Connect with us

Politics

House Republicans Advance Trump’s ‘Big, Beautiful Bill’

Published

on

House Republicans Advance Trump’s ‘Big, Beautiful Bill’

The House Budget Committee late Sunday night revived President Trump’s stalled bill to cut taxes and spending, after a handful of fiscally conservative Republicans relented and allowed it to advance even as they continued to press for deeper reductions to health and environmental programs.

The vote signaled a temporary resolution to a remarkable revolt from a group of hard-liners on the panel, who on Friday joined Democrats in opposing the bill in committee, tanking it over concerns that it did not do enough to rein in the nation’s ballooning debt.

On Sunday, after a weekend of intensive negotiations with House Republican leaders and White House officials, they switched their votes to “present,” allowing the measure to move forward without lending their explicit support. It sent the bill past a crucial procedural hurdle but indicated that there was still major trouble ahead for the package, which Speaker Mike Johnson has said he wants to be considered by the full House before Memorial Day.

“Deliberations continue to this very moment,” Representative Jodey C. Arrington of Texas, the chairman of the panel, said as he opened the session late Sunday night. “They will continue on into the week and, I suspect, right up until the time we put this big, beautiful bill on the floor of the House.”

Mr. Arrington added: “I don’t know anything about side deals or any deals. I just know we’re at a place where we can take a vote today.”

Advertisement

The vote was 17 to 16, with all four Republicans who initially voted to defeat the legislation — Representatives Chip Roy of Texas, Josh Brecheen of Oklahoma, Ralph Norman of South Carolina and Andrew Clyde of Georgia — voting “present.”

In a lengthy statement on social media minutes after the vote, Mr. Roy said he and the three other conservatives had secured commitments for changes to the bill that include speeding implementation of new work requirements for Medicaid and further curtailing clean energy tax credits created by the Inflation Reduction Act. He did not offer more details about either proposal, and Republican leaders provided no information on what concessions they had promised.

But Mr. Roy did say that “the bill does not yet meet the moment,” and alluded to wanting deeper cuts to Medicaid, in a sign of the difficult path ahead.

The legislation would make the 2017 tax cuts permanent and eliminate taxes on tips and overtime pay, fulfilling the president’s campaign promise. It also would raise spending on the military and immigration enforcement. Cuts to Medicaid, food stamps, education and subsidies for clean energy would offset part of the price of the bill, though they would not cover the entire cost of $3.8 trillion over 10 years.

The four Republicans on the panel voted against the legislation the first time the budget panel met, protesting the timeline for the work requirements for Medicaid recipients — which the bill would not impose until 2029, after the next presidential election — and the provisions targeting the clean energy tax credits in the Inflation Reduction Act, which the measure would partially but not completely repeal.

Advertisement

Work requirements are broadly popular among congressional Republicans, and even those who have balked at other cuts to Medicaid have said they could support such requirements.

In an interview on Sunday on Fox News, Mr. Johnson said Republican leaders were trying to strike a balance between moving up the implementation date for new work requirements and giving states the time they needed to update their systems and ensure that the new laws could be enforced.

“I think we’ve got to compromise on that,” he said. “We’ll get everyone in line to do it.”

Winning support across the House G.O.P. conference for rolling back the clean energy tax credits created under President Joseph R. Biden Jr. in the Inflation Reduction Act could be trickier.

The bill would sharply curtail most big tax credits for clean energy, but it did not eliminate all of the provisions in the law. That was a key demand of the ultraconservatives, who said their party should have no problem repealing a statute that Democrats passed on their own through reconciliation, over unified Republican opposition.

Advertisement

But at least three dozen Republicans in the House, many who represent districts that have benefited from the clean energy tax credits, have called for preserving at least some of the incentives, such as for nuclear power or domestic manufacturing, to protect jobs and bolster U.S. energy security.

There are still other outstanding issues that must be resolved in order for the legislation to pass on the House floor.

One group of moderate holdouts from New York and other higher-tax states is threatening to withhold its votes unless the bill includes a substantial increase to the state and local tax, or SALT, deduction.

Some Republicans, including Representative Nick LaLota of New York, have floated the idea of paying for the larger deduction by allowing the top income bracket to revert to where it was before the 2017 tax cuts, jumping back to 39.6 percent from 37 percent.

