Politics

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump has installed plaques underneath portraits of presidents at the White House, using them to insult and make unfounded claims about some of his predecessors including Joe Biden and Barack Obama — the latest in a series of controversial White House changes under Trump.

The plaques, many of which the White House said Trump penned himself, add to what the president has dubbed the “Presidential Walk of Fame” — a portrait gallery along the West Wing Colonnade — and describe the tenures of former commanders in chief in an overtly political way.

Trump’s most recent predecessors’ plaques read the most editorialized. The permanent signs are stylistically similar to the president’s social media posts, with sporadic capitalizations and punctuation — including many exclamation points.

Under Biden, depicted only by his signature written by the presidential autopen, the plaque includes claims such as “Sleepy Joe Biden was, by far, the worst President in American History,” adding that he took office “as a result of the most corrupt Election ever seen in the United States” and that “Biden oversaw a series of unprecedented disasters that brought our Nation to the brink of destruction.”

Trump also attacked Biden for his economic record, his climate, immigration and foreign policies, including the Afghanistan withdrawal (calling it “among the most humiliating events in American History”). He also said that because of Biden’s “weakness,” Russia invaded Ukraine, and “Hamas terrorists launched the heinous October 7th attack on Israel.”

The plaque also cites what Trump calls Biden’s “severe mental decline, and his unprecedented use of the Autopen.”

Under Obama, Trump wrote: “Barack Hussein Obama was the first Black President, a community organizer, one term Senator from Illinois, and one of the most divisive political figures in American History.” 

Obama’s plaque ends with a more false claims that he “spied on the 2016 Presidential Campaign of Donald J. Trump, and presided over the creation of the Russia, Russia, Russia Hoax, the worst political scandal in American History.” 

The plaques also make two references to Hillary Clinton, the former secretary of State and the 2016 Democratic nominee who lost to Trump. Under Obama’s portrait, it says that Hillary Clinton was his “handpicked successor,” and noted that she “would then lose the Presidency to Donald J. Trump.” Under Bill Clinton’s portrait, it says that “President Clinton’s wife, Hillary, lost the Presidency to President Donald J. Trump.”

Obama had no comment about the plaque. ABC News did not receive immediate responses from Biden and the Clintons for comment.

Many of the plaques were “written directly by the President himself,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement about the new decor.

“The plaques are eloquently written descriptions of each President and the legacy they left behind. As a student of history, many were written directly by the President himself,” Leavitt said in the statement.

Trump had teased these bronze plaques during an interview with Fox’s Laura Ingraham in November, saying that each would describe what the respective president did during his tenure.

In addition to the changes he has made to the colonnade, Trump has also altered the White House by paving over the Rose Garden, renovating White House Palm Room that was originally designed by former first lady Jackie Kennedy and connects the front of the White House to the Rose Garden in the back and redesigning the Oval Office. He has added statues around the Rose Garden and added ample gold leafing and decor to the Oval Office.

Most notably, Trump tore down the East Wing of the White House earlier this year, making room for a sweeping, multimillion-dollar ballroom that the president has said will be completed by the end of his term. 

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — House Speaker Mike Johnson denied he has “lost control of the House” after a group of moderate Republicans revolted and joined Democrats’ effort to force a vote on a three-year extension of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies.

“We have the smallest majority in U.S. history, OK? These are not normal times. There are [processes] and procedures in the House that are less frequently used when there are larger majorities,” Johnson said. “When you have a razor-thin margin, as we do, then all the procedures in the book people think are on the table, and that’s the difference.”

Johnson’s assertion comes after four Republicans broke ranks and signed onto House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries’ discharge petition, giving it the 218 signatures needed to force a vote though the vote is not likely to occur until January 2026 at the earliest.

The decision by moderate Republican Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick, Mike Lawler, Rob Bresnahan and Ryan Mackenzie to join Democrats came after the Republican-controlled House Rules Committee on Tuesday night blocked amendments to extend the ACA subsidies from advancing.

