House takes up DOGE cuts amid Trump-Musk feud fallout
House Republicans this week will vote on codifying billions of dollars of cuts made by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), days after the profound — and very public — breakup between President Trump and Elon Musk, the force behind the cost-cutting agency.
The $9.4 billion package claws back funding for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which supports NPR and PBS, among other areas targeted by DOGE.
Some Republicans have expressed reservations with various parts of the bill, raising questions about its fate in the House. Also this week, the House will vote on a bill to classify fentanyl-related substances as Schedule I.
Across the Capitol, Senate Republicans are working to finalize changes to the 'big, beautiful bill,' as party leaders aim to send the package to President Trump by July 4. Some committees may begin to roll out text this week.
Additionally, a flurry of cabinet secretaries will visit Capitol Hill this week to answer questions about the president's fiscal year 2026 budget request.
House Republicans are plowing ahead with their first attempt at codifying DOGE cuts this week, planning a vote on the Rescissions Act of 2025, which would rescind $9.4 billion in federal funding.
The House Rules Committee is scheduled to meet on the measure on Tuesday at 2 p.m., tee-ing up the legislation for the week.
'We're gonna codify the DOGE cuts, you'll see that in a series of actions here in the House,' Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) told reporters on Friday. 'We got the first rescissions package this week, we'll be passing it early next week, that DOGE cuts, there'll be more of that to come.'
Not all Republicans, however, are on board with the legislation: A handful of lawmakers have voiced concerns with different provisions in the measure, leaving leadership with some work to do before the bill hits the floor.
Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), for example, has expressed opposition to clawing back funding for U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, known as PEPFAR, which was established during the George W. Bush administration. The congressman said leadership has assured him they are not gutting the entire program, but instead cutting 'weird appendages off.'
'I talked to the whip team, I'm on the whip team, I said if it's gonna be cutting all of PEPFAR, I'm a no,' Bacon told reporters on Friday.
The effort comes days after the blistering feud between Trump and Musk, which began as a back-and-forth over the party's tax cuts and spending package before quickly turning into a personal fight — severing ties between the world's most powerful man and the richest person on the planet.
'I would assume so, yeah,' Trump told NBC News in an interview on Saturday when asked if he thought his relationship with the brainchild of DOGE was over.
Senate Republicans this week are continuing work on the 'big, beautiful bill,' as party leaders push to meet their self-imposed deadline of enacting the package by July 4.
Committees are expected to start rolling out text throughout the week as the chamber nears a vote on the sprawling legislation.
There are still a number of key debates that must be adjudicated before the package can squeak through. Some conservatives are still pushing for steeper spending cuts, while a cadre of moderates are calling for a less aggressive rollback of green-energy tax credits Democrats approved in 2022.
'The spending cuts are not nearly enough,' Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) told 'Fox News Sunday' of the bill. The Kentucky Republican has also expressed opposition to the $4 trillion debt limit increase included in the measure.
Perhaps one of the most contentious questions is what to do about the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap. Moderate House Republicans from high-tax blue states negotiated with their leadership to include a $40,000 SALT deduction cap in the bill — up from the $10,000 deduction cap in current law — a provision they say must remain in-tact to earn their vote when the package returns to the House.
Senate Republicans, however, are pushing to lower that number. With zero Republicans representing states that are impacted most by the SALT deduction cap — New York, New Jersey and California — the language is at risk of changing.
'No, and it shouldn't survive,' Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) said on 'Fox News Sunday' when asked if he thinks the $40,000 SALT deduction cap survives in the Senate. 'We should not be subsidizing blue state governors' wasteful spending. That's exactly what, if that's in there, then Florida will be paying for…the state government of New York, and that's wrong.'
House Republicans in the SALT Caucus are warning that if their deal is tampered with in the Senate, they will not support the package when it returns to the House.
'If the Senate changes the SALT deduction in any way, I will be a no, and I'm not going to buckle on that,' Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) said on CNN's 'Inside Politics' on Sunday. 'And I know in speaking to my other colleagues, they will be a no as well.'
The House this week is slated to vote on a bill that would permanently categorize fentanyl-related substances as Schedule I in the Controlled Substances Act, classifying the opioid as having high abuse potential that is not allowed to be used medically.
