Congress

The next megabill Congress needs to worry about

Published

1 year ago

July 5, 2025

Thursday’s historic vote passing President Donald Trump’s megabill ended a monthslong process of negotiation, infighting and compromise. It also started a countdown until Congress has to do it all over again.

That’s because the super-sized domestic policy legislation includes a sharp cliff for tax cuts and deep safety-net restrictions — teeing them up to be the subject of fierce political battles in the 2026 midterms and the 2028 presidential election.

The most politically explosive cuts to Medicaid and the nation’s largest food program, for instance, are set to take effect in 2028. Meanwhile, Trump’s most popular tax cuts and a key deduction prized by blue-state Republicans are set to sunset in 2028 and 2029, respectively.

It’s not escaping the notice of Democrats. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries spent much of his marathon floor speech before the vote Thursday calling out GOP moderates in battleground seats, many of whom had swallowed their misgivings after expressing deep concern with the safety-net cuts set to be enshrined in law.

“How is it that so many of our Republican colleagues … had principled opposition to Donald Trump’s one big, ugly bill … and now seem prepared to fold on the floor of the House of Representatives?” asked Jeffries.

Jeffries read letters from constituents appealing to their Republican representatives up for re-election in swing districts — including Reps. John McGuire of Virginia, Derrick Van Orden of Wisconsin and Ryan Mackenzie of Pennsylvania — to vote against cuts to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

“All we need is four Republicans to show John McCain levels of courage,” Jeffries said before the vote, referring to the Arizona senator who famously prevented the GOP’s repeal of the Affordable Care Act in 2017.

Only two Republicans targeted by Democrats in 2026 — Maine Sen. Susan Collins and Pennsylvania Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick — voted against the bill. Now the structure of the GOP’s marquee legislation ensures that the most politically perilous provisions in the bill will remain a hot potato — and an opportunity for moderates — for years to come.

For instance, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) — who ultimately voted for the sweeping domestic policy package — pledged to ensure that cuts to state taxes that fund Medicaid would never take effect.

The Senate cut deeply into states’ ability to levy those taxes. But it also delayed those cuts until 2028 after intense lobbying by Hawley and other moderates and after Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) warned that the cuts would prove disastrous in the midterms. Now, the reductions to medical provider taxes used to leverage federal funding begin in three years, with the rates dropping from the current level of 6 percent incrementally down to 3.5 percent.

“Unless changes are made … you’re going to see Medicaid reductions in my state,” Hawley told reporters last week. “I think that is a huge mistake.”

Sixteen House moderates similarly urged Speaker Mike Johnson in a letter in June to revert the Senate’s language. They all ended up voting for the bill, but at least some were also thinking that there was an opportunity to revisit the deep cuts in the future.

“Any of the changes in the provider tax don’t go into effect until ’28, so he’s right, there’s time,” Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.) said about Hawley’s comments, though he added that the system does “have to be reformed” and that “we’re on the right track.”

The benefit cuts could figure as a major issue in the 2028 presidential race, too, with likely candidate Vice President JD Vance emerging as a key salesman for the “big, beautiful bill” and a key defender of the administration’s approach. Democrats are already seeking to yoke to with the bill’s least popular provisions.

Meanwhile, lawmakers in virtually every state will face pressure in 2028 as provisions kick in requiring most states to shoulder part of the costs of federal food aid for the first time. Under the GOP’s sweeping bill, states with SNAP payment error rates above 6 percent would have to start paying 5 to 15 percent of the food benefit costs.

According to an analysis of data going back to 2003 by the left-leaning Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, only one state has ever had an error rate low enough to avoid the new cost-sharing arrangement.

On the flip side, Trump’s signature campaign promises to cut taxes for tipped wages, overtime work and seniors are set to sunset at the end of 2029. And blue-state Republicans who fought viciously for an increase to the state-and-local-tax deduction for their constituents are already eyeing making the boosted SALT break permanent down the road.

The boost of the deduction from $10,000 to $40,000 was crafted by House Republicans to grow with inflation through 2033 and be permanent after that. But Senate Republicans revised the proposal so the bigger deduction would stay in place for only five years, cutting more than $100 billion from the cost of their tax package.

