House Republicans have been discussing reconciliation for months, with one consistent priority: reinstating the ban on federal funding for abortions. However, the budget resolution to kick-start the reconciliation process, released Wednesday morning, included no directive to block the funding.

House Republicans introduced the $95 billion budget resolution with two goals in mind: pass the SAVE America Act and provide emergency supplemental defense funding.

When this Congress last July passed the first reconciliation bill, the “One Big, Beautiful Bill,” it prohibited Medicaid reimbursements for Planned Parenthood for a year. That expired this month, and Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest provider of abortions, is once again eligible for federal funding.

Pro-life Republicans are now calling on Congress to ensure that the hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars will no longer be given to Planned Parenthood, which was responsible for the abortion of 430,000 preborn American children last year.

Arrington Answers

The Daily Signal asked House Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, why the priority didn’t make it into the final directive.

“It was brought up early when we had a much more extensive view of what we could get done,” Arrington said.

The Texas Republican explained that while they had to “stay narrow,” this plan will “support our troops, provide certainty to the food supply, and lastly, safeguard our elections.”

“The American people, by over 80%, want commonsense safeguards for the integrity of our national election, and we’re going to do that. We believe this vehicle will do that,” Arrington added.

The resolution instructs four committees to write reconciliation legislation: the House Administration Committee, at $10 billion, for SAVE America; the House Armed Services Committee, at $60 billion; the House Intelligence Committee, at $13 billion, both for defense and Iran spending; and the House Agriculture Committee, at $12 billion, for farmers.

In the past year, there have been multiple priority lists from various Republican caucuses, including the Republican Study Committee and the House Freedom Caucus. Priorities discussed for months included ending federal funding for abortion, fraud prevention, affordable housing, reforming President Joe Biden-era energy policy, and a Republican health care plan. None were included.

Arrington explained that it all came down to time and suggested that he believes Republicans will eventually be able to stop federal funding for abortions. However, this was Republicans’ last chance before the possibility of losing the majority in the midterms.

“We had the time, the luxury of time, in the One Big, Beautiful Bill, to work through that and get at least a partial win for the pro-life movement. I was very happy about that,” he said.

“We got to a point where the clock was just, was what it was,” Arrington continued. “I’ve been talking about this for months, and, you know, there’s just been a lot of other things … we as a unified Republican leadership team have had to deal with.”

Hawley’s Plan

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., says that this funding being reinstated is a “moral consequence.” 

“The United States Congress has a significant decision to make. Is this Congress, a Republican Congress, going to provide hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer money to the worst, most notorious abortion provider in the United States of America?” he asked. 

“This Congress should have acted long ago,” Hawley continued. “There is no excuse, none, for Planned Parenthood to be receiving taxpayer money to be carrying out the mutilation of our children, to be carrying out the murder of the innocent unborn. And yet, that is exactly what this Congress is now planning to do.” 

Hawley has a long history of fighting abortion funding. During the last reconciliation, he filed an amendment to the budget resolution to ban the funding. Now he says it is the time to act. 

“It should have been done in the last go-round, and it should be done now. This is the time to act. It is a moment of moral consequence, and it is a moment for moral leadership,” Hawley continued. 

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., sharply criticized Republicans’ budget reconciliation proposal Wednesday, calling it a “reckless” measure that Democrats are determined to defeat.

Speaking to reporters after House Democrats began debating the legislation, Jeffries argued that Republicans were struggling to advance their agenda despite holding the House majority.

“A few moments ago, yet again, another reckless Republican bill went down to defeat on the floor of the House of Representatives,” Jeffries said. “How are Democrats in the minority, but continue to control the floor as if we were in the majority?”

Jeffries pointed to what he described as recent Democratic policy victories, including legislation passed by House Democrats in January to extend Affordable Care Act tax credits. He said the measure helped protect health care coverage for more than 20 million Americans.

The New York Democrat also criticized the SAVE America Act, legislation that would require voters to present identification before casting a ballot. Jeffries said House Democrats would oppose measures they believe could hinder “free and fair elections.”

“House Democrats are committed to making sure that we have a free and fair election in November,” Jeffries said. “When that occurs, we’re confident that we’re gonna take back control of the United States House of Representatives.”

Jeffries also condemned the Republican-backed budget package for continuing to fund U.S. military operations against Iran.

