Politics
Here’s What to Know About Congressional Republicans’ Budget Plans
The Senate on Tuesday evening voted on party lines to adopt a budget outline designed to clear the way for a major piece of President Trump’s domestic agenda, putting forth a measure that calls for increasing spending on immigration enforcement and defense while cutting other federal programs.
Republicans in Congress have been consumed for weeks with advancing a budget blueprint to power their push to enact Mr. Trump’s sweeping tax and immigration agenda. Approval of such a plan is a crucial first step if Republicans want to avail themselves of a process called budget reconciliation, which allows legislation that affects government revenues to pass the Senate on a simple majority vote.
For decades, both parties have used that maneuver to push major domestic policy legislation through Congress — including tax cuts, health care policy changes and economic relief packages — over the opposition of the minority party. The stakes are exceedingly high, and the process is tremendously difficult.
The House and Senate, both controlled by Republicans, have been working on separate budget plans and are at odds on how to move forward. With the House G.O.P. divided and delayed in considering their outline, the Senate is moving ahead.
Here’s what you need to know about the budget.
What is a budget resolution?
In theory, Congress is supposed to adopt a budget resolution each year setting a top-line number for federal funding and providing general contours for how that money should be spent. After the plan is approved, it falls to lawmakers on the Appropriations Committees to allocate federal dollars, following the blueprint.
Lawmakers in recent years have not produced such a plan or put it to a vote, sidestepping tough decisions about what programs to spend on and what programs to cut. Instead, congressional leaders, in collaboration with senior appropriators, have agreed on the overall numbers and simply passed spending legislation each year.
But in order to use the reconciliation process, the House and the Senate must each adopt a budget resolution that lays out broad areas of agreement on where to increase and decrease spending.
The budget resolution is just a blueprint. Unlike a spending bill, it does not carry the force of law, and it does not fund the government. Its consideration is entirely separate from another task that Republicans in Congress have in the weeks ahead: agreeing to and passing legislation to keep federal funding flowing past a March 14 deadline.
The budget measure being considered this week does not even lay out what specific legislative changes to take in order to meet the spending targets it contains. Those changes must be detailed in separate legislation — one or multiple bills — that is subject to restrictive rules for what can be included and which must pass both the House and Senate to become law.
What’s the difference between the House and Senate blueprints?
The Senate blueprint is far more bare-bones than the House plan. It calls for increasing military spending by $150 billion. Funding for border security measures, including additional detention beds and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, would increase by $175 billion. It does not lay out specific spending cuts to pay for those increases, but Senator Lindsey Graham, the South Carolina Republican who chairs the Budget Committee, has indicated that the legislation would be fully paid for, in part through new revenues from domestic drilling.
Mr. Graham has said the blueprint represents just the opening salvo in the Senate’s legislative drive, and that it would be followed by a second bill that would extend the 2017 tax cuts.
The House plan is both more expansive and more granular, in an effort to meet the demands of conservative hard-liners who have demanded that House G.O.P. leaders guarantee deep spending cuts.
That blueprint calls for legislation that would add roughly $3 trillion to the deficit over a decade, while imposing deep cuts in spending on health care and food programs for low-income people. That would help pay for $4.5 trillion in tax cuts. It also calls for raising the debt limit by $4 trillion.
Why are the House and the Senate advancing different plans?
House and Senate leaders have remained divided over the best way to enact Mr. Trump’s fiscal promises into law. In the Senate, Republicans have argued that lawmakers should deliver the president an early political victory and quickly pass legislation increasing funding for immigration enforcement, arguing that the Homeland Security Department desperately needs more money to carry out the White House’s ambitious deportation agenda.
But G.O.P. leaders in the House have argued that lumping Mr. Trump’s entire domestic policy agenda into one big bill will make it easier to pass in a chamber where Republicans have a razor-thin majority and will need to muster near-unanimity in order to pass the blueprint.
Senate leaders initially deferred to the House, but after internal divisions slowed their efforts to put together a budget plan, Mr. Graham went ahead and advanced his own plan.
What programs are on the chopping block?
Because the budget resolution only lays out broad spending targets by committee, Republicans have not yet had to choose which federal programs they will cut — or by how much.
But the House blueprint hints at where Republicans plan to find the money to finance their tax cuts. For example, the plan instructs the Energy and Commerce Committee, which oversees Medicaid, to come up with at least $880 billion in cuts. That accounts for more than half of the reductions laid out in the budget outline.
Those choices will be among the toughest Republican leaders will have to make, especially in the House. They will need to balance the demands of hard-right conservatives who want to gut Medicaid and food stamps against the entreaties of politically vulnerable moderates whose constituents rely on those programs.
At the same time, they will have to decide which tax cuts championed by Mr. Trump are essential, and which they can jettison. Just extending the 2017 tax cuts alone would cost roughly $4 trillion over the next 10 years.
Andrew Duehren contributed reporting.
