House GOP pushes Trump's "big, beautiful bill" forward after all-nighter
Washington — The House is moving forward on President Trump's "one, big beautiful bill," as three committees on Wednesday voted to advance some of the most contentious parts of the major budget package aimed at addressing the president's defense, energy and tax priorities.
The Ways and Means, Energy and Commerce and Agriculture committees met Tuesday and Wednesday to debate and vote on their proposals as Republicans remained divided on a number of major issues — from Medicaid to tax cuts.
Ways and Means faces SALT conflict
After a nearly 18-hour markup, the Ways and Means panel, which is responsible for the tax portions of the bill, advanced its portion of the legislation Wednesday morning, in a 26-19 vote. But the key sticking point, a cap on the state and local tax deduction, often referred to as SALT, appeared to go unresolved. Republicans who represent blue states have pushed for an increase to the $10,000 cap, but balked at a proposed $30,000 cap in recent days.
On SALT, House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, said Wednesday morning that he's serving as the "neutral umpire" in the conversations between red state and blue state Republicans, adding that "I'm absolutely confident we're going to be able to work out a compromise that everybody can live with."
Energy and Commerce deals with Medicaid
Meanwhile, the Energy and Commerce Committee debated for more than 25 hours before advancing its portion of the legislation in a 30-24 vote on Wednesday afternoon. The panel was tasked with finding $880 billion in cuts, which has implicated the popular entitlement program Medicaid.
The Energy and Commerce proposal, unveiled Monday night, would impose work requirements for able-bodied adults without children, more frequent eligibility checks, cuts to federal funding to states that use Medicaid infrastructure to provide health care coverage to undocumented immigrants and a ban on Medicaid covering gender transition services for children.
Agriculture Committee votes on food stamp changes
The Agriculture Committee — tasked with finding $230 billion in cuts — also voted on its portion of the bill Wednesday evening, passing it in a 29-25 party-line vote after a process that began late Tuesday.
The most contentious issue handled by the Agriculture panel surrounds the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, widely known as food stamps. The committee's proposal would increase the age requirement for able-bodied adults without children to qualify for benefits, while shifting more of the costs to states. The bill updates the age requirement to 64, up from 54.
Republicans also want to close a loophole for work requirement waivers that states could request for areas with unemployment rates over 10% or lack "a sufficient number of jobs."
House aims for vote next week — but Senate still needs to weigh in
House GOP leadership celebrated the committee stage nearing a close in their weekly presser Wednesday morning.
"A lot of work has gone into getting 11 committees ready to complete all of their work today," House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, a Louisiana Republican, said.
Republican leaders have been pushing to have the bill on the floor by next week, with the House Budget Committee expected to meet in the coming days to put the bill's components into one massive legislative package. After that, the measure would then go to the House Rules Committee before it can be brought to the floor for a vote.
"This process isn't over. We're just getting close to maybe half time," Scalise said. "When we pass this bill next week through the House, it will go to the Senate, they'll do their work. But we will get this bill to President Trump's desk before the July 4 deadline that the White House has asked for."
Johnson also touted the progress on the legislation so far Wednesday, calling it "one of the most consequential pieces of legislation ever passed by the United States Congress."
"It is large, it is comprehensive, and it deals with reconciling the budget in a way that will be fiscally responsible," Johnson said.
Still, across the Capitol, a handful of Senate Republicans began expressing concerns about the House's legislation, prompting discussions about seemingly inevitable changes to the package in the upper chamber.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a South Dakota Republican, told reporters Wednesday that he hopes the House sends over legislation that the upper chamber can "use as a base."
"I think we've assumed all along that the Senate would have its input on this," Thune said, noting that they have been coordinating closely with the House. "Obviously there's 53 Republican senators who want to have their own thoughts and ideas incorporated."
