Republican holdouts fold yet again to send megabill to Trump’s desk
Despite days of protest and public resistance, GOP hardliners and swing-district members caved to pass a $4.5 trillion megabill that cements Trump’s agenda and cuts deeply into the social safety net.
Editor’s Note: After a week of late nights and early mornings covering both Senate and House final passage of the $4.5 trillion GOP megabill, I’m running on fumes, so this week’s Congress Nerd is a bit different. Instead of a typical Thursday week-in-review, I’m sharing my on-the-ground reporting from the Hill as Republicans pushed the bill to Trump’s desk. It’s a front-row view of the chaos, the deal-making and the moments that mattered. Thanks for reading.
THE HOUSE ON THURSDAY afternoon passed the Senate’s $4.5 trillion Republican megabill, capping months of internal GOP fights and a daylong scramble to lock down votes.
The final vote was 218–214, with Republicans Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania breaking ranks and joining all Democrats in opposition.
The vote marks a defining moment for unified Republican control of Washington, clearing the final hurdle for President Donald Trump’s sweeping tax and spending package to become law ahead of his self-imposed July 4th deadline.
But the outcome also laid bare the truth of contemporary GOP governance: No matter how much they criticize the flaws or denounce the structure, Republicans almost always fold when it’s time to turn rhetoric into votes.
“The Republicans always cave. The moderates talk a good game, but they don't fight,” Rep. Jennifer McClellan (D-Va.) told me. “And the conservatives, they may fight, but they always fold. So I didn't expect this to be any different.”
The House reconvened early Wednesday afternoon for a three-vote series that stretched deep into the night.
The first procedural vote passed narrowly, as six GOP absences nearly tipped the outcome in favor of the Democrats.
The second vote was added to correct a procedural error in the original rule text, ensuring Republicans could control the floor debate and prevent Democrats from offering motions to delay or derail the process. That vote became the longest in House history, lasting more than seven hours as Johnson and his allies scrambled to persuade conservative holdouts who had publicly vowed not to support opening debate.
Johnson decided to call the vote to open debate on the bill despite threats from hardliners to tank the motion, known as a rule. He quickly lost the three votes he could afford to spare before facing a humiliating floor defeat. Fitzpatrick, who represents a district that former Democratic nominee Kamala Harris carried in 2024, joined the hardliners, putting the vote in serious jeopardy. Trump critic Massie then flipped his vote from "yes" to "no," effectively sealing Johnson’s fate.
At one point, it looked bleak: Members decamped to their offices and condos, Trump was rage-posting online, and Johnson worked the holdouts on the floor and in his ceremonial office just off the chamber.
The speaker had vowed to hold the vote open as long as it took—and he stuck to it. With help from the White House and MAGA allies, Johnson’s team eventually flipped every holdout except Fitzpatrick, clearing the final procedural hurdle between Republicans and final passage.
Democratic perfect attendance gave Johnson virtually no room for error.
“We know that we're in the minority, but we still have the power of the vote, so we are going to show up,” House Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) told me. “We're going to be here, we’re going to be united because this is about a fight for [the American people].”
DEMOCRATS used the final hour of debate to make their closing argument to the American people about what they called the horrors of the GOP megabill.
The emotional peak came during House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries’ “magic minute,” a procedural privilege that allows party leaders to speak for as long as they like without using more than one minute of allotted debate time.
For more than eight and a half hours, Jeffries railed against both the process and the substance of the bill in the longest speech in U.S. House history.
“I’ve heard a lot from my Republican colleagues who have expressed pride in this accomplishment,” he said. “I ask the question: If Republicans were so proud of this one big ugly bill, why did the debate begin at 3:28 a.m. in the morning?”
He read testimonials from Medicaid recipients across the country, including from districts “currently represented” by Republicans. Dozens of Democratic members sat behind him in solidarity, erupting into applause during his sharpest lines.
“We’re in a more-is-more environment and House Democrats, we’re going to continue to do everything that we can to stand up on behalf of the American people,” Jeffries said moments after he walked off the floor. “And beyond that, I’ll just let my words speak for themselves.”