Politics
Pritzker pushes prosecutions of Trump officials as part of Dem ‘Project 2029’ agenda
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Illinois Democratic Gov. JB Pritzker said that Democrats should seek criminal prosecution against Trump administration and law enforcement officials who have “broken the law” if they were to gain control of the White House in 2028.
Pritzker, who is running for a third gubernatorial term, sat down for an interview with the New York Times in which he proposed Democrats adopt their own version of Project 2025 — the Heritage Foundation’s conservative policy blueprint for presidential administrations released in nearly every election cycle since the 1980s. Pritzker dubbed the Democrats’ counter “Project 2029,” urging it to be quickly implemented to “restore the rule of law.”
“I don’t think you can speak of it in shorthand, but we’ve got to restore the rule of law, and that means holding people accountable who’ve broken the law,” Pritzker said. “I’m talking about the people in this administration who’ve broken the law and federal agents who’ve broken the law.”
New York Times reporter Lulu Garcia-Navarro asked Pritzker whether this meant Trump officials and law enforcement agents would face criminal prosecution.
TRUMP SAYS CHICAGO MAYOR, ILLINOIS GOVERNOR ‘SHOULD BE IN JAIL FOR FAILING TO PROTECT’ ICE OFFICERS
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker speaks to members of the media at Manny’s Cafeteria and Delicatessen during a primary election in Chicago, Illinois, on Tuesday, March 17, 2026. (Credit: Christopher Dilts / Bloomberg via Getty Images)
“Criminally prosecuted, civilly prosecuted,” Pritzker said. “Whatever it is that we can do.”
Trump and Pritzker have been at odds over Trump’s immigration enforcement agenda for months.
Last October, Pritzker filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration over its deployment of National Guard troops to Chicago. The lawsuit argued that the deployment of the National Guardsmen to the Windy City was “unconstitutional and/or unlawful.”
PRITZKER CLAIMS COUNTRY UNDER TRUMP WORSE THAN COVID PANDEMIC WHERE PEOPLE DIED ‘IN DROVES’
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents walk down a street during a multi-agency targeted enforcement operation in Chicago, Illinois, on Sunday, Jan. 26, 2025. President Donald Trump has pledged to carry out the largest deportation effort in U.S. history, vowing to ultimately deport all people living in the country without legal status. (Christopher Dilts / Bloomberg via Getty Images)
U.S. District Judge April Perry issued a temporary restraining order preventing the deployment of National Guard troops to the state as the lawsuit worked its way through the legal system. The Supreme Court also upheld Perry’s decision. The Trump administration withdrew federal troops from the state in January.
Pritzker and Trump have also clashed over the tactics used by federal immigration enforcement agents in Illinois. Pritzker has accused federal agents of “waging war on our people” and “acting like jackbooted thugs.”
U.S. President Donald Trump attends a tour of a Thermo Fisher Scientific facility in Reading, Ohio, on March 11, 2026. Trump is highlighting his administration’s push to lower drug prices at the biotechnology and pharmaceutical company. (Andrew Harnik / Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The Trump administration faces another lawsuit stemming from accusations of immigration enforcement agents’ alleged misconduct during Operation Midway Blitz in Chicago. Plaintiffs in the lawsuit accused federal agents of violating protesters’ constitutional rights through their use of tear gas and force. District Judge Sara Ellis issued a preliminary injunction barring federal agents’ use of force and tear gas on protesters, but an appeals court overturned her decision earlier this month.
Fox News Digital reached out to Pritzker’s office and the White House for comment.
Politics
Pentagon orders 2,500 troops, 3 warships from California to the Middle East
WASHINGTON — The Pentagon is reportedly sending three California-based warships and roughly 2,500 Marines to the Middle East, the second significant deployment in a week.
The three warships are part of the San Diego-based USS Boxer amphibious ready group. The Marines are from the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit, based at Camp Pendleton. The deployments were reported Friday by the Associated Press, citing Pentagon sources.
A 2,500-strong Marine unit accompanied by the USS Tripoli warship launched from Japan on Saturday.
The major reinforcement comes as the war’s economic shock waves are felt throughout the globe, as Washington seeks to secure vital shipping lanes and deter further attacks on energy infrastructure around the Persian Gulf.
President Trump has continued pressing allies to join his proposed coalition to patrol the Iranian-controlled Strait of Hormuz, a vital shipping lane through which about 20% of the world’s oil supply passes. So far, Europe, Japan, China and Australia have refused to heed the call.
Trump on Thursday said Iran “is close to demolished,” but that securing the Strait of Hormuz remained a struggle. He suggested the U.S. was working to secure the strait not for its own oil needs, but “just to be nice” to other countries that rely on oil from the region to a much larger degree than the U.S.
“They complain about the high oil prices they are forced to pay, but don’t want to help open the Strait of Hormuz, a simple military maneuver that is the single reason for the high oil prices. So easy for them to do, with so little risk. COWARDS, and we will REMEMBER!” Trump wrote Friday on Truth Social.
Iran continued sweeping attacks on Mideast energy facilities, a retaliation to Israeli strikes on its Iran’s South Pars field, the world’s largest natural gas field Wednesday. The fallout has dragged the Gulf states into the war amid the largest energy supply disruption in history.
