Friday, 17 July 2026, 7:39
House Republicans on Wednesday released a fiscal 2027 budget blueprint that would unlock up to $95 billion in new spending, primarily to fund the ongoing Iran war, provide farm aid, and enact strict voter ID requirements. The partisan package, which relies on the reconciliation process to avoid a Senate filibuster, represents a high-stakes gamble ahead of the midterm elections. The 47-page outline is a sequel to the massive tax and spending cut bill that President Donald Trump signed into law last year. House Speaker Mike Johnson pushed ahead after meeting with Trump at the White House this week in what will be the Republicans’ calling card to voters this fall heading into the midterm elections, with control of Congress at stake. “Safeguarding American elections and strengthening our national defense are the most basic responsibilities of Congress,” Johnson said in a statement. Johnson welcomed the chance to again use a legislative process that would allow Republicans to overpower Democratic objections and eventually approve legislation on a party-line vote, saying the Democrats won’t be able to block the GOP’s priorities “any longer.” Democrats, however, have argued against the sharply partisan path, particularly for matters of war funding.
The resolution instructs four House committees to draft legislation by September 11. The largest allocation goes to the Armed Services Committee, with a target of $60 billion. The Intelligence Committee receives $13 billion, Agriculture $12 billion, and the House Administration Committee $10 billion—the latter focused on enacting the SAVE America Act, which would require proof of citizenship to register to vote and photo ID at polling places. Combined, the defense-related spending totals $73 billion, though this falls far short of President Trump’s requested $350 billion for a $1.5 trillion defense budget. The bulk of the $95 billion would go for the U.S.-led war against Iran, reflecting the White House’s request for supplemental spending to rebuild stockpiles and fund classified programs, among other expenses related to Operation Epic Fury. The plan is on par with a request the White House submitted to Congress last month, as the Iran war drags past four months. But it falls far short of the $350 billion increase the White House proposed earlier this year to boost defense resources. Approving extra war funding will be difficult, even among Republicans supporting the Iran effort, as the nation confronts staggering annual deficits reaching nearly $2 trillion this year.
Notably, the resolution makes no attempt to pay for the new spending with cuts to other programs, despite repeated GOP promises to curb fraud and waste. This has drawn sharp criticism from fiscal conservatives. Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) called it “DOA” on social media, accusing leadership of relying on “the most hidden and regressive tax—inflation.” The fight underscores the competing pressures on Republicans as they try to show voters action on national security, agriculture and election security while also maintaining their claim to fiscal discipline. Budget watchdogs also slammed the lack of offsets. Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said the plan could add more than $100 billion to the national debt after factoring in interest costs. “To require no offsets in this budget is baffling,” MacGuineas said. “The federal government is projected to spend more than $78 trillion before interest costs over the next decade, and Congress cannot bring itself to find 0.1% of that total to cut or any revenue to raise?”
For California’s Central Valley, including Fresno County, the $12 billion in farm aid is especially significant. The region’s agricultural economy has been battered by higher input costs, retaliatory tariffs, and water shortages. Local farmers and lawmakers are watching closely, as the aid could provide a crucial lifeline ahead of the midterms. However, the lack of offsetting cuts raises concerns about long-term fiscal sustainability.
This would be the third reconciliation bill of the current Congress, following last year’s tax and spending law and a spring immigration enforcement package. The process allows passage with a simple majority in the Senate, but strict rules—like the Byrd Rule—limit what can be included. Previous efforts to attach non-budgetary policies have been stripped by the Senate parliamentarian. It’s unclear how the budget package would impose or fund voting law changes and if any alterations could be made before the midterm elections, with many state elections processes already underway. Trump has insisted that Republicans approve the elections overhaul bill, which has passed the House but does not have the votes to overcome the 60-vote threshold in the Senate. So Republicans are looking to get parts of it through the arduous reconciliation process that allows both chambers to pass a bill with a simple majority. Vice President JD Vance met with House Republicans in the afternoon, saying he wanted to give them a message of unity. He said they’ve accomplished a lot, but needed to stick together to get “one very big thing” done. “We’ve got a good piece of legislation to support the troops, support the farmers and get SAVE America Act passed,” Vance said.