The legislation — dubbed the HALT Fentanyl Act — passed the Senate on a bipartisan 84-16 vote in March, sending the measure to the House for consideration.
The lower chamber is expected to approve the measure: In February, the House passed its own version of the bill in a bipartisan 312-108 vote.
Consideration of the Senate-passed bill in the House this week marks the latest example of Republicans cracking down on the spread and use of fentanyl, which has been a key focus of the GOP-controlled Congress in addition to the Trump White House.
'House Republicans are doing everything in our power to stop fentanyl from claiming more American lives – everyone should support our efforts to halt this deadly crisis,' the office of House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) wrote in its floor lookout.
A number of cabinet secretaries are scheduled to appear before committees on both sides of the Capitol this week, as they field questions about their agencies and the White House's budget request for fiscal year 2026.
Other hot topics — including Trump deploying the National Guard to Los Angeles, the state of the economy, and the Trump-Musk feud — will likely come up during the hearings.
Tuesday, June 10
9:30 a.m.: House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense oversight hearing
Witnesses: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Dan Caine
10 a.m.: House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy hearing on the fiscal year 2026 Department of Energy budget
10 a.m.: House Appropriations Subcommittee on Departments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies budget hearing on Department of Housing and Urban Development
Witness: HUD Secretary Scott Turner
Wednesday, June 11
10 a.m.: House Ways and Means Committee hearing with Secretary Scott Bessent
Witness: Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent
10 a.m.: Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Department of Defense hearing to examine proposed budget estimates for fiscal year 2026 for the Department of Defense — Led by Subcommittee Chairman Mitch McConnell (R-Ky._
Witnesses: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Dan Caine
10 a.m.: House Agriculture Hearing for the purpose of receiving testimony from the Honorable Brooke L. Rollins
Witness: Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins
10 a.m.: Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing to examine the president's proposed budget request for fiscal year 2026 for the Department of the Interior
3:30 p.m.: Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies hearing to examine proposed budget estimates for fiscal year 2026 for the Department of Housing and Urban Development
Witness: HUD Secretary Scott Turner
4 p.m.: Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government hearing to examine proposed budget estimates for fiscal year 2026 for the Department of the Treasury
Witness: Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent
Thursday, June 12
10 a.m.: House Natural Resources Committee: 'Examining the President's FY 2026 Budget Request for the Department of the Interior'
Witness: Interior Secretary Doug Burgum
10 a.m.: House Armed Services Committee hearing on Department of Defense fiscal year 2026 budget request
Witnesses: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Dan Caine
10 a.m.: Senate Finance Committee hearing to examine the president's proposed budget request for fiscal year 2026 for the Department of Treasury and tax reform
Witness: Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
Amid backlash, Tesla remained resilient in Texas
Even as Tesla deliveries plunged nationally this year amid Elon Musk's very visible (if short-lived) alliance with President Trump, there was at least one state where Tesla registrations were up: Texas. Why it matters: The registration data, obtained by Axios through public information requests, indicates loyalty to the brand in its home base, including Texas' large urban and suburban counties. The depth of conservatives' enthusiasm for Musk's automobiles now faces a major test amid the absolute meltdown last week between the Tesla CEO and the president. By the numbers: Texans registered 12,918 new Teslas in the first three months of 2025, a period when Musk, who contributed more than $250 million to a pro-Trump super PAC during the 2024 election campaign, was enmeshed in the Trump administration as the overseer of DOGE, the president's cost-cutting initiative. Over the same period in 2024, Texans registered 10,679 Teslas. That's a 21% increase year over year. The intrigue: The spike in Texas registrations came as Tesla was flailing elsewhere. Tesla's vehicle deliveries plunged 13% globally in the first quarter of 2025 (336,681 electric vehicles) compared with Q1 2024 (386,810). Tesla vehicles were torched at showrooms and the brand's reputation cratered. Zoom in: Tesla saw year-over-year improvements in its sales in some of the most populous Texas counties. In Travis County, new Tesla registrations grew from 1,369 in the first quarter of 2024 to 1,424 during