Was it actually a cut or was it not renewing something that was expiring? A bill to fund the government seems like the wrong place to be debating new spending.
I don’t know what the news rhetoric on all of this is, I haven’t seen it mentioned on here or on news articles, and I’m not on the socials/don’t watch tv. IIRC the initial ACA bill always had this cliff in order to make the numbers work for the bill to pass.
Like most long-term financial bills, everyone just assumed the cliff won’t hit and new legislation will pass.
This is the actual crux, no? “We expected the funny numbers to pass again” as opposed to “we should have addressed this before Biden left office”
