Senate to move on Trump request to cut foreign aid, public media funding
In what's known as a rescissions package, the White House in June requested that Congress cancel billions in funding that had previously been approved for spending, starting the clock on a process that gives lawmakers 45 days to act.
The move seeks to make permanent some of the Department of Government Efficiency's spending cuts, with the package's primary focus being slashing foreign aid. But it would also effectively cut off federal funding for NPR and PBS.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a South Dakota Republican, said he hoped to hold the first procedural votes Tuesday, though he was still having conversations with some members who are resistant to pulling back all of the funding.
Last month, the House approved the request, overcoming opposition from all Democrats and four Republicans.
The rescissions package
The rescissions request would cut $8.3 billion for the United States Agency for International Development, or USAID, along with other international assistance programs — from peacekeeping efforts to refugee assistance and climate projects. Also included in the package is a proposed $1.1 billion in cuts for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the private nonprofit that serves as the steward of the funding to NPR and PBS. The White House has targeted the entities, claiming they have "spread radical, woke propaganda disguised as 'news.'"
But some Senate Republicans have opposed components of the package, like cuts to a program aimed at combating HIV and AIDS globally.
Started by former President George W. Bush, the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR, has been credited for saving millions of lives around the world. Sen. Susan Collins, a Maine Republican, told reporters last week that she wants to strike the PEPFAR rescissions, saying, "I can't imagine why we would want to terminate that program."
Collins, the chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, pushed back when Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought testified to the panel in June that "no lifesaving treatment will be impacted by this rescissions package" and that "anyone currently receiving lifesaving treatment will continue to receive that treatment."
"When you look at PEPFAR, you are eliminating a lot of the prevention programs," Collins said, also questioning whether the package would harm efforts to prevent the spread of tuberculosis, polio and malaria and what effects it would have on maternal and child health programs that help feed malnourished children. "Those are all programs that have been proven effective."
"These are not only the right thing to do for humanitarian reasons, but they're incredible instruments of soft power," Collins said.
Others have raised concerns about cuts to local radio and television stations, especially in rural areas where they take on added significance as a means of communicating emergency messages.
Sen. Mike Rounds, a South Dakota Republican who also sits on the Appropriations Committee, told reporters last week that he's not comfortable with some of the provisions like cuts to public broadcasting, saying, "That's the reason why we're proposing changes."
Rounds pointed to Native American tribes that have a public radio system that relies heavily on funding and would be targeted under the White House proposal, saying Senate Republicans have been working with the Office of Management and Budget to "find a path forward where the funding for those radio stations would be left alone." He added that the goal is not to eliminate a number of the provisions within the rescissions package, but "specifically to take care of those that were in some of these rural areas," pointing to stations in South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana and Alaska.
Thune said Monday that there were ongoing discussions about an amendment process on the rescissions package.
"I'm hoping that as we get on that bill we can see some savings achieved that will complement the things we already accomplished in reconciliation," Thune said last week, referencing the massive tax and spending package that Congress approved earlier this month.
Amending the package would mean the House would have to sign off on the changes. And with the Friday deadline, time is running out to do so before the request expires. House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, said Monday he hopes the Senate sticks with the House-approved package.
"I think you've got to respect the White House's request, and that's what we did," Johnson said.
In the Senate, rescissions bills are not subject to the 60-vote threshold needed to advance most legislation, requiring only a simple majority. But with just 53 Republicans, Senate GOP leaders can only afford to lose a handful of their members to approve the package.
President Trump weighed in on the rescissions push late last week, saying in a post on Truth Social that it's "very important that all Republicans adhere to my Recissions Bill," citing the public broadcasting cuts in particular. The president warned that any Republican who doesn't support the clawback in funding "will not have my support or Endorsement."
Meanwhile, the rescissions push has sparked frustration among Democrats, who have little ability to stand in its way. But an upcoming spending fight is another story. Democrats have begun suggesting that the GOP effort to claw back already approved congressional funds could have an impact on their willingness to work across the aisle on government funding down the road.
Each year, Congress approves funding to keep the federal government running before the funds are disbursed to government agencies and programs. The rescissions process allows Congress to cancel funds that the federal government has not yet spent.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer warned about the upcoming rescissions push in a letter to his colleagues upon the return from the Fourth of July recess, arguing that the package's passage "would be an affront to the bipartisan appropriations process." The New York Democrat called it "absurd" for the GOP to expect Democrats to engage in a bipartisan appropriations process that could be undermined by rescissions.
"Republicans are, in effect, proposing Congress negotiate bipartisan deals in the Committee room, while they retreat to a backroom to rubberstamp President Trump's purely partisan scheme that only needs a simple majority to pass to tear up those very same agreements," Schumer wrote.
In response, Thune said on the Senate floor last week that he was "disappointed" to see Schumer "implicitly threaten to shut down the government," while adding that he's "hopeful that that is not the position" of Senate Democrats.
When asked by reporters about the possibility of a shutdown, Schumer said, "Ask the Republicans why they are heading on this path.""We are doing everything we can to keep the bipartisan appropriations process going, and they're undermining it with rescissions," Schumer added.
