The Brief

President Donald Trump's massive spending and tax cut bill is on the way to his desk for a signature. The bill passed Thursday after Republican leaders in the House of Representatives convinced holdouts in their own party to get in line behind the controversial legislation.

House Republicans passed the bill by a vote of 218 to 214, nearly entirely along party lines. All 212 Democrats voted in unison against the bill, and were joined by two Republicans, Reps. Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania. Leaders were forced to work all night to win the votes necessary to pass to meet Trump's demand to sign the bill by July 4.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., pledged in a speech on the House floor that the bill would make the country "stronger, safer and more prosperous than ever before."

"Today we are laying a key cornerstone of America's new golden age," he said.

The sprawling GOP bill — clocking in at nearly 1,000 pages — represents a dramatic realignment of the federal government's role in American life, shifting resources from the social safety net and investments in clean energy, and reorienting them to finance trillions of dollars in new spending on tax cuts, immigration enforcement and national defense.

President Trump was heavily involved in selling the bill to skeptical lawmakers, including calling them to the White House for talks throughout the day on Wednesday.

Trump also weighed in repeatedly on social media throughout the night, demanding that lawmakers finish the job.

"Largest Tax Cuts in History and a Booming Economy vs. Biggest Tax Increase in History, and a Failed Economy. What are the Republicans waiting for??? What are you trying to prove??? MAGA IS NOT HAPPY, AND IT'S COSTING YOU VOTES!!!," Trump wrote just after midnight.

The legislative effort fulfills key campaign pledges Trump made during his reelection bid — including making hefty tax cuts passed during his first term permanent. But it violates a key promise, too: Trump promised repeatedly during the campaign not to touch Medicaid benefits, the joint federal and state program that provides healthcare for more than 70 million low-income, elderly, and disabled Americans.

Republicans say they are targeting waste, fraud and abuse in the program and the bill makes significant changes to work requirements and ways the program is funded— the Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan group of professional staff who provide information and analysis to support the legislative process, estimates that the cuts could result in nearly 12 million people losing health coverage.

Democrats rally against the bill without power to block or change it

Democrats warned throughout the day and night that the legislation contains major cuts to Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan group of professional staff who provide information and analysis to support the legislative process, the social safety net, including food aid and insurance coverage for millions of Americans.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., spoke on the House floor for 8 hours and 44 minutes before the vote in a wide ranging speech, railing against Republicans and the impact of the bill.

The speech broke the record for the longest leadership speech in the history of the House of Representatives. The previous record, of eight hours, 32 minutes was set by then-House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, Calif., in 2021.

During the speech, Jeffries read letters from people insured through the program, including many who said they live in Congressional districts represented by Republicans. Jeffries called the bill "an immoral document."

"Everybody should vote no against it because of how it attacks children, and seniors and every day Americans. And people with disabilities." Jeffries said. "That is why I stand here on the floor of the House of Representative with my colleagues in the House Democratic caucus to stand up and push back against it with everything we have."

President Trump delivers remarks as he hosts a "One, Big, Beautiful" event in the East Room of the White House on June 26.

(

Chip Somodevilla

/

Getty Images

)

The package also comes with a hefty price tag. The CBO estimates the bill will increase the deficit — how much money the government spends over the amount it brings in — by $3.4 trillion over ten years.

These issues were the focus of significant debate during both Senate and House deliberations over the bill. The House passed an initial version in late May, although it changed in the Senate as lawmakers incorporated additional cuts to Medicaid and a higher increase to the debt limit.

Republican concerns dragged negotiations through the night

The Senate passed its updated bill on Tuesday and sent it back to the House, which then needed to approve the same text to move it forward.

Much like in the Senate, House GOP leaders then had to work with conflicting factions of the conference to get enough lawmakers on board, particularly those concerned about Medicaid changes and conservative fiscal hawks who wanted to see more savings.

GOP holdouts slowly got on board with the bill throughout Monday evening into Tuesday.

Before the vote, House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters that many previously opposed lawmakers had needed a "reasonable" amount of time to understand the Senate changes.

"I gave them the space to do it," he said, adding, "the president helped answer some questions. We got Cabinet secretaries involved and experts in all the fields and they got their questions answered."

Members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, including Rep. Ralph Norman R-SC., echoed that sentiment on Monday in between discussions telling reporters that the meeting at the White House was "very helpful."

"[There] won't be any vote until we get satisfied," Norman said, before ultimately announcing he would support the bill later that evening. "What I want to know is... what actions we can put in place, that the president and his team can do, to make sure we have our questions answered."

However when reporters asked Johnson Tuesday morning about any potential executive actions the president pledged to take to address concerns from conservatives, the speaker said he wasn't clear on any details. "I know there was a lot of talk about how the bill would be implemented and what role the executive would have."