Johnson has also resisted from allowing an up or down amendment vote on extending the expiring subsidies, which were Democrats’ focal point of the record 43-day government shutdown this fall.

Asked if he will allow a vote on the ACA extension in January, Johnson said, “Everybody stay tuned. We are having conversations.”

The speaker, who was spotted huddling with moderates on the floor during votes on Wednesday morning, said, “We just had some intense fellowship … We’re working through very complex issues, as we do here all the time, and it’s good. Everybody’s working towards ideas. We’re keeping the productive conversation going. That’s what happens.”

Moderate Republicans who signed onto the petition took aim at House leadership.

Lawler, of New York, said he doesn’t endorse the Democrats’ bill as written, but “when leadership blocks action entirely, Congress has a responsibility to act. My priority is ensuring Hudson Valley families aren’t caught in the gridlock,” Lawler wrote on X.

Pennsylvania’s Fitzpatrick again urged for an up or down vote on extending the ACA subsidies — calling on leadership to “let the House work its will.”

ABC News Capitol Hill Correspondent Jay O’Brien pressed Fitzpatrick on if signing the Democrats’ discharge petition will force GOP leadership to take a different approach.

“I sure hope so,” he said. “But you have to let the people’s voice be heard on the House floor. You cannot not put bills on the floor because you’re afraid they’re going to pass. That’s not how this place should operate.”

Bresnahan, who also represents Pennsylvania, said leadership on both sides of the aisle failed to reach a bipartisan compromise on the ACA subsidies.

“Doing nothing was not an option, and although this is not a bill I ever intended to support, it is the only option remaining,” he said in a statement.

What happens next? 

The Republican-controlled House will hold vote on a clean three-year extension of the ACA subsidies; however, the vote is not expected to occur until January 2026 at the earliest given the rules for when a discharge petition can hit the floor.

The big question now is how the Senate will respond. The Senate already rejected a clean three-year extension of the subsidies in a pair of dueling health care votes last week, though several Republican senators crossed the aisle to join all Democrats in supporting it.

On Wednesday night, the House will hold a vote at approximately 5:30 p.m. on a narrow Republican health care package that does not address the expiring ACA tax credits.

Johnson needs a simple majority for the bill to pass and can only afford to lose three Republican votes. Democratic leaders are whipping their members against the bill. The vote will be tight for Johnson, who continues to navigate a slim majority.

The House GOP proposal would expand the availability of association health plans and what are known as “CHOICE arrangements;” impose new transparency requirements on pharmacy benefit managers to lower drug costs; and appropriate money for cost-sharing reductions to reduce premiums in the individual market. 

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — A group of moderate House Republicans broke ranks with GOP leadership on Wednesday to force a vote on a clean, three-year extension of the Affordable Care Act insurance subsidies set to expire at the end of the year.

Four Republicans signed onto House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries’ discharge petition, giving it the 218 signatures needed to force a vote.

The decision by moderate Republican Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick, Mike Lawler, Rob Bresnahan and Ryan Mackenzie to join Democrats comes after the Republican-controlled House Rules Committee on Tuesday night blocked amendments to extend the ACA subsidies from advancing.

House Speaker Mike Johnson has also resisted from allowing an up or down amendment vote on extending the expiring subsidies, which were Democrats’ focal point of the record 43-day government shutdown this fall.

Moderate Republicans who signed onto the petition took aim at House leadership.

Lawler, of New York, said he doesn’t endorse the Democrats’ bill as written, 

“…When leadership blocks action entirely, Congress has a responsibility to act. My priority is ensuring Hudson Valley families aren’t caught in the gridlock,” Lawler wrote on X.

