Senate

The United States Senate has begun debating President Donald Trump’s 940-page “Big, Beautiful Bill” of tax breaks and sweeping cuts to healthcare and food programmes.

The all-night session on Sunday came as the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said the bill would add an estimated $3.3 trillion to the US debt over a decade.

It also said that 11.8 million more Americans would become uninsured by 2034 if the bill became law.

Republican leaders, who reject the CBO’s estimates, are rushing to meet Trump’s deadline of July 4, the country’s Independence Day.

But they barely secured enough support to muscle the bill past a procedural vote on Saturday night. A handful of Republican holdouts revolted, and it took phone calls from Trump and a visit from Vice President JD Vance to keep the legislation on track.

Republican Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who voted against the bill on Saturday, announced he would not seek re-election after Trump threatened to back a primary challenger in retribution for his “no” vote.

Tillis said he could not vote for the bill with its steep cuts to Medicaid, which provides health cover for low-income people.

Trump welcomed Tillis’s decision not to run again, saying in a post on TruthSocial: “Great News! ‘Senator’ Thom Tillis will not be seeking reelection.”

Other Senate Republicans, along with conservatives in the House of Representatives, are pushing for steeper cuts, particularly to healthcare, drawing their own unexpected warning from Trump.

The US president addressed “all cost cutting Republicans,” and said: “REMEMBER, you still have to get reelected. Don’t go too crazy! We will make it all up, times 10, with GROWTH, more than ever before.”

‘Most dangerous piece of legislation’

All told, the Senate bill includes some $4 trillion in tax cuts, making permanent Trump’s 2017 rates, which would expire at the end of the year if Congress fails to act, while adding the new ones he campaigned on, including no taxes on tips.

The Senate package would roll back billions in green energy tax credits that Democrats warn will wipe out wind and solar investments nationwide, and impose $1.2 trillion in cuts, largely to Medicaid and food stamps, by imposing work requirements and making sign-up eligibility more stringent.

Additionally, the bill would provide a $350bn infusion for border and national security, including for deportations, some of it paid for with new fees charged to immigrants.

Democratic Senators, who are all opposed to the bill, continued efforts to delay its passage, after earlier requesting the entirety of the draft legislation be read on the Senate floor – a process that took some 16 hours.

Minority Senate leader Chuck Schumer said Republicans were trying to rush through the extensive bill before Americans knew what was in it, and said Democrats would continue to “shine a light” on the bill in the coming days.

“Some Republicans are trying to rush through a bill that they released less than two days ago under the cloak of darkness, written behind closed doors,” he said.

The latest version of the bill, Schumer added, includes changes such as “even worse” cuts to clean energy, which would see Americans pay 10 percent more on electricity bills and “kill 900,000 good paying jobs in clean energy”.

Independent Senator Bernie Sanders called it “the most dangerous piece of legislation in the modern history of our country”.

“We don’t have enough money to feed hungry children. We don’t have enough money to make sure that people continue to have the health care that they need,” he said. “But somehow, the military industrial complex is going to get another $150bn, 15 percent increase.”

He added that Tillis’s decision not to seek re-election shows the hold that Trump’s cult of personality has over the Republican Party.

Trump’s “Big, Beautiful Bill” is a gift to the billionaire class while causing massive pain for working families. It is the most dangerous piece of legislation in the modern history of our country.

I’m LIVE on the floor to oppose this disastrous bill. https://t.co/flAfpXmEzM

— Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) June 29, 2025

Lengthy process ahead

The legislation has been the sole focus of this weekend’s marathon congressional session. After the debate concludes, the Senate will enter an amendment session, known as a “vote-a-rama,” before voting on passage.

Lawmakers said they hoped to complete work on the bill on Monday.

If the Senate can pass the bill, it would need to return to the House.

Speaker Mike Johnson has told legislators there to be on call for a return to Washington, DC, this week.

Al Jazeera’s Mike Hanna, reporting from Washington, DC, said the bill faces a “lengthy process” with “a lot of discussion, debate lying ahead”.

“Trump and his followers insist that it’s going to meet a lot of the promises he made during his campaign,” he said.

“Democrats point out that the massive tax relief is aimed at very wealthy individuals as well as corporations. They also argue very strongly that all of these tax cuts for the wealthy are being funded largely by massive cuts to social welfare programmes like Medicare, like food stamps,” he said.

“The other way it’s going to impact Americans is where the money is going as well. It’s a massive increase in funding for the military. It’s a massive increase in funding for those forces fighting against immigration.”

According to the American Immigration Council, the bill includes as much as “$45 billion for building new immigration detention centres, including family detention facilities”. This comes as the “Alligator Alcatraz” detention centre in the Florida Everglades is expected to open on Tuesday this week, as the Trump administration continues to call for 3,000 daily immigration arrests.

Despite the opposition, Republicans appear undeterred.

“We are going to make sure hardworking people can keep more of their money,” Senator Katie Britt, an Alabama Republican, told CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday.

Senator Lindsey Graham, who heads the Budget Committee, promised to do everything he can to get the bill to Trump’s desk.

“We’re going to pass the ‘Big, beautiful bill,” he said.

June 29 (UPI) — The Senate has started formal debate on the Trump administration’s budget reconciliation bill after lawmakers spent 16 hours reading the entire measure aloud on the Senate floor.

This Senate’s version of the budget measure would make deeper cuts to social service programs and lead to fewer people having insurance than previous versions, the Congressional Budget Office has reported.

According to the Congressional Budget office report, nearly 12 million Americans would lose coverage by 2034. Federal spending on Medicaid, SNAP and marketplace insurance benefits would drop by $1.1 trillion. At least $1 trillion would come from Medicaid alone.

With its changes, he Senate version of the bill would add nearly $3.3 trillion to the national debt over a decade, the CBO report said, while the House version would add $2.4 to the debt. These estimates are based on including the costs of extending Trump’s 2017 tax cuts.

Republicans in the House and Senate have asked CBO, as well as the Joint Committee on Taxation, to score the bill using a method called “current policy baseline,” which would not include the the cost of extending the cuts.

The fate of the bill in the Senate remains unclear as some high profile lawmakers have expressed skepticism of the measure in its current form.

Majority leader John Thune, R-D., has said the measure could lack key GOP support in a final vote, which could send it back to the House.

“Well find out,” Thune said.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky, and Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., were the only GOP senators who voted Saturday night against brining the bill to the Senate floor for debate.

When the cost of extending the tax cuts is excluded from estimates, both the House and Senate versions of the bill have been estimated to add between $400 billion and $600 billion to the debt over the next decade, according to the New York Times and Politico.

Medicaid cuts have been at the center of a high profile debate as social service agencies and rural hospitals have planned for spending reductions that could come at the expense of the nation’s hungry children and force some hospitals, especially in rural areas, to reduce services or close their doors.

The Senate voted Saturday to open debate on the bill and began a full reading of the measure on the floor.

The Trump administration has said it is reducing waste and fraud in social service programs, and that some of those responsibilities would be shifted to the states.

President Donald Trump has said he wants the budget bill passed by July 4th.

The cuts being considered to Medicaid would be the largest since it was launched in 1965.

WASHINGTON — The changes made to President Trump’s big tax bill in the Senate would pile trillions onto the nation’s debt load while resulting in even steeper losses in healthcare coverage, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said in a new analysis, adding to the challenges for Republicans as they try to muscle the bill to passage.

The CBO estimates that the Senate bill would increase the deficit by nearly $3.3 trillion from 2025 to 2034, a nearly $1-trillion increase from the House-passed bill, which the CBO has projected would add $2.4 to the debt over a decade.

The analysis also found that 11.8 million more Americans would become uninsured by 2034 if the bill became law, an increase over the estimate for the House-passed version of the bill, which predicts that 10.9 million more people would be without health coverage.

The stark numbers are yet another obstacle for Republican leaders as they labor to pass Trump’s bill by his declared July 4 deadline.

Even before the CBO’s estimate, Republicans were at odds over the contours of the legislation, with some resisting the cost-saving proposals to reduce spending on Medicaid and food aid programs even as other Republicans say those proposals don’t go far enough. Republicans are slashing the programs as a way to help cover the cost of extending some $3.8 trillion in Trump tax breaks put in place during his first term.

The push-pull was on vivid display Saturday night as a routine procedural vote to take up the legislation in the Senate was held open for hours as Vice President JD Vance and Republican leaders met with several holdouts. The bill ultimately advanced in a 51-49 vote, but the path ahead is fraught, with voting on amendments still to come.

Still, many Republicans are disputing the CBO estimates and the reliability of the office’s work. To hoist the bill to passage, they are using a different budget baseline that assumes the Trump tax cuts expiring in December already have been extended, essentially making them cost-free in the budget.

The CBO on Saturday released a separate analysis of the GOP’s preferred approach that found the Senate bill would reduce deficits by about $500 billion.

Democrats and economists decry the GOP’s approach as “magic math” that obscures the true costs of the GOP tax breaks.

In addition, Democrats note that under the traditional estimation system, the Republican bill would violate the Senate’s “Byrd Rule” that forbids the legislation from increasing deficits after 10 years.

