Congress

GOP moves to let Obamacare subsidies expire as Trump promises ‘money to the people’

Published

7 months ago

December 10, 2025

Republican leaders on Capitol Hill are moving decisively away from extending key Obamacare tax credits that help more than 20 million Americans pay for health insurance — following direct cues from President Donald Trump while also stoking ire among many in the GOP who fear severe political repercussions.

In a Monday interview with POLITICO, Trump refused to endorse a continuation of the expiring subsidies, even as his administration faces mounting pressure to address rising costs for Americans. He instead laid out his own vision for health care: “I want to give the money to the people, not to the insurance companies.”

Senate Republicans now plan to offer a proposal for a vote Thursday that would let the subsidies expire and instead encourage the use of health savings accounts. That abrupt shift in strategy is in turn putting new pressure on House GOP leaders to come up with their own health plan, according to four people who attended a closed-door meeting with Speaker Mike Johnson and senior Republicans Tuesday afternoon.

Yet after months of pressure from competing factions, lawmakers inside the meeting didn’t reach a conclusion and Johnson is still trying to figure out what that plan should be. House GOP staff Tuesday were prepping a health care framework to give Republicans something to vote on next week before they leave Washington for the holidays — one that, for now, does not include an extension of the enhanced Obamacare subsidies.

For many Republicans facing tough reelection races and even some in deep-red areas with a high reliance on the tax credits, following Trump’s one-sentence policy prescription would harm Americans and make for political disaster as the Dec. 31 expiration of the tax credits looms.

“We can agree that the current construct is flawed, but that letting them expire is not acceptable,” Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) said in an interview Tuesday. “That doesn’t work.”

Fitzpatrick is pushing a competing proposal that would extend the tax credits for two years while imposing an income cap and other eligibility restrictions. Fitzpatrick’s bill also includes new HSA provisions and a bipartisan package aimed at lowering drug costs, but he said it was unrealistic for GOP leaders to completely replace the subsidy framework in a matter of weeks.

“They can just dig themselves into an ideological corner all day long — it’s not fixing the problem,” Fitzpatrick added. “We can’t live in this fantasy land.”

But Johnson appears determined to cobble together a health care framework that will not include even a short-term extension of the subsidies, which can cut premiums for many families by $1,000 a year or more. He blindsided members of his own leadership circle and senior Republicans who have been involved in health care policy work when he announced last week his intentions to hold a vote this month.

“What health care plan?” said one of the senior Republicans who has been involved in the talks and was granted anonymity to share a candid reaction to Johnson’s pledge.

Turning Johnson’s promise into legislation has been difficult. As of Tuesday evening, the House GOP framework centered on an expansion of health savings accounts and funding for cost-sharing reductions — a type of Obamacare subsidy meant to reduce out-of-pocket health costs, according to three people granted anonymity to describe the deliberations.

While the plan does not currently include a temporary subsidy extension, some senior House Republicans say it might still be on the table — including Rep. Lisa McClain of Michigan, the No. 4 GOP leader, who said she believed it was still an option as she left the health care meeting Tuesday.

It’s also still to be determined whether the plan will be offered up as a suite of individual bills or packaged together. But the goal is for GOP lawmakers to have “something” to vote on before the end of next week, according to one of the senior House Republicans involved in the talks — even if there is no time left for the Senate to pass it before the subsidies lapse.

GOP members will be briefed on the talks during their closed-door conference meeting Wednesday morning, according to three people granted anonymity to discuss internal planning. They will not be presented with a formal plan, they said.

The health care sprint also comes as Johnson faces down growing displeasure inside the GOP over his leadership style, where he has repeatedly sought to bulldoze internal dissent and march in lockstep with Trump. In this case, Johnson has so far sided with the bulk of his conference who want to see the Obamacare subsidies expire — even though some Trump aides have counseled that an extension would be politically prudent.

The White House was on the cusp of endorsing a two-year continuation of the subsidies just before Thanksgiving, but top Republicans on Blue Light News were not fully consulted first and moved to quash the idea — to the horror of many in the rank-and-file who favor an extension.

“I don’t think leadership understands just how upset people are,” said one House Republican who among several granted anonymity to speak frankly about internal conversations. “People are getting desperate.”

