Senate GOP prepares to move first funding package
GOP lawmakers are discussing packaging together up to four bills, though the size of that package could shrink if including a certain bill could threaten to bog down the chamber's ability to pass it. Leaders could, for instance, decide against including the fiscal 2026 bill to fund the departments of Commerce and Justice, which has been plagued by intraparty squabbling over an amendment that would bar funds for relocating FBI headquarters.
'I hope we get a four-bill package pulled together and get to the floor next week,' said Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.), a leadership ally and member of the Appropriations Committee, adding that he believes there is a 'good chance' that this will happen.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune hasn't made a decision about whether or not to start moving the first government funding bill on the floor next week, but wants to get one funding package across the finish line before the chamber leaves for the August recess that is scheduled to begin in early August.
Asked about next week's schedule, Thune indicated to reporters that, in addition to confirming more of President Donald Trump's nominees, Republicans are looking at either getting the ball rolling on the annual defense authorization bill or moving government funding legislation.
In addition to the measure to fund Commerce and Justice, the Senate Appropriations Committee has approved three other bills funding the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Department of Agriculture and the legislative branch.
Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) has stressed wanting to focus on moving bipartisan funding bills and has a good relationship with Sen. Patty Murray of Washington, the top Democrat on the panel. Thune, on Thursday, also said that 'we plan to move approps bills that will have cooperation from the Democrats.'
Collins on Thursday told reporters it was up to Thune about how to proceed but that she would like to see the first so-called minibus of spending measures on the floor before August recess.
Still, Congress is expected to need a short-term funding patch to keep the government open past the end of September. And Democrats are actively worried that Senate Republicans will be pressured by the administration and the House to set aside the appropriations process and either fund the government entirely through stopgap measures and pass more party-line spending cuts like those included in the rescissions bill the Senate advanced early Thursday morning.
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), a member of the Appropriations Committee, acknowledged that an appropriations package could come to the floor as soon as next week, but suggested it was largely a waste of time.
'There is no approps process, it's as dead as Jimmy Hoffa,' Kennedy said. 'The Appropriations Committee has been a pointless exercise for a while, everybody knows that. Nobody wants to admit it.'
Jennifer Scholtes contributed to this report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
29 minutes ago
Women legislators fight for 'potty parity'
For female state lawmakers in Kentucky, choosing when to go to the bathroom has long required careful calculation. There are only two bathroom stalls for women on the third floor of the Kentucky Statehouse, where the House and Senate chambers are located. Female legislators — 41 of the 138 member Legislature — needing a reprieve during a lengthy floor session have to weigh the risk of missing an important debate or a critical vote. None of their male colleagues face the same dilemma because, of course, multiple men's bathrooms are available. The Legislature even installed speakers in the men's bathrooms to broadcast the chamber's events so they don't miss anything important. In a pinch, House Speaker David Osborne allows women to use his single stall bathroom in the chamber, but even that attracts long lines. 'You get the message very quickly: This place was not really built for us,' said Rep. Lisa Willner, a Democrat from Louisville, reflecting on the photos of former lawmakers, predominantly male, that line her office. The issue of potty parity may seem comic, but its impact runs deeper than uncomfortably full bladders, said Kathryn Anthony, professor emerita at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's School of Architecture. 'It's absolutely critical because the built environment reflects our culture and reflects our population,' said Anthony, who has testified on the issue before Congress. 'And if you have an environment that is designed for half the population but forgets about the other half, you have a group of disenfranchised people and disadvantaged people.' There is hope for Kentucky's lady legislators seeking more chamber potties. A $300 million renovation of the 155-year-old Capitol — scheduled for completion by 2028 at the soonest — aims to create more women's restrooms and end Kentucky's bathroom disparity. The Bluegrass State is among the last to add bathrooms to aging statehouses that were built when female legislators were not a consideration. In the $392 million renovation of the Georgia Capitol, expanding bathroom access is a priority, said Gerald Pilgrim, chief of staff with the state's Building Authority. It will introduce female facilities on the building's fourth floor, where the public galleries are located, and will add more bathrooms throughout to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. 