logo
These are the Republicans who voted against Trump's $9 billion clawback of foreign aid, NPR funding

These are the Republicans who voted against Trump's $9 billion clawback of foreign aid, NPR funding

Fox News17-07-2025
Though Senate Republicans were successful in their mission to pass President Donald Trump's clawback package, not every member of the conference was on board.
Only two Republicans, Sens. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, and Susan Collins, R-Maine, joined with every Senate Democrat to vote against the $9 billion package geared toward clawing back foreign aid and public broadcasting funding.
Senate Republican leaders had hoped that stripping $400 million in cuts to Bush-era international AIDS and HIV prevention funding could win over all the holdouts, both public and private. But the lawmakers who voted against the bill had deeper concerns about the level of transparency during the process and the impact successful rescissions could have on Congress' power of the purse.
Collins, who chairs the Senate Appropriations Committee, said she agreed with rescissions in general and supports them during the appropriations process, but couldn't get behind the White House's push because of a lack of clarity from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) about exactly what would be cut and how.
She said that "the sparse text" sent to lawmakers included little detail and did not give a specific accounting of programs that would be cut to hit the original $9.4 billion target.
"For example, there are $2.5 billion in cuts to the Development Assistance account, which covers everything from basic education, to water and sanitation, to food security — but we don't know how those programs will be affected," she said.
Murkowski demanded a return to legislating and appeared to warn that lawmakers were just taking marching orders from the White House rather than doing their own work.
Both Murkowski and Collins were also concerned about the cuts to public broadcasting, particularly to rural radio stations. Both attempted to make changes to the bill during the vote-a-rama. Collins' ultimately decided not to bring her amendment, which would have reduced the total amount of cuts in the bill to north of $6 billion, to the floor. However, Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., still brought the change for a vote. And Murkowski offered an amendment that would have drastically reduced the cuts to public broadcasting.
The climactic vote for the bill came hours after tsunami warnings rippled through Alaska, and Murkowski argued that federal warnings were relayed through local public broadcasting.
"The tsunami warnings are now thankfully canceled, but the warning to the U.S. Senate remains in effect," she said. "Today of all days, we should vote down these misguided cuts to public broadcasting."
Still, both attempts to modify the bill failed to pass muster.
Their decision to go against the package left some scratching their heads. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., argued that the cuts amounted to less than a tenth of a percent of the federal government's entire budget.
"This should be a chip shot, OK? I have faith in [OMB Director] Russ Vought," he said. "I have faith in the Trump administration. They're not going to cut things that are important spending."
Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., who is leading the bill in the Senate, rebuked the duo's arguments and said that lawmakers weighing in on the rescissions package was in line with their legislative duties.
"That's exactly what we're doing," the Missouri Republican said. "I would hope that maybe what this will also do is highlight some of the wasteful spending, so when we get into the appropriations process in the next few months that we would be more keen to be focused on saving people money."
Trump's bill, which would cancel unspent congressionally approved funding, would slash just shy of $8 billion from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and over $1 billion from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), the government-backed funding arm for NPR and PBS.
Some lawmakers, like Sen. Thom Tillis, who earlier this month voted against Trump's "big, beautiful bill" over cuts to Medicaid funding, understood where the pair were coming from.
The North Carolina Republican told Fox News Digital that Collins, in particular, would be leading negotiations for an end-of-year bipartisan funding deal with Senate Democrats, and to vote in favor of canceling congressionally approved funding could hurt her ability to find a solution to keep the government funded.
"I don't think people really understand the value of your word and your consistency and your living up to commitments and how important that is to getting things done," Tillis said. "And this, I think, that's what Susan's looking at, I think Murkowski is as well, and I respect them for that."
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Republicans move to clear final hurdles to funding bill before recess
Republicans move to clear final hurdles to funding bill before recess

