WASHINGTON — U.S. House Republicans passed a measure to curb stock trading by members of Congress that was packaged with an unrelated voter ID bill, part of President Donald Trump’s push for major federal involvement in elections.

The legislation passed by a vote of 232-198. All Republicans and 13 Democrats voted in favor.

The bill faces possible headwinds in the narrowly split Senate where 60 votes are required for passage. Republicans control the upper chamber with 53 members, to Democrats’ 47 members. 

The House-passed bill, sponsored by Rep. Bryan Steil, R-Wis., would require voters to present a current state-issued driver’s license or identification card, passport, valid military or veteran ID, or tribal government-issued ID card to be able to vote. 

The base bill, the Stop Insider Trading Act, would prohibit members of Congress and their spouses and close family members from purchasing certain stocks, and require a public notice and waiting period prior to selling stocks.

Violators could face a penalty of $2,000 or 10% of the transaction value, whichever is greater, plus any net gain realized from the transaction over a specified time period. 

The bill would govern investments issued by a publicly traded company. Some investments would be exempt, including widely held investment funds and investments held in a trust. Also, a spouse’s or dependent’s transactions made on behalf of another person, or held as part of a job benefits package would also be exempt.

Voter ID

But it was the voter ID bill that attracted most attention as lawmakers debated the measure this week.

Under the bill, if a voter doesn’t have one of the listed physical forms of identification, state election officials can issue a provisional ballot. The voter would then have three days to provide the accepted ID or an affidavit that the voter doesn’t have one because of religious objections to being photographed.

Additionally, state officials would be prohibited from accepting absentee ballots unless the voter attaches a copy of a valid ID, the last four digits of their Social Security number with an affidavit that they cannot obtain a photo ID, or a notarized statement that the voter personally completed their ballot.

During Monday’s House Rules Committee debate of the bill, Democrats criticized Republicans for removing a state grant provision from the voter ID section of the bill that would have covered voters’ individual costs of acquiring IDs. 

Democrats also panned the bill for going further than state laws in Florida and Wisconsin that are considered among the nation’s strictest. 

As of April 2025, 36 states had some form of voter ID law on the books, though they vary in restrictions, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Rep. Joe Neguse, D-Colo., asked Steil why Wisconsin state law allows some university IDs at the voting polls, while his federal bill does not.

“Plenty of constituents of yours at a variety of different colleges and universities that you represent … right now comply with what has been described by others as the most strict voter ID law in the country by using their college ID. But their congressman is championing a bill that would tell them that they can no longer do that,” Neguse said.

“Great question,” Steil replied. “Universities across the country, including in my home state, issue IDs to noncitizens, issue IDs to illegal immigrants.”

Not as restrictive as SAVE America Act

Attaching the voter ID legislation to a bill curbing lawmakers’ stock trading appears to be Republicans’ compromise with the president’s eagerness for a more restrictive bill that faces a slim to nothing chance of clearing Congress.

Trump is pushing Republicans to pass an even broader federal election regulations bill dubbed the SAVE America Act. That bill would require additional documents, such as passports and birth certificates, to register to vote. Critics say it would upend state management of elections.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has warned there are not enough votes in the Senate to pass Trump’s preferred bill.

The president promoted the legislation in a primetime address July 16 when he declassified evidence that he said showed attempted election interference by China in 2020.

Experts say the documents released did not prove Trump’s claims, and critics panned the speech as the president’s attempt to undermine trust in the upcoming November midterm elections that will decide control of Congress.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., praised the joint stock trading and voter ID bill Tuesday, saying “probably in excess of 9 out of 10 Americans support both measures.” Johnson also said House Republicans “will continue to hammer” Trump’s messaging about elections.

Dems object

House Democratic leadership urged members to vote “no” on the bill because it would allow lawmakers and close family members to continue buying and selling stocks. 

Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon, D-Pa., said Americans “have had it” with stock trading by federal lawmakers.

