Budget fight pushes Arizona closer to shutdown

A state budget stalemate pitting Senate Republicans and Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs against the GOP-controlled House escalated over the weekend, with the end of the fiscal year a week away and an unprecedented government shutdown looming.
Why it matters: If a new budget isn't in place by the start of the next fiscal year — July 1 — the Arizona government will shut down.
Catch up quick: Senate Republicans and Hobbs negotiated a $17.6 billion bipartisan plan, which the Senate passed Friday before voting to adjourn for the year.
House Republicans had voted the previous week to unilaterally approve a $17.3 billion budget, which Hobbs declared "dead on arrival."
The latest: After a lengthy, closed-door meeting of House Republicans, Speaker Steve Montenegro (R-Goodyear) issued a statement Friday afternoon saying the chamber would pass a short-term "continuation budget" to avert a shutdown and fund the government past June 30 while negotiations continue.
He said the Senate and Hobbs' budget didn't have the votes to pass the House, which Senate President Warren Petersen (R-Gilbert) disputed.
The governor's office on Saturday met with House Republicans to discuss the continuation budget, which she pledged to veto, calling it "pointless political grandstanding."
Petersen on Sunday posted that if the House passes a new spending plan, "the Senate will reconvene to receive their budget proposal." It's unclear whether he would support a continuation budget, and he did not respond to a request for comment from Axios.
The intrigue: Senate Republicans and Hobbs both pointed fingers at House Republicans, stressing their leadership's refusal to participate in budget negotiations with them.
Senate Republican chief of staff Josh Kredit posted on X the text of an email he sent to House Republicans, saying the Senate and Hobbs administration negotiated a budget after the House ignored an invitation to join the talks.
Senate Appropriations Committee chair Sen. John Kavanagh (R-Fountain Hills) told Axios nearly three weeks ago that it was unusual the House hadn't joined budget discussions, adding, "It's never happened before in my time."

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Politico

26 minutes ago

• Politico

Oz nudges Senate Republicans to ease off on Medicaid cuts

House Republicans are aiming to slash funding for the nonpartisan watchdog for waste, fraud and abuse within the federal government by nearly half in the next fiscal year, according to spending bill text released Sunday night. The House Appropriations subcommittee funding Congress and its support agencies, led by chairman David Valadao (R-Calif.), is set to mark up their fiscal 2026 measure Monday evening, with the full committee set to act Thursday. The Legislative Branch bill would provide $6.7 billion — $51 million below the current funding level, which was set in fiscal 2024. Per tradition, the House bill does not touch any Senate funding. 'Chairman Valadao's bill puts the American people first — in strengthening the institutions that represent them, protecting effective governance, and safeguarding taxpayer dollars,' said House Appropriations Committee Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) in a statement. The deepest cuts in the bill are to the Government Accountability Office, an arm of Congress that would see a $396.5 million reduction from current levels to $415.4 million. GAO has served as the nation's chief investigator of wrongdoing at federal agencies for more than a century, but has been fighting for months as Republicans in Congress and the Trump administration have attempted to undercut its legal conclusions and independence. Now, they are attempting to shrink the agency into submission as it pursues nearly 40 investigations into whether the White House is illegally withholding, or 'impounding,' money Congress had previously approved. Also tucked into the bill is a major policy change that would eliminate the GAO's ability to bring civil action against the executive branch over impoundments of funds. 'GAO's work makes it possible for the legislative branch to hold government accountable,' said Daniel Schuman, executive director of the American Governance Institute. 'Congress needs independent expert advice, which is exactly what GAO provides.' Also on the chopping block is the Library of Congress, which is another legislative branch agency also engaged in a power struggle against intrusion by the Trump administration. The bill allocates $767.6 million for the Library of Congress, which is $84.5 million below the current funding level and $133.7 million below the FY26 request. 'This bill does nothing to safeguard against the growing levels of executive overreach into legislative branch agencies,' said Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.), the top Democrat on the legislative branch subcommittee. Some other key provisions in the GOP-written bill include: Capitol Police: The Capitol Police would see a $84.4 million boost to their funding under the bill, bringing the total to $891 million. Some lawmakers had asked for an increase in office funding for use for security, but the bill flat-funds the Members Representational Allowance, which can be used for some member security purposes. Member Pay: The bill would continue the member pay freeze that has been in effect since 2013, halting automatic cost of living increases that members of Congress are supposed to get under law. Gay marriage: The bill includes language that prohibits discrimination against any person who 'speaks, or acts' in accordance with a 'sincerely held religious belief, or moral conviction, that marriage is, or should be recognized as, a union of one man and one woman.'

