Tangle - The "Big Beautiful Bill" gets a Byrd bath.

Episode Date: June 26, 2025

Following a meeting of the Senate Finance Committee on Sunday, Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough advised that several measures in the “Big Beautiful Bill” fail the Byrd Rule and cannot be included in Republicans’ omnibus spending and taxation bill under budget reconciliation. Among the measures MacDonough identified are provisions barring certain noncitizens from receiving benefits under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), requiring the U.S. Postal Service to sell its electric vehicles, reducing the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s funding to zero, and forcing the federal government to sell public lands. Ad-free podcasts are here!Many listeners have been asking for an ad-free version of this podcast that they could subscribe to — and we finally launched it. You can go to ReadTangle.com to sign up!You can read today's podcast⁠ ⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠, our “Under the Radar” story ⁠here and today’s “Have a nice day” story ⁠here⁠.Take the survey: What do you think of the parliamentarian’s decisions? Let us know!Disagree? That's okay. My opinion is just one of many. Write in and let us know why, and we'll consider publishing your feedback.You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here. Our Executive Editor and Founder is Isaac Saul. Our Executive Producer is Jon Lall.This podcast was written by: Isaac Saul and edited and engineered by Dewey Thomas. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75.Our newsletter is edited by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman, Senior Editor Will Kaback, Hunter Casperson, Kendall White, Bailey Saul, and Audrey Moorehead.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This episode is sponsored by the OCS Summer Pre-Roll Sale. Sometimes when you roll your own joint, things can turn out a little differently than what you expected. Maybe it's a little too loose. Maybe it's a little too flimsy. Or maybe it's a little too covered in dirt because your best friend distracted you when you dropped it on the ground. There's a million ways to roll a joint wrong, but there's one roll that's always perfect. The Pre-Roll. Shop the Summer Pre-Roll and infuse pre-roll sale today at ocs.ca and participating retailers.

["Tangle"] From executive producer, Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon and good evening and welcome to the Tangle Podcast, the place we get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking and a little bit of my take. I'm your host, Isaac Saul. And on today's episode, we're going to be talking about some of the latest updates to the big, beautiful bill, the reconciliation bill moving through Congress right now that just is now undergoing as we speak.

I mean, we got some news about it this morning, undergoing some scrutiny around the Byrd rule and the Senate parliamentarian, Elizabeth McDonough, who has started to make some rulings that are going to have a really big impact on what the final outcome of this bill is. So I know that sounds really boring. We'll try and make it sound interesting. And it's really important stuff in terms of what the final product is.

So we're gonna break down exactly what happened and then share some views from the left and the right as always. Before we do though, we unfortunately do have a quick correction we have to issue. In yesterday's though, we unfortunately do have a quick correction we have to issue. In yesterday's podcast, we were talking about democratic candidate

for mayor of New York City, Zoran Mamdani's experience working as a campaign manager for the 2018 mayoral campaign of a Jewish candidate, Ross Barkin. In fact, Barkin was running for state Senate in New York, not mayor. I wrote this line and it was my correction to own. I think it was just a mix-up likely related to our main topic being the mayoral race.

And none of my editors caught it, so it's their fault too. But we apologize. This is our 138th correction in Tangles' 307-week history. And our first correction since June 23rd, which really wasn't that long ago, so that's a bummer. We tracked these corrections and placed them at the top of the podcast in an effort to our first corrections since June 23rd, which really wasn't that long ago. So that's a bummer. We track these corrections and place them at the top of the podcast in an effort to maximize transparency with our listeners. Uh, with that, I'm going to send it over to John for today's main story.