It will be a central issue for lawmakers in swing districts such as Reps. Young Kim (R-Calif.) and Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.) in their 2026 re-election campaigns — but also for Democrats running for the same seats and in other districts with high property, income and other local taxes.

“I listened to Hakeem Jeffries pontificate about this. He got exactly zero changes when Democrats had complete control. We delivered on a promise that I made when I first ran, and this is a big win,” Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) said after the House vote. “It’s the single biggest tax cut in the bill.”

When asked whether New Yorkers would push to make sure that the SALT cap doesn’t go back to $10,000 after 2029, Lawler responded, “Of course.”

The fact that various Republicans are already looking at punting their spending cuts while extending the temporary tax cuts raises questions about the real cost of the legislation. Senate Republicans scaled down many of Trump’s priorities in order to make room for expensive business tax cuts, and the final bill would add $1.1 trillion more to the debt than the initial House-passed plan, according to the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

“I prefer permanence. I prefer not to create cliffs,” said Senate Finance Chair Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), the architect of the Senate’s tax bill, who has said that he didn’t have the fiscal room to make Trump’s latest tax proposals permanent. “There are terminating provisions, and all I can say is that I prefer not to do that anymore than we have to.”

Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) told reporters Sunday that policy sunsets are “common” with these kinds of sprawling packages. But other lawmakers readily acknowledged that the tax cuts could be extended down the road, potentially adding to the megabill’s costs.

“You can’t limit or change what other legislative bodies in the future see as appropriate at that time,” Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) said in a brief interview. “You’re looking at a 10-year window. They’ll have to look at a 10-year window. They’ll play the same game, and once again, they may have different priorities.”

Congress

Senate-passed government funding bill gets warm House reception

Published

2 hours ago

August 13, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

In a sign of momentum for efforts to punt government funding talks beyond the midterms, House Rules Chair Virginia Foxx predicted Thursday that a Senate-approved stopgap spending measure could pass in the House.

“I think it will pass on suspension,” the North Carolina Republican told reporters as she presided over a pro forma session of the House.

She was referring to an expedited procedure typically reserved for noncontroversial bills that require a two-thirds majority vote to secure passage — a workaround for House GOP leaders who might not be able to bring the measure up under a party-line procedural rule.

Before leaving for their extended recess this past weekend, senators passed a bill with overwhelming bipartisan support that would extend current government funding levels until Dec. 11, with some exceptions. It also included a provision that would block the Trump administration from finalizing — for the length of the stopgap — a controversial plan to put political appointees in charge of approving federal grants.

In contrast, the House passed a short-term funding measure before its own summer break that would put off larger government funding decisions until Dec. 4. Democrats largely opposed that bill, angry at Republicans for shutting them out of negotiations and not including legislative language to ensure funding would not go to certain immigration enforcement activities.

Foxx’s suggestion that House Republicans could ultimately eschew their original plan for the Senate’s offering could be foreshadowing an inevitable compromise between the two chambers as members of both parties are eager to spend as much time as possible in their districts leading up to the November elections — rather than being stuck in Washington at loggerheads.

The Senate measure, which incorporated the funding increases and authorizations the Trump administration requested, also has the White House’s explicit support.

But it’s not clear whether Speaker Mike Johnson would agree to put the Senate bill on the floor, under suspension or otherwise. A Johnson spokesperson did not say Thursday whether the speaker would advance the measure.

One top House Democrat signaled she would likely help get the Senate spending bill over the finish line: Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, the senior Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, called the measure “a welcome improvement” from the House’s product.

Congress

Capitol agenda: ‘No tax’ fever hits Congress

Published

6 hours ago

August 13, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Special tax carve-outs for everyday Americans are suddenly all the rage in Congress.

What began with President Donald Trump’s signature tax cuts has sprung copycats, with lawmakers from both sides of the aisle proposing breaks on virtually everything — from boat loan interest to selling New Jersey swag.

“Must be an election year,” Rep. David Schweikert, a retiring tax writer.

