¶ David Rouzer – Key Votes
¶ Rouzer Voted To Threaten The Health Care Of More Than 52,000 North Carolinians In His District
According To The Joint Economic Committee, More Than 52,000 North Carolinians Were At Risk Of Losing Their Health Insurance As A Result Of Republicans' Reconciliation Bill. [Joint Economic Committee, June 2025]
¶ July 2025: Rouzer Voted For The Final Version Of The Republican Reconciliation Bill
July 2025: Rouzer Voted For The Senate FY 2025 Budget Reconciliation Bill That Extended $4 Trillion In Expiring Tax Cuts, Added New Tax Breaks, Appropriated $448 Billion In Defense, Border, And Immigration Enforcement Funding, Increased The SALT Deduction To $40,000, And Cut Medicaid And Other Social Programs To Offset The Costs. In July 2025, Rouzer voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, the “motion to concur in the Senate amendment to the bill that would permanently extend nearly $4 trillion in expiring individual and business tax cuts, create several new tax breaks and fund border and immigration enforcement and air traffic control upgrades. It would cut Medicaid and other safety net programs to partly offset the cost. Among other provisions, it would raise the statutory debt ceiling by $5 trillion and appropriate more than $448 billion in mandatory funding for Trump administration priorities and other needs, including $153 billion for defense, $89 billion for immigration enforcement, and $89.5 billion for border control and security. It also would increase the state and local tax deduction cap to $40,000 annually for five years for households making up to $500,000 a year until 2030, when it would permanently revert to $10,000.” The House passed the bill by a vote of 218 to 214. [House Vote 190, 7/3/25; Congressional Quarterly, 7/3/25; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
- HEADLINE: "At Least 17 Million Americans Would Lose Insurance Under Trump Plan" [Washington Post, 7/1/25]
- The Congressional Budget Office Estimated That 11.8 Million People Would Become Uninsured As A Result Of The Medicaid Cuts In Republicans’ Reconciliation Bill. According to the Washington Post, "The bill, which narrowly passed the Senate on Tuesday and now heads back to the House, would effectively accomplish what Republicans have long failed to do: unwind many of the key components of the ACA, President Barack Obama’s signature domestic achievement, which dramatically increased the number of Americans with access to health insurance. To start, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the Senate version of the bill would result in 11.8 million more uninsured in 2034, mostly because of Medicaid cuts, compared with 10.9 million if the House version became law." [Washington Post, 7/1/25]
¶ May 2025: Rouzer Voted In Favor Of House Republicans’ Reconciliation Bill, Which Cut Medicaid
2025: Rouzer Voted For The FY 2025 Budget Reconciliation Bill That Included $3.8 Trillion In Tax Cuts Offset By $1.5 Trillion In Spending Reductions To Programs Like Medicaid And The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. In May 2025, Rouzer voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, “the bill that would provide for approximately $3.8 trillion in net tax cuts and $321 billion in military, border enforcement and judiciary spending, offset by $1.5 trillion in spending reductions, as instructed in the fiscal 2025 budget resolution (H Con Res 14). It would raise the statutory debt limit by $4 trillion and provide for increased spending on defense and border security, spending cuts on social safety net programs, such as Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. It also includes a mix of tax breaks for businesses and individuals; tax increases on universities and foundations; and a phase-down of clean energy tax credits. […] It would reduce federal spending on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program by requiring states to shoulder more of the cost, expand work requirements for SNAP, extend programs authorized under the 2018 farm bill, and prohibit the U.S. Department of Agriculture from increasing the cost of the Thrifty Food Program. As amended, it would cap state and local tax deductions at $40,000 for households with incomes below $500,000.” The House passed the bill by a vote of 215 to 214. [House Vote 145, 5/22/25; Congressional Quarterly, 5/22/25; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
- The House GOP Budget Bill Was Estimated To Increase The Uninsured Population By 8.6 Million By 2034. According to CNN, “The Medicaid and Affordable Care Act provisions in the package could result in 8.6 million more people being uninsured in 2034, according to an early CBO estimate released by Democratic lawmakers. That number is expected to grow with the latest changes.” [CNN, 5/28/25]
- HEADLINE: “House Republican Budget Takes Away Health Care, Food Aid To Pay For Expanded Tax Cuts For Wealthy” [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2/21/25]
- HEADLINE: “CBO: 7.6 Million Would Go Uninsured Under GOP Medicaid Bill” [Politico, 5/13/25]
¶ February 2025: Rouzer Voted For House Republicans’ Budget Framework, Which Set Up Future Cuts To Medicaid
2/25/25: Rouzer Voted For The FY 2025 Budget Framework That Included $2 Trillion In Cuts, Raised The Statutory Debt Limit By $4 Trillion, And Required House Committees To Recommend Legislation That Would Implement Trump’s Agenda. In February 2025, Rouzer voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, “the concurrent resolution that would recommend a budget for fiscal 2025 and budget levels through fiscal 2034. The resolution would assume minimum savings of $1.5 trillion over 10 years and 2.6 percent economic growth over the same period. It also would require the statutory debt limit to be raised by $4 trillion. It also would authorize the House Ways and Means Committee to increase deficits by $4.5 trillion over 10 years to extend the 2017 tax cuts and implement new tax cuts proposed by the White House. It also would provide instructions for the budget reconciliation process through which separate legislation could be considered and passed in the Senate via a simple majority vote. The measure would deliver instructions to 11 House committees to report legislation that would implement President Donald Trump’s agenda, such as expanding tax cuts and bolstering border security and immigration enforcement. The committees would be required to report their legislative recommendations to the House Budget Committee by March 27, 2025. It also would set a $2 trillion target for the spending cuts to be submitted to the House Budget Committee. The resolution also would stipulate that if the committees don't reach that target, the Ways and Means’ reconciliation instructions to increase the deficit by a maximum of $4.5 trillion would be decreased by the amount the other committees come in below the target. Similarly, it would stipulate that Ways and Means could increase the deficit above the $4.5 trillion level by the amount of savings the committees achieve above the $2 trillion target.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the resolution by a vote of 217 to 215. [House Vote 50, 2/25/25; Congressional Quarterly, 2/25/25; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 14]
- HEADLINE: "House Republican Budget Takes Away Health Care, Food Aid To Pay For Expanded Tax Cuts For Wealthy" [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2/21/25]
- New York Times Reported The $880 Billion In Cuts Required By The Republican Budget Proposal Would Have To Come From Medicaid, Medicare, Or CHIP. According to the New York Times, "The budget resolution itself is silent on whether Congress cuts Medicaid, which provides health coverage to 72 million poor and disabled Americans. But it instructs the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which has jurisdiction over the program, to cut spending by $880 billion over the next decade. If the committee can’t save at least that much, the entire effort could be imperiled because of the special process Congress is using to avoid a Senate filibuster. Ten other committees have their own instructions to follow, though none have been assigned with cutting nearly as much. It’s not so simple as finding the cuts elsewhere. The special process, known as budget reconciliation, means Republicans will have to find all $880 billion from within the Energy and Commerce Committee’s jurisdiction. That leaves them with fewer options than one might think. […] If Republicans want to avoid major cuts to Medicaid, the largest pot of available money is in the other big government health insurance program: Medicare. […] Even if the committee cuts everything that’s not health care to $0, it will still be more than $600 billion short. The committee could also save around $200 billion by eliminating the Children’s Health Insurance Program, but that option has not been raised by the budget committee or anyone in House leadership. […] Even if all of these cuts, revenues and rule cancellations from outside health care can pass muster, the committee will still be left with hundreds of billions of dollars to cut to hit its goal. Mathematically, the budget committee’s instructions mean the committee would need to make major cuts to either Medicare, Medicaid or both." [New York Times, 2/25/25]
¶ Rouzer Repeatedly Voted To Repeal The Affordable Care Act
2017: Rouzer Voted For The FY 2018 Republican Study Committee Budget Resolution Which In Part Called For Fully Repealing Obamacare. In October 2017, Rouzer voted for a budget resolution that would in part, according to Congressional Quarterly, “provide for $2.9 trillion in new budget authority in fiscal 2018. It would balance the budget by fiscal 2023 by reducing spending by $10.1 trillion over 10 years. It would cap total discretionary spending at $1.06 trillion for fiscal 2018 and would assume no separate Overseas Contingency Operations funding for fiscal 2018 or subsequent years and would incorporate funding related to war or terror into the base defense account. It would assume repeal of the 2010 health care overhaul and would convert Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program into a single block grant program. It would require that off budget programs, such as Social Security, the U.S. Postal Service, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, be included in the budget.” The underlying legislation was an FY 2018 House GOP budget resolution. The House rejected the RSC budget by a vote of 139 to 281. [House Vote 555, 10/5/17; Congressional Quarterly, 10/5/17; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 455; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 71]
- Legislation Called For Repealing The ACA And Replacing It With Parts Of AHCA. According to the Republican Study Committee FY 2018 Budget, “Obamacare is a failed experiment and cannot be reformed; it must be fully repealed. […] The RSC budget fully repeals Obamacare and its distortionary and destructive tax increases. […] On January 4, 2017, the RSC reintroduced the American Health Care Reform Act (AHCRA), the updated version of the patient-centered health care reform legislation that the RSC has sponsored since the 113th Congress. Introducing AHCRA on the second day of the 115th Congress kick-started a process by which the House has begun to fulfill the promise of repealing and replacing Obamacare. The American Health Care Act (AHCA) passed the House on May 4, 2017. This reconciliation bill, while not perfect by any standards, includes many of the principles and policies first put forward in legislation by the RSC.” [Republican Study Committee, Accessed 10/17/17]