And I'll be back for my take. Thanks Isaac. And welcome everybody. Here are your quick hits for today. First up, President Donald Trump said the U.S. will hold nuclear talks with Iran next week and seek an agreement to end its nuclear program, though he said he didn't think such a deal was necessary. Separately, Iran's government approved legislation to suspend cooperation with the International

Atomic Energy Agency, hampering efforts to assess the damage to the country's nuclear facilities by U.S. airstrikes. Number 2. During a news conference at Wednesday's NATO summit, President Trump met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and said he was considering sending additional Patriot air defense systems to Ukraine following heightened Russian airstrikes. Number 3. The members of the newly appointed Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's

Vaccine Advisory Committee announced they will review the federal childhood vaccination schedule and make recommendations on measles and hepatitis B shots. Number four, the Supreme Court voted six to three that patients do not have a right to sue states that disqualify Planned Parenthood from Medicaid coverage based on their opposition to abortion. The court's three liberal justices dissented.

5. Syria's Interior Ministry said the Islamic State was responsible for a recent bombing at a church near Damascus that killed 25 people. The spokesperson said security forces had stopped two other attempted attacks by the IS. Following a meeting of the Senate Finance Committee on Sunday, Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth McDonough advised that several measures in the Big Beautiful bill fail the Byrd Rule and cannot be included in Republicans' Omnibus, Spending, and Taxation bill under budget reconciliation.

Among the measures McDonough identified are provisions barring certain non-citizens receiving benefits under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, requiring the U.S. Postal Service to sell its electric vehicles, reducing the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's funding to zero, and forcing the federal government to sell public lands. This week, McDonough cited additional inclusions as violations of the reconciliation rules. On Wednesday, she identified a provision barring federal subsidies under the Affordable Care Act from applying to health plans that cover abortion services, then made further rulings on Medicaid and Medicare reforms, among other measures, on Thursday.

Democrats are seeking to remove other provisions, like tax credits for donations to private school scholarships, as the bill works its way through the Finance Committee. We first covered the big beautiful bill in May, and you can check out our coverage with a link in today's episode description. For context, the Byrd Rule, named after the late Senator Robert C. Byrd, Democrat from West Virginia, is a procedural constraint that prohibits non-budgetary provisions from being tacked onto reconciliation bills. Reconciliation is a legislative process spelled out in the Congressional Budget Act to expedite

legislation that changes spending, revenues, or the federal debt limit. The procedure requires the House and Senate to agree on a budget resolution, and it allows the Senate to bypass the 60-vote threshold required to overcome a filibuster. The Senate parliamentarian is an unelected, nonpartisan official appointed by the majority leader to assist in daily proceedings and rule on the appropriateness of amendments, measures, and motions. President Donald Trump whips support among House Republicans to advance the bill from the lower chamber in May and has pushed the Senate to pass it into law by July 4th.

The parliamentarian's rulings put the bill in jeopardy of missing the President's deadline. Senate Republicans could attempt to overrule McDonough, but Senate Majority Leader John Thune, the Republican from South Dakota, has signaled that they are unwilling to attempt to do so, which could end special provisions for reconciliation in the future. To comply with the rulings, Republicans could either remove the provisions or vote on the bill through the regular process that requires a 60-vote majority to pass, which Republicans are unlikely to obtain given that they hold 53 votes in the Senate. However, removing the provisions is risky,

as their inclusion was crucial for the support of many lawmakers. Republicans have largely accepted that portions of the bill will have to be rewritten. Yes, the Byrd Rule limits what can go into the reconciliation bill, but I'm doing everything I can to support President Trump and move this forward,

Senator Mike Lee of Utah said on X. On Wednesday, Lee released a smaller replacement policy for his previous land sale proposal that the parliamentarian blocked. However, Senator Tommy Tuberville of Alabama called for McDonough's firing on Thursday morning shortly after her decision to exclude several healthcare provisions

from the reconciliation process. Democrats praised the parliamentarian's decision, saying the provision she identified clearly violated the rule. The Byrd rule is enshrined in law for a reason and Democrats are making sure it is enforced, Senator Jeff Merkley from Oregon, the top Democrat on the Senate Budget Committee said. Today we'll take a look at what the right and the left are saying about the potential changes to the spending and tax bill, and then Isaac's take. We'll be right back after this quick break.