A Democratic staffer texted me that Jeffries’ speech felt like the unofficial launch of the House Democrats’ 2026 campaign.
“We have our marching orders,” a member texted me from inside the chamber.
On the eve of the final vote, House Democrats staged a show of force against the GOP's massive bill.
They gathered on the East Front Steps of the Capitol on Wednesday morning to demonstrate unified opposition.
Jeffries, Clark and House Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) were joined by the overwhelming majority of their caucus, along with key committee leaders, including Reps. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) of Energy and Commerce, Richie Neal (D-Mass.) of Ways and Means and Angie Craig (D-Minn.) of Agriculture, who focused on the bill’s sweeping cuts to Medicaid, SNAP and clean energy investments.
“All we need are four Republicans to join us in support of their constituents, to have John McCain–level courage and stand up in defense of the health care of the American people,” Jeffries said, invoking the late senator’s dramatic 2017 vote to save the ACA.
Members also called out specific vulnerable Republicans by name, detailing the projected local impact: Jeffries noted the bill would result in 30,000 people losing Medicaid and 60,000 losing SNAP in Rob Bresnahan’s northeastern Pennsylvania district, and 25,000 Medicaid and 40,000 SNAP losses in Scott Perry’s south-central Pennsylvania district. Clark cited massive losses in David Valadao and Young Kim’s California districts—including thousands of clean energy jobs—while Aguilar singled out Gabe Evans, warning of steep health care and energy job cuts in the Colorado district he flipped in 2024.
Alongside party leadership, Democratic ideological and identity-based caucuses—including the Progressive Caucus, Congressional Hispanic Caucus, and Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus—mounted their own campaigns against the bill, joined by state delegations like New York’s.
During the rule debate, members of the Congressional Black Caucus attempted to force a vote on an amendment to strike the bill’s Medicaid and SNAP cuts but were blocked when Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) refused to yield the floor for a unanimous consent request. The CBC also held a press conference later that afternoon, highlighting the disproportionate impact of the bill on Black communities.
Members outlined concerns ranging from maternal mortality and defunding Planned Parenthood to the erosion of education access and misleading claims around tax relief. They blasted the bill’s tax math and reliance on trickle-down economics, warning that it would make college even less accessible for Black students and rebutting GOP messaging around tax breaks for tips, overtime and Social Security, drawing on recent reporting to clarify what is actually in the bill.
“The House Democratic Caucus has done a tremendous job of pressing our case,” Jeffries told me late Wednesday night. “And we're going to continue to run through the finish line.”
REPUBLICANS BEGAN SKETCHING out the contours of a reconciliation package in 2024 in preparation for the possibility of unified control.
After Trump won and Republicans reclaimed the Senate while retaining the House, internal debates quickly surfaced over strategy: Whether to pursue one massive bill encompassing Trump’s full agenda or split the priorities into two separate packages.
Proponents of a two-bill strategy argued that separating Trump’s border, energy and defense proposals from the more complex tax provisions would deliver Trump a quick political win and ease pressure on moderates who preferred less drastic cuts to social programs to offset the cost of extending the 2017 tax cuts.
But the one-bill camp ultimately prevailed after convincing Trump that the task of wrangling votes would be easier if done once rather than twice. That decision shaped the size, scope and pace of what would become the megabill and contributed to the high-stakes drama surrounding its passage.
The final version maintains sharp Medicaid cuts, including a phaseout of enhanced funding for expansion states and stricter eligibility criteria and cost-sharing requirements for low-income adults. It also imposes a one-year ban on federal Medicaid funding for providers that offer abortion care with limited exceptions, a move Democrats say will effectively defund Planned Parenthood.
SNAP changes were tweaked at the eleventh hour to secure Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s vote, temporarily exempting high-error states like Alaska from new cost-sharing rules while leaving others to shoulder the full burden.
