Congress

State budgets land in GOP crosshairs amid struggle to fund megabill

Published

1 year ago

May 7, 2025

Congressional Republicans agree that the federal government has a spending problem. Now top GOP leaders want to make it someone else’s problem — by shifting some safety-net programs onto state budgets.

The plans under discussion could generate hundreds of billions of dollars in savings to finance the GOP’s domestic policy megabill. But they’re vexing Republican lawmakers — many of them former governors and state legislators — who are not interested in addressing Washington’s fiscal woes by creating them in state capitals, including those run by their own party.

It’s one big reason why Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune are struggling right now to build consensus for the “big, beautiful bill,” with its expensive suite of tax cuts as well as border and defense spending plus-ups. Already they are scaling back ambitious plans that would force states to either subsidize health and food aid or kick thousands of residents off benefit rolls.

“Most of us are not interested in simply shifting costs,” said Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), a former governor, who warned “there most certainly would” be significant pushback from states if the GOP proceeds with cost-sharing plans.

“I hope to goodness we don’t go there,” added Sen. Jim Justice (R-W.Va.), another former governor, whose constituents are heavily reliant on federal programs.

The mathematical impetus for the GOP proposals is straightforward enough: The tax cuts that President Donald Trump and Republican leaders are eyeing are estimated to cost $5 trillion or more over the coming decade. Offsetting that cost requires more than shaking the couch cushions, and two safety-net programs have emerged as particularly appealing targets.

Together Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly known as food stamps, account for about $1 trillion in yearly federal spending. Republicans are mostly unified on instituting work requirements, tightening eligibility verification, excluding undocumented immigrants from benefits and cracking down on waste, fraud and abuse. But to achieve even deeper cuts, they are looking to make states pick up more of the tab.

Medicaid has been a joint federal-state program since its creation in the Great Society era, but its 2010 expansion under the Affordable Care Act put the federal government on the hook for 90 percent of the costs for newly eligible beneficiaries. States, meanwhile, have never had to bear the costs of SNAP benefits, though they are responsible for a portion of administrative costs.

Under some House GOP proposals now under consideration, states would have to assume a greater share of the cost for the Medicaid expansion population while also bearing a portion of SNAP benefit costs for the first time. Republicans are also exploring whether to curtail health provider taxes states frequently use to finance their Medicaid costs.

Together, it could shift hundreds of billions of dollars yearly to state budgets that are already strained as federal pandemic aid runs out and other Trump administration cuts take effect. In California, for instance, lawmakers are preparing for a minimum $10 billion budget shortfall for the fiscal year starting July 1, with that number set to triple at least in 2026.

The National Association of State Budget Officers has found that Medicaid makes up more than half of federal funding to states. Brian Sigritz, the group’s director of state fiscal studies, said in an interview that states will either have to raise taxes, cut benefits or slash other programs in response to the slew of changes impacting their budgets. Sigritz said the impact will be “cumulative.”

“It’s clear states won’t be able to absorb the federal cuts and cost shifts in recent federal actions and congressional proposals,” Sigritz said. “States are required to balance their budget, and states won’t be able to fill in the gap.”

Republicans have trained much of their criticism on Democratic-run states that, they argue, run those two programs wastefully. But millions of low-income families in red states also rely on the programs for health care and food aid, and some of the latest GOP plans would actually hurt deep-red states even more than others — including a reworked SNAP state-cost share plan.

That has fueled the intra-GOP backlash, with many Republicans in the House and Senate shorthanding their opposition by insisting they will not “cut benefits” — meaning they might tolerate work requirements and other ancillary changes but not changing the federal government’s core responsibilities.

Rep. David Valadao, one of the most vulnerable Republicans up for reelection in 2026, is a former state legislator who sharply criticizes the fiscal management of his home state of California. But he’s also wary of putting a greater financial burden on states like his.

“California has kind of blown it on some of these fronts,” Valadao said. “So it puts me as a Californian in a difficult position.”

Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R-Wis.) stood up during a closed-door House GOP conference meeting Tuesday morning to warn about the SNAP proposal’s impact on his home state of Wisconsin’s budget. Alongside Van Orden sat dozens of House Republicans in states that would be hit even harder.