This episode is sponsored by the OCS Summer Pre-Roll Sale. Sometimes when you roll your own joint, things can turn out a little differently than what you expected. Maybe it's a little too loose. Maybe it's a little too flimsy. Or maybe it's a little too covered in dirt because your best friend distracted you and you dropped it on the ground. There's a million ways to roll a joint wrong, but there's one roll that's always perfect. The Pre-Roll. Shop the Summer Pre-Roll and Infuse Pre-Roll Sale today's always perfect. The pre-roll. Shop the summer pre-roll and infuse pre-roll sale today at ocs.ca and participating retailers.

All right, first up, let's start with what the right is saying. The right is dismayed by the rulings, and some call on Senate Republicans to circumvent the parliamentarian. Many say the removals undermine the bill's budget savings. Others endorse a cautious approach to selling federal land. The Washington Times editorial board said GOP leaders must not let Senate Parliamentarian McDonough derail their agenda. An unelected functionary wields enormous influence over the fate of major legislation.

Elizabeth McDonough, the Senate parliamentarian, is using her clout to veto key elements of the House passed One Big Beautiful Bill Act. That needs to stop, the board wrote. Although she holds a nonpartisan position, it's hard not to play favorites when implementing a legal standard that's as vague and convoluted as the Byrd Rule. Under the Byrd Rule, any senator can object to an extraneous provision that doesn't meet the criteria laid out by Senator Robert C. Byrd, the late Democratic leader. Ms. McDonough's decisions regarding President Trump's top priorities have raised concerns

about her objectivity. She rejected a section that would make it more difficult for federal judges to impose nationwide injunctions. It does so by forcing anyone suing the administration to post a bond covering the full cost to the public of carrying out the judicial decree, the board said. When Senator Trent Lott was in charge, the Mississippi Republican canned an unhelpful parliamentarian who interfered with the Republican agenda. That's the precedent Majority Leader John Thune, South Dakota Republican, ought to apply now.

In National Review, John R. Perry explored the dozens of provisions stripped from the bill. Given the obvious politics of the Republicans' bill, winning bipartisan support to meet that threshold is not an option. Therefore, the reconciliation package must undergo a bird bath to eliminate all provisions that the parliamentarian thinks are more about making policy changes than adjusting the federal budget," Perry wrote. Unfortunately, the removal of such policies will make the Big Beautiful bill worse. The bill was already a mixed bag for fiscal conservatives. Now, over $250 billion worth of savings will have to go, as well as some immigration enforcement

tools and limits on regulatory overreach. One silver lining is this birdbath is a provision on artificial intelligence that the parliamentarians surprisingly allowed to stay. This would predicate federal funding to states on the condition they not regulate AI for 10 years. Beyond that, there is not much to cheer for other than upholding the rules that sustain the Senate filibuster. Republicans will especially have a hard time filling the holes in their planned budget

savings that the Byrd rule has carved out. The Deseret News editorial board wrote, Sell some public lands, but do it carefully. Lee says changes to his bill are coming. That's good. We hope they include clear and unmistakable language that protects important public lands, which Lee has said all along is the intent of this bill,

the board said. Lee has said the revised bill would restrict the Bureau of Land Management to selling land within five miles of a population center. He has said the land should be connected to existing subdivisions, for a service land would not be for sale. Freedom zones would be established to protect farmers, ranchers, and those who use public

lands for recreation. Those solutions are worth considering. Lee's original proposal would require 11 states to sell between 0.5 and 0.75 percent of all Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service lands, with a combined maximum 1.5% in some cases. The plan was to use the proceeds to help pay for some of the proposed tax cuts in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the board wrote. We are encouraged by any plausible measure that would reduce the relentless and ultimately

disastrous accumulation of debt. However, the sale of land would provide a one-time reduction of the annual deficit. What the nation needs is more permanent fiscal integrity, most likely through reforms to entitlement programs and a combination of spending cuts and revenue increases. ["Sailor's Guide to the Future"] All right, that is it for what the right is saying, which brings us to what the left is saying. The left welcomes the parliamentarians' rulings, suggesting they uphold the intent of the

