Fiscal Year 2026 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Bill, Fiscal Year 2026 Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Bill, and Updated Interim Subcommittee Allocations

2025-07-17

Loading video...

Summary

An Appropriations Committee meeting was held to mark up the Transportation, Housing, and Urban Development (THUD) and Energy and Water Development appropriations measures for Fiscal Year 2026 (FY26)[ 00:27:26 ] . The session was characterized by extensive debate over funding priorities, significant proposed cuts, and the impact of these measures on various sectors and communities across the nation[ 00:43:01-00:44:05 ]

. Discussions often highlighted sharp divisions between Republican and Democratic members regarding fiscal policy and the role of federal investment[ 00:43:01-00:44:05 ] .

Themes

Transportation, Housing, and Urban Development (THUD) Bill

The THUD bill, proposed by Chairman Womack, aims for fiscal responsibility with a 5% reduction in spending compared to FY25, totaling $89.9 billion. Key priorities include transportation safety on railways, roads, and airways, and supporting a responsible safety net for vulnerable citizens through housing assistance. Republicans highlighted investments in FAA facilities and air traffic controllers, highways, Amtrak, and maritime missions, while also noting the elimination or reduction of 38 programs to achieve over $7 billion in savings. Funds were redirected from lower priority programs of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (IIJA) to core areas like air traffic control and rail safety. Democrats, led by Ranking Member Clyburn and DeLauro, expressed strong opposition, arguing the bill shortchanges HUD rental assistance programs by over $5 billion, eliminates eviction prevention, and cuts housing construction and preservation programs significantly[ 00:44:05 ]

. They also raised concerns about cuts to Amtrak, public transit, and fair housing enforcement, asserting that the bill exacerbates the cost of living and homelessness crises.

Air Traffic Controller Shortage

Ms. McCollum brought forth an amendment to address the critical shortage of air traffic controllers, highlighting the existing 3,000-person deficit and the resulting mandatory overtime for current staff. She emphasized the need to accelerate training pipelines through the FAA Academy and collegiate programs. While the amendment was withdrawn, the Chair and Ranking Member Clyburn expressed bipartisan commitment to addressing this national safety concern[ 01:46:10 ]

Executive Authority and Federal Funding

Several amendments debated the executive branch's power over congressionally appropriated funds. Ms. Wasserman Schultz proposed an amendment to unfreeze IIJA funds for EV charging infrastructure, arguing that the administration's unilateral actions constituted an impoundment and undermined Congress's power of the purse. Mr. Levin, Mr. Hoyer, and Ms. Kaptur also voiced strong concerns over the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director's stance on congressional spending authority and the arbitrary cancellation of federal awards by the Department of Energy. Republicans argued against the amendments, stating they either exceeded budget allocations or interfered with the administration's efforts to ensure fiscal responsibility and uphold federal law.

Social and Environmental Policy Riders

Mr. Espaillat introduced an amendment to strike several controversial riders from the Energy and Water bill, which he described as irrelevant and designed to disenfranchise communities. These riders included prohibitions on funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, language perceived as allowing discrimination based on same-sex marriage, and protection for Confederate-named sites. Democrats argued these riders target specific groups and represent a step backward on civil rights and social progress. Republicans defended the riders as promoting political neutrality and ensuring federal funds are not used for activities that discriminate or enforce predetermined outcomes[ 11:23:21 ]

Energy and Water Development Bill

The Energy and Water bill totals $57.3 billion, representing a decrease of $766 million from FY25. Chairman Fleischman emphasized prioritizing national security with $25.3 billion for nuclear security, enhancing American energy dominance through new nuclear technologies and fossil fuel resources, and strengthening economic competitiveness. The bill also allocates $8.4 billion for DOE's Office of Science and $9 billion for the Army Corps of Engineers. Ranking Member Kaptur expressed deep concern over cuts to energy efficiency and renewable energy programs (47% reduction), defense nuclear non-proliferation (17% cut), and nuclear cleanup efforts. Democrats argued these cuts would increase energy costs for families, hinder clean energy innovation, and undermine national security in the face of climate change and global competition.

Tone of the Meeting

The meeting started with a brief moment of levity and celebration for the women's softball team victory[ 00:26:28 ] . However, the tone quickly shifted to being contentious and highly partisan as members debated the proposed appropriations bills and their amendments[ 00:43:01 ]

. Many Democratic members expressed "strong opposition," "sadness," and "disappointment" over the proposed cuts and policy riders, viewing them as detrimental to vulnerable populations and national progress[ 00:43:01 ] . Accusations of "slash and burn" policies and prioritizing "tax breaks for billionaires" over American families were common. Despite the ideological divides, there were moments of bipartisan agreement and cooperation on specific issues, such as addressing the air traffic controller shortage, concerns over border drone activity, and an amendment to study headlight brightness[ 01:46:10 ] . The overall sentiment remained one of deep disagreement on fundamental approaches to fiscal management and social policy.