2017: Rouzer Voted For The American Health Care Act That Which Would Result In 23 Million Fewer Americans With Health Insurance By 2026. In May 2017, Rouzer voted for the American Health Care Act which would have significantly repealed portions of the Affordable Care Act by cutting Medicaid, cutting taxes on the rich, removing safeguard for pre-existing conditions and defunding Planned Parenthood. The overall legislation would have in part, also according to Congressional Quarterly, “ma[d]e extensive changes to the 2010 health care overhaul law, by effectively repealing the individual and employer mandates as well as most of the taxes that finance the current system. It would [have], in 2020, convert[ed] Medicaid into a capped entitlement that would provide[d] fixed federal payments to states and end[ed] additional federal funding for the 2010 law’s joint federal-state Medicaid expansion. It would prohibit federal funding to any entity, such as Planned Parenthood, that performs abortions and receives more than $350 million a year in Medicaid funds. […] It would [have] allow[ed] states to receive waivers to exempt insurers from having to provide certain minimum benefits.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 217 to 213. The bill, in modified forms, died in the Senate. [House Vote 256, 5/4/17; Congressional Quarterly, 5/4/17; Kaiser Family Foundation, 5/17; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1628]
- HEADLINE: "The American Health Care Act: The Obamacare Repeal Bill The House Just Passed, Explained" [Vox, 5/4/17]
- The American Health Care Act Would Have Resulted In 14 Million Additional Uninsured Americans In 2018, Rising To 23 Million In 2026. According to the New York Times, “A bill to dismantle the Affordable Care Act that narrowly passed the House this month would leave 14 million more people uninsured next year than under President Barack Obama’s health law — and 23 million more in 2026, the Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday. Some of the nation’s sickest would pay much more for health care. Under the House bill, the number of uninsured would be slightly lower, but deficits would be somewhat higher, than the budget office estimated before Republican leaders made a series of changes to win enough votes for passage. Beneath the headline-grabbing numbers, those legislative tweaks would bring huge changes to the American health care system.” [New York Times, 5/24/17]
- The American Health Care Act Would Have Cut Medicaid By $834 Billon Over Ten Years, Including A Roll Back Of The Medicaid Expansion. According to the New York Times, “The House repeal bill was approved on May 4 by a vote of 217 to 213, with no support from Democrats. It would eliminate tax penalties for people who go without health insurance and roll back state-by-state expansions of Medicaid, which have provided coverage to millions of low-income people. And in place of government-subsidized insurance policies offered exclusively on the Affordable Care Act’s marketplaces, the bill would offer tax credits of $2,000 to $4,000 a year, depending on age. […] The bill would reduce projected spending on Medicaid, the program for low-income people, by $834 billion over 10 years, and 14 million fewer people would be covered by Medicaid in 2026 — a reduction of about 17 percent from the enrollment expected under current law, the budget office said.” [New York Times, 5/24/17]
2017: Rouzer Voted For A Budget Resolution Designed To Begin The Process Of Repealing The Affordable Care Act, Which Also Assumes A $9 Trillion Increase In The Federal Debt Over The Next Ten Years. In January 2017, Rouzer voted for a budget resolution designed to begin reconciliation instructions to repeal the Affordable Care Act. According to Congressional Quarterly, “the proposed 10-year spending framework culminates in a $1 trillion annual deficit and adds about $9 trillion to the national debt.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the budget resolution by a vote of 227 to 198. The Senate had already passed the resolution. [House Vote 58, 1/13/17; Congressional Quarterly, 1/4/17; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 3]
2015: Rouzer Voted To Repeal The Affordable Care Act, As Part Of The FY 2016 Conference Report Budget Resolution. In April 2015, Rouzer voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act as part of the FY 2016 Conference Report budget resolution. According to Congressional Quarterly, “Adoption of the conference report on the concurrent resolution that would reduce spending by $5.3 trillion over the next 10 years, including $2 trillion in reductions from repeal of the 2010 health care overhaul.” The vote was on the Conference Report; the Conference Report passed by a vote of 226 to 197. The Senate also passed the budget resolution. [House Vote 183, 4/30/15; Congressional Quarterly, 5/5/15; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 11]
- Center For Budget And Policy Priorities Said The Budget Would Eliminate Health Coverage For Millions Of Americans. According to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, “The House-passed budget agreement that the Senate will consider next week would repeal health reform and cut Medicaid over the coming decade by roughly half a trillion dollars on top, making tens of millions more Americans uninsured.” [Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 5/1/15]
2015: Rouzer Voted For The FY 2016 Budget Resolution Which Called For Repealing Most Of The Affordable Care Act. In March 2015, Rouzer voted for the FY 2016 budget resolution which called repealing most of the Affordable Care Act. According to Congressional Quarterly, the resolution, “assumes […] that the 2010 health care overhaul is repealed — including its expansion of Medicaid to cover more Americans under the program.” In addition, also according to Congressional Quarterly, the budget resolution calls for the “repeal the Independent Payment Advisory Board. […] In repealing the health care law, however, the budget assumes that the reductions made to Medicare by that law would not be repealed; instead, those savings and others would be retained, with the budget calling for them to be used to shore up Medicare rather than ‘paying for new entitlements.’” The vote was on the budget resolution. The House passed the resolution 228 to 199. The budget resolution died in the Senate, but a similar concurrent resolution did pass both Houses. [House Vote 142, 3/25/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/23/15; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 11; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 27]
2015: Rouzer Voted For A FY 2016 Budget Resolution Which Called For Repealing Most Of The Affordable Care Act. In March 2015, Rouzer voted for a FY 2016 Budget Resolution which called repealing most of the Affordable Care Act. According to Congressional Quarterly, the resolution, “assumes […] that the 2010 health care overhaul is repealed — including its expansion of Medicaid to cover more Americans under the program.” In addition, also according to Congressional Quarterly, the budget resolution calls for the “repeal the Independent Payment Advisory Board. […] In repealing the health care law, however, the budget assumes that the reductions made to Medicare by that law would not be repealed; instead, those savings and others would be retained, with the budget calling for them to be used to shore up Medicare rather than ‘paying for new entitlements.’” The vote was on the adopting the substitute amendment. The House passed the amendment 219 to 208 and later passed the budget resolution. The budget resolution died in the Senate, but a similar concurrent resolution did pass both Houses. [House Vote 141, 3/25/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/23/15; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 86; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 27]
2015: Rouzer Voted For A Bill Repealing The Affordable Care Act And Requiring Congressional Committees To Come Up With A Replacement In No Specified Time. In February 2015, Rouzer voted for a bill repealing the Affordable Care Act and directing four Congressional Committees to come up with a replacement, without specifying when this must be done. According to Congressional Quarterly, “this bill repeals the 2010 health care overhaul […] and requires House committees to report legislation to replace the health care law. Under the measure, the repeal would be effective 180 days after enactment (rather than retroactively repealed to a date in 2010, as in the introduced version), and it provides that the provisions of law that were amended or repealed by the health care overhaul would be restored or revived as if the overhaul had not been enacted. […] The bill requires four House committees to report legislation within each of their jurisdictions to replace the 2010 health care overhaul: Education and the Workforce, Energy and Commerce, Judiciary, and Ways and Means. It does not, however, specify a time frame or deadline for those committees to act.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill 239 to 186. The Senate took no substantive action on the legislation. [House Vote 58, 2/3/15; Congressional Quarterly, 1/30/15; Congressional Quarterly, Accessed 10/1/15; Congressional Actions, H.R. 596]
¶ Rouzer Voted Against Condemning Lawsuits That Attacked The Affordable Care Act
4/3/19: Rouzer Voted Against Condemning The Trump Administration For Pushing Legal Action To Attack The Affordable Care Act. According to the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives, Rouzer voted against, "This resolution urges the Department of Justice (DOJ) to cease its efforts against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) and reverse its position in Texas v. United States. (On March 25, 2019, DOJ submitted a letter to the appellate court agreeing with the lower court's decision that PPACA should be struck in its entirety)." [U.S. House of Representatives, H.R. 271, Vote 146, 4/3/19]
- HEADLINE: "House Condemns Trump Administration For Legal Attack On Health Law" [New York Times, 4/3/19]
2019: Rouzer Voted Against Directing The Office Of The General Counsel Of The House To Represent The House In The Texas ACA Case Which Sought To Overturn The Entire ACA. In January 2019, Rouzer voted against rules for the 116th Congress. According to Congressional Quarterly, “Adoption of the resolution that would establish the rules of the House for the 116th Congress. Title III of the resolution would authorize the speaker, on behalf of the House of Representatives, to intervene in the Texas court case that found the 2010 healthcare law unconstitutional and other cases related to the law. It would also direct the Office of General Counsel to represent the House in any such litigation.” The House passed the resolution by a vote of 235 to 192. [House Vote 19, 1/9/19; Congressional Quarterly, 1/9/19; Congressional Actions, H. Res. 6]
- House Democrats Sought To Allow The Speaker And The House To Intervene In A Court Case Where A Texas Judge Had Ruled The Affordable Care Act Was Unconstitutional. According to the Washington Post, "House Democrats used their new majority on Thursday to squeeze Republicans on health care, taking the first step to intervene in a court case in which a Texas judge has ruled the Affordable Care Act unconstitutional. That move will be followed by a vote next week designed to force GOP lawmakers into a political corner: agree to defend a law many members have spent years reviling or appear to oppose popular ACA protections for millions of Americans with preexisting medical conditions that many have pledged to uphold. […] Thursday’s authorization was part of a collection of rules the House adopted to guide its operation in the new Congress. It gives Pelosi permission to intervene in the Texas court case and allows the chamber’s counsel to work on the litigation." [Washington Post, 1/3/19]