Byrd Rule. Some worry that Republicans could move to circumvent the parliamentarian. Others say the Lansdale measure would primarily benefit corporations and the wealthy. In the American Prospect, David Dayen wrote, The Parliamentarian comes for the big beautiful bill. The Parliamentarian has reshaped the bill in important ways. She threw out most of the Senate Banking Committee title, including measures that would have defunded or dismantled the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Office of Financial Research, and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board,

Dayton said. She stopped the repeal of emissions standards for passenger vehicles and a pay-to-play measure whereby developers of infrastructure projects could avoid judicial review if they paid a fee. She stopped two bizarre home-state gifts snuck in by Senator Ted Cruz, one of which would have robbed a space shuttle from the Smithsonian and ferreted it to Houston on the taxpayers' dime. The biggest move by the parliamentarian in budgetary terms thus far was her jettisoning of a provision that would have forced states to add matching funds to the Supplemental

Nutritional Assistance Program, or SNAP, on a sliding scale based on program error rates. Because states don't have reserves lying around to backfill the loss, it would have meant severe cutbacks to nutritional assistance eligibility," Dayan wrote. It should be said, of course, that Senate Republicans could simply ignore the parliamentarian. But Senate Majority Leader John Thune, the Republican from South Dakota, has vowed to heed the parliamentarian's rulings, and so far, everyone is proceeding as if they will be adhered to. Blowing up the current policy baseline would be the real test here.

In common dreams, Stephen Harper called McDonough an unsung hero. Republicans in the Senate made the bill worse. Over the weekend, an unlikely hero blocked this assault on the Constitution, the Senate parliamentarian. Will her ruling stick, or will Senate Republicans detonate the nuclear option to save the provision? Harper asked. Buried in the House Bill's 1,000-plus pages was Section 70302, which allowed Trump to disregard all existing injunctions and continue his unconstitutional policies with impunity.

It provided, retroactively, that unless a court required a bond, it could not enforce a contempt charge for violating an injunction or temporary restraining order. The Senate proposed a different way to protect Trump's unconstitutional actions from judicial scrutiny – an enormous bond that would close the courts to the vast majority of potential litigants. The current attempt to limit federal court injunctions is among many provisions that McDonough struck from the Senate version of the One Big Beautiful Bill, Harper said. Unfortunately, Trump, who has urged elimination of the filibuster, doesn't

care about preserving the institutional value of anything. If he can neuter the courts in the process of bending the Senate to his will, so much the better. Senator John Thune is about to get the test of his political career. Loyalty to Trump or the Constitution? In MSNBC, Hays Brown argued the land sale provision is designed to benefit the wealthy. The fire sale of public lands is something of a pet project from the committee's chair, Utah Republican Senator Mike Lee. Lee and other supporters argued that the provision would help alleviate the nation's housing

crisis. But in practice, the sale of these lands would more likely be yet another boon to the wealthy in a bill already designed to facilitate a massive upward transfer of wealth, Brown wrote. He believes the West's vast federal estate is reserved for the enjoyment of very few, an elite who want to transform the American West into picturesque tourist villages and uninhabited but but nonetheless beautiful, vistas. The Senate's version of the provision goes further than the one the House rejected, offering up almost four times as much land for sale. Crucially, the Senate bill would exempt one Western state, Montana, and one of the state's congressmen, Representative Ryan Zinke, led the opposition to the House version.

