Skip to content

OBBB Signed Into Law

President Donald Trump signed his “One Big, Beautiful Bill” into law during the July 4th picnic on the White House grounds, enacting a sweeping multitrillion-dollar legislative package that reflects the core of his policy agenda. The measure passed with near-unanimous Republican support in both chambers of Congress following months of negotiations and intense pressure from the president and GOP leadership.

The legislation extends Trump’s 2017 tax cuts and boosts funding for immigration enforcement and national defense. To balance the increased spending, the bill imposes substantial reductions to domestic programs, slashing Medicaid and food assistance by $1.2 trillion and cutting billions from federal higher education funding. According to estimates from the Congressional Budget Office, the bill will increase the national deficit by $3.3 trillion over the next decade and result in 11.8 million additional people losing health coverage.

Despite internal dissent and unanimous Democratic opposition, Trump succeeded in pushing the massive reconciliation bill through Congress in time for the July 4th deadline.

 

“Big, Beautiful Bill” Passes Senate

After a record-breaking vote-a-rama lasting over 24 hours, the U.S. Senate has passed President Trump’s expansive tax and spending reconciliation package — a major step toward his goal of signing the legislation into law by July 4. The bill encompasses the majority of the President’s legislative agenda.

The final vote was 51–50, with Vice President JD Vance casting the tie-breaking vote. Republican Senators Susan Collins (ME), Thom Tillis (NC), and Rand Paul (KY) joined all Senate Democrats in opposing the measure. Senators Collins and Tillis cited the bill’s Medicaid cuts and their potential impact on rural hospitals as key reasons for their “no” votes. A proposed amendment from Collins to establish a rural hospital stabilization fund failed in a procedural vote Tuesday morning. Tillis recently announced his decision to retire at the end of his term after facing political fallout from President Trump over his earlier vote against the motion to proceed.

For much of the overnight session, the bill’s fate remained in doubt. Republican leadership engaged in extensive negotiations with undecided senators, both behind closed doors and on the Senate floor. Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski (AK), who had withheld support for much of the process, ultimately voted in favor after securing Alaska-specific carve-outs from certain provisions in the legislation.

The legislative battle now shifts to the House of Representatives, where Speaker Mike Johnson is expected to bring the bill to a vote as early as Wednesday. The initial version of the package narrowly passed the House, where Republicans hold only a slim majority. Several members have already expressed concern over changes made by the Senate.

The conservative wing of the House GOP — particularly the House Freedom Caucus — has objected to the bill’s suspension of the debt ceiling and what it views as insufficient spending reductions. The House GOP’s budget plan called for $2 trillion in spending reductions to match $4.5 trillion in tax cuts. The Senate bill cuts just over $1.5 trillion but spends the full amount on taxes.

Meanwhile, more moderate Republicans have raised alarms over the deep Medicaid cuts included in the Senate-passed version. Senate Republicans approved a $1 trillion cut to Medicaid, which is far harsher than the original House plan.

Members of the House have been called back to Washington from their July 4 recess to begin consideration of the revised legislation. While its final passage remains uncertain, Speaker Johnson and President Trump have demonstrated a strong ability to unify their caucus in the past.

The Office of Federal Relations will continue to monitor developments and provide updates as this process unfolds.

Byrd Bath Strikes Medicaid Proposals

In yet another setback for Senate Republicans, the Senate Parliamentarian has ruled that several key Medicaid provisions in the GOP’s sweeping budget reconciliation bill violate the Byrd Rule, effectively stripping them from the legislation.

The Byrd Rule, a procedural safeguard named after the late Senator Robert Byrd, restricts what can be included in budget reconciliation bills. It prohibits provisions that are considered “extraneous” to the federal budget, meaning they must primarily affect government spending or revenue and not merely serve policy goals.

Among the provisions deemed to be in violation of the Byrd Rule are restrictions on pharmacy benefit managers and ACA subsidies for certain immigrants as well as, perhaps most importantly, limits on Medicaid provider taxes, which are state-imposed taxes on healthcare providers that are then used to draw down more federal Medicaid funding.