¶ 2025: Rouzer Voted Against Extending Affordable Care Act Premium Subsidies
1/8/26: Rouzer Voted Against Extending The Affordable Care Act Tax Credits For Three Years. In January 2026, Rouzer voted against, according to Congressional Quarterly, “the bill, as amended, that would extend for three years, through the end of calendar year 2028, the enhanced tax credits to subsidize premiums for health insurance purchased on the Affordable Health Care Act health insurance markets. It would allow taxpayers whose household income exceeds 400 percent of the federal poverty line to receive tax credits for three more years. The measure would retroactively take effect Jan. 1, 2026.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 230 to 196. [House Vote 11, 1/8/26; Congressional Quarterly, 1/8/26; Congressional Actions. H.R. 1834]
- 17 Republicans Voted For Passage Of The “Clean” Extension, Following A Procedural Vote The Day Before That Had Support From Nine Republicans. According to Politico, “Seventeen Republicans joined Democrats in passing legislation Thursday that would revive enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies for three years, rebuffing opposition from GOP leadership. The 230-196 vote follows a procedural vote Wednesday to advance the bill, where nine Republicans joined Democrats in favor of moving forward.” [Politico, 1/8/26]
- Speaker Johnson Called The Bill “Really Bad Policy.” According to Politico, “Johnson’s office, in a last-ditch effort Thursday morning to undermine the effort, blasted out a memo accusing ‘Democrats [of] want[ing] to expand a COVID subsidy system already flagged for massive fraud and abuse, with absolutely zero reforms.’ After the vote Thursday evening, Johnson said in an interview of the Republicans who defected, ‘I think it’s a really bad policy, and I wish they hadn’t, but everybody had a vote.’” [Politico, 1/8/26]
1/8/26: Rouzer Effectively Voted Against Extending The Affordable Care Act Tax Credits. In January 2026, Rouzer voted against, according to Congressional Quarterly, the “adoption of the rule (H Res 780) providing for consideration of the bill (HR 1834). It would consider as adopted the McGovern, D-Mass., substitute amendment that would extend, through 2028, the enhanced tax credits to subsidize premiums for health insurance purchased on the Affordable Health Care Act health insurance markets. The rule would direct the clerk to transmit to the Senate a message that the House has passed HR 1834 no later than one calendar day after passage.” The vote was on the adoption of the rule. The House agreed to the motion by a vote of 224 to 202. [House Vote 10, 1/8/26; Congressional Quarterly, 1/8/26; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 780; Congressional Actions. H.R. 1834]
1/7/26: Rouzer Effectively Voted Against Extending The Affordable Care Act Tax Credit. In January 2026, Rouzer voted against, according to Congressional Quarterly, the “motion to discharge from the House Rules Committee the rule (H Res 780) providing for consideration of the anticipated ACA tax credit extension vehicle (HR 1834).” The vote was on the motion to discharge the rule. The House agreed to the motion by a vote of 221 to 205. [House Vote 4, 1/7/26; Congressional Quarterly, 1/7/26; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 780; Congressional Actions. H.R. 1834]
¶ Rouzer's Votes Threatened Medicare Benefits
¶ 2025: Rouzer Voted for House Republicans’ Reconciliation Bill, Which Would Trigger Nearly $500 Billion in Medicare Cuts, absent future congressional action
May 2025: Rouzer Voted For The FY 2025 Budget Reconciliation Bill That Included $3.8 Trillion In Tax Cuts Offset By $1.5 Trillion In Spending Reductions To Programs Like Medicaid And The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. In May 2025, Rouzer voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, “the bill that would provide for approximately $3.8 trillion in net tax cuts and $321 billion in military, border enforcement and judiciary spending, offset by $1.5 trillion in spending reductions, as instructed in the fiscal 2025 budget resolution (H Con Res 14). It would raise the statutory debt limit by $4 trillion and provide for increased spending on defense and border security, spending cuts on social safety net programs, such as Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. It also includes a mix of tax breaks for businesses and individuals; tax increases on universities and foundations; and a phase-down of clean energy tax credits. […] It would reduce federal spending on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program by requiring states to shoulder more of the cost, expand work requirements for SNAP, extend programs authorized under the 2018 farm bill, and prohibit the U.S. Department of Agriculture from increasing the cost of the Thrifty Food Program. As amended, it would cap state and local tax deductions at $40,000 for households with incomes below $500,000.” The House passed the bill by a vote of 215 to 214. [House Vote 145, 5/22/25; Congressional Quarterly, 5/22/25; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
- HEADLINE: "Trump And GOP’s Tax Bill Would Force Cuts To Medicare, CBO Says" [Washington Post, 5/21/25]
- Congressional Budget Office Estimated That The House Republican Reconciliation Bill Would Trigger Nearly $500 Billion In Cuts To Medicare. According to a letter the Congressional Budget Office sent to Rep. Brendan Boyle, "Today the Congressional Budget Office transmitted an estimate of the budgetary effects of the 2025 reconciliation bill, as ordered reported by the House Committee on the Budget on May 18, 2025. 1 CBO has not yet completed estimates of the effects of interactions among the titles of the legislation. This letter responds to your questions concerning the sequestration (the cancellation of budgetary resources) in accordance with the Statutory Pay‑As‑You‑Go Act of 2010 (S-PAYGO) that would occur if an enacted bill raised deficits by $2.3 trillion over 10 years. Under S-PAYGO, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is required to maintain 5- and 10-year scorecards that it updates with the estimated cumulative changes in revenues and outlays generated by newly enacted legislation. […] The 4 percent maximum reduction in Medicare spending would apply to sequestration orders for years after 2026. If OMB ordered a sequestration of $230 billion for each year through 2034, the ordered reductions in Medicare spending would increase to about $75 billion in 2034 and would total roughly $490 billion over the 2027–2034 period." [Letter to Rep. Brendan Boyle – Congressional Budget Office, 5/20/25]
July 2025: Rouzer Voted For The Senate FY 2025 Budget Reconciliation Bill That Extended $4 Trillion In Expiring Tax Cuts, Added New Tax Breaks, Appropriated $448 Million In Defense, Border, And Immigration Enforcement Funding, And Cut Medicaid And Other Social Programs To Offset The Costs. In July 2025, Rouzer voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, the “motion to concur in the Senate amendment to the bill that would permanently extend nearly $4 trillion in expiring individual and business tax cuts, create several new tax breaks and fund border and immigration enforcement and air traffic control upgrades. It would cut Medicaid and other safety net programs to partly offset the cost. Among other provisions, it would raise the statutory debt ceiling by $5 trillion and appropriate more than $448 billion in mandatory funding for Trump administration priorities and other needs, including $153 billion for defense, $89 billion for immigration enforcement, and $89.5 billion for border control and security. It also would increase the state and local tax deduction cap to $40,000 annually for five years for households making up to $500,000 a year until 2030, when it would permanently revert to $10,000.” The House passed the bill by a vote of 218 to 214. [House Vote 190, 7/3/25; Congressional Quarterly, 7/3/25; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
¶ Rouzer Has Previously Voted for Massive Medicare Cuts
2017: Rouzer Voted For The GOP FY 2018 Budget Resolution, Which Started The Process Towards Tax Reform And Called For Cutting Medicare By $473 Billion. In October 2017, Rouzer voted for a budget resolution that would have, according to The Hill, “The spending blueprint is key to Republicans’ efforts to pass tax reform because it includes instructions that will allow the plan to avoid a Democratic filibuster. […] The budget, meant to outline spending for the fiscal year, was widely viewed as a mere vehicle for passing tax reform. […] The budget would allow the Senate GOP’s tax plan to add up to $1.5 trillion to the deficit over a decade, a proposal that has raised concerns with fiscal hawks in the GOP. Its instructions call for the Senate Finance Committee to report a tax bill by Nov. 13. Still, the document outlines the Senate GOP’s political vision. It maintains spending at 2017 levels for the year, but would then cut nondefense spending in subsequent years, leading to a $106 billion cut in 2027. It would also allow defense levels to continue rising at their current rates, reaching $684 billion at the end of a decade. The resolution also proposes $473 billion in cuts to Medicare’s baseline spending over a decade and about $1 trillion from Medicaid, though those provisions are not enforceable without additional legislation.” The vote was on a motion to concur in the Senate amendment. The House agreed to the motion, thereby agreeing to the budget by a vote of 216 to 212. [House Vote 589, 10/26/17; The Hill, 10/19/17; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 71]
2015: Rouzer Voted To Make $430 Billion In Unexplained Cuts To Medicare, As Part Of The FY 2016 Conference Report Budget Resolution. In April 2015, Rouzer voted for the FY 2016 conference report budget resolution which, according to the Congressional Conference Report, “The agreement proposes the same amount of Medicare savings reflected in the Senate-passed fiscal year 2016 budget as a target to extend the life of the Hospital Insurance trust fund and tasks the committees of jurisdiction in the House and Senate with determining the specific Medicare reforms needed to bring spending levels under current law in line with the budget.” According to Bloomberg, the Senate’s original budget, “avoided a plan to partially privatize Medicare that the U.S. House of Representatives embraced in its budget [and] instead call[ed] for $430 billion in spending cuts without explaining where they would be made.” The vote was on the Conference Report; the Conference Report passed by a vote of 226 to 197. The Senate also passed the budget resolution. [House Vote 183, 4/30/15; Conference Report, 4/29/15; Bloomberg, 3/27/15; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 11]
- Politico Reported That Senate Republican FY 2016 Budget “Calls For Finding $430 Billion In Cuts From Medicare, But Offers Few Details On How To Achieve Those Savings.” According to Politico, “The overall budget, written by Enzi in his first budget as chairman, slashes $5.1 trillion in spending over 10 years — achieving the GOP’s goal of balancing the budget within a decade. The budget also relies heavily on a war contingency fund to boost military spending — a move that allows Republicans to go around the strict spending caps outlined in a 2011 deficit deal. It calls for finding $430 billion in cuts from Medicare but offers few details on how to achieve those savings. It also proposes cuts to Medicaid and welfare programs, while not increasing taxes. The budget also gives reconciliation instructions to two key committees that would be charged with replacing Obamacare.” [Politico, 3/27/15]