The budget resolution faces an uncertain path. With a razor-thin House majority, Speaker Mike Johnson can afford only a few defections. Democrats are united in opposition, and even some Republicans are wary of the war funding and voting restrictions. The House Budget Committee is set to mark up the resolution on Thursday, with a floor vote expected next week. Overall, passage of the package would be a lengthy process, with much of the action taking place after lawmakers return from their August recess and during the heart of election season. Johnson told reporters his goal is for both chambers to pass the budget framework before lawmakers leave Washington for the August recess. Democrats are expected to overwhelmingly oppose whatever final product emerges and force Republicans to take votes on scores of difficult amendments.
The resolution marks the opening salvo in Republicans’ effort to use the budget reconciliation process one final time to advance key GOP priorities while they still control both chambers of Congress and the White House. Because reconciliation bills can pass the Senate with a simple majority, the process would allow Republicans to sidestep a Democratic filibuster. The budget resolution serves as a blueprint, setting parameters for a more detailed reconciliation bill. The House Budget Committee is scheduled to mark up the budget resolution Thursday, kicking off what GOP leaders hope will be their final reconciliation push amid the high-stakes 2026 midterm elections. “Republicans were sent to Washington on a mission to reverse the failed policies of the socialist Democrats and restore the greatness of America,” House Budget Committee Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) said in a statement. “On Thursday, House Republicans will unlock a third budget reconciliation to stop Democrat obstruction, support our troops, and safeguard the integrity of our elections. We will use every tool and resource at our disposal to govern our great nation and deliver on behalf of the freedom-loving people who gave us unified Republican leadership,” he added.
The defense funding is expected to bolster military readiness, strengthen the defense industrial base and replenish U.S. weapons stockpiles as the military conflict with Iran drags on. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and House Republicans received a briefing from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth Tuesday evening on the package’s defense provisions.
But the broader reconciliation bill, which does not include offsets for spending, is already drawing skepticism from fiscal hawks who have long insisted that any new spending be paired with cuts elsewhere. Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio), a fiscal conservative, said in a post on X that his prediction on the budget resolution is that it will be “DOA” — dead on arrival — signaling the resistance Johnson could face from his right flank. In another post, Davidson wrote that, “There is no will to spend less or honestly pay for massive spending. Deficits, Debt, and Debasement all the way to the crash site. Nothing stops this train. Make a plan.” Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), the House Freedom Caucus’ policy chair and a member of the House Budget Committee, had previously acknowledged the tension between defense spending and conservatives’ push for fiscal restraint. “People like me want to pay for everything, so you know getting a little hung up on some of those issues. But you know, if it’s a reasonably targeted amount on defense, and we’re dealing with these — you know, trying to force the Senate’s hand on SAVE America, then we’ll see if we can get it done,” he told reporters Tuesday, before the resolution was released.
“We’re going to provide certainty for our food supply. Food security is national security. Every year, especially the last four or five years, because of high input cost, high inflation, droughts, and things that are outside of the producer’s control, they’ve needed some economic assistance,” Arrington told reporters on Wednesday. “We need some, you know, emergency funding for our food supply, food supply resilience, certainty for our producers, so that we don’t disrupt, you know, something that is critical to our national security,” Arrington added. The House had previously passed a farm bill in April reauthorizing agricultural and food programs for the next five years. The legislation would “expand investments in rural communities, bring science-backed management back to our national forests, and restore regulatory certainty in the interstate marketplace,” among other things, according to the House Agriculture Committee. However, the Senate has yet to mark up its own version of the bill. Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.), chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee, told Politico he’s still “working on” the timeline for marking up the bill.
Johnson had previously floated the idea of a grant program that would create a fund for states to tap to implement provisions of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act. It is an attempt to work around the Senate’s Byrd Rule, which sets strict budget
The House has passed a different version of the SAVE Act separately, but it has stalled in the Senate, where some Republicans have warned that it lacks support and may not qualify for the fast-track budget process party leaders hope to use. That process allows certain tax and spending bills to pass the 100-member Senate by a simple majority, avoiding the higher, 60-vote threshold usually needed to overcome Democratic opposition.
The budget resolution roughly lines up with an $87.6 billion supplemental funding request the White House sent last month, which included $67.1 billion for the military. The new framework does not include the larger $350 billion Pentagon funding boost Republicans have proposed as they aim for an unprecedented $1.5 trillion defense budget. "A more ambitious effort was narrowed to address concerns of conservatives about adding to the deficit," the Associated Press reports.
Racing to pass the plan: The narrower resolution is scheduled for a markup in the House Budget Committee on Thursday morning, as Johnson and Republican leaders race to try to pass the measure before a six-week August recess. The House and Senate both need to adopt the same budget framework to unlock the reconciliation process Republicans want to use. The aggressive timeline faces plenty of potential obstacles, though, as some in the party raise objections to the budget plan.
