President Donald Trump just notched a stunning win that’s got spending hawks cheering from the rooftops. Late Thursday night, the House of Representatives passed a White House-proposed rescissions package with a razor-thin vote of 216 to 213, slashing $9 billion in previously approved funds.
Breitbart reported that, in a nutshell, this bill cuts funding for foreign aid and public television, ends taxpayer support for NPR and PBS, and awaits Trump’s signature to become law.
The vote itself was a nail-biter, with the House barely pushing through the package after intense debate.
Two Republicans, Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania and Rep. Mike Turner of Ohio, even broke ranks on the procedural vote that sealed the Senate-amended bill’s fate.
Fitzpatrick, who recently opposed another of Trump’s initiatives, and Turner, a former House Intelligence Committee chairman, couldn’t quite stomach this particular cut.
Yet, despite the internal dissent, Trump’s ability to rally enough support showcases his knack for outmaneuvering the establishment, even in a Senate where moderate Republicans wield considerable sway. This isn’t just a win for the president; it’s a long-awaited victory for conservatives who’ve dreamed of reining in federal excess for decades.
Trump himself couldn’t contain his excitement, posting on Truth Social about the “big” achievement. He called out the “atrocious” waste on public broadcasting, claiming billions were squandered annually—a jab that’s sure to sting progressive defenders of these programs.
But let’s be honest, when taxpayers are footing the bill for content that often leans hard into one ideological camp, isn’t it fair to ask why? The specifics of the cuts are telling, targeting fiscal year 2024 spending levels that had been extended into 2025.
The package not only freezes year-over-year spending—a rare feat in itself—but goes further by slashing beyond those frozen levels. It also zeroes out certain foreign aid grants managed by the U.S. Agency for International Development, redirecting focus to domestic priorities.
Ending subsidies for NPR and PBS is perhaps the most eyebrow-raising part of this package. For years, conservatives have argued that public broadcasting shouldn’t rely on taxpayer dollars when it often pushes narratives that clash with half the country’s values.
While $9 billion might seem like a drop in the federal budget bucket, it’s a symbolic stand against what many see as government overreach into media.
Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought echoed this sentiment, telling reporters at a Christian Science Monitor breakfast that the appropriations process shouldn’t be a bipartisan lovefest.
He quipped that no voter ever hit the polls demanding compromise on spending. And frankly, when budgets balloon year after year, his point about fiscal discipline hits harder than a tax bill in April.
Looking ahead, this rescissions package could be just the beginning, with hints of more cuts on the horizon. Vought signaled before the vote that the White House plans to double down on spending control, a promise that’s music to conservative ears. If future packages succeed, the funding levels Congress debates by the September 30 deadline could shrink even further.
That September 30 deadline, by the way, is the next big hurdle, when Congress must either pass new funding bills or extend current levels with a continuing resolution. If additional rescissions gain traction by then, the baseline for those extensions will be leaner than ever. It’s a prospect that has fiscal conservatives cautiously optimistic.
Meanwhile, the bill’s passage also nods to Trump’s border security agenda, with Congress supplementing the spending freeze with extra funds for those initiatives.
It’s a reminder that while cuts are the headline, the administration’s priorities—like securing national borders—aren’t taking a backseat. This balance of slashing waste while funding essentials is a tightrope, but one Trump seems determined to walk.
Critics, of course, will lament the loss of foreign aid and public media funding, arguing these programs serve vital roles. But when every dollar spent is a dollar borrowed against future generations, shouldn’t we prioritize what directly benefits American citizens? It’s a question that deserves more than a soundbite in response.
For now, the bill sits on Trump’s desk, awaiting a signature that will cement this as law. It’s a moment of triumph for those who’ve long pushed against the tide of endless appropriations, proving that even modest cuts can send a powerful message.
And let’s not forget the broader context—Congress achieving a spending freeze, even if supplemented by border security funds, is no small feat in a town addicted to pork-barrel politics. This rescissions package builds on that, offering a glimpse of what disciplined governance could look like if the momentum holds.