“They are fed up with it. Congress needs to enact a comprehensive ban on members of Congress as well as the president, the vice president and members of their families from owning or trading individual stocks or having other financial dealings,” Scanlon said Monday.

Scanlon’s amendment to replace the GOP-sponsored stock trading bill with the text of Rhode Island Democrat Seth Magaziner’s more restrictive bill, dubbed the Restore Trust in Government Act, failed. Magaziner’s bill also includes restrictions on the president, vice president and their families.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., characterized the bill on the House floor Tuesday as a “fake stock trading ban.” 

“I want to be very clear: their bill does not block insider trading, no matter what it’s called,” Jayapal said.

They also objected to the voter ID portion.

The measure “would functionally eviscerate mail voting by forcing Americans to include photocopies of their IDs alongside their mailed ballots,” according to House Minority Whip Katherine Clark’s email to members ahead of the vote Wednesday.

Additionally, Clark, a Massachusetts Democrat, castigated the bill’s “narrow set of acceptable photo identification in order to cast a ballot in a federal election.”

The Congressional Black Caucus issued a statement Tuesday slamming the bill.

“House Republicans are not serious about enacting a meaningful congressional stock trading ban,” the Democrat-aligned group said. “The combined Stop Insider Trading Act and Voter ID Act — which incorporates provisions from the voter-suppressive, so-called SAVE America Act — would allow Members of Congress to continue owning, selling, and, in some cases, purchasing individual stocks while simultaneously imposing stricter voter ID requirements that would make it harder for millions of eligible Americans to vote, including by mail.”

WASHINGTON — Advocates and public health experts urged Republicans in Congress on Wednesday to implement a two-year delay on requiring states to begin sharing the costs for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits. 

Provisions of the Republican-backed law that President Donald Trump signed last year that go into effect in October 2027 will require states with high SNAP error rates — the percentage of benefits that are overpaid, underpaid or go to recipients who are ineligible — to begin covering some of the program’s costs. It marks a stark change for SNAP, which is solely funded by the federal government. 

In an online briefing hosted by the left-leaning think tank Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the American Academy of Pediatrics and Invest in Louisiana, speakers said Congress should use the government funding process to protect access to affordable food for American families. 

Sharon Parrott, the center’s president, said that Republicans are “looking right past this emergency” and using their current budget resolution to help farmers struggling with increased costs that have resulted from Trump’s tariffs and oil prices that have been driven up by the war with Iran — but not low-income grocery shoppers.

“Republican leaders in Congress are ignoring the urgent need to help low-income families and kids who are losing SNAP and can’t afford groceries,” she said. “Congress could use the budget process to help both farmers and families. At a minimum, Congress needs to slow down the hasty implementation of the massive cost-shift in SNAP costs to states.”

She said that since the GOP law, called the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, altered SNAP eligibility requirements, more than 4.5 million people have stopped receiving food assistance benefits. Nearly one-third, 1.5 million, are children. 

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated the changes to SNAP would reduce federal spending by nearly $190 billion over the next 10 years.

Local leaders push back

Wednesday’s briefing comes amid similar calls from community organizations and state and local leaders from across the country. 

On Monday, the United States Conference of Mayors sent a letter to leaders of the Senate Agriculture Committee asking them to reconsider SNAP changes enacted over the last year and shifting funding to states. 

“At a time when many Americans continue to face economic challenges, we should be working to expand opportunity and food security, not create new barriers to assistance,” the letter, signed by more than 200 mayors, read. 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement Monday that Republicans and Democrats must work together to draft a farm bill that restores SNAP and protects funding for food assistance. 

Schumer added that he will not support any farm bill that does not provide states more time to prepare to shoulder the program’s costs. 

Time is running out to get a cost-shift pause through Congress. 

