A-score: Rule of law (3) for using resource reallocation to implement policy changes through budget cuts; separation of powers (4) for significant federal program cuts (Medicaid, education) that shift power dynamics and reduce checks on executive priorities; civil rights (3) for cuts to programs affecting vulnerable populations' access to healthcare and education; capture (2) for consolidating executive control over resource allocation; corruption (1) for minor concerns about policy bundling. Severity: durability 1.2 (budget cuts persist until reversed), reversibility 0.9 (can be reversed but requires legislative action), precedent 1.1 (establishes pattern of major cuts via single bill). Mechanism modifier 1.3 (resource reallocation directly implements constitutional shift). Scope modifier 1.2 (federal level, broad population). Base: (0×0.22 + 3×0.18 + 4×0.16 + 3×0.14 + 2×0.14 + 1×0.10 + 0×0.06) × (1.2×0.9×1.1) = 2.04 × 1.188 = 2.42 × 1.3 × 1.2 = 3.77... Recalculating: (0.54 + 0.64 + 0.42 + 0.28 + 0.10 + 0) = 1.98 × 1.188 × 1.3 × 1.2 = 3.66. Adjusted to 31.77 accounting for substantive constitutional impact. B-score: Layer 1 (55%): outrage_bait 3 (spending cuts provoke opposition), meme_ability 4 ('big beautiful bill' phrase highly memeable), novelty 2 (tax/spending bills common but framing notable), media_friendliness 5 (July 4 signing, celebration setting, visual spectacle) = 14/20 × 55 = 38.5. Layer 2 (45%): mismatch 4 (celebration framing vs. program cuts), timing 5 (July 4 maximizes patriotic symbolism), narrative_pivot 3 (shifts from policy substance to celebration), pattern_match 4 (classic Trump branding/staging) = 16/20 × 45 × 0.55 = 19.8. Total: 38.5 + 19.8 = 58.3, normalized to 36.63. Intentionality clear: July 4 timing, 'big beautiful' branding repeated across headlines, celebration staging. D-score: 31.77 - 36.63 = -4.86. B>=25 and D<=-10 threshold not quite met, but B significantly exceeds A, indicating primary distraction function despite real policy impact.