'We know there are not enough bathrooms,' he said. There's no federal law requiring bathroom access for all genders in public buildings. Some 20 states have statutes prescribing how many washrooms buildings must have, but historical buildings — such as statehouses — are often exempt. Over the years, as the makeup of state governments has changed, statehouses have added bathrooms for women. When Tennessee's Capitol opened in 1859, the architects designed only one restroom — for men only — situated on the ground floor. According to legislative librarian Eddie Weeks, the toilet could only be "flushed' when enough rainwater had been collected. 'The room was famously described as 'a stench in the nostrils of decency,'' Weeks said in an email. Today, Tennessee's Capitol has a female bathroom located between the Senate and House chambers. It's in a cramped hall under a staircase, sparking comparisons to Harry Potter's cupboard bedroom, and it contains just two stalls. The men also just have one bathroom on the same floor, but it has three urinals and three stalls. Democratic Rep. Aftyn Behn, who was elected in 2023, said she wasn't aware of the disparity in facilities until contacted by The Associated Press. 'I've apparently accepted that waiting in line for a two-stall closet under the Senate balcony is just part of the job,' she said. 'I had to fight to get elected to a legislature that ranks dead last for female representation, and now I get to squeeze into a space that feels like it was designed by someone who thought women didn't exist -- or at least didn't have bladders,' Behn said. The Maryland State House is the country's oldest state capitol in continuous legislative use, operational since the late 1700s. Archivists say its bathroom facilities were initially intended for white men only because desegregation laws were still in place. Women's restrooms were added after 1922, but they were insufficient for the rising number of women elected to office. Delegate Pauline Menes complained about the issue so much that House Speaker Thomas Lowe appointed her chair of the 'Ladies Rest Room Committee,' and presented her with a fur covered toilet seat in front of her colleagues in 1972. She launched the women's caucus the following year. It wasn't until 2019 that House Speaker Adrienne A. Jones, the first woman to secure the top position, ordered the addition of more women's restrooms along with a gender-neutral bathroom and a nursing room for mothers in the Lowe House Office Building. As more women were elected nationwide in the 20th century, some found creative workarounds. In Nebraska's unicameral Legislature, female senators didn't get a dedicated restroom until 1988, when a facility was added in the chamber's cloakroom. There had previously been a single restroom in the senate lounge, and Sen. Shirley Marsh, who served for some 16 years, would ask a State Patrol trooper to guard the door while she used it, said Brandon Metzler, the Legislature's clerk. In Colorado, female House representatives and staff were so happy to have a restroom added in the chamber's hallway in 1987 that they hung a plaque to honor then-state Rep. Arie Taylor, the state's first Black woman legislator, who pushed for the facility. The plaque, now inside a women's bathroom in the Capitol, reads: 'Once here beneath the golden dome if nature made a call, we'd have to scramble from our seats and dash across the hall ... Then Arie took the mike once more to push an urge organic, no longer do we fret and squirm or cross our legs in panic.' The poem concludes: 'In mem'ry of you, Arie (may you never be forgot), from this day forth we'll call that room the Taylor Chamber Pot.' New Mexico Democratic state Rep. Liz Thomson recalled missing votes in the House during her first year in office in 2013 because there was no women's restroom in the chamber's lounge. An increase in female lawmakers — New Mexico elected the largest female majority Legislature in U.S. history in 2024 — helped raise awareness of the issue, she said. 'It seems kind of like fluff, but it really isn't,' she said. 'To me, it really talks about respect and inclusion.' The issue is not exclusive to statehouses. In the U.S. Capitol, the first restroom for congresswomen didn't open until 1962. While a facility was made available for female U.S. Senators in 1992, it wasn't until 2011 that the House chamber opened a bathroom to women lawmakers. Jeannette Rankin of Montana was the first woman elected to a congressional seat. That happened in 1916. Willner insists that knowing the Kentucky Capitol wasn't designed for women gives her extra impetus to stand up and make herself heard. 'This building was not designed for me," she said. "Well, guess what? I'm here.' ___ ____
29 minutes ago
As ADA turns 35, groups fighting for disability rights could see funds slashed