In a Sunday letter to Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley, the top Democrat on the Senate Budget Committee, CBO Director Phillip Swagel said the office estimates that the Finance Committee’s portion of the bill, also known as Title VII, “increases the deficits in years after 2034” under traditional scoring.

Hussein writes for the Associated Press.

The Republican-controlled Senate of the United States has voted to take President Donald Trump’s so-called “Big Beautiful Bill” into the next phase of discussion, making it more likely to pass in the coming days.

The measure, which is Trump’s top legislative goal, passed its first procedural hurdle in a 51 to 49 vote on Saturday, with two Republican senators joining all Democrats in voting against it.

The result came after several hours of negotiation as Republican leaders and Vice President JD Vance sought to persuade last-minute holdouts in a series of closed-door negotiations.

Trump has pushed his party to get the bill passed and on his desk for him to sign into law by July 4, the US’s Independence Day.

He was monitoring the vote from the Oval Office late into the night, according to a senior White House official.

One Big Beautiful Bill Act

Al Jazeera’s Mike Hanna, reporting from Washington, DC, said the 940-page “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” was released shortly before midnight on Friday, and senators are still attempting to understand exactly what it means.

“One of the clear things in the bill is that it provides a $150bn boost to military spending. It also adds funding for mass deportations and building that border wall. Now, in order to get this money, what has happened is that there are cuts to Medicare, as well as to the Clean Energy funding programme,” he said.

“The other issue is that there are 53 Republicans and 47 Democrats in the Senate. Now all the Democrats are opposed to the bill. That means every single Republican vote will count,” Hanna added.

The procedural vote on Saturday, which would start a debate on the megabill, began after hours of delay.

It then remained open for more than three hours of standstill as three Republican senators – Thom Tillis, Ron Johnson and Rand Paul – joined Democrats to oppose the legislation.

Three others – Senators Rick Scott, Mike Lee and Cynthia Lummis – negotiated with Republican leaders into the night in hopes of securing bigger spending cuts.

In the end, Wisconsin Senator Johnson flipped his no vote to yes, leaving only Paul and Tillis opposed among Republicans.

Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said Republicans unveiled the bill “in the dead of night” and are rushing to finish the bill before the public fully knows what is in it.

He immediately forced a full reading of the text in the Senate, which would take an estimated 15 hours.

“Future generations will be saddled with trillions in debt. Debt is abstract, but what does it mean for the average American? Raising your costs, raising your costs to buy a home, raising your costs to buy a car, raising your costs on credit card bills. And why are they doing all this?” he asked.

“Why are they doing the biggest Medicaid cuts in history? Now it’s getting close to a trillion dollars, just in Medicaid alone, all to cut taxes for the ultra-rich and special interests.”

Elon Musk renews criticism

If passed in the Senate, the bill would go back to the House of Representatives for approval, where Republicans can only afford to lose a handful of votes – and are facing stiff opposition from within their own ranks.

Republicans are split on the Medicaid cuts, which will threaten scores of rural hospitals and lead to an estimated 8.6 million Americans being deprived of healthcare.

The spending plan would also roll back many of the tax incentives for renewable energy that were put in place under Trump’s predecessor, Joe Biden.

Nonpartisan analysts estimate that a version of Trump’s tax cut and spending bill would add trillions to the $36.2 trillion US government debt. They also say that the bill would pave the way for a historic redistribution of wealth from the poorest 10 percent of Americans to the richest.

The bill is unpopular across multiple demographic, age and income groups, according to extensive recent polling.

On Saturday, billionaire Elon Musk, with whom Trump had a public falling out this month over his criticism of the bill, again doubled down on his criticism of the draft legislation.

The Tesla and Space X CEO called the package “utterly insane and destructive”.

“The latest Senate draft bill will destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country,” he wrote on X. “It gives handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future.”

He later posted that the bill would be “political suicide for the Republican Party.”

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans voting in a dramatic late Saturday session narrowly cleared a key procedural step as they race to advance President Trump’s package of tax breaks, spending cuts and bolstered deportation funds by his Fourth of July deadline.

The 51-49 vote came after a tumultuous session with Vice President JD Vance on hand if needed to break a tie. Tense scenes played out in the chamber as voting came to a standstill, dragging on for hours as holdout senators huddled for negotiations. In the end, two Republicans opposed the motion to proceed to debate, joining all Democrats and independents.

It’s still a long weekend of work to come.

Republicans are using their majorities in Congress to push aside Democratic opposition, but they have run into a series of political and policy setbacks. Not all GOP lawmakers are on board with proposals to reduce spending on Medicaid, food stamps and other programs as a way to help cover the cost of extending some $3.8 trillion in Trump tax breaks.

Ahead of the expected roll call, the White House released a statement of administrative policy saying it “strongly supports passage” of the bill that “implements critical aspects” of the president’s agenda. Trump was at his golf course in Virginia on Saturday with GOP senators posting about it on social media.

“It’s time to get this legislation across the finish line,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.).

But as the day wore on, billionaire Elon Musk, a key Trump advisor for the first months of the administration, lashed out against the package — as he has in the past — calling it “utterly insane and destructive.”

“The latest Senate draft bill will destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country!” he said in a post on X.

The 940-page bill was released shortly before midnight Friday, and senators are expected to grind through the hours of all-night debate and amendments in the days ahead. If the Senate is able to pass it, the bill would go back to the House for a final round of votes before it could reach the White House.

With narrow Republican majorities in the House and Senate, leaders need almost every lawmaker on board in the face of essentially unified opposition from Democrats. GOP Sens. Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Rand Paul of Kentucky voted against.

Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said Republicans unveiled the bill “in the dead of night” and are rushing to finish the vote before the public fully knows what’s in it. He was expected to call for a full reading of the text in the Senate overnight, which would take hours.

The weekend session could be a make-or-break moment for Trump’s party, which has invested much of its political capital on his signature domestic policy plan. The president is pushing Congress to wrap it up and has admonished the “grandstanders” among GOP holdouts to fall in line.

The legislation is an ambitious but complicated series of GOP priorities. At its core, it would make permanent many of the tax breaks from Trump’s first term that would otherwise expire by year’s end if Congress fails to act, resulting in a potential tax increase on Americans. The bill would add new breaks, including no taxes on tips, and commit $350 billion to national security, including for Trump’s mass deportation agenda.

But the cutbacks to Medicaid, food stamps and green energy investments, which a top Democrat, Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, said would be a “death sentence” for America’s wind and solar industries, are also causing dissent within GOP ranks.

The Republicans are relying on the reductions to offset the lost tax revenues, but some lawmakers say the cuts go too far, particularly for people receiving healthcare through Medicaid. Meanwhile, conservatives, worried about the nation’s debt, are pushing for steeper cuts.

Tillis, who said he spoke with Trump late Friday explaining his concerns, announced Saturday he cannot support the package as is, largely because he said the healthcare changes would force his state to “make painful decisions like eliminating Medicaid coverage for hundreds of thousands.”

The release of that draft had been delayed as the Senate parliamentarian reviewed the bill to ensure it complied with the chamber’s strict “Byrd rule,” named for the late Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.). It largely bars policy matters from inclusion in budget bills unless a provision can get 60 votes to overcome objections. That would be a tall order in a Senate with a 53-47 Republican edge and Democrats unified against Trump’s bill.

Republicans suffered a series of setbacks after several proposals, including shifting food stamp costs from the federal government to the states or gutting the funding structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, were deemed out of compliance with the rules.

But over the past few days, Republicans have quickly revised those proposals and reinstated them.

The final text includes a proposal for cuts to the Medicaid provider tax that had run into parliamentary hurdles and objections from several senators worried about the fate of rural hospitals. The new version extends the start date for those cuts and establishes a $25-billion fund to aid rural hospitals and providers. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who had opposed the cuts, vowed “to do everything I can” to make sure the reductions never go into effect.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has said that under the House-passed version of the bill, some 10.9 million people would lose their healthcare coverage and at least 3 million fewer would qualify for food aid. The CBO has not yet publicly assessed the Senate draft, which proposes steeper reductions.

Top income earners would see about a $12,000 tax cut under the House bill, while the package would cost the poorest Americans an additional $1,600, the CBO said.

The Senate included a compromise over the so-called SALT provision, a deduction for state and local taxes that has been a top priority of lawmakers from California, New York and other high-tax states, but the issue remains unsettled.

The current SALT cap is $10,000 a year, and a few Republicans wanted to boost it to $40,000 a year. The final draft includes a $40,000 cap but limits it to five years.

Many Republican senators say that is still too generous. At least one House GOP holdout, Rep. Nick LaLota of New York, has said that would be insufficient.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) sent his colleagues home for the weekend with plans to be on call to return to Washington. But as the Senate draft was revealed, House GOP support was uncertain. One Republican, Rep. David Valadao of Hanford, said he was opposed.

Mascaro, Freking and Cappelletti write for the Associated Press. AP writers Ali Swenson and Matthew Daly contributed to this report.

June 28 (UPI) — Senate Democrats have failed in their attempt to curtail President Donald Trump‘s ability to use the military against Iran without congressional approval.

The vote Friday night was 53-47. Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky voted with Democrats to approve the resolution, and Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania was the only Democrat to vote no in invoking the War Powers Act of 1973.