“Our only request was a Floor vote on this compromise, so that the American People’s voice could be heard on this issue. That request was rejected,” Pennsylvania’s Fitzpatrick said in a statement. “Then, at the request of House leadership, me and my colleagues filed multiple amendments, and testified at length to those amendments. House leadership then decided to reject every single one of these amendments. As I’ve stated many times before, the only policy that is worse than a clean three-year extension without any reforms, is a policy of complete expiration without any bridge. Unfortunately, it is House leadership themselves that have forced this outcome.”

What happens next? 

The Republican-controlled House will hold vote on a clean three-year extension of the ACA subsidies; however, the vote is not expected to occur until January 2026 at the earliest given the rules for when a discharge petition can hit the floor.

The big question now is how the Senate will respond. The Senate already rejected a clean three-year extension of the subsidies in a pair of dueling health care votes last week, though several Republican senators crossed the aisle to join all Democrats in supporting it.

On Wednesday night, the House will hold a vote at approximately 5:30 p.m. on a narrow Republican health care package that does not address the expiring ACA tax credits. 

Johnson needs a simple majority for the bill to pass and can only afford to lose three Republican votes. Democratic leaders are whipping their members against the bill. The vote will be tight for Johnson, who continues to navigate a slim majority. 

The House GOP proposal would expand the availability of association health plans and what are known as “CHOICE arrangements;” impose new transparency requirements on pharmacy benefit managers to lower drug costs; and appropriate money for cost-sharing reductions to reduce premiums in the individual market. 

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(ST. CLOUD, Minn.) — For Justice Anne McKeig, the high-stakes endeavor of deciding cases on the Minnesota Supreme Court is increasingly an exercise in stress management and risk tolerance.

“It is an overwhelming responsibility,” said McKeig, an amateur musician and the first indigenous woman justice anywhere in the country.

An unprecedented surge of violent threats directed at state and federal judges in Minnesota and across the country has created taxing new dimensions to life as a judge and to upholding rule of law in America.

“I think people are extremely unhappy, and they don’t know where to take out their anger, or how to take out their anger in a way that is not involving violence,” McKeig told ABC News.

Nearly three quarters of Minnesota judges have reported receiving threats, according to a 2024 report from the Minnesota District Court Judges Association. About as many say they fear for their safety because of the job they do.

“Also, it’s the public response to the decisions that we make,” McKeig added. “We’re in the press more than some of our district court colleagues, but all of our families get impacted by this.”

As courts at all levels of the judiciary raise alarm about an influx of vitriolic phone calls, swatting and doxxing incidents involving judges’ personal homes, and social media posts threatening bodily harm, Justice McKeig says many arbiters of justice have been searching for new ways to cope.

“I thought, OK, we need to find out a way to have some fun, because this is a pretty serious job,” McKeig said.

Her answer is called the Reasonable Doubts, an all-judge rock band that meets twice a month to blow off steam and jam together inside an old law library.

“The job is tough, and you have to have outlets for something to get you out of your own head every once in a while,” said retired Judge Dale Harris, who plays guitar.

The group of 9 from across the state plays classics from Johnny Cash to contemporary hits from Elle King, part of a diverse repertoire that has a decidedly law and order vibe.

“Being a judge is not only stressful, but there’s a lot of secondary trauma. We sit through trials where you have victims testify who have suffered through some really difficult criminal experiences,” said Sarah Hennessy, an associate justice of the state Supreme Court.

“This is therapy for us. This is a way to use something creative to feel better,” she said.

The judges — which hail from rural, suburban, and urban communities and include Republican and Democrat appointees — have also begun performing in public, taking the stage at community gatherings.

“I think that it shows people a side of judges that they don’t expect,” McKeig said. “It’s like, well, no, actually, we’re people.”

The band is believed to be the only of its kind in the country — heightening public exposure of the judges at a time when safety risks have kept many others shying from the spotlight.

Recent cases of political violence in Minnesota, in particular, have unsettled McKeig and her peers. Earlier this year, a gunman killed the top Democrat in the state House and her husband, and wounded a state senator and his wife, both at their homes.

