House GOP eyes tax bill vote this week as disagreements persist
Washington — House Republicans plan to move ahead with a vote this week on the legislation containing President Trump's second term agenda. But fractures in the GOP conference appeared to persist over the weekend, despite the legislation's movement out of committee, throwing its passage into question.
"There's a lot more work to do," House Speaker Mike Johson told reporters late Sunday. "But I'm looking forward to very thoughtful discussions, very productive discussions, over the next few days — and I'm absolutely convinced we're going to get this in final form and pass it."
After the final three committees advanced their portions of the massive legislative package last week, a handful of conservative hardliners on the House Budget Committee blocked the package from moving forward Friday. The setback prompted work through the weekend to negotiate with the holdouts, who ultimately allowed the legislation to advance late Sunday.
House Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington called it a "critical step," while acknowledging that deliberations are continuing, with disagreements remaining on a cap on the state and local tax deduction, known as SALT, and on when Medicaid work requirements would take effect. But Arrington said the vote to advance the legislation Sunday "is a sign that people are confident that these things will be resolved."
Reps. Chip Roy of Texas and Ralph Norman of South Carolina, two of the conservative holdouts, celebrated a change made Sunday that would remove delays from the Medicaid work requirements, since conservatives opposed the original plan, which would have delayed until 2029 work requirements for childless Medicaid recipients without disabilities. But Roy noted in a post on social media that "the bill does not yet meet the moment," pointing to remaining sticking points on cutting clean energy subsidies implemented under the Biden administration and cuts to the federal share of payments for Medicaid.
Johnson suggested that he and the conservatives had agreed to "minor modifications" over the weekend. The speaker is walking a tightrope between the hardliners demanding more cuts and moderates who are reluctant to slash Medicaid, while a number of Republicans who represent blue states have also threatened to withhold their votes unless their demands are met on SALT, among other divisions.
House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana, at the US Capitol, in Washington, DC, US, on Thursday, May 15, 2025.
Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images
The legislation is set to go before the House Rules Committee on Wednesday at 1 a.m., where any changes to the legislation would be made. But Roy and Norman also sit on the Rules Committee and could raise a final hurdle there ahead of the full House vote. Should the package advance out of the Rules Committee, it would tee up a vote on the package on Thursday, before lawmakers are set to leave town for the Memorial Day recess.
As Republican leadership irons out the remaining issues, President Trump is expected to continue to pressure Republicans to get the bill passed this week, as he did on Friday on social media. But whether the White House intervenes more forcefully by meeting with key holdouts or making calls to individual members remains to be seen.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said during a press briefing Monday morning that it's "absolutely essential that Republicans unite behind the one big, beautiful bill, and deliver on President Trump's agenda," adding, "there is no time to waste."
Meanwhile, the legislation is expected to face some resistance in the Senate, where a number of Republicans have warned that should the House pass the bill, the upper chamber will try to make changes.
Sen. Rick Scott, a Florida Republican, told reporters late last week that the House bill "would not pass in the Senate, and I think there's plenty of us that would vote against it." And Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a South Dakota Republican, told reporters that "we've assumed all along that the Senate would have its input on this."
Johnson said on Fox News Sunday that "the package that we send over there will be one that was very carefully negotiated and delicately balanced, and we hope that they don't make many modifications to it because that will ensure its passage quickly."
Beyond the self-imposed deadlines, the inclusion of a debt limit increase in the package has added urgency to getting the legislation to the president's desk. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent urged Congress earlier this month to address the debt limit by mid July, warning that the U.S. could be unable to pay its bills as soon as August without action. And top administration and congressional leaders have circled July 4 as the deadline to get the package to the president desk.
"We've got to get this done and get it to the president's desk by that big celebration on Independence Day," Johnson said. "I'm convinced that we can."