Johnson said he was planning to move another reconciliation package in the fall and in the early spring to address items that were not included in this package.

Asked if he's trying to win over Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., who opposed the procedural measure to bring up the bill, Johnson said, "I've certainly tried to encourage him to get to a yes."

The speaker admitted he had not gotten any sleep. "Can you tell?" he joked to reporters.

Final passage of the legislation came just one day ahead of a self-imposed GOP deadline to have the bill on the president's desk by July 4. Trump has been a constant presence throughout the process for Republicans, pressuring members to strike a deal and threatening to support primary challengers to lawmakers who oppose it.
Copyright 2025 NPR

As Los Angeles homeowners grapple with the expense of rebuilding after last year’s devastating fires, an L.A. City Councilmember is putting forward an idea that could lower some costs.

Councilmember Traci Park, who represents the Pacific Palisades, has introduced a motion to explore waiving part of the city’s portion of the local sales tax for fire victims who purchase rebuilding materials in the city.

The 1% of the local 9.75% sales tax that goes into the city’s general fund would be given back to consumers under the proposal. The waiver could apply to lumber, appliances and other rebuilding goods purchased within the city.

The motion, introduced Friday by Park and seconded by Councilmember John Lee, says: “The City should do everything within its power to alleviate the financial burden for these residents and businesses in order to facilitate their return and stabilize the Pacific Palisades community.”

Would it make much of a difference? 

Economists told LAist the proposal could help many homeowners mitigate the high cost of rebuilding, but likely wouldn’t tip the scales for under-insured, under-resourced property owners.

“It wouldn't hurt if it's very well designed and easy to use,” said Alexander Meeks, a director at the Santa Monica-based Milken Institute. “But I'm not sure if it's really going to tackle the scale of the financial challenge that survivors are facing.”

Meeks noted that the tax waiver wouldn’t lower up-front costs such as environmental testing, architectural design and permitting. And it may not help homeowners sourcing raw materials from outside the city.

Zhiyun Li, a UCLA Anderson School of Management economist, said the waiver could help some homeowners justify the additional cost of rebuilding more fire-safe structures.

“Homeowners must typically pay out of pocket to upgrade to IBHS+ standards, which are more stringent,” Li said. “The tax waiver could encourage upgrading to IBHS+ standards or investing more in mitigation, thereby reducing future risk and improving the likelihood of maintaining insurance coverage.”

What’s next for the proposal? 

The proposed tax relief would not be available to properties that have been sold since the fires started in January 2025.

The motion has been sent to the City Council’s budget and fire recovery committees. If approved by the full council, it would require the city administrative officer, the Office of Finance and the city attorney to report back to the council within 60 days on options for crafting a tax relief plan.

The motion calls for the report to consider factors such as how to minimize the burden of administering the tax relief, what documentation homeowners would have to submit and what it would cost the city to oversee the program.

Senate and House Republican leadership have resurrected a stalled plan to fund the Department of Homeland Security after a record 47-day funding lapse.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said in a joint statement on Wednesday that the House will take up a measure passed by the Senate last week to fund most of DHS except Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol through the end of September.

Republicans would then attempt to fund ICE and Border Patrol for three years using a party-line budget reconciliation bill that would not require support from Democrats.

"In following this two-track approach, the Republican Congress will fully reopen the Department, make sure all federal workers are paid, and specifically fund immigration enforcement and border security for the next three years so that those law-enforcement activities can continue uninhibited," Thune and Johnson wrote.

The agreement comes nearly a week after House Republicans dismissed an identical plan, refusing to take up the Senate-passed measure and instead passing a 60-day short term funding bill for all of DHS that had little chance of overcoming Democratic opposition in the Senate.

Johnson called the agreement a "joke" and President Donald Trump declined to publicly endorse the deal. Trump had previously resisted any package that did not include his push to overhaul federal elections known as the Save America Act.

"I think any deal they make, I'm pretty much not happy with it," Trump told reporters last week.

Democrats welcomed the agreement as in line with their pledge not to give ICE any more money without reforms after immigration enforcement agents killed two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis. But the deal does not include any of the policy demands Democrats are pressing for, such as a ban on masks for immigration enforcement officers and requiring warrants issued by a judge, not just the agency, to enter homes.

"For days, Republican divisions derailed a bipartisan agreement, making American families pay the price for their dysfunction," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., wrote in a statement Wednesday. "Throughout this fight, Senate Democrats never wavered."

Trump seemed to bless the revived plan earlier Wednesday, writing on social media that he wants a party-line bill to fund immigration enforcement on his desk by June 1.