“I tell my kids, you are to never acknowledge that I’m your mom,” McKeig said, “and that’s a sad statement. If somebody says, is your, mother Anne McKeig, you say no. I don’t want them to get hurt.”

Federal judges have also experienced a wave of threats, particularly those who have handed down rulings against the Trump administration.

Federal District Court Judge John McConnell of Rhode Island, who recently ordered the Trump administration to pay out SNAP food benefits in full during the shutdown, says he’s had six credible death threats against his life.

“I’ve been on the bench almost 15 years, and I must say it’s the one time that actually shook my faith in the judicial system, in the rule of law, in the work we do,” McConnell said earlier this year during a rare public forum of active federal judges speaking publicly about security concerns.

Dozens of federal and state judges nationwide have reported cases of unsolicited pizza deliveries to their personal homes as acts of intimidation.

A delivery to Judge McConnell’s home was in the name of Daniel Anderl, the son of federal Judge Ester Salas of New Jersey who was murdered in 2020 by a disgruntled lawyer posing as a delivery man outside Salas’ home.

“To hear that my beautiful son’s name — everything that Danny stands for is love and light, you know — and to hear people using it as a weapon, weaponizing his name to inflict fear on Judge McConnell,” said an emotional Judge Salas during the forum. “Now Florida judges, state judges that are just doing their jobs, are getting pizzas in my beautiful boy’s name.”

Members of the Reasonable Doubts say they hope the band can inject a spirit of humanity into divisive public rhetoric around courts and judges and maybe even deepen respect for those tasked with upholding rule of law.

“You can have disagreements, but it doesn’t mean that we have to be at war with each other,” McKeig said.

“And we take care of each other,” added Hennesy.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told reporters on Tuesday that he won’t release the full unedited version of video showing a Sept. 2 attack on a suspected drug boat that killed 11 people, calling the video “top secret” and said releasing that version to the public would violate “longstanding Department of War policy.”

Democrats balked at the explanation, which he also shared during a closed-door briefing with Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Capitol Hill. They note that Hegseth, President Donald Trump and the U.S. Southern Command for several weeks have been posting edited clips of some two dozen boat attacks on their social media accounts.

“In keeping with longstanding Department of War policy, Department of Defense policy, of course we’re not going to release a top secret full unedited video of that to the general public,” Hegseth told reporters. Lawmakers on the House and Senate armed services committees and those overseeing appropriations will see it, Hegseth added, “but not the general public.”

Some Republicans said they thought the video should at least be shared more broadly in Congress in the interest in transparency and because it would show a lawful operation.

“I think the video should be given to everybody in Congress,” said South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, a longtime ally of Trump.

“Release it. Make your own decisions,” he later added, saying “I’d like all of us to see it.”

At issue is whether the Sept. 2 military strike on the alleged drug boat amounted to a war crime, as some lawmakers have suggested. Officials have confirmed there were four military strikes against the boat — the first strike killing nine of the 11 people aboard. Some 40 minutes later, a second strike was ordered to kill the remaining two survivors. Two more strikes were ordered to sink the boat, officials say.

Trump initially said he would release the video, telling reporters on Dec. 3 “whatever they have, we’d certainly release, no problem.” Trump later backtracked, saying he would defer to Hegseth.

Some lawmakers have seen extended portions of the video of the strikes in a classified briefing earlier this month, but described the state of the survivors before being killed in a second strike in starkly different terms. Democrats insisted the survivors were helpless and should have been rescued to comply with international laws that call for either sides in a conflict to help combatants who fall overboard or are shipwrecked. Republican Sen. Tom Cotton, however, said the survivors were trying to “flip” the boat “so they could stay in the fight.”

Adm. Mitch Bradley, who ordered the strikes, was expected to return to Capitol Hill on Wednesday to brief the House and Senate armed services committees behind closed doors, two officials told ABC News on Tuesday.

