US Senate (Washington Insider) – The Senate
narrowly approved a $9 billion rescissions package targeting foreign aid and
public media, advancing President Trump’s proposal to the House.
Moderate Republicans Lisa Murkowski of Alaska
and Susan Collins of Maine broke with one another to support the final
proposal. Later on Thursday, the House is anticipated to consider the updated
measure.
A Republican substitute that removed a $400
million rescission to the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR),
a well-known anti-HIV program, and prohibited any further rescissions from
removing funding for agriculture and nutrition assistance as well as certain
country-specific grants, including to Jordan and Egypt, was adopted by senators
52-47, ending a 13-hour vote-a-rama.
The Senate took almost two dozen votes on the replacement, with only one Republican, Rand Paul of
Kentucky, voting against it.
Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of
Alaska, both moderate Republicans, split with each other to back the final
plan. The House is expected to consider the amended proposal later
Thursday.
After a 13-hour vote-a-rama, senators 52-47
approved a Republican substitute that eliminated a $400 million rescission to
the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), a well-known anti-HIV
program, and forbade any additional rescissions from removing funding for
nutrition and agriculture assistance as well as certain country-specific
grants, including to Jordan and Egypt.
Only one Republican, Rand Paul of Kentucky,
voted against the replacement, which was decided by over two dozen votes in the
Senate.
Collins and Murkowski also supported other
Democratic proposals to weaken the bill, such as one from Virginia’s Tim Kaine
that would prohibit rescissions to the International Development and Migration
and Refugee Assistance accounts from affecting contracts for faith-based
organizations. The vote against Kaine’s amendment was 48–51.
In order to prevent rescissions that would limit
children’s access to educational programs on public television, the two also
supported a move to recommit the bill. Edward J. Markey, a Democrat from
Massachusetts, made the motion, but it was rejected 47–50. Mark Kelly, a
Democrat from Arizona, made the rare offer of a substitute amendment written by
Collins, which she had previously chosen not to propose. The amendment would
remove many of the package’s rescissions.
The approval vote was a win for the Trump
administration, which wants to codify cutbacks made by the Department of
Government Efficiency, or DOGE, and use the rescissions process to reduce
federal expenditure. However, Democrats cautioned their Republican
counterparts about the long-term damage to the chamber’s appropriations
process, which requires bipartisan backing to move spending measures due to a
60-vote barrier.
“We have never, never before seen bipartisan
investments, slashed through a partisan rescissions package. Do not start now,”
Senate Appropriations ranking member Patty Murray, D-Wash., said in a floor
speech Wednesday. “Not when we are working, at this very moment, in a
bipartisan way to pass our spending bills.”
Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., acknowledged the
argument put forth by Democrats that the annual appropriations process would be
damaged if a precedent is set that spending agreements could be canceled
whenever one party has unified control of the White House and Congress.
“If I’m a Democrat and you’re trying to get me
to vote and get to a 60-vote threshold to fund the government and you’ve just
betrayed a prior agreement and a prior appropriation, what is the likelihood
that they will do that,”
Tillis said in a floor speech.
In addition, Tillis threatened to withdraw his
support for any further rescission packages if the White House failed to
fulfill promises that non-military aid to Ukraine would not be included in the
rescissions of foreign aid.
If Trump and Russ Vought, the director of the
White House Office of Management and Budget, present more rescission packages
to Congress, Democrats are also predicting more difficult vote-a-ramas, which
will further reduce the Senate’s limited floor time.
There have already been lengthy vote-a-ramas
this year, including one on the Republican reconciliation package less than a
month ago that lasted 27 hours and another on the GOP budget resolution that
lasted six hours with 21 votes in April.
What process does the House need to follow to
approve the Senate’s amended version by the Friday deadline?
Once the Senate passes its amended version, the
bill returns to the House. For the package to become law, both chambers must
agree to the exact same text.
House leadership schedules the amended bill for
a vote.
Debate time is limited—typically just two hours
in the House for a rescissions package, expediting procedures compared to other
legislation. Passage requires a simple majority (more than half of the voting
members).
Unlike typical appropriations bills, filibusters
or extended debate are not permitted in the Senate, and the House process is
similarly streamlined for rescissions.
If the House votes to approve the Senate’s
version without further amendment, the measure is sent directly to the
President for signature.
If the House amends the Senate bill, it must
return to the Senate for agreement before the deadline, which adds complexity
and risks missing the deadline.
