The Archive

IN THIS EDITION

The big gamble: Senate GOP presses ahead with ‘skinny’ budget plan

Senate GOP hawks watch their influence slip away

Chavez-DeRemer prepares for GOP pushback at hearing

Republicans get briefing on TikTok liability

Spending deal hung up over Dem demands for Trump limits

THE TOP

The big gamble: Senate GOP presses ahead with ‘skinny’ budget plan

Happy Wednesday morning.

Senate Republicans have kicked off their biggest gamble so far of the 119th Congress — beginning debate on a $300 billion-plus “skinny” budget resolution despite opposition from both Democrats and House Republicans.

By a 50-47 vote, Senate GOP leaders pushed through a motion on Tuesday night to start consideration of Senate Budget Committee Chair Lindsey Graham’s (R-S.C.) resolution. The measure would authorize $340 billion in new Pentagon and border security money, including funding for President Donald Trump’s border wall between the United States and Mexico.

It would also make changes to federal energy policy while being fully offset by cuts in mandatory spending.

Senate Republicans have to pass the budget resolution to unlock Trump’s legislative agenda. Yet doing so allows Democrats to offer a slew of politically charged amendments on potential cuts to Medicaid, food stamps and other social safety net programs and argue they finance tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. (More on this below.)

The Senate GOP budget plan would also require passage of a second reconciliation bill to extend the 2017 Trump tax cuts, the president’s top legislative priority.

During a vote-a-rama later this week, Democratic senators can offer an unlimited number of amendments intended to force vulnerable senators to take politically difficult votes.

Top Senate Republicans insist they’re ready for this debate.

“We’re doing this to secure the border, unleash American energy and to make sure we have peace through strength,” said Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso of the expected Democratic amendments.

“These are three things that were completely ignored by the Democrats, which is why they lost the presidency and why they lost the House and the Senate.”

However, House Republicans remain adamant that they want to do “one big, beautiful bill” rather than two. Speaker Mike Johnson and other senior House Republicans don’t believe they can pass two reconciliation bills given their razor-thin margin of control. Johnson took a shot at Senate Republicans on Tuesday, tweeting that the House GOP budget resolution “implements President Trump’s FULL America First agenda, not just parts of it with promises to come back later for the rest.”

Johnson has said he won’t put the Senate GOP resolution on the floor. And without approval from the House, Senate Republicans can’t actually enact any of the new funding they’re proposing.

We’ll also note that Trump said during a Fox News interview alongside mega-billionaire Elon Musk that Republicans wouldn’t touch Medicaid, in addition to repeating his assertion that Medicare and Social Security won’t be touched. But it would be nearly impossible to achieve the kinds of spending cuts Republicans need to achieve without cutting Medicaid.

News on Dems’ plans: Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has been on the receiving end of intense criticism over his strategy to counter Trump in the opening days of the new administration.

But those same critics — mostly outside progressive groups — have joined several calls with Schumer in recent days to lend support for the New York Democrat’s messaging plan for this week’s vote-a-rama. These calls have included leaders of the Center for American Progress, the AFL-CIO, and the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, among others.

Everything Democrats do during the vote-a-rama, Schumer told us in an interview Tuesday, is intended to advance their core argument that Republicans are seeking to give tax breaks to the richest Americans and force everyone else to pay the price.

“It’s a first step. It’s not going to change things overnight,” Schumer acknowledged of the Democratic efforts. “But, A, it’s going to put the Republicans in a very awkward position. B, if we keep hammering away at this issue, we will drive Trump’s numbers down.”

Democratic amendments will also center on some of the most controversial moves of Trump’s first four weeks in office. These range from DOGE and mass layoffs of federal workers, Musk, the OMB funding freeze, the firings of inspectors general and more.

Even though the GOP budget resolution is only for border security, defense spending and energy policy, the chief focus for Democrats will be on taxes and how extending tax cuts for wealthier Americans — which are a slice of the tax cuts up for renewal — will impact the rest of the country.

“This gives us direction, focus and some degree of real hope,” Schumer added.