The House is scheduled to adjourn Friday, and won’t be back in session until Aug. 31. Even then, it will just be back for a few weeks, before again adjourning for almost all of October. The Senate will adjourn after the first week in August and will similarly be out for the beginning of September and almost all of October. 

All about the error rates

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act will require most states with error rates of above 6% to cover between 5% and 15% percent of the benefits’ total cost. States under a 6% error rate will be exempt. 

But some states with the highest SNAP error rates — of about 13.3% or higher — will be given an extension to lower their error rates before being forced to bear some of the program’s costs. Depending on the error rate, the states will be granted up to an extra two years to begin sharing costs. 

“Congress can act right now to stop the bleeding and steer us away from this oncoming childhood hunger crisis by extending that same two-year delay to every state — not just the few that benefit from the existing carveout,” said Ty Jones Cox, the budget and policy center’s vice president for food assistance. 

States with the highest error rates in fiscal 2025 included Alaska at 23%, and Delaware and New Mexico both at approximately 16%, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture data. 

Cox said the center estimates nearly half of U.S. states will likely have to pay $100 million or more because of the cost-sharing changes. 

“These are huge costs,” she said. “States are working hard to reduce their error rates, but they’re up against the wall. The law didn’t give them any time or resources to do so.”

Cox said that states that plan to maintain SNAP benefits will have to find the funding from other places, if they are unable to generate more revenue. She said some states may choose to eliminate summer EBT or end universal school meals to continue funding the program. 

Given the steep costs, some states, such as Alabama, have floated the possibility of cutting their SNAP programs entirely if they are unable to lower error rates, Parrott said. 

Public health impacts

The effect of losing SNAP benefits extends beyond food insecurity, said Andrew Racine, president of the American Academy of Pediatrics. 

Besides clean air and water, and a supportive family and environment, he said, food is the most important determinant of a child’s health and future success. 

Racine added that the long-term benefits of SNAP are not being taken into account when decisions regarding its future are made. 

“The benefits of SNAP accrue to that child, accrue to that family, but they accrue to people around them,” he said. “[If] you have a child who’s not suffering from hunger in the classroom, and their ability to concentrate is improved, that has impact on their fellow classmates who are not on SNAP.”

WASHINGTON — Republicans on the U.S. House Budget Committee approved their budget resolution Thursday, marking one small step forward in the complicated process that could allow the party to enact a third party-line bill. 

The 20-14 vote followed hours of debate over amendments from Democrats that sought to roll back pieces of the earlier Republican packages and change how the upcoming process would work. None of the Democratic changes were approved. 

Texas Republican Rep. Chip Roy, Texas Democratic Rep. Veronica Escobar and Virgin Islands Democratic Delegate Stacey Plaskett didn’t vote. 

House Republican leaders are likely to bring the budget resolution to the floor next week before that chamber leaves for its five-week August recess, now expected July 23. 

The Senate will be in session for an additional two weeks after that before beginning its summer break, though it isn’t clear if GOP leadership in that chamber will bring the budget measure up for a vote. 

Process to provide funds for defense, farms

Both chambers of Congress must adopt a budget resolution in order to unlock the budget reconciliation process that will allow them to move another bill without Democratic support. 

House Republicans said during committee debate they hope another package would provide up to $95 billion. That currently unreleased measure would bolster aid to farmers, provide more funding to the Defense Department and implement pieces of a voter identification bill they’ve dubbed the SAVE America Act. 

“We are going to use reconciliation to make a run at doing what we think will save this country for our children’s future and for the remainder of this century,” Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, said. “I can’t think of a more important thing to work on.”

Pennsylvania Democratic Rep. Brendan Boyle, ranking member on the committee, criticized Republicans for not focusing on how to make life more affordable for everyday Americans. 

“Over the last 18 months, we have seen where Republicans’ priorities are: trillions of dollars in tax cuts for billionaires, tens of billions of dollars for war and absolutely nothing for the American people,” Boyle said. 

