Congress

Senate GOP isn’t sold on Mike Johnson’s budget blueprint

Published

3 hours ago

July 16, 2026

Senate Republicans are pouring cold water on the House GOP’s $95 billion blueprint for a new party-line spending package.

Their skepticism is a reality check on Speaker Mike Johnson’s ambitious pledge that the Senate will adopt a budget resolution before leaving in early August.

“That’d be news to me,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Thursday about Johnson’s floated timeline, indicating he had signed on to no such thing.

His comments came as the House Budget Committee debated a resolution that would pave the way for drafting and passing a party-line policy bill with the power to skirt the Senate filibuster.

Thune and Johnson have had a good working relationship. But Johnson’s penchant for speaking for the Senate over the past year, including during last summer’s debate over the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, has been a point of frustration for Thune and his allies — especially because Thune is mindful not to speak for the House.

Some Senate Republicans are also exasperated with the House’s decision to push forward with a third reconciliation attempt — a followup to last year’s tax-cuts-focused megabill and the immigration enforcement package from June. They view it as more of a midterm messaging effort than an actual attempt to legislate, according to two people granted anonymity to disclose private conversations.

It’s not just the timeline though that is an issue in the Senate, though: The House’s blueprint also contains $73 billion for military and intelligence efforts, as well as $12 billion in farm assistance and $10 billion for election-related efforts. Senate GOP defense hawks want a higher number for the military, and agriculture-state Republicans are clamoring for more farm aid.

That means the Senate will need to amend the House budget blueprint to add instructions for its own committees that could involve setting higher spending ceilings for the military and agriculture aid, according to three people granted anonymity to speak candidly.

Thune tipped his hand Thursday morning to the hurdles he’ll face among Senate Republicans, repeatedly asking, “Is the juice worth the squeeze?”

He also noted that while defense hawks would want a larger military number, fiscal hawks are going to want to pay for the bill. And giving the Agriculture Committee buy-in to provide funding for farm assistance could end up giving Democrats an opening to force votes on a host of politically sensitive issues including cuts to federal food aid.

“Then the question on the floor of … can we get 50 [votes] on anything? And even if we can get 50 to pass it, can we defeat all the poison-pill amendments?” Thune said. “‘I’m not pooh-poohing it, I’m just saying people need to think long and hard. … It’s a much easier proposition in the House.”

Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming, the No. 2 GOP leader, is also keeping his powder dry but predicted that Johnson will need to help sell Senate Republicans on any budget resolution that can get through the House.

“I expect that [Johnson is] going to be part of the whip team once he gets that passed. So we’re going to wait and see what he can get over here,” he said.

On one side of the Senate GOP, leaders are likely to face skepticism from some members of the Appropriations Committee. Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine), for instance, said she hadn’t yet looked at the House framework but “in general my view is that we should not be using reconciliation, we should work through the normal appropriations process.”

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), another senior appropriator, also voted against the second reconciliation bill, which funded immigration enforcement for the rest of Trump’s term over concerns about its impact on the government funding process.

Thune also has deficit hawks, including incoming Budget Chair Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), who are likely to want to include offsets for at least part of the spending. The House’s plan currently includes no offsets.

Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), a member of the Budget Committee, said in a statement that Congress should “pass a reconciliation package which is paid for” — and, if a short-term government funding bill can’t pass, “the reconciliation package needs to fund important government services.”

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) added on X Thursday: “Our national debt is a runaway train. The next reconciliation bill should be fully paid for.”

Congress

Republicans take first step to move $95B party-line package

Published

21 minutes ago

July 16, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Reconciliation 3.0 is on the move in the House.

House Republicans advanced their budget plan out of committee Thursday afternoon — the initial legislative step toward clearing their third party-line budget reconciliation package ahead of the impending August recess.

The House Budget Committee voted to approve a budget resolution along party lines, 20-14. The measure would unlock $95 billion for a GOP-only package to deliver funding President Donald Trump has demanded for the Pentagon, farmers and other priorities.