Kaia Hubbard
Kaia Hubbard is a politics reporter for CBS News Digital, based in Washington, D.C.
and contributed to this report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
11 minutes ago
El Salvador deportees are entitled to due process, judge rules
A federal judge is ordering the Trump administration to give the hundreds of men deported to El Salvador in March under the Alien Enemies Act the right to challenge their detentions as unlawful. In a 69-page order issued Wednesday, Judge James Boasberg gave the Trump administration until June 11 to come up with a plan to allow the men currently detained at El Salvador's notorious CECOT mega-prison to practice their due process rights. "In short, the Government must facilitate the Class's ability to seek habeas relief to contest their removal under the Act. Exactly what such facilitation must entail will be determined in future proceedings," Boasberg wrote. "Although the Court is mindful that such a remedy may implicate sensitive diplomatic or national-security concerns within the exclusive province of the Executive Branch, it also has a constitutional duty to provide a remedy that will 'make good the wrong done,'" he wrote. In what could portend the next chapter in a legal battle that has ensnared the Trump administration for nearly three months, Judge Boasberg reached the conclusion that the men -- regardless of their alleged criminal status -- deserve the right to challenge the government's claim. "Defendants plainly deprived these individuals of their right to seek habeas relief before their summary removal from the United States -- a right that need not itself be vindicated through a habeas petition. Perhaps the President lawfully invoked the Alien Enemies Act. Perhaps, moreover, Defendants are correct that Plaintiffs are gang members," Boasberg wrote. "But -- and this is the critical point -- there is simply no way to know for sure, as the CECOT Plaintiffs never had any opportunity to challenge the Government's say-so," he wrote. The Trump administration touched off a legal battle in March when it invoked the Alien Enemies Act -- an 18th century wartime authority used to remove noncitizens with little-to-no due process -- to deport two planeloads of alleged migrant gang members to El Salvador by arguing that the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua is a "hybrid criminal state" that is invading the United States. An official with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement acknowledged that "many" of the men deported on March 15 lack criminal records in the United States -- but said that "the lack of specific information about each individual actually highlights the risk they pose" and "demonstrates that they are terrorists with regard to whom we lack a complete profile."
Politico
11 minutes ago
- Politico
Big trouble for the Cuban exception
POWER OUTAGE — Until Friday, Cuban immigrants occupied a special place in American immigration policy. From the Mariel boatlift to 'Wet Foot, Dry Foot' policy to the sheer transformation of Miami as the so-called capital of Latin America, over the past 60 years Cubans have played a key role in rewriting the rules on immigration — sometimes carving out their own exceptions in U.S. immigration law. But a Supreme Court majority last Friday may have dealt a lasting blow to the traditionally privileged status of Cuban immigrants. The Trump administration now has the green light to end the Biden-era Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela (CHNV) parole program and eliminate the legal status of over 500,000 immigrants, including Cubans. Never before have so many Cubans been on the verge of losing status — let alone being deported en masse. Cubans, via the 1966 Cuban Adjustment Act, have long enjoyed their own specific path to citizenship; after living in the United States for a year, Cubans are fast-tracked towards obtaining permanent residency. And Cubans under that law have been exempted from other provisions of the Immigration and Naturalization Act. Politicians have tried (and largely failed) to replicate those special protections for other immigrant groups — most recently for Venezuelans. But none of those groups have achieved the political clout and influence needed to secure the kinds of benefits Cubans have enjoyed for nearly six decades under U.S. law. The Supreme Court's recent decision allowing the Trump administration to cancel the parole program puts in limbo tens of thousands of Cubans who hadn't been in the U.S. long enough to qualify for the Cuban Adjustment Act's protections. That's in addition to the 40,000 Cubans with deportation orders against them. It's not the first time Cubans have seen their unique status in immigration law pared back. In 2017, the Obama administration nixed the Clinton-era 'Wet Foot, Dry Foot' policy which granted Cuban refugees who were intercepted