It’s all part of lawmakers’ push to show they’re responding to voters’ affordability concerns ahead of the midterms, despite the mixed reviews for last year’s GOP tax cuts — even from Trump supporters.

The slew of targeted tax break proposals are modeled and named after some of the best known provisions of Republicans’ One Big Beautiful Bill Act, with titles like “No Taxes on Utility Bills” and “No Tax on Health Care.”

Still, they’ve spurred frustrations from some conservatives over clogging the tax code with smaller, specific changes, while progressives worry the breaks eat into funding dollars they’d like to see go elsewhere. And fiscal hawks have sounded off on concerns over shrinking the tax base while the U.S. has a sky-high deficit.

None of this is set to go away anytime soon, tax experts say, as provisions from the megabill are poised to expire in 2028. That leaves lawmakers with an opportunity to extend and create more special exemptions in addition to the tax breaks on tips, overtime, seniors and car-loan interest.

“These policies elicited eye rolls with Republicans while they were crafting the tax bill — these were just Trumpist favors they had to include before getting to the real tax cuts,” said Jessica Riedl, a former Republican tax aide now at Brookings Institution. “Over time, Republicans have increasingly embraced this kind of stuff. I don’t think this is a temporary trend.”

Plus, for Democrats, there’s the exemptions that possible 2028 hopefuls have been looking to enact, from Sen. Jon Ossoff’s proposal to temporarily allow farmers to shield crop payments from taxes to Sen. Chris Van Hollen’s plan to strike everyone earning less than $46,000 from paying federal income taxes.

And both parties recognize that allowing the breaks to lapse during a presidential election year could be a risky gambit.

“I don’t know what they think is going to happen,” said Bob Lord, a vice president at Patriotic Millionaires, a group of wealthy individuals who support higher taxes, who helped devise Van Hollen’s plan. “If they do away with no tax on tips, well, they can kiss the state of Nevada goodbye.”

What else we’re watching:

— FIRST IN IC: FLANAGAN TALKS SCHUMER, PANELS: Democratic Senate hopeful Peggy Flanagan — fresh off her primary victory in Minnesota Tuesday —said she’d pursue many of the same committee assignments as predecessor Sen. Tina Smith if elected. “This particular seat has a long track record of serving on the Indian Affairs Committee,” Flanagan, who would be the first Native American woman elected to the chamber, said, adding she “would look forward to serving on that committee and bringing my lived experience and work in strengthening tribal government relations to that table.” Flanagan also flagged Agriculture, Banking and Health, adding “there are a lot of priorities for Minnesotans that go right through that committee.” Flanagan also declined to back Chuck Schumer as the party’s leader should Democrats retake the chamber, saying she was “grateful” for his work but, “I think it’s time for us to have a new voice in that role.”

— REPUBLICANS TRY TO KEEP THEIR FRAUD FIGHTING DREAMS ALIVE: House Republicans are hoping Vice President JD Vance’s personal appeal to the conference to tackle alleged abuse of safety-net programs will push the issue back to the forefront of the GOP’s already-long priority list. But many are skeptical any such legislation will ultimately reach the president’s desk. Finding ways to cut government waste and fraud across Medicare, Medicaid and federal food assistance programs was a top priority for House Republicans, who set out earlier this year to pass another party-line reconciliation package centralizing the effort. Many believed the fraud issue would speak to voters’ larger concerns about affordability, since it would ostensibly involve returning lost funds to government programs.

Brian Faler, Mia McCarthy and Robert King contributed to this report.

Congress

Cory Mills hopes Trump boost will overcome Ethics headlines in Florida primary

Published

9 hours ago

August 13, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

TALLAHASSEE, Florida — Rep. Cory Mills, under investigation by the House and shunned by some of his GOP colleagues in Congress, heads into a primary next week hoping a months-old endorsement from President Donald Trump will outweigh negative headlines and weak fundraising

Mills has remained adamant that he has done nothing wrong amid a long line of incidents — including a restraining order placed on him at the request of a former girlfriend — and has defied calls from other Republicans to step down from his central Florida congressional seat. He has compared his own legal woes to Trump’s, even as some media outlets have reported he has come under investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice.