“If we are to ask our young men and women to fight, and potentially give their lives, then we in this body can at least muster the courage to debate if American military intervention is warranted,” Paul who has advocated for restrained foreign policy, said on the Senate floor before the vote.

“Abdicating our constitutional responsibility by allowing the executive branch to unilaterally introduce U.S. troops into wars is an affront to the Constitution, and the American people,” he said.

Fetterman, a staunch supporter of Israel, told reporters he voted against the resolution “simply because I would never want to restrict any future president, Republican or Democrat, to do this kind of military exercise.”

Days before Trump authorized B-2 stealth bombers to strike three Iranian nuclear sites last weekend, Sen. Tim Kaine had already introduced a resolution under the War Powers Act of 1973, which limits a president’s power to enter an armed conflict without the consent of Congress. Israel first struck Iran on June 13 in an effort to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear bomb.

Congress has not issued a formal declaration of war since World War II.

The War Powers Act was approved after President Richard Nixon expanded the Vietnam War into Cambodia. Congress sought Nixon’s power to continue expanding the war amid deep national displeasure about the war. Nixon vetoed the bill, which was overridden by a near unanimous vote of Congress.

In this new situation, the White House would need approval from the House and Senate before U.S. forces could use further military action against Iran.

“I think the events of this week have demonstrated that war is too big to be consigned to the decision of any one person,” Kaine said on the Senate floor. “War is too big an issue to leave to the moods and the whims and the daily vibes of any one person.”

In 2020, eight Republicans joined Democrats in preventing Trump from acting against Iran during his first term in the White House.

“I’ll be voting with Republicans against the war power resolution. When we’re talking about nuclear weapons, the president should have the discretion he needs to act,” Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, who supported the 2020 resolution, posted Thursday X.

Susan Collins, a moderate from Maine, joined her Republican colleagues to vote against the bill.

“I continue to believe that Congress has an important responsibility to authorize the sustained use of military force. That is not the situation we are facing now. The President has the authority to defend our nation and our troops around the world against the threat of attack,” Collins wrote on X after the vote.

In the House, Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky had also introduced a war powers resolution but decided not to press for a vote amid the cease-fire in the Iran-Israel conflict, which announced Monday as his supports hit out against Massie.

The Pro Trump PAC MAGA Kentucky released an ad titled “What Happened to Thomas Massie?” seeking his ouster from the House in 2026 after an interview about the resolution on Sunday morning.

June 28 (UPI) — Senate Republicans released their updated version of the massive spending bill late Friday, which still includes an extension of tax cuts mainly for wealthy people, and have scheduled the first vote to move it forward for Saturday.

The Senate conveyed for a special session at 2 p.m. for a key procedural vote, though it’s uncertain whether Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota has the necessary 50 votes for it to move forward, ABC, CBS and NPR reported.

Republicans hold a 53-47 majority in the Senate with all Democrats planning to oppose the legislation.

House and Senate leaders are committed to sending the bill to President Donald Trump on the Fourth of July. Trump has been pressuring Senators to send the bill to his desk for signing, including conducting an event Thursday that touted the advantages.

Thune hopes the Senate bill not only draws reluctant colleagues but conforms to what parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough approves. On Thursday, she rejected key aspects of changes with Medicaid, which is health insurance for low-income people.

NPR and Politico analyzed Senate changes in the 940-page bill.

Reconciliation allows bills to pass with a simple majority instead of 60 votes and all changes in the Senate bill need to be sent back to the House for approval. “The house is ready to act as soon as the Senate does,” House Speaker Mike Johnson said Friday.

The legislation passed the House 215-214 on May 22. Two Republicans voted against the bill and one voted present.

In the reconciliation process, after time for up to 20 hours of debate has expired, Senators may continue to offer amendments, a process that could stretch into Sunday.

Each Senator was able to speak for 10 minutes on Saturday, freshman Sen. Bernie Moreno of Ohio as the first speaker.

“We are about to enter a historic moment in this chamber,” he said. “We’re going to take up a bill called the One Big Beautiful Bill. If you’ve been watching the media over the last maybe six months, you’ve heard all kinds of absolute misinformation about this bill. I’ve had a chance to read it. … It’s an absolute historic and transformative piece of legislation that reserves four years of an assault on American workers.”

He said “indisputable facts include interest deductibility of cars are built in the United States, no taxes on tips and overtime, income tax cuts on all payees and a government-funded savings account given to raise kids. And Medicare and Social Security is untouched with Medicaid improved with work requirements.

House Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York was the first Democrat to speak.

“Senate Republicans are trying to pull a fast one on the American people,” he said. “For weeks they’ve struggled with the reality that most people hate this bill. Leadership has struggled to secure votes among their own ranks who know how bad the bill is. And now they’ve scrambled to meet an entire arbitrary deadline.”

“So what did the Republicans do last night. Hard to believe, this bill is even worse than any draft we’ve seen this far. It’s worse on healthcare, it’s worse on SNAP, it’s worse on the deficit. At very last minute, Senate Republicans made their bill more extreme to cater to the radicals in the House and Senate,” he added.

He said the bill was released “without knowing how much it will cost,” including a Congressional Budget Office score. He said Republicans, who have sought to lower the deficit “have made it worse” and Americans will pay the price.

Senate bill changes

The new Senate version includes much of what the House approved, including increased funding for border security and extension of tax cuts passed in 2017 during Trump’s first term in the White House. The tax cuts reduced the corporate rate from 35% to a flat 21% and for high-income single filers of more than $400,000 to 37% from 39.6%, for example.

The tax cuts would total $4 trillion over ten years in the Senate bill compared with $3.8 trillion in the House.

Some Republican senators have joined Democrat colleagues in opposing changes to Medicaid.

“We’ve got a few things we’re waiting on, outcomes from the parliamentarian on, but if we could get some of those questions issues landed, and my expectation is at some point tomorrow, we’ll be ready to go,” Thune said Friday.

In Medicaid, a stabilization fund for rural hospitals over five years was boosted to $25 billion from $15 billion in the Senate bill. Some Republicans opposed big cuts to the health program.

Republicans Josh Hawley of Missouri and Susan Collins of Maine have warned rural hospitals could be forced to close.

Planned cuts to provider taxes that fund state obligations for Medicaid would be delayed by one year to 2028. The allowable provider tax in Medicaid expansion states would go from 6% to 3.5%. The new Senate bill increases the deduction from $10,000 to $40,000 but would revert to current levels after 2029.

Schumer said on the Senate floor that when he learned the CBO said the Medicaid cuts are worse than previous versions, he fears that “Medicaid will be fed to the sharks.”

In the Senate’s version of the bill, the debt limit would be increased by $5 trillion, instead of the $4 trillion voted for by the House. Currently, the U.S. debt stands at $36.22 trillion, according to the U.S. Treasury.

Sen. Rand Paul, a Republican from Kentucky, opposed boosting the debt limit. Republicans can spare only three oppositions.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has determined the House version of the bill would add roughly $2.4 trillion to the debt over 10 years. The $5.3 trillion of tax cuts and increases to spending the House approved would be partially offset by $2.9 trillion of revenue increases and spending cuts.

The new Senate bill raises the per-child tax credit from $2,000 to $2,200. Also, the Senate would permanently expand the standard deduction instead of only through 2028 in the House version. What remains is the deduction phasing out for people earning more than $75,000.

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, referred to as SNAP and formerly known as food stamps, provides food for more than 40 million low-income U.S. residents, remains in both versions. But the Senate legislation adds work requirements for “able-bodied adults” up to age 64 with some exemptions.

Alaska and Hawaii may be temporarily exempted from paying for some costs. Alaska’s two Republican senators, Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan, want an exception for their state.

GOP senators also changed the state and local tax deduction, or SALT, which has been backed by House members in states dominated by Democratic voters.

WASHINGTON — Democratic efforts in the Senate to prevent President Trump from escalating his military confrontation with Iran fell short Friday, with Republicans blocking a resolution that marked Congress’ first attempt to reassert its war powers after U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear sites.

The resolution, sponsored by Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, aimed to affirm that Trump should seek authorization from Congress before launching more military action against Iran. Asked Friday whether he would bomb Iranian nuclear sites again if he deemed necessary, Trump said, “Sure, without question.”

The measure was defeated in a 53-47 vote in the Republican-held Senate. One Democrat, Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, joined Republicans in opposition, while Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky was the only Republican to vote in favor.

Most Republicans have said Iran posed an imminent threat that required decisive action from Trump, and they backed his decision to bomb three Iranian nuclear sites last weekend without seeking congressional approval.

“Of course, we can debate the scope and strategy of our military engagements,” said Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.). “But we must not shackle our president in the middle of a crisis when lives are on the line.”

Democrats cast doubt on that justification, arguing that the president should have come to Congress first. They also said the president did not update them adequately, with Congress’ first briefings taking place Thursday.

“The idea is this: We shouldn’t send our sons and daughters into war unless there’s a political consensus that this is a good idea, this is a national interest,” Kaine said in a Thursday interview with the Associated Press. The resolution, Kaine said, wasn’t aimed at restricting the president’s ability to defend against a threat, but that “if it’s offense, let’s really make sure we’re making the right decision.”