After two weeks of saying he was reviewing the matter, Hegseth told lawmakers during the closed-door briefing on Tuesday that he has no plans to do so. He said Adm. Mitch Bradley, who ordered the strikes, would share the video with members of the House and Senate armed services committees on Wednesday. 

He added that Bradley “has done a fantastic job, has made all the right calls, and we’re glad he’ll be there to do it.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said that if classification was a problem, Hegseth could at least share the video with every senator in a classified setting.

“Every senator is entitled to see it,” Schumer said.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly on Tuesday called Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s investigation into him a “bunch of bull****” and said he believes it’s about sending a message to retired service members not to speak out against the president.

“This is very performative for him,” Kelly told reporters about the investigation.

Kelly said Hegseth raised the investigation during a closed-door briefing to senators on the military’s campaign in the Eastern Pacific and Caribbean Sea targeting boats believed to be carrying drugs. According to Kelly, he asked a question about the boat strikes and Hegseth responded by chastising Kelly and other democratic lawmakers for posting a video urging troops not to follow illegal orders.

Hegseth asked Secretary of the Navy John Phelan to review Kelly for “potentially unlawful conduct” after the Arizona senator was featured in the video with five other Democrats who have served in the military and U.S. intelligence.

The Pentagon confirmed Tuesday in a prepared statement that it was “escalating” its review into Kelly from a preliminary review to an official “command investigation.”

Hegseth has said he believes the video by Kelly and others created confusion among troops and could encourage insubordination. Hegseth said he’s looking into whether the military should call Kelly, a retired Navy captain, back to active duty to face a court martial or some kind of administrative punishment.

On Monday, Kelly’s attorney, Paul Fishman, said in a letter to Phelan that if the Trump administration moves ahead with proceedings against Kelly in any forum, “all appropriate legal action” will be taken.

“To be clear: there is no legitimate basis for any type of proceeding against Senator Kelly, and any such effort would be unconstitutional and an extraordinary abuse of power. If the Executive Branch were to move forward in any forum—criminal, disciplinary, or administrative—we will take all appropriate legal action on Senator Kelly’s behalf to halt the Administration’s unprecedented and dangerous overreach,” Fishman wrote in the letter obtained by ABC News.

Kelly said he hasn’t heard anything from the Defense Department since he retired in 2011 when he was recognized for his 25 years of service.

“This is all bunch of bull****,” Kelly said Tuesday.

Kelly later added: “This is just about sending a message to retired service members, active duty service members, government employees — do not speak out against this president, or there will be consequences.”

The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Kelly’s remarks to reporters on Tuesday.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump said Tuesday he’ll deliver a live national address on Wednesday at 9 p.m. from the White House.

“It has been a great year for our Country, and THE BEST IS YET TO COME!” Trump posted on his social media platform.

“I look forward to seeing you then,” he said.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — In candid interviews with Vanity Fair, White House chief of staff Susie Wiles opened up about President Donald Trump and his Cabinet over the first year of Trump’s second term.

Wiles took part in 11 interviews that occurred in real time. Two parts of those interviews were published on Tuesday.

In them, Wiles offered unreserved descriptions of top figures in the administration — including Trump, who she said has an “alcoholic’s personality.”

Wiles said Trump, who has repeatedly said he doesn’t drink alcohol, said he “operates [with] a view that there’s nothing he can’t do. Nothing, zero, nothing.”

She called Vice President JD Vance a “conspiracy theorist for a decade” and White House Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought “a right-wing absolute zealot.” Billionaire Elon Musk, she said, was an “odd duck” and “avowed ketamine [user].”

Wiles also weighed in on Attorney General Pam Bondi’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files, Musk’s slashing of federal government agencies and programs, the chaotic rollout of Trump’s tariff plans, the administration’s aims for Venezuela and more.

Wiles, responding to Vanity Fair’s articles, said it is a “disingenuously framed hit piece on me and the finest President, White House staff, and Cabinet in history.”

