Back in high school, the fear of having to stay after class if my homework wasn’t done really kept me on track. But it turns out, that kind of motivation doesn’t quite translate to adults in government.
Senate Majority Leader John Tune (Rs.D.) has even suggested maintaining his position in June, if it means getting President Trump’s agenda—particularly the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” also called the 2025 Settlement Bill—over the finish line.
After a meeting on Monday, Senate Republicans left looking just as divided as they arrived, particularly over issues like cuts to Medicaid, tax adjustments, and various minor items buried in the lengthy bill. It seems that the prospect of skipping out for an extended weekend wasn’t enough to spark any immediate agreement.
The pressing question hanging over both the House and Senate bills is whether they’ll really cut enough to impact the deficit meaningfully. Some disgruntled House Republicans are pretty upset about the bill, especially since estimates from the Congressional Budget Bureau suggest it could increase the deficit over the next decade instead of decreasing it.
The President’s administration disagrees with this assessment, arguing that the bill still serves as a deficit reducer. Both sides are entrenched in their predictable debates.
The term “settlement” was chosen by those drafting the 1974 Congressional Budget and Water Storage Management Act, which aimed to clarify the budget resolution process. This year, both chambers are set to adopt a budget resolution, although it doesn’t hold the force of law. It’s more of a vision for the government’s financial landscape.
However, once the Congressional budget framework is in place, there are real ramifications. The usual spending process will need to align with discretionary caps. Additionally, a settlement order may direct changes in existing laws—like tax rules—to either increase or decrease spending to meet the budget resolution’s targets.
But there’s tension surrounding this. A few members in both chambers resist certain provisions in the bill passed by the House. Initially, there was a goal to finalize the settlement actions before the July 4 break, but House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) now thinks that deadline might slip into later this month.
Another critical element of the budget process is withdrawal. According to the 1974 act, withdrawal serves as a tool for the president. If he wants to reverse or cancel enacted budget provisions, he must send a request for withdrawal to Congress. If Congress doesn’t approve the request in 45 days, the spending proceeds as planned.
On May 30, President Trump submitted a $9.4 billion withdrawal request. The House passed a minor withdrawal bill last week, with the Senate set to consider it after reaching a resolution on the settlement measures. In his previous term, Trump had proposed a $15 billion withdrawal package that was ultimately rejected by the Senate.
The Government Accountability Office, responsible for auditing Congress, has stated that the Trump administration is breaking the law by withdrawing funds from the Museum and Library Services Institute without Congress’s approval. Earlier this year, they flagged similar issues regarding the management of a $5 billion program for electric vehicle charging stations.
The accountability office noted they were investigating over three dozen cases this year related to one-sided funding cuts, many stemming from actions linked to Elon Musk’s initiatives. Some administration members argue that a withdrawal bill isn’t necessary, contending that the president already has the authority to withhold funds as he sees fit without needing Congressional nods. They even go so far as to claim that the overall budget is unconstitutional.
It looks like this fundamental disagreement will eventually end up in the Supreme Court. Until then, the administration must navigate how to fulfill its budgetary commitments, trying to ensure as many cuts are legal while also submitting additional withdrawal requests. Meanwhile, Congress has to finalize the allocations for the 2025 budget before the deadline hits on September 30.
Don Wolfensberger has decades of experience in parliamentary staff roles, including a term as the prime minister of the House Rules Committee in 1995. He authored works on Congress and its relationship with the public.