“It’s a fiscally responsible move that reflects the priorities of the new Republican Party,” Mr. LaLota wrote in a social media post. “Protect working families, address the deficit, fix the unfair SALT cap, and safeguard programs like Medicaid and SNAP, without raising taxes on the middle class.”

Advertisement

Maya C. Miller and James C. McKinley Jr. contributed reporting.

Politics

Video: Epstein’s Emails About Trump

Published

on

Video: Epstein’s Emails About Trump

new video loaded: Epstein’s Emails About Trump

Our investigative reporter Steve Eder provides context about Jeffrey Epstein’s relationship with President Donald Trump based on information from over 20,000 pages of documents from Epstein’s estate released by the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday.

By Steve Eder, Claire Hogan, James Surdam, Stephanie Swart and Nikolay Nikolov

November 13, 2025

Continue Reading

Politics

Rev. Jesse Jackson hospitalized amid health battle with neurodegenerative disease

Published

on

Rev. Jesse Jackson hospitalized amid health battle with neurodegenerative disease

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Longtime civil rights activist Rev. Jesse Jackson was hospitalized Wednesday, his organization announced in a statement.

Jackson, 84, was admitted to the hospital and under observation for progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP), a rare neurodegenerative disease for which there is currently no cure.

The Rainbow PUSH Coalition, a progressive organization Jackson formed in 1996 by merging two groups he founded earlier, said he has been managing his PSP condition for more than a decade.

“He was originally diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease; however, last April, his PSP condition was confirmed. The family appreciates all prayers at this time,” the organization said.

Advertisement

JESSE JACKSON ARRESTED AT POOR PEOPLE’S CAMPAIGN MARCH IN DC

Martin Luther King III, Rep. Maxine Waters, Rev. Al Sharpton, Rev. Jesse Jackson, and Rep. Jonathan Jackson cross the Edmund Pettus Bridge to mark the 60th anniversary of “Bloody Sunday,” March 9, 2025, in Selma, Alabama. (Michael M. Santiago/Getty)

Jackson announced his Parkinson’s diagnosis in 2017.

“After a battery of tests, my physicians identified the issue as Parkinson’s disease, a disease that bested my father,” he said at the time. “Recognition of the effects of this disease on me has been painful, and I have been slow to grasp the gravity of it.”

7 KEY BEHAVIORS THAT COULD SHIELD YOUR BRAIN FROM PARKINSON’S DISEASE

Advertisement

Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr. delivers a speech during a presidential campaign stop with Rep. Maxine Waters and supporters at the Los Angeles Hilton Hotel, June 6, 1984. (Bob Riha Jr./Getty)

The longtime political activist and Baptist minister who worked alongside Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. has faced several health challenges in recent years, including gallbladder surgery and hospitalization due to COVID-19.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Jackson announced his retirement as president of the Rainbow PUSH Coalition in 2023, naming Rev. Frederick Douglass Haynes III as the organization’s new leader.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Column: Trump’s improv approach to policymaking doesn’t actually make policy

Published

on

Column: Trump’s improv approach to policymaking doesn’t actually make policy

Democrats’ caterwauling this week after a few of their senators caved to end the government shutdown couldn’t completely drown out another noise: the sound of President Trump pinballing dumb “policy” ideas as he flails to respond to voters’ unhappiness that his promised Golden Age is proving golden only for him, his family and his donors.

On social media (of course) and in interviews, the president has been blurting out proposals that are news even to the advisors who should be vetting them first. Rebates of $2,000 for most Americans and pay-downs of federal debt, all from supposed tariff windfalls. (Don’t count on either payoff; more below.) New 50-year mortgages to make home-buying more affordable (not). Docked pay for air traffic controllers who didn’t show up to work during the shutdown, without pay, and $10,000 bonuses for those who did. (He doesn’t have that power; the government isn’t his family business.) Most mind-boggling of all, Trump has resurrected his and Republicans’ long-buried promise to “repeal and replace” Obamacare.

It’s been five years since he promised a healthcare plan “in two weeks.” It’s been a year since he said he had “concepts of a plan” during the 2024 campaign. What he now calls “Trumpcare” (natch) apparently amounts to paying people to buy insurance. Details to come, he says, again.