"We are going to work as fast, and as focused, as possible to replenish funding for our Border and ICE Agents, and the Radical Left Democrats won't be able to stop us," Trump wrote.

Despite the shutdown, ICE has been minimally impacted because Republican lawmakers approved $75 billion for ICE through another party-line budget reconciliation bill last year.

Congress is on a two-week recess, but the Senate and House could move to fund all of DHS except ICE and CBP as early as Thursday using a procedure known as unanimous consent that allows the chambers to circumvent formal voting as long as no member objects.

Even during a recess when most members are not in Washington, this could be unpredictable, especially in the House, where many hard-line conservatives oppose a deal that does not fully fund DHS.

"Let's make this simple: caving to Democrats and not paying CBP and ICE is agreeing to defund Law Enforcement and leaving our borders wide open again," Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., a member of the ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus, wrote on X. "If that's the vote, I'm a NO."

If a member does object, that could require waiting for another vote when all members are back from recess.

Claudia Grisales contributed reporting.
Copyright 2026 NPR

California clocked its second-worst snowpack on record Wednesday, a potentially troubling signal ahead for fire season.

It’s an alarming end to a winter that saw abnormally dry conditions briefly wiped from California’s drought map in January, for the first time in a quarter-century.

Though precipitation to date has been near average, much of it fell as rain rather than snow. Then March’s record-breaking heat melted most of the snow that remains. The state’s major reservoirs are nevertheless brimming above historic averages and are flirting with capacity, and a smattering of snow, rain and thunderstorms are dousing last month’s heat wave.

But experts now warn that California’s case of the missing snowpack could herald an early fire season in the mountains.

On Wednesday, state engineers conducting the symbolic April 1 snowpack measurement at Phillips Station south of Lake Tahoe found no measurable snow in patches of white dotting the grassy field.

“I want to welcome you call to probably one of the quickest snow surveys we’ve had — maybe one where people could actually use an umbrella,” joked Karla Nemeth, director of the California Department of Water Resources. “We’re getting a lot of questions about are we heading into a hydrologic drought? The answer is, I don’t know.”

State data reports that California’s snowpack is closing out the season at an alarming 18% of average statewide, and an even more abysmal 6% of average in the northern mountains that feed California’s major reservoirs.

Only the extreme drought year of 2015 beat this year’s snowpack for the worst on record, measuring in at just 5% of average on April 1st, when the snow historically is at its deepest.

“I think everyone's anticipating that it will be a long, busy fire season,” said Lenya Quinn-Davidson, director of the UC Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources Fire Network.

“Without a snowpack, and with an early spring, it just means that there’s much more time for something like that to happen.”

‘It’s pretty bizarre up here’ 

In the city of South Lake Tahoe, which survived the massive Caldor Fire in the fall of 2021 without losing any structures, fire chief Jim Drennan said his department is already ramping up prevention efforts.

“It's pretty bizarre up here right now. It really seems like June conditions more than March,” Drennan said. “People are already turning the sprinklers on for their lawns.”

Without more precipitation, an early spring may complicate prescribed burning efforts. But Drennan said fire agencies in the Tahoe basin can start mechanically clearing fuels from forest areas earlier than usual.

“That means we can get more work done,” he said.

It also means homeowners need to start hardening their homes now, said Martin Goldberg, battalion chief and fuels management officer for the Lake Valley Fire Protection District, which protects unincorporated communities in the Lake Tahoe Basin’s south shore.

Goldberg urges residents to scour their yards for burnable materials, create defensible space and reach out to local fire departments with questions. The risks are widespread — from firewood, wooden fences, gas cans, plants, pine needles — even lawn furniture stacked against a house.

“In years past, I wouldn't even think of raking and clearing until May,” Goldberg said. “But my yard's completely cleared of snowpack, and it has been for a couple weeks now.”

‘A haystack fire’

Battalion chief David Acuña, a spokesperson for Cal Fire, said fire season is shaped by more than just one year’s snowpack.

Climate change has been remaking California’s fire seasons into fire years. And California’s recent average to abundant water years have fueled what Acuña called “bumper crops of vegetation and brush.”

“Most of California is like a haystack. And if you’ve ever seen a haystack fire, they burn very intensely because there's layers of fuel,” Acuña said.

Like Quinn-Davidson, Acuña wasn’t ready to make specific predictions about fires to come.

But John Abatzoglou, a professor of climatology at UC Merced, said the temperatures and snowpack conditions this year offer a glimpse of California in the latter decades of this century, as fossil fuel use continues to drive global temperatures higher.

How this year’s fires will play out will depend on when, where and how wind, heat, fuel and ignitions combine. But it foreshadows the consequences of a warmer California for water and fire under climate change.

“This,” Abatzoglou said, “is yet another stress test for the future in the state.”

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.