In a statement after Friday’s vote, Kaine said he was “disappointed that many of my colleagues are not willing to stand up and say Congress” should be a part of a decision to go to war.

Democrats’ argument for backing the resolution centered on the War Powers Resolution, passed in the early 1970s, which requires the president “in every possible instance” to “consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces.”

Speaking on the Senate floor ahead of Friday’s vote, Paul said he would back the resolution, saying that “despite the tactical success of our strikes, they may end up proving to be a strategic failure.”

“It is unclear if this intervention will fully curtail Iran’s nuclear aspirations,” said Paul.

Trump is just the latest in a line of presidents to test the limits of the resolution — though he’s done so at a time when he’s often bristling at the nation’s checks and balances.

Trump on Monday sent a letter to Congress — as required by the War Powers Resolution — that said strikes on Iran over the weekend were “limited in scope and purpose” and “designed to minimize casualties, deter future attacks and limit the risk of escalation.”

But after classified briefings with top White House officials this week, some lawmakers remain skeptical about how imminent the threat was.

“There was no imminent threat to the United States,” said Rep. Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, after Friday’s classified briefing.

“There’s always an Iranian threat to the world. But, I have not seen anything to suggest that the threat from the Iranians was radically different last Saturday than it was two Saturdays ago,” Himes said.

Meanwhile, nearly all Republicans applauded Trump’s decision to strike Iran. And for GOP senators, supporting the resolution would have meant rebuking the president at the same time they’re working to pass his major legislative package.

Kaine proposed a similar resolution in 2020 aimed at limiting Trump’s authority to launch military operations against Iran. Among the eight Republicans who joined Democrats in approving that resolution was Indiana Sen. Todd Young.

After Thursday’s classified briefing for the Senate, Young said he was “confident that Iran was prepared to pose a significant threat” and that, given Trump’s stated goal of no further escalation, “I do not believe this resolution is necessary at this time.”

“Should the Administration’s posture change or events dictate the consideration of additional American military action, Congress should be consulted so we can best support those efforts and weigh in on behalf of our constituents,” Young said in a statement.

Trump has said that a ceasefire between Israel and Iran is now in place. But he and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei have verbally sparred in recent days, with the Iranian leader warning the U.S. not to launch future strikes on Iran.

White House officials have said they expect to restart talks soon with Iran, though nothing has been scheduled.

Cappelletti writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Leah Askarinam contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — A plan to sell more than 3,200 square miles of federal lands has been ruled out of Republicans’ big tax and spending cut bill after the Senate parliamentarian determined the proposal by Senate Energy Chairman Mike Lee would violate the chamber’s rules.

Lee, a Utah Republican, has proposed selling millions of acres of public lands in the West to states or other entities for use as housing or infrastructure. The plan would revive a longtime ambition of Western conservatives to cede lands to local control after a similar proposal failed in the House earlier this year.

The proposal received a mixed reception Monday from the governors of Western states. New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, a Democrat, called it problematic in her state because of the close relationship residents have with public lands.

Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon, a Republican, voiced qualified support.

“On a piece-by-piece basis where states have the opportunity to craft policies that make sense … we can actually allow for some responsible growth in areas with communities that are landlocked at this point,” he said at a news conference in Santa Fe, New Mexico, where the Western Governors’ Association was meeting.

Lee, in a post on X Monday night, said he would keep trying.

“Housing prices are crushing families and keeping young Americans from living where they grew up. We need to change that,’’ he wrote, adding that a revised plan would remove all U.S. Forest Service land from possible sale. Sales of sites controlled by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management would be significantly reduced, Lee said, so that only land within 5 miles of population centers could be sold.

Environmental advocates celebrated the ruling late Monday by Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough, but cautioned that Lee’s proposal was far from dead.

“This is a victory for the American public, who were loud and clear: Public lands belong in public hands, for current and future generations alike,’’ said Tracy Stone-Manning, president of The Wilderness Society. “Our public lands are not for sale.”

Carrie Besnette Hauser, president and CEO of the nonprofit Trust for Public Land, called the procedural ruling in the Senate “an important victory in the fight to protect America’s public lands from short-sighted proposals that would have undermined decades of bipartisan work to protect, steward and expand access to the places we all share.”

“But make no mistake: this threat is far from over,” Hauser added. “Efforts to dismantle our public lands continue, and we must remain vigilant as proposals now under consideration,” including plans to roll back the bipartisan Great American Outdoors Act and cut funding for land and water conservation, make their way through Congress, she said.

MacDonough, the Senate parliamentarian, also ruled out a host of other Republican-led provisions Monday night, including construction of a mining road in Alaska and changes to speed permitting of oil and gas leases on federal lands.

While the parliamentarian’s rulings are advisory, they are rarely, if ever, ignored. Lawmakers are using a budget reconciliation process to bypass the Senate filibuster to pass President Trump’s tax-cut package by a self-imposed July Fourth deadline.

Lee’s plan revealed sharp disagreement among Republicans who support wholesale transfers of federal property to spur development and generate revenue, and other lawmakers who are staunchly opposed.

Land in 11 Western states from Alaska to New Mexico would be eligible for sale. Montana was carved out of the proposal after lawmakers there objected. In states such as Utah and Nevada, the government controls the vast majority of lands, protecting them from potential exploitation but hindering growth.

“Washington has proven time and again it can’t manage this land. This bill puts it in better hands,” Lee said in announcing the plan.

Housing advocates have cautioned that federal land is not universally suitable for affordable housing. Some of the parcels up for sale in Utah and Nevada under a House proposal were far from developed areas.

New Mexico Sen. Martin Heinrich, the ranking Democrat on the energy committee, said Lee’s plan would exclude Americans from places where they fish, hunt and camp.

“I don’t think it’s clear that we would even get substantial housing as a result of this,” Heinrich said earlier this month. “What I know would happen is people would lose access to places they know and care about and that drive our Western economies.”

Daly writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — The massive tax and spending cuts package that President Trump wants on his desk by July 4 would loosen regulations on gun silencers and certain types of rifles and shotguns, advancing a longtime priority of the gun industry as Republican leaders in the House and Senate try to win enough votes to pass the bill.

The guns provision was first requested in the House by Georgia Rep. Andrew Clyde, a Republican gun store owner who had initially opposed the larger tax package. The House bill would remove silencers — called “suppressors” by the gun industry — from a 1930s law that regulates firearms that are considered the most dangerous, eliminating a $200 tax while removing a layer of background checks.

The Senate kept the provision on silencers in its version of the bill and expanded upon it, adding short-barreled, or sawed-off, rifles and shotguns.

Republicans who have long supported the changes, along with the gun industry, say the tax infringes on 2nd Amendment rights. They say silencers are mostly used by hunters and target shooters for sport.

“Burdensome regulations and unconstitutional taxes shouldn’t stand in the way of protecting American gun owners’ hearing,” said Clyde, who owns two gun stores in Georgia and often wears a pin shaped like an assault rifle on his suit lapel.

Democrats are fighting to stop the provision, which was unveiled days after two Minnesota state legislators were shot in their homes, as the bill speeds through the Senate. They argue that loosening regulations on silencers could make it easier for criminals and active shooters to conceal their weapons.

“Parents don’t want silencers on their streets, police don’t want silencers on their streets,” said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York.

The gun language has broad support among Republicans and has received little attention as House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) work to settle differences within the party on cuts to Medicaid and energy tax credits, among other issues. But it is just one of hundreds of policy and spending items included to entice members to vote for the legislation that could have broad implications if the bill is enacted within weeks, as Trump wants.

Inclusion of the provision is also a sharp turn from the climate in Washington just three years ago when Democrats, like Republicans now, controlled Congress and the White House and pushed through bipartisan gun legislation. The bill increased background checks for some buyers under the age of 21, made it easier to take firearms from potentially dangerous people and sent millions of dollars to mental health services in schools.

Passed in the summer of 2022, just weeks after the shooting of 19 children and two adults at a school in Uvalde, Texas, it was the most significant legislative response to gun violence in decades.

Three years later, as they try to take advantage of their consolidated power in Washington, Republicans are packing as many of their longtime priorities as possible, including the gun legislation, into the massive, wide-ranging bill that Trump has called “beautiful.”

“I’m glad the Senate is joining the House to stand up for the 2nd Amendment and our Constitution, and I will continue to fight for these priorities as the Senate works to pass President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill,” said Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who was one of the lead negotiators on the bipartisan gun bill in 2022 but is now facing a primary challenge from the right in his bid for reelection next year.

If the gun provisions remain in the larger legislation and it is passed, silencers and the short-barrel rifles and shotguns would lose an extra layer of regulation that they are subject to under the National Firearms Act, passed in the 1930s in response to concerns about mafia violence. They would still be subject to the same regulations that apply to most other guns — and that includes possible loopholes that allow some gun buyers to avoid background checks when guns are sold privately or online.

Larry Keane of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, who supports the legislation, says changes are aimed at helping target shooters and hunters protect their hearing. He argues that the use of silencers in violent crimes is rare. “All it’s ever intended to do is to reduce the report of the firearm to hearing-safe levels,” Keane says.