A 'mockery' of the budget process: Fiscal hawks, for example, still want cuts to offset at least portions of the proposed new spending. The package includes no such cuts or revenue increases, meaning that it would allow for $95 billion in increased deficits through 2036. That's not likely to change at this point. Rep. Brendan Boyle, the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee, criticized the Republican plan for potentially adding billions to the debt in support of an unpopular war. And budget watchers slammed the lack of offsets. "Lawmakers have once again decided to abandon any semblance of fiscal discipline and allow themselves to add more to our nation's already massive national debt," said Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a nonprofit that advocates for deficit reduction. "This budget resolution continues the recent trend of making a mockery out of the budget process - it's a false budget purely intended to shuffle through increases in defense funding and other priorities." MacGuineas said that the GOP plan could add more than $100 billion to the national debt after factoring in interest costs. "To require no offsets in this budget is baffling," MacGuineas said. "The federal government is projected to spend more than $78 trillion before interest costs over the next decade, and Congress cannot bring itself to find 0.1% of that total to cut or any revenue to raise?"
House Republican leaders are reportedly emphasizing the Pentagon's need for a speedy infusion of funding given the escalation of fighting with Iran and arguing that any effort to provide that funding via a more traditional bipartisan process would involve additional Democratic demands. Democratic votes would be needed to get any regular appropriations bill or an emergency supplemental package through the Senate.
On Thursday, the House Budget Committee advanced the $95 billion package on a party-line vote of 20-14. Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington framed the proposal as one last push to deliver for voters ahead of the midterm elections. With Iran war funding making up the bulk of the package, some $60 billion, Arrington acknowledged that people can debate “why we’re there” in the overseas conflict. But he said the money is needed for basic supplies — “just the bombs, bullets and battlefield readiness for our men and women in uniform to finish the fight successfully and return home safely — that’s it.”
Democrats offered more than a dozen amendments during the hourslong Budget Committee session, including proposals to reverse healthcare cuts, reinstate food stamp funding, and offset costs with immigration enforcement funds. Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) blamed the high costs of living on the Iran war, saying every time Americans open their refrigerators or go to the gas pump they are “paying for a war that should never have been started.”
Next steps are highly volatile. The House holds a rare Saturday pro forma session to file the resolution for consideration next week. Johnson can only lose a few detractors on his side of the aisle. But the resolution would also have to be agreed on by the Senate, and Republican senators have largely panned the House effort. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said senators have “a lot of questions” about it – from defense hawks concerned about the military to deficit hawks who want to offset costs. “It’s a very uneven path,” he said. “We’ll see what the House can execute on,” but “I can’t make any guarantees over here.” Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), expected to take over the Senate Budget Committee after the sudden death of Sen. Lindsey Graham, has been a leading budget hawk concerned about the nation’s rising deficits.
The $12 billion in farm aid is intended to help farmers hurt by President Donald Trump’s trade war, according to the new source.
Senate Republicans are expressing strong opposition to the House GOP’s $95 billion budget reconciliation package. Senate conservatives are calling for the cost to be offset with spending cuts, while appropriators complain that passing another major spending bill outside regular appropriations would undercut their authority. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said, “I’m dubious about any reconciliation. I think the House is wishful thinking. Just talk to the appropriators over here. They don’t like reconciliation because it bypasses appropriations. I’d be shocked if it’s possible.” Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) threatened to use every tool to stall any package that would force states to implement new voting rules before the midterm election, calling it a “charade” and “distraction.” Senate Majority Leader John Thune expressed skepticism about moving a reconciliation package shortly before the election, warning it would be “risky” and asking, “Is the juice worth the squeeze?” Thune noted that defense hawks want more than $60 billion, fiscal hawks want it paid for, and Democrats will offer poison pill amendments. He questioned whether $60 billion in new defense money is worth the political peril. The House GOP budget framework came together over the weekend at Camp David, with House Republicans working with White House staff. House Budget Committee Chair Jodey Arrington said he was consulting closely with Senate Budget Committee Chair Lindsey Graham before Graham’s sudden death, complicating the path. Arrington acknowledged he hasn’t coordinated yet with Senate Republican leaders. Fiscal conservatives including incoming Senate Budget Committee Chair Ron Johnson, Bill Cassidy, Rick Scott, and Rand Paul want to offset the cost.