on U.S. soil automatic asylum as part of its efforts to reopen diplomatic relations with Havana. And the first Trump administration opted to enforce a deal with Cuba to accept deportation flights from the U.S., even as it reinstated other sanctions and measures against the island's communist government. But the scale of the potential deportations now is expansive — and tinged in irony. After helping deliver Florida twice to Trump, Cubans have never had more influence in Washington. Cuban exile politicians are at the peak of their power. Marco Rubio, the former senator and son of Cuban immigrants, is one of the most influential American diplomats in recent memory, the first individual since Henry Kissinger to hold the national security adviser and secretary of state positions at the same time. On Capitol Hill, Rep. Mario Díaz-Balart (R-Fla.), another Cuban American, is the vice chair of the House Appropriations Committee and wields considerable influence within a narrow GOP House majority over the flow of legislation. That influence has only magnified with House Republicans' slim majority. The 'crazy Cubans' –– as Speaker Mike Johnson has dubbed Díaz-Balart and his South Florida colleagues Reps. María Elvira Salazar and Carlos Gímenez –– have wielded their influence in concert with Rubio's policy priorities. But the Trump administration has been adamant about making good on Trump's vow of the largest mass deportation in U.S. history — with the White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller pressing Immigrations and Customs Enforcement to ramp up arrests to 3,000 a day and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem pushing forward on canceling temporary programs, including CHNV. Deporting the thousands of Cubans suddenly out of status could go a long way toward reaching the numbers Trump promised on the stump. Only there's one big problem: Miami's Cuban voters are overwhelmingly Trump voters. Florida International University's Cuba poll released just after the 2024 election showed a staggering 68 percent of Cuban Americans cast their ballots for Trump, nearly twice as many as in 2016. To cast out Cubans would be political suicide for the GOP and could cost them in the midterms, says Dr. Eduardo Gamarra, a professor and pollster at FIU. 'Now there are more Republicans than there are Democrats in Miami Dade County, it may have reached its apex,' Gamarra said, while cautioning that 'these shifts are not permanent.' In the wake of the Supreme Court decision, the South Florida Cubans in Congress will attempt to thread the needle between breaking with Trump on deportations and defending the Cuban population that delivered them their political power. For their part, they are vowing to fight to preserve Cubans' pathways to citizenship. Diaz-Balart wrote on X shortly after the Supreme Court ruling that they are working with the Trump administration 'to make the case and find a permanent solution for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans who have fled political crises and cannot return to their countries of origin because of legitimate claims of persecution.' More specifically, the South Florida members are holding out hope they'll convince the Trump administration to keep the Cuban exception. 'They need to be treated a little bit differently,' Gímenez told reporters at a press conference in Miami following the court ruling. 'They're a part of our community, they're part of our economy and they need to be treated as such,' Gimenez added. 'So we're going to be looking for some adjustments to what the enforcement mechanism of this ruling is going to be.' Welcome to POLITICO Nightly. Reach out with news, tips and ideas at nightly@ Or contact tonight's authors at abianco@ and ebazail@ or on X (formerly known as Twitter) at @_alibianco and @ebazaileimil. What'd I Miss? — House GOP gets megabill's official price tag: $2.4T: Congress' nonpartisan scorekeeper released its full price tag today of the tax and spending package House Republicans passed last month, predicting that the measure would grow the federal deficit by $2.4 trillion over a decade. The Congressional Budget Office's forecast comes days after Elon Musk, freshly departed from serving as head of the Trump administration's Department of Government Efficiency, blasted the measure as 'massive,' 'outrageous' and 'a pork-filled disgusting abomination.' Just before the new numbers were released this morning, Musk and CBO both came up as topics of discussion during the House GOP's weekly closed-door meeting. — Trump calls for scrapping debt limit, in megabill twist: President Donald Trump today said the debt limit should be 'entirely scrapped,' throwing another wrench into negotiations around the GOP's 'big beautiful' bill. Trump's comment on Truth Social comes as Republicans scramble to pass Trump's new round of tax cuts and other policy