Congress

Trump’s health care plan in flux amid GOP backlash

Published

7 months ago

November 24, 2025

Donald Trump’s health care plan is in limbo after pushback from Republicans who were caught off guard by the president’s forthcoming proposal — questioning, in particular, whether it would include additional abortion restrictions.

Trump had been expected to unveil a new policy framework Monday afternoon, said two people familiar with the plan and granted anonymity to describe deliberations around it. That framework was expected to center around a two-year extension of Affordable Care Act subsidies with income caps and other new limits backed by conservatives.

But while White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Monday that Trump remained focused on “unveiling a health care proposal,” she declined to get into specifics about subsidy extensions or a timeline for the rollout: “I’ll let the president speak for himself.”

A White House official separately noted Trump’s daily schedule never listed plans for a Monday rollout.

The uncertainty around the timing of the announcement comes as Hill Republicans remain sharply divided over whether to extend the enhanced tax credits to prevent premiums from skyrocketing next year or to let them expire at the end of the year and coalesce around an alternative approach to keep health care costs down.

One House Republican granted anonymity to speak freely said in an interview Monday they needed to see “what structural changes” Trump might float, adding that GOP lawmakers should demand “reforms … in exchange for extending the subsidies.”

According to three additional people granted anonymity to share details of the plan ahead of its release, Trump was preparing to place new income caps on individuals receiving the subsidies and require minimum premium payments for Obamacare enrollees. He also was expected to propose an option for enrollees to receive part of their tax credit in a tax-advantaged savings account if they downgrade to a lower-premium health plan.

These policy changes align with what many conservatives have been seeking. But it wasn’t clear Monday whether the plan would also include expanded restrictions under the so-called Hyde amendment, which bans federal funds from being used for abortions.

One of the people who described the tentative plan and two other people granted anonymity to disclose private discussions said congressional Republicans still didn’t know how Trump’s proposal would deal with that thorny issue.

The ACA has always barred federal subsidies from paying for abortions but left it up to states to determine whether health insurance plans in the individual market could cover abortion using other funding.

Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of SBA Pro-Life America, reiterated in a statement Monday her anti-abortion group will penalize any lawmaker who votes for a subsidies extension without additional abortion guardrails that ban coverage nationwide.

“We oppose any health care plan that fails to include this safeguard,” she said. “Our position is consistent and will not change.”

Trump’s plan to extend the ACA credits — even with changes sought by conservatives — also blindsided some Hill Republicans who have dug in against any bipartisan deal to extend the credits.

“I know that we’ve got different ideas in our conference,” House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) said in a Monday morning interview on Fox Business Network. “I think you’re going to hear more from the White House.”

House GOP leadership last week gave a presentation to the House Republican Conference slamming the subsidies for perpetuating what they dubbed the “Unaffordable Care Act,” a moniker Emmer repeated Monday.

Not all Republicans reacted negatively to the news of a forthcoming health policy announcement from Trump. Rep. Tim Burchett in an interview Monday credited the president with having “some guts” to get lawmakers “to the table.” Trump’s forthcoming framework, Burchett added, “starts the negotiating.”

“I don’t like the subsidies,” the Tennessee Republican continued, “but everybody griping about it doesn’t have a plan, so get some guts, put up a plan … or get the heck out of the way.”

Burchett also said the White House will now roll out the plan Tuesday, underscoring confusion and mixed messaging around the forthcoming presentation.

Leavitt left open a broad array of possibilities for the final White House plan Monday, including that it might not ultimately include a subsidy extension. Asked specifically if that provision would be included, she told reporters, “As you all know, sometimes you report things and then President Trump comes out with an announcement and those things are not always true.”

Some Democrats expressed cautious optimism upon learning that Trump was preparing to embrace an extension of the ACA credits.

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), who has been heavily involved in the bipartisan negotiations on health care, said in a statement Monday that she has had “constructive conversations” with Republicans about extending the enhanced tax credits.

“If the reports are true and the President is considering coming to the table in good faith, I believe we can find a path forward that can earn broad bipartisan support in Congress,” Shaheen said.

She added that anything Trump puts out on the issue could signal “a serious proposal to begin negotiations.”

Democrats, including Shaheen, have been discussing what their strategy should be ahead of a floor vote in mid-December on a proposal to extend the subsidies, which was promised to Democrats by Senate Majority Leader John Thune in exchange for their votes to end the government shutdown. Democrats will get to decide what proposal they want a vote on, though Republicans are expected to offer their own alternative unless there is a bipartisan deal.

One provision that had been included in Trump’s tentative plan — pegging the eligibility cap for the subsidies at 700 percent of the federal poverty line — is among the ideas being mulled by Shaheen and her colleagues.

But other Democrats slammed the proposal outright, further casting doubt on how Trump’s opening salvo would land on Capitol Hill.

In a statement Monday afternoon, the three top House Democrats on committees with jurisdiction over health care — Reps. Richard Neal of Massachusetts, Frank Pallone of New Jersey and Bobby Scott of Virginia — panned the White House’s forthcoming proposal, calling it the “greatest hits of Republican health care ideas the people have rejected for years.”

They continued, “At this point, anything short of a clean extension is unworkable and won’t avoid the price hikes people are now facing.”

Congress

Johnson-backed plan to combine Pentagon and election bills advances to floor

Published

6 hours ago

June 30, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The House Rules Committee advanced a procedural measure aimed at breaking an intra-Republican deadlock Monday night. But GOP leaders are still facing a major battle Tuesday to regain control of the House floor.

The panel approved on party lines a measure to set up Republicans’ $1.1 trillion defense policy bill, a government funding bill and other GOP bills for floor debate. It would then combine the Pentagon bill, once passed, with the contentious elections overhaul known as the SAVE America Act and send it to the Senate as one piece of legislation.

That maneuver, telegraphed by Speaker Mike Johnson earlier Monday, is aimed at appeasing House GOP hard-liners who have blockaded the floor, demanding the Senate pass the elections bill that has languished there for months.

However, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, the Republican leading the blockade, said in an interview Monday before the Rules Committee acted that Johnson’s plan is not sufficient — raising the possibility she and allies could vote down the measure on the floor. Other House GOP hard-liners say there are other outstanding issues to battle over Tuesday.

Rep. James McGovern of Massachusetts, the top Rules Democrat, called the merger move “a big waste of time.” The panel voted down a motion by McGovern to remove the provision to combine the two bills in a party-line vote.

The Senate is set to debate its own version of the defense bill next month, and it is likely that the elections overhaul will be removed in negotiations between the two chambers — as McGovern acknowledged Monday and House GOP leaders privately concede.

“The Senate will just strip the SAVE Act out,” he said at the meeting. “There is a zero percent chance SAVE ends up in the [Pentagon bill] because of this rule today.”

The defense bill faces a tight vote if Republicans can pass the procedural measure. Most Democrats are expected to oppose the measure over its massive price tag, which they contend is wasteful.

The panel is set up debate on 312 amendments to the bill. The slate includes GOP measures to codify a Trump executive order to block transgender people from serving in the military, prohibit coverage of gender-affirming care, block aid to arm Ukraine and strip Democratic-backed protections for collective bargaining for Pentagon civilian workers.

The committee also voted down Democratic proposals to slash $150 billion from the bill’s topline and limit the war against Iran.

Mia McCarthy contributed to this report.

Congress

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

Published

8 hours 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

9 hours 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.