With all this seat-of-the-pants policymaking, Trump only underscores the policy ignorance that’s been a defining trait since he first ran for office. No other president in memory put out such knee-jerk junk that’s easily discounted and mocked.

In his first term, Trump didn’t learn how to navigate the legislative process, and thus steer well-debated ideas into law. He didn’t want to. Even more in his second term, Trump avoids that deliberative democratic process, preferring rule by fiat and executive order (even if the results don’t outlast your presidency, or they fizzle in court). For Trump, ideas don’t percolate, infused with expertise and data. They pop into his head.

Advertisement

But diktats are not always possible, as the shutdown dramatized when Republicans couldn’t agree with Democrats on the must-pass legislation to keep the government funded.

With Republicans controlling the White House and Congress (and arguably the Supreme Court: see recent decisions siding with the Trump administration to block SNAP benefits), the Democrats were never going to actually win the shutdown showdown — not if winning meant forcing Republicans to agree to extend health insurance tax credits for millions of Americans. Expanding healthcare coverage has never been Republicans’ priority. Tax cuts are, mainly for the wealthy and corporations, and Republicans pocketed that win months ago with Trump’s big, ugly bill, paid for mainly by cuts to Medicaid.

Yet Democrats won something: They shoved the issue of spiraling healthcare costs back onto politics’ center stage, where it joins the broader question of affordability in an economy that doesn’t work for the working class. Drawing attention to the cruel priorities of Trump 2.0 is a big reason that I and many others supported Democrats forcing a shutdown, despite the unlikelihood of a policy “W.” (I did not support the Senate Democrats’ caving just yet, not so soon after Democrats won bigger-than-expected victories in last week’s off-year elections on the strength of their fight for affordability, including health insurance.)

The fight isn’t over. The Senate will debate and vote next month on extending tax credits for Obamacare that otherwise expire at year’s end, making coverage unaffordable for millions of people. Even if the Democrats win that vote — unlikely — the subsidies would be DOA in the House, a MAGA stronghold. What’s not dead, however, is the issue of rising insurance premiums for all Americans. It’s teed up for the midterm election campaigns.

Such pocketbook issues have thrown Trump on the defensive. The result is his string of politically tone-deaf remarks and unvetted, out-of-right-field initiatives.

Advertisement

On Monday night, having invited Fox News host Laura Ingraham into the White House for an interview and a tour of his gilt-and-marble renovations, he pooh-poohed her question about Americans’ anxiety about the costs of living with this unpolitic rejoinder: “More than anything else, it’s a con job by the Democrats.” When Ingraham, to her credit, reminded Trump that he’d slammed President Biden for “saying things were great, and things weren’t great,” Trump stood his shaky ground, sniping: “Polls are fake. We have the greatest economy we’ve ever had.” (False.)

On Saturday, Trump had posted that Republicans should take money “from the BIG, BAD Insurance Companies, give it to the people, and terminate” Obamacare. He told Ingraham, “Call it Trumpcare … anything but Obamacare.” Healthcare industry experts pounced: Such direct payments could allow younger, healthy people to get cheaper, no-frills coverage, but would leave the insurance pools with disproportionately more ailing people and, in turn, higher costs.

As for Trump’s promised $2,000 rebates and reductions in the $37 trillion federal debt, he posted early Sunday and again on Monday that “trillions of dollars” from tariffs would make both things possible soon. On Tuesday night, he sent a fundraising email: “Would you take a TARIFF rebate check signed by yours truly?”

Maybe if he’d talked to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who professed ignorance about the idea on ABC News’ “This Week” on Sunday, Trump would have learned that tariffs in the past year raised not trillions but $195 billion, significantly less than $2,000 rebates would cost. Not only would there be nothing to put toward the debt, but rebates would add $6 trillion in red ink over 10 years. That would put Trump just $2 trillion short of the amount of debt he added in his first term.

When Ingraham asked where he’d get the money to pay bonuses to air traffic controllers, Trump was quick with a nonanswer: “I don’t know. I’ll get it from someplace.” And when she told him the 50-year mortgage idea “has enraged your MAGA friends,” given the potential windfall of interest payment for banks, Trump was equally dismissive: “It’s not even a big deal.”

Advertisement

Not a big deal: That’s policymaking, Trump-style.

Bluesky: @jackiecalmes
Threads: @jkcalmes
X: @jackiekcalmes

Continue Reading

Trending