logo
Trump megabill in danger after fourth GOP senator threatens ‘no' vote on key motion

Trump megabill in danger after fourth GOP senator threatens ‘no' vote on key motion

The Hill28-06-2025
President Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' appears to be in serious danger of stalling on the Senate floor after Montana Sen. Tim Sheehy (R) threatened to vote 'no' on a critical motion to proceed to the legislation because it includes language to sell millions of acres of public lands.
'I oppose the sale of public lands and will vote no on the motion to proceed if it is included,' Sheehy posted on X on Saturday afternoon after Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) told colleagues to expect a 4 p.m. vote to advance the measure.
The legislation includes language sponsored by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) directing the secretary of the Interior to sell between 0.25 percent and 0.5 percent of public lands to build more housing throughout the American West.
The provision directing the Bureau of Public Lands to sell millions of acres appears to exempt Montana, which was not among the 11 states named in the bill.
Three other Republican senators have said they will either vote to proceed to the bill or final passage of the bill for various reasons: Sens. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.).
Thune can only afford three defections and still advance the bill. Republicans control 53 Senate seats.
Tillis told reporters after a closed-door meeting with colleagues Saturday that he will vote against the bill because of steep cuts to federal Medicaid spending and urged GOP leaders to return to the Medicaid changes passed by the House last month.
'I'm going to vote no on motion to proceed and on final passage,' he said.
'I did my homework on behalf of North Carolinians, and I cannot support this bill in its current form,' Tillis said in a statement released by his office.
He said the bill 'would result in tens of billions of dollars in lost funding for North Carolina, including our hospitals and rural communities.'
'This will force the state to make painful decisions like eliminating Medicaid coverage for hundreds of thousands in the expansion population,' he warned.
Johnson said he's voting 'no' on the motion to proceed because he just got his copy of the legislation at 1:23 am and hasn't had a chance to read it carefully.
He wants Senate Republican leaders to add substantially bigger spending cuts to the bill and has proposed targeting mandatory spending programs outside of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.
'I'm not going to vote for motion to proceed today. We just got the bill. I got my first copy about 1:23 in the morning, this morning,' he said on 'Fox & Friends Weekend.'
Paul is a hard 'no' vote because the legislation includes a provision to raise the debt limit by $5 trillion.
Thune said his leadership team would know when the vote is held where exactly his colleagues stand on the bill.
'We'll get to the vote here before long and we'll answer all those questions,' he said when asked about the threatened 'no' votes from Sheehy, Tillis, Johnson and Paul.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Who's REALLY ‘destroying democracy' — after failing to win voters legitimately?
Who's REALLY ‘destroying democracy' — after failing to win voters legitimately?

New York Post

time23 minutes ago

  • New York Post

Who's REALLY ‘destroying democracy' — after failing to win voters legitimately?

'Destroying democracy' — the latest theme of the left — can be defined in many ways. How about attempting to destroy constitutional, ancient and hallowed institutions simply to suit short-term political gains? So, who in 2020, and now once again, has boasted about packing the 156-year-old, nine-justice Supreme Court? Who talks frequently about destroying the 187-year-old Senate filibuster — though only when they hold a Senate majority? Who wants to bring in an insolvent left-wing Puerto Rico and redefine the 235-year-old District of Columbia — by altering the Constitution — as two new states solely to obtain four additional liberal senators? Who is trying to destroy the constitutionally mandated 235-year Electoral College by circumventing it with the surrogate 'The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact?' Does destroying democracy also entail weaponizing federal bureaucracies, turning them into rogue partisan arms of a president? So who ordered the CIA to concoct bogus charges of 'collusion' to sabotage Donald Trump's 2016 campaign, the 2016-2017 transition, and the first 22 months of Trump's first term? Who prompted a cabal of '51 former intelligence officials' to lie to the American people on the eve of the last debate of the 2020 election that the FBI-authenticated Hunter Biden laptop was instead the work of a 'Russian intelligence operation?' Who ordered the FBI to connive and partner with social-media conglomerates to censor accurate news deemed unhelpful to the 2020 Biden campaign? Who pulled off the greatest presidential coup in history by using surrogates in the shadows to run the cognitively debilitated Biden presidency, then by fiat canceled his reelection effort and finally anointed as his replacement the new nominee Kamala Harris, who had never won a single primary delegate? Who ordered FBI SWAT teams to invade the home of a former president because of a classification dispute over 102 files out of some 13,000 stored there? Who tried to remove an ex-president and leader of his party from at least 25 state ballots to deprive millions of Americans of the opportunity to vote for or against him? Who coordinated four local, state and federal prosecutors to destroy a former and future president by charging him with fantasy crimes that were never before, and will never again be, lodged against anyone else? Who appointed a federal prosecutor to go after the ex-president, who arranged for a high-ranking Justice Department official to step down to join a New York prosecutor's efforts to destroy an ex-president, and who met in the White House with a Georgia county prosecutor seeking to destroy an ex-president — all on the same day — a mere 72 hours after Trump announced his 2024 reelection bid? Who but the current Democrats ever impeached a president twice? Has any party ever tried an ex-president in the Senate when he was out of office and a mere private citizen? When have there ever been two near-miss assassination attempts on a major party presidential candidate during a single presidential campaign? Who destroyed the southern border and broke federal law to allow in, without criminal or health background audits, some 10 million to 12 million illegal aliens? Who created 600 'sanctuary jurisdictions' for the sole purpose of nullifying federal immigration law, in the eerie spirit of the renegade old Confederacy? Who allowed tens of thousands of rioters, arsonists and violent protesters over four months in 2020 to destroy over $2 billion in property, kill some 35 people, injure 1,500 police officers and torch a federal courthouse, a police precinct and a historic church — all with de facto legal impunity? How do the purported destroyers of democracy find themselves winning 60% to 70% approval on most of the key issues of our times, while the supposed saviors of democracy are on the losing side of popular opinion? How does a president 'destroy democracy' by his party winning the White House by both the popular and Electoral College vote, winning majorities in both the Senate and House by popular votes and enjoying a 6-3 edge in the Supreme Court through judges appointed by popularly elected presidents? So what is behind these absurd charges? Three catalysts: One, the new anguished elitist Democratic Party alienated the middle classes through its Jacobin agenda and therefore lost the Congress, the presidency and the Supreme Court, and now has no federal political power. Two, the Democratic Party is polling at record lows and yet remains hellbent on alienating the traditional sources of its power — minorities, youth and Independents. Three, Democrats cannot find any issues that the people support, nor any leaders to convince the people to embrace them. So it is no surprise that the panicked Democrats bark at the shadows — given that they know their revolutionary, neo-socialist agenda is destroying them. And yet, like all addicts, they choose destruction over abandoning their self-destructive fixations. Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness.

