
GOP centrists borrow hardliner tactics to sway Trump agenda
Speaker Mike Johnson's agenda has been repeatedly seized by a group of GOP hardliners who have used the party's razor-thin margin in the House to score their own political wins.
Now, Republicans from the party's center are prepared to try the same.
As Congress returns Monday to the enormous task of drafting President Donald Trump's first policy package, Johnson will be hearing an earful from an even larger faction of his conference with big red lines on the bill: the middle. And those GOP centrists insist that unlike in past votes, they won't be the ones forced to swallow whatever leadership puts to a floor vote.
'There is a strong and loud group of us that are not going to be bullied into supporting something that we don't agree with,' Rep. Mike Lawler of New York, whose 2022 upset helped propel Republicans into the majority, told CNN. 'The only reason we have the gavels is because of folks like me.'
Many of these members — a loose coalition of several dozen centrists, purple seat and pro-governing Republicans — told CNN they are tired of the House GOP's longtime playbook in which right-wing members have refused to compromise and, in effect, have cornered Johnson into supporting their own ideas. And they say the stakes are even higher now, as Republicans prepare for a potentially difficult 2026 midterm cycle that some already fear could wipe out their House majority.
Their biggest concern now is preserving benefits for Medicaid, which has become a target of party fiscal hawks as they seek to cut at least $1.5 trillion from government programs — a large chunk of which must come from federal health programs. But the centrists have plenty of other priorities, from federal nutritional programs to state and local tax deductions to clean energy programs — and policy fights are about to come to a head in the House in the next month.
One centrist — Rep. Jeff Van Drew, a self-described 'populist Republican' — is already flexing his political muscle. He's spoken with Trump about Medicaid four times, including once in recent days. He was also one of 12 members who signed a rare public letter to their leadership demanding that they preserve the health program benefits in a final bill. (Behind the scenes, more members were supportive but decided not to put their names on it, according to three people familiar with the discussions.)
Van Drew said he will not vote for any bill that 'cuts eligible recipients — whether they be entities such as hospitals and nursing homes — or human beings' from Medicaid. The New Jersey Republican said a group of right-wing Republicans have repeatedly dictated their own agenda to leadership, but that he and others would not – in this case – accept 'business as usual' for the sake of their constituents and their House GOP majority.
'You don't take stuff away from people who are legally and appropriately receiving it. Don't do that. That's bad,' Van Drew said. 'If you want to do a one-hour tutorial on how to lose your majority, do that. Go ahead and do that stuff and you can write a game plan on how to lose your majority.'
The party's political fault lines on Medicaid are bursting into public view with just weeks to go until Republicans are expected to release their first draft of the plan. The panel charged with finding those savings — the Energy and Commerce Committee — will meet the week of May 5 and the GOP will have to publicly show how they plan to shave $880 billion in their jurisdiction.
For weeks, GOP lawmakers and senior aides have stressed to party leaders that it would be a terrible idea — both policy-wise and politically — to go after Medicaid, according to multiple people who have been part of the conversations. The program enrolls more than 80 million Americans, including many who voted for Trump. Democrats have already signaled they'll seek to make it a defining issue of the 2026 midterms.
The president said in a recent interview with Time magazine that he would veto a bill that cuts Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, and Republicans have argued there are ways to cut hundreds of billions in wasted money on federal health programs without slashing Medicaid benefits – but it remains unclear where those cuts would come from.
Top Republicans believe they have found some politically palatable ways to trim spending — including potential new rules requiring recipients to work to get coverage, rules requiring recipients to reapply every six months to ensure eligibility and tightening existing rules that ban coverage to anyone who is in the country illegally. (One GOP member estimated that those alone could have saved a half-trillion dollars over a decade — but still far short of leadership's $880 billion goal.)
Last week, Georgia Rep. Austin Scott, however, reignited a political firestorm in the conference when he told Fox News that Republicans are eying big reductions to the federal government's matching funds to Medicaid, which was expanded in many states under the Affordable Care Act. That was something that many of his colleagues believed had already been ruled out, according to two people briefed on the discussions.
'There have been a gazillion things talked about but with very little specificity. Now is the time in the game for people to actually put proposals on the table,' one GOP member said.
The difficulty for Republicans on programs like Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, will be finding ways to reduce wasteful spending in these massive federal programs without causing any disruptions to those who rely on those benefits.
Some Republicans are anxiously thinking back to the 2018 midterms, when their party was similarly accused of trying to take away health care for millions.
'We know how the movie ends,' a senior GOP aide said of that election. 'We lost 40 seats.'