the first quarter of 2025. In Harris County, they grew from 1,526 to 1,837 during the same period. Tesla registration grew from 1,316 to 1,546 in Collin County and from 990 to 1,146 in Dallas County. In Bexar County, registrations grew from 631 to 664. What they're saying:"It's homegrown pride," is how Matt Holm, president and founder of the Tesla Owners Club of Austin, explains the car company's resilience to Axios. "And regardless of all the drama going on these days, people can differentiate between the product and everything else going on, and it's just a great product." "Elon has absolutely and irreversibly blown up bridges to some potential customers," says Alexander Edwards, president of California-based research firm Strategic Vision, which has long surveyed the motivations of car buyers. "People who bought Teslas for environmental friendliness, that's pretty much gone," Edwards tells Axios. Yes, but: The company had been enjoying an increasingly positive reputation among more conservative consumers. Musk was viewed favorably by 80% of Texas Republicans polled by the Texas Politics Project in April — and unfavorably by 83% of Democrats. In what now feels like a political lifetime ago, Trump himself even promoted Teslas by promising to buy one in support of Musk earlier this year. "In some pockets, like Austin, you have that tech group that loves what Tesla has to offer, can do some mental gymnastics about Musk, and looks at Rivian and says that's not what I want or might be priced out," Edwards says. Between the lines:"Being in the state of Texas, you're naturally conditioned to think you're better than everyone else in the U.S. And when you buy a Tesla" — a status symbol — "that's what you're saying. It doesn't surprise me that there's an increase in sales" in Texas, Edwards says. Plus: Tesla's resilience in Texas could have practical reasons as well, Edwards says. Texas homes — as opposed to, say, apartments in cities on the East Coast — are more likely to have a garage to charge a car in, he adds. What's next: Musk said late last month that Tesla was experiencing a "major rebound in demand" — without providing specifics. But that was before things went absolutely haywire with Trump and Tesla stock took a bath last week.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Colombian presidential candidate in a critical condition following assassination attempt
BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) — Miguel Uribe, a conservative Colombian presidential hopeful, was in critical condition on Monday after being shot in the head from close range during a rally at the weekend. In a statement, doctors said the 39-year-old senator had 'barely' responded to medical interventions, that included brain surgery, following the assassination attempt that has had a chilling effect on the South American nation. Uribe was shot on Saturday as he addressed a small crowd of people who had gathered in a park in Bogota's Modelia neighborhood. On Sunday hundreds of people gathered outside the hospital where Uribe is being treated to pray for his recovery. Some carried rosaries in their hands, while others chanted slogans against President Gustavo Petro. 'This is terrible' said Walter Jimenez a lawyer who showed up outside the hospital, with a sign calling for Petro's removal. 'It feels like we are going back to the 1990's,' he said, referring to a decade during which drug cartels and rebel groups murdered judges, presidential candidates and journalists with impunity. Petro has condemned the attack and urged his opponents to not use it for political ends. But some Colombians have also asked the president to tone down his rhetoric against opposition leaders. The assassination attempt has stunned the nation, with many politicians describing it as the latest sign of how security has deteriorated in Colombia, where the government is struggling to control violence in rural and urban areas, despite a 2016 peace deal with the nation's largest rebel group. The attack on Uribe comes amid growing animosity between Petro and the Senate over blocked reforms to the nation's labor laws. Petro has organized protests in favor of the reforms, where he has delivered fiery speeches referring to opposition leaders as 'oligarchs' and 'enemies of the people." 'There is no way to argue that the president… who describes his opponents as enemies of the people, paramilitaries and assassins has no responsibility in this' Andres Mejia, a prominent political analyst, wrote on X. The Attorney General's office said a 15-year-old boy was arrested at the scene of the attack against Uribe. Videos captured on social media show a suspect shooting at Uribe from close range. The suspect was injured in the leg and was recovering at another clinic, authorities said. Defense Minister Pedro Sánchez added that over 100 officers are investigating the attack. On Monday, Colombia's Attorney General Luz Adriana Camargo said that minors in Colombia face sentences of up to eight years in detention for committing murders. Camargo acknowledged that lenient sentences have encouraged armed groups to recruit minors to commit crimes. However, she said that Colombian law also considers that minors who are recruited by armed groups are victims, and is trying to protect them. 'As a society we need to reflect on why a minor is getting caught up in a network of assassins, and what we can do to stop this from happening in the future' she said.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