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
Washington Post
23 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Trump vs. Harvard has international athletes scrambling for answers
Not long after President Donald Trump's first attempt to bar Harvard from enrolling international students last month, the school's men's soccer team, along with athletic teams all over campus, received a note from the coaching staff. They were monitoring the situation, the coaches said. The school was monitoring it, too. Everyone, it seemed, was monitoring a situation that had gone haywire in mid-May, but that provided no immediate clarity on what it meant for athletes with student visas. Could they stay at Harvard, for their classes and for next season? Could the seniors graduate? How about going home to visit their families this summer? 'It's the type of thing that creates this general feeling of uncertainty and unease and tension around campus,' said Jan Riecke, who was a senior captain on last season's team and graduated last month. (Riecke lived in Switzerland and Germany before attending Harvard, but he was born in the United States to German parents and is a U.S. citizen). 'It's a tension among students, among professors, because it's not just the people who are directly affected, the international students and athletes, but also your teammates and coaches, right? You play and train next to them, so you obviously feel for the fact that they are worried. They are worried about their futures.' A day after the coaches sent that message, Harvard sued the Trump administration to maintain its ability to enroll international students. A judge twice ruled in Harvard's favor, most recently blocking the Department of Homeland Security's order while the legal process plays out. But on Wednesday evening, Trump doubled down, suspending entry into the United States for any new Harvard students or exchange visitors with F, M or J visas. The next steps came in a now-familiar rhythm: By Thursday, Harvard had amended its legal complaint. By Friday morning, a federal judge had ruled with Harvard again, blocking the president's latest order, which attempts to reject Harvard-sponsored visas. The back-and-forth continues. But despite any temporary relief, the political battle has clouded the present and short-term future for some of Harvard's athletes and teams. For the 2024-25 academic year, 139 athletes listed international hometowns on team rosters, accounting for 17 percent of all athletes on those squads, according to a Washington Post analysis. The analysis included only Harvard's NCAA championship sports, plus women's rugby, which is one of the NCAA's emerging sports meant to provide opportunities to women. Harvard has several other programs, such as squash and sailing, meaning the uncertainty reaches even further. Some athletes listing international hometowns could, like Riecke, be U.S. citizens and therefore not dependent on the status of student visas. Based on hometowns, in the past two semesters, Harvard athletes represented roughly three dozen countries, Canada and Britain by far the most common. Ten out of 30 men's soccer players last season had international hometowns listed. Other teams, including women's soccer and field hockey, had even more athletes from abroad. On seven Harvard teams in The Post's analysis, athletes with international hometowns accounted for more than 30 percent of the roster. Those teams would struggle to compete without them. An athletic department spokesman declined to make any officials available for an interview, pointing The Post to university statements calling Trump's attacks illegal and retaliatory. More than a half dozen coaches and dozens of current and recently graduated Harvard athletes did not respond or declined to comment, including several who cited fears of retaliation from the Trump administration. Across NCAA sports in 2023-24, roughly 7 percent of D-I athletes were not U.S. citizens, according to the NCAA's demographics data. And while international athletes still fill a small fraction of D-I rosters, their share has grown by more than 40 percent since 2011-12, the first academic year included in the NCAA's public data, which is self-reported by schools. In the eight-school Ivy League, the share of NCAA athletes who are not U.S. citizens has nearly doubled since 2012, jumping to 6 percent in 2024. But the proportion of international athletes in the conference slightly trails the overall Division I mark. (The NCAA does not publish demographic data aggregated by school, and Harvard declined to provide data on how many of its athletes are not U.S. citizens.) 'This is not exclusively a Harvard issue,' said Ksenia Maiorova, a leading sports immigration attorney. 'This is something that has the potential to have tentacles in other spaces. What we're seeing is that the administration feels comfortable weaponizing the student visa for its goals of political retribution against a particular institution.' As much as possible, Harvard treats its athletes like all other students on campus, meaning any pressing visa questions have been routed to the school's international office. 'We don't have an academic services office just for student-athletes, we don't have housing just for student-athletes, so we also don't have an international office just for student-athletes,' said one school official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to publicly discuss this issue. 