For months, Johnson and his leadership team have punted their toughest choices about how to proceed with Trump's 'one big, beautiful bill,' papering over major divisions within their ranks.
Now Johnson and his leadership team are eying a vote on the House's version of Trump's agenda as soon as the week of May 19, though few in the party are taking that self-imposed deadline seriously.
But even if the House can overcome deep party divisions to move this quickly, the Senate is expected to move far slower. And that reality has further stoked anxiety among GOP centrists who do not want to walk the plank on a contentious bill that dies across the Capitol in the Senate.
The next month in the House will consist of marathon committee meetings and markups to hash out policy — including trillions in tax cuts, massive increases in border and military funding and sharp spending cuts to federal programs.
So far, GOP leaders have kept any details largely under wraps. That includes another issue that will be critical for Republicans like Lawler and his New York colleagues: the state and local tax deduction issue, known as SALT.
Republicans from New York, New Jersey, Illinois and California have spent months crafting a compromise to restore a state and local tax deduction that was capped in Trump's 2017 tax bill. These members are waiting on leaders of the House Ways and Means Committee to present a final proposal on what the change may look like — language that will almost certainly cause headaches within the conservative House Freedom Caucus as well.
Most Republicans in Congress — including those in the GOP controlled Senate — hail from lower-tax states and therefore detest the expensive policy change. House conservatives have balked at some of the proposals in the past to raise the deduction.
But Republicans like Lawler and fellow New York Rep. Nick LaLota have insisted they will not support a bill that doesn't include major SALT changes back home.
'I would not have voted for the 2017 tax bill if I were in Congress. It is unreasonable to ask me to lend my vote to extend the status quo,' said LaLota, who won his Long Island seat in 2022.
'At the end of the day, it's going to take 218 votes in the House. The fact is, with a very slim majority, the majority was delivered by seats like mine,' Lawler added. 'We're not going to do things that harm our districts or our constituents. The fact is, there's going to need to be compromise along the way.'

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
13 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump launches web site for ‘gold card'
The Trump administration on Thursday launched a website for those interested in a $5 million investor visa for the U.S. to sign up for early access to a newly created 'gold card.' 'Thousands have been calling and asking how they can sign up to ride a beautiful road in gaining access to the Greatest Country and Market anywhere in the world,' President Trump wrote in a statement on Truth Social. Trump in February pitched the gold card as a replacement of the EB5 visa program, upping the amount investors would need to spend and promising a path to citizenship. 'This is a gold card. We're going to be putting a price on that card of about $5 million and that's going to give you green card privileges, plus it's going to be a route to citizenship. And wealthy people will be coming into our country by buying this card,' Trump said at the time, adding that those who received the card will be 'paying a lot of taxes.' Gone, however, on the site launched by the administration are any references to the gold card, with the page instead saying, 'The Trump card is coming.' Those interested can enter an email to be notified 'the moment access opens.' As displayed on a mockup of the card, the president is positioned near a bald eagle with the Statue of Liberty in the background. It also includes his signature. The design, modeled after a U.S. dollar bill by displaying the $5 million price tag, draws parallels to cryptocurrency ventures pursued by Trump. The current EB5 program requires would-be investors to invest a little over $1 million and create at least 10 jobs and it also puts investors on a pathway to a green card and later citizenship. Trump has said he plans to end the EB5 program, but it was reauthorized by Congress in 2022.


CNN
21 minutes ago
- CNN
Tracking the major Supreme Court cases of 2025
All eyes are on the Supreme Court as it issues this term's final flurry of opinions — some of which concern hot-button issues like birthright citizenship and gender-affirming care — before breaking for summer recess. CNN is tracking the key Supreme Court cases of the 2024-2025 term. Justices have ruled on some major cases already, including one involving 'reverse discrimination' and another tied to gun violence at the border. More than 40% of total cases remain. Here's what we know so far and what we're still waiting on. Among the cases that have already landed is Ames v. Ohio, a lawsuit in which a woman alleged she was discriminated against by her gay boss because she is straight. The court unanimously sided with the plaintiff in early June, making it easier to win 'reverse discrimination' suits in some parts of the country. The Supreme Court also threw out a lawsuit from the Mexican government that argued American gunmakers should be held accountable for contributing to gun violence and chaos at the border. The lawsuit alleged that the American companies were marketing firearms specifically to drug cartels and gangs. In a 9-0 ruling, however, the court said the Mexican government did not 'plausibly allege' that manufacturers aided and abetted unlawful sales. The Supreme Court has yet to weigh in on some of the most important cases of the term, which could have far-reaching implications for millions of Americans. One of those cases centers on birthright citizenship — which guarantees citizenship to all children born on US soil, regardless of their parents' immigration status. The justices will decide whether President Donald Trump can deny birthright citizenship through an executive order, effectively reshaping long-standing legal precedent. A high-profile case concerning transgender care is also on the docket. The court is reviewing Tennessee's gender-affirming care ban, which restricts puberty blockers and hormone therapy for transgender minors and penalizes healthcare providers who violate the law. More than half of all US states have passed bans on medical care for trans youth. Sixteen states and the District of Columbia, however, have enacted 'shield' laws to preserve access to trans health care. As part of a yearslong effort to expand parental rights in schools, parents of Montgomery County Public Schools in Maryland are suing the state's board of education for violating their religious beliefs. The justices will decide whether elementary schools need to allow parents to opt their children out of reading LGBTQ+ books in class. The Supreme Court's 6-3 conservative majority has signaled that they would side with the parents.