Speaking on the floor before the bill passed the House, Rep. Clyde said the bill restores 2nd Amendment rights from “over 90 years of draconian taxes.” Clyde said Johnson included his legislation in the larger bill “with the purest of motive.”

“Who asked for it? I asked,” said Clyde, who ultimately voted for the bill after the gun silencer provision was added.

Clyde was responding to Rep. Maxwell Frost, a 28-year-old Florida Democrat, who went to the floor and demanded to know who was responsible for the gun provision. Frost, who was a gun-control activist before being elected to Congress, called himself a member of the “mass shooting generation” and said the bill would help “gun manufacturers make more money off the death of children and our people.”

Among other concerns, control advocates say less regulation for silencers could make it harder for law enforcement to stop an active shooter.

“There’s a reason silencers have been regulated for nearly a century: They make it much harder for law enforcement and bystanders to react quickly to gunshots,” said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety.

Schumer and other Democrats are trying to persuade the Senate parliamentarian to drop the language as she reviews the bill for policy provisions that aren’t budget-related.

“Senate Democrats will fight this provision at the parliamentary level and every other level with everything we’ve got,” Schumer said earlier this month.

Jalonick writes for the Associated Press.

ORLANDO, Fla. — Randolph Bracy and LaVon Bracy Davis are taking sibling rivalry to a new level as the brother and sister run against each other in a race for a Florida state Senate seat on Tuesday.

Not only that, one of their opponents for the Democratic nomination in the district representing parts of metro Orlando is Alan Grayson, a combative former Democratic U.S. congressman who drew national attention in 2009 when he said in a House floor speech that the Republican health care plan was to “die quickly.”

The headline-grabbing candidates are running in the special primary election for the seat that had been held by Geraldine Thompson, a trailblazing veteran lawmaker who died earlier this year following complications from knee-replacement surgery. A fourth candidate also is running in the Democratic primary — personal injury attorney Coretta Anthony-Smith.

The winner will face Republican Willie Montague in September for the general election in the Democratic-dominant district. Black voters make up more than half registered Democrats in the district.

Florida Sen. Randolph Bracy, rear, makes a point during a Senate Committee on Reapportionment hearing in a legislative session, Thursday, Jan. 13, 2022, in Tallahassee, Fla.

(Phelan M. Ebenhack / Associated Press)

Both siblings have experience in the state legislature. Bracy Davis was a state representative, and Bracy was a former state senator. Adding to the family dynamics was the fact that the siblings’ mother, civil rights activist Lavon Wright Bracy, was the maid of honor at Thompson’s wedding and was one of her oldest friends. She has endorsed her daughter over her son.

The siblings’ family has been active in Orlando’s civic life for decades. Their father, Randolph Bracy Jr., was a local NAACP president, a founder of a Baptist church in Orlando and director of the religion department at Bethune-Cookman University.

It wasn’t the first time the family has been caught up in competing endorsements. When Bracy and Thompson ran against each other for the Democratic primary in a state senate race last year, Bracy Davis endorsed Thompson over her brother. Campaign fliers sent out recently by a Republican political operative start with “Bracy Yourself!”

Bracy, 48, who one time played professional basketball in Turkey, told the Orlando Sentinel that it was “disappointing and hurtful” for his sister to run after he had announced his bid. But Bracy Davis, 45, an attorney by training, said she was running for the people in state senate District 15, not against any of the other candidates. She said that she intended to continue Thompson’s legacy of pushing for voters’ rights and increasing pay for public schoolteachers. Thompson’s family has endorsed Bracy Davis.

Grayson was elected to Congress in 2008 and voted out in 2010. Voters sent him back to Congress in 2012, but he gave up his seat for an unsuccessful 2016 Senate run.

WASHINGTON — Republicans have suffered a sizable setback on one key aspect of President Trump’s big bill after their plans to gut the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau and other provisions from the Senate Banking Committee ran into procedural violations with the Senate parliamentarian.

Republicans in the Senate proposed zeroing out funding for the CFPB, the landmark agency set up in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, to save $6.4 billion. The bureau had been designed as a way to better protect Americans from financial fraud, but has been opposed by many GOP lawmakers since its inception. The Trump administration has targeted the CFPB as an example of government overregulation and overreach.

The findings by the Senate parliamentarian’s office, which is working overtime scrubbing Trump’s overall bill to ensure it aligns with the chamber’s strict “Byrd Rule” processes, signal a tough road ahead. The most daunting questions are still to come, as GOP leadership rushes to muscle Trump’s signature package to the floor for votes by his Fourth of July deadline.

Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), the chairman of the Banking Committee that drafted the provisions in question, said in a statement, “My colleagues and I remain committed to cutting wasteful spending at the CFPB and will continue working with the Senate parliamentarian on the Committee’s provisions.”

For Democrats, who have been fighting Trump’s 1,000-page package at every step, the parliamentarian’s advisory amounted to a significant win.

“Democrats fought back, and we will keep fighting back against this ugly bill,” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, the top Democrat on the Banking Committee, who engineered the creation of the CFPB before she was elected to Congress.

Warren said that GOP proposals “are a reckless, dangerous attack on consumers and would lead to more Americans being tricked and trapped by giant financial institutions and put the stability of our entire financial system at risk — all to hand out tax breaks to billionaires.”

The parliamentarian’s rulings, while advisory, are rarely, if ever ignored.

With the majority in Congress, Republicans have been drafting a sweeping package that extends some $4.5-trillion tax cuts Trump approved during his first term, in 2017, that otherwise expire at the end of the year. It adds $350 billion to national security, including billions for Trump’s mass deportation agenda. And it slashes some $1 trillion from Medicaid, food stamps and other government programs.

All told, the package is estimated to add at least $2.4 trillion to the nation’s deficits over the decade, and leave 10.9 million more people without healthcare coverage, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office’s review of the House-passed package, which is now undergoing revisions in the Senate.

The parliamentarian’s office is responsible for determining if the package adheres to the Byrd Rule, named after the late Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia, who was considered one of the masters of Senate procedure. The rule essentially bars policy matters from being addressed in the budget reconciliation process.

Senate GOP leaders are using the budget reconciliation process, which is increasingly how big bills move through Congress, because it allows passage on a simple majority vote, rather than face a filibuster with the higher 60-vote threshold.

But if any of the bill’s provisions violate the Byrd Rule, that means they can be challenged at the tougher 60-vote threshold, which is a tall order in the 53-47 Senate. Leaders are often forced to strip those proposals from the package, even though doing so risks losing support from lawmakers who championed those provisions.

One of the biggest questions ahead for the parliamentarian will be over the Senate GOP’s proposal to use “current policy” as opposed to “current law” to determine the baseline budget and whether the overall package adds significantly to deficits.

Already the Senate parliamentarian’s office has waded through several titles of Trump’s big bill, including those from the Senate Armed Services Committee and Senate Energy & Public Works Committee.

The Banking panel offered a modest bill, just eight pages, and much of it was deemed out of compliance.

The parliamentarian found that in addition to gutting the CFPB, other provisions aimed at rolling back entities put in place after the 2008 financial crisis would violate the Byrd Rule. Those include a GOP provision to limit the Financial Research Fund, which was set up to conduct analysis, saving nearly $300 million; and another to shift the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, which conducts oversight of accounting firms, to the Securities and Exchange Commission and terminate positions, saving $773 million.

The GOP plan to change the pay schedule for employees at the Federal Reserve, saving $1.4 billion, was also determined to be in violation of the Byrd Rule.

The parliamentarian’s office also raised Byrd Rule violations over GOP proposals to repeal certain aspects of the Inflation Reduction Act, including on emission standards for some model year 2027 light-duty and medium-duty vehicles.

Mascaro writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — President Trump on Friday called for the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate the 2020 election won by Democrat Joe Biden, repeating his baseless claim that the contest was marred by widespread fraud.

“Biden was grossly incompetent, and the 2020 election was a total FRAUD!” Trump said in a social media post in which he also sought to favorably contrast his immigration enforcement approach with that of the former president. “The evidence is MASSIVE and OVERWHELMING. A Special Prosecutor must be appointed. This cannot be allowed to happen again in the United States of America! Let the work begin!”

Trump’s post, made as his Republican White House is consumed by a hugely substantial foreign policy decision on whether to get directly involved in the Israel-Iran war, is part of an amped-up effort by him to undermine the legitimacy of Biden’s presidency. Earlier this month, Trump directed his administration to investigate Biden’s actions as president, alleging aides masked his predecessor’s “cognitive decline.” Biden has dismissed the investigation as “a mere distraction.”

The post also revives a long-running grievance by Trump that the election was stolen even though courts around the country and a Trump attorney general from his first term found no evidence of fraud that could have affected the outcome. The Department of Homeland Security’s cybersecurity arm pronounced the election “the most secure in American history.”

It was unclear what Trump had in mind when he called for a special prosecutor, but in the event Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi heeds his call, she may face pressure to appoint someone who has already been confirmed by the Senate. A Justice Department spokesman declined to comment Friday.

The Justice Department in recent years has appointed a succession of special counsels — sometimes, though not always, plucked from outside the agency — to lead investigations into politically sensitive matters, including into conduct by Biden and by Trump.