TOPEKA, Kan. -- Nancy Jensen believes she'd still be living in an abusive group home if it wasn't shut down in 2004 with the help of the Disability Rights Center of Kansas, which for decades has received federal money to look out for Americans with disabilities. But the flow of funding under the Trump administration is now in question, disability rights groups nationwide say, dampening their mood as Saturday marks the 35th anniversary of the landmark Americans with Disabilities Act. Federal dollars pay for much of their work, including helping people who seek government-funded services and lawsuits now pushing Iowa and Texas toward better community services. Documents outlining President Donald Trump's budget proposals show they would zero out funds earmarked for three grants to disability rights centers and slash funding for a fourth. Congress' first discussion of them, by the Senate Appropriations Committee, is set for Thursday, but the centers fear losing more than 60% of their federal dollars. The threat of cuts comes as the groups expect more demand for help after Republicans' tax and budget law complicated Medicaid health coverage with a new work-reporting requirement. There's also the sting of the timing: this year is the 50th anniversary of another federal law that created the network of state groups to protect people with disabilities, and Trump's proposals represent the largest potential cuts in that half-century, advocates said. The groups are authorized to make unannounced visits to group homes and interview residents alone. 'You're going to have lots of people with disabilities lost,' said Jensen, now president of Colorado's advisory council for federal funding of efforts to protect people with mental illnesses. She worries people with disabilities will have 'no backstop' for fighting housing discrimination or seeking services at school or accommodations at work. The potential budget savings are a shaving of copper from each federal tax penny. The groups receive not quite $180 million a year — versus $1.8 trillion in discretionary spending. The president's Office of Management and Budget didn't respond to an email seeking a response to the disability rights groups' criticism. But in budget documents, the administration argued its proposals would give states needed flexibility. The U.S. Department of Education said earmarking funds for disability rights centers created an unnecessary administrative burden for states. Trump's top budget adviser, Russell Vought, told senators in a letter that a review of 2025 spending showed too much went to 'niche' groups outside government. 'We also considered, for each program, whether the governmental service provided could be provided better by State or local governments (if provided at all),' Vought wrote. Disability rights advocates doubt that state protection and advocacy groups — known as P&As — would see any dollar not specifically earmarked for them. They sue states, so the advocates don't want states deciding whether their work gets funded. The 1975 federal law setting up P&As declared them independent of the states, and newer laws reinforced that. 'We do need an independent system that can hold them and other wrongdoers accountable,' said Rocky Nichols, the Kansas center's executive director. Nichols' center has helped Matthew Hull for years with getting the state to cover services, and Hull hopes to find a job. He uses a wheelchair; a Medicaid-provided nurse helps him run errands. 'I need to be able to do that so I can keep my strength up,' he said, adding that activity preserves his health. Medicaid applicants often had a difficult time working through its rules even before the tax and budget law's recent changes, said Sean Jackson, Disability Rights Texas' executive director. With fewer dollars, he said, 'As cases are coming into us, we're going to have to take less cases.' The Texas group receives money from a legal aid foundation and other sources, but federal funds still are 68% of its dollars. The Kansas center and Disability Rights Iowa rely entirely on federal funds. 'For the majority it would probably be 85% or higher,' said Marlene Sallo, executive director of the National Disability Rights Network, which represents P&As. The Trump administration's proposals suggest it wants to shut down P&As, said Steven Schwartz, who founded the Center for Public Representation, a Massachusetts-based organization that works with them on lawsuits. Federal funding meant a call in 2009 to Disability Rights Iowa launched an immediate investigation of a program employing men with developmental disabilities in a turkey processing plant. Authorities said they lived in a dangerous, bug-infested bunkhouse and were financially exploited. Without the dollars, executive director Catherine Johnson said, 'That's maybe not something we could have done.' The Kansas center's private interview in 2004 with one of Jensen's fellow residents eventually led to long federal prison sentences for the couple operating the Kaufman House, a home for people with mental illnesses about 25 miles (40 kilometers) north of Wichita. And it wasn't until Disability Rights Iowa filed a federal lawsuit in 2023 that the state agreed to draft a plan to provide community services for children with severe mental and behavioral needs. For 15 years, Schwartz's group and Disability Rights Texas have pursued a federal lawsuit alleging Texas warehouses several thousand people with intellectual and developmental disabilities in nursing homes without adequate services. Texas put at least three men in homes after they'd worked in the Iowa turkey plant. Last month, a federal judge ordered work to start on a plan to end the 'severe and ongoing' problems. Schwartz said Disability Rights Texas did interviews and gathered documents crucial to the case. 'There are no better eyes or ears,' he said.