- Bloomberg Reported That Senate Republican FY 2016 Budget “Avoided” House Budget’s “Plan To Partially Privatize Medicare, […] Instead Calls For $430 Billion In Spending Cuts.” According to Bloomberg, “Senate Republicans avoided a plan to partially privatize Medicare that the U.S. House of Representatives embraced in its budget. The Senate plan instead calls for $430 billion in spending cuts without explaining where they would be made. Some Senators worried that the House approach on Medicare, unpopular with voters, would damage them politically in 2016. Next year, Republicans must defend 24 Senate seats compared with 10 for Democrats, a reversal from the past two elections when significantly more Senate Democrats were on the ballot. The Medicare provisions will now be the subject of a House-Senate conference committee next month.” [Bloomberg, 3/27/15]
¶ Rouzer Repeatedly Voted to Raise the Medicare Eligibility Age
2017: Rouzer Voted For The FY 2018 Republican Study Committee Budget Resolution Which In Part Called For Raising The Medicare Eligibility Age. In October 2017, Rouzer voted for a budget resolution that would in part, according to Congressional Quarterly, “provide for $2.9 trillion in new budget authority in fiscal 2018. It would balance the budget by fiscal 2023 by reducing spending by $10.1 trillion over 10 years. It would cap total discretionary spending at $1.06 trillion for fiscal 2018 and would assume no separate Overseas Contingency Operations funding for fiscal 2018 or subsequent years and would incorporate funding related to war or terror into the base defense account. It would assume repeal of the 2010 health care overhaul and would convert Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program into a single block grant program. It would require that off budget programs, such as Social Security, the U.S. Postal Service, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, be included in the budget.” The underlying legislation was an FY 2018 House GOP budget resolution. The House rejected the RSC budget by a vote of 139 to 281. [House Vote 555, 10/5/17; Congressional Quarterly, 10/5/17; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 455; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 71]
- The FY 2018 Republican Study Committee Budget Called To Increase The Medicare Eligibility Age. According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, "The RSC budget would reduce Medicare spending by nearly $900 billion over a decade. It would do so by converting Medicare to a premium support system starting in 2022 for new beneficiaries, increasing means testing, and aligning the program’s eligibility age with the Social Security normal retirement age, among other reforms." [Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, 9/11/17]
2015: Rouzer Voted For The FY 2016 Budget Resolution Which Called For Increasing The Medicare Eligibility Age To 67, Beginning In 2024. In March 2015, Rouzer voted for the FY 2016 budget resolution which called for changing Medicare for future beneficiaries to a voucher system. According to Congressional Quarterly, “To reduce the growth rate of Medicare costs in the future […] the budget would also begin raising the age for eligibility so it corresponds with Social Security's age requirement, eventually reaching the age of 67. The current eligibility age for Medicare is 65.” The vote was on the budget resolution. The House passed the resolution 228 to 199. The budget resolution died in the Senate, but a similar concurrent resolution did pass both Houses. [House Vote 142, 3/25/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/23/15; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 11; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 27]
- CBPP: Increasing Medicare Eligibility Would Leave Many 65- And 66-Year-Olds Uninsured. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, “This change, which is not mentioned in the 73-page booklet on his plan that Chairman Ryan released, would put many more 65- and 66-year-olds who don't have employer coverage and can’t afford insurance into the individual insurance market — where the premiums charged to people in this age group tend to be very high — leaving them uninsured. [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 4/7/11]
- Increasing The Medicare Eligibility Age Would Raise The Costs Of Healthcare Across The Economy. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, “[R]aising Medicare’s eligibility age would not only fail to constrain health care costs across the economy; it would raise them. Medicare provides health coverage more cheaply than private health insurance plans because it has lower administrative costs and pays less to providers. Raising the Medicare age would shift costs to most of the 65- and 66-year olds who would lose Medicare coverage, to remaining Medicare beneficiaries, to employers that provide coverage for their retirees, and to states. These cost increases would, in total, more than offset the savings to the federal government.” [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 3/28/12]
2015: Rouzer Voted For A FY 2016 Budget Resolution Which Called For Increasing The Medicare Eligibility Age To 67, Beginning In 2024. In March 2015, Rouzer voted for a FY 2016 Budget Resolution which called for changing Medicare for future beneficiaries to a voucher system. According to Congressional Quarterly, “To reduce the growth rate of Medicare costs in the future […] the budget would also begin raising the age for eligibility so it corresponds with Social Security's age requirement, eventually reaching the age of 67. The current eligibility age for Medicare is 65.” The vote was on the adopting the substitute amendment. The House passed the amendment 219 to 208 and later passed the budget resolution. The budget resolution died in the Senate, but a similar concurrent resolution did pass both Houses. [House Vote 141, 3/25/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/23/15; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 86; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 27]
¶ Rouzer Voted in Favor of Turning Medicare Into a Voucher System
2015: Rouzer Voted For The FY 2016 Budget Resolution Which Called For Changing Medicare For Those Who Enter The Program Beginning In 2024 To A Voucher System. In March 2015, Rouzer voted for the FY 2016 budget resolution which called for changing Medicare for future beneficiaries to a voucher system. According to Congressional Quarterly, “the current fee-for-service Medicare program and its benefits would remain in place for people who enter the program before 2024. For new Medicare enrollees beginning in 2024, the budget envisions Medicare competing against private health care plans in a ‘premium support’ system where individuals would choose which health insurance plan they want for coverage through a new Medicare exchange, with the government making premium-support payments to the health plan to help pay for an individual's insurance premium.” The vote was on the budget resolution. The House passed the resolution 228 to 199. The budget resolution died in the Senate, but a similar concurrent resolution did pass both Houses. [House Vote 142, 3/25/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/23/15; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 11; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 27]
2015: Rouzer Voted For A FY 2016 Budget Resolution Which Called For Changing Medicare For Those Who Enter The Program Beginning In 2024 To A Voucher System. In March 2015, Rouzer voted for a FY 2016 Budget Resolution which called for changing Medicare for future beneficiaries to a voucher system. According to Congressional Quarterly, “the current fee-for-service Medicare program and its benefits would remain in place for people who enter the program before 2024. For new Medicare enrollees beginning in 2024, the budget envisions Medicare competing against private health care plans in a ‘premium support’ system where individuals would choose which health insurance plan they want for coverage through a new Medicare exchange, with the government making premium-support payments to the health plan to help pay for an individual's insurance premium.” The vote was on the adopting the substitute amendment. The House passed the amendment 219 to 208 and later passed the budget resolution. The budget resolution died in the Senate, but a similar concurrent resolution did pass both Houses. [House Vote 141, 3/25/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/23/15; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 86; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 27]
¶ Rouzer Voted to Raise the Social Security Retirement Age
2017: Rouzer Voted For The FY 2018 Republican Study Committee Budget Resolution. In October 2017, Rouzer voted for a budget resolution that would in part, according to Congressional Quarterly, “provide for $2.9 trillion in new budget authority in fiscal 2018. It would balance the budget by fiscal 2023 by reducing spending by $10.1 trillion over 10 years. It would cap total discretionary spending at $1.06 trillion for fiscal 2018 and would assume no separate Overseas Contingency Operations funding for fiscal 2018 or subsequent years and would incorporate funding related to war or terror into the base defense account. It would assume repeal of the 2010 health care overhaul and would convert Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program into a single block grant program. It would require that off budget programs, such as Social Security, the U.S. Postal Service, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, be included in the budget.” The underlying legislation was an FY 2018 House GOP budget resolution. The House rejected the RSC budget by a vote of 139 to 281. [House Vote 555, 10/5/17; Congressional Quarterly, 10/5/17; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 455; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 71]
- The FY 2018 Republican Study Committee Budget Called To Raise The Social Security Retirement Age To 69 Years Old. According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, "The RSC budget would eliminate Social Security’s long-run shortfall and make the program sustainably solvent by adopting Representative Sam Johnson’s (R-TX) ‘Social Security Reform Act,’ which would slow initial benefit growth for higher-earners, gradually raise the normal retirement age to 69, and means-test annual cost-of-living adjustments, which would be calculated based on the chained Consumer Price Index (CPI)." [Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, 9/11/17]
¶ Rouzer Voted Against Cheaper Prescription Drugs for North Carolina Seniors
¶ 2022: Rouzer Voted Against The Inflation Reduction Act
August 2022: Rouzer Voted Against The Inflation Reduction Act. In August 2022, according to Congressional Quarterly, Perry voted against concurring in the Senate amendment to the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, “comprising a package of climate, tax and health care provisions.” The vote was on a motion to concur. The House concurred with the Senate by a vote 220-207, thus the bill was sent to President Biden for final signage. President Biden signed the bill and it ultimately became law. [House Vote 420, 8/12/22; Congressional Quarterly, 8/12/22; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5376]
