July 2025: Flood 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, Flood 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]
2025: Flood 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, Flood 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]
2/25/25: Flood 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, Flood 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]
Flood Admitted That He Did Not Read The Entire “Big Beautiful Bill” Before Voting For It. According to New York Times, “‘If we didn’t pass the Big Beautiful Bill,’ Mr. Flood said, ‘there would have been a $1,600 tax increase to every Nebraska family.’ […] Mr. Flood admitted to voters earlier this summer at a town hall that he had not read the entire bill before voting to pass it. The August recess marks the first extended period of time that lawmakers have returned home since Mr. Trump signed the bill into law on July 4.” [New York Times, 8/5/25]
Flood Said The Big Beautiful Bill Will Help Farmers And Ranchers, Take Care Of The Vulnerable, And Would Protect Medicaid. According to CNN, “‘I truly believe that this bill will allow America to experience growth, that it will allow our communities to thrive, that it will spark our economy, that it will help farmers and ranchers, that it will take care of the vulnerable. And more than anything, I truly believe this bill protects Medicaid for the future,’ Flood said, speaking over outbursts from the crowd.” [CNN, 8/5/25]
Flood Warned Republicans About The Constituent Backlash They Would Receive If They Altered Medicaid. According to Austin Villager, “House Republicans are currently deliberating the potential for a significant legislative initiative targeting Medicaid in the upcoming months, following their recent passage of a comprehensive tax and spending policy. The deliberations reveal internal tensions within the party regarding potential healthcare policy modifications. […] The potential legislative push comes with significant political complexity. While some Republican members are eager to pursue healthcare policy reforms, others express considerable reservations. Representative Mike Flood (R-Nebraska) has explicitly warned about potential constituent backlash, highlighting the politically sensitive nature of proposed Medicaid alterations.” [Austin Villager, 8/15/25]
2023: 94,900 Nebraskans In The 1st Congressional District Were Enrolled In Medicaid Or CHIP.
[Center for American Progress, 3/11/25]
[Joint Economic Committee, 6/5/25]
December 2025: Flood Called For An Extension Of ACA Tax Credits “So That We Can Work Through This And Not Do This Pressure Cooker Situation.” According to the Washington Post, "Flood is chairman of the House’s Main Street Caucus, which consists of more than 80 members who consider themselves ‘pragmatic conservatives.’ He described in an interview the type of situation he keeps hearing. ‘He’s 62, and she’s 64; she’s going to get on Medicare next year. Their premium right now is $2,200, and it’s going to $3,000,’ Flood said. ‘$3,000 a month is obscene. That buys you the best house in Butler County, Nebraska.’ […] Flood agrees that longer-term solutions are called for. In the meantime, he also would like to see Congress deal with the immediate financial crisis that his constituents are facing. ‘Let’s do an extension so that we can work through this and not do this under a pressure-cooker situation. That’s the thing. Everybody’s got 15 different ideas, but we’re talking about something that’s super complex. It affects a lot of Americans, and we’re in a deadline situation,’ Flood said." [Washington Post, 12/14/25]
1/8/26: Flood Voted Against Extending The Affordable Care Act Tax Credits For Three Years. In January 2026, Flood 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]
1/8/26: Flood Effectively Voted Against Extending The Affordable Care Act Tax Credits. In January 2026, Flood 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: Flood Effectively Voted Against Extending The Affordable Care Act Tax Credit. In January 2026, Flood 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]
Flood Voted Against Expanding Affordable Care Act Subsidies Because The “Proposal Included Zero Reforms.” According to a press release from Rep. Mike Flood, “I have said all along that I support an extension of the subsidies but not without reforms, including the elimination of waste, fraud, and abuse that both Democrats and Republicans have acknowledged exists. This proposal included zero reforms. While it is unlikely to become law, it would result in billions of dollars of waste, fraud, and abuse if it ever did so and that is why I voted against it. House Republicans have been working on solutions to address rising insurance premiums for all Americans, and I will continue fighting for fiscally responsible reforms that help bend the healthcare cost curve that's straining family budgets across the country." [Press Release – Congressman Mike Flood, 1/7/26]
Flood Was Not One Of The Republican Signers On A Discharge Petition Led By House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.
[Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives, Discharge Petition No. 10, 11/12/25]
Flood Was Not One Of The Republican Signers On A Discharge Petition Led By Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick.
[Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives, Discharge Petition No. 12, 12/10/25]
Flood Was Not One Of The Republican Signers On A Discharge Petition Led By Rep. Josh Gottheimer.
[Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives, Discharge Petition No. 13, 12/10/25]
2025: Flood Voted For The Lower Health Care Premiums For All Americans Act That Allowed The ACA Tax Credits To Expire. In December 2025, Flood voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, “the bill that would expand the ability of small businesses to establish association health plans and bars states from preventing small businesses from obtaining stop-loss insurance for self-funded health insurance plans. It would codify and expand rules governing employer-funded health reimbursement arrangements and would allow employees in such arrangements to pay Affordable Care Act health insurance premiums through salary reductions. It would provide funding for ACA policy cost sharing reduction payments that reduce deductibles and copayments. It would prohibit plans from providing abortion-related care. It also would require pharmacy benefit managers to provide transparency regarding prescription drug costs and the drug rebates they receive.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 216 to 211. [House Vote 349, 12/17/25; Congressional Quarterly, 12/17/25; Congressional Actions, H.R. 6703]
The December 2025 Republican Health Care Bill Failed To Prevent Imminent Premium Spikes For More Than 20 Million People Who Relied On ACA Marketplace Plans. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, "The health bill House Republicans are preparing to bring to the floor this week not only fails to prevent imminent premium spikes for more than 20 million people in marketplace plans, but would raise costs even higher for many marketplace enrollees and weaken pre-existing condition protections for individuals and small businesses." [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 12/16/25]
The December 2025 Republican Health Care Bill Would Expand Association Health Plans, Which Would Result In Higher Underlying Premiums For Individuals And Small Businesses That Remained In ACA-Regulated Markets. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, "It would expand association health plans (AHPs), a type of health plan that trade associations, professional groups, and other organizations may offer their members, to cover self-employed individuals and small businesses as if they were large employers. By allowing more people to enroll in coverage not subject to ACA standards and consumer protections, this would segment insurance risk pools: individuals who are younger and healthier, or small businesses with younger or healthier employees, could get plans with lower premiums because they would be priced separately from ACA-compliant coverage and wouldn’t have to meet ACA standards such as having to cover a set of essential health benefits. As a result, individuals and small businesses remaining in ACA-regulated markets would see higher underlying premiums." [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 12/16/25]
The December 2025 Republican Health Care Bill Would Likely Lead To Higher Premiums For Older And Sicker Small Groups And Self-Employed People, Thereby Undermining Protections For People With Pre-Existing Conditions. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, "In addition, the bill would undermine protections for people with pre-existing conditions. While it would bar AHPs from rejecting individuals or charging them more based on certain health factors, it would give them greater ability to base a small group’s or self-employed person’s costs on their health risk compared to individual or small-group coverage. This would likely lead to higher premiums for older and sicker small groups and self-employed individuals, making such arrangements more attractive to healthier individuals and groups." [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 12/16/25]
HEADLINE: "ACA Tax Credits Set To Expire, Threatening 130,000 Nebraskans With Doubled Premiums" [KOLN, 12/10/25]
HEADLINE: "Some Nebraskans’ Affordable Care Act Monthly Premium Payments Could Jump By Thousands If Tax Credits Are Allowed To Expire" [Nebraska Public Media, 10/20/25]
HEADLINE: "Omaha Woman's Insurance Quadruples As Affordable Care Act Tax Credits Set To Expire" [KETV, 12/7/25]
The Expiration Of Enhanced ACA Premium Tax Credits Created A “Subsidy Cliff” Whereby If Households Earned Even $1 More Than A Specific Income Threshold They Could Lose All Eligibility For Assistance. According to CNBC, "For the first time in years, many Americans enrolled in a health insurance plan via the Affordable Care Act marketplace will need to keep a careful accounting of their annual income — or risk a hefty federal tax bill. Enhanced ACA subsidies lapsed at the end of 2025, leaving millions of households on the hook for higher insurance premiums. The lapse also reintroduced the so-called subsidy cliff, whereby households that earn even $1 more than a specific income threshold will lose all eligibility for subsidies, also known as premium tax credits. That income cutoff, which varies by family size, is $62,600 for a single person, $84,600 for a two-person household and $128,600 for a family of four in 2026, for example." [CNBC, 1/6/26]
Households That Went Over The Income Limit Would Have To Pay Back Any Federal Assistance They Received For Premiums, Which Could Cost Thousands Of Dollars, When They Filed Their Taxes. According to CNBC, "Households over the limit would have to pay back any federal subsidies they received for premiums — potentially worth thousands of dollars — when they file taxes next year for 2026." [CNBC, 1/6/26]
Republicans’ Big Beautiful Bill Exacerbated The Problem By Stripping Away Guardrails Capping The Amount Of Excess Subsidies Households Are Required To Repay. According to CNBC, "The potential financial impact is exacerbated by a multitrillion-dollar legislative package known as the ‘big beautiful bill’ that Republicans passed over the summer, which stripped away guardrails capping the amount of excess subsidies households must repay, experts said." [CNBC, 1/6/26]
Approximately 22 Million Americans Relied On ACA Premium Tax Credits To Afford Health Insurance. According to CNBC, "About 22 million Americans received premium subsidies, also known as premium tax credits, in 2025. Households can opt to receive the tax credit in one of two ways: As a lump sum during tax season or as an advanced payment. Under the latter option, by far the most popular, the federal government issues the tax credit directly to a consumer’s insurer, which then lowers the consumer’s out-of-pocket premium. Consumers receive those advanced ACA subsidies based on an estimated annual income they provide when signing up for insurance. They must reconcile those subsidies during tax season and repay any excess tax credits to the IRS." [CNBC, 1/6/26]