Sen. Lindsey Graham says "a turning point regarding Russia's invasion of Ukraine is coming"
Trump pushes senators to make $9.4 trillion in spending cuts
Student's unique talent that's for the birds
Hashtags

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


Boston Globe
24 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
With gavel in hand, Trump chisels away at the power of a compliant Congress
The moment left a memorable mark on a historic day. The gesture reflected a traditional nod of honor, from one leader to another, a milestone of the Republican Party's priority legislation becoming law. But the imagery also underscored a symbolic transfer of political power, from Capitol Hill to the White House as a compliant Congress is ceding more and more of its prerogative to the presidency. Since Trump's return to the White House in January, and particularly in the past few weeks, Republicans in control of the House and Senate have shown an unusual willingness to give the president of their party what he wants, regardless of the potential risk to themselves, their constituents and Congress itself. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Republicans raced to put the big package of tax breaks and spending cuts on Trump's desk by his Independence Day deadline. Senators had quickly confirmed almost all of Trump's outsider Cabinet nominees despite grave reservations over Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as health secretary, Pete Hegseth as the Pentagon chief and others. House Republicans pursued Trump's interest in investigating his perceived foes, including investigating Democratic Advertisement But at the same time, Congress hit the brakes on one of its own priorities, legislation imposing steep sanctions on Russia over its war on Ukraine, after Trump announced he was allowing President Vladimir Putin an additional 50 days to negotiate a peace deal, dashing hopes for a swifter end to the conflict. Advertisement This past week, Congress was tested anew, delivering on Trump's request to rescind some $9 billion that lawmakers had approved but that the administration wanted to eliminate, including money for public broadcasting and overseas aid. It was a rare presidential request, a challenge to the legislative branch's power of the purse, that has not been used in decades. 'We're lawmakers. We should be legislating,' said a defiant Sen. Lisa Murkowksi, R-Alaska, as she refused to support the White House's demand to rescind money for National Public Radio and others. 'What we're getting now is a direction from the White House and being told, 'This is the priority. We want you to execute on it. We'll be back with you with another round,'' she said. 'I don't accept that.' Congress, the branch of government the Founding Fathers placed first in the Constitution, is at a familiar crossroads. During the first Trump administration, Republicans frightened by Trump's angry tweets of disapproval would keep their criticisms private. Those who did speak up — Liz Cheney of Wyoming in the House and Mitt Romney of Utah in the Senate, among others — are gone from Capitol Hill. One former GOP senator, Jeff Flake of Arizona, who announced in 2017 during Trump's first term that he would not seek reelection the next year, is imploring Republicans to find a better way. 'The fever still hasn't broken,' he wrote recently in The New York Times. 'In today's Republican Party, voting your conscience is essentially disqualifying.' Advertisement But this time, the halls of Congress are filled with many Republicans who came of political age with Trump's 'Make America Great Again' movement and owe their ascent to the president himself. Many are emulating his brand and style as they shape their own. A new generation of GOP leaders, Johnson in the House and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, have pulled closer to Trump. They are utilizing the power of the presidency in ways large and small — to broker deals, encourage wayward lawmakers to fall in line, even to set schedules. Johnson, R-La., has openly pined for what he calls a 'normal Congress.' But short of that, the speaker relies on Trump to help stay on track. When Republicans hit an impasse on cryptocurrency legislation, a Trump priority, it was the president who met with holdouts in the Oval Office late Tuesday night as Johnson called in by phone. The result is a perceptible imbalance of power as the executive exerts greater authority while the legislative branch dims. The judicial branch has been left to do the heavy lift of checks and balances with the courts processing hundreds of lawsuits over the administration's actions. 'The genius of our Constitution is the separation of power,' said Democratic Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California, the former speaker, in an interview on SiriusXM's 'Mornings with Zerlina.' 'That the Republicans in Congress would be so ignoring of the institution that they represent, and that have just melted the power of the incredibly shrinking speakership' and Senate leadership positions, 'to do all of these things, to cater to the executive branch,' she said. Advertisement Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., endured Trump's criticism over his opposition to the tax and spending cuts bill. The senator raised concerns about steep cuts to hospitals, but the president threatened to campaign against him. Tillis announced he would not seek reelection in 2026. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, voted against that bill and the rescissions package despite Trump's threat to campaign against any dissenters. One Republican, Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, appears to be pressing on, unphased. He recently proposed legislation to force the administration to release the Jeffrey Epstein files, something the president had been reluctant to do. 'Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that if the president wants something, you must do it,' said Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, in a Senate speech. 'We don't have to do this. We don't have to operate under the assumption that this man is uniquely so powerful.'


Politico
25 minutes ago
- Politico
Republicans slashed food aid. Grocers in small towns and rural areas are taking the hit.