“I’m the only person who sits on this stage today who has been endorsed three times by President Donald J. Trump,” Mills said last week at a primary debate in New Smyrna Beach. “I’m going to continue to fight for the American people, and that’s not what the swamp wants. But I can tell you right now, I’ve never cared about what the swamp wants or what the swamp needs.”

Mills’ bid to hang onto the state’s 7th District is just the latest race in a summer replete with members’ Ethics concerns hanging over their campaigns. The House Ethics panel derailed GOP Rep. Chuck Edwards’ reelection campaign last week after recommending censure for inappropriate behavior with female staffers. And Rep. Max Miller, an Ohio Republican, is officially on the ballot this fall after pressure campaigns failed to push him out amid domestic abuse allegations that he denies.

But if Mills fends off his three Republican primary challengers, his seat will likely become the top target for Florida Democrats. He has seen his fundraising efforts stagger, and his latest federal campaign reports show that he has less than $70,000 in his campaign account.

Republicans are trying to pick up as many as four seats in the state following a mid-decade redistricting push by Gov. Ron DeSantis that reshaped districts held by Democratic incumbents. Mills’ district did not change under that new map; Trump carried it by more than 12 points in 2024, but only won it by about 5.5 points four years earlier.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has already targeted the seat and has lined up behind Bale Dalton, a military veteran who also worked as chief of staff for Bill Nelson when Nelson led NASA.

Mills, who is seeking a third term in Congress, is currently under investigation by the House Ethics Committee into whether he benefited from contracts from the federal government. In February, Washington police investigated whether he assaulted a former girlfriend. Lindsey Langston, a former Miss United States and Republican state committee member from north Florida, accused him of threatening to release sexually explicit videos when asked for a restraining order. There have been calls to censure or even expel Mills from other members of Congress.

Trump gave Mills his “complete and total endorsement” last February, and Mills has leaned into that endorsement in his campaign messaging to voters, including a new television ad the campaign has cut. (It’s not clear when that ad will air. Mills does not have any pending ad buys, according to ad tracking firm AdImpact.)

Trump last week and on Tuesday evening posted repeated endorsements on his Truth Social account in several other Florida contests including governor. But he did not include one for Mills.

The three GOP challengers seeking to oust Mills have contended that he has lost trust among Republican voters and other GOP elected officials.

Ryan Elijah, a former local television anchor who has led primary opponents in fundraising, has warned GOP voters that backing Mills will result in Democrats flipping the seat in November.

“We have a member of Congress who is on the verge of getting kicked out, and that’s what you need to understand,” Elijah said at last week’s debate. “We’re all conservatives here. But if you look the other way, we are going to get a huge surprise in November.”

Elijah, who waved a copy of the since-expired restraining order at Mills during last week’s debate, told Blue Light News that he got into the race because of Mills and his “reputation” that has alienated other Republicans.

“We’re not running against the president, we’re not running against the party,” he said this week.

Elijah’s bid to knock off Mills has picked up support from central Florida sheriffs as well as GOP Reps. Anna Paulina Luna and Mike Haridopolos. Luna previously told POLITICO she thought Mills should have resigned from Congress.

Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd, a law enforcement officer well-known in the region who routinely gets statewide attention, ripped into Mills this past week as a “liar” even though Florida’s 7th does not include that county. Judd was upset Mills listed him as a supporter on his website because the sheriff endorsed him in a previous run.

Others challenging Mills have leaned into other allegations against him as well. Michael Don Johnson, an Army veteran who also worked for the Pentagon and ran against Mills two years ago, has criticized Mills over his personal life as well as reports alleging inconsistencies regarding his military record. Mills has sharply denied that he has misrepresented his service in order to receive awards he didn’t deserve.

At last week’s debate, Johnson pushed back against Republicans upset with his criticisms of Mills and said they had “warped minds.”

“I’m sorry that you folks like lies and falsehoods, you need to go to talk to your preacher,” Johnson said. “I’m telling the truth, and I’ve been doing it all my life. And defending this man for all the things he’s lied about over his years in Congress is despicable. It’s disgusting.”