This AI Company Wants Washington To Keep Its Competitors Off the Market
Dario Amodei, CEO of the artificial intelligence company Anthropic, published a guest essay in The New York Times Thursday arguing against a proposed 10-year moratorium on state AI regulation. Amodei argues that a patchwork of regulations would be better than no regulation whatsoever. Skepticism is warranted whenever the head of an incumbent firm calls for more regulation, and this case is no different. If Amodei gets his way, Anthropic would face less competition—to the detriment of AI innovation, AI security, and the consumer. Amodei's op-ed came in a response to a provision of the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which would prevent any states, cities, and counties from enforcing any regulation that specifically targets AI models, AI systems, or automated decision systems for 10 years. Senate Republicans have amended the clause from a simple requirement to a condition for receiving federal broadband funds, in order to comply with the Byrd Rule, which in Politico's words "blocks anything but budgetary issues from inclusion in reconciliation." Amodei begins by describing how, in a recent stress test conducted at his company, a chatbot threatened an experimenter to forward evidence of his adultery to his wife unless he withdrew plans to shut the AI down. The CEO also raises more tangible concerns, such as reports that a version of Google's Gemini model is "approaching a point where it could help people carry out cyberattacks." Matthew Mittelsteadt, a technology fellow at the Cato Institute, tells Reason that the stress test was "very contrived" and that "there are no AI systems where you must prompt it to turn it off." You can just turn it off. He also acknowledges that, while there is "a real cybersecurity danger [of] AI being used to spot and exploit cyber-vulnerabilities, it can also be used to spot and patch" them. Outside of cyberspace and in, well, actual space, Amodei sounds the alarm that AI could acquire the ability "to produce biological and other weapons." But there's nothing new about that: Knowledge and reasoning, organic or artificial—ultimately wielded by people in either case—can be used to cause problems as well as to solve them. An AI that can model three-dimensional protein structures to create cures for previously untreatable diseases can also create virulent, lethal pathogens. Amodei recognizes the double-edged nature of AI and says voluntary model evaluation and publication are insufficient to ensure that benefits outweigh costs. Instead of a 10-year moratorium, Amodei calls on the White House and Congress to work together on a transparency standard for AI companies. In lieu of federal testing standards, Amodei says state laws should pick up the slack without being "overly prescriptive or burdensome." But that caveat is exactly the kind of wishful thinking Amodei indicts proponents of the moratorium for: Not only would 50 state transparency laws be burdensome, says Mittelsteadt, but they could "actually make models less legible." Neil Chilson of the Abundance Institute also inveighed against Amodei's call for state-level regulation, which is much more onerous than Amodei suggests. "The leading state proposals…include audit requirements, algorithmic assessments, consumer disclosures, and some even have criminal penalties," Chilson tweeted, so "the real debate isn't 'transparency vs. nothing,' but 'transparency-only federal floor vs. intrusive state regimes with audits, liability, and even criminal sanctions.'" Mittelsteadt thinks national transparency regulation is "absolutely the way to go." But how the U.S. chooses to regulate AI might not have much bearing on Skynet-doomsday scenarios, because, while America leads the way in AI, it's not the only player in the game. "If bad actors abroad create Amodei's theoretical 'kill everyone bot,' no [American] law will matter," says Mittelsteadt. But such a law can "stand in the way of good actors using these tools for defense." Amodei is not the only CEO of a leading AI company to call for regulation. In 2023, Sam Altman, co-founder and then-CEO of Open AI, called on lawmakers to consider "intergovernmental oversight mechanisms and standard-setting" of AI. In both cases and in any others that come along, the public should beware of calls for AI regulation that will foreclose market entry, protect incumbent firms' profits from being bid away by competitors, and reduce the incentives to maintain market share the benign way: through innovation and product differentiation. The post This AI Company Wants Washington To Keep Its Competitors Off the Market appeared first on