- The Inflation Reduction Act Allowed Medicare To Negotiate Prices For Certain Prescription Drugs. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, "Negotiations are underway between HHS and the participating drug companies of the first 10 prescription drugs selected for negotiation in the first cycle of the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. The first 10 drugs selected treat conditions such as blood clots, diabetes, heart disease, heart failure, autoimmune diseases, and chronic kidney disease." [U.S. Health and Human Services, Inflation Reduction Act Of 2022, Viewed 7/1/24]
- The Inflation Reduction Act Required Drug Companies To Pay A Rebate To Medicare If They Raised Prices Faster Than The Rate Of Inflation. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, "Allowing Medicare to negotiate with participating drug companies to get lower drug prices for certain drugs covered under Medicare Beginning negotiations with the participating drug companies that manufacture all 10 drugs selected for the first cycle of negotiations" [U.S. Health and Human Services, Inflation Reduction Act Of 2022, Viewed 7/1/24]
¶ 2019: Rouzer Voted Against Allowing Medicare to Negotiate Prescription Drug Prices
2019: Rouzer Voted Against The House Drug Price Negotiation Bill For Medicare Programs. In December 2019, Rouzer voted against a motion that would, according to Congressional Quarterly, “allow the Health and Human Services Department to negotiate prices for certain drugs under Medicare programs and would make a number of modifications to Medicare programs related to drug costs and plan benefits.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 230-192. [House Vote 682, 12/12/19; Congressional Quarterly, 12/12/19; Congressional Actions, H.R.3]
- The Bill Would Have Allowed HHS To Negotiate The Prices Of Prescription Drugs Covered By Medicare And Penalize Companies That Don’t Comply. According to Vox, “Under current law, the Health and Human Services secretary is barred from engaging in negotiations for prescription drugs covered by Medicare […] The final bill enables the HHS secretary to negotiate the prices of as many as 250 drugs annually. Additionally, it would penalize companies that do not negotiate with HHS with a fine starting at 65 percent of a drug’s gross sales from the prior year. For every quarter that the company does not engage, the penalty goes up by 10 percentage points, until it hits 95 percent of a drug’s gross sales.” [Vox, 12/12/19]
¶ Rouzer Was The Deciding Vote To Protect Trump’s Tariffs
¶ Rouzer repeatedly voted to protect trump’s tariffs
¶ February 2026: Rouzer Voted To Protect Trump’s Tariffs
2026: Rouzer Effectively Voted Against Terminating Tariffs On Canada. In February 2026, Rouzer voted against, according to Congressional Quarterly, “the joint resolution that would terminate the Feb. 1, 2025, national emergency that imposed tariffs on goods from Canada.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the joint resolution by a vote of 219 to 211. [House Vote 65, 2/11/26; Congressional Quarterly, 2/11/26; Congressional Actions. H.J. Res. 72]
2026: Rouzer Effectively Voted To Block Floor Votes On Terminating Tariffs Enacted Through Trump’s 2025 Executive Orders. In February 2026, Rouzer voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, “the rule (H Res 1042) providing for floor consideration of the Law-Enforcement Innovate to De-Escalate Act (HR 2189), the Undersea Cable Protection Act (HR 261), and the Securing America’s Critical Minerals Supply Act (HR 3617). […] It also would block the expedited consideration of joint resolutions terminating President Donald Trump's 2025 tariff actions under the Feb. 1, April 2, July 30, and Aug. 6 executive orders by providing that each day during the period from Feb. 10, 2026 through July 31, 2026, will not constitute a calendar day under the federal law pertaining to terminating national emergencies.” The vote was on the rule. The House rejected the rule by a vote of 214 to 217. [House Vote 60, 2/10/26; Congressional Quarterly, 2/10/26; Congressional Actions. H.Res. 1042]
- The Provision Was Added To A Rule Opening Debate On Three Unrelated Bills. According to Reuters, “Lawmakers voted 217-214 to derail the plan to bar tariff challenges through July 31, with three Republicans joining 214 Democrats in opposition. The prohibition was included in a measure intended to open debate on three unrelated bills.” [Reuters, 2/11/26]
- The House Adopted A Rule In March Of Last Year Barring Tariff Challenges That Expired In January Resulting In Speaker Johnson Calling Another Extension, Through This Rule, “Necessary.” According to Reuters, “Earlier in the day, Johnson told reporters that he expected the measure to pass the House, calling it necessary in view of an expected Supreme Court ruling on the legality of the tariffs. House Republicans first adopted a rule barring tariff challenges last March and later extended it through January.” [Reuters, 2/11/26]
- The Rule That Barred Tariffs Challenges Did Not Consider Days As “Calendar Days”, Blocking Democrats From Repealing Trump’s Declared National Emergency That Allowed For His Broad Tariffs. According to the Hill. “Trump declared national emergencies as a basis for implementing his broad-based global tariffs, as well as specific tariffs on China, Mexico and Canada. The National Emergencies Act dictates that Congress can use joint resolutions to repeal a national emergency, and outlines procedures to expedite that action after a certain number of calendar days. Multiple times last year, GOP leaders inserted language into procedural rule legislation to not count a ‘calendar day’ for the purposes of the National Emergencies Act until a specific date, blocking members from forcing action to repeal the tariffs. That prohibition expired at the end of January as GOP leaders faced resistance from Republicans. The latest attempt would have reinstated that prohibition until July 31, 2026.” [Reuters, 2/11/26]
- Johnson Delayed The Vote From 1:30 PM To 8:30 PM In An Attempt To Flip Votes. According to the Hill, “Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) was unable to win over the holdouts, despite delaying the vote from 1:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.” [Hill, 2/10/26]
¶ September 2025: Rouzer Voted To Protect Trump’s Tariffs
2025: Rouzer Effectively Voted For A Procedural Trick To Block Votes On The Reversal Of Trump’s Tariffs Through March 2026. In September 2025, Rouzer voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, “the resolution [that] would allow for the tolling (the pausing of counting) of days for resolutions of inquiry from Sept. 30, 2025 through March 31, 2026. It also would provide that each day during the period from April 9, 2025, through March 31, 2026. would not constitute a calendar day for the purposes of section 202 of the National Emergencies Act with respect to a joint resolution to terminate President Donald Trump's April 2, 2025 executive order declaring a national emergency regarding tariffs on imported goods. The resolution also would provide that during the period for March 11, 2025 through March 31, 2026, would not constitute a calendar day for purposes of section 202 of the National Emergencies Act with respect to a joint resolution terminating a national emergency executive order declared by President Trump on Feb. 1, 2025. Such an executive order concerned tariffs on many Canadian and Mexican imports and Chinese goods. The resolution also would provide that the provisions of section 202 of the National Emergencies Act would not apply through March 31, 2026 to a joint resolution terminating the national emergency.” The vote was on the rule. The House agreed to the rule by a vote of 213 to 211. [House Vote 268, 9/16/25; Congressional Quarterly, 9/16/25; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 707;Congressional Actions, H.Con. Res. 14]
- Support Was Won From GOP Holdouts Through A Promise Of A Vote Later In The Week To Shorten The Block To End In January Rather Than March. According to Politico, “GOP leaders flipped several of the Republican holdouts with a promise to add language shortening the block on tariff disapproval votes to a forthcoming measure set for approval later in the week, per two Republicans with direct knowledge of the agreement. The expiration date on the block will be reset from March 31 to the end of January, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise said Tuesday. It’s likely the Supreme Court will have ruled on a challenge to Trump’s tariff-declaring powers by then.” [Politico, 9/16/25]
¶ April 2025: Rouzer Was The Deciding Vote To Protect Trump’s Tariffs
2025: Rouzer Cast The Deciding Vote For A Procedural Trick To Block Votes On The Reversal Of Trump’s Tariffs Through September 2025. In April 2025, Rouzer voted for, “adoption of the rule (H Res 313) that would provide for floor consideration of the Senate amendment to the fiscal 2025 budget resolution (H Con Res 14). The rule would provide up to one hour of debate on a motion to concur in the Senate amendment to the measure. It also would block the expedited consideration of joint resolutions terminating President Donald Trump’s tariff actions under the April 2 executive order by providing that each day during the period from April 9, 2025 through Sept. 30, 2025, will not constitute a calendar day under the federal law pertaining to terminating national emergencies.” The vote was on the rule. The underlying legislation was the FY 2025 budget resolution. The House agreed to the rule by a vote of 216 to 215. [House Vote 94, 4/9/25; Congressional Quarterly, 4/9/25; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 313;Congressional Actions, H.Con. Res. 14]
- Speaker Johnson Backed The Move, Claiming Trump Has “Executive Authority” And That The Tariffs Are “In The Interest Of The American People.” According to ABC News, “House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., defended the move, telling reporters, ‘I've made it very clear I think the president has executive authority. It's an appropriate level of authority to deal with the unfair trade practices. That's part of the role of the president is to negotiate with other countries.’ Johnson said Trump told him Tuesday night that ‘there are almost 70 countries that are [in] some stage in negotiation of more fair-trade agreement agreements with the United States. I think that is in the interest of the American people. I think that is an ‘America First’ policy that will be effective, and so we have to give them the space to do it.’” [ABC News, 4/9/25]
- The Vote Was The Second Use Of The Procedural Tactic To Block Votes On The Tariffs, The First Use Of It Being In March. According to ABC News, “House Democrats, led by Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-N.Y., moved to force a vote on Tuesday on terminating the national emergency authority and blocking Trump's sweeping tariffs. Now, that vote is unlikely to occur. This is the second time Johnson has moved to stop the legislative calendar to prevent votes on Trump's authority on tariffs. Under House rules, these votes would typically come up within 15 calendar days but now will not if the ‘rule’ passes during the vote series Wednesday afternoon.” [ABC News, 4/9/25]
¶ If One “Aye” Vote Had Switched To A “No” On House Vote 94 The Measure Would Have Failed Instead Of Passing
The Measure Considered In House Vote 94 Passed By A Vote Of 216 “Ayes” To 215 “Nos,” Which Meant If One Aye Vote Had Switched To A No Vote The Measure Would Have Failed.
