House Republican leaders are facing significant internal opposition to a large budget reconciliation package that includes defense spending and election integrity provisions, potentially jeopardizing their ambitious timeline.
Concerns over the lack of spending offsets and the linkage of the SAVE America Act to the broader bill have created divisions among Republican lawmakers in both chambers. Senator Thom Tillis, R-N.C., expressed strong opposition to attaching the SAVE Act, stating that if it were included, he would vote against the entire package and actively slow down other legislative processes. "If we keep on layering layers of complexity, like another bogus attempt at the SAVE Act, then we're never gonna get it done," Tillis said. He further characterized the effort as a "waste of time" and an "exercise of futility."
Despite these objections, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has indicated confidence that a budget blueprint, the initial step in the reconciliation process, could be approved by both chambers before the August recess. The House Budget Committee has advanced its plan, setting it up for floor consideration.
However, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., expressed surprise at Johnson's timeline assurance, stating it was "news to me." While acknowledging the desire to advance defense funding and the SAVE America Act, Thune warned of potential negative consequences, questioning the "$60 billion worth the risk of putting something like that on the floor."
The compressed timeline is particularly challenging as the House is expected to recess by the end of the next week, and the Senate by the first week of August. Some senators, like Rick Scott, R-Fla., argue that lawmakers should remain in Washington until the work is completed.
The Trump administration has publicly supported House Republicans' $95 billion budget framework, which allocates approximately $73 billion for defense and intelligence funding, urging Congress to pass it "without modification."
However, several Republicans remain skeptical. Rep. Kevin Kiley, an independent who caucuses with Republicans, expressed concern about the potential for limited congressional oversight on the $73 billion in defense funding. Kiley also voiced opposition to the reconciliation process itself, arguing it excludes Democrats and that normal appropriations channels should be used instead. He previously voted against a $72 billion immigration enforcement funding package, citing a lack of Democratic buy-in.
Fiscal conservatives in both chambers are criticizing the budget blueprint for not including any proposed spending cuts, which they argue would increase the national debt. "I think you got to pay for it," Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Mo., told reporters. Senator Bill Cassidy, R-La., echoed this sentiment on social media, stating, "Our national debt is a runaway train. The next reconciliation bill should be fully paid for."
Burlison also voiced reservations about the proposed $10 billion funding pool intended to incentivize states to adopt SAVE America Act elements, such as citizenship verification and voter ID requirements. He indicated he could support the framework if GOP leaders could compel Democratic-led states to implement these provisions, suggesting that small financial incentives might not be sufficient given past state rejections of federal funding, such as for Medicaid expansion.
Adding to the complexity is the question of whether former President Donald Trump would accept a reconciliation bill that does not fully incorporate the SAVE America Act, given his strong advocacy for it. Senator Thune noted this uncertainty, stating, "That's a good question. If you get the answer, let me know."