House centrists are discussing the outlines of a possible compromise to extend Affordable Care Act insurance subsidies in hopes of jump-starting stalled talks over the soon-to-expire tax credits that have also emerged as a key fault line in the brewing government shutdown battle.

The bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus has privately broached whether an income cap should be imposed on who can benefit from the subsidies. Several Republicans in the group have floated a $200,000 cap, according to three people granted anonymity to describe the talks.

More than 20 million Americans currently benefit from the enhanced subsidies, which were enacted by Democrats under President Joe Biden in 2021. Some Republicans are now open to extending them, though many are pushing for new curbs to bring down the cost. The income cap is a bare minimum demand for many Republicans.

Democrats, meanwhile, are pushing for a permanent extension as part of government funding talks ahead of the Sept. 30 shutdown deadline. Some centrist Democrats have been willing to discuss concessions, though they are wary of publicly supporting any new limitations at this point.

After a pair of dueling partisan funding bills failed in the Senate last week, members of the Problem Solvers’ executive board discussed Monday how a potential compromise on the insurance subsidies could fit into a bipartisan agreement to address a government shutdown, according to two other people with direct knowledge of the meeting.

Top Republican leaders have ruled out dealing with the ACA subsidies as part of any deal to avert an Oct. 1 shutdown, saying it’s an issue to deal with in November or December.

But Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), co-chair of the Problem Solvers Caucus, pushed back on that timeline in an interview last week.“That can’t happen,” Fitzpatrick said. “We’re up against a real deadline. The rates are going to kick in probably Nov. 1. So we have October to get it done.”

The Problem Solvers group has yet to settle on any restrictions beyond a clean one-year extension bill that is led by Rep. Jen Kiggans (R-Va.) and Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.) and backed by several other members of the caucus.

Beyond the income cap, some more conservative House Republicans have floated other restrictions — such as grandfathering in current beneficiaries but cutting off access for new enrollees, or forcing some enrollees to pay a minimum out-of-pocket premium — according to three other people granted anonymity to describe the conversations. Another section of GOP hardliners want to completely axe the subsidies, providing another wrinkle for GOP leaders to work through as centrists raise concerns about the fallout in their districts.

Fitzpatrick — a member of the Ways and Means Committee, which has jurisdiction over the subsidies — confirmed that the income cap and other reforms have come up in private talks with centrist House lawmakers over an extension.House Democrats, meanwhile, generally want a longer extension with fewer limitations on enrollees. Even Democrats in the Problem Solvers Caucus caution they haven’t agreed to anything or seriously discussed the details of an income cap. Any final agreement, they note, will have to be negotiated and blessed by top congressional leaders.

If an extension deal can’t be struck quickly around the shutdown standoff, Fitzpatrick and other worried Republicans are planning to push for passage of a standalone bill in October before insurers start to lock in pricing for 2026.

“A lot of our folks back home are talking about this,” he added. “It’s a big, big deal.”

Speaker Mike Johnson is about to confront one of his biggest leadership tests yet, courtesy of voters in southwest Arizona.

They are highly likely to elect a new Democratic House member in a special election Tuesday. That would-be lawmaker, Adelita Grijalva, told Blue Light News she plans to become the 218th and clinching supporter of a bipartisan effort to force public disclosure of federal investigative files related to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

It’s a controversy that Johnson has been working desperately to snuff out in recent months on behalf of President Donald Trump, who has called the effort a “Democrat hoax.” Now he will have to decide whether to pull rank and settle a fight that has divided his conference or let the matter play out on the House floor.

Grijalva — who is heavily favored to succeed her late father, Raúl Grijalva, in a district Trump lost by 22 points — said she will be pleased to force the issue. She would be eligible to sign immediately after she is sworn in, likely early next month.

“This is as much about fulfilling Congress’ duty as a constitutional check on this administration as it is about demanding justice for survivors,” she said. “The days of turning a blind eye to Trump must end.”

Grijalva’s signature would complete a process launched by Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) after the Epstein controversy exploded over the summer, cornering Republican leaders between Trump and GOP voters who have insisted on transparency in the government’s handling of the abuser.

The discharge petition allows Massie and Khanna to sidestep Johnson, who has instead supported a House Oversight Committee probe into Epstein. It would force a floor vote requiring publication of all Justice Department records related to the sex offender, with limited exceptions to protect victims.

Johnson has options, however. He can seek to block the discharge effort in the Rules Committee, which he nominally controls, but he has faced a string of mutinies there over Epstein in recent weeks. Or he can let the bipartisan Epstein bill proceed to the floor, where it’s very likely to pass, extending the controversy and handing the hot potato to Senate GOP leaders.