[House Vote 94, 4/9/25; Congressional Quarterly, 4/9/25; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 313;Congressional Actions, H.Con. Res. 14]
¶ April 2025: Rouzer Voted To Protect Trump’s Tariffs
2025: Rouzer Effectively Voted For A Procedural Trick To Block Votes On The Reversal Of Trump’s Tariffs Through September 2025. In April 2025, Rouzer voted for, “motion to order the previous question (thus ending debate and possibility of amendment) on the rule (H Res 313) that would providing for floor consideration of the Senate amendment to the fiscal 2025 budget resolution (H Con Res 14). The rule would provide up to one hour of debate on a motion to concur in the Senate amendment to the measure. It also would block the expedited consideration of joint resolutions terminating President Donald Trump’s tariff actions under the April 2 executive order by providing that each day during the period from April 9, 2025 through Sept. 30, 2025, will not constitute a calendar day under the federal law pertaining to terminating national emergencies.” The vote was on the previous question. The House agreed to the rule by a vote of 217 to 212. [House Vote 93, 4/9/25; Congressional Quarterly, 4/9/25; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 313]
¶ March 2025: Rouzer Voted To Protect Trump’s Tariffs
2025: Rouzer Voted For A Procedural Trick To Block Votes On The Reversal Of Trump’s Tariffs. In March 2025, Rouzer voted for, “the bill that would provide for Congressional disapproval of, and nullify, a December 2024 IRS rule related to gross proceeds reporting by brokers involved in digital asset sales. The rule imposed reporting requirements, beginning in 2027, on non-custodial brokers who participate in the decentralized digital asset market. It also required brokers to file information returns and provide payee statements reporting gross proceeds from certain digital asset sales and transactions.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 292 to 132. [House Vote 71, 3/11/25; Congressional Quarterly, 3/11/25; Congressional Actions, H.J. Res. 25]
- The Bill Effectively Blocked The House From Voting To Reverse Trump’s Tariffs On Mexico, Canada, And China For The Next Year. According to the New York Times, “Republican leaders on Tuesday slipped language into a procedural measure that would prevent any resolution to end the tariffs on Mexico, Canada and China from receiving a vote this year. It passed on party lines as part of a resolution that cleared the way for a vote later Tuesday on a government spending bill needed to prevent a shutdown at the end of the week.” [New York Times, 3/11/25]
- The Bill Nullified A Law That Would Allow The House And Senate To End A Disaster Declared By The President. According to the New York Times, “In this case, Republican leaders did so using a particularly unusual contortion: They essentially declared the rest of the year one long day, nullifying a law that allows the House and Senate to jointly put an end to a disaster declared by the president.” [New York Times, 3/11/25]
- The National Emergencies Act Required Consideration Of Resolutions Ending A Presidentially Declared Emergency Within Fifteen Calendar Days But Republican Leadership Included A Measure In The Bill Declaring The Rest Of The Year Did Not Constitute A Calendar Day. According to the New York Times, “The national emergency law lays out a fast-track process for Congress to consider a resolution ending a presidential emergency, requiring committee consideration within 15 calendar days after one is introduced and a floor vote within three days after that. But the language House Republicans inserted in their measure on Tuesday declared that, ‘Each day for the remainder of the 119th Congress shall not constitute a calendar day’ for the purposes of the emergency that Mr. Trump declared on Feb. 1.” [New York Times, 3/11/25]
¶ Rouzer Voted To Cut SNAP Benefits For Millions Of Americans
¶ July 2025: Rouzer Voted For The Final GOP Reconciliation Bill, Which Contained The Largest SNAP Cut In History
July 2025: Rouzer Voted For The Senate FY 2025 Budget Reconciliation Bill That Extended $4 Trillion In Expiring Tax Cuts, Added New Tax Breaks, Appropriated $448 Million In Defense, Border, And Immigration Enforcement Funding, Increased The SALT Deduction To $40,000, And Cut Medicaid And Other Social Programs To Offset The Costs. In July 2025, Rouzer voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, the “motion to concur in the Senate amendment to the bill that would permanently extend nearly $4 trillion in expiring individual and business tax cuts, create several new tax breaks and fund border and immigration enforcement and air traffic control upgrades. It would cut Medicaid and other safety net programs to partly offset the cost. Among other provisions, it would raise the statutory debt ceiling by $5 trillion and appropriate more than $448 billion in mandatory funding for Trump administration priorities and other needs, including $153 billion for defense, $89 billion for immigration enforcement, and $89.5 billion for border control and security. It also would increase the state and local tax deduction cap to $40,000 annually for five years for households making up to $500,000 a year until 2030, when it would permanently revert to $10,000.” The House passed the bill by a vote of 218 to 214. [House Vote 190, 7/3/25; Congressional Quarterly, 7/3/25; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
- HEADLINE: "Trump’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ Cuts Food Stamps For Millions — The Average Family May Lose $146 Per Month, Report Finds" [CNBC, 7/10/25]
- The GOP Reconciliation Bill Would Cut SNAP Funding By $186 Billion, Which CBPP Said Constituted The “Largest Cut To SNAP In History.” According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, "The Senate Republican leadership’s reconciliation bill would dramatically raise costs and reduce food assistance for millions of people by cutting federal funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) by $186 billion through 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), about 20 percent — the largest cut to SNAP in history. These cuts would increase poverty, food insecurity, and hunger, including among children. The so-called ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ is anything but beautiful; it would cause widespread harm by making massive cuts to Medicaid and SNAP, which would raise costs on families and make it much harder for them to afford the high cost of health care and groceries." [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 6/30/25]
¶ May 2025: Rouzer Voted For The House Version Of The Republican Reconciliation Bill, Which Included A $300 Billion Cut To SNAP
May 2025: Rouzer Voted For The FY 2025 Budget Reconciliation Bill That Included $3.8 Trillion In Tax Cuts Offset By $1.5 Trillion In Spending Reductions To Programs Like Medicaid And The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. In May 2025, Rouzer voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, “the bill that would provide for approximately $3.8 trillion in net tax cuts and $321 billion in military, border enforcement and judiciary spending, offset by $1.5 trillion in spending reductions, as instructed in the fiscal 2025 budget resolution (H Con Res 14). It would raise the statutory debt limit by $4 trillion and provide for increased spending on defense and border security, spending cuts on social safety net programs, such as Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. It also includes a mix of tax breaks for businesses and individuals; tax increases on universities and foundations; and a phase-down of clean energy tax credits. […] It would reduce federal spending on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program by requiring states to shoulder more of the cost, expand work requirements for SNAP, extend programs authorized under the 2018 farm bill, and prohibit the U.S. Department of Agriculture from increasing the cost of the Thrifty Food Program. As amended, it would cap state and local tax deductions at $40,000 for households with incomes below $500,000.” The House passed the bill by a vote of 215 to 214. [House Vote 145, 5/22/25; Congressional Quarterly, 5/22/25; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
- The House Republican Reconciliation Bill Included Nearly $300 Billion In Cuts To The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, "The House-passed Republican reconciliation plan would cut nearly $300 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) through 2034, based on Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates — by far the largest cut to SNAP in history.[1] As a result of these cuts and other policies in the legislation — which are being used to pay partly for trillions in tax cuts skewed to the wealthy — millions of people would lose some or all of the food assistance they need to afford groceries, when many low-income households are struggling to afford the high cost of food and other basic needs." [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 5/28/25]
¶ February 2025: Rouzer Voted For House Republicans’ Budget Framework, Which Set Up Future Cuts To SNAP
February 2025: Rouzer Voted For The FY 2025 Budget Framework That Included $2 Trillion In Cuts, Raised The Statutory Debt Limit By $4 Trillion, And Required House Committees To Recommend Legislation That Would Implement Trump’s Agenda. In February 2025, Rouzer voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, “the concurrent resolution that would recommend a budget for fiscal 2025 and budget levels through fiscal 2034. The resolution would assume minimum savings of $1.5 trillion over 10 years and 2.6 percent economic growth over the same period. It also would require the statutory debt limit to be raised by $4 trillion. It also would authorize the House Ways and Means Committee to increase deficits by $4.5 trillion over 10 years to extend the 2017 tax cuts and implement new tax cuts proposed by the White House. It also would provide instructions for the budget reconciliation process through which separate legislation could be considered and passed in the Senate via a simple majority vote. The measure would deliver instructions to 11 House committees to report legislation that would implement President Donald Trump’s agenda, such as expanding tax cuts and bolstering border security and immigration enforcement. The committees would be required to report their legislative recommendations to the House Budget Committee by March 27, 2025. It also would set a $2 trillion target for the spending cuts to be submitted to the House Budget Committee. The resolution also would stipulate that if the committees don't reach that target, the Ways and Means’ reconciliation instructions to increase the deficit by a maximum of $4.5 trillion would be decreased by the amount the other committees come in below the target. Similarly, it would stipulate that Ways and Means could increase the deficit above the $4.5 trillion level by the amount of savings the committees achieve above the $2 trillion target.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the resolution by a vote of 217 to 215. [House Vote 50, 2/25/25; Congressional Quarterly, 2/25/25; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 14]
- HEADLINE: "House Republican Budget Takes Away Health Care, Food Aid To Pay For Expanded Tax Cuts For Wealthy" [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2/21/25]
- CBPP Said The Republican Budget Resolution Outlined $230 Billion In Cuts, Primarily From SNAP Benefits. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, "The House Republicans’ budget plan would give major tax cuts to high-income, wealthy households. Extending the expiring individual income and estate tax provisions for households with incomes in the top 5 percent of the income distribution (households with incomes over $321,000) costs around $1.8 trillion through 2034, accounting for 49 percent of the total $3.6 trillion cost of extension through 2034. That $1.8 trillion for wealthy and high-income households is close to the amount of the spending cuts House Republicans have outlined — including at least $880 billion primarily from Medicaid, $230 billion primarily from SNAP benefits, and $330 billion primarily from making student loans more expensive. Of the tax cuts for wealthy households, nearly $200 billion is for an estate tax giveaway that showers some $6 million per estate on the 1 in 1,000 wealthiest estates. In contrast, the average SNAP benefit is $6.20 per person per day, which helps struggling families put food on the table." [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2/21/25]
¶ Rouzer Voted Against Expanding VA Health Benefits For Veterans Exposed To Toxic Burn Pits