Iranian shahed drones hammered Kuwait’s largest oil refinery Friday. Similar attacks triggered fires at Ras Laffan Industrial City in Qatar, bringing energy product screaming to a halt at the largest natural gas hub in the globe. Repairs are expected to take years.
Meanwhile, United Arab Emirates’ air defense systems were countering Iranian missiles overnight, and Saudi Arabia said it might respond with force if Iran continues to attack facilities in the kingdom.
Israel said Friday it had killed Esmail Ahmadi, a senior intelligence official in Iran’s Basij and deputy to its commander, in an airstrike. Officials described Ahmadi as “one of the most important pillars” of the Basij volunteer paramilitary force.
Even as Israel carries out daily decapitation airstrikes in Tehran and the U.S. deploys renewed forces to its front door, the Islamic Republic has not faltered.
Abolfazl Shekarchi, a senior spokesperson for Iran’s armed forces, said American and Israeli officials could be targeted worldwide.
“From now on, based on the information we have, even recreational and tourist locations around the world will not be safe for you,” Shekarchi said.
Oil prices have surged past $100 a barrel and found a volatile new floor amid the chaos.
Financial markets have reacted with sustained losses. Wall Street has now posted its fourth consecutive week of declines, with investors increasingly pricing in the risk that higher energy costs could slow economic growth while reigniting inflation. Analysts warn that persistently elevated crude prices are likely to squeeze corporate margins and weigh on consumer spending in the United States and beyond.
The International Monetary Fund has cautioned that the conflict could push inflation higher, too. The Federal Reserve is now facing renewed uncertainty as they weigh whether to hold interest rates higher for longer in response to rising energy costs.
At a White House event on Friday, Trump maintained that the United States’ military operation is “going extremely well in Iran.”
“The difference between them and us is they had a navy two weeks ago and they have no navy anymore. It’s all at the bottom of the sea,” Trump said. “Fifty-eight ships were knocked down in two days and we have the greatest navy in the world. It is not even close.”
The president did not take questions from reporters in the room. But in unprompted remarks, he said the United States and Iran are not engaging in talks because their leaders “are all gone,” adding to the uncertainty about the war’s exit strategy.
“We are having a hard time, we want to talk to them and there is nobody to talk to,” he said. “We have nobody to talk to and you know what? We like it that way.”
Politics
Video: Trump Makes Pearl Harbor Joke In Meeting With Japan’s Prime Minister
new video loaded: Trump Makes Pearl Harbor Joke In Meeting With Japan’s Prime Minister
transcript
transcript
Trump Makes Pearl Harbor Joke In Meeting With Japan’s Prime Minister
President Donald Trump made a joke about the Japanese attack on Dec. 7, 1941, which led the United States into World War II, during a press conference with Japan’s prime minister Sanae Takaichi on Thursday. The president has been pressing Japan’s leader for military help in the Middle East to ease the oil crisis.
-
“Who knows better about surprise than Japan?” Reporter: “Why didn’t you tell U.S. allies in Europe and Asia, like Japan, about the war before attacking Iran?” “The one thing you don’t want to signal too much. When we go in, we went in very hard and we didn’t tell anybody about it because we wanted surprise. Who knows better about surprise than Japan? Why didn’t you tell me about Pearl Harbor, OK? Reporter: “Do you intend to potentially put U.S. troops or more troops in the region?” “No, I’m not putting troops anywhere. If I were, I certainly wouldn’t tell you. I hate to make this excursion, but we’re going to have to do it. I wanted to put out that fire and I said, if I do that, oil prices will go up. The economy will go down a little bit. I thought it would be worse, much worse, actually. I thought there was a chance it could be much worse. It’s not bad, and it’s going to be over with pretty soon.” Reporter: “If the war is almost over, why is the Pentagon going to ask Congress for an additional $200 billion?” “Well, we’re asking for a lot of reasons beyond even what we’re talking about in Iran. This is a very volatile world. So we’re in very good shape. But we want to be in the best shape, the best shape we’ve ever been in. We want to be sure, and it’s a small price to pay to make sure that we stay tippy top.”
By Meg Felling
March 19, 2026
-
Detroit, MI2 days agoDrummer Brian Pastoria, longtime Detroit music advocate, dies at 68
-
Oklahoma6 days agoFamily rallies around Oklahoma father after head-on crash
-
Nebraska1 week agoWildfire forces immediate evacuation order for Farnam residents
-
Georgia4 days agoHow ICE plans for a detention warehouse pushed a Georgia town to fight back | CNN Politics
-
Massachusetts1 week agoMassachusetts community colleges to launch apprenticeship degree programs – The Boston Globe
-
Alaska5 days agoPolice looking for man considered ‘armed and dangerous’
-
Colorado1 week ago‘It’s Not a Penalty’: Bednar Rips Officials For MacKinnon Ejection | Colorado Hockey Now
-
Southwest1 week agoTalarico reportedly knew Colbert interview wouldn’t air on TV before he left to film it