Yahoo

27 minutes ago

• Yahoo

4 Ways Trump's ‘Big Beautiful Bill' Will Change How You Plan for Retirement

President Donald Trump's signature legislation, dubbed the 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' includes plans for tax cuts, green energy cuts, Medicaid cuts and more. It also contains new retirement account provisions that could affect how Americans plan for their golden years. Be Aware: Read Next: As the landmark bill makes its way from the House to the Senate, here's a look at what you need to understand about how it can affect how you plan for retirement. Many Americans would receive a break on their taxes owed if the bill is passed. This means they would be able to channel more money into retirement savings accounts. 'Retirement planning fundamentally comes down to having sufficient resources to make work optional,' said Brett Horowitz, principal and wealth manager at Evensky & Katz / Foldes Financial Wealth Management. 'The proposed extensions of the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act provisions, combined with new deductions for tip income, overtime pay and seniors over 65, could significantly improve retirement outcomes for Americans.' Those who benefited from the cuts in the original Tax Cuts & Jobs Act will continue to enjoy these cuts, allowing them to continue saving for retirement as they had been. 'With many TCJA provisions set to expire at the end of 2025, the House Republican proposal to make these extensions permanent may provide the certainty we need for effective long-term planning,' Horowitz said. 'Retirement modeling depends on clear inputs and stable variables,' he continued. 'The less uncertainty in tax policy, the more accurately we can project success rates. When these changes take effect — pending Senate approval — we'll be able to deliver much better news to clients about their retirement timeline.' Horowitz believes if Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill' does not ultimately pass, it could negatively affect Americans' abilities to save for retirement. 'There's a profound psychological difference between telling someone they can retire earlier than expected versus having to extend their working years,' he said. 'The former energizes people about their financial future; the latter can feel overwhelming. These tax provisions create the conditions where more Americans can realistically achieve comfortable retirement.' Learn More: Savvy long-term investment strategies should take taxes into account, so changes to tax laws can shift these strategies. 'Smart investing isn't actually about chasing the highest gross returns — it's about maximizing what clients actually keep after taxes and expenses, and this tax bill addresses some issues there,' Horowitz said. 'While we can control costs through low-fee funds, tax efficiency requires a more nuanced approach that varies by everyone's personal circumstances. 'Higher tax rates push us toward tax-free municipal bonds and tax-efficient ETFs in taxable accounts, while we place tax-inefficient investments in retirement accounts,' he continued. 'This 'tax location' strategy can significantly impact net returns, even if it means accounts perform differently.' 'Two provisions in the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act have created the most anxiety for our clients — the SALT deduction cap and estate tax exemptions,' Horowitz said. 'Both are getting significant relief under the current proposal.' The proposed increase in the SALT deduction cap means retirees will face less of a penalty if they choose to spend their golden years in a state with higher income taxes. 'The SALT deduction increase from $10,000 to $40,000 will reshape where people choose to live and retire,' Horowitz said. 'We've already seen migration patterns shift dramatically since 2017, with high-tax states losing residents to states like Florida and Texas. This change reduces the penalty for living in high-income-tax states, though it doesn't eliminate the advantage of no-tax states entirely.' Estate planning strategies would also change for many Americans if the bill were to pass. 'On the estate side, the current $13.99 million exemption was set to drop to $7.14 million in 2026 — a reduction that had wealthy clients scrambling to implement complex gifting strategies and trust structures,' Horowitz said. 'The proposed permanent increase to $15 million per person, or $30 million for couples, provides enormous relief for families in that middle tier.' This is particularly important because of state-level complications, Horowitz continued. 'Take New York, where you could face no federal estate tax, but still owe state estate taxes on estates between $7.16 million and $13.99 million,' he said. 'The interplay between federal and state rules makes domicile planning critical.' The 'One Big Beautiful Bill' should make estate planning less complex for many people. 'For clients who've already implemented sophisticated estate planning strategies, those structures remain valuable,' Horowitz said. 'But for families with estates under the new thresholds, this eliminates the pressure to make rushed gifting decisions or create complex trusts simply to avoid tax cliffs.' Overall, Horowitz believes the bill will make retirement planning easier. 'The permanent nature of these changes — assuming they pass — finally gives families the certainty to make long-term decisions about where to live, how to structure their wealth and when to implement estate planning strategies,' he said. Editor's note on political coverage: GOBankingRates is nonpartisan and strives to cover all aspects of the economy objectively and present balanced reports on politically focused finance stories. You can find more coverage of this topic on More From GOBankingRates Mark Cuban Warns of 'Red Rural Recession' -- 4 States That Could Get Hit Hard 10 Genius Things Warren Buffett Says To Do With Your Money 5 Types of Cars Retirees Should Stay Away From Buying This article originally appeared on 4 Ways Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' Will Change How You Plan for Retirement Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Fox News