But leaving out the state still might not be enough to sway the Montana delegation to support Lee's provision, Brown said. As the Wilderness Society warned, letting this provision pass sets up a precedent to quickly liquidate huge chunks of America's treasured lands in the future whenever politicians have a pet project to pay for. In this case, it would entail disposing of untouched nature in favor of newly built McMansions and second homes. All right, let's head over to Isaac for his take.

["Isaac's Theme Song"] All right, that is it for what the left and the right are saying, which brings us to my take. So, first of all, legislating is hard. Bringing together Republican members of the House to pass a bill with a thin majority is difficult enough. Creating a bill that 95% of Republicans in the Senate unify behind is even more challenging.

These are two different kinds of members of Congress. Senators elected statewide to six-year terms versus district-elected representatives on two-year terms with very different motives, very different incentives, very different instincts. Getting them to all align gets 10 times harder when you try to cram every political priority into one giant, big, beautiful bill as President Trump has opted to do here. And the result here is why we increasingly see leaders settle for the easy work of symbolic, illegal, or fickle executive action.

The Senate parliamentarian wields a great deal of power, which may seem irrational and does carry its own issues. Trusting one unelected official to impartially rule on what is or isn't fair game in a reconciliation bill is a tenuous process. But to say it plainly, the parliamentarian is not the problem. The root issue actually is that Senate Republicans,

in this case, but Democrats do this too, they want to pass a massive piece of legislation without a 60 vote majority in the Senate. What they can do with a simple 50-vote majority is properly limited because the upper chamber is supposed to be a deliberative body with a higher threshold for changing our country's laws. And it should say that way. In a more functioning Congress, fewer decisions would come down to the parliamentarian because

the majority would propose compromise bills outside the reconciliation process that could earn 60 or more votes. Republicans are instead choosing to try to do everything they want all at once without even engaging the other side, but they simply can't because they don't have 60 seats. They have the White House and slim majorities in both chambers, but they don't have a modicum of restraint, so the parliamentarian is providing it for them. Frankly, it's a relief to me to see Majority Leader Thune respecting the parliamentarian's rulings given that Republicans could try to fight them if they wanted to blow up the system and set a new precedent for ignoring them. The Senate has actually done it quite recently, but overriding a reconciliation ruling would

be a much bigger deal. Given all the precedent breaking and norm challenging we hear about on a weekly basis, a lot of people in Washington, DC still respect the system and try to work within it. Suffice it to say, I was glad to see the Byrd rule applied. Perhaps most importantly to me, I was relieved to see the attempted federal land sale struck from the bill, though Senator Mike Lee is now trying again with a revised proposal. We talked about this last week on the Tangle podcast, but I found myself more incensed by the prospect than I expected to be.

Despite the potential sale applying to a small sliver of federally owned lands, and despite us not knowing what precise land might be sold, though national parks and forests were exempted, I thought justifying the sales by increased housing supply was self-evidently nonsense. The actual outcome to me seemed obvious. Ultra wealthy Americans would snatch up the now for sale land and turn it into their own privately owned resorts or getaways. We already have swaths of open, privately owned

American land surrounding burgeoning cities across the heartland that need to be revived with housing and jobs. I was also pleased to see the removal of a House provision rewritten in the Senate that would have created a pathway for Trump to ignore federal injunctions. Basically, Republicans wanted to put a bond on federal lawsuits so large that potential claimants would not be able to challenge Trump's federal actions, an alarming attempt to evade the same court scrutiny every other president has had to abide by. And even if you supported that effort, it certainly doesn't belong in a definitionally budget-focused reconciliation bill. Actually, I think the birdbath should have scrubbed more, like the artificial intelligence provision that effectively prohibits states from regulating AI for 10 years. This provision has drawn the ire of Republicans like Representative