The legislation, he said, would provide “$60 billion in additional taxpayer money for [President] Donald Trump’s reckless and costly war of choice in the Middle East.”

According to Jeffries, the conflict has left Iran in a stronger position than before military operations began, despite the United States having depleted more than a large part of Iran’s military, executive personnel, and the regime’s sources of income.

“The war in Iran has been a disaster for the American people,” he said.

Jeffries concluded by pledging that Democrats would oppose what he called the GOP’s “America last” budget resolution and instead push to restore funding for Medicaid and nutrition assistance programs.

He accused Republicans of forcing through “devastating cuts” to those programs in last year’s reconciliation package, which he referred to as the party’s “one big, ugly bill.”

House Republicans have defended the budget reconciliation measure as necessary to advance key spending and policy priorities, while Democrats have united in opposition to the proposal.

 

 

We discuss polling, economy, battleground states, and more.

Stay ahead of the censors – Join us warroom.org/join

Aired On: 7/16/2026

Watch:
On the Web: https://www.warroom.org
On Gettr: @WarRoom
On X: @Bannons_WarRoom
On Podcast: Apple, iHeart Radio, Google 
On TV: PlutoTV Channel 240, Dish Channel 219, Roku, Apple TV, FireTV or on https://AmericasVoice.news. #news #politics #realnews 

 

The post Episode 5521: China’s Plan To Bomb US WarShips; China Cuts Off AI appeared first on Stephen K Bannon's War Room.

 

 

We discuss polling, economy, battleground states, and more.

Stay ahead of the censors – Join us warroom.org/join

Aired On: 7/16/2026

Watch:
On the Web: https://www.warroom.org
On Gettr: @WarRoom
On X: @Bannons_WarRoom
On Podcast: Apple, iHeart Radio, Google 
On TV: PlutoTV Channel 240, Dish Channel 219, Roku, Apple TV, FireTV or on https://AmericasVoice.news. #news #politics #realnews 

 

The post Episode 5520: Briefing The Enemies Of The President appeared first on Stephen K Bannon's War Room.

New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill is defending her use of a state police helicopter to attend a U.S. Naval Academy alumni event in Maryland after Republican lawmakers questioned whether taxpayer-funded aircraft should be used for what they described as a personal trip, Politico reported.

For the third time in two years, House Republicans have passed election integrity legislation, only to watch it stall in the Senate. But two officials told the California Courier how they expect the SAVE America Act to be passed.

As part of his 2024 campaign, President Donald Trump vowed to secure U.S. elections with voter ID, paper ballots, proof of citizenship, and same-day voting. Multiple versions of the SAVE Act have passed the House only to stall in the Senate. House Republicans are now trying a different route by including the bill in their border security reconciliation package.

“It’s incredibly frustrating that we couldn’t get the Save America Act through the Senate without reconciliation,” Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, told the California Courier when asked about the possibility of the move last week. 

“I do think that that is the best path to actually getting this signed into law, which is the goal of this entire exercise,” Gill added. “We’re not doing this to just pass bills out of the House that die in the Senate, but that’s what’s happened.”

National Efforts

The effort began in May 2024 when Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, introduced the original SAVE Act. It passed the House by July but stalled in the Senate. After Trump won the 2024 election, Republicans brought the bill back in January 2025. It passed the House again in April, only to stall once more.

Senate Democrats and some Senate Republican leaders drew backlash from the Trump administration and the conservative base during that period. In May 2025, Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, tried to pass the bill by unanimous consent, but Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., blocked it using procedural objections.

House Republicans made a third attempt in February by expanding the bill into the SAVE America Act. It passed the House, but Republicans failed to get to the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster.

“We passed it twice and sent it over to the Senate. We need them to do their job now,” Gill told the California Courier. “I think that many of the senators have talked about probably a lighter version of the Save America Act as part of a reconciliation bill. And the reason that they say that is there are stipulations as to what type of legislation can be in a reconciliation bill and what cannot.”

“So anything, in order to be a part of that reconciliation bill, any piece of legislation has to have some nexus to the budget, and you can create that nexus,” Gill continued. “There are ways to do that, and we’ve done similar things in the past. That totally comports with the provisions of reconciliation, but that’s going to be the issue the Senate’s going to have to deal with.”

Gill noted that due to running the Save America Act through the reconciliation bill, it is a “procedural vehicle” to get lawmakers around the 60-vote filibuster threshold in the Senate. 