2022: Rouzer Voted Against Establishing A Presumption Of Service-Connected Exposure For Certain Illnesses And Cancers For Veterans Who Served Near Burn Pits Or Other Airborne Hazards In Iraq, Afghanistan And Persian Gulf Countries Since August 1990. In July 2022, according to Congressional Quarterly, Rouzer voted against the Honoring our PACT Act of 2022, which would “expand VA health care benefits for veterans with service-connected exposure to burn pits or other toxic substances, making such veterans eligible for VA hospital care, medical services and nursing home care. Specifically, it would establish a presumption of service-connected exposure for certain types of cancer and certain respiratory illnesses, including asthma diagnosed after service, for all veterans who served in certain periods and locations where burn pits or other airborne hazards were present, including those who served in Iraq, Afghanistan and Persian Gulf countries beginning in August 1990.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote 342-88, thus the bill was sent to President Biden and became law. [House Vote 309, 7/13/22; Congressional Quarterly, 7/13/22; Congressional Actions, S. 3373]
- The PACT Act Expanded VA Benefits To Millions Of Veterans Who Were Exposed To Radiation And Hazardous Chemicals As Part Of Their Military Service. According to Military.com, "Veterans from many eras who suffer from chronic illnesses related to their military service are eligible for free health care and disability benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs. In perhaps the largest health-care and benefits expansion in VA history, the Honoring our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics (PACT) Act extended VA benefits to millions of veterans who were exposed to radiation and hazardous chemicals as part of their military service since the 1960s. This law expanded eligibility and added several medical conditions to VA's list of ‘presumptive conditions’ that automatically qualify a veteran for free medical care and possibly a monthly disability payment from the VA. When a medical condition is presumptive, the VA presumes it was caused by military service. If a veteran is suffering from a presumptive illness, they do not need to prove their illness was caused by military service. They only need to have served during a specific time period in a specific location." [Military.com, 6/6/24]
2022: Rouzer Effectively Voted Against Expanding VA Health Benefits For Veterans With Service-Connected Toxic Exposure. In July 2022, according to Congressional Quarterly, Rouzer voted for the “Bost, R-Ill., motion to recommit the bill to the House Veterans' Affairs Committee.” The vote was on a motion to recommit. The House rejected the motion by a vote 208-219. [House Vote 308, 7/13/22; Congressional Quarterly, 7/13/22; Congressional Actions, S. 3373]
¶ Rouzer Voted Against a Bipartisan Bill to Fix Georgia's Infrastructure
2021: Rouzer Voted Against The Bipartisan Infrastructure Package, Which Provided $550 Billion In New Infrastructure Funding, Including For Surface Transportation, Broadband, Water And Energy Infrastructure. In November 2021, Rouzer voted against concurring in the Senate amendment to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, “provide approximately $550 billion in new infrastructure spending, including for surface transportation, broadband, water and energy infrastructure.” The vote was on a motion to concur in the Senate amendment. The House concurred with the Senate by a vote of 228-206, thus the bill was sent to the President and ultimately became law. [House Vote 369, 11/5/21; Congressional Quarterly, 11/5/21; Congressional Actions, S.Amdt. 2137; Congressional Actions, H.R. 3684]
¶ Rouzer Voted to Give Tax Breaks to Billionaires and Big Corporations
2017: Rouzer Voted For The House GOP’s 2017 Tax Reform Plan Which Significantly Cut Taxes For The Rich And Corporations; Legislation Moved The Tax Rates From Seven To Four. In November 2017, Rouzer voted for reconciliation legislation which significantly altered the federal tax code. According to Congressional Quarterly, “The bill substantially restructures the U.S. tax code to simplify the code and reduce taxes on individuals, corporations and small businesses. For individuals, it consolidates the current seven tax brackets down to four and eliminates or restricts many tax credits and deductions, including by eliminating the deduction for state and local income taxes and limiting the deduction for property taxes to $10,000 and the interest deduction for a home mortgage to the first $500,000 worth of a loan. […] On the business side, it reduces the corporate tax from 35% to 20% and establishes a ‘territorial’ tax system that would exempt most income derived overseas from U.S. corporate taxation. It allows businesses to immediately expense 100% of the cost of assets acquired and placed into service, and for small businesses it raises the Section 179 expensing limit to $5 million for five years. It also establishes a 25% rate for a portion of pass-through business income that would otherwise have to be paid at the ordinary individual tax level, and for small businesses where an individual would receive less than $150,000 in pass-through income it taxes the first $75,000 of that income at a 9% rate.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 227 to 205. President Trump later signed an amended version of the bill into law. [House Vote 637, 11/16/17; Congressional Quarterly, 11/15/17; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
- The GOP Tax Bill Included Permanent Tax Cuts For Corporations, But Not For Individuals. According to the Washington Post, The essential gamble of Republican plans to overhaul the tax code is now becoming clear: Big businesses get a large, permanent tax cut, while American families receive only temporary tax relief that expires as soon as 2023 in the House bill and 2026 in the Senate bill. In the House bill, the tax increase would mostly hit moderate and middle-income families because a credit designed to help them expires after five years. But in the Senate plan, released late Tuesday, virtually all Americans would face higher tax rates because the individual income rate cuts go away entirely in 2026. The tax cuts for corporations do not expire.” [Washington Post, 11/15/17]
- By 2027, The Top One Percent Would Get 50 Percent Of The Total Benefit Of The Republican Tax Bill. According to the Tax Policy Center, “In 2027, the overall average tax cut would be smaller than in 2018, reducing taxes by about $860 on average, or 0.9 percent of after-tax income (table 2). Taxpayers in the bottom two quintiles of the income distribution (those with income less than about $55,000) would see little change in their taxes, with average tax decreases of $50 or less. Taxpayers in the middle of the income distribution would see a net tax cut on average and see their after-tax incomes increase 0.5 percent. Taxpayers in the top 1 percent would receive nearly 50 percent of the total benefit; their after-tax income would increase 2.6 percent on average.” [Tax Policy Center, 11/13/17]
2017: Rouzer Voted For The Final Version Of Trump’s Tax Reform Plan, Which Substantially Cut Taxes For Rich Americans And Corporations. In December 2017, Rouzer voted for the Tax Cut and Jobs Act, also known as Trump’s tax reform bill. According to Congressional Quarterly, “This Conference Summary deals with the conference report on HR 1, Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which the House will consider Tuesday. The agreement significantly cuts corporate and individual taxes and seeks to simply the tax code, although most individual tax provisions would expire after 2025. It reduces the corporate tax from 35% to 21% and reduces taxation of so-called ‘pass-through’ businesses where profits are taxed at the individual rate. For corporate taxes it also establishes a ‘territorial’ tax system that exempts most overseas income from U.S. taxation. Most individual tax rate rates would be reduced, including by dropping the top rate from 39.6% to 37%, and it eliminates personal exemptions but nearly doubles the standard deduction so fewer taxpayers will itemize deductions.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 227 to 203. The Senate later passed a slightly modified version of the bill, which the House later agreed to. President Trump later signed an amended version of the bill into law. [House Vote 692, 12/19/17; Congressional Quarterly, 12/18/17; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
- In 2027, 83 Percent Of The Total Tax Benefit From The Republican Tax Bill Would Go To The Top One Percent. According to Tax Policy Center, “In 2027, the overall average tax cut would be $160, or 0.2 percent of after-tax income (table 3), largely because almost all individual income tax provisions would sunset after 2025. On average, taxes would be little changed for taxpayers in the bottom 95 percent of the income distribution. Taxpayers in the bottom two quintiles of the income distribution would face an average tax increase of 0.1 percent of after-tax income; taxpayers in the middle income quintile would see no material change on average; and taxpayers in the 95th to 99th income percentiles would receive an average tax cut of 0.2 percent of after-tax income. Taxpayers in the top 1 percent of the income distribution would receive an average tax cut of 0.9 percent of after-tax income, accounting for 83 percent of the total benefit for that year.” [Tax Policy Center, 12/18/17]
- Last Minute Provision Added To The Republican Tax Bill Gave A Tax Break To Real-Estate Moguls. According to the International Business Times, “President Donald Trump has made tens of millions of dollars of a specific kind of income that could be subjected to a last-minute tax break inserted into the Republicans’ tax legislation released Friday, according to federal records reviewed by International Business Times. The same is true for Tennessee GOP Sen. Bob Corker — a commercial real estate mogul who suddenly switched his vote to ‘yes’ on the tax bill after the provision was added to the legislation. Previously, Corker was the only Republican to vote against the Senate version of the bill. […] The reconciled tax bill includes a new 20 percent deduction for so-called ‘pass-through’ entities, business structures such as LLCs, LPs and S-Corporations that don’t pay corporate taxes, but instead ‘pass through’ income to partners who pay individual tax rates on that money. The Senate version of the bill included safeguards that would only allow businesses to take advantage of the new break if they paid out significant wages to employees. But the new provision, which wasn’t included in either version of the bill passed by the House and Senate, and was only added during the reconciliation process, gives owners of income-producing real estate holdings a way around that safeguard, effectively creating a new tax break for large landlords and real estate moguls.” [International Business Times, 12/16/17]
- The Republican Tax Bill Reduced Taxes For Pass-Through Companies Via A 20 Percent Deduction. According to Vox, “Pass-through companies, like the Trump Organization, which get a new deduction reducing their tax burden. The House-Senate compromise bill allows people with pass-through income to deduct a portion of that income from their taxes; the deduction is for 20 percent of pass-through income, less than the 23 percent under the Senate-passed bill.” [Vox, 12/18/17]
- Most Of The Republican Tax Bill’s Tax Cuts For Individuals Were Temporary, But The Corporate Ones Were Permanent. According to the Washington Post, “The core of the plan is a massive and permanent cut to the corporate tax rate, dropping it from 35 percent to 21 percent. The bill also would cut individual tax rates for all income tax levels. Families earning less than $25,000 a year would receive an average tax cut of $60, while those earning more than $733,000 would see an average cut of $51,000, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. Many of the breaks for individuals are set to expire in the coming years. Republicans set those expiration dates to comply with Senate limits on how much their legislation could add to the nation’s deficit, and they say a future Congress will extend the cuts or make them permanent.” [Washington Post, 12/20/17]
¶ It Took Rouzer 11 Months To Vote To Release The Epstein Files, And He Did Only After Trump Signaled To House Republicans That He Approved
¶ it took Rouzer 11 months to vote to release the epstein files and he only did after trump said it was okay for republicans to do so
¶ November 16, 2025: Trump Said House Republicans Should Vote To Release The Epstein Files
HEADLINE: "In A Shift, Trump Says House Republicans Should Vote To Release Epstein Files" [NPR, 11/16/25]