On immigration, the bill provides tens of billions in funding for expanded detention capacity, border wall construction and the hiring of additional ICE and Border Patrol agents, policies the White House has touted as the most hardline immigration enforcement push in modern history. It fast-tracks fossil fuel leasing, eliminates key climate guardrails from the Inflation Reduction Act and expands subsidies for oil and gas development. The defense section authorizes $150 billion for the Pentagon, including a boost in procurement and weapons systems aimed at countering China and maintaining U.S. military dominance.
A proposed 10-year federal ban on state AI regulations was stripped from the final bill and a new SALT deal temporarily raises the deduction cap from $10,000 to $40,000 through 2030.
Republicans also extended several provisions of Trump’s 2017 tax law, including lower income rates, a higher estate tax exemption, and an expanded standard deduction. To blunt criticism, the bill adds tax breaks for tipped income, overtime pay, and Social Security benefits—but Democrats say these modest perks pale in comparison to the bill’s windfalls for the rich.
THE SENATE NARROWLY passed the package on Tuesday after more than 24 hours of amendment votes and internal negotiations. Vice President JD Vance cast the tie-breaking vote after three Republicans, Sens. Rand Paul (Ky.), Thom Tillis (N.C.), and Susan Collins (Maine), joined all Democrats in opposition. Murkowski was the final Republican to support the bill, having secured the previously mentioned wins for her state.
Senate passage came after an unusually slow vote-a-rama, which Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) used to lock down GOP votes. Democrats criticized the delay as evidence of disarray. Vance’s public emphasis on immigration enforcement over budget scoring drew backlash from Democrats, who argued the process revealed the GOP’s ideological priorities.
In a notable break from institutional tradition, the bill became more—not less—conservative during Senate consideration.
Rather than serving as a moderating force, the upper chamber sharpened key provisions, restoring some of the harshest Medicaid restrictions and rewriting others to assuage hardline demands. It’s a reversal of the Senate’s long-cultivated reputation as the chamber that tempers the House’s most ideological impulses.
“The Senate Republican bill that’s been sent back over to the House doesn’t make anything better in an already flawed bill,” Jeffries told me of the shift. “Why would anyone who claims to be concerned about protecting their constituents from these devastating Medicaid and health care cuts vote for Donald Trump’s One Big Ugly Bill? It’s perplexing.”
TRUMP IS EXPECTED to sign the bill with maximum fanfare, which will include a July 4 celebration to mark the legislation’s enactment. The holiday’s patriotic backdrop will serve as a fitting stage for a president who cares little for legislative nuance but everything about spectacle.
From start to finish, the process has reflected Trump’s governing essence: Skip the fine print, brand it as historic and grind down resistance through brute political force. Lawmakers who wavered faced relentless pressure—not just from party leaders and the White House, but from Trump himself, who made clear that dissent could invite the wrath of MAGA diehards or even a primary challenger.
And the GOP’s legislative push may not be over.
Speaker Johnson confirmed on Fox News this week that Republicans are planning a second reconciliation package for the fall tied to the FY26 budget, with the possibility of a third bill during the lame-duck session before the end of the Congress. Many Republicans view that post-election window as their final chance to act before the 2026 midterms potentially disrupt the balance of power.
The push reflects how aggressively Republicans are using their trifecta to enshrine core conservative priorities—on taxes, immigration, energy and the safety net—through the fast-track reconciliation process. With Democrats locked out of power and legislative filibusters off the table, GOP leaders see reconciliation as their most potent tool to implement even more of the Trump agenda while they still can.
Democrats also warn that while Trump celebrates, it’s the American people—particularly the poor, sick and working class—who will bear the burden. They’ve spent months denouncing the bill’s deep Medicaid and SNAP cuts, permanent tax breaks for the wealthy and policies they say will widen inequality and gut public investment. And many think Republicans will pay the price in 2026.
While passing time during the record-long amendment vote, I ran into a Democratic operative I work with often but rarely see on the Hill. I asked what brought them to my neck of the woods.
“I wanted to be here the day the Republicans lost the majority,” they said.