Ranking Member Sanchez and other Democrats used the field hearing of the House Ways and Means Committee at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library to argue that HR 1 — described by proponents as a package of permanent tax reforms — pairs tax cuts with large spending reductions that would reduce health and nutrition coverage for millions.

Why it matters: Democrats and community advocates said the bill’s spending changes would increase uninsured rates, reduce access to care and push costs onto states and localities; witnesses and members tied the changes to potential real‑world consequences in California communities.

Ranking Member Sanchez opened the hearing’s Democratic critique, saying the measure “gives the top point 1% an average tax cut of $309,000 in 2037 alone” and that the bill “will also raise all of our health care premiums, cut coverage for over 17,000,000 Americans.” She said provisions in the bill would trigger cuts to Medicare and impose limits that threaten children’s coverage in CHIP.

Representative Judy Chu said the hearing was “pathetic political theater” and that the bill is “the largest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich in modern history,” asserting that Republicans’ estimate of beneficiaries misstates impacts on working‑class families.

John Kim, president and CEO of the California nonprofit Catalyst California, described CBO estimates and state consequences: “According to the CBO, HR 1 is the most costly bill in history, adding 3,400,000,000,000.0 to the deficit,” Kim said, and he told members that the package could put “3,000,000 California families” at greater risk of food insecurity and that California could face a multibillion‑dollar funding gap in Medicaid over the coming decade. Kim also linked recent ICE enforcement actions to local economic harm and said the bill includes increased enforcement funding that he said would exacerbate harms to communities.

Committee Democrats also highlighted an item in discussion: Representative Sanchez pointed to a bill allocation of “an additional $75,000,000,000 … towards ICE detention centers, enforcement, and personnel,” saying that would expand federal enforcement activity in local communities.

Democrats repeatedly asked witnesses and Republican members to explain how the bill’s temporary and permanent provisions would affect low‑ and moderate‑income households. Witnesses and some members disputed the magnitude and methodology of some cost and distributional estimates; Republicans emphasized work and productivity incentives and the benefits of tax certainty for businesses.

No formal vote or committee action occurred during the field hearing; Democrats said they will continue to press their concerns in committee and on the floor. Written submissions and supplemental documents provided by witnesses will be included in the official hearing record.

Ending: The hearing captured a partisan clash over whether HR 1′s tax cuts are worth the spending tradeoffs; Democrats framed the package as a policy that would reduce health and nutrition benefits for millions and impose costs on states, while supporters emphasized investment and growth.