“The truth is the Trump White House has already accomplished more in eleven months than any other President has accomplished in eight years and that is due to the unmatched leadership and vision of President Trump, for whom I have been honored to work for the better part of a decade,” Wiles wrote on X.

“Significant context was disregarded and much of what I, and others, said about the team and the President was left out of the story. I assume, after reading it, that this was done to paint an overwhelmingly chaotic and negative narrative about the President and our team,” Wiles added.

ABC News has reached out to Condé Nast, Vanity Fair’s parent company, for comment on Wiles’ criticism.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt defended Wiles on X. 

“Chief of Staff Susie Wiles has helped President Trump achieve the most successful first 11 months in office of any President in American history. President Trump has no greater or more loyal advisor than Susie. The entire Administration is grateful for her steady leadership and united fully behind her,” Leavitt wrote in a post responding to Wiles’ criticism of the articles.

Trump, Bondi and Musk have not publicly responded to the Vanity Fair articles.

Vance, at an event Tuesday in Pennsylvania, said he hadn’t read the Vanity Fair article but responded to Wiles’ remark that he’s been a “conspiracy theorist for the past decade.” Wiles made the comment on Vance while discussing the Epstein files.

“I haven’t looked at the article. I, of course, have heard about it. But conspiracy theorist, sometimes I am a conspiracy theorist but I only believe in the conspiracy theories that are true,” Vance told reporters.

“And by the way, Susie and I have joked in private and in public about that for a long time,” he added.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Former President Barack Obama told House Democrats at an event on Sunday in Los Angeles that as they focus on trying to win control of the House of Representatives, they should not get caught up in ideological differences within the party and can “sort through” them later, according to excerpts of his comments provided to ABC News.

Ideological arguments within the Democratic Party between its progressive and moderate wings came into sharp focus during 2025’s key elections — particularly in New York City, as Democrats debated over the candidacy of democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani. This past year, Obama campaigned on the ground for the Democratic Party’s Virginia and New Jersey gubernatorial candidates and spoke with Mamdani ahead of Election Day.

The party has also been divided over how to handle government funding and the expiration of Affordable Care Act subsidies.

Obama told the lawmakers to “focus” on winning back the Republican-controlled House in the 2026 midterm elections, indicating that after that the party could work more through those ideological divisions.

“Because I promise, when that gets done, we have enormous talent, and we are then going to be in a position, as the next presidential campaign ramps up, to sort through some of the differences,” Obama said, according to excerpts of his remarks obtained by ABC News.

Obama spoke in a conversation with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries at the event, which was hosted by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee to support House Democrats. The event was attended by Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi, around a dozen members of the House, and other party supporters.

Obama said the Democratic Party’s “differences aren’t that big” — but “sometimes they get magnified because that’s the nature of social media.”

But, Obama said, more progressive Democrats such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Bernie Sanders, and moderates such as Minority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer and the “Blue Dog” Democrats “actually agree in making sure that people have a living wage, they can support a family,” and on issues such as people having health care and not being discriminated against.

ABC News has reached out to the offices of Ocasio-Cortez, Schumer, Sanders and Jeffries about Obama’s remarks.

While some Democrats have “tactical differences,” he added, “that shouldn’t be our primary concern because we’re fighting a bigger fight.”

“Our job is to focus like a laser on this upcoming election. That’s the short term,” Obama said, according to the excerpts.

He also told House Democrats that while the short-term goal is to win back the House, the longer-term goal is to “tell a story” to “bring [Democrats] back in.” But, he added, they won’t be able to bring those people back in “if we don’t win the House of Representatives.”

Obama told lawmakers that the party’s wins in 2025, while not surprising for him, have reenergized the party and show a path forward for discussing issues such as affordability and health care.

“If we bring energy and clarity and commitment to talking about things like affordability and making sure people have health care when they need it, and that they have the ability, if they work hard, to be able to support a family and create a better future for their children and their grandchildren … when we deliver that message, it resonates with people, and we have to have confidence in that,” Obama said, according to the excerpts of his remarks.