In fact, according to six other House GOP lawmakers and senior aides with direct knowledge, enough Republicans could sign a discharge petition that would sidestep Johnson and force a vote on extending the expiring subsidies. One of those House Republicans said they would be willing to support a discharge of Fitzpatrick’s legislation, which largely mirrors the White House trial balloon, or another bill from Rep. Jen Kiggans (R-Va.) and is waiting to see details of what Johnson proposes as an alternative.

“We shall see,” the lawmaker said.

Some in the GOP who support an extension have floated a short-term patch until Jan. 30 in order to buy some more time to come up with a deal. Many Republicans in the White House and on Capitol Hill believe that once the tax credits expire, there could be a chance to work out a wider health care deal next month that could tackle issues such as HSAs and drug prices.

While that argument has its merits on paper, people involved in the talks say a short-term punt wouldn’t make much sense for people trying to buy health insurance for the entire year and could create major logistical hassles.

One of the many problems is the White House itself isn’t providing any clear guidance amid all the internal divisions. The Trump administration itself has been and still is deeply divided about allowing the Obamacare tax credits to lapse, according to two administration officials and three senior House Republicans involved in the conversations.

“It depends on who you ask,” said a senior House Republican about the White House’s views on health care.

One White House official said Tuesday that “policy teams are looking at a lot of different avenues” and that “three weeks is actually a lot of time for a lot of stuff to come together.” However, both the House and Senate are set to adjourn for the holidays at the end of next week.

The Senate plan now set for a vote Thursday, from Sens. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana and Mike Crapo of Idaho, quickly won support inside the GOP this week amid fears that the party would look hapless if they did not put up an alternative to Democrats’ plan to extend the subsidies for three years.

But there are still plenty of lawmakers who are anxious about voting to upend the health care system with the deadline looming and no signals from the White House on what Trump would accept.

“There’s just not enough time to do a comprehensive bill,” one House Republican said, adding that the expiring subsidies will be “a problem for everyone” in the GOP.

Jordain Carney, Cheyenne Haslett and Mia McCarthy contributed to this report.

Congress

Pentagon and elections bills could be combined in bid to unfreeze House floor

Published

12 minutes ago

June 29, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Speaker Mike Johnson said Monday he plans to deploy an unusual procedural maneuver in a bid to unfreeze the House floor this week, seeking to send the annual Pentagon policy bill and the GOP elections bill known as the SAVE America Act to the Senate in a single package.

That is likely a recipe for a continued standoff between the two chambers over the SAVE America Act, which has stalled in the Senate for months due to internal GOP divides. Under Johnson’s plan, the annual defense policy bill, which typically passes every year with large bipartisan majorities, could become a collateral victim of the impasse.

Asked in brief interview if he had talked to Senate Majority Leader John Thune about his plans, Johnson replied, “I have to do my job in the House, and they’ve got to do their job in the Senate, so we’ll see what happens.”

Johnson is seeking to placate House conservative hard-liners, led by Florida Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, who have threatened to oppose the procedural measures that give Republicans control of the floor unless they agree to tougher tactics meant to force the Senate into passing the elections bill.

House GOP leaders discussed the plan to merge the two bills over the weekend as Luna pushed to amend the defense bill directly.

She did not say in an interview Monday whether Johnson’s gambit would suffice: “We want it baked together, not able to be stripped out,” she said.

But the Senate is free to work its own will, and members of that chamber are likely to reject any defense bill that has the partisan elections bill attached. That would set the stage for GOP leaders to strip it out when the House and Senate hash out the differences between their competing Pentagon bills later this year.

Johnson, meanwhile, is pushing a separate plan to pass a slimmed-down version of the SAVE America Act through the party-line budget reconciliation process — an option hard-liners have all but rejected.

“I don’t think that that can be done,” Luna told reporters Monday.

He’s also facing another complication: The version of the SAVE America Act he is proposing to attach to the Pentagon bill doesn’t include the latest demands for the bill from President Donald Trump — including a near-total ban on mail voting that is opposed by many Republicans.

Jennifer Scholtes contributed to this report.

Congress

Top Trump officials face bipartisan questions in first all-member Iran briefings

Published

1 hour ago

June 29, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Lawmakers of both parties questioned Secretary of State Marco Rubio and top Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff Monday in the first broad congressional briefings on President Donald Trump’s Iran deal.

While Democrats asked some of the sharpest questions, participants in an afternoon conference call with House members said, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) at one point pressed the administration officials on the fate of Iran’s stockpile of near-bomb-grade uranium.

