Appropriations markup exposes deep cuts across Labor, HHS and Education programs
Loading...
Summary
House Appropriations Committee members spent hours debating a fiscal 2026 Labor-HHS-Education bill that would cut funding for education, public health and workforce programs, prompting dozens of amendments and repeated objections from Democrats who warned of real-world harm.
The House Appropriations Committee on Tuesday advanced a Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education fiscal 2026 bill after a full-day markup that devolved into partisan clashes over program cuts. Committee leaders said the measure seeks to reduce waste and protect key national priorities; Democrats said it slashes services that families, students and communities depend on.
Committee chair Representative Bryan Cole and subcommittee chair Representative Robert Aderholt framed the bill as a disciplined approach to spending while preserving priorities the majority favors. Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro and other Democrats called the bill a sweeping rollback of investments in public education, public health and workforce development, citing specific reductions to Title I education grants, student aid and public health programs.
Leading Democrats argued the bill would cut the Department of Education by roughly 15 percent from FY2025 levels and reduce Department of Labor funding by roughly 30 percent. Democrats warned those changes would force local school districts to eliminate teachers and reduce services for low-income students, while slashing job training programs and public-health work across state and local agencies.
The markup included dozens of amendments, ranging from protecting vaccine coverage and restoring HIV prevention funding to proposals to add back support for community schools, nursing workforce development and preschool grants. Committee members repeatedly clashed over offsets and whether program rescissions were justified; several of the most contested amendments failed on roll call votes.
Democrats pressed that the bill would cut programs that save lives and help children—including Title I, English-learner programs, federally funded research, HIV/AIDS prevention programs, and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention activities—and that these cuts would worsen inequalities and public-health readiness.
The committee adopted a manager’s amendment agreed by both sides, and recorded votes were held repeatedly as members sought to restore some of the funding. Several high-profile amendments—on vaccines, HIV funding, education and public broadcasting—were rejected, while others, including a bipartisan amendment to protect Job Corps centers, were accepted.
The bill now moves toward the full House floor process and will face continued scrutiny from members who argued during the markup that the measure’s choices will shape services in their districts for years.
The markup record shows a sharply divided committee on the question of what to preserve and what to cut, with appropriators on both sides warning of long-term consequences if their priorities are not restored later in the House–Senate negotiations.
Ending: Members on both sides said they will continue to press for changes as the measure moves through the House and toward conference with the Senate, where several programs cut by the House bill remain funded at higher levels.
