Bipartisan bill would offer legal support for Ohioans facing eviction
COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — A bipartisan bill would offer state funding for legal costs to low-income Ohioans facing eviction, an issue of great concern in Franklin County.
Sponsored by State Sens. Michele Reynolds (R-Canal Winchester) and Hearcel Craig (D-Columbus), Senate Bill 83 would revise eviction and property laws in Ohio to assist households facing eviction. The bill would establish a legal services housing defense fund to finance legal services to eligible Ohioans, bringing more direct state support for residents in eviction hearings.
According to the Eviction Lab, eviction is a prevailing concern in Franklin County. There have been more than 100,000 eviction filings in Franklin County in the past five years, 25% of which occurred in the past year alone.
What to know as Canada geese nest across central Ohio
Franklin County evictions noticeably increased after COVID-19. According to the Eviction Lab, evictions from the past year are 39% higher than average eviction filings before COVID-19. Further, data shows the eviction crisis is likely to worsen as pandemic-era federal funding runs out. See previous coverage of eviction concerns in the video player above.
Senate Bill 83 wants to reduce barriers for Ohioans facing eviction. The new state fund would cover legal costs for eligible households, or households with an established annual income under 300% of the federal poverty level. Poverty levels vary by household size, but a four-person home would be eligible if it makes less than $96,450 annually.
The bill would also allow parties involved in eviction filings to request nonbinding mediation to help come to an understanding. To help protect tenants' rights, any eviction notice would have to include the right to free legal representation and information on how to see if they are eligible.
S.B. 83 would keep all associated records private until an eviction was formalized. Any eviction case documents could also be removed from public record if both parties agree to it. In those cases, only authorized judicial staff, parties directly involved in the case or someone with a court order could access the records.
What's new and coming soon at Easton Town Center
The bill would also adjust property and inspection laws. Under S.B. 83, any property transaction would need to provide proof the involved parties are real people before the county auditor would endorse the sale. Building code enforcement certification would also have to be 'as accessible as possible' without compromising safety.
Finally, S.B. 83 would require inspections of construction projects within 30 days of receiving a plan review or inspection request. Local building boards would also have to publish a list of approved and certified third-party inspectors.
'How we resolve the housing crisis impacts our future economic development and the strength of our schools and local governments,' Craig said.
S.B. 83 was referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee in February but has not had hearings since. The program would require the General Assembly to allocate funding to the bill, and it could emerge in ongoing Senate discussions of Ohio's biennial budget.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
42 minutes ago
- USA Today
Is remote work only for the rich? Double standard ignites workplace tension
More remote workers are being called back to the office in the private sector and the federal government. But the new rules don't always apply to everyone. When ride-sharing company Uber increased the number of days employees had to show up in person from two to three, the return-to-office mandate set off a fiery backlash. In an all-hands meeting and then in online forums, the rank-and-file groused they were being summoned back to work while many corner offices sat empty. Soon, another brouhaha erupted at JPMorgan Chase. After thousands of employees at the world's largest bank were ordered back to the office five days a week, word leaked that Filippo Gori would now run business affairs in Europe, the Middle East and Africa from New York, not from Dubai, Johannesburg or London. JPMorgan Chase did not comment. With employers cracking down on how many days a week people can work from home, office workers are calling out what they say is a double standard: Executives who enforce in-person work for their teams but reserve the right to work wherever they please. Salesforce's Marc Benioff is one of those CEOs who self-identifies as a remote worker. "I've always been a remote worker my whole life," Benioff told MSNBC in 2023. "I don't work well in an office. It just doesn't work with my personality. I can't tell you why." His employees often don't have that luxury. In September, they were told to return to the office at least three days a week. Benioff said the message is to 'mix in-person and remote together.' Salesforce did not respond to a request for comment. 'Regardless of how you feel about remote work, you have to laugh at the nerve of these types of people who are being compensated millions of dollars per year to implement 'rules for thee and not for me,'' one Uber employee commented on Blind, an anonymous app for professionals. 