Marjorie Taylor Greene from Georgia who conceded that she did not see it in the bill she voted for. Putting aside my frustration at Greene for not doing the very basic work of her job, reading a bill before voting for it, I agree with her on the danger of the provision's inclusion. Not only is removing the state's rights to govern undemocratic, but, as North Carolina Attorney General Jeff Jackson explained, trusting the provision requires trusting that Congress can pass an AI regulation bill of its own, which it has proved totally incapable of. So, the likely outcome was no regulation at all. In maybe the biggest ruling of them all, news broke this morning that the parliamentarian struck several critical healthcare provisions from the bill,

amounting to an estimated $250 billion of savings removed. I haven't had as much time to read and understand her rationale here, but this seems like the most controversial and perhaps least understandable set of rulings. It immediately sparked calls for a vote to override the parliamentarian. I'm not sure that vote would succeed, but the importance of Medicaid cuts to this bill might

be enough to rally Republicans to fight the parliamentarian in earnest. Practically speaking, these rulings very obviously limit this bill's scope and send Republicans back to the drawing board, but again, that's good. The sweeping provisions across so many sectors of American life were very clearly pushing the boundaries of what was appropriate in reconciliation, But again, that's good. The sweeping provisions across so many sectors of American life were very clearly pushing the boundaries of what was appropriate in reconciliation. And the parliamentarian's rulings all seemed quite reasonable, if not overly restrained.

Hopefully, Republicans continue to respect those rulings and their final product is appropriately tempered to fit the legislative process they've chosen. We'll be right back after this quick break. This episode is sponsored by the OCS Summer Pre-Roll Sale. Sometimes when you roll your own joint, things can turn out a little differently than what you expected. Maybe it's a little too loose, maybe it's a little too flimsy, or maybe it's a little too covered in dirt because your a little too flimsy. Or maybe it's a little too covered in dirt because your best friend distracted you and you dropped it on the ground.

There's a million ways to roll a joint wrong, but there's one roll that's always perfect, the pre-roll. Shop the summer pre-roll and infuse pre-roll sale today at ocs.ca and participating retailers. dollars. All right. That is it for my take, which brings us to your questions answered. This one is from Keith in North Haven, Connecticut. He said, how do you feel about visible figures in major news and media outlets being brought in by the White House to fill federal positions? Could this further erode trust in those institutions and reinforce existing biases by rewarding

favorable media coverage with prestigious positions, or is this just how the game is played? So, simply put, no, this is not how the game is typically played, and it will do more, I think, to affect trust in government than reshape any media coverage. The trust is generally eroded the other way, when people leave government positions for lucrative media spots, like a former Biden spokesperson becoming a host on MSNBC. But people going from media to government is frankly more concerning to me, personally. Two people in particular recently made jumps from broadcasting careers, specifically at

Fox News, to important positions within the government. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and the interim U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro. Broadcast news experience isn't nothing. It ensures someone is a professional communicator, plays well on camera, and understands how to deliver a political message. In contrast, Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy is also a former Fox host, but compliments it with 10 years as a district attorney and 10 more years in Congress.

Hegseth and Pirro both have their own relevant experience, of course, but neither of them seem to have the resume to lead professionals at a government agency, to take on long and thankless projects outside the public eye or stay current in the area that experts are depending on them to lead. I feel this way about people like Dan Bongino too, a former secret service agent turned famous podcast host who now has a very high ranking position at the FBI. We express these concerns and others

when President Trump nominated Hegset, the former Fox and Friends co-host to lead the Department of Defense. So far, he has made high-level professional missteps while reports circulate that the White House is struggling to hire senior advisors to support him. And while Judge Pirro has only been in office for a few weeks, we have similar worries.

