White House likely to send another rescissions package to Congress
Vought's comments came as Republicans on Capitol Hill appeared poised to revoke $9 billion in previously approved federal funding as part of an initial package of cuts put forward by the White House.
'I don't want to get ahead of the package itself,' Vought said of a future proposal during an event hosted by the Christian Science Monitor.
Vought did not provide specifics about what funds would be targeted or a timeline for when the next package would be sent to Congress, but told reporters, 'It's likely to come soon.'
The administration has targeted government spending for cuts it has deemed wasteful or that does not align with the president's 'America first' agenda.
'There is still a great enthusiasm for these rescissions bills,' Vought said.
The $9 billion package, which was passed by the Senate early Thursday morning and will head to the House for a final vote, targets money for global aid programs and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which funds National Public Radio and PBS, organizations President Trump and his allies accuse of liberal bias.
The White House agreed to an amendment to remove from the package $400 million in cuts to the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief global anti-AIDS initiative in the face of GOP pushback.
Even as the bill is expected to reach the president's desk once it passes the GOP-controlled House, some Republicans have expressed frustration about a perceived lack of information in the White House's request.
Vought pushed back on those criticisms Thursday. He argued the administration provided the same amount of detail as previous rescissions packages, laying out dollar amounts for programs the administration wanted to cut.
'People always want more detail,' Vought said. 'We provided all the detail that was needed.'
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 This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.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
Politico
25 minutes ago
- Politico
New Pirro committee vote set for Thurs
House Republicans will scrap several votes this week as internal party drama over Jeffrey Epstein derails a key committee that handles legislation on its way to the floor. The House Rules Committee came to a standstill Monday night as GOP leaders struggled to contain rank-and-file Republicans and their Democratic allies clamoring for a floor vote to compel the publication of materials related to the late disgraced financier and convicted sex offender. Committee Democrats had planned to force a vote that evening on legislation that would call for the release of the materials, as the panel worked to tee up floor consideration on a slate of unrelated bills. It was poised to be a repeat of what transpired last Thursday inside Rules, which gummed up the works for several hours. But rather than this time work through the Democratic disruption, Republicans chose instead Monday to recess the rest of the Rules meeting altogether, with House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) saying it was 'unlikely' that the panel would reconvene this week at all. Later, lawmakers said there were no plans to return at all. That means House members will depart for August recess at the week's end without being able to vote on legislation that would not otherwise be able to pass on the chamber floor with a simple majority vote, including an immigration-related bill that would increase penalties for individuals who enter the country illegally and a water-permitting measure. The House will still vote on measures that can be taken up under an expedited procedure typically reserved for noncontroversial legislation that can pass with a two-thirds majority of those present and voting, such as a bill that would establish new ZIP Codes for certain communities and deter China in the ongoing Taiwan conflict. 'See you in September,' said Rules Committee ranking member Jim McGovern (D-Mass.). He was spearheading the effort to call up a vote on the legislation from Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.). The two men are working to force a floor vote on that bill through a procedural maneuver known as a discharge petition, which allows members to put a bill on the floor without leadership approval if the effort gets 218 signatures. Scalise blamed Democrats for the meltdown. 'At the end of the day, look, Democrats are yelling and screaming,' he said in an interview. 'They spent four years covering up for Epstein, and you know, at least President Trump's in the courts right now trying to get documents released, and I really think you're gonna see, hopefully, a lot unsealed from that and then we've got some other options.' Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), a member of the Rules Committee, also accused Democrats of 'grandstanding' and said Republicans refused to give the minority party 'an endless microphone.' McGovern, in a statement, accused Republicans of making their own mess. 'Democrats on the Rules Committee gave Republicans a choice — either vote to release the Epstein Files, or keep them a secret. Republicans are so afraid of taking that vote that they are torching their own agenda instead of doing something they promised the voters they would do,' he said. 'Trump and his top allies have been pushing this for years — and people aren't going to forget about it in a month.' Massie, speaking to reporters Monday night, was unrepentant. He'd just been seeing walking onto the House floor with a binder labeled 'The Epstein Files: Phase 2,' and the bill number of his resolution with Khanna. 'Their Epstein bill resolution is non-binding so it's kind of fake. The resolution I have with Khanna would be binding on the President,' Massie said, explaining the breakdown between Republican leaders and other members of the House. Rules leadership last week teed up compromise legislation that would simply support the release of Epstein materials, which opponents called two week and which Speaker Mike Johnson has since said he won't bring to the floor, anyway. Scalise reiterated that decision, saying in a brief interview, 'the Trump administration's petitioned the courts to release some of the sealed documents. Hopefully, the court acts swiftly. It'd be important if they got that out.' Trump last week instructed Attorney General Pam Bondi to begin the process of unsealing grand jury testimony in Epstein's criminal case. It followed publication of a Wall Street Journal report alleging Trump sent Epstein a racy birthday letter several decades ago, though Trump has said the letter is fake and is now seeking billions in a defamation lawsuit against the paper.
Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
House grinds to a halt as GOP tries to shut down Epstein votes
House Republicans have virtually stopped work on all major legislation leading up to their six-week summer recess to avoid taking votes on forcing the release of the Jeffrey Epstein files. Why it matters: Democrats have been gleefully using every opportunity to force their GOP colleagues on the record about Epstein as President Trump pressures them to make the issue go away. "They're certainly not making it easier for themselves. ... If the Republicans continue to make their jobs harder, that's on them," said Rep. Sarah McBride (D-Del.). She added: "We certainly won't refrain from pointing that out as long as they continue to perform this self-own time and time again." House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) shot back: "Where were these 'interested' Democrats for four years when they could have released all of it? They have no credibility because they had no desire to release it when they were in control." State of play: The House Rules Committee is not planning to hold votes this week to prepare major legislation for the House floor, meaning any remaining votes will likely be on small, noncontroversial bills. The House had been scheduled to vote on GOP legislation involving immigration and environmental legislation this week that had to go through the panel first. But Democrats planned to force yet more votes on amendments aimed at forcing the Justice Department to release all its documents on Epstein. What they're saying: Members of the Rules Committee in both parties told reporters the standstill is due to Republicans not wanting to vote on the Epstein-related amendments. Trump has been keeping pressure on his Republican allies not to try to force the release of the documents, despite his MAGA base long clamoring for such a move. Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), the ranking member of the Rules Committee, told Axios there is also "concern whether they can pass a rule on the floor" since right-wing Republicans increasingly agitating for an Epstein vote. What's next: Republicans won't be able to put off the inevitable, with Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) telling reporters he is confident he can get 218 members to sign onto a discharge petition to force a vote on releasing the files.
Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
Jim VandeHei: Rise of Super Journalists
We write and talk a lot about the rise of AI superintelligence machines that'll be much smarter than humans — and the technology's impact on society and traditional journalism. In this column, we'll delve into the rise of what we call Super Journalists — reporters with sourcing, expertise, nuance and connections no machine can possibly match. Why it matters: We believe Super Journalists will dominate media in the AI era. These are journalists with true domain expertise, top-notch sourcing and historical depth to tell people things they don't know. They're not your average journalist doing a dutiful job chronicling unfolding events. Those, we believe, will be displaced by an AI agent summarizing things to match — with precision — the tastes of each individual user. No, these are the journalists with deep passion for a topic — be it politics, AI or a specific city — and deep sourcing, knowledge and credibility. They establish an authentic human connection, based on trust built over years. The big picture: This is great for you, the news consumer. In the future, we envision a world where discerning readers, viewers and listeners get the best of both worlds: higher quality human expertise on their favorite topics and quicker, better summaries of daily news or happenings via AI. We built Axios years ago for this very moment. We have a smaller newsroom than some older competitors. But we have true subject matter experts — including Sara Fischer on media, Dan Primack on deals, Ina Fried on tech, Hans Nichols on Congress, Neil Irwin and Courtenay Brown on economics and the Fed, Marc Caputo on the White House, Alex Thompson on national politics, Barak Ravid on the Middle East, Eleanor Hawkins on communications strategy, Joann Muller on transportation, and so many more. We're doing the same in Axios Local cities — now 34 and counting — where we hire the most wired reporters in a city to cover that city for a core local audience of smart professionals. We're not alone: Substack just raised $100 million to entice experts to go solo on its platform. New media companies, notably Puck, have adopted a similar Super Journalist ethos. AI will change journalism dramatically. We're updating the Axios Manifesto to make it clear we'll use AI as a tool for research, data collection and analysis, and compilation of data like concerts or events in cities — not to write stories. We'll soon start sharing some of the best use cases we've found. We believe AI will enable us to expand Axios Local to many more cities, much faster (more on this soon). But it won't replace Super Journalists. In fact, the spread of AI will make their work even more vital and valuable. Here's how we think about it: AI will help facilitate getting more high quality human-generated content to more humans. The distinctiveness of true Super Journalists' work will stand out amid the sameness of commodity news spit out by AI machines. We're betting you'll yearn for and reward: Authentic scoops by people you trust. Authentic context to see and think about topics in a more sophisticated way. Authentic nuance that flows not from the literal words and actions of people — but from their facial expressions, body language and true intent. The bottom line: Super Journalists + superintelligence = information nirvana if Axios can nail the mix and win your trust.