According to two people granted anonymity to disclose the private remarks, Witkoff and Rubio repeated assurances the administration has privately made to select lawmakers in prior briefings — that the goal is to negotiate a final deal that would prohibit Iran from keeping its highly enriched uranium.

The memorandum of understanding Trump signed earlier this month, they said, was meant to launch those negotiations. Witkoff, the people said, added that the technical team involved in that part of the talks was traveling from Switzerland to Qatar, where talks between the U.S. and Iran are set to happen Tuesday.

Democrats, meanwhile, pushed the administration for more details on what financial benefits Iran could reap under the memorandum — including proceeds from previously sanctioned oil sales.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) went back and forth with Rubio and Witkoff over the lifting of the oil sanctions, two other people granted anonymity on the House call said. The officials eventually cut off the conversation and ended the call.

At another point, Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-Pa.) raised concerns about Witkoff’s business interests in the Middle East as he’s negotiating with Iran, prompting a sharp defense from Rubio, those people said.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer asked Rubio and Witkoff about the oil sanctions during a separate all-senators call Monday, saying in a statement afterward that they “confirmed to me that Iran will reap billions in oil revenue while retaining dangerous leverage over the Strait of Hormuz.”

“If this is the administration’s defense behind closed doors, Secretary Rubio should make it under oath, in public, before the Foreign Relations Committee,” Schumer added, calling the briefing “delayed, deficient, and devoid of details.”

An administration official granted anonymity to speak candidly countered on Schumer’s characterization, noting that he had previously gotten a briefing of the deal as part of a group of top leaders engaged on national security matters. Schumer, the official said, had the opportunity to ask multiple follow-up questions on the Senate call.

A separate group of White House officials briefed top congressional leaders and key committee chairs in a classified briefing in the Capitol later Monday.

The administration has faced bipartisan skepticism over multiple provisions of the memorandum of understanding — particularly the lifting of oil sanctions and a $300 billion reconstruction fund that many Senate Republicans fear will help fuel Iran’s military and regional proxies.

Rubio and Witkoff sought to ease concerns about the slow reopening of the Strait of Hormuz — the critical trade route whose closure has sparked higher fuel and fertilizer costs. Both officials said more mine removal is required, and Witkoff indicated that Iran broke the terms of the Trump-signed deal by launching a drone attack on a passing ship over the weekend.

They also sought to assure lawmakers that Iran has received no money under the memorandum — especially not directly from American sources. Administration officials have previously pledged in smaller briefings that the reconstruction fund won’t include U.S. funds.

Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) called the Senate briefing a “productive conversation” but said “much of what I heard today is similar to what I heard last week” during a dinner at Vice President JD Vance’s residence.

Congress

Senate Ethics dismisses allegations against Ruben Gallego

Published

6 hours ago

June 29, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The Senate Ethics Committee has dismissed allegations of misconduct levied against Sen. Ruben Gallego, who stood accused by Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of “campaign finance violations and inappropriate conduct of a sexual nature.”

The charges came following the resignation of the Arizona Democrat’s longtime friend, Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), who was forced to step down amid accusations of serious sexual misconduct. Luna, a Florida Republican, sought to implicate Gallego by claiming in an interview on CBS that a woman would come forward about an “incident that occurred between the two of them at the same time and the event was sexual in nature allegedly.”

But in a letter to Gallego sent Monday — which he shared in a public news release — the notoriously inactive Ethics Committee cited Gallego’s “prompt contact with the Committee following media reports of the allegations and appreciated your full cooperation with the Committee throughout the investigation.”

Gallego has maintained he was unaware of the allegations against Swalwell and said in a statement he was a victim of “right-wing conspiracies peddled by far-right activists like Anna Paulina Luna, the White House, and their allies.”

He continued, “I look forward to an apology from Rep. Luna for weaponizing the ethics process while refusing to investigate historic corruption that’s making life harder for families.”

Luna, in a post on X, defended her referral to the Senate Ethics Committee.

“The good news about DC is everyone talks, and eventually the reporters come forward with your texts,” Luna wrote on social media. “Do yourself a favor and keep raising for your legal defense fund. Once a creep always a creep, and you’re gonna need it.”

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this report misstated Rep. Anna Paulina Luna’s state. She represents Florida.