The Senate Finance Committee, which has jurisdiction over Medicaid, proposed lowering the provider tax cap to 3.5% of net patient revenue over the next 6 years in Medicaid-expansion states, and barring non-expansion states from raising provider taxes beyond their current levels.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, this proposal would save the government hundreds of billions of dollars over the next 10 years. Hospitals around the country, however, warned that this could devastate rural and underserved hospitals that rely heavily on Medicaid funding. The potential impacts of Medicaid cuts were a point of contention within the Senate GOP, with members such as Josh Hawley (R-MO) and Susan Collins (R-ME) voicing concerns over the cuts.
Republicans will now have to work to rewrite these provisions to be Byrd Rule compliant if they wish to keep them in the bill. While they do have the option to overrule the Parliamentarian, this move is controversial, and Majority Leader John Thune has said that it is not on the table.
With the self-imposed July 4th deadline for sending the “Big, Beautiful Bill” to President Trump’s desk looming, Senate Republicans will be scrambling over the weekend to make crucial decisions on the future of the Medicaid portion of this bill. If it does manage to pass the Senate, its chances of success are still wary in the House, where many members are unhappy with Senate changes.
The Federal Relations Office will keep you updated with changes as the process unfolds.

GOP Education Plan Hits a Byrd Rule Snag

Senate Republicans were dealt a major blow in their proposed plans to overhaul higher education this week. Two important provisions contained in the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions’ reconciliation package have been deemed to violate the Senate’s Byrd Rule.
The Senate Parliamentarian — the nonpartisan official tasked with interpreting and issuing rulings on Senate rules — has ruled that the Workforce Pell and consolidated loan repayment provisions of the bill are in violation of the Byrd Rule.
The Byrd rule, officially known as Section 313 of the Congressional Budget Act, requires that reconciliation legislation comply with certain parameters, including that the provisions must directly relate to the budget, can’t contain unrelated policy priorities, and can’t grow the deficit beyond the budget window provided in the bill.
The Parliamentarian’s ruling means that, unlike the simple majority needed for passage of a reconciliation bill, these provisions would need to clear a 60-vote threshold if challenged on the Senate floor — which they almost certainly would be.
The proposed Senate loan repayment changes attempt to end the multiple existing income-driven student loan repayment plans. In their place, both current and future borrowers would be transitioned into one of two consolidated plans: a standard repayment plan, and a single income-driven repayment plan.
The Parliamentarian’s ruling determined that repealing these repayment plans for current borrowers was in violation of the Byrd rule. Senate lawmakers and committee staff will need to rewrite elements of the bill in order to comply. The proposed changes were expected to net over $200 billion in savings, which Republicans may now seek to find through other avenues.
While current borrowers will now likely be permitted to maintain their current repayment plan, the Parliamentarian’s ruling did not apply to future borrowers, meaning that borrowers who take out new student loans on or after July 1, 2026, may only have access to two repayment plans.  One would be a Standard plan, with monthly payments stretched out over a term ranging from 10 to 25 years. The other would be a new income-driven repayment plan called the Repayment Assistance Plan, or RAP. RAP would use a repayment formula that differs in many ways from current IDR options and would in some cases have higher monthly payments.
The situation remains fluid. The Office of Federal Relations will continue to update with the status of the bill and changes.

Dept. of Education Budget Request Released

The Trump administration has released its budget request for the Department of Education for Fiscal Year 2026, proposing steep funding cuts of more than 15%—a $12 billion reduction in budget authority. The administration characterizes these cuts as part of a broader effort to “responsibly wind down” the department.

While the president’s budget request serves as an important policy statement, it carries no legal authority. Final funding decisions rest with Congress, which determines allocations through the annual appropriations process. Several key Congressional committees are set to begin deliberations in the coming weeks, shaping the future of federal education spending.

Included below are some of the key higher education policy changes proposed in the budget request:

  • Pell Grant Reduction: The maximum Pell Grant award would be cut by $1,685, reducing it to $5,710 in total. The administration argues that this is necessary to address a $2.7 billion shortfall that has resulted from increasing instances of fraud as well as congressional irresponsibility.
  • Elimination of TRIO Programs: Federal funding for TRIO programs would be ended entirely. The administration argues that programs to support students from disadvantaged backgrounds will be better administered by individual states.
  • Cuts to Federal Work-Study: The administration requests to cut funding for work-study programs by $980 million. The administration hopes these proposed cuts will help to “enact a more appropriate split between Federal and employer wage subsidy, where employers pay 75 percent of a student’s hourly wages and reduce the federal contribution to 25 percent.”
  • Defunding GEAR UP: The GEAR UP program would also be defunded under this proposal.