GOP leaders have pulled back from some of the farthest-reaching proposals. The House Agriculture Committee had been eyeing having states pick up a 25 percent share of SNAP costs; the latest proposal would start at 10 percent for states with the lowest rates of overpayments. “No one likes this,” said one Republican granted anonymity to describe private sentiments inside the party, “but we need to reach these cuts.”

As for Medicaid, Johnson on Tuesday ruled out cutting the federal reimbursement rate and suggested that an alternative — per-capita caps on federal reimbursements — would also be excluded.

But other proposals — like limiting state provider taxes — remain on the table, and so far the public pushback inside the House GOP has been relatively limited. That’s not true in the Senate, where most Republicans hate the idea of saddling states with billions of dollars in new financial burdens — though discussion continued about cutting the federal share for some Medicaid beneficiaries at a party retreat Wednesday, according to two senators who attended and were granted anonymity to describe the closed-door event.

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), a former state House speaker, has warned against catching states off guard on Medicaid changes and said he plans to call members of his own state legislature to discuss the percolating proposals. Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), another veteran of state government, said shifting costs to states “may make [the federal] numbers look better … but it still becomes a burden.”

Senate Agriculture Chair John Boozman (R-Ark.) said in an interview that he has “concern” about sharing costs for food aid and that his panel is not pursuing the idea. Sen. John Hoeven — who, like Boozman, is in frequent contact with House Agriculture Chair G.T. Thompson (R-Pa.) — said he was skeptical the House would ultimately follow through: “I’d put that in the category of, let’s actually see if they do it.”

New cost-sharing mandates could stick GOP-dominated states such as Alaska, West Virginia, Mississippi, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Alabama and Florida with multi-billion-dollar annual bills — forcing high-stakes choices for state officials who would suddenly have to worry about their own political hides. Even White House officials have privately fretted about a potential “one-two punch” for red states, leaving many in the GOP much more comfortable with the less drastic proposals, such as work requirements.

“I think the politics of work are a lot lighter burden to carry than just pushing off some of the costs to the states,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), who is seeking reelection next year.

Samuel Benson, Rachel Bluth and Eric He contributed to this report.

Congress

Capitol agenda: Summer exit eludes Senate

Published

2 hours ago

August 6, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Don’t expect the typically strong smell of Thursday jet fumes in the halls of the Senate just yet.

Ideally, senators would be leaving town for a five-week recess after business Thursday, but a legislative pile-up and pressure from President Donald Trump has made that impossible.

All 100 senators still need to agree to a deal to speed up consideration of a measure to extend government funding through Dec. 11, a Russia sanctions bill, dozens of nominees including Todd Blanche and a bipartisan college athletics bill — an agenda that would otherwise take weeks to accomplish.

Republicans also need to make a decision about whether they’re going to attempt to take an initial step on a third party-line spending bill, which includes election security measures Trump is demanding.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Wednesday evening the vibes were “starting to pick up” in terms of a deal taking shape. But he cautioned on jet fumes:

“You’re not going to be smelling those anytime real soon. …We’ve obviously got, like I said, a stack of stuff to do,” he said.

While Thune hasn’t ruled out taking up a budget blueprint for the GOP bill, he said it was “hard to say at this point” if the votes were there.

However senators are eyeing an exit strategy to allow Republicans to leave town while giving Trump a small win by taking up his elections measure. With that option, Republicans would bring up legislation related to the SAVE America Act instead of advancing a budget resolution, three people granted anonymity to discuss internal discussions said.

Thune said it “remains to be seen” whether that’s enough for hard-liners who have threatened to oppose leaving town without a vote on it.

Also still in limbo is Trump’s attorney general pick Blanche, who met Wednesday with GOP holdouts Sens. Bill Cassidy and Lisa Murkowski. Neither said afterward how they would vote on the nomination — and Blanche needs to secure at least one of their votes.

Government funding legislation is also stuck in the pile-up, with Republicans grappling with intraparty wrangling over hemp language. And an agreement to speed up consideration of the Russia sanctions measure is also in limbo as Democrats work through concerns in their ranks about it.

