THE LOOK AHEAD – MAY 2025
Produced By:
Bret Manley (bret@elevatega.com) former Chief of Staff to Rep. Rodney Davis (R-IL)
David Marten (david@elevatega.com) former Legislative Director for Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA)
Elevate Government Affairs (www.elevatega.com)
Balance of Power
Senate: 53 Republicans, 45 Democrats, 2 Independents Caucusing with Democrats
House: 220 Republicans, 213 Democrats*, 2 Vacancies
- TX-18: Rep. Sylvester Turner (D-TX) passed away on March 5th after just arriving in Congress to fill the seat long held by former Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee until she passed away last year. A special election will be held November 4th, 2025. This is a safe Democratic seat.
- AZ-07: Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) passed away from cancer on March 13th. He had served in Congress since 2003 and as the top Democrat on the Committee on Natural Resources since 2015 until Rep. Jared Huffman (D-CA) supplanted him this January. The primary for this seat will be held July 15th and the general election on September 23rd. This is a safe Democratic seat.
Top Line Takeaways:
- Reconciliation Kicks Into High Gear: Several markups have come and gone, but the big ones are yet to come (and keep getting postponed). Not to mention these bills will all be different than whatever the Senate process produces, and remember they did that on purpose. “I’m Just a Bill on Capitol Hill” taught us all when we were very young that the bills have to match. It’s tough to see a direct path forward at this moment due to the sheer number of high-profile issues that haven’t been resolved. We’re STILL fighting about the budgetary impact of SALT… how’s it gonna look when the GOP makes good on the promise not to tax tips? We, for one, are ready for our new underground economy where everything is gifted to us, and we simply tip for the pleasure of receiving it. Big Law is gonna have fun with that one.
- Appropriations, Remember Them?: The Approps process marches on. Death, taxes, and appropriations in May. The world could descend into a nuclear winter, and the surviving cockroaches would still be able to feed off the crumbs of last night’s pizza delivery to the Subcommittee on Labor-HHS. We’re told they really want to pass all 12 bills by October 1. This time they’re serious. Like for real it’s gonna happen. No takebacks. The Committee is still crunching through their oversight hearings in the next two weeks, if they don’t get to markups fast, they’ll be lucky to pass a single bill by October 1st.
- Big Budget-Little Budget: Earlier this morning, Trump released a “skinny” budget that proposes massive cuts across the federal government. The comprehensive budget documents Hill observers are accustomed to – you know the one with all the fancy charts and graphics with arrows pointing up and down and all around – will come out toward the end of May. Friendly reminder, this document isn’t worth the paper it isn’t printed on anymore (Congress eliminated the printing requirement…who says they don’t do anything useful?). Even though the President’s budget has no force of law and is in essence a marketing document that requires a lot of staff time (ahem…DOGE), we all have to pretend it’s important and read a bunch of very serious thought pieces about what it all means. It means nothing.
- Tax Talk: This week saw a bunch of House committees markup their portion of the reconciliation bill. They were following the instructions set out by the budget resolution. But at the end of the day these markups are the sideshow to the coming circus. Sure, there may be a couple fun rides along the way, but the main attraction will be Ways and Means, which is expected to hold their markup “sometime” in May. However, both W&M and Energy and Commerce’s markups have been pushed to the week of May 12th. Speaker Johnson has promised a reconciliation bill on the floor by the Memorial Day recess – or is it July 4th? Your hosts are quite confident the only thing President Trump really wants is reauthorization of TCJA with some add-ons (no tax on tips!). Which means Dumbo isn’t going to fly until they figure that part out, and going forward we will, again, gladly accept tips!
- We’re On a Highway to Reauthorization: The process for reauthorizing our nation’s highway programs begins in earnest with the House leading the way. Stakeholders were asked in April to submit requests and staff will begin meeting with stakeholders to develop language. A call for projects hasn’t gone out yet but be on the lookout!
- CRA’s Last Hurrah: Time is almost up for Congressional Republicans to pull back rulemakings via the Congressional Review Act. Remember a CRA not only eliminates a rule, but it forever prevents a future Administration from engaging in a similar rulemaking without a new Congressional authorization. So, while reconciliation markups will get the bulk of the press’s attention, this is where Congress will do actual work this month. The deadline is on or around May 8th, and then you’ll be free from caring about CRAs for the next three years!
- Rescissions: No…not the bar on the Jersey Shore (that’s Recessions, like the other bar in DC) but the package from Team Trump on previously appropriated, though not obligated, funding it wishes to repeal. Maybe they should hold the vote at Recessions; would be a lot likelier to pass. More on this in Get Smart!