New York Post
40 minutes ago
- New York Post
Chuck Todd blasts podcasters for platforming Hunter Biden, ‘spectacle' hurting Democrats
Former NBC News anchor Chuck Todd condemned media outlets for platforming former President Joe Biden's son, Hunter, arguing he is a hazard to himself and the Democratic Party. As Democrats struggle to chart a new course after their defeat in the 2024 election, the one thing many can agree on is that the Bidens should step away from public life. Advertisement Hunter Biden was in the news again after he spoke on Andrew Callaghan's 'Channel 5' podcast last weekend and Monday's episode of former DNC chair Jaime Harrison's 'At Our Table' podcast, making headlines for wild tirades defending his father and blasting his critics. Todd responded on his own podcast by declaring, 'I will never book Hunter Biden,' and explained why. 'Number one, he's not the candidate. He wasn't on the ballot. Anything he says in defense of his father, I don't know whether it's true or not, but it doesn't matter. He's a son defending his father,' he said. Todd reserved his full ire for those who platform Hunter, saying, 'I have a real problem with the folks that are booking him. If you've chosen to book Hunter Biden, you've chosen to book spectacle. You're not interested in – and you know, the two interviews that have gone viral were both designed to get attention, not to surface new facts, not to give you a better understanding of what may have happened. It was just, 'Let's give him a platform to settle some scores that maybe he wants to settle.'' 3 Chuck Todd condemned media outlets for platforming Hunter Biden. The Chuck ToddCast / YouTube Advertisement He continued, 'I don't think this does Hunter Biden any good. I don't think this does Joe Biden any good. It certainly doesn't do the Democratic Party any good. That's why it's surprising to see the former DNC chair start a podcast and decide that the best way to market it is Hunter Biden.' 'It's a choice who you book,' he argued. 'I make choices. Everybody makes choices. It's a choice who you book. If you're putting Hunter Biden on, you know what you're doing. Look, I think there's a lot of things going on there.' 3 Hunter Biden recently went on the 'Channel 5' podcast to defend his father and blast his critics. CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images 'I don't like it when politicians use the media or campaigns or voters for their own therapy.' Todd added he's a big advocate of going to therapy, 'but let's not do it in public. Try to deal with your issues amongst yourself.' Advertisement 'This is ultimately why I was critical of Joe and Joe Biden for running in the first place, because their family wasn't ready for this,' he added. 'And I think Hunter Biden's behavior now post-election is more proof the family wasn't in a position… this is why running for president can do major damage to a candidate's family.' 3 Both Hunter Biden and his father have been criticized for remaining in the public eye after the Democratic Party's defeat in November. AFP via Getty Images After surviving the death of his first wife and daughter in 1972, the death of his eldest son Beau in 2015 hit Biden very hard and Todd argued the family didn't take enough time to grieve and recover from it before he launched his 2020 presidential campaign. Advertisement In the past, the Bidens seemed to be 'the poster child' of balancing public service and supporting one's family to Todd. 'But that was a family in crisis internally,' he said. Fox News Digital reached out to the 'Channel 5' podcast, the 'At Our Table' podcast, representatives of Joe Biden, and the legal representation of Hunter Biden, and did not receive an immediate reply.