With the attachment to the budget bill, the Senate will only need 51 votes to pass the legislation, meaning Vice President JD Vance could break a 50-50 tie if necessary. 

However, Republicans still face a potential obstacle: The Senate parliamentarian could strip out parts of the bill that don’t have a clear budgetary impact under the Byrd Rule.

In California

California has faced its own scrutiny over election practices, particularly its widespread use of mail-in ballots, ballot harvesting, and the extended time it takes to certify results. With several contentious races this year, attention has focused on who would win the state’s top offices, including the next mayor of Los Angeles.

Many were surprised when Democratic socialist City Councilmember Ninthya Raman secured the second spot in the mayor’s race, especially after underdog candidate Spencer Pratt, a Palisades fire victim, gained attention during the campaign. Rumors of election irregularities quickly spread after videos from Skid Row appeared to show some homeless individuals claiming they were paid to vote for Mayor Karen Bass and Raman. 

Just days after the election, First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli announced he would work with the Department of Justice’s assistant attorney general for the Civil Rights Division, Harmeet Dhillon, to “conduct a comprehensive audit” of the state’s voter rolls.

When asked about the election issues in Los Angeles during a recent interview with the California Courier, Essayli pushed back on the idea that the DOJ can simply fix California’s election problems. 

“People are looking to me, the Department of Justice, to the courts, to sort of fix California’s problems, fix their elections. That’s not our role and that’s not our job,” Essayli said. “There’s a political problem in California. There’s a problem with the Legislature. There’s a problem with people in office. I can only prosecute and enforce crimes. I can only enforce laws that Congress has passed.”

“Especially in this election space, Congress has a lot of power to regulate elections. They can ban vote-by-mail. They can ban ballot harvesting. They can require voter IDs. That’s what the SAVE [America] Act is about. That’s what the president is fighting for in Congress. And really, that’s their job,” Essayli added. “And they’re the ones that need to regulate the elections.”

Essayli argued that while federal action is necessary, California, which has had a Democrat supermajority for over 15 years, has created its own set of rules that effectively tilt the playing field. 

“There’s a lot of areas where things are wrong, maybe even slightly corrupt, but it may not be illegal,” Essayli told the California Courier. “And that’s the space we’re operating in California.” 

“Ballot harvesting is allowed by state law. Ballot harvesting is illegal in most states. But in California, they made it legal. So when the president says these elections are rigged, he also means like they’ve legally rigged it, that they’ve changed state laws to rig the elections in their favor. So that way they can go do the ballot harvesting,” Essayli added. 

What’s Next

The House has yet to vote on the full reconciliation bill, only passing a procedural resolution on Wednesday that directed that the SAVE America Act be included.

Prior to Congress’ decision, Republican Sens. Rick Scott of Florida and Lee pushed to cancel lawmakers’ August recess until the bill passes. Lee has also publicly pushed back on Thune’s apprehension around the legislation.

In March, Thune told reporters he was open to using reconciliation for the SAVE America Act. By June, however, he warned about the Byrd Rule, telling Fox Business that if the parliamentarian strips the bill from the package, SAVE America would not be at a 51-vote threshold. It would be at a 60-vote threshold under the rules.

That possibility has some Republicans already preparing for a fallback plan. If the SAVE America Act is removed from the reconciliation package, the only realistic path left would be forcing a talking filibuster. 

The approach is one that Lee has long advocated for, and that hardline House members like Rep. Anna Paulina Luna and Gill have also pushed.

“The Senate prides themselves on being the deliberative body, as opposed to us barbarians of the House. But if the Senate wants to be the deliberative body, they ought to actually deliberate legislation,” Gill told the California Courier. “So, the Senate right now could get the Save America Act passed … but they need to be willing to use a talking filibuster.”

“That does not require a change in Senate rules. It simply requires senators, I think, to do their job and debate legislation on the Senate floor the way they’re supposed to,” Gill added. 

In June, Thune had down-played the idea of using the talking filibuster, claiming that he did not believe there would be enough support behind it. 

With the new advancement, the House is expected to vote on the budget bill sometime next week.

Former Attorney General John Ashcroft ripped apart Democrats’ narrative that the Trump administration is using the Department of Justice as a personal office to prosecute “political enemies.” Ashcroft was testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee in favor of the nomination of Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche to the permanent position when Democrats like Sens. Adam […]

SHERMAN OAKS, CA — A local cockroach somehow maintained his composure on camera despite unexpectedly making contact with a journalist.