Democratic changes rebuffed

Democrats offered more than a dozen amendments during debate, including one from Vermont Rep. Becca Balint that would have removed the instructions for the Armed Services Committee and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

Republicans’ budget resolution, once approved by both chambers, would allow the Armed Services Committee to spend up to $60 billion and the Intelligence panel to spend up to $13 billion. 

“My colleagues use the deficit as a pretext to excuse increasing hunger and deepening poverty in this country,” Balint said. “They preach fiscal responsibility, and yet, when it comes to approving tens of billions of dollars in additional Pentagon spending, they are a rubber stamp.”

Michigan Republican Rep. Jack Bergman spoke against the proposal, saying the additional defense funding “is necessary to support our troops and supply them with the munitions and anything else they need to fight, win and return home safely.”

In addition to providing instructions for more defense spending, the budget resolution would allow the Agriculture Committee to write a bill that would provide up to $12 billion in additional aid to farmers. 

The Administration Committee would be able to spend up to $10 billion, likely to create a grant program for states that institute voter identification requirements. 

WASHINGTON — A major legislative package that would put into law President Donald Trump’s push to greatly reduce the responsibilities of the U.S. Department of Education advanced out of a U.S. House panel on Wednesday. 

The U.S. House Committee on Education and Workforce approved — nearly along party lines — each of the package’s 10 bills that would permanently transfer several of Education’s functions to other departments. 

The measure, largely reflecting many of the interagency agreements, or IAAs, Education has signed with other agencies, signifies a sweeping effort from Republicans in Congress to carry out the Trump administration’s plan to do away with the 46-year-old department as part of the president’s quest to return education “back to the states.” 

That drive continues, though much of the oversight and funding of schools already occurs at the state and local levels.

But the legislation faces an uncertain fate. Even if passed in the full U.S. House down the line, it would face steep odds in the narrowly GOP-controlled Senate. 

The upper chamber requires at least 60 senators to advance a bill past the filibuster, and Republicans hold just 53 seats.

Rep. Tim Walberg, chair of the House panel, lauded the package as the “first step toward ending the Department of Education’s reign over our nation’s education system,” during his panel’s markup. 

The Michigan Republican added that the legislation advances Trump and Education Secretary Linda McMahon’s “vision for an education system that empowers families, students, workers and local communities.” 

McMahon said “today marks a major step by Congressional leaders to cement the Trump Administration’s historic reforms to right-size the federal role in education,” in a statement after the package advanced out of the committee. 

Other departments to take over

Under multiple bills, the Department of Labor would manage Education’s programs surrounding elementary and secondary education; postsecondary education; and career, technical and adult education — mirroring earlier IAAs. 

In another piece of legislation, the Treasury Department would manage Education’s federal student aid functions, a nod to a March agreement Education signed with Treasury to take over its responsibility for collecting on defaulted federal student loan debt.

That agreement marked the first step in a multiphase process toward Treasury taking on Education’s entire roughly $1.7 trillion federal student loan portfolio.

Under other bills in the package, the State Department would manage Education’s international education and foreign language studies programs, as well as its foreign gift and contract reporting — also mirroring earlier agreements. 

Reflecting additional IAAs, the Department of Health and Human Services would manage Education’s accreditation for foreign medical schools; functions regarding child care access for low-income parents in postsecondary education; and family engagement programs for elementary and secondary education. 

The Interior Department would also manage tribal education and job training programs under the package. 

Notably, the 10-bill package does not include any efforts to transfer Education’s responsibilities regarding special education programs and civil rights enforcement to other agencies. 

In perhaps the Trump administration’s most far-reaching attempts yet to dismantle the Education Department, the agency in June said HHS will administer programs under the Education’s Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, while civil rights enforcement under its Office for Civil Rights, or OCR, will be transferred to the Department of Justice. 

Rep. Bobby Scott, the top Democrat on the panel, said that the committee’s move to not consider either of the two actions in the package was possibly because “even my colleagues recognize how politically unpalatable such transfers would be.” 