Last year, Trump’s personal lawyers launched an aggressive, and successful, challenge to the appointment of Jack Smith, the special counsel assigned to investigate his efforts to undo the 2020 presidential election and his retention of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Fla. A Trump-appointed judge agreed, ruling that then-Atty. Gen. Merrick Garland had exceeded his bounds by appointing a prosecutor without Senate approval and confirmation, and dismissed the case.

That legal team included Todd Blanche, who is now deputy attorney general, as well as Emil Bove, who is Blanche’s top deputy but was recently nominated to serve as a judge on a federal appeals court.

Tucker writes for the Associated Press.

Reporting from Washington — For those outside Washington, government institutions seem equally dysfunctional. Inside the Beltway, however, the Senate occupies a somewhat special place.

The upper chamber is often revered – especially by its own members — as a more thoughtful, deliberate and collaborative body, where respect for minority viewpoints is baked into cherished rules and precedents.

But one by one, those long-standing traditions that have served as a check against extreme legislation or appointments are being tossed aside amid growing partisanship and a closely divided government.

Rather than nudging senators to compromise, the rules are now a being used in a procedural arms race that threatens to erode the very culture and practice that made the Senate different than the majority-rules House.

“This is the latest manifestation of a changing and declining Senate,” said Thomas Mann, a congressional scholar at the Brookings Institution and the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies.

Trump made promises to blue-collar voters. Democrats plan to make sure he follows through »

“The polarization between the parties and the intensity of sentiment outside the Senate has already led to changes in norms and practices,” he said. “Our system is not well structured to operate in a period of intense polarization.”

The latest example came Wednesday when GOP lawmakers took the extraordinary step of changing committee rules to advance two of President Trump’s Cabinet nominees without any Democrats in attendance.

Democrats, revealing their own willingness to defy Senate niceties, had boycotted the votes on Steven Mnuchin as Treasury secretary and Rep. Tom Price as head of Health and Human Services as they sought more answers on the nominees’ records.

Now Trump would like to see other Senate rules scrapped to the ensure approval of his Supreme Court nominee, Neil M. Gorsuch, whom Democrats had vowed to block even before his name was revealed.

Democrats are still stinging over Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s refusal for most of last year to grant a vote for President Obama’s nominee, Judge Merrick Garland, to fill the seat of the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

Supreme Court nominations have rarely been subjected to filibusters, but Democrats are talking about taking such a move against Gorsuch. In response, Republicans are considering changing Senate rules so only 51 votes are needed to end the delaying tactic, rather than the current 60. The move is seen as so severe it’s been dubbed the “nuclear option.”

“I would say, ‘If you can, Mitch, go nuclear,’ because that would be an absolute shame if a man of this quality was caught up in the web,” Trump said Wednesday.

Democrats opened the door themselves in 2013 when they used the nuclear option to push through several of Obama’s judicial and executive nominations, which Republicans had been filibustering.

The final frontier in this procedural war could be ending the use of filibusters on ordinary legislation. That would means that bills — which typically require 60 votes to advance in the Senate — could be moved with a 51-vote simple majority. With Republicans currently holding 52 seats, it would relegate Democrats to bystanders in the Senate.

“What is the Senate if that’s gone?” asked one Senate aide. “It’s just the House.”

The Senate has long been a frustrating place. Its slow pace and cumbersome rules are nothing like the more rambunctious House, where the majority can quickly pass a legislative agenda.

But the founders designed the bicameral system with that unique difference — one chamber to swiftly answer the will of the people, the other for a more measured second look before sending bills on to the White House.

Only in the 20th century did senators create an option for ending a filibuster as a way to cut off prolonged debate.

It all sounds pretty archaic to an increasingly frustrated public that is reeling in an intensely partisan environment.

Trump’s election has only accelerated the pressure to end the civilities of the past. On the Republican side, tea party activists pressured Republicans to jam Obama’s agenda, even if that meant shutting down the government.

Now Democratic voters are marching in the streets to stop Trump, pressuring their party leaders to confront just as aggressively what many fear is a dangerous agenda.

“What we’re seeing now is that the base is more motivated than any of us have ever seen,” said Mark Stanley, spokesman for Demand Progress, a 2-million-member progressive group whose activists will be calling and emailing Democratic senators to oppose Gorsuch. It recently turned out 3,000 people at a Democratic senator’s town hall meeting in Rhode Island to protest his vote for Trump’s CIA director nominee.

“Especially in these unprecedented times we’re in, Democrats have to stick by their principles and do what their constituents are really asking for,” Stanley said.

Though both parties have contributed to the gridlock in the Senate, it was McConnell’s willingness to utilize the filibuster as an ordinary weapon in the Obama era — rather than the occasional cudgel — that is largely seen as having fueled today’s standoff.

McConnell has made it clear that Trump’s Supreme Court nominee will be confirmed even if Democrats mount a filibuster — all but declaring he will use the nuclear option to do so.

Trump and the GOP are charging forward with Obamacare repeal, but few are eager to follow »

Such a move would probably poison legislative operations in the Senate for the foreseeable future.

The prospect has so alarmed some Democrats that they may be willing to hold their nose and vote for Gorsuch to preserve the filibuster. Others are not so sure.

Sen. Angus King, an independent from Maine who caucuses with Democrats, acknowledges that when he arrived in the Senate in 2013, he, too, was so quickly frustrated by the obstruction that he was willing to consider rules changes.

But the former governor vividly remembers a private meeting of the Democratic caucus when one of the older senators advised the newer arrivals about the importance of the Senate as the cooling body and urged them to think about the long-term ramifications of their actions.

“One of the things that surprise me about this place is that people do things and they expect it’s not going to have results four or five years from now,” King said. “I’ve come to realize the 60-vote majority requires some kind of bipartisan support which ultimately makes legislation better.”

[email protected]

@LisaMascaro

ALSO

Despite talk of GOP unity, Trump’s programs face fight from Republican budget hawks

‘Believe me’: People say Trump’s language is affecting political discourse ‘bigly’

Trump’s rise draws white supremacists into political mainstream: ‘I am winning,’ says David Duke

More coverage of Congress

Live coverage from the campaign trail

WASHINGTON — Nearly six months after Joe Biden left the White House, Senate Republicans are still scrutinizing his presidency, kicking off the first in what’s expected to be a series of congressional hearings this year on his mental fitness in office.

Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee brought in three witnesses Wednesday — none of whom served in Biden’s administration — to scrutinize his time in office, arguing that the former president, his staff and the media must be held accountable. Democrats boycotted the hearing and criticized Republicans for “armchair-diagnosing” Biden when the committee could be looking into serious matters.

Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, who co-chaired the hearing, said that they will aim to “shine a light on exactly what went on in the White House during Biden’s presidency.”

“We simply cannot ignore what transpired because President Biden is no longer in office,” Cornyn said.

A spokesperson for Biden declined to comment on the hearing.

It was the first in what could be several hearings about Biden in the coming months. Over in the House, the Oversight Committee has subpoenaed several of Biden’s former staff members, along with his White House doctor, ordering him to testify at a June 27 hearing “as part of the investigation into the cover-up of President Joe Biden’s cognitive decline.”

Questions about Biden’s age and fitness erupted in the summer after his disastrous performance in a debate against Republican challenger Donald Trump, which ultimately led to the Democrat’s withdrawal from the race.

Even after Trump won back the presidency in November, Republicans have continued to hammer on Biden’s age, citing in part new reporting about Biden that was published this year.

Trump now alleges that Biden administration officials may have forged the former president’s signature and taken sweeping actions without his knowledge, though he provided no evidence of that happening. Trump has ordered lawyers at the White House and the Justice Department to investigate.

Republicans played clips during the hearing Wednesday of Democrats defending Biden. In the montage, the Democrats talk about how Biden was mentally sharp when he was in office.

“Most Democrats on this committee have chosen to all but boycott the hearing and have failed to call a single witness,” Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) said. “They have chosen to ignore this issue, like they ignored President Biden’s decline.”

Sen. Dick Durbin, the committee’s top Democrat, criticized Republicans for holding a hearing on the last president at a time when there are “numerous critical challenges facing the nation that are under our jurisdiction.”

“Apparently armchair-diagnosing former President Biden is more important than the issues of grave concern,” said Durbin of Illinois.

After his opening remarks, Durbin played a video montage of his own — but with clips of Trump speaking that he said reflected the “cognitive ability” of the current president. Durbin left the hearing after his opening remarks.

Three witnesses testified: former White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer, former White House official Theodore Wold and University of Virginia law professor John Harrison. Spicer and Wold both served under Trump.

Much of the focus was on Biden’s alleged use of an autopen. Trump has repeated long-standing allegations that the Biden White House relied on an autopen to sign presidential pardons, executive orders and other key documents, claiming that its use cast doubt on their validity.

Sen. Katie Britt (R-Ala.) also questioned Spicer on “what mechanisms should we put in place” to hold the media accountable “for not actually following what is clearly in front of them.”

Cappelletti writes for the Associated Press.

Decades ago, Pete Wilson did something unusual. The U.S. senator came home to run for California governor.

The path to power typically goes the opposite direction, with governors trading the statehouse for the (perceived) influence and prestige of being one of just 100 members of a club that fancies itself — not so humbly or precisely — as “the world’s greatest deliberative body.”