America has a strange habit of waiting until its leaders are gone before deciding they are worthy of honor.

We name buildings after them; place their portraits on our walls; and speak about their courage, accomplishments, and place in history; but by the time we do, the person being honored is no longer here to see it.

We shouldn’t wait.

That is why I sponsored the legislation renaming Palm Beach International Airport as President Donald J. Trump International Airport.

President Trump is the first president in American history to call Florida home. Palm Beach County is not simply a place he visits or a state he carried in an election: It is his community.

In Palm Beach, President Trump has built a life, loved his family, created jobs, and returned to call the county home after serving his first term as commander in chief.

His connection to the iconic Florida coast is real, lasting, and unlike that of any other president.

President Trump’s influence impacts the lives of the county’s residents too.

Like me, for example.

President Trump’s common sense, resolve to stand by his convictions, and motivation to challenge an establishment that had stopped listening to everyday Americans inspired me to follow in his footsteps.

Watching him place America first made me realize that regular people cannot remain on the sidelines; we have to step forward, serve, and make a difference.

People may disagree with President Trump’s policies, style, or political movement, but his positive impact on the American people is undeniable.

The president transformed the Republican Party; reshaped American politics; and made it through impeachments, investigations, prosecutions, attempts to remove him from the ballot, and even an assassin’s bullet—which I believe missed the president because of God’s divine intervention.

When most people would have quit, the challenges only motivated him to move forward. Trump then retook to the presidency with a national mandate, where he delivered for the American people.

The president has secured his place in history. We, as Americans, owe it to him to recognize it while he is still here to receive the honor.

Despite this, critics have continuously tried to portray the airport renaming as a private benefit for the Trump family or the Trump Organization.

That claim is false, and the legislation was written to ensure it could never become true.

Palm Beach County will pay no licensing fees or royalties. President Trump, his family, and the Trump Organization will receive no revenue from the airport’s name.

The Trump Organization permanently waived its trademark rights connected to the airport name and related merchandise.

Trump and his family will not make one dollar.

Even more, if Palm Beach County makes any money from airport merchandise, that money will belong to the county and be reinvested into the community.

I know this because Florida State Rep. Kim Kendall, Florida State Sen. Debbie Mayfield, and I worked with Palm Beach County and the Trump Organization from the beginning to make this legislative effort transparent, protective of taxpayers, and legally sound.

This effort was never about using a public airport to enrich a private business, but about honoring a president while ensuring the public receives the full benefit.

Unfortunately, political debate too often begins with the worst possible assumptions. When the Trump name is involved, adversaries of the president and his family immediately search for self-serving motives or corruption.

However, they forget that public officials have a responsibility to look past the noise and ask a more basic question: Is this good for the people we represent?

In this case, the answer is yes.

President Donald J. Trump International Airport will bear one of the world’s most recognized names, one already inseparable from Palm Beach County. Travelers from all corners of the world associate Florida, Palm Beach, and Mar-a-Lago with President Trump.

That recognition has value.

In recent years, Palm Beach County has been growing, and its aviation infrastructure should keep pace. There are two additional airports in the county that could accommodate more activity through longer runways, additional hangars, and future investment.

President Donald J. Trump International Airport can become the premier gateway to Palm Beach County and the free state of Florida, strengthening its national and international identity while our other aviation assets expand to serve the region’s growth.

Reasonable people can disagree about whether an airport should bear President Trump’s name. I respect honest disagreement.

But honest disagreement requires honest facts.

Taxpayers are protected. Palm Beach County receives the benefit. The airport gains a globally recognized identity tied directly to the county it serves.

And Florida honors its first president while he is still alive to appreciate it.

I grew up in a home where service was respected and gratitude was expressed while people were still able to receive it.

President Trump has served this country through attacks and opposition that few American leaders have ever faced.

Trump has brought Florida with him to the White House, enshrined Palm Beach County as part of presidential history, and inspired people like me to step forward and serve.

One day, people won’t even know naming this airport for him was ever controversial.

I prefer to be remembered as someone who recognized the moment rather than as someone who was too afraid of political criticism to act.

President Trump deserves the honor. Palm Beach County deserves the opportunity. Taxpayers deserve the protections we secured.

That is why I sponsored the legislation, voted for it, and am proud to stand by it.

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.