‘Pain and suffering’

Meanwhile, the legislative package drew fierce pushback from congressional Democrats on the committee, who offered up a slew of amendments to the bills in an attempt to block the dismantling. 

Scott, a Virginia Democrat, said “it’s difficult to articulate how impractical these proposals are, to say nothing of the pain and suffering they’ll inflict on students, educators and their communities, if they were to become law.” 

He pointed to the GOP’s objective of stripping down the department as part of its intent to “return education to the states,” saying these proposals “will actually contribute to the creation of miles of bureaucratic red tape, inconsistent education policy and enforcement across the federal government and a significant waste of the taxpayers’ money.” 

Rep. Suzanne Bonamici said the bills under consideration “demonstrate that Republicans in Congress know that the Department of Education lacks the authority to transfer offices and programs to other federal agencies without congressional action, and are now trying to cover for the unlawful actions already taken.” 

The Oregon Democrat, who introduced an impeachment resolution against McMahon in June, added that the secretary “has said that it is her mission to shut down the Department of Education, something she does not have the authority to do, but that is exactly what she is doing, disguised as a series of interagency agreements.” 

WASHINGTON — U.S. House Republicans released their latest budget resolution Wednesday, the first step in a long and complicated process that could allow Congress to approve a third party-line bill. 

The 47-page document, once adopted by both chambers, would send instructions to four House committees to draft bills that would be bundled into a roughly $95 billion package. 

• The Administration Committee could provide a maximum of $10 billion that would likely create a grant program for states that institute voter identification requirements.
• The Agriculture Committee would be able to spend no more than $12 billion for farm aid.
• The Armed Services Committee could write a bill that gives the Defense Department a maximum of $60 billion to account for increased costs related to the war with Iran and other military actions taken by the Trump administration. 
• The Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence would be able to approve up to $13 billion in new spending.

House floor votes as soon as next week

The House Budget Committee is scheduled to debate and vote on the budget resolution Thursday. It’s possible that is followed by floor debate and a vote to send the resolution to the Senate as soon as next week. 

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., could hold a floor vote on the budget resolution in that chamber before its lawmakers depart for their August recess, though it wasn’t immediately clear Wednesday whether there is enough support among GOP senators to approve the measure. 

Thune has been skeptical about using for a third time the complex budget reconciliation process the party used to enact its “big, beautiful” law last year and provide $70 billion in additional spending for immigration enforcement earlier this year. 

Senate debate on the budget resolution is significantly different than in the House. It requires a marathon amendment voting session that typically lasts overnight and leads to tough votes for Republican senators facing reelection this November. By contrast, House floor debate likely won’t include votes on any amendments. 

Elections and defense

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., posted to social media shortly after the budget resolution was released that the reconciliation process would provide a way for Congress to change how elections work and appropriate more funding for defense. 

“Safeguarding American elections and strengthening our national defense are the most basic responsibilities of Congress and are supported by an overwhelming majority of Americans,” Johnson wrote, before criticizing Democrats for voting against Republicans’ SAVE America Act.

It’s unlikely Republicans will be able to include the full text of that bill, which would require Americans to provide proof of citizenship to register to vote and a photo ID to cast a ballot, given the rules of the budget reconciliation process. 

Every provision in the package must have an impact on federal spending, revenue, or the debt that isn’t deemed “merely incidental” by the Senate parliamentarian.

House Budget Committee ranking member Brendan Boyle, D-Pa., wrote in a statement he plans “to fight like hell to make sure taxpayer dollars are being used to lower costs and make life better for American families, not to bankroll Trump’s giveaways to billionaires and endless wars overseas.”

“Republicans have already made life worse for American families and added trillions to the national debt,” Boyle wrote. “Now, this ‘America Last’ budget would add tens of billions more to the national debt to fund the most unpopular war in American history.”