The challenge ahead, he told lawmakers later, is how the party strategizes toward the future and what it should do if it does win the House in 2026.

“With that as a bulwark, we’re now able to block some of the worst impulses that are coming out of this White House,” he added, according to the excerpts of his remarks. “We have a platform now to highlight some of the damage that’s already been done, and we can make an argument about how we’re going to deal with some big, long-term problems.”

ABC News’ Benjamin Siegel contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — House Republicans — led by Speaker Mike Johnson — unveiled Friday a narrow health care package to address rising costs, but the plan does not extend the expiring enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies.

The GOP proposal — which will receive a vote on the House floor sometime next week — would expand the availability of association health plans and what are known as “CHOICE arrangements”; impose new transparency requirements on pharmacy benefit managers to lower drug costs; and appropriate money for cost-sharing reductions to reduce premiums in the individual market.

Association health plans allow employers to band together to purchase coverage.

Notably, the 111-page measure would not funnel additional money into health savings accounts.

“While Democrats demand that taxpayers write bigger checks to insurance companies to hide the cost of their failed law, House Republicans are tackling the real drivers of health care costs to provide affordable care, increase access and choice, and restore integrity to our nation’s health care system for all Americans,” Johnson said in a statement Friday.

Republicans are also discussing staging a vote on an amendment to the health care package that would extend the ACA subsidies. The specifics of the amendment are still being discussed, according to GOP leadership aides.

The Rules Committee plans to mark up the bill at 2 p.m. on Tuesday. The House would then have to vote on an amendment related to extending the subsidies and then the underlying bill before sending it over to the Senate.

Speaking to reporters on Friday, President Donald Trump said he wants a health care plan that would directly funnel aid to patients, adding that money should be given to people for health care through an insurance account.

“I think what most Republicans want to see– what is what I want to see, and I leave it to them, and hopefully they’re going to put great legislation on this desk right here: we want to see all of the money that’s been squandered and given to insurance companies because Obamacare is horrible health insurance,” Trump said.

He added, “And we want the money to go to the people. They’ll go in the form of an insurance account, health care account, or any other form that we can create with a lot of different forms. We want to give the money to the people and let the people buy their own great health care, and they’ll save a lot of money, and it’ll be great,” he continued.

But Trump also kept the door open, slightly, on extending ACA tax credits, saying he was going to “look into” the possibility of doing so with the assurance that an extension deal would come with some caveats that Republicans want.

House GOP leadership aides hope to pass the health care package next week — the last legislative week of 2025 that the House is expected to be in session for. 

 “The Lower Health Care Premiums for All Americans Act will actually deliver affordable health care — and we look forward to advancing it through the House,” Johnson said.

Even if the measure does clear the House, the Senate is not likely to take any further major action on health care next week, leaving those enhanced premium subsidies all but certain to lapse.

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries called the Republican proposal “toxic legislation” that doesn’t address the coming hike in ACA premiums.

“House Republicans are not serious about ending the healthcare crisis they have unleashed in this country,” Jeffries said in a statement. “After promising legislation for months, this 11th hour measure fails to extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits that tens of millions of Americans rely on to afford their healthcare.”

Jeffries said Democrats are willing to work with Republicans on extending the subsidies, saying: “We are ready to work with anyone in good faith on the other side of the aisle who wants to prevent the Affordable Care Act tax credits from expiring at the end of the month.”

Ahead of the measure being introduced Friday, nearly a dozen House Republicans had publicly defied Johnson by trying to force a vote on extending the expiring subsidies.

As of Thursday, 11 Republicans had signed on to two discharge petitions — one filed by a Republican and the other by a Democrat — that would extend the subsidies.

In the Senate, two competing health care proposals aimed at addressing the expected premium spikes — one championed by Democrats and the other by Republicans — failed to advance earlier this week.  

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.