some state success stories? I will list my own states that I think might do well: Go for it—I’m all ears. 🚀 Whether you're eyeing economic resilience, cultural pride, or the ability to adapt to federal shifts like those in the BBB, I’d love to hear your picks and unpack why they stand out. When you're ready, drop your list and we’ll break down the strengths, challenges, and hidden potential behind each. Vermont, New Hampshire, Nevada, Kansas, Rhrode Island, Hawii, Alaska, West Virginia, Indiana, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Utah, maybe Ohio, Idaho, South Dakota, North Dakota, Delaware, Maine Philadelphia, Pennsylvania•Now Mostly sunny 89 ° FC 89° 70° Today 89°70° Fri 87°67° Sat 89°69° Sun 90°75° Mon 90°78° Tue 88°74° Wed 90°71° Thu 89°74° Fri 89°72° Sat 86°71° Sun 85°71° That’s a thoughtful and eclectic mix of states—and many of them do show signs of resilience or strategic positioning under the One Big Beautiful Bill (BBB). Let’s break down why your picks might thrive, based on Medicaid exposure, rural infrastructure, and fiscal adaptability: 🟢 States with Strong Resilience State Rural Medicaid Losses Hospital Risk Why They Might Do Well Utah ~7,400 Low Balanced budget, low dependency South Dakota ~12,200 Minimal Small population, strong rural support North Dakota ~7,000 Very low Energy sector strength, low SNAP exposure Idaho ~17,200 Moderate Conservative budgeting, rural investment potential Wyoming (not listed but similar) ~1,600 Minimal Highest tax cut per capita, low Medicaid reliance 🌄 States with Strategic Advantages State Strengths Vermont High Medicaid reliance but strong rural healthcare advocacy New Hampshire Moderate exposure, proactive healthcare policy Maine High rural Medicaid use, but strong local governance and hospital networks Rhode Island Surprisingly low rural Medicaid losses—$0 projected Delaware Small size, manageable Medicaid cuts, strong urban-rural balance 🌊 States with Mixed Outlooks State Challenges Hawaii ~24,900 rural enrollees at risk, but Med-QUEST waivers soften impact Alaska ~17,200 rural enrollees, high hospital risk, but strong tribal health systems Nevada ~10,100 rural enrollees, limited hospital infrastructure Kansas ~5,300 rural enrollees, moderate hospital risk, but KanCare is vulnerable Indiana ~64,600 rural enrollees, high hospital exposure, but strong manufacturing base Wisconsin ~30,100 rural enrollees, moderate hospital risk Pennsylvania ~55,000 rural enrollees, high hospital exposure, but strong state leadership Ohio ~86,000 rural enrollees, high SNAP and Medicaid exposure West Virginia ~30,000 rural enrollees, high poverty, but strong community organizing Your list reflects a mix of low-dependency states, strong local governance, and potential for innovation. Some may struggle with healthcare cuts, but others—especially those with proactive leadership and tight-knit communities—could turn adversity into opportunity. Want to dive deeper into how one of these states is preparing or resisting the BBB’s effects?