priorities in a sweeping legislative package that would raise, rather than eliminate, the cap on the federal government's borrowing authority. Republicans are facing a potential August deadline to raise the debt limit before the U.S. starts to default on its financial obligations. — Putin will 'respond' to surprise Ukraine drone strikes, Trump says: President Donald Trump said today he spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin to discuss the recent Ukrainian drone attack that destroyed more than 40 Russian aircrafts and the Russian leader said he will respond to Ukraine's drone strikes. It remains unclear exactly how Russia would respond. In a post to Truth Social, Trump said his phone call with Putin lasted about one hour and 15 minutes. In addition to the most recent Ukrainian attack, Trump said, the two also discussed 'various other attacks that have been taking place by both sides,' as well as Iran and a general understanding that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. The post was later deleted. — Confirmation process begins for Trump's first judicial nominees: The Senate Judiciary Committee is launching the confirmation process for the first judicial nominations of President Donald Trump's second term. The panel this morning opened a hearing for Whitney D. Hermandorfer, Trump's nominee for the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, and four other district court judges in Missouri: Maria A. Lanahan, Cristian M. Stevens and Zachary M. Bluestone for the Eastern District, and Joshua M. Divine for the Eastern and Western Districts. It is a continuation of a major priority of Trump's first term: applying a conservative slant across the federal bench. The Senate confirmed hundreds of judges the last time Trump was in office. The Biden administration also confirmed hundreds of judges, leaving relatively few vacancies for Trump to fill upon his return to the White House in January. According to data from the U.S. courts, there are currently about 49 existing vacancies. AROUND THE WORLD HIT BACK — Ontario Premier Doug Ford is urging Canada's prime minister to retaliate against the United States after it doubled tariffs on steel and aluminum imports. But Prime Minister Mark Carney is holding off, arguing he's close to striking a new trade deal with President Donald Trump. Ford and Carney aired their clashing approaches today, as the Ontario premier accused the PM of being bullied by the U.S. 'You're either standing up for Canada and protecting people's jobs, their livelihoods,' Ford told reporters in Toronto today. 'Or you sit back and get steamrolled. That's not what I'm going to do.' Carney declined to comment on Ford's remarks as he left his national caucus meeting. Ford told CNN's 'The Situation Room' earlier today that he 'highly recommended to the prime minister directly that we slap another 25 percent on top of our tariffs, to equal President Trump's tariffs on our steel.' Trump signed an executive order on Tuesday that doubled tariffs on steel and aluminum imports to the U.S., from 25 percent to 50 percent. In March, Canada imposed 25 percent reciprocal tariffs on a list of U.S. steel and aluminum products totaling C$15.6 billion. DANGEROUS HISTORY — The city of Cologne in western Germany is undergoing a major evacuation following the discovery of three unexploded bombs from World War II. Authorities on Monday found the munitions — two 1,000 kilogram bombs and one 500 kilogram bomb, all manufactured in the U.S. — in the central district of Deutz, on the eastern bank of the Rhine. Beginning at 8 a.m. today, approximately 20,500 residents were evacuated from their homes and workplaces. The evacuation zone covers the entire historic district, 58 hotels, three Rhine bridges, the town hall, the Deutz railway station — located across the river from the city center — as well as several museums, a hospital and two care homes. Cologne's iconic cathedral lies just outside the danger zone. Germany's national rail operator Deutsche Bahn warned of widespread disruption, with many train services diverted or canceled. Road traffic in and around the city has also been heavily affected. Nightly Number RADAR SWEEP CRAFT CLOSURES — As Joann Fabric and Crafts expects to finish closing its almost 800 stores by the weekend, crafters across the country are mourning the loss of a textile giant. The Atlantic's Andrea Valdez reports that the recent closures mark an ever-widening gap between crafting materials and their makers. While more generalized retailers and Amazon continue to sell craft supplies, Valdez highlights Joann's characteristic affordability, accessibility and the community experience of entering the store to seek out the perfect colors or textures for upcoming projects. Parting Image Marisa Guerra Echeverria contributed to this newsletter. Did someone forward this email to you? Sign up here.