Wilson bucked that sentiment.

“It is a much more difficult role,” he said of being governor, and one he came to much prefer over his position on Capitol Hill.

It turns out that Wilson, a Republican who narrowly prevailed in a fierce 1990 contest against Democrat Dianne Feinstein, was onto something.

Since, then five other lawmakers have left the Senate to become their state’s governor. Several more tried and failed.

Although it’s still more common for a governor to run for Senate than vice versa, in 2026 as many as three sitting U.S. senators may run for governor, the most in at least 90 years, according to the nonpartisan Cook Political Report.

Clearly, the U.S. Senate has lost some of its luster.

There have always been those who found the place, with its pretentious airs, dilatory pacing and stultifying rules of order, a frustrating environment to work in, much less thrive.

The late Wendell Ford, who served a term as Kentucky governor before spending the next 24 years in the Senate, used to say “the unhappiest members of the Senate were the former governors,” recalled Charlie Cook, founder of the eponymous political newsletter. “They were used to getting things done.”

And that, as Cook noted, “was when the Senate did a lot more than it does now.”

What’s more, the Senate used to be a more dignified, less partisan place — especially when compared with the fractious House. An apocryphal story has George Washington breakfasting with Thomas Jefferson and referring to the Senate as a saucer intended to cool the passions of the intemperate lower chamber. (It helps to picture a teacup filled with scalding brew.)

These days, both chambers are bubbling cauldrons of animosity and partisan backbiting.

Worse, there’s not a whole lot of advising going in the Senate, which reflexively consents to pretty much whatever it is that President Trump asks of the prostrated Republican majority.

“The Senate has become an employment agency where we just have vote after vote after vote to confirm nominees that are are going to pass, generally, 53 to 47, with very rare exceptions,” said Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet, a Democrat who’s running to be governor of his home state.

Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet, a Democrat, is the front-runner in his bid to be the state’s next governor.

(Mark Schiefelbein / Associated Press)

The other announced gubernatorial hopeful is Alabama Sen. Tommy Tuberville, a Republican who’s made no secret of his distaste for Washington after a single term. Tennessee’s Marsha Blackburn, a fellow Republican fresh off reelection, is also expected to run for governor in her state.

Bennet arrived in the Senate 16 years ago and since then, he said, it’s been “really a one-way ratchet down.”

“You think about the fact that we’re really down to a couple [of] bills a year,” he said this week between votes on Capitol Hill. “One is a continuing resolution that isn’t even a real appropriations bill … it’s just cementing the budget decisions that were made last year, and then the defense bill.”

Despite all that, Bennet said he’s not running for governor “because I’m worn out. It’s not because I’m frustrated or bored or irritated or aggravated” with life in the Senate, “though the Senate can be a very aggravating place to work.” Rather, working beneath the golden dome in Denver would offer a better opportunity “to push back and to fight Trumpism,” he said, by offering voters a practical and affirmative Democratic alternative.

Try that as one of 47 straitjacketed senators.

When Wilson took office in January 1991, he succeeded the term-limited George Deukmejian, a fellow Republican.

He immediately faced a massive budget deficit, which he closed through a package of tax hikes and spending cuts facilitated by his negotiating partner, Democratic Assembly Speaker Willie Brown. Their agreement managed to antagonize Democrats and Republicans alike.

Wilson didn’t much care.

After serving in the Legislature, as San Diego mayor and a U.S. senator, he often said being California governor was the best job he ever had. There are legislators to wrangle, agencies to oversee, natural disasters to address, interest groups to fend off — all while trying to stay in the good graces of millions of often cranky, impatient voters.

“Not everybody enjoys it,” Wilson said when asked about the prospect of Kamala Harris serving as governor, “and not everyone is good at it.”

Harris, who served four years in the Senate before ascending to the vice presidency, has given herself the summer to decide whether to run for governor, try again for the White House or retire from politics altogether.

California’s next governor will probably have to take some “very painful steps,” Wilson said, given the dicey economic outlook and the likelihood of federal budget cuts and other hostile moves by the Trump administration. That will make a lot of people unhappy, including many of Harris’ fellow Democrats.

How would she feel about returning to Sacramento’s small stage, wrestling with intractable issues such as the budget and homelessness, and dealing with the inevitable political heat? We won’t know until and unless Harris runs.

If passed, the bill will establish for the first time a regulatory regime for stablecoins, a fast rising financial product.

The United States Senate has passed a bill to create a regulatory framework for US-dollar-pegged cryptocurrency tokens known as stablecoins, in a watershed moment for the digital asset industry.

The bill, dubbed the GENIUS Act, received bipartisan support on Tuesday, with several Democrats joining most Republicans to back the proposed federal rules. It passed 68-30. The House of Representatives, which is controlled by Republicans, needs to pass its version of the bill before it heads to President Donald Trump’s desk for approval.

Stablecoins, a type of cryptocurrency designed to maintain a constant value, usually a 1:1 dollar peg, are commonly used by crypto traders to move funds between tokens. Their use has grown rapidly in recent years, and proponents say that they could be used to send payments instantly.

If signed into law, the stablecoin bill would require tokens to be backed by liquid assets – such as US dollars and short-term Treasury bills – and for issuers to publicly disclose the composition of their reserves on a monthly basis.

“It is a major milestone,” said Andrew Olmem, a managing partner at law firm Mayer Brown and the former deputy director of the National Economic Council during Trump’s first term.

“It establishes, for the first time, a regulatory regime for stablecoins, a rapidly developing financial product and industry.”

The crypto industry has long pushed for lawmakers to pass legislation creating rules for digital assets, arguing that a clear framework could enable stablecoins to become more widely used. The sector spent more than $119m backing pro-crypto congressional candidates in last year’s elections and had tried to paint the issue as bipartisan.

The House passed a stablecoin bill last year but it died after the Senate, in which Democrats held the majority at the time, did not take it up.

Conflict of interest

Trump has sought to broadly overhaul US cryptocurrency policies after courting cash from the industry during his presidential campaign.

Bo Hines, who leads Trump’s Council of Advisers on Digital Assets, has said the White House wants a stablecoin bill passed before August.

Tensions on Capitol Hill over Trump’s various crypto ventures at one point threatened to derail the digital asset sector’s hope of legislation this year as Democrats have grown increasingly frustrated with Trump and his family members promoting their personal crypto projects.

“In advancing these bills, lawmakers forfeited their opportunity to confront Trump’s crypto grift – the largest, most flagrant corruption in presidential history,” said Bartlett Naylor, financial policy advocate for Public Citizen, a consumer rights advocacy group.

Trump’s crypto ventures include a meme coin called $TRUMP, launched in January, and a crypto company he partly owns, called World Liberty Financial.

The White House has said there are no conflicts of interest present for Trump and that his assets are in a trust managed by his children.

Other Democrats have expressed concern that the bill would not prevent Big Tech companies from issuing their own private stablecoins, and argued that legislation needed stronger anti-money laundering protections and prohibitions on foreign stablecoin issuers.

“A bill that turbocharges the stablecoin market, while facilitating the president’s corruption and undermining national security, financial stability and consumer protection is worse than no bill at all,” said Senator Elizabeth Warren, a Democrat, in remarks on the Senate floor in May.

The bill could face further changes in the House.

In a statement, the Conference of State Bank Supervisors called for “critical changes” to mitigate financial stability risks.

“CSBS remains concerned with the dramatic and unsupported expansion of the authority of uninsured banks to conduct money transmission or custody activities nationwide without the approval or oversight of host state supervisors,” said president and CEO Brandon Milhorn in a statement.

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans on Monday proposed deeper Medicaid cuts, including new work requirements for parents of teens, as a way to offset the costs of making President Trump’s tax breaks more permanent in draft legislation unveiled for his “Big Beautiful Bill.”

The proposals from Republicans keep in place the current $10,000 deduction of state and local taxes, called SALT, drawing quick blowback from GOP lawmakers from New York and other high-tax states, who fought for a $40,000 cap in the House-passed bill. Senators insisted negotiations continue.

The Senate draft also enhances Trump’s proposed new tax break for seniors, with a bigger $6,000 deduction for low- to moderate-income senior households earning no more than $75,000 a year for singles, $150,000 for couples.

All told, the text unveiled by the Senate Finance Committee’s Republicans provides the most comprehensive look yet at changes the GOP senators want to make to the 1,000-page package approved by House Republicans last month. GOP leaders are pushing to fast-track the bill for a vote by Trump’s Fourth of July deadline.

Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), the chairman, said the proposal would prevent a tax hike and achieve “significant savings” by slashing green energy funds “and targeting waste, fraud and abuse.”

It comes as Americans broadly support levels of funding for popular safety net programs, according to the poll from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. Many Americans see Medicaid and food assistance programs as underfunded.

What’s in the “Big Beautiful Bill” so far

Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” is the centerpiece of his domestic policy agenda, a hodgepodge of GOP priorities that Republicans are trying to swiftly pass over unified opposition from Democrats — a tall order for the slow-moving Senate.

Fundamental to the package is the extension of some $4.5 trillion in tax breaks approved during his first term, in 2017, that are expiring this year if Congress fails to act. There are also new ones, including no taxes on tips, as well as more than $1 trillion in program cuts.