The Hill

timean hour ago

  • The Hill

Republicans move to clear final hurdles to funding bill before recess

Senate Republicans are moving swiftly to clear key hurdles in their effort to pass a set of spending bills before the August recess and get the ball moving toward avoiding a government shutdown in two months. Appropriators are crafting a three-bill package that covers full-year funding for the departments of Agriculture (USDA), Veterans Affairs (VA), Commerce, Justice (DOJ), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), rural development, military construction and science agencies. Both chambers have fallen behind on their funding work, and appropriators are eager to put some bipartisan points on the board before the September sprint to avoid a shutdown that will greet them when they return from recess. Republicans took a major step Tuesday by clearing two key holds on the package, giving them a clear path on their side as they await word from Democrats on what they hope will be a bipartisan effort to get the measure across the finish line in the coming days. '[We] have essentially resolved the holds that have to do with appropriations,' Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) told reporters, lauding the 'great progress' by negotiators. Chief among the issues they resolved was one raised by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who had placed the hold over language that would have downgraded the military hospital at Fort Leonard Wood in central Missouri to a clinic. 'We've got a deal, I think,' Hawley told reporters Tuesday afternoon, calling the potential downgrade a 'disaster.' The Missouri senator also argued such a move would be 'stupid' given the amount of taxpayer funding that has already gone toward building up the rural hospital. 'We need to protect it,' Hawley said. 'There will be language in this bill now that will protect it, and there will be language in this bill that will force the Army to come up with a plan to replace all of the housing at Fort Leonard Wood that needs it. It's a good outcome.' In addition, Collins and her fellow appropriators resolved a separate holdup by nixing language in the annual agricultural funding bill that would close what Republicans have described as a 'hemp loophole' in current law. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) spearheaded the push to excise the provision, which was secured by Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), a senior appropriator and former GOP leader. Republicans say the loophole was unintentionally created by the 2018 farm bill, which legalized hemp production, as multiple states have complained the 'vagueness' in the law accidentally helped fuel a market of intoxicating hemp products. A McConnell spokesperson said the senator 'wants to pass all the appropriations bills before the end of the fiscal year – and doesn't want to hold up the process – so he is working with the committee on a path forward.' Paul raised concerns about the measure's impact on the industry, telling reporters Thursday that the move to strip the proposal was a 'step forward.' 'If there's going to be one it's on the products that humans use, and not the plant, because the plants vary a lot in potency,' he said. 'And you know, right now, a lot of farmers start growing hemp, and if one of the plants is hot, they got to plow under all the plants. It's a terrible way to regulate this thing.' Republicans are optimistic that they'll be able to push the emerging package out of the Senate before they leave for the coming recess. But Democrats have kept mum as to how they plan to vote on the package if it comes to the floor. Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), a senior appropriator, didn't say Tuesday how he would vote on the overall plan, while pointing to 'unresolved issues regarding the FBI headquarters.' 'We made proposals, and the ball is in Republicans' court,' Van Hollen said. Both parties clashed in committee earlier this month over the Trump administration's plans to keep the FBI's crumbling headquarters in the nation's capital. The disagreement threatened to sink the bill in committee when the panel initially voted to buck Trump's proposal in favor of a decision made under the Biden administration to relocate the headquarters to Maryland. However, the proposal was later scrapped after Republicans signaled they would tank the overall plan in objection to the Democratic-crafted measure. Other Democrats say they're waiting to see details of potential changes Republicans have made to the forthcoming package before saying how they intend to vote. Overall, the bills would provide more than $250 billion in discretionary funding for fiscal 2026. The largest bill, funding the VA and military construction, would allow for more than $133 billion for the agency, including about $114 billion for VA medical care and nearly $20 billion for the Pentagon's military construction program. The package is expected to provide about $80 billion in the annual bill funding the DOJ, the Commerce Department and science agencies, as well as $27 billion for a full-year funding plan for the USDA, FDA and rural development. Republicans are itching to hold the vote on the 'minibus' before they depart for the recess and amid a sea of nominations they are attempting to process. Members discussed the nominations issue at length during lunch Tuesday, with a number of members expressing support for Trump making recess appointments in August. Republicans have complained about Senate Democrats not allowing any Trump nominees to be confirmed via unanimous consent or voice vote, but recess appointments are currently not feasible, as the House already left for recess and both chambers would have to agree to allow them to proceed. Senate Republicans have also been unenthused with the prospect of recess appointments previously. Republicans are hoping to put forth a package of noncontroversial nominees to expedite and process before departing. In the meantime, they believe the current minibus is close to being ready for prime time. 'I think a minibus [will happen],' said Sen. Shelley Moore Capito ( an appropriator. 'I don't know what their issues are, but … I think we'll have that on the docket in the next day or two.'

3 Reasons Why Coca-Cola Is Still a Top Dividend Stock for Generating Passive Income
3 Reasons Why Coca-Cola Is Still a Top Dividend Stock for Generating Passive Income

