House Speaker Mike Johnson is navigating a challenging legislative path as he seeks to advance a $95 billion budget package, dubbed the "SAVE and Protect Act," which includes funding for defense, intelligence, and farm aid. The plan, which aims to fund U.S. military operations in Iran, is being pursued through budget reconciliation, a procedural tool that allows bills to pass the Senate with a simple majority.
The House Budget Committee has advanced the GOP budget resolution, the first step in the reconciliation process. The blueprint proposes up to $60 billion for military funding and $13 billion for intelligence costs, totaling $73 billion to address the conflict in Iran. The package also includes $12 billion in aid for farmers and components of an election overhaul effort, referred to as the SAVE America Act. House GOP leaders aim to hold a vote on the budget resolution before the chamber's summer recess.
However, the proposal is encountering significant resistance within the House Republican Conference. Several members, including Republican Rep. Warren Davidson, have expressed concern that the bill does not include spending cuts or offsets to balance the new spending. Davidson stated that a plan without offsets is "dead on arrival" and could be blocked by a small group of members.
Vice President JD Vance met with House Republicans to rally support for the plan, emphasizing its inclusion of election integrity provisions and aid to troops and farmers. Despite these efforts, some lawmakers remain unconvinced. Republican Rep. Lloyd Smucker acknowledged the importance of the proposed spending but indicated a preference for budgetary offsets.
An aide for House GOP leadership explained that the absence of offsets was a strategic choice, prioritizing the current funding package over the possibility of a larger, un-offset spending bill. The aide suggested that even fiscal conservatives recognize the necessity of the proposed funding.
Independent Rep. Kevin Kiley, who aligns with Republicans, voiced skepticism, arguing that such legislation should be bipartisan. Republican Rep. Nancy Mace also publicly criticized the plan, citing concerns about the deficit spending and the lack of provisions to address the rising cost of living for American families.
The plan is also facing headwinds in the Senate. Republican Sen. Thom Tillis indicated he would oppose reconciliation bills that include election integrity provisions he disputes, and Sen. Bill Cassidy stated that any future reconciliation bill "should be fully paid for."