Also: Thune told reporters that House Republicans’ budget resolution that calls for $4.5 trillion of room for spending on tax cuts “doesn’t allow for” the permanent extension of the 2017 Trump tax cuts that he and fellow GOP senators are pushing for.

“That’ll have to be changed,” Thune said.

Without using a scoring option that would consider current policy extensions cost-free, it’s not politically feasible to lock in tax cuts beyond the next 10 years. As we’ve told you, disagreement on the tax instructions is part of why it’s not so simple for the House and Senate to align on a reconciliation strategy right now.

— John Bresnahan, Andrew Desiderio and Laura Weiss

Want to make sure your whole office has the full Punchbowl News experience? We have team plans available for companies, organizations, classes, Capitol Hill offices and more. Fill out this form and find out if your team is eligible for a discount.

Don’t miss our special edition, the 2025 Tax Preview. Check your inboxes and our website later this morning for the latest news on reconciliation, President Donald Trump’s tax wish list and the looming battle on Capitol Hill.

WASHINGTON X THE WORLD

Senate GOP hawks watch their influence slip away

Senate Republicans are watching as President Donald Trump is rapidly and systematically dismantling key tenets of U.S. foreign policy they’ve consistently supported — helping Ukraine defend itself against Russia and bolstering NATO.

As Trump openly disparages Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and echoes Russia’s calls for new Ukrainian elections, GOP senators are cautioning that they view the Trump team’s talks with Russian officials as simply preliminary. They’re willing to give their former colleague, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, some leeway to try to bring the Ukraine war to an end.

But many of these GOP senators are clearly wary of a lopsided deal that favors Russia. They also want Ukrainian and European leaders to be at the negotiating table, even as Trump insists they shouldn’t be.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune told us in a brief interview Tuesday that he views the U.S.-Russia talks, which took place in Saudi Arabia, as a “work in progress.”

“I’m willing to give [Rubio] some space and some time to figure this out. But obviously, the Ukrainians have to be there — and the Europeans for that matter, too,” Thune said.

Yet Trump on Tuesday dismissed the notion that Ukraine should be involved in the talks, a stunning comment about a country that has lost tens of thousands of soldiers and seen many of its major cities attacked or destroyed. Trump went on to criticize Zelensky and falsely assert that Ukraine, not Russia, “started” the war. This has been a main talking point of Russian state media throughout the nearly three-year conflict.

“You’ve been there for three years. You should’ve ended it in three years,” Trump said of Zelensky. “You should have never started it. You could have made a deal.”

The implication here is that the United States should have never helped the Ukrainians defend themselves from a Russian onslaught — a policy that, at least at the outset, had overwhelming GOP support.

Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.) told us it’s his “fervent hope” that Trump is able to deliver a “good deal,” meaning Russia’s encroachments in Ukraine aren’t “rewarded” with territorial gains. Yet given Trump’s comments, it’s difficult to envision him being on the same page as Senate Republicans about what constitutes a “good” deal.

Since his return to the Oval Office just a month ago, Trump has ripped up decades of GOP foreign policy doctrine. As a result, the party’s traditional defense hawks are seeing their influence wane.

On Ukraine, Trump promised a quick end to a war that has cost the United States tens of billions of dollars while growing ever more unpopular with the GOP base. And Trump’s consistently deferential posture toward Russia and Russian President Vladimir Putin will only make things more awkward for Republican hawks.

“Well I disagree with that,” Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), who just returned from Kyiv, said of Trump’s rejection of a Ukrainian role in the negotiations.

“They were invaded by Putin and he’s responsible for murder, rape, torture, kidnapping of an untold number of Ukrainians. They’ve got to be at the table.”

Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), who has long opposed the idea of negotiating with Putin, called the Russian president “a war criminal who should be in jail for the rest of his life, if not executed.” Wicker said Putin cannot be trusted in any sort of negotiation.

Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) had a terse response when we asked what he thought of Trump saying Ukraine “started” the conflict.

“I will simply make one statement: Russia attacked Ukraine,” Rounds said.