Between 60 percent and 80 percent of Buche's customers rely on SNAP, accounting for nearly half of his revenue. Buche said he's weighing layoffs in order to keep his doors open. Republican lawmakers, many of whom represent districts with substantial numbers of food aid recipients, defended their megabill, saying the cuts will ultimately help low-income families and their local communities. 'Grocers are good people, hard-working families, and they only make a 1 to 2 percent margin,' said House Agriculture Chair G.T. Thompson (R-Pa.), a top negotiator in the plan to slash SNAP. 'A significant number of people who currently are on SNAP through unemployment will now be climbing a ladder of opportunity, which [means] they'll be able to have more resources to buy more food. So our grocers are going to do well with this.' Thompson said grocers have been 'the victim of fear mongering by the Democrats' and the benefits restrictions will be a boon to their industry. Democrats like Rep. Shontel Brown (D-Ohio) disagree and are exploring ways to mitigate the SNAP cuts through upcoming legislation and negotiations. 'We'll use every tool at our disposal,' said Brown, deputy ranking member of the House Agriculture Committee. 'I know there's been some conversation around a skinny farm bill, and I don't know, candidly, what that will look like. But if there's any opportunity to reverse course or to supplement funds, I will certainly do that.' Several Republican and Democratic state officials have already warned that it will be difficult to backfill the loss of federal dollars. They will need to consider redirecting funds from existing programs, cutting benefits, raising taxes or finding some alternative method to protect their budgets. 'I don't think any state is going to cut [SNAP benefits],' Thompson said. 'If they do, the governors and state legislators that do the cuts are not going to be governors and state legislators for very long.' Rep. Gabe Vasquez (D-N.M.) said that his state is bracing for 'tens of thousands of people' losing access to SNAP. 'The key here is that if we keep enough folks buying at local rural grocery stores, those local rural grocery stores have a higher chance to survive,' Vasquez said. 'We have to make sure folks either have money in their pocket and that states can make up the shortfall in SNAP cuts to preserve that access, or for other folks, provide alternate means to be able to feed them.'

25 minutes ago
Trump calls those who want Epstein files released 'troublemakers'
Although President Donald Trump ordered the Justice Department to request the release of more details in the probe of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, he claimed Saturday that the move may do little to quell the outspoken criticism of his administration's handling of the case. The president reiterated on social media that he asked the DOJ "to release all Grand Jury testimony with respect to Jeffrey Epstein, subject only to Court Approval." Trump, however, lashed out against the loud voices who have called for transparency since the Justice Department and FBI issued their July 6 memo regarding their decision not to release any further files from federal investigations into the late financier. "Even if the Court gave its full and unwavering approval, nothing will be good enough for the troublemakers and radical left lunatics making the request. It will always be more, more, more," Trump said in his post. Trump has downplayed the concerns from several people, including prominent Republicans and conservative pundits, that the government hasn't done enough to get to the truth behind the sex trafficking charges issued against the financier six years ago. The Justice Department and FBI confirmed Epstein died by suicide in a Manhattan jail on Aug. 10, 2019. Trump once had a friendly relationship with Epstein, socializing in New York and Palm Beach. When Epstein was arrested in 2019, Trump said they'd had a falling out and hadn't spoken in 15 years The president has never been accused of wrongdoing in connection with the Epstein case despite his name appearing several times on Epstein's private jet flight logs. The DOJ said in its Friday filing that its request for grand jury testimony follows "extensive public interest." The filing said the DOJ plans to work with the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York "to make appropriate redactions of victim-related information and other personal identifying information prior to releasing the transcripts." "Transparency in this process will not be at the expense of our obligation under the law to protect victims," the filing added. The filing, which was only signed by Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, requested the court "conclude that the Epstein and [Ghislaine] Maxwell cases qualify as a matter of public interest, release the associated grand jury transcripts, and lift any preexisting protective orders." Maxwell, an associate of Epstein, was convicted of sex trafficking and other charges and sentenced to 20 years in prison in 2022. A former federal prosecutor told ABC News that the Justice Department's request might not give any new details. The transcript likely mentions a small fraction of the overall testimony and evidence gathered by the DOJ against the disgraced financier, former assistant United States attorney Sarah Krissoff told ABC News. While the president's pledge to unseal the transcripts has been heralded by his supporters as evidence of his commitment to transparency, Krissoff cautioned that grand jury testimony generally does not shed much light compared to the case file or evidence presented at trial. "The grand jury testimony is going to be very limited compared to the entire case file," she said. "It's just going to be a real, high-level review – a highlight reel – of what the prosecutors think is important in the case file, which could be hundreds of thousands, if not millions of documents." Krissoff spent more than a decade as a prosecutor with the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, which brought criminal cases against both Epstein and Maxwell. Krissoff, now a partner at Cozen O'Connor, did not directly work on either case. She said that SDNY prosecutors generally do not present firsthand witnesses to the grand jury, instead opting to use federal agents who can summarize evidence and the testimony of others. "The standard practice, particularly in the SDNY, is to keep the grand jury presentation as slim as possible," Krissoff said. "The goal of the prosecutor is essentially to put in as little evidence as they need in order to get that indictment." Considering the evidence made public through civil lawsuits and the criminal trial of Maxwell, Krissoff argued that the transcripts are unlikely to change the public understanding of the case. "I understand that the president wants to appease some folks by disclosing the grand jury testimony, but I just don't see that as really shedding a light on much here," she said.