'Like the key to the executive toilet' Many office workers got hooked on remote work as the COVID-19 pandemic shut down offices across America. With only 'essential' frontline workers required to show up in person, the white-collar workforce skipped rush hour and cocooned at home. Prioritizing once elusive goals such as quality of life, they relocated in droves to more affordable places such as Salt Lake City and Boise, Idaho. Their new schedules made life much easier to balance, especially for parents of young children and workers with disabilities, while research frequently showed the pandemic-induced work arrangements had other benefits. Employees who worked from home were happier and as – if not more – productive. Five years later, a growing number of companies from Amazon to Ford are winding back the clock on remote work – but not for everyone. Flexibility is fast becoming an elite perk, with some top executives running their businesses hundreds or thousands of miles from the home office from the comfort of their own home office. Last year, Starbucks lured Brian Niccol from Chipotle Mexican Grill with a $10 million cash signing bonus, a $75 million stock award and a $1.6 million annual salary, making him one of the highest-paid CEOs in America. But none of his eye-popping perks got as much attention as the work-from-home deal he cut. Even as other corporate workers in the coffee chain's Seattle headquarters were told to work in the office three days a week, Niccol didn't pull up stakes. Instead, he commutes 1,600 miles from his Newport Beach, California, home on the company's private jet and on its dime. Starbucks said its CEO, who engineered the 'Back to Starbucks' turnaround plan to rebound from a prolonged sales slump, maintains an office and home in Seattle but prioritizes an active schedule visiting coffeehouses, roasting plants, support centers and business partners around the globe. Still, that special treatment irks employees. A 2023 Wall Street Journal report that Boeing Chief Financial Officer Brian West, the second-highest-ranking executive at the company, worked from a small office about five minutes from his home in New Canaan, Connecticut, and hundreds of miles from the company's Arlington, Virginia, headquarters, caused a stir. West has maintained that arrangement even after many staffers were told to return to the office. According to securities filings, Boeing provided $42,271 worth of flights on company aircraft last year for West, whose total compensation was nearly $6.2 million. Boeing declined to comment. Management experts say it matters far less where key executives log into work each day. After all, they often live out of suitcases while jetting to far-flung offices and calling on customers. But permitting executives to live and work remotely conflicts with the messaging that businesses benefit the most when employees show up in person. Like most sought-after workplace perks, flexibility is largely a function of power and pay, according to Stanford University economics professor Nick Bloom, who studies remote work. Higher-income workers are more likely to have remote work arrangements than those at the lower end of the pay scale, his research shows. Just 5% of workers making $10,000 to $50,000 a year live 50 or more miles from their office, compared to 14% of those earning over $250,000. 'Before the pandemic, working from home was a predictor of low pay. We used to joke about it. Is he working from home or shirking from home?' Bloom said. 'Now it's like the key to the executive toilet. Being able to work from home is something that people are flexing about.' Some workers, CEOs buck return to office A similar phenomenon is playing out in the public sector. President Donald Trump made splashy headlines when he ordered federal workers back to the office full-time. But, said Bloom, Trump often prefers his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida to the Oval Office. The president is far from alone. A 2023 McKinsey survey found the largest share of employees who strongly prefer working from home earn more than $150,000 a year. They were also the group most likely to quit their jobs if called back to the office every day. The rank-and-file feels strongly about it, too. Three-quarters of employed adults who have a job that can be done from home are working remotely at least some of the time, according to a recent Pew Research Center survey. If their employer no longer allowed them that flexibility, nearly half said they would be unlikely to stay on. Pavi Theva was stationed in Texas as a product manager when Amazon began enforcing a new three-day-a-week in-person policy. With none of her teammates located in the Austin office, she'd make the 45-minute commute to sit by herself. She regularly scrambled to find an empty conference room so she could attend virtual meetings uninterrupted. Time spent in the office was pointless, she said. 'It wasn't adding any value from a productivity standpoint or a collaboration standpoint.' After getting flagged a couple of times for not badging into the office often enough, Theva quit in February 2024 to turn a side hustle in career coaching into a full-time gig. She never looked back. 'I have zero commute,' she said. 'Just 20 seconds from my bedroom to my study in my PJs.' A report from the Census Bureau that surveyed 150,000 firms from November 2024 to January 2025 concluded remote workers like Theva are here to stay. Employees work from home at least one day a week on average and businesses expect that to continue through 2029. And some business leaders are leaning into that trend. In 2022, Airbnb instituted a 'Live and Work Anywhere' remote work policy which allows employees to work from home as long as they regularly meet up in person. Before the pandemic, some 95% of Airbnb's employees lived within 50 miles of an office, according to the online marketplace for short-term vacation rentals. Today, that figure stands at about 70%. 'If you want a team to work harder, don't make them come to the office, give them a crazy deadline and check on their progress every week,' CEO Brian Chesky said on the Masters of Scale Rapid Response podcast. 'That's how you get them to work harder, not by being in the office. I don't care where you are.' Dropbox has also doubled down on flexibility with its 'Virtual First' remote work policy. CEO Drew Houston says it doesn't make sense to force employees to show up in the office to do the same work they would do remotely. Over the last five years, about 70% of job applicants have cited remote work as the reason they are interested in working at the file-storage company, Dropbox said. Dropbox has also seen its lowest attrition rates and highest offer acceptance rates since going fully remote, internal company data shows. "We can be a lot less dumb than forcing people back into a car three days a week or whatever to literally be back on the same Zoom meeting they would have been at home,' Houston told Fortune's Leadership Next podcast. 'There's a better way to do this."