After the House passed its version, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated the bill would add $2.4 trillion to the nation’s deficits over the decade, and leave 10.9 million more people without health insurance, due largely to the proposed new work requirements and other changes.

The biggest tax breaks, some $12,000 a year, would go to the wealthiest households, CBO said, while the poorest would see a tax hike of roughly $1,600. Middle-income households would see tax breaks of $500 to $1,000 a year, CBO said.

Both the House and Senate packages are eyeing a massive $350-billion buildup of Homeland Security and Pentagon funds, including some $175 billion for Trump’s mass deportation efforts, such as the hiring of 10,000 more officers for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE.

This comes as protests over deporting migrants have erupted nationwide — including the stunning handcuffing of Sen. Alex Padilla last week in Los Angeles — and as deficit hawks such as Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul are questioning the vast spending on Homeland Security.

Senate Democratic Leader Charles E. Schumer warned that the Senate GOP’s draft “cuts to Medicaid are deeper and more devastating than even the Republican House’s disaster of a bill.”

Trade-offs in bill risk GOP support

As the package now moves to the Senate, the changes to Medicaid, SALT and green energy programs are part of a series of trade-offs GOP leaders are making as they try to push the package to passage with their slim majorities, with almost no votes to spare.

But criticism of the Senate’s version came quickly after House Speaker Mike Johnson warned senators of making substantial changes.

“We have been crystal clear that the SALT deal we negotiated in good faith with the Speaker and the White House must remain in the final bill,” the co-chairs of the House SALT caucus, Reps. Young Kim (R-Calif.) and Andrew Garbarino (R-N.Y.), said in a joint statement Monday.

Republican Rep. Nicole Malliotakis of New York posted on X that the $10,000 cap in the Senate bill was not only insulting, but a “slap in the face to the Republican districts that delivered our majority and trifecta” with the White House.

Medicaid and green energy cuts

Some of the largest cost savings in the package come from the GOP plan to impose new work requirements on able-bodied single adults, ages 18 to 64 and without dependents, who receive Medicaid, the health care program used by 80 million Americans.

While the House first proposed the new Medicaid work requirement, it exempted parents with dependents. The Senate’s version broadens the requirement to include parents of children older than 14, as part of their effort to combat waste in the program and push personal responsibility.

Already, the Republicans had proposed expanding work requirements in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, to include older Americans up to age 64 and parents of school-age children older than 10. The House had imposed the requirement on parents of children older than 7.

People would need to work 80 hours a month or be engaged in a community service program to qualify.

One Republican, Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley, has joined a few others pushing to save Medicaid from steep cuts — including to the so-called provider tax that almost all states levy on hospitals as a way to help fund their programs.

The Senate plan proposes phasing down that provider tax, which is now up to 6%. Starting in 2027, the Senate looks to gradually lower that threshold until it reaches 3.5% in 2031, with exceptions for nursing homes and intermediate care facilities.

Hawley slammed the Senate bill’s changes on the provider tax. “This needs a lot of work. It’s really concerning and I’m really surprised by it,” he said. “Rural hospitals are going to be in bad shape.”

The Senate also keeps in place the House’s proposed new $35-per-service co-pay imposed on some Medicaid patients who earn more than the poverty line, which is about $32,000 a year for a family of four, with exceptions for some primary, prenatal, pediatric and emergency room care.

And Senate Republicans are seeking a slower phaseout of some Biden-era green energy tax breaks to allow continued develop of wind, solar and other projects that the most conservative Republicans in Congress want to end more quickly. Tax breaks for electric vehicles would be immediately eliminated.

Conservative Republicans say the cuts overall don’t go far enough, and they oppose the bill’s provision to raise the national debt limit by $5 trillion to allow more borrowing to pay the bills.

“We’ve got a ways to go on this one,” said Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.).

Mascaro and Freking write for the Associated Press. AP writers Mary Clare Jalonick and Matthew Daly contributed to this report.

June 11 (UPI) — The U.S. Senate overwhelmingly advanced legislation for a regulatory method for payment with stablecoins.

The cloture, which ended debate, was approved 68-30, including 18 Democrats. It clears the way for final approval for the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act, or GENIUS. Two Republicans, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Josh Hawley of Missouri, voted no.

A stablecoin, which supporters say is a type of cryptocurrency designed to maintain a stable value, is typically pegged to another asset such as a currency such as a U.S. dollar or a commodity, including gold. Other digital cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin, can experience significant price fluctuations and are not part of the Senate legislation.

For passage in the Senate, there needs to be at least 60 votes. On Tuesday, two House committees easily approved a bill that establishes a regulatory framework for digital assets, not just stablecoin, called the CLARITY Act.

“We want to bring cryptocurrency into the mainstream, and the GENIUS Act will help us do that,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota, adding there was “more work to be done” for Congress in regard to digital assets, referring to the House’s bill.

The bill would require stablecoins to be fully backed by U.S. dollars or similar liquid assets, mandate annual audits for issuers with more than $50 billion in market capitalization and add language around foreign issuance.

The cloture ended an open amendments process. Democrats had sought to add a provision that would prevent President Donald Trump and other elected officials from profiting off stablecoins.

“Let me be clear, this did not happen by accident,” Senate Banking Committee Chair Tim Scott, R-S.C., said on the Senate floor before the vote. “It happened because we led. To those who said Washington could not act, to those who said Washington could not act, to those who doubted bipartisanship — let’s prove them wrong.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York voted against the bill along with other prominent Democrats.

“The GENIUS act attempts to set up some guardrails for buying and selling a type of cryptocurrency, one type called a stablecoin,” Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., said on the Senate floor before his no vote.

“Well, we need guardrails that ensure that government officials aren’t openly asking people to buy their coins in order to increase their personal profit or their family’s profit,” he added. “Where are those guardrails in this bill? They’re completely, totally absent.”

Some Democrats were concerned about foreign issuers, anti-money laundering standards, potential corporate issuance of stablecoins and Trump’s deepening ties to crypto ventures.

Trump and his wife, Melania, launched meme coins days before his inauguration on Jan. 20. His affiliated venture, World Liberty Financial, recently launched its stablecoin. Trump Media is planning to build a multi-billion dollar Bitcoin treasury. And American Bitcoin,a mining firm backed by his sons, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., is planning to go public via a Gryphon merger.

“It’s extremely unhelpful that we have a president who’s involved in this industry, and I would love to ban this activity, but that does not diminish the excellent work of this legislation,” Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., who approved the measure, said.

“It does not diminish the hard work that bipartisan group of senators put into this to make a difference and to write a law that can protect consumers, that can protect our financial services industry, that can protect the strength of the dollar, and that can protect people who would like access to capital.”

Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who voted against cloture, said: “Through his crypto business, Trump has created an efficient means to trade presidential favors like tariff exemptions, pardons and government appointments for hundreds of millions, perhaps billions of dollars from foreign governments, from billionaires and from large corporations. By passing the GENIUS Act, the Senate is not only about to bless this corruption, but to actively facilitate its expansion.”

SACRAMENTO — California’s state Democrats are shaking up leadership, with the Senate Democratic Caucus pledging unanimous support to Sen. Monique Limón (D-Goleta), who will take over as Senate president pro tem in early 2026.

Limón, who was elected to the state Senate in 2020, is chair of the Senate Democratic Caucus and the Senate banking committee. The 45-year-old Central Coast native served in the Assembly for four years before her Senate campaign and worked in higher education at UC Santa Barbara and the Santa Barbara County School Board before entering politics.

She highlighted the importance of the moment, noting that the caucus, amid ICE raids led by the Trump administration targeting minorities in Los Angeles and across the state, elected her — the first woman of color to hold the position.

The uncertain times, she said, were “a reminder of why leadership today, tomorrow and in the future matters, because leadership thinks about and influences the direction in all moments, but, in particular, in these very challenging moments. And for me, it is unbelievably humbling to be here.”

Recently, Limón has been vocal on the Sable Offshore Pipeline project, which aims to repair and reopen a pipeline off the coast of Santa Barbara County that spilled 21,000 gallons of crude oil in 2015. This year she wrote a measure, Senate Bill 542, in response to the project that would require more community input on reopening pipelines and better safety guidelines to find weak points that could lead to another spill.

“No one has fought harder to make college more affordable than Monique Limón,” said current Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire (D-Healdsburg), who also applauded her work on wildfire recovery. “She is a tireless voice for the Central Coast in rural parts of this great state.”

McGuire took leadership of the Senate in a unanimous vote by Democrats with former speaker and gubernatorial candidate Toni Atkins’ blessing in February. He pledged to protect the state’s progressive ideals ahead of a problematic state budget that continued to bubble over, with the Trump administration and Republican-controlled Congress supporting cuts in federal aid to the state for heathcare for low-income Californians, education and research and other essential programs.

The Sonoma County Democrat’s takeover was part of a wider change — both legislative houses were led by lawmakers from Northern California this year, leaving Southern California legislators with limited control. Limón’s district covers Santa Barbara County and parts of Ventura and San Luis Obispo counties.

McGuire terms out of office next year and may be planning a run for insurance commissioner in 2026 but wouldn’t confirm his plans despite collecting more than $220,000 in contributions so far this year.