Legislative Action in March
In the Senate: We’ll finally see something different than nominations next week as the Senate will seek to pass a number of CRAs the House has sent over, in advance of the CRA clock expiring. Other than that? More nominations. Another thing to watch is whether there will be additional floor action related to the tariffs after attendance issues on the pro-disapproval side scuttled the effort this week. Predicted shortages from falling imports will take their time to appear through the supply chain but once they hit, they’re not going away fast…putting more pressure to get Senators on record.
In the House: The House (and then Senate) will exhaust its final slate of Biden Administration rules it wishes to repeal via the CRA process. Next week the House will likely consider Trump’s recissions package. This is a bill to undo funding that was appropriated in previous years but has not been spent, less than $10 billion. They’re going vote on a bill to make Gulf of America that statutory name of the body of water formerly known as the Gulf of Mexico. Also up will be an effort to allow former Presidents and Vice Presidents to move State cases to federal court (call this the Letitia James Act). In addition to all that, it’s Police Week the week of May 12th which means we’ll get a bunch of police friendly law enforcement bills and Irish Times will make enough money to somehow sustain operations for the 51 weeks of the year that are not Police Week.
Committee Spotlight
House Transportation and Infrastructure: Since it technically happened in April, we won’t cover the reconciliation bill here, but T&I is quietly one of the most productive committees on the Hill. Chairman Graves and Ranking Member Larsen – who have a strong working relationship – have begun the process for reauthorizing our nation’s highway programs and in addition to hearing directly from stakeholders in May they’re fielding requests for language. Typically, there is a formal call for projects as well and we don’t expect that to change this time around, but in the current political environment there might be some sensitivity to having that get caught up in reconciliation and DOGE conversations. We’re also told that the Committee will begin briefing staff on the Coast Guard Reauthorization package for a planned markup in May. Recall, last year’s authorization didn’t make it over the finish line at the end of the last Congress, but it passed with over 400 votes. We’re watching to see how – or if – the Committee wades into the rumored effort to create a Secretary of the Coast Guard, putting a Senate Confirmed person atop the agency (like the other branches have) to insulate the Commandant. Finally, the Committee is planning legislation responding to Secretary Noem’s desire to re-establish FEMA as an independent agency, and thus not under the DHS umbrella.
House Energy and Commerce: We expect E&C’s reconciliation package to be released as early as Monday, with a markup now slated for the week of May 12th. From what we’ve been told, the total savings in the bill is going to come in $100-200 billion below the instructions. Simply too many issues in the committee’s jurisdiction can lead to very uncomfortable votes. Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE) issued a “red-line” for Medicaid savings and that’s noteworthy for two reasons. One, Bacon has been a reliable team player for years with leadership and doesn’t have a history of making public demands. Two, he’s held on to his seat that by all measures should be in Democratic hands. Bacon won his race by 1%, while Donald Trump lost the district by 4 points. These are canary in the coal mine statements from Members that make the GOP majority.
House Ways and Means: The amount of open issues for W&M to resolve before they can head to a markup makes it difficult to see how they’re going to get there by the week of the 12th, when they’re rumored to hold their markup. SALT for one isn’t resolved let alone one of Trump’s biggest campaign promises of No Tax on Tips. Remember, the Senate doesn’t really care about SALT. Why? All the high-cost coastal states are represented by Democrats so there isn’t going to be any help coming from the other chamber. We haven’t even gotten into whether they try to treat TCJA as current law and thus budget neutral. Regardless of what happens in all the other committees, if W&M can’t get it together and get everyone on board this thing isn’t going anywhere.
Senate Agriculture: Remember the Farm Bill? You’d be remiss for forgetting amid all the other deadlines. We are on our second extension of the 2018 (!) Farm Bill with no clear path towards getting a new bill done by when the current extension ends in September. But with reconciliation taking up all the oxygen in the room, it’s very unlikely we will see any discussion on a renewed farm bill effort until after a final reconciliation bill passes. By which time, of course, we’ll need another extension! And so, the cycle continues. House Republicans have been trying to shift a bunch of the Farm Bill (primarily Title 1 programs on crop commodities and Title 11 on crop insurance) into reconciliation which would blow up the current structure of the bill, but may run into Byrd Rule issues over in the Senate.
Senate Commerce: The real action in Commerce continues to be on the reconciliation package, of course, as Chairman Cruz continues to work on a deal to free up spectrum coveted by DoD that can be used as a pay for, along with investments in air traffic control and the Coast Guard. But we’d be remiss to not focus on the actual most interesting piece of legislation that is currently making its way through the committee—the Sunshine Protection Act, which would “lock the clock” with permanent daylight savings time (or, maybe, permanent standard time). Remember in 2022, when the Senate passed the bill by unanimous consent; because when the bill was hotlined, no Senate legislative director thought their boss could possibly care about it? Well, David sure does, because turns out senators have a lot of opinions on moving to permanent daylight savings time if they are actually asked, and the Senate had to ask the House to please not vote on the bill once that became clear. This time, there’s been real regular order–the committee even had a hearing where the association of golf course owners (a real thing) testified on how an extra hour of daylight helps them fit in more tee times (as a golfer, David is all for this). But with no clear consensus about whether to have daylight savings or standard time be permanent, the country seems doomed to keep turning our clocks back and forward for the time being.