11/16/25: Trump Said House Republicans Should Vote To Release The Epstein Files And That The House Oversight Committee Could Have Whatever It Was Legally Entitled To. According to Trump’s Truth Social post, "As I said on Friday night aboard Air Force One to the Fake News Media, House Republicans should vote to release the Epstein files, because we have nothing to hide, and it’s time to move on from this Democrat Hoax perpetrated by Radical Left Lunatics in order to deflect from the Great Success of the Republican Party, including our recent Victory on the Democrat ‘Shutdown.’ The Department of Justice has already turned over tens of thousands of pages to the Public on ‘Epstein,’ are looking at various Democrat operatives (Bill Clinton, Reid Hoffman, Larry Summers, etc.) and their relationship to Epstein, and the House Oversight Committee can have whatever they are legally entitled to, I DON’T CARE! All I do care about is that Republicans get BACK ON POINT, which is the Economy, ‘Affordability’ (where we are winning BIG!), our Victory on reducing Inflation from the highest level in History to practically nothing, bringing down prices for the American People, delivering Historic Tax Cuts, gaining Trillions of Dollars of Investment into America (A RECORD!), the rebuilding of our Military, securing our Border, deporting Criminal Illegal Aliens, ending Men in Women’s Sports, stopping Transgender for Everyone, and so much more! Nobody cared about Jeffrey Epstein when he was alive and, if the Democrats had anything, they would have released it before our Landslide Election Victory. Some ‘members’ of the Republican Party are being ‘used,’ and we can’t let that happen. Let’s start talking about the Republican Party’s Record Setting Achievements, and not fall into the Epstein ‘TRAP,’ which is actually a curse on the Democrats, not us. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!" [Truth Social, @realDonaldTrump, 11/16/25]
¶ November 17, 2025: Rouzer Voted With Nearly Every Other Member Of The U.S. House To Release The Epstein Files
2025: Rouzer Voted To Release The Epstein Files. In November 2025, Rouzer voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, “the bill that would require the attorney general, within 30 days of the bill's enactment, to make publicly available all Justice Department records, documents, communications and investigation material related to the department’s investigation of Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell and other individuals or entities associated with Epstein. It would require the DOJ to disclose any immunity deals or plea bargains involving Epstein or his associates. It would allow the Justice Department to withhold or redact certain materials to protect victims' privacy, among other limited exceptions. It also would require the attorney general, within 15 days of making such records public, to submit a report to Congress that includes information on the materials it has released and withheld, a list of any redactions made and the legal justification for doing so, and a list of any government officials and politically exposed persons named in the investigation.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 472 to 1 and it was ultimately signed into law by President Trump. [House Vote 289, 11/18/25; Congressional Quarterly, 11/18/25; Congressional Actions, H.R. 4405]
- HEADLINE: "Congress Passes Bill To Force The Release Of The Epstein Files" [NBC News, 11/17/25]
- The Justice Department Had 30 Days After Trump Signed The Bill To Release All Unclassified Documents About Jeffrey Epstein. According to the Washington Post, "President Donald Trump said Wednesday that he has signed a bill directing the Justice Department to release the Epstein files, documents related to the sprawling sex-trafficking investigation into the onetime powerful financier that are fervently sought by Trump’s political opponents and members of his political base. After Trump’s announcement, made in a social media post, the Justice Department will have 30 days to release all unclassified documents about Jeffrey Epstein, who was arrested on federal sex-trafficking charges in 2019 and died in an apparent suicide while in federal custody." [Washington Post, 11/19/25]
- Speaker Johnson Sent The House Home A Day Early In July To Avoid A Vote On The Release Of The Files. According to ABC News, “House Speaker Mike Johnson had tried to avoid holding a vote in the lower chamber on the Epstein matter. In late July, Johnson sent the House home a day early for August recess because the House was paralyzed in a stalemate over the Epstein issue.” [ABC News, 11/18/25]
- Speaker Johnson Expressed Opposition To The Process, Saying He Was “Deeply Disappointed” In The Outcome. According to NBC News, “Even after having voted for the bill, Johnson was still fuming over the process hours later. Returning to the Capitol from a White House dinner honoring Saudi Arabia's crown prince, Johnson said, ‘I'm deeply disappointed in this outcome,’ and he lamented that ‘Chuck Schumer rushed it to the floor.’ Senate Majority John Thune, R-S.D., didn't object, despite being aware of Johnson's concerns. Johnson said he was continuing to have conversations with Trump about those issues. ‘I'm frustrated with the process,’ he said, ‘but I trust Leader Thune.’” [NBC News, 11/17/25]
- Republican Rep. Clay Higgins Was The Only Member Of Congress Who Voted Against A Discharge Petition That Called To Release The Epstein Files. According to NBC News, "Congress voted overwhelmingly Tuesday to pass legislation to compel the Justice Department to release its records related to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein — a major victory for lawmakers in both parties who've been leading the push for months. As the final vote tally in the House, 427-1, was read, several Epstein survivors who were sitting in the gallery embraced one another and loud cheers went up through the chamber. Rep. Clay Higgins, R-La., was the only lawmaker to vote no." [NBC News, 11/17/25]
Rouzer Touted His Vote To Release The Epstein Files And Claimed That Americans “Deserve Transparency Surrounding Jeffery Epstein And His Crimes.”
Rouzer Touted His Vote To Release The Epstein Files And Claimed That Americans “Deserve Transparency Surrounding Jeffery Epstein And His Crimes.” According to Rouzer’s Twitter, “Today I voted to release Epstein Files. Americans deserve transparency surrounding Jeffery Epstein and his crimes. The Biden Administration & Congressional Democrats had four years to release the files, but instead chose to make this a political fight, using victims & survivors as pawns. This vote will provide much needed transparency to the American people and hopefully provide some closure for victims.”
[Twitter, @RepDavidRouzer, 11/18/25]
¶ Rouzer never signed the discharge petition to release the epstein files that eventually made its way to the house floor
Nancy Mace, Lauren Boebert, And Marjorie Taylor Greene Were The Only Other Republicans To Sign Thomas Massie’s Discharge Petition To Get A House Floor Vote On Releasing The Epstein Files.
[Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives, Discharge Petition No. 9, 9/2/25]
¶ Rouzer never co-sponsored legislation that called for the epstein files to be released
As Of November 25/25, Rouzer Was Not Listed As A Co-Sponsored On Rep. Thomas Massie’s Legislation That Called To Release The Epstein Files.
[U.S. House of Representatives, H.Res.581, Introduced 7/15/25]
- H.Res.581 Called On The Justice Department To Release All Unclassified Documents That Related To Jeffrey Epstein Or Ghislaine Maxwell. According to Congress.gov, H.Res.581 would, "This resolution provides a special rule for consideration of H.R. 185 and amends that bill to direct the Department of Justice (DOJ) to make publicly available certain records related to Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell. Under H.R. 185, as amended by the resolution, DOJ must publicly disclose all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials in its possession that relate to Epstein or Maxwell. The records include unclassified records referring or relating to Epstein's detention and death; flight logs of aircraft owned or used by Epstein; individuals named in connection with Epstein’s criminal activities, civil settlements, or immunity or plea agreements; immunity deals, sealed settlements, or plea bargains of Epstein or his associates; entities with ties to Epstein’s trafficking or financial networks; and internal Department of Justice communications concerning decisions to investigate or charge Epstein or his associates. However, under the amended bill, DOJ may withhold or redact portions of records with written justification that such portions contain (1) victims' personally identifiable information; (2) child sexual abuse materials; (3) images of death, physical abuse, or injury; (4) information which would jeopardize an active federal investigation or prosecution; or (5) classified information. DOJ may not withhold or redact records on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity. Further, within 15 days of completing the required disclosures, DOJ must provide Congress with a report listing all categories of records released and withheld, all redactions made and their legal basis, and all government officials and politically exposed persons named or referenced in the released materials." [U.S. House of Representatives, H.Res.581, Introduced 7/15/25]
¶ Rouzer had previously voted to protect the accused pedophiles named within the epstein files
¶ September 2025: Rouzer Effectively Voted Against Releasing The Epstein Files
2025: Rouzer Effectively Voted Against Releasing The Epstein Files. In September 2025, Rouzer voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, “adoption of the rule [that] […] would consider as adopted a resolution (H Res 668) that would direct the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee to continue its ongoing inquiry into the possible mismanagement of the federal government's investigation of disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell, the circumstances surrounding Epstein's death in federal custody, sex trafficking rings and potential ethics violations by elected officials. […] It also would table a rule (H Res 598) that would provide for the adoption of a resolution (H Res 589) concerning the release of certain documents related to the Epstein case.” The vote was on the rule. The House agreed to the rule by a vote of 212 to 208. [House Vote 222, 9/3/25; Congressional Quarterly, 9/3/25; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 672]
- Representatives Massie And Khanna Introduced A Discharge Petition To Force A Vote On The Release Of The Files With Four Republicans Signed On To It As Of Mid-September. According to NBC News, “In the House, the ‘discharge petition’ to force a vote on the Massie-Khanna legislation is on track to succeed. It has 216 signatures — including all Democrats and four Republicans — and needs just two more. Those two are expected to arrive this month in the form of a newly elected Democrat in a Virginia special election and another safe blue seat in Arizona that will get a special election in late September. Massie told NBC News on Tuesday that the four Republicans who have signed on are solidly behind the effort and won’t bow to pressure to remove their names. He said other GOP lawmakers have signaled to him they are open to signing the petition but prefer not to get crosswise with Trump or party leaders publicly if their votes aren't needed to pass it. [NBC News, 9/10/25]
¶ July 2025: Rouzer Cast The Deciding Vote Against Releasing The Epstein Files
HEADLINE: "House GOP Blocks Second Dem Attempt To Release Epstein Files" [Axios, 7/15/25]
2025: Rouzer Voted To Block The Release Of The Epstein Files. In July 2025, Rouzer voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, the “motion to order the previous question on the rule (H Res 580) providing for floor consideration of the fiscal 2026 Defense appropriations bill (HR 4016), the Anti-CBDC Surveillance State Act (HR 1919), the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act (HR 3633) and the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act (S 1582).” The vote was on the previous question. The House agreed to the motion by a vote on of 211 to 210. [House Vote 194, 7/15/25; Congressional Quarterly, 7/15/25; Congressional Actions, H. Res. 580]
- The Vote Served As A Referendum With Its Passage Blocking Consideration Of Representative Khanna’s Amendment To Require Release Of The Epstein Files. According to Politico, “Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) had slightly more success mounting an effort to amend cryptocurrency-related legislation scheduled to hit the House floor later this week to compel the release of Epstein-related files. Democrats forced a Rules Committee vote on whether to allow a floor vote on Khanna’s amendment; Republicans voted it down, though one Rules member in their ranks, Rep. Ralph Norman of South Carolina, crossed party lines. On the floor Tuesday afternoon, House Democrats attempted to cast a procedural vote as a referendum on releasing the so-called Epstein files. Had their effort to vote down the motion succeeded, they said, they would have moved forward with Khanna’s amendment. But the ‘previous question’ vote, which hasn’t been won by the House minority since 1988, prevailed 211-210 on party lines.” [Politico, 7/15/25]
¶ If One “Aye” Vote Had Switched To A “No” Vote In House Vote 194, The Measure Being Considered Would Have Failed Instead Of Passing
The Measure Considered In House Vote 194 Passed With 211 “Ayes” And 210 “Nos,” Which Meant If One Aye Vote Had Switched To A No Vote The Measure Would Have Instead Failed.
[House Vote 194, 7/15/25; Congressional Quarterly, 7/15/25; Congressional Actions, H. Res. 580]