And Democrats are waiting for smoke signals from Republicans on whether they’ll force them to vote on cryptocurrency legislation that many of them currently oppose (more on that below). Dems are eager to avoid taking that vote ahead of the recess, potentially fueling tens of millions of dollars of campaign spending by industry allies.

What else we’re watching:

— JOHNSON BULLISH ON SPEAKERSHIP: Mike Johnson said he is planning to remain speaker if House Republicans hold onto the House — but didn’t weigh in on his future plans if Democrats flip the majority. “I don’t have to answer that question because we’re gonna win,” Johnson told Dasha Burns on Tuesday in an interview for Blue Light News’s The Conversation. “I’m gonna remain speaker of the House,” he added. Johnson would face difficult political headwinds to stay on as minority leader if Democrats take back the chamber, but he dodged on the topic, reiterating his optimism.

— FARM BILL OUTLOOK DIMS: Agriculture ranking member Amy Klobuchar is signaling she’ll oppose the GOP-led farm bill up for a markup Thursday, likely scuttling chances it’ll advance. At issue is a provision to delay requirements that states pay for part of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits. Agriculture Chair John Boozman has offered a one-year delay while Democrats are asking for two years. The nutrition aid requirements were passed as part of the GOP’s megabill last summer. Boozman needs to win support from at least one Democrat to advance the bill out of committee given Sen. Mitch McConnell’s prolonged absence.

Jordain Carney, Mia McCarthy and Grace Yarrow contributed to this report.

Congress

Senate’s summer pileup is threatening a quick recess escape

Published

13 hours ago

August 6, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Ideally, the Senate would be adjourning for a five-week break in less than 24 hours.

Instead, Republican senators are still navigating what Majority Leader John Thune described as a “train wreck” as they face a pileup of legislation, key nominations and public pressure from President Donald Trump and angry conservatives to show progress on a GOP election bill Trump views as his “No. 1 priority.”

They’re heading into Thursday — when the scent of jet fumes typically starts wafting through the halls of Congress — without a deal that would let them speed up votes on a government funding bill or long-stalled Russia sanctions bill.

Meanwhile, Todd Blanche’s attorney general nomination is still stuck in limbo after he came to the Capitol Wednesday for a roughly hourlong meeting with two key Republican holdouts.

That said, the general outlines of a deal that would allow senators to quickly get out of Washington and onto the campaign trail has started taking shape, even as senators and aides acknowledged they might have to stick around at least a little bit longer than they’d hoped.

“Don’t kill the vibe — it’s starting to pick up,” Thune said in an interview, while cautioning that “you’re not going to be smelling those [jet fumes] anytime real soon. … We’ve obviously got, like I said, a stack of stuff to do.”

One key issue Republicans haven’t yet settled is a new party-line spending bill that would pump billions of dollars into the Pentagon, to ailing farmers and into some elections-related spending that could take some of the Trump-fueled pressure off — even as several people with knowledge of the discussions said the votes aren’t there.

Thune hasn’t formally ruled out taking up a budget blueprint for the GOP bill, saying Wednesday it was “hard to say at this point” if he had the votes. But he indicated there was progress behind the scenes toward an exit strategy that would allow Republicans to start their recess with minimal internal friction.

“There’s not clarity, but it’s getting less cloudy if you put it that way,” Thune said.

Three people granted anonymity to discuss internal discussions said that endgame would not involve the time-consuming process of advancing a budget, but instead calling up a vote related to the SAVE America Act, the Trump-backed elections bill.

Republican leaders are hoping that holding a vote on the elections proposal, at the Senate’s usual 60-vote threshold for legislation, will let them hammer Democrats as the holdup while satisfying Republicans who have been frustrated over the lack of progress and have threatened to oppose leaving town.

“We’re looking at options there,” Thune said about possible SAVE America-related votes.

He added that it “remains to be seen” if that would be enough to placate Trump-allied rabble-rousers, “but we’ve had a number of conversations now about how we get the votes people feel are necessary.”

A key MAGA ally, Sen. Mike Lee of Utah, posted a social media video Wednesday thanking Thune, saying that the conversation has moved in a “favorable direction” and that Republicans were discussing “what procedural vehicle to use in order to get this thing done.”