'And that international office, as you can imagine, is very, very busy providing support to all students.' But it's not just Harvard's current international athletes who are affected by the confusion and escalating policies. Incoming freshmen from other countries are feeling uneasy. So, too, are international recruits who were considering Harvard and are now having second thoughts. Lars Blenckers is a co-founder of Plus31 Sports, a company that mostly guides international field hockey and soccer players through the recruiting process with U.S. colleges. While he's not working with any current Harvard athletes, he does have two field hockey players who are supposed to enroll and begin training in August. One is from South Africa, the other from New Zealand. Naturally, on the same day Harvard coaches were scrambling to contact their international athletes, Blenckers started hearing from the players' parents. His phone has been buzzing almost nonstop since. The parents are asking whether their daughters can still attend Harvard, he said. If not, they're wondering whether they could defer a year and try again next summer, when the political turmoil will have hopefully died down. The athlete from South Africa has secured her student visa. The athlete from New Zealand, however, is still trying to schedule an appointment, another major complication. In late May, the U.S. State Department paused appointments for student or exchange visitor (F, M and J) visas. 'That system is just completely blocked now, so you cannot even go online and book any appointment,' Blenckers said of his athlete from New Zealand. 'So it's also very uncertain that even if Harvard is allowed to accept international students, can these athletes get their visas in time?' Pedro Mol is the CEO of Slamstox, a Netherlands-based company that also helps international athletes land opportunities with U.S. colleges. In the past few months, many families he works with have soured on not just Harvard but all Ivy League schools. Columbia remains in Trump's crosshairs. Maiorova, the sports immigration attorney, listed California-Berkeley, Michigan and the Ivies as the archetype of schools that could lose high-level athletes because of clashes with the president. Mol, a Netherlands native and a former Division I athlete, said he had a male tennis player flip his choice from Harvard to Georgia Tech this year. At Georgia Tech, the athlete would receive an athletic scholarship, which Ivy League schools don't offer. There would also be a better chance of earning name, image and likeness (NIL) money, because the Ivy League has been slow to warm to athletes earning money beyond small endorsement deals. 'And there just isn't the same political uncertainty there,' Mol said. 'The media here in Holland is pretty obsessed with Trump. Everything he does right now, it is blasted all over, so we obviously get a ton of questions. We do a monthly newsletter, and recently we did one on how Trump's orders affect our athletes. It was our most read ever by far.' After graduation in late May, Riecke, the former men's soccer captain, set out on a European trip with some of his teammates. As a last hurrah, they wanted to show each other the countries they grew up in. It has made Riecke think about the efforts to remove international students and athletes from Harvard, which would have made it impossible for him to make lifelong friends from other cultures. He hopes the worst developments have passed. 'It's brought people together as well,' Riecke said. 'You feel like you just pat someone on the shoulder once more than you would before, tell them: 'Hey, hopefully it's going to be all right. We're here for you.' I think that's the response we've gotten from a lot of the community.'
Washington Post
24 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Corbin Burnes needs Tommy John surgery. Prepare for aftershocks.
When Arizona Diamondbacks ace Corbin Burnes left a pitch up to CJ Abrams last Sunday and immediately motioned for trainers, everyone at Chase Field understood what it might mean. And when cameras caught Burnes appearing to express concern about his elbow, there was little reason to doubt his self-diagnosis. Burnes has been one of the game's most durable starters since the start of the 2021 season. He knew this would change that. Diamondbacks Manager Torey Lovullo on Friday confirmed what Burnes and others had already suspected: The ace to whom Arizona committed $210 million over the next six years will miss the rest of the 2025 season and most of 2026 because he needs Tommy John surgery. Burnes, 30, will have the procedure next week. All injuries spur ripples — sometimes through a team's active roster, sometimes deep into an organization's minor league depth. But an injury to Burnes, one of the game's preeminent starting pitchers anchoring the rotation of a would-be playoff team fighting for its life, will have aftershocks near and far. The first jolt, of course, will be felt in the desert, where the Diamondbacks are hovering around .500 while trying to steady a pitching staff that was disappointing even with Burnes. Their other ace, Zac Gallen, has been uncharacteristically mediocre. Promising righty Brandon Pfaadt has been getting pummeled and lefty Eduardo Rodriguez only returned from injury Friday, meaning the Diamondbacks cannot be sure what he will give them. As such, if they intend to contend, they will likely need to add a starter at or before the trade deadline. Demand was already high, and with several teams still weighing their commitment to 2025, supply remains limited. But the Burnes injury could also change more than just the Diamondbacks' 2025 calculus; Arizona's owner, Ken Kendrick, has invested in winning recently but could seize the whiff of mediocrity to balance his recently bloated budget. If the Diamondbacks fall out of contention — and without Burnes, the chances of that increase — they could seek trades for first baseman Josh Naylor (making $10.9 million this year), third baseman Eugenio Suarez ($15 million), Gallen ($13.5 million) and right-hander Merrill Kelly ($7 million), all of whom would represent significant savings even with just the post-deadline portions of their salaries gone. Any savings could be crucial, because Burnes's injury also complicates Arizona's offseason. Gallen will be a free agent for the first time, and he will almost certainly want to test the market. Kelly will be a free agent, too. So is Jordan Montgomery, who also underwent Tommy John surgery this year. That leaves Arizona with only three sure things in next