Asked last week about the dilemma, Johnson said he wasn’t ready to make a call.

“We haven’t talked about any of that,” he said in a brief interview before leaving the Capitol Friday, adding that the discharge vote was a “moot point.” He referenced a House vote this month that directed the Oversight panel to continue its probe without explicitly requiring the Justice Department to release the files.

“The Oversight Committee is working overtime on this,” Johnson said. “They’re releasing every single page of documents every time they receive one. I mean, it’s all out in the open. It genuinely is a moot point.”

Behind closed doors, Johnson has told Republicans in recent weeks he wouldn’t force the Rules Committee to short-circuit the discharge petition. Johnson and GOP leaders have also acknowledged in private that a floor vote is likely if the petition gets 218 signatures, as POLITICO reported earlier this month.

House Rules Chair Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) also said in a brief interview earlier this month that her panel would not intervene in the discharge petition and block a floor vote on Massie-Khanna bill.

White House operatives have been aware for weeks that the petition was on track to receive the necessary 218 signatures without any additional GOP support, according to two Trump officials granted anonymity to comment on internal dealings. Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-Va.) became the 217th supporter after winning a special election earlier this month. Grijalva’s victory has not been in much doubt.

Trump has stewed over the matter. Earlier this month, he argued on the Truth Social that DOJ “has done its job” and “given everything requested of them,” adding that it’s “time to end the Democrat Epstein Hoax.”

Despite White House pressure, three Republican women — Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.), Nancy Mace (S.C.) and Lauren Boebert (Colo.) — have declined to remove their names from the discharge petition. They have cast their decisions to sign as a gesture of support for Epstein’s victims and for transparency.

“These are some of the most courageous women I’ve ever met,” Greene said after meeting some of them earlier this month. “This shouldn’t have been a battle, and unfortunately, it has been one.”

If the bipartisan bill goes to the floor, other House Republicans who didn’t sign onto the discharge effort are expected to join the three women in supporting the measure — possibly many more.

That could ramp up pressure on Senate Republicans to take action, though Majority Leader John Thune has so far beaten back several Democratic efforts to surface the Epstein issue in that chamber. He has declined to say how the Senate might act on the Massie-Khanna measure.

Some Republicans have recognized that burying the issue could be untenable for party leaders.

“I don’t think there’s too many options,” Rep. Riley Moore (R-W.Va.) told reporters when asked about the House discharge petition in late August. “I think you have to take it up, right?”

Nicholas Wu and Jordain Carney contributed to this report.

A failed effort to punish Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar for comments about Charlie Kirk led to more squabbling Monday among two Republicans.

Rep. Nancy Mace attacked Rep. Cory Mills for voting against the measure with a series of social media posts, calling attention to previous reports alleging that the Florida lawmaker has exaggerated his war record.

Mace, who is running for governor of South Carolina, has been feuding with Mills since he became one of four Republicans to join all Democrats to kill her censure measure, which fell just one vote short of passing on Wednesday.

She suggested in her social media posts that Mills should be removed from his position on the House Armed Services Committee for lying about his Army service.

“Cory Mills never spent over 20 years in the Iraq War or Middle East fighting terrorists,” Mace wrote. “This guy definitely has a screw loose and shouldn’t be on Foreign Affairs or the House Armed Services Committee.”

Mills said he voted against censoring Omar on First Amendment grounds. “At the end of the day, I’m a constitutionalist,” Mills wrote on X after blocking Mace’s censure vote.

The vote ended the effort to strip Omar of her committee assignments over her criticism of the late conservative political activist. The Minnesota lawmaker strenuously denied directly making the comments cited by Mace, and House Democrats rallied behind her.

Neither Mace nor Mills responded Monday to requests for comment.

Mills responded on social media with a handful of posts defending his military service and past statements, even posting a lettersigned by a fellow service member from his time in Iraq to respond to attacks that have been leveled previously against the Florida lawmaker.

“On multiple occasions Team-21 was attacked by insurgents with improvised explosive devices (IEDs and EFPs),” the letter reads. “Cory was present for two of these attacks.”

The letter goes on to defend Mills’ statements that he had been “blown up” on two missions in Iraq, incidents that Mace has specifically questioned.

“I understand that there may be a question as to what “blown up” means to the military contractors that served in Iraq and Afghanistan,” the letter states. It refers (in contractor speak) to being in a motorcade struck by improvised explosive devices. It does not necessarily mean that you are physically “blown up” or even seriously wounded.”

Mace dismissed his responses in follow-up posts.

“This post doesn’t say or prove anything,” Mace replied on X. “This is what he does. Blows hot air hoping no one will notice. And you’re not allowed to question all of his many lies.”