After a dozen vulnerable Republicans spent days hand-wringing over whether they would support $9.4 billion in Department of Government Efficiency cuts to international aid and public broadcasting, they caved on Thursday.
House Republicans voted largely along party lines to pass the measure, 214-212, with four Republicans joining every Democrat in voting against the legislation.
A group of more moderate House Republicans had been complaining about codifying some of these DOGE cuts, including $7.4 billion in international aid programs like the U.S. Agency for International Development, $1.1 billion in public broadcasting and $9 million from President George W. Bush’s legacy HIV-AIDS relief program, known as PEPFAR. Those had all been generally popular programs within the GOP until Elon Musk took his chainsaw to the federal bureaucracy.
But Republicans ultimately went along with the cuts — enough of them, anyway.
After holding the vote open for about 12 minutes, Reps. Don Bacon and Nick LaLota changed their votes from “no” to “yes.” In LaLota’s case, it took some personal lobbying from Speaker Mike Johnson, House Majority Whip Tom Emmer and a collection of other Republicans.
Reps. Mike Lawler and Young Kim, who held back their votes until it was clear Republicans would need them to get the bill over the line, also ultimately voted “yes,” too.
But Republican Reps. Mark Amodei, Brian Fitzpatrick, Nicole Malliotakis and Mike Turner voted “no,” despite a last-minute plea from President Donald Trump on social media.
“The Rescissions Bill is a NO BRAINER, and every single Republican in Congress should vote, “YES.” MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN,” Trump said in a Truth Social post, just minutes before the vote.
After the vote, LaLota suggested he withheld his vote not over the rescission bill, but over the reconciliation package. Specifically, LaLota is concerned the Senate might water down the state and local tax deduction that was crucial to getting his vote. LaLota said he spoke with Johnson about the state and local tax deduction and got some assurances.
“We had some private discussions and expectations that my constituents will get what they need,” LaLota said.
Moderates feared that, in Musk’s pursuit of savings, he hastily nixed access to medical treatments abroad and funding for popular news programs in their districts. They worried that by voting “yes” on Thursday, voters may perceive them as Musk’s co-conspirators, leaving them vulnerable to Democratic attacks.
“If they’re cutting things in regards to actual medical treatments, yeah, that is concerning,” Rep. David Joyce told NOTUS last week. (Joyce ultimately voted “yes.”)
Another point of contention was the $1.1 billion cuts from public broadcasting, which remains popular in many rural districts that Republicans represent.
“Furthermore, public broadcasting represents less than 0.01% of the federal budget, yet its impact reaches every congressional district,” Republican Rep. Mark Amodei said in a joint statement with Democratic Rep. Dan Goldman earlier this week. “Cutting this funding will not meaningfully reduce the deficit, but it will dismantle a trusted source of information for millions of Americans.”
But moderates also confronted a House GOP leadership that has been eager to put some legislative points on the board. Trump’s first months in office have been historically unproductive in Congress, despite Republicans controlling a trifecta.
Although Musk has fallen out of favor with Trumpworld — in spectacular fashion — Trump has lauded DOGE’s cost-cutting operation and has leaned on Republican lawmakers to make official a batch of Musk’s cuts to previously congressionally approved funds.
Moderates found themselves in the crosshairs. And while they chose the path of least resistance now — after all, Johnson immediately touted passage as a massive victory for his conference — they potentially face significant resistance on the campaign trail.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries blasted the bill to reporters Thursday morning, calling the package “reckless” and claiming it would “undermine America’s national security, hurt our ability to protect the American people in terms of their health, their safety and their well-being.”
“Republicans want to rip billions of dollars away from America’s efforts to keep her people safe and secure to satisfy some extreme ideological crusade related to a deeply unpopular effort formerly led by Elon Musk to devastate the American way of life,” he continued in a monologue that sounded perfectly tailored for future Republican attack ads.
It’s unclear, 23 weeks into the 119th Congress, exactly what moderate Republicans would be willing to vote against. A similar cohort of moderates repeatedly raised concerns about the party’s reconciliation package involving Medicaid cuts, food assistance funding slashes and clean energy credit rollbacks. Every moderate member voted for that bill anyway, even though they continue to complain about the legislation.
Now that the measure has passed the House, it will head to the Senate, where its path to Trump’s desk might be complicated. There are a handful of moderate Republicans who share the same concerns that their counterparts do in the House, including Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins.
But rescission legislation only needs 51 votes in the Senate, meaning Republicans could theoretically lose three of their own members and have Vice President JD Vance break a tie.
Still, lawmakers have talked about a lengthy amendments process for the rescission legislation, and Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Thursday he expects the bill “could be” tweaked by the Senate.
“The clock starts running, but we’ll do reconciliation first,” Thune told reporters. “So I would expect that the rescissions package probably would be a July time frame.”
—
Riley Rogerson and Daniella Diaz are reporters at NOTUS.