Most lawmakers who spoke to The Epoch Times expect and support a single bill. The House Freedom Caucus and the Senate want two.
DORAL, Fla.—House Republicans are meeting at Trump Doral National in South Florida to talk over reconciliation—a way their narrow majority could pass a budget that would further President Donald Trump’s agenda during his first hundred days while avoiding a filibuster in the Senate.
On Jan. 28, midway through the retreat, lawmakers still sounded uncertain as to what the final product will look like—but most suggested a single bill was in the offing.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and other top House Republicans want one reconciliation package that would likely be signed by late April. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and the House Freedom Caucus advocate two.
Trump initially pushed for “one big, beautiful bill.” Later, in his Jan. 27 speech at the retreat, where more than three-quarters of the House GOP are in attendance, he said he was fine with either option.
So did Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), who said the president “wants to get it all done, pull the Band-Aid off at once, but he understands he might have to give it a few tugs.”
“I’d take 50 bills if we make serious cuts, and we keep our word to the American public. I don’t think America cares,” Burchett told The Epoch Times.
Rep. Bob Onder (R-Mo.) said he anticipated a single bill would emerge, and Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.) said he thinks the majority of the conference favored such an approach.
Rep. Cliff Bentz (R-Ore.) said he hadn’t sensed much change from House leadership.
“I don’t think Speaker Johnson has or Chairman Smith has moved away from one bill,” he said, referring to Ways and Means Committee Chair Jason Smith (R-Mo.), who advocates a single piece of legislation that includes tax provisions.
Rep. Lloyd Smucker (R-Pa.), a member of the Ways and Means and Budget committees, said Smith’s one-bill proposal was the goal, and Rep. Raul Grijalva (R-Ariz.) said he had only heard discussion of “the one-bill approach.”
One Bill Looks Likely
Ahead of Johnson’s fireside chat in the early evening, members spent the afternoon weighing what reconciliation could include at the level of individual committees.
“As with any bill, the devil is always in the details,” Onder said.
Bentz, who serves on the Natural Resources and Judiciary committees, said “careful analysis at the committee level of what we need and what we don’t need” would be critical, describing spending increases since 2019 as a major problem.
Amid talk of hammering out the specifics, some Republican lawmakers said they still hope a one-bill package will ultimately emerge, in line with what Johnson has pushed.
“I personally, for tactical reasons, would prefer to have one,” Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R-Wis.) told The Epoch Times. “We don’t get everything we want exactly when we want it.”
He said members had to put aside their disagreements and arrive at a workable package or face significant losses during the 2026 midterms.
“We were given a mandate by the American people to get President Trump’s agenda across the line, and it’s going to take more than two years, but if people aren’t working together, we’re only going to have two years. That’s what happened to Biden,” he said.
Rep. Bob Latta (R-Ohio), a one-bill advocate who chairs a key House energy subcommittee, wasn’t certain what the priorities outlined at the conference would mean for energy-related spending. Like Van Orden, he suggested the perfect could be the enemy of the good.
“Is everybody going to get everything they want? No,” he said.
Rep. Brian Babin (R-Texas) said he thinks the two-bill pressure is “emanating from the Senate.” He opposes that approach.
“Let’s get it done,” he said.
Two Bills Also Possible
Rep. Eric Burlison (R-Mo.) warned that pressure from the Senate could necessitate a two-bill package as the year wears on. He hopes for a two-bill package, with the first one passed before the end of next month.
“If you’re a fiscal hawk, it’s better to break it up into two bills,” Burlison said. He thinks the one-bill advocates are those least likely to take serious steps against the deficit and debt. He noted that the Freedom Caucus’s two-step proposal would include raising the debt ceiling—not a move that those constitutional conservatives traditionally relish, but one they would make to get more border and defense funding.
He fears that a looming March 14 government shutdown deadline could force what he sees as unacceptable compromises from the speaker.
“We won’t be able to make the policy changes we want to make in the budget,” he predicted.
Rep. Darrell Issa, (R-Calif.) believes the House has “always been looking at two bills.”
“Now the question becomes, can we still put in the first bill all the important things the president wants and not leave things for a second bill that then becomes cannon fodder in the Senate?” he said, suggesting a few lawmakers seeking a two-step solution might intend to vote down the second package.
“We should have two wins, two touchdowns,” Issa said. He said the first bill would need to tackle Trump’s 2017 tax cuts, now up to be either extended or made permanent, and funding for border-related proposals.