What the budget blueprint doesn’t contain is instructions to committees to find the vast savings that fiscal hawks were looking for to pay for the new spending. House Budget Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) tried to quell concerns from within his party about a lack of offsets required within the budget resolution by pointing to executive branch action.

“He declared war on fraud,” Arrington told the panel, referring to Trump. “He has a whole of government attack on that $500-plus billion a year in fraud.”

On Wednesday, Vice President JD Vance also tried to respond to hard-liners’ concerns by telling a gathering of House Republicans that his White House-based task force on fraud is already finding savings from social programs to offset spending. Fiscal hawks were not sold.

Some budget hawks including Reps. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) and Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.) voted to advance the resolution in committee. Rep. Chip Roy (R) of Texas did not vote in committee. On Wednesday he told reporters “the stupidest thing to do would be to try to jam it through committee when you’ve got bigger problem[s] on the House floor.”

The budget resolution prescribes up to $73 billion for military and intelligence programs and $12 billion for farm assistance. It also opens the door for Republicans to put another $10 billion toward election-related matters including grants to states to incentivize strict voter-ID laws. That portion of the effort is an attempt to enact some of the controversial election security bill that Trump is demanding be passed before he signs any other legislation.

“Not one word on bringing down costs for the American people. Not one word,” ranking member Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) said of the nearly 50-page budget resolution. “Instead, we have tens of billions of dollars for the most unpopular war in American history.”

The $73 billion allowed for military and intelligence is about the amount the White House sought in another emergency funding request last month. But the defense total is far below Trump’s demand of $350 billion in new party-line Pentagon funding this year. Of the $60 billion in defense funding, some would go to the ongoing war in Iran and another portion to service member pay, which Pentagon officials have warned will run short in August.

The panel defeated all 14 amendments Democrats offered, including proposals to roll back a bevy of policies from Republicans’ earlier party-line policy bills. Those measures targeted cuts to nutrition assistance programs, energy programs, student loan limitations and changes to Affordable Care Act policies.

Other rejected proposals include language to bar any taxpayer dollars from going to participants in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, barring funding for Trump’s White House ballroom and striking down Trump’s tariffs impacting agriculture producers. Multiple Democratic amendments focused on the conduct of federal immigration officers after several fatal shootings in recent days.

A floor vote on the fiscal blueprint is House GOP leaders’ next challenge in the arduous process of unlocking the filibuster-skirting power of reconciliation. Speaker Mike Johnson is trying to put the resolution on the floor next week, but that will require a serious whip operation to persuade deficit hawks to support the resolution.

On Wednesday ahead of the markup, House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) brushed off colleagues who are looking for the package to be fully paid for, including the defense portion.

“When did you ever pay for a war? A lot of this is military expenses aimed at that war,” he said. “The point is that play’s been called. It’s time to put up or shut up.”

Meredith Lee Hill contributed to this report.

Congress

Crypto regulatory text expected to be released Thursday does not have Senate Democrat support

Published

21 minutes ago

July 16, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Senators are planning to release the updated text of a cryptocurrency regulatory bill shortly after a meeting with President Donald Trump on Thursday afternoon, Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) told reporters.

Democratic senators are not expected to attend the meeting. Several Democrats said they wouldn’t support the version of the bill that could be released Thursday, suggesting it faces steep odds for passage.

Negotiations on the Clarity Act have gone back and forth for the better part of the past year. A major unresolved issue involves an ethics provision seeking to address Trump’s business ties to the crypto industry. The measure is a requirement for Senate Democrats, whose support is necessary to pass the bill through the chamber.

“We’ll do that right after the meeting,” Moreno said. “You guys have a lot of reading to do.”

Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), who is also expected to attend the meeting, said in an interview Thursday she “certainly hopes” draft text is released after speaking with the president but didn’t confirm.

Moreno pointed to the time spent meeting with Democrats on the bill over the past year, and said “it’s time for a vote now, but the president asked for a briefing.”

The Ohio Republican said one of his main goals of the meeting with Trump is to get a vote on the bill before August recess.