Yahoo

time11 hours ago

  • Yahoo

3 Reasons Why Coca-Cola Is Still a Top Dividend Stock for Generating Passive Income

Key Points Coke continues to generate organic growth despite a highly challenging operating environment. The company is adapting to changing consumer preferences and regulatory pressure by offering Coke made with U.S. cane sugar instead of corn syrup. Coke has a growing and affordable dividend with a competitive yield. 10 stocks we like better than Coca-Cola › Some top stocks are known for their growth potential, while others are recognized for their predictability. Coca-Cola (NYSE: KO) is in that second camp. The company isn't perfect, and its results have been disappointing in some periods. But through it all, one constant that investors have been able to count on is Coke's rock-solid dividend. Coke is unique because it has a high yield at 3% and it has an extensive track record of increasing its payout. It has done so for 63 consecutive years, earning it a spot on the list of Dividend Kings. Here's why Coke remains a great buy for investors looking to boost their passive income. 1. Delivering solid results Coke reported a good second quarter on July 22. The company grew organic revenue by 5%, comparable earnings per share (EPS) by 4%, and comparable operating margins rose to 34.7% versus 32.8% for the second quarter of 2024. For the full year, Coke expects organic revenue growth of 5% to 6%, comparable currency-neutral EPS of 8%, and comparable EPS of $2.88. So currency headwinds are really throwing a wrench in Coke's results and detracting from the strength of the underlying business. Coke's resilient results didn't get a big reaction from Wall Street, but that may be because Coke is up around 11% on the year, which is slightly better than the gain for the S&P 500 (SNPINDEX: ^GSPC). Coke has been a standout in what has otherwise been a challenging consumer staples sector -- especially for packaged food and beverage and snack companies. Many food and beverage stocks are at multiyear, if not multidecade, lows. Inflation and relatively high interest rates have been hitting consumer demand hard for everyday household goods. When the cost of these goods go up, it affects all consumers, but especially those with less discretionary income. Another challenge is changes in consumer preferences. Some consumers are shifting their buying behavior toward healthier options, characterized by lower sugar content, better ingredients, and improved nutrition. These trends were reflected in Coke's latest results, which highlighted volume growth in Coca-Cola Zero Sugar, Diet Coke, Fanta, Fairlife, BodyArmor, and Powerade. For years now, Coke has been seeing excellent growth in zero sugar and diet versions of its flagship Coca-Cola products -- a sign that investment in these labels is paying off. 2. Adapting to the times The Trump administration's Make America Healthy Again Commission is pressuring food and beverage companies to phase out petroleum-based synthetic dyes and replace artificial ingredients with natural ingredients. On its latest earnings call, Coke said that it plans to expand its Trademark Coca-Cola product range to include U.S. cane sugar this fall. In the U.S., Coke uses high-fructose corn syrup as its primary sweetener because it is cost-effective. But Coke made in Mexico typically uses cane sugar, which is why some consumers tend to go out of their way to buy this product version. The decision to make Coke with cane sugar in the U.S. may have garnered a negative reaction if announced years ago, but the time is right to make this change. Coke's standout brands in recent years have generally been the healthier options in its portfolio. It has had resounding success growing Topo Chico since it acquired the brand in 2017. Similarly, its dairy brand Fairlife (acquired in 2020) has been a value add for the company. Not only are these brands doing well, but they also diversify Coke away from a majority soda lineup toward other options, which makes the company better positioned to unlock earnings growth from a diversified revenue stream. 3. A growing and affordable dividend Money isn't created out of thin air. For a company to consistently grow its dividend and thus incur a larger dividend expense, it must grow its earnings. Coke's earnings growth hasn't been great in recent years, but that's mostly because it has been making significant changes to its brand lineup and addressing the aforementioned challenges. However, the growth has been sufficient for Coke to continue increasing its dividend. Coca-Cola pays a $0.51 per share quarterly dividend, or $2.04 per year. If Coke hits its adjusted EPS guidance of 3%, earnings will be $2.97 in 2025 -- meaning that Coke can afford to grow its dividend without impacting its financial health or taking away cash that could otherwise be reinvested in the business. Coke also has a reasonable valuation. Based on the share price of $69.17 at the time of this writing and $2.97 in 2025 earnings, Coke would have a price-to-earnings ratio of 23.3. It's not a bargain-bin price for a low-growth dividend stock. And there are plenty of better deals available for investors seeking a superior value. However, Coke arguably deserves this valuation because the dividend is so reliable, and the company continues to generate organic growth and pricing power at a time when many of its peers are struggling. A potential centerpiece of a passive income portfolio Coke's brand lineup, high-margin business, and willingness to adapt to changes in consumer preferences make the company a worthy foundational holding for income investors. The shift from corn syrup to cane sugar in the U.S. may lead to higher costs in the near term, but the move could pay off if it increases sales volumes. Coke continues to demonstrate why it is the industry leader across numerous non-alcoholic beverage categories, and why the stock remains a plug-and-play option for income investors to add to their portfolios. Do the experts think Coca-Cola is a buy right now? The Motley Fool's expert analyst team, drawing on years of investing experience and deep analysis of thousands of stocks, leverages our proprietary Moneyball AI investing database to uncover top opportunities. They've just revealed their to buy now — did Coca-Cola make the list? When our Stock Advisor analyst team has a stock recommendation, it can pay to listen. After all, Stock Advisor's total average return is up 1,041% vs. just 183% for the S&P — that is beating the market by 858.71%!* Imagine if you were a Stock Advisor member when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $636,628!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,063,471!* The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 28, 2025 Daniel Foelber has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. 3 Reasons Why Coca-Cola Is Still a Top Dividend Stock for Generating Passive Income was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

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