Thune has several other obstacles to clear besides the SAVE America fight.

Senators want an agreement that would let them extend government funding into mid-December, pass a sanctions bill targeting Russia in honor of the late Sen. Lindsey Graham, confirm dozens of Trump nominees, including Blanche, and start work on a bipartisan college sports bill.

The highest drama surrounds Blanche, who met Wednesday with GOP Sens. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. Neither said afterward how they would vote on his nomination. With Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and every Democrat expected to oppose Blanche, and Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) out for health reasons, he will need to win support from at least one of the two.

The legislative targets have issues, too: Republicans are grappling with intraparty wrangling over hemp language included in the stopgap bill, and Democrats are working through concerns in their ranks about the sanctions bill.

They also want to know if Republicans are going to force them to take a vote on cryptocurrency legislation that many Democrats currently oppose. They are eager to avoid taking that vote ahead of the recess as bipartisan talks happen behind the scenes — especially because a failed vote could potentially fuel tens of millions of dollars of campaign spending against Democratic opponents by industry allies.

Democrats are also looking for signals from Republicans about whether they will move forward with the party-line budget plan. But it was clear by Wednesday afternoon that major obstacles remained.

One GOP senator said Wednesday evening that “there won’t be the votes to do reconciliation and that will simplify things” for the rest of the schedule.

At a Senate GOP lunch meeting, Budget Chair Ron Johnson of Wisconsin presented his ideas for the budget blueprint. It would closely mirror a version that the House advanced last month, but it would also instruct a host of new committees to help draft the bill — expanding the range of issues Democrats could force vulnerable GOP incumbents to take tough votes on just months before the midterms.

Besides ongoing intra-GOP disputes about the amount of Pentagon funding to include and whether to offset the spending with cuts elsewhere, Thune is dealing with senators who aren’t convinced that they should force the issue just months before voters cast ballots.

Retiring Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), who described himself as a “lean no” on the budget, said his views were being influenced by wanting to protect vulnerable colleagues.

“There’s only like five members of my conference that I care about. and they’re the ones who are running in at-risk states,” he said.

Asked if he would vote “no” to protect them, Tillis added, “I’m going to support my members who are up for election. They’re the most important priority right now.”

Congress

Trump urges GOP senators to back off hemp ban

Published

16 hours ago

August 5, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

President Donald Trump and top White House officials are privately lobbying Republican senators to delay a ban on intoxicating hemp that’s set to kick in this fall.

At the Trump administration’s urging, the government funding patch the Senate is working to pass this week would push off the forthcoming ban of some cannabis products derived from hemp. But several Republican senators are demanding a vote to strip the delay out and let that prohibition kick in come November.

They’re hearing from the White House about it.

Trump called Sen. Ted Budd on Tuesday night, after the North Carolina Republican filed an amendment to ensure the ban kicks in as mandated on Nov. 12, according to a Senate aide granted anonymity to describe the private discussion. On the call, the president discussed creating a federal regulatory framework for hemp but did not ask Budd to withdraw his amendment, the individual added.

“I’ve been asked by lots of people to stand down on this amendment,” Budd told reporters Wednesday.

Budd noted that the Trump administration has had almost nine months to come up with a plan for implementing the ban.

“So why all of a sudden pop up for some seemingly innocent delay?” he asked, accusing the White House of instead preparing to “jam this on some must-pass” funding package at year’s end to further delay the prohibition.

A White House official granted anonymity to discuss the private debate said the Trump administration is seeking “a modest four-week delay” through the Dec. 11 expiration of the funding patch “to allow for productive conversations to continue.” Some synthetic cannabis products would be permanently banned in the meantime, the official added.

The administration lobbying has successfully swayed some Senate Republicans, such as Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), who said in an interview that “the White House has committed to me that they’re committed to regulate the industry.”

Republican Sen. Rand Paul of hemp-rich Kentucky said the issue came up “in a big way” during Senate Republicans’ private lunch meeting Wednesday. Paul said he spoke in support of delaying the ban and said those arguing for a delay “aren’t very rational.”

“They’re wanting to hold up the funding for the government over one month,” he said. “It’s kind of insane.”

Grace Yarrow contributed to this report.