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Ranked choice voting promised more moderates. It delivered extremists instead.
Ranked choice voting further loosens party control and gives the activists within either party more say in the process. And voters in the middle suffer the consequences. In one of my first published columns ever, I advocated for ranked choice voting, which was at the time a lesser-known alternative way to conduct elections in which you rank several candidates in order of preference. I have since changed my view. Since then, the idea has grown in popularity, even making its way into New York City's Democratic Party primary election on Tuesday, June 24. Ranked choice made headlines as state lawmaker Zohran Mamdani won that primary. The promise of ranked choice voting producing more moderate candidates has been undermined by extreme candidates. American politics are better off under more traditional voting systems. What is ranked choice voting? Ranked choice voting seeks to solve the issue of strategic voting ‒ when voters cast their ballot not for their top choice in a crowded field, but rather their preference between one of the two candidates with a high chance of winning. One of the central arguments in favor of ranked choice is that, because people can express their true preferences, it is more likely to produce more moderate candidates. However, in practice, it rarely accomplishes this goal. Take New York's mayoral primary race, for example. The city's ranked choice system led to the election of Mamdani, a democratic socialist, as the Democratic nominee to be the next mayor, giving him the inside track at the job. Now, part of that issue is candidate quality. Mamdani's opponent was Andrew Cuomo, who is best known for resigning the New York governorship in disgrace in 2021 due to numerous sexual harassment claims and mismanagement of COVID-19. But that dilemma goes even further to the point of ranked choice voting not producing better outcomes than an ordinary ballot system. The New York election is not the sole arbiter of this system's effectiveness, however. Other municipalities that have adopted ranked choice have seen more extreme candidates prevail. Researchers have found that 'as an electorate grows more polarized, candidates located at the median are less likely to be elected under IRV (another term for ranked choice voting) because they simply are not the first choice of enough voters.' In our polarized political environment, ranked choice voting may make matters even worse by favoring more extreme candidates, thus widening the partisan divide in races. Ranked choice voting weakens political parties One fact that many in the news media are reluctant to admit (but may agree with privately) is that voters are extraordinarily bad at selecting good candidates. This is why America is better off with strong political parties. Strong political parties, with more influence over who their nominees are, limit the extent to which voters can influence a party to nominate a candidate outside of the mainstream opinion. Political parties have grown weaker in recent years as populist movements in both parties grow, and the result is a rise in extreme candidates in response to American political polarization. More extreme candidates acting outside the structure of parties is a major reason for this. Ranked choice voting reduces the amount of sway that a political party has over its nominee. Ordinarily, in a primary election, there is a uniform sequence of dropouts that build coalitions among two and three candidates by the time Election Day rolls around. This typical procession gives parties plenty of opportunities to interject their preferences into the race, and to help boost their preferred candidate. Still, the existence of a primary system in the first place entails that, from time to time, the voters will override the preferences of the internal party structure, such as Donald Trump's initial nomination in the 2016 presidential election. That problem has worsened as activists have captured the primary system to promote their candidates, rather than those of the median partisan. Ranked choice voting further loosens party control and gives the activists within either party more say in the process. These activists are only further likely to produce more extreme candidates, and the voters in the middle suffer the consequences. Dace Potas is an opinion columnist for USA TODAY and a graduate of DePaul University with a degree in political science.