— Andrew Desiderio and John Bresnahan

NOMS, NOMS, NOMS

Chavez-DeRemer prepares for GOP pushback at hearing

Lori Chavez-DeRemer, President Donald Trump’s pick to lead the Labor Department, has her hearing on Wednesday in front of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. And she’s likely going to need Democratic help to reach the floor, which we previewed for you last month. Here’s what to watch:

Republican opposition: Chavez-DeRemer, a former one-term House Republican from Oregon, has attracted some loud GOP opposition, most notably from Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).

If Paul votes no in the HELP committee, Chavez-DeRemer will need Democratic votes to advance to the Senate floor.

Paul is unhappy that Chavez-DeRemer co-sponsored the PRO Act while in the House, a pro-labor piece of legislation that angered Republicans who hail from “right-to-work” states.

The Kentucky Republican reiterated on Tuesday that Chavez-DeRemer’s PRO Act support is “a deal-killer” for him. But Paul wouldn’t commit to opposing the nominee in committee, only saying to reporters he wanted to see how the hearing goes.

Chavez-DeRemer has been telling senators in her private meetings that she doesn’t want to invalidate state “right-to-work” laws.

“I would be surprised if many Republican senators voted against one of the president’s picks, when I haven’t heard anybody say that she’s not qualified,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) told us.

Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) said Chavez-DeRemer’s pluses outweigh any negative feelings he has toward her support for the PRO Act.

How Democrats are feeling: A number of HELP Democrats told us they are inclined to support Chavez-DeRemer, who’s widely seen as one of Trump’s more moderate Cabinet picks.

“She’s obviously an interesting candidate because she supports the PRO Act,” Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) said. “At least on the surface, I see a lot of good about her.”

Hickenlooper’s favorable opinion aligns with what we heard from Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) earlier in the process.

But at least one Democrat — Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) — is opposing Chavez-DeRemer to make a broader point about his opposition to Trump’s stunning overhaul of the federal government. Markey said his decision to vote no has nothing to do with Chavez-DeRemer’s qualifications.

What she’ll say: In excerpts of her opening statement that we obtained, Chavez-DeRemer pledges to “implement President Trump’s policy vision” of “ensuring a level playing field for businesses, unions, and most importantly, the American worker.”

The labor secretary nominee will also nod to the fact that Trump made big gains among Teamsters, Black and Latino voters in 2024.

“They are calling for action, progress, and leadership that puts the American worker first,” Chavez-DeRemer will say.

— Max Cohen

SPENDING WARS

Spending deal hung up over Dem demands for Trump limits

Top House and Senate appropriators remain deadlocked over fiscal year 2025 spending, unable to reach agreement on a topline figure for the 12 annual bills, even as the threat of a government shutdown grows.

The chief sticking point remains Democrats’ demand for language binding President Donald Trump to spend funds as appropriated by Congress, according to sources in both parties. Republicans refuse to give in on that point, saying they won’t do anything to limit Trump’s options. Federal agencies will run out of money after March 14.

Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) said she still believes a deal is possible, although the rapidly approaching deadline has become an issue.

“I do, although I am becoming increasingly concerned about the small amount of time that is left before a shutdown would kick in,” Collins said Tuesday night when asked whether she believes a bipartisan compromise is achievable.

Collins added that she and House Appropriations Committee Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) “made another offer over the weekend. It is more than fair. And we’ve yet to hear back from the Democrats.”

The dispute over government funding comes as official Washington is in an uproar over the Trump administration’s decision to fire tens of thousands of federal employees as part of mega-billionaire Elon Musk’s DOGE initiative. Lawmakers in both parties are stunned by the size and speed of the layoffs, which are spreading across numerous agencies and departments.

GOP efforts to push through massive reconciliation bills in order to extend the 2017 Trump tax cuts have also angered Democrats.

But while DOGE and reconciliation get the headlines, the dispute over FY 2025 spending may cause the more immediate crisis.

Sources in both parties say the two sides aren’t that far apart on money, but they remain deeply divided over impoundment and Trump’s ability to redirect — or refuse to spend — congressionally approved funding that has been signed into law. Democrats insist nothing short of ironclad agreements could restrain Trump and OMB Director Russ Vought from impounding funds approved by Congress even after Trump has signed spending bills into law.

– John Bresnahan and Samantha Handler

MOMENTS

CLIPS