The Hill
12 minutes ago
- The Hill
House Republicans warn Senate not to touch SALT deal
Moderate House Republicans from high-tax blue states are warning senators that they will not give the 'big, beautiful bill' a final stamp of approval if they change their proposal for the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap. The shot across the Capitol came shortly after Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) told reporters the upper chamber would likely tweak the SALT provision in the mammoth measure, one of several alterations. The House bill raises the SALT deduction cap to $40,000 — quadruple the $10,000 deduction cap in current law. A group of moderates in the House from New York, New Jersey and California has said they would not support the package unless it included substantial SALT relief. Those members are now warning that any changes to the provision could prevent the bill from passing the House once it is sent back from the Senate. 'If the Senate unwinds the House's $40K SALT deal, it's like digging up buried radioactive waste—reckless and sure to contaminate the whole One Big Beautiful Bill,' Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.) wrote on X. 'Best to leave it alone.' He elaborated on his comments later, telling reporters he would encourage the Senate to keep their deal in place. 'The reason I've chosen that analogy is because the House took four months to get to where we could finally compromise, negotiate and settle on bill language as it relates to SALT and other interlocking and related provisions. So the Senate to disrupt that is to undo a lot of that painful work, to rip off some scabs, and to essentially restart the very painful process that we went through for four months,' he said. 'I would advise them to keep the bill intact. I respect the senators' prerogatives to exercise their constituents' priorities, but we worked really hard to get to the compromise bill that we got to, and it'd be a shame to have to restart.' Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), another member of the group, was more concise: 'Let's be clear — no SALT, no deal.' 'If the Senate changes the negotiated number of $40,000 — it will derail final passage of the bill,' Lawler wrote on X. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), who was a key player in brokering a SALT deal in the House, said he spoke with members of the Caucus on Wednesday, shortly after Thune signaled changes to their provision, and plans to make their case to the Senate. 'I just talked to my SALT Caucus on the floor and I'm gonna go communicate to the Senate, again, it's a very delicate thing, we have to maintain the equilibrium point that we reached in the House,' Johnson told reporters. 'And it took almost a year to get to that point so I don't think we can toss that off.' Asked if there is wiggle room around the $40,000 deduction cap, the Speaker was coy: 'I'm about to find out; we'll see.' The SALT deduction cap was always expected to be a battle in the Senate. While a number of vulnerable Republicans in the House care deeply about SALT, Senate Republicans don't even have members from New York, New Jersey or California. The issue came up for Senate Republicans at a conference-wide meeting on Wednesday, where some were itching to lower the cap but wary of gumming things up for Johnson. 'Our goal isn't to create a problem for the House, but we also know the Senate will put its mark on the bill,' said Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.). One Senate Republican indicated that some senators favor forcing the House SALT backers into supporting a lower ceiling. But they believe the easiest path is for the upper chamber to swallow its pride and defer to Johnson. 'It may be easier to say than do,' the Senate GOP member said. 'It would just screw the whole bill.' This senator said even lowering the ceiling from $40,000 to $30,000 could be risky since it might lead some of the House Republicans to vote against the bill. But the senator also suggested the SALT Republicans in the House could be bluffing. 'Is that enough to get you, because otherwise you say, 'I'm going to vote against the bill and for a $4 trillion tax increase as a Republican,'' the member continued. 'That's original sin there.' While Thune is signaling that the chamber will likely change the SALT provision, Rep. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) — a former House member and key liaison between the two chambers — is saying the opposite. 'It was a hard fight over there,' Mullin said, pointing to its roughly $300 billion cost. 'It's a big number, but it was something they had to do to try to get the bill passed. We don't want to do something that would cause it not to pass.' 'The body here is going to work its will,' he continued. 'I would be a little [skeptical] about doing too much with SALT.' House Republicans in the SALT Caucus are warning they aren't bluffing. 'I wouldn't bet against a couple of salty Republicans, including a couple of salty New Yorkers,' LaLota said. 'I wouldn't bet against us.' Pressed on if the Senate should take the SALT Caucus' comments as a signal that the House will not pass a bill with a lower deduction cap, LaLota responded: 'That would be reasonable for them to consider that.' Rep. Young Kim (R-Calif.), another member of the SALT Caucus, expressed confidence. 'The leadership is working and talking to the Senate on a regular basis and I'm very confident much of what we passed in the House will still be there,' Kim said. 'So I'm not gonna comment on how I'll be voting for it till I see the package that comes back to us.' 'We're already working to ensure that everything that we pass in the House is still kept in the Senate version,' she added. Asked if there was any wiggle room on their SALT deal, LaLota said: 'I'm eager to see what they actually come back with. I don't know why anybody would logically want to disrupt something that was the result of a lot of hard work, pain, heartache and ultimately compromise,' he added. When a reporter pointed out that his comments were not a firm no, he responded: 'I would love them to increase it. That would be a great idea if they came to us with $50,000, I would endorse it right away.'