USA Today
6 hours ago
- USA Today
Trump agenda survives key Senate vote but final outcome still uncertain
The GOP-led Senate has agreed to begin a marathon floor debate that's expected to go overnight and culminate with a final roll call - where the outcome still remains uncertain. WASHINGTON – The Senate voted to begin a marathon debate about President Donald Trump's package of legislative priorities − stuffed with tax cuts, Medicaid reforms and border security funding – despite lingering Republican concerns about the legislation. Majority Leader John Thune, R-South Dakota, has said he is uncertain whether enough Republicans will support their version to send it back to the House. "We'll find out," Thune said. But the 51-49 vote to proceed signals that there is enough GOP support to at least begin the hours-long debate and expected voting on dozens of amendments. GOP Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Thom Tillis of North Carolina each voted against debating the bill as written. The vote that began at 7:30 p.m. EDT was held open for more than three hours as Thune scrambled to find a majority of votes to kickstart the debate. If the Senate is ultimately successful, the House would have to vote on the upper chamber's changes in order to reach Trump's desk by his self-imposed deadline of July 4. The Senate has trimmed the House version from about 1,100 pages to 940 − and still faces votes on what are expected to be dozens of amendments. The success of Trump's domestic agenda for tax cuts and border security hangs in the balance. Republican approval of the spending blueprint would allow a majority of the 100-member Senate to approve all of Trump's priorities included in it through legislation later in the year, rather than needing 60 votes to overcome a filibuster for each measure. Here's what we know about the legislative package: Senate voting on whether to debate Trump's bill A long wait, then a vote to begin debate With little fanfare, the Senate began voting at about 7:30 p.m. EDT on whether to begin the debate on Trump's legislative package. Majority Leader John Thune, R-South Dakota, simply asked the Senate to vote on a motion to begin debating the bill. The move came after hours of inaction – interrupted by the occasional speech – since the Senate gaveled into action at 2 p.m. - Bart Jansen Nevada senator votes despite COVID-19 The vote was close enough and important enough that a Nevada senator voted despite testing positive for COVID-19. 'After experiencing mild symptoms, I have tested positive for COVID,' Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nevada, said in a social media post. 'I'll continue to follow my doctor's guidelines and wear a mask while voting this weekend.'- Bart Jansen Lee drops provision for public land sales from bill Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, agreed to drop a contentious provision for public land sales from the legislative package. Environmental groups had criticized the provision for opening lands to logging and oil, gas and coal production. A fellow Republican, Sen. Tim Sheehy of Montana, threatened to vote against the bill unless the provision was removed, which could have scuttled the entire bill. Lee announced on social media that he wasn't able to secure safeguards that the land must be sold to Americans rather than the Chinese or investors. 'I continue to believe the federal government owns far too much land – land it is mismanaging and in many cases ruining for the next generation,' Lee said. - Bart Jansen Trump blasts Tillis over opposition to legislation Trump criticized Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, one of three Republicans to vote against debating the legislation, as 'making a BIG MISTAKE.' Tillis had voiced concern about steeper Medicaid cuts in the Senate version of the bill than in the House version, and said he would have to oppose it. But Trump noted he won the state in three presidential elections in the Tarheel State, where Tillis faces reelection next year. Trump highlighted provisions in the legislation to eliminate taxes on tips, overtime and Social Security. He argued taxes will rise if 2017 tax cuts aren't extended, and that the country needs to increase the limit on borrowing. 'Thom Tillis is making a BIG MISTAKE for America, and the Wonderful People of North Carolina!' Trump said in a post June 28 on social media. In another post, Trump said he would be meeting with 'numerous people' who have asked to run in the GOP primary against Tillis. Trump said he is 'looking for someone who will properly represent the Great people of North Carolina.' - Bart Jansen Democrats force Senate to read entire Trump bill Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-New York, forced Senate clerks to read the entire bill out loud, further delaying the start of debate on the bill. While typically a formality, Schumer objected to waiving the reading of the bill. His objection forced clerks to read the 940-page document. Then senators will begin hours of debate followed by hours of voting. A vote on final passage could come June 30. - Bart Jansen 'No cause for alarm' on vote delay: Sen. Mike Rounds South Dakota GOP Sen. Mike Rounds told CNN that he thinks Republicans will ultimately have the votes to begin the floor debate but were working on ensuring commitments for concerned GOP lawmakers that they'll get the chance to offer amendments to address their issues. "No cause for alarm," Rounds said, adding that the lengthy delay from the plan to have a 4 p.m. EDT opening procedural vote stemmed from the wait for the Congressional Budget Office