Get Smart – Rescissions and The Impoundment Control Act (ICA)
Trump is expected to send a package of “rescissions” to the Hill next week for a vote in Congress in the neighborhood of $10 billion but probably lower. What is a rescission? It’s the act of rescinding…like when your homeowner’s association takes away your right to paint your front door red. While we can’t help you with that, we can help you understand this thing call the Impoundment Control Act and why it’s going to play a major role for the duration of the Trump Administration.
Ok, Frame This For Me Pal: Gladly! The Constitution…that little ole’ thing…gives Congress the “power of the purse”. Specifically, Article 1, Section 9, Clause 7 states that “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law…”
Yeah Yeah I Knew That, How Does It Actually Work Though?: Simply put, Congress appropriates money via its 12 appropriations bills—which all get passed on time…always—but that’s not like sending a check to the Department of Transportation to build a $7 billion charging station. Technically, the appropriations bill gives an agency the authority to make financial obligations. Those financial obligations are then met by disbursements from the Treasury.
Ok This All Seems Pretty Clear, What’s The Problem?: The problem, our dear sweet reader, is there is no mechanism that actually forces an Agency to make financial obligations. This has happened many times in U.S. history and was relatively non-controversial for the vast majority of U.S. history. However, this is a pretty glaring loophole. And the Laws of Loopholes (written in stone around the time of the Bible…probably) states that ‘all loopholes must be exploited.’
Ok, You’re Setting Me Up, What Happened?: Richard Nixon happened. That trickster Dick Nixon decided he would take this glaring loophole and drive a Lincoln Continental Mark IV right through the middle of it. He decided he would simply withhold funding from programs he didn’t like. He got sued a bunch, but really it resulted in Congress needing to act and act it did!
You’re Gonna Tell Me Congress Created the Impoundment Control Act?: Yes! Wow you’re really good at this! In 1974, Congress enacted Title X of the Budget Control Act to clarify that there were two types of impoundments…deferrals (temporary) and rescissions (permanent)…but importantly it set a requirement that the President notify Congress. The President can withhold funding for 45 legislative days after submitting a rescissions proposal to Congress after which time the funding must be released. Released to whom though? Hmmmm…
So This Fixed The Problem Right? No More Shenanigans?: Kinda, sorta, not really. As recently as the Fiscal Responsibility Act, Congress has enacted rescissions, so from that standpoint it works. Enter President Donald Trump (and importantly a man named Russ Vought who runs OMB). They argue that the Impoundment Control Act is unconstitutional and have indicated a willingness to test that theory.
Ok, I’ll Bite, What Are Their Arguments That ICA Is Unconstitutional?: The argument hinges on three main arguments. In no particular order
- Take Care Clause: Article II, Section 3 states that the President “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” and therefore gives him discretion over how to execute laws (prosecutorial discretion is an offshoot of this theory), which means a President should be able to withhold money from things that are wasteful, violate other laws, or jeopardize the national security.
- Separation of Powers: This one boils down to the President doesn’t think the Congress can “micromanage” the executive and that the Executive is imbued with the authority to um…execute the laws. This argument comes up a lot over foreign policy which is a core executive function under the Constitution.
- Unitary Executive Theory: The overarching theory here, that the President, as the elected representative of the people, has sole authority over the Executive branch. This theory is also where the Agency RIF and Realignment Plans are coming from and why the Administration is so keen to test their ability to shed federal employees.
So What Will The Courts Say When The Lawsuits Settle: Courts have generally ruled that President’s must spend money as Congress has allocated. For instance, in Trump’s first term, he tried to take money from the Army Corps budget and put it toward the border wall. That was a no-no. Supreme Court precedent has also generally supported Congress in this regard though it has never ruled directly on the ICA…
…Ugh…What’s The But?: BUT…even if the Supreme Court finds the ICA constitutional, a human being sitting in a federal office building, at the direction somewhere up the chain of another human being who was hired by the President has to actually execute a contract. The Supreme Court can rule the ICA constitutional and say the President has to give out the money Congress has appropriated….BUT it can’t say who they have to give it to. And that will be a question we will probably get an answer to in the next 4 years. What happens if a President simply refuses to award a grant?
You Guys Always Cheer Me Up: Thanks! We’re here to help!
Reminder: Elevate Government Affairs offers monitoring and full coverage of hearings and markups for our clients. Be sure to ask us if you need something covered!
This is a product of Elevate Government Affairs LLC. To learn more about our firm, visit elevatega.com.
