As House Republicans sprint to advance a bill codifying $9.4 billion of Department of Government Efficiency funding cuts this week, vulnerable Republicans are in the precarious position of slashing programs that were once championed by their own party.
Speaker Mike Johnson is aiming to hold a vote as soon as this week, likely Thursday, on the rescissions package. But he could face problems from moderate Republicans, who have expressed concern about rushing to cut international aid and public broadcasting.
“We want to make sure that we meet the objectives of saving, and the approach that I’ve had of not funding programs that are failing for the sake of funding them. Also, not gutting programs that are working for the sake of gutting them,” Rep. Juan Ciscomani, a moderate Republican on the Appropriations Committee, told NOTUS last week. “We have to comb through the whole thing carefully.”
Perhaps the most politically fraught measure is a cut of at least $9 million from the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR. The program was created in 2003 to address the global HIV-AIDS epidemic and is considered key to President George W. Bush’s legacy.
The rescissions package targets an additional $7.4 billion from other foreign assistance programs like the U.S. Agency for International Development and the United Nations Children’s Fund — programs that Republicans once embraced. The legislation will also slash $1.1 billion from public broadcasting, which remains popular in several red districts.
The question for Johnson now is whether moderates are prepared to swallow the cuts — or plan to put up a fight. But if history repeats itself, it’s unlikely they’d block final passage of the bill over their concerns.
There’s not much time to figure it out. Johnson is eyeing a vote on the Rule by Tuesday to advance the bill, barring any complications on the whip count.
Ciscomani isn’t the only House Republican sounding less than sold on the package.
“If PEPFAR is in there, that is a red line,” Rep. Don Bacon told Semafor last week.
Before House Republican leadership officially published the bill text, Rep. David Joyce told NOTUS that he is also worried about the specifics of PEPFAR cuts.
“If they’re cutting things in regards to actual medical treatments, yeah, that is concerning,” Joyce said.
A spokesperson for the Office of Management and Budget said that the cuts target “$3 million for circumcision, vasectomies, and condoms in Zambia” and “$5.1 million to strengthen the ‘resilience of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans gender, intersex, and queer global movements.’”
Assuming full attendance, Johnson can only afford to lose three votes when the bill hits the floor, meaning it would only take resistance from a few moderates to derail his whip operation.
For the most part, House Republicans appear prepared to back the rescissions package, arguing that the good of deficit reduction outweighs the potential harm caused by cutting the programs.
“I’m currently running a $2 trillion deficit, and I need to cut some spending,” Appropriations Chair Tom Cole told NOTUS. “That means, sooner or later, cutting some things you actually really like, but they’re nice to have, not have to have.”
Cole called himself a “big supporter” of PEPFAR, saying that “if we can find a way to achieve the cuts without doing that, I would prefer to do it.”
But, he added, “Right now, I’m going to have an up or down choice. In that case, I’m gonna vote for it. And we’ll see what we can do later on in the process to correct anything we think went too far.”
Rep. Joe Wilson — a veteran member of Congress who voted to pass PEPFAR in 2003 — told NOTUS he, too, welcomed the rescissions package.
“It’s terrific,” Wilson said. “Any rescissions package will have things that people don’t support. But the bottom line, it addresses so many different issues, mainly restraining the growth of government.”
PEPFAR isn’t the legislation’s only thorny policy area, although some moderates indicated they’d be willing to back the package despite concerns.
Rep. Mike Bost told NOTUS he’s wary of the public broadcasting cuts potentially affecting his southern Illinois district. Still, he said he would back the package.
“The whole package itself would probably outweigh that,” Bost said.
Rep. Mike Simpson, a senior appropriator, told reporters Thursday that while he’s supportive of his home state of Idaho’s public television, he doesn’t think “in the long run the rescissions are going to hurt them.”
Even if House Republicans pass the package this week, it’s unclear whether the Senate is prepared to do the same. A rescission is privileged in the Senate through the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, which means the legislation would just need 50 votes. But Senate moderates are cautious about the specific cuts. Sens. Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski have already voiced opposition to the PEPFAR funding clawbacks.
But if there’s a bright spot for Johnson, it’s that the faction of his caucus that has been his biggest impediment to advancing legislation — conservatives — are the most eager about the prospect of cutting costs.
“You guys know me,” Rep. Chip Roy, one of Johnson’s chief agitators, told reporters last week. “What are they going to send up to rescind that I’m not going to support?”
This story has been updated with further details on the timing of the vote.
—
Riley Rogerson and Daniella Diaz are reporters at NOTUS. NOTUS reporter Reese Gorman contributed reporting