year's rotation: Rodriguez, Pfaadt and Ryne Nelson, who was in Arizona's bullpen but has started three games for the Diamondbacks this year. They will need more to contend in the National League West, which means they might need to be major players in this year's offseason starting pitching market, even though they just gave Burnes the largest pitching contract in their history. Fortunately for anyone seeking starting pitching this winter, options abound. Gallen, Framber Valdez and Dylan Cease headline a class that will also include Ranger Suárez, Chris Bassitt and Zach Eflin, not to mention the dozen or so strong starters who could opt out of deals if they so choose. But one more team on the prowl increases demand this winter — just like one more seller changes the entire trade deadline a few months earlier. For that reason, the aftershocks of the Burnes injury will also be felt in New York and Los Angeles and Chicago and beyond. If the Diamondbacks do decide to sell, even an underperforming Gallen would be one of the more coveted assets available — a potential fate-alterer for any postseason team. Suarez, too, offers the kind of clubhouse pep and on-field power that would make him a highly sought after deadline option. The Yankees, for example, have been hunting for a third base solution all year. Naylor has plenty of pop and postseason experience, too. Kelly has proven himself to be as tough as they come. If the Diamondbacks sell, any one of those players could change a team's October trajectory, if the stars align. Arizona is currently one of several teams that expected to contend and are underachieving. The Boston Red Sox, Atlanta Braves, Baltimore Orioles and Texas Rangers are all hoping to stave off a deadline sale by rejuvenating their chances over the next two months. The more that do so, the higher demand for Arizona's assets will be. The Diamondbacks have not been ones to cave in recent years, in large part because few teams know better how quickly fates can change. In 2023, they found themselves two games under .500 on August 11. They ended up in the World Series. But rallies like those are hard to engineer even with an annual Cy Young contender in the rotation. Without one … well, the contending vultures are starting to gather in the desert.
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Has Warren Buffett made his best move ever selling his Apple stock?
It's never a good idea trying to second-guess the Oracle of Omaha. Warren Buffett sold a huge chunk of his Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL) stock last year. It wasn't the first time he trimmed his position in the tech giant. Back in 2021, he admitted selling was 'probably a mistake'. But, amid recent share price weakness, I doubt he will repeat the same line this time. Recent soundings from Apple CEO Tim Cook seem to indicate he has taken a leaf out of Buffett's playbook. In a recent earnings call, he pushed investors to be patient as it attempts to roll out AI features in the iPhone. 'Not first, but best' was how he put it in an interview last year. In an investing landscape measured in quarterly earnings, though, many don't have much patience. In some respects, he is right. Three years into the generative AI revolution and not one consumer product has emerged, other than ChatGPT, of course. And that's despite the industry spending hundreds of billions of dollars, and with the might of the media hyping the technology on an almost daily basis. Recently, Jony Ive, the architect instrumental in the design of the iPhone, sold his company to OpenAI for $6.5bn. At the not-for-profit startup, he is working on what has been described as a 'screen-free' device. Some reports highlight that mass production could start as early as 2027. The threat is clearly on Apple's radar. During the ongoing Google anti-trust trial, one of Apple's senior executive stated: 'You may not need an iPhone 10 years from now, as crazy as that sounds.' Given the present state of hardware technology and the extremely vague statements that have come from Sam Altman regarding no-screen devices, I'm not willing to give much credence to these remarks. But, of course, that could change in the years ahead. Apple has a history of not rushing into a new technology, until its full potential is understood. It was a little-known company when General Magic invented the first smartphone. It didn't invent the music player, either. The biggest short-term risk to the stock is tariffs. Apple has undoubtedly been the biggest beneficiary of outsourcing manufacturing to China. It has certainly been a major contributor in pushing the valuation to $3trn. Trump's ambition of seeing the iPhone mass produced in the US is unlikely to ever happen, in my opinion. With consumers being squeezed from all directions these days, I don't believe they would ever stomach paying up to $3,000 for one. Tim Cook has already guided to expect $900m in additional costs over the next quarter. A tiny figure, yes, but I can't see it ending there. Without price increases, the frothy valuation looks unsustainable. As I just said, I'm not sure that consumers will be as obliging as in the past and accept such increases. As for Buffett, he still holds a significant chunk of Apple stock. But with a trailing price-to-earnings of 32, I'm not sure the risks are fully priced in. Therefore, I won't be investing. The post Has Warren Buffett made his best move ever selling his Apple stock? appeared first on The Motley Fool UK. More reading 5 Stocks For Trying To Build Wealth After 50 One Top Growth Stock from the Motley Fool Andrew Mackie has no position in any of the shares mentioned. The Motley Fool UK has recommended Apple. Views expressed on the companies mentioned in this article are those of the writer and therefore may differ from the official recommendations we make in our subscription services such as Share Advisor, Hidden Winners and Pro. Here at The Motley Fool we believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. Motley Fool UK 2025