to analyze late changes to the Senate bill. Looking ahead, Rounds outlined a floor plan that would start with Democrats forcing a full reading of the 990-page bill, something the Republican said he hoped they would not do so that congressional staff can go home for the night and get rest before resuming debate on June 29. Once the floor debate begins, Rounds said Democrats and Republicans would get 20 hours equally divided - with the GOP likely surrendering a considerable amount of that time. Only then would the Senate begin to hold what's known as a "vote-a-rama" where they consider scores of amendments."We've got a long couple of days ahead of us yet," Rounds said. - Darren Samuelsohn Business Roundtable endorses Trump bill Business groups endorsed Trump's legislative package for its anticipated economic benefits as the Senate prepared to debate it. 'This critical legislation would protect and enhance the transformative economic benefits that President Trump's historic 2017 tax reform delivered for American businesses, workers and families,' Business Roundtable President Kristen Silverberg said. 'We urge the Senate to swiftly pass this measure.' - Bart Jansen Democrats to force reading aloud of the entire Senate bill Senate Democrats unified in opposition to the legislation plan to force the chamber's clerk to read the entire 990-page GOP tax, policy and spending bill aloud if Republicans vote to open the floor debate. "Future generations will be saddled with trillions in debt," said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-New York. "Under this draft Republicans will take food away from hungry kids to pay for tax breaks to the rich." Schumer's plans mean that the Senate is sure to be in session late into the night, if not past dawn - presuming Republicans vote to begin the debate. - Darren Samuelsohn, Reuters Elon Musk opens fire, calls Trump bill 'utterly insane and destructive' Billionaire Elon Musk, Trump's former adviser on cutting government spending, fired off another set of attacks against the president's legislative package for potentially killing millions of jobs. The latest Senate draft bill will destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country!Utterly insane and destructive. It gives handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future. Musk had quieted his harsh criticism of Trump and the legislation the week after his departure from government May 30. But he blasted the bill again as the Senate prepared to debate it. 'The latest Senate draft bill will destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country!' Musk said June 28 on social media. 'Utterly insane and destructive. It gives handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future.' As the Senate vote remained in limbo, Musk added another post warning the GOP of the electoral risks if they vote for the Trump-backed legislation that is not polling well with Republicans. Polls show that this bill is political suicide for the Republican Party - Bart Jansen Paging Vice President JD Vance: The Senate might need a tie-breaker Coming out of a GOP lunch June 28, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Missouri, said he's 'under the impression' Senate leadership has the buy-in to advance Trump's bill. But, 'I'm thinking we need the VP,' he said. Republicans need a simple 51-vote majority to pass the bill. But with a tight 53-member majority and ongoing disputes, every swing vote counts. If they hit 50, Vice President JD Vance, in his capacity as Senate president, can break the tie in Trump's favor. -Savannah Kuchar Environmental groups criticize bill's support for fossil fuels Environmental advocates criticized the Senate version of Trump's legislative priorities for not just ending incentives for renewable energy but setting taxes on wind and solar power generation. The advocacy group Natural Resources Defense Council estimated taxes on some projects could grow 50%. The bill could also trigger the largest sale of public lands in history for logging and oil, gas and coal production, according to the group. Trump campaigned on boosting domestic energy production with the phrase 'drill, baby, drill.' "The new budget reconciliation bill text is a shocking fossil fuels industry fever dream come to life,' said Christy Goldfuss, the council's executive director. 'The bill has gone from fossil fuels boosterism to an active effort from Congress to kill wind and solar energy in the United States.' - Bart Jansen GOP senators join Trump for golf President Donald Trump had no public events on his calendar, but he had a couple of key allies join him for golf at his Northern Virginia course: CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Republican Sens. Eric Schmitt of Missouri, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. Looking forward to beginning the One Big Beautiful Bill the day with @POTUS and thanked him for his Go! After posting a picture with Trump on the golf course, Graham added that he partnered with Trump and Paul to beat Schmitt and Ratcliffe. "Proud to announce no casualties," Graham wrote. "A lot of fun! Big Beautiful Bill on the way.". - Bart Jansen Saying 'no' and voting 'no' two different things: Sen. Markwayne Mullin Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Oklahoma, a supporter of Trump's legislative package, told reporters at the Capitol that lawmakers warning about voting against it and actually voting 'no' are two different things. Sens. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin; Thom Tillis, R-North Carolina; and Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, have each said they were opposed to the bill that is still changing. Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, have voiced concerns about it. 'Everybody's got concerns, but saying you're voting 'no' and when you get to the floor and voting 'no' is two totally different things,' Mullin said. 'I don't believe in losing and we're going to get the votes.' - Bart Jansen Budget blueprint debate could be 30 hours of 'nonsense': Sen. Brian Moreno Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, a supporter of Trump's legislative package, said a final vote would likely come after 30 hours of 'nonsense' from Democrats voting on proposals to change the contentious bill. 'It's an absolutely historic and transformative piece of legislation that reverses four years of an assault on American workers,' Moreno said. 'I want everybody watching this to remember this as you listen to probably what's going to be 30-plus hours of complete nonsense from the other side.' - Bart Jansen Senate meets before debating Trump legislative package The Senate gaveled in at 2 p.m., in anticipation of beginning debate on President Trump's legislative priorities, but lawmakers haven't yet voted to begin talking about the measure. A majority of senators must agree to begin debate, which can sometimes kill legislation before it begins. With 53 Republicans and 47 Democratic caucus members, just a few GOP lawmakers could prevent a debate. But the hurdle appears a mere technicality because wavering GOP members such as Sen. Susan Collins of Maine have said she would support the debate even if not necessarily the final bill. -Bart Jansen Sen. Josh Hawley says Republicans have 'soul searching' to do Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Missouri, had been one of the leading voices among Senate Republicans raising concerns about proposed cuts to Medicaid and how that would impact his largely rural state. But after studying the latest, finalized bill text — which delays pushing costs onto states and establishes a $25 billion rural hospital fund — Hawley said he's a yes on passing the bill. Beyond this weekend's vote, though, Hawley said he intends to keep pushing back in effort to prevent the delayed federal spending cuts from ever going into effect. 'This has been an unhappy episode, here in Congress, this effort to cut to Medicaid,' he said. 'And I think, frankly, my party needs to do some soul searching.' — Savannah Kuchar Sen. Susan Collins remains a wildcard Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said she'll support Senate leadership bringing the mega bill to the floor and kicking off presumably hours of debate. But she cautioned reporters that she remains uncertain how she'll side when a final vote gets called. 'That does not, in any way, predict how I'm going to vote on the final passage,' Collins told reporters while walking into the Capitol for the start of the day's events. Collins said her final vote ultimately will depend on what the bill looks like after lawmakers — including herself — introduce and potentially tack on further amendments. 'There's some very good changes that have been made in the latest version, but I want to see further changes,' Collins said. - Savannah Kuchar What is in the Senate bill? The largest provisions in the legislation would extend expiring tax cuts and create a few new ones, and a dramatic increasing in spending on border security. Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, a Republican holdout on the bill, said he wouldn't vote for the bill unless the debt limit gets a separate vote. But Republican leaders want to keep the unpopular vote within the overall package. −Bart Jansen What's not in the Senate version of the bill? Republican support in the Senate waned after Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough ruled several significant provisions would have to be removed to avoid a filibuster. Republicans removed provisions to curb environmental regulations; restrict federal judges' powers; bulk up immigration enforcement; and cut funding from a consumer protection agency. MacDonough also ruled against provisions that aimed to reduce Medicaid spending on health care programs for undocumented immigrants. −Bart Jansen What does Trump say about the Senate version of the bill? The Trump administration 'strongly supports' the Senate version of the bill, in a White House Office of Management and Budget statement June 28. The statement isn't intended to favor the Senate version over the House version on any particular provision, but to signal Trump would sign it if approved by Congress. The two-page statement highlighted provisions for tax cuts, border security, energy and defense. 'President Trump is committed to keeping his promises, and failure to pass this bill would be the ultimate betrayal," the statement said. −Bart Jansen Is there really a July 4 deadline? Trump has told congressional Republicans he's want this thing wrapped up by Independence Day. But the due date is less procedural than it is political. The sooner the president can tout legislation that makes good on several of his 2024 campaign promises, including a tax limit on tips and overtime wages, plus extends his 2017 tax cuts for high-income earners, the better. The more impending deadlines are sometime in August, when Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has said the federal government is at risk of hitting its debt ceiling, and the end of the year, when Trump's first-term tax cuts are set to expire. The legislation up for a vote in the Senate currently contains a provision to raise the debt limit.− Savannah Kuchar