28 minutes ago

• Fox News

Top Trump health official slams Democrats for 'misleading' claims about Medicaid reform

FIRST ON FOX: A top Trump White House official is looking to undercut Senate Democrats' talking points on Medicaid, arguing that the GOP's plan to reform the healthcare program would benefit rural hospitals, not harm them. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz told Fox News Digital that "special interests are pushing misleading talking points to try and stop the most ambitious healthcare reforms ever." Oz's sentiment comes as Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and Senate Republicans sprint to finish their work on President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill" ahead of a self-imposed July 4 deadline. Part of the bill from the Senate Finance Committee aims to make good on the GOP's promise to root out waste, fraud and abuse within the widely used healthcare program by including work requirements and booting illegal immigrants from benefit rolls, among other measures. Tweaks to the Medicaid provider tax rate have ruffled feathers on both sides of the aisle. Indeed, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. and Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., sent a letter to Trump and the top congressional Republicans last week warning that changes to the Medicaid provider tax rate would harm over 300 rural hospitals. And a cohort of Senate Republicans were furious with the change after the bill dropped last week. But Oz contended that "only 5%" of inpatient Medicaid spending happens in rural communities, and that the mammoth bill "instead targets abuses overwhelmingly utilized by large hospitals with well-connected lobbyists." "We are committed to preserving and improving access to care in rural communities with a transformative approach that bolsters advanced technology, invests in infrastructure, and supports workforce — rather than propping up a system that mostly benefits wealthier urban areas," Oz said. Schumer's letter included data from a study recently conducted by the Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research at the University of North Carolina at his behest. He warned that if the bill is passed as is, millions of people would be kicked off of their healthcare coverage, and "rural hospitals will not get paid for the services they are required by law to provide to patients." Fox News Digital reached out to Schumer, Wyden and Merkley for comment. However, another report from the Trump-aligned Paragon Health Institute argued similarly to Oz that special interest groups and healthcare lobbyists were "flooding the airwaves with claims" that Republicans' changes to Medicaid would shutter rural hospitals. For example, they argued that a recent report from the Center for American Progress warned that over 200 rural hospitals would be at risk of closure, but that the findings were based on changes to the federal medical assistance percentage, or the amount of Medicaid costs paid for by the federal government. Changes to that percentage were mulled by congressional Republicans but were not included in the "big, beautiful bill." Still, the changes to the Medicaid provider tax rate, which were a stark departure from the House GOP's version of the bill, angered the Republicans who have warned not to make revisions to the healthcare program that could shut down rural hospitals and boot working Americans from their benefits. The Senate Finance Committee went further than the House's freeze of the provider tax rate, or the amount that state Medicaid programs pay to healthcare providers on behalf of Medicaid beneficiaries, for non-Affordable Care Act expansion states, and included a provision that lowers the rate in expansion states annually until it hits 3.5%. However, Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, is working on a possible change to the bill that would create a provider relief fund that could sate her and other Republicans' concerns about the change to the provider tax rate.