States are trying to keep disasters apolitical in the new Trump era
States are trying to keep disasters apolitical in the new Trump era

Politico

time24 minutes ago

  • Politico

States are trying to keep disasters apolitical in the new Trump era

'This decision was petty. This decision was partisan, and this decision was punishing.' Moore said. And after the Los Angeles wildfires in January, California Gov. Gavin Newsom was quick to propose that politics could play a role in Trump's approval or denial of funding for his state. 'He's done it in the past, not just here in California,' Newsom said on Pod Save America. 'The rhetoric is very familiar, it's increasingly acute, and obviously we all have reason to be concerned about it.' A review by Seattle-based public radio station KUOW in June found that FEMA denied six of the 10 major disaster requests that Democratic states filed between February and June, while denying just one of 15 requests from Republican states. Asked about the analysis, a White House official said that 'Democrat state requests were denied in the first six months because they were not disasters. In the past, states have abused the process. President Trump is right-sizing FEMA and ensuring it is serving its intended purpose to help the American people.' Democratic Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs became the rare governor to criticize the federal government's disaster management in mid-July when she called for an investigation following a destructive fire on federal land that burned down a beloved Grand Canyon lodge. Hobbs said that she does not intend her call for an investigation to be viewed as a criticism of the Trump administration. 'I don't, and I think it's really important,' Hobbs said in an interview, adding that good working relationships between officials managing tribal, federal and state land are key. 'This is not intended to undermine that collaboration, but … we need to look at what led to that decision being made.' Steve Ellis, former deputy director of the Bureau of Land Management who worked for the agency and the U.S. Forest Service under multiple administrations, said that any federal agency involved in managing a fire of the magnitude and destructiveness as the one in the Grand Canyon should be launching an investigation without a governor's need to call for it.

More than 700 National Guard troops from 3 GOP-led states will be deployed to DC to bolster Trump crackdown
More than 700 National Guard troops from 3 GOP-led states will be deployed to DC to bolster Trump crackdown

New York Post

timean hour ago

  • New York Post

More than 700 National Guard troops from 3 GOP-led states will be deployed to DC to bolster Trump crackdown

Three Republican-led states will be deploying hundreds of National Guard members to Washington, DC, to bolster President Trump's crackdown on crime and homelessness in the nation's capital. West Virginia will be sending up to 400 troops, South Carolina has pledged 200 and Ohio will dispatch 150 in the coming days, the three states announced on Saturday. 'We stand ready to support our partners in the National Capital Region and contribute to the collective effort of making our nation's capital a clean and safe environment,' Maj. Gen. Jim Seward of the West Virginia National Guard said. The Mountain State's governor, Patrick Morrisey, added: 'West Virginia is proud to stand with President Trump in his effort to restore pride and beauty to our nation's capital,' adding that the mission 'reflects our shared commitment to a strong and secure America.' Three Republican-run states are sending an additional 750 National Guard personnel to Washington DC. AP South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster announced the deployment of 200 National Guard personnel from the Palmetto State to DC, but said the troops could be recalled in the event of a major national disaster such as a hurricane. He said the deployment was part of Trump's efforts to restore law and order in Washington, and in response to a request from the National Guard Bureau at the Pentagon. Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, meanwhile, said he was sending 150 military police officers to support the DC National Guard. It follows protests in the capital on Saturday. Getty Images 'These Ohio National Guard members will carry out presence patrols and serve as added security,' he said in a statement. None of the members — who are expected to arrive in DC within the coming days — are currently serving as law enforcement officers within the Buckeye State, DeWine said. The deployments of 750 troops from the three states would bring the total number of National Guard personnel within the capital to over 1,450. So far, National Guard members have played a limited role in the federal intervention. Troops have been spotted patrolling landmarks such as the National Mall and Union Station, as well as assisting law enforcement with tasks such as crowd control. With Post wires

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store