Several Democrats said they wouldn’t support the version of the bill set for release Thursday because it lacks strong ethics provisions.

“They’re taking a version of the text to the president with their ethics provisions, not with anything that we agree to as Democrats,” Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), a key negotiator of the legislation, said in an interview Thursday. “At the end of the day, we don’t have strong ethics. I don’t care what the president says. You’re not going to have the Democratic votes.”

Gallego said the version of ethics language he’s seen so far is “very weak” and gives “a lot of latitude to the president to continue doing his grift, and also it’s not very consumer protection friendly.”

Moreno has been adamant that the crypto bill “has the strongest ethics provision of any piece of legislation ever passed by any Congress.”

A Democratic Senate aide granted anonymity to discuss the unreleased draft said “the Republican plan being presented to the president is weaker than what Democrats will accept” and that “Democrats have not seen nor agreed to what is being presented to the White House.”

Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), who has been working on the CFTC portion of the bill, said in an interview he’s still in active negotiations on the bill, which aren’t expected to be finished Thursday.

“I hope they’re not going to drop something before we finish our negotiation,” Booker said. “The only way to get this done is a bipartisan pathway.”

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this report misstated Democratic Sen. Ruben Gallego’s party affiliation.

Congress

Senators bullish on chances for a July vote on college sports bill

Published

21 minutes ago

July 16, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Senate Commerce Chair Ted Cruz is hopeful the Senate will be able to vote this month on his bipartisan college athletics legislation as he makes “minor modifications” to win support.

The Texas Republican said Wednesday he has been meeting throughout this week with “several dozen” commissioners and university presidents to solicit feedback on the bill he introduced last month with the Commerce Committee’s top Democrat, Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington.

“We continue to make significant progress,” he said, declining to get into the “active discussions” around negotiations.

“I believe we will vote on it this month,” Cruz added.

The so-called Protect College Sports Act would establish a federal rule book for college athletics by enacting new policies for student-athlete transfers, banning coaches from moving schools mid-season and enshrining certain “name, image and likeness” protections in law.

Time is running out to schedule a floor vote in July, however, and it remains unclear how much work needs to be done to build consensus in the next two weeks.

A person granted anonymity to share private discussions said Senate Majority Leader John Thune has expressed interest in moving the bill to the floor once it can get 60 votes. But members in both parties have misgivings — including Democrats concerned about student athlete labor protections as well as some Republicans attuned to concerns from major college athletic conferences.

Cantwell, in an interview Thursday, said there’s a “possibility for sure” the bill could land on the Senate floor by the end of the month, while acknowledging there was still some work to do.

“I think right now we have a bill that’s like really in the middle and then there’s people on both sides trying to make change,” she said. “And I think we’ll have to see what we can do that still preserves that agreement but grows the votes.”

Two lobbyists actively engaged in talks around the bill, who were granted anonymity to comment on private conversations, said the legislation is far from ready for a floor vote, adding that the Commerce Committee has not made substantial progress on winning over key players in college sports.

Several universities and conferences — including Louisiana State University, the University of Alabama and Auburn University — have reiterated in recent days that they believe the Cruz-Cantwell bill still requires substantial changes like clarifying liability protections for schools and closing potential loopholes around non-NIL payments for student-athletes.

The bill has also faced strong headwinds as the Big Ten and the Southeastern Conference — the two largest college athletics conferences in the country — have pushed back on a provision aimed at allowing conferences to pool their media rights, insisting the bill clarify that any such provision is entirely voluntary.

Several major conferences were at one time more enthusiastic about the rival proposal in the House known as the SCORE Act, which would offer strong antitrust protections and preempt state NIL laws. But that bill stalled amid opposition from GOP hard-liners and others, emboldening Cruz and Cantwell to forge ahead with their own plan.

Both measures, however, have faced pushback from the Congressional Black Caucus, which has continued to vow to boycott any college sports legislation amid efforts by GOP-led states to redraw congressional maps across the South.