The Hill
27 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump's Medicaid and SNAP red tape will devastate millions of Americans
Extending President Trump's 2017 tax cuts is a centerpiece of what the president calls his 'big, beautiful' spending bill that was passed late last month by House Republicans by a single vote. Now it is the Senate's turn to weigh in, but that chamber's narrow Republican majority needs to take a hard look at the facts before pressing the yay button. Trump's legislation may truly be enormous, but it is far from pretty — it stigmatizes the wrong people, slashes the wrong programs and will hurt far more Americans than it helps. For starters, those tax cuts will disproportionately go to the wealthy while adding trillions to the deficit. Meanwhile, the punitive work requirements and layers of paperwork for Medicaid and SNAP (formerly food stamps) recipients are still visible beneath the flimsy camouflage of reducing welfare fraud. Academic research, including my own, shows that the vast majority of Americans who are working, are disabled or are providing caregiving already meet these requirements for state and federal aid. Even the independent Congressional Budget Office reports that work requirements for Medicaid and SNAP do not accomplish their stated goal of increasing employment. Millions of Americans rely on Medicaid and SNAP, essential programs that have lasting benefits beyond health care and healthy eating. In 2023, nearly 83 million children and adults — 24 percent of Americans — relied on Medicaid. Medicaid supports care from the cradle to the grave: Medicaid pays for more than 4 in 10 births in the U.S., and is the largest funder of long-term care, supporting the long-term services and supports needed by almost 6 million Americans in 2021. In 2023, SNAP provided food assistance to an average of 42 million Americans each month. SNAP is important across the age spectrum, too: Nearly half of all children in the U.S. participate in SNAP before their 20th birthday, and more than 4 million seniors 60 or older receive SNAP. The CBO estimates that if the Senate passes the bill in its current form, nearly 15 million Americans will lose their health coverage by 2034 because of Medicaid work requirements and other cuts. The reconciliation bill includes the largest SNAP cut in history. It will eliminate food benefits for more than 3 million adults (about 1 million adults over 55) and roughly 1 million children each month. Still, that doesn't keep Republicans from continually trying to portray recipients as lazy cheaters who need to lace up their boots and get back to the factory. They've been making the same mistake for years. Arkansas in 2018 and Georgia in 2023 implemented Medicaid work requirements. Those moves merely caused thousands to lose insurance coverage, had no effect on employment and did not protect these states from fraud. In Arkansas, they were halted after one year. The punitive requirements in the House Republicans' bill will not only fail to force millions of people into low-paying jobs, but they will also increase Americans' medical debt, creating a further, unnecessary strain on our economy and health care system. If Republicans really think that work requirements and paperwork reduce fraud, they are wrong. Medicaid fraud, for example, is relatively rare and more often committed by health care providers, not beneficiaries. Further, these work requirements will bury Americans in mounds of paperwork and cost millions to administer. Instead, they should try to limit the sophisticated tax evasion strategies used by the top 1 percent, which are rarely detected but very expensive for the country. If Trump's complaisant members of Congress really wanted to increase employment, expansions in public preschool and child care would be much more effective and economical. It's somewhat ironic that an administration that supposedly is taking a chainsaw to the federal bureaucracy is moving to wrap ordinary Americans in red tape. But the reality is the Trump administration seeks to break down barriers for millionaires, while building them up around the rest of us. Taryn Morrissey is a professor and chair of American University's Department of Public Administration and Policy, and associate dean of research at the School of Public Affairs.