Her last judgeship ended in 2005, and her only political experience is three failed campaigns for office in New York. Could Trump appointing Hegseth and Pirro incentivize more people in broadcasting to play nice in hopes of landing positions within the administration? Maybe, but editorial media bias is an existing problem. We're more concerned with the competency of these selections and their effect on trust in government. Appointing people with thin resumes on the basis of political allegiance is a risky move. And if major mistakes like Signalgate continue to happen,

we shouldn't be surprised if trust in government continues to decline. All right, that is it for your questions answered. I'm gonna send it back to John for the rest of the pod and I'll see you guys tomorrow. Have a good one, peace. Thanks, Isaac. Here's your under the radar story for today, Isaac. Here's your Under the Radar story for today, folks. On Monday, New York Governor Kathy Hochul directed the state's power authority to develop

plans for its first new nuclear power plant in decades. Hochul framed the initiative as a bid for energy independence and economic growth as the state moves away from fossil fuel power plants. New York has three active nuclear power plants generating approximately 3.3 gigawatts of power, and the new plant would aim to increase that capacity to roughly 4.3 gigawatts. However, some opponents worry about the cost and time needed to construct the plant, citing a pair of reactors recently built in Georgia that opened seven years later than expected and cost $35 billion to build.

The Associated Press has this story and there's a link in today's episode description. Alright next up is our numbers section. The year the Congressional Budget Act was enacted was 1974, establishing the budget reconciliation process. The year the Byrd Rule was incorporated into the Congressional Budget Act and made permanent was 1990. According to a March 2025 Congressional Research Service report, the number of reconciliation bills signed into law since 1980 is 23. The average number of days between the adoption of a Congressional budget resolution and the enactment of the resulting reconciliation bill is 152 days.

The total number of actions considered and disposed of under the Byrd Rule on reconciliation bills in the Senate since 1980 is 152. According to a June 2025 KFF poll, the percentage of U.S. adults who have a favorable view of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is 35%, and the percentage of U.S. adults who have an unfavorable view of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is 64%. The bill's net favorability among Democrats is minus 72%, and the bill's net favorability among Democrats is minus 72 percent, and the bill's net favorability among Republicans is plus 25 percent.

And last but not least, our Have a Nice Day story. Goliath, a Galapagos tortoise, recently celebrated his 135th birthday. The occasion was extra sweet, as it was also Goliath's first birthday as a father. The 517-pound tortoise, who lives at Zoo Miami, had failed to conceive with several female tortoises before finally succeeding with sweet pea. According to the zoo, the hatchling appears to be healthy and has been removed from the incubator and placed in a separate enclosure where it is active and full of energy. The zoo also submitted applications to the Guinness Book of World Records seeking to

recognize Goliath as the oldest first-time father in history and him and Sweepee as the oldest first-time parents in history. NPR has this story and there's a link in today's episode description. Alright everybody, that is it for today's episode. As always, if you'd like to support our work, please go to READTANGLE.com where you can description. And though we will be putting out a preview of that piece, the podcast version in full will be available to members only. So if you don't have a membership, it's a great time to sign up as we have more offerings coming in the future. Isaac, Ari and Camille will be here for the Sunday podcast

and I will return on Monday. For the rest of the crew, this is John Wall signing off. Have an absolutely fantastic weekend, y'all. Peace. Our executive editor and founder is me, Isaac Saul, and our executive producer is John Lull. Today's episode was edited and engineered by Dewey Thomas. Our editorial staff is led by managing editor,

Ari Weitzman, with senior editor, Will Kavak, and associate editors, Hunter Kaspersen, Audrey Moorhead, Bailey Saul, Lindsay Knuth, and Kendall White. Music for the podcast was produced by Dyett75. To learn more about Tangle and to sign up for a membership, please visit our website at retangle.com. This episode is sponsored by the OCS Summer Pre-Roll Sale. Sometimes, when you roll your own joint, things can turn out a little differently than what you expected. Maybe it's a little too loose. Maybe it's a little too flimsy.

Or maybe it's a little too covered in dirt because your best friend distracted you and you dropped it on the ground. There's a million ways to roll a joint wrong, but there's one roll that's always perfect. The pre-roll. Shop the Summer Pre-Roll and Infuse Pre-Roll Sale today at OCS.ca and participating retailers.