Key Takeaways:

• A stealth provision in the government funding deal lets some Senate Republicans sue for up to $500,000.
• House Republicans call the stealth provision “self-serving,” but they avoid removing it now.
• They plan to repeal the stealth provision later so the shutdown ends quickly.
• The deal extends food aid, reverses federal worker firings, and ensures a vote on health subsidies.
• Democrats say the deal still fails to extend Affordable Care Act help immediately

A stealth provision in the bipartisan bill to reopen the government is causing a stir. It lets Senate Republicans sue the federal government for up to $500,000 each. They can claim this money if they prove their communications got monitored in the 2020 election investigation. Critics fear the Trump administration could quickly settle these suits and reward senators for backing election conspiracy theories.

Why the stealth provision matters

Many see this stealth provision as improper. In fact, far-right House members say it looks bad. However, they refuse to back Democratic moves to strip it out before the bill passes. Instead, they want a separate effort later to repeal it. This approach means the government gets funded faster. At the same time, critics say it sends the wrong message about self-dealing.

How the stealth provision works

Under this rule, each affected senator may claim up to half a million dollars. They must show special counsel Jack Smith’s team monitored their calls or emails. If successful, they can file a lawsuit against the federal government. Then, the administration can choose to defend or settle. Observers worry it will simply settle. As a result, public funds could flow directly to these senators.

Moreover, no deadlines force a quick court decision. Therefore, the process could drag on, creating uncertainty. Meanwhile, the optics of paying lawmakers in this way seems odd. For example, some say it looks like a reward for promoting election falsehoods. Critics warn that this sets a dangerous precedent.

House Republicans express discomfort

Several House Republicans openly criticize the stealth provision. Rep. Chip Roy of Texas calls it “self-serving” and “self-dealing.” He says it creates a bad appearance. Similarly, Rep. Austin Scott of Georgia labels it a misuse of taxpayer money. Both, however, stop short of joining Democrats to remove it now.

Instead, they propose a two-step plan. First, pass the government funding bill as is. Then, attach a repeal of the stealth provision to a later measure. By doing this, they avoid deepening a shutdown fight. As Roy explains, “We need to end the shutdown quickly.” Yet critics say this approach pushes the problem into the future.

What else is in the funding deal

Beyond the stealth provision, the bill includes several key items. First, it extends nutrition assistance for nearly a year. Millions of families will keep getting food help. Second, it restores jobs for federal workers fired since October. Workers who lost paychecks or benefits can return with back pay.

Third, the bill guarantees a House vote on extending Affordable Care Act subsidies. Democrats demanded this move for weeks. However, critics note it does not actually extend those subsidies now. Instead, it merely promises a future vote. As a result, many worry some families will face a coverage gap.

In addition, the deal maintains current funding levels for most agencies. It prevents sudden cuts or program delays. Yet, it leaves out any immediate fix for rising health care costs under the ACA. Democratic lawmakers say this omission falls short. They want subsidy extensions in place before passing funding bills.

Reactions and next steps

Democrats call the entire deal flawed. They argue it fails to meet several key priorities. For example, they wanted immediate ACA subsidy relief. They also asked for climate and clean energy funding. However, the final package ignores those areas.

Conversely, moderate Republicans see the bill as a fair compromise. They say it ends the shutdown and keeps federal operations running. Some even praise the deal for protecting vital programs. Yet the stealth provision remains a sticking point.

If the House approves the bill, the Senate must follow. Then, the president can sign it to end the shutdown. Meanwhile, supporters plan a separate vote to repeal the stealth provision. They hope this later repeal gains enough support. Still, opponents warn of delays and legal fights.

Ultimately, the government funding fight shows deep divisions. Lawmakers balance ending a shutdown with political battles. In doing so, they push tough issues into future debates. As a result, taxpayers and voters face uncertainty on key policies.

What happens if repeal never passes?

If lawmakers fail to repeal the stealth provision, it stays in law. Then, disgruntled senators could file their lawsuits. The administration may choose to settle quickly. As a result, public money could line the pockets of a few politicians. Observers say this outcome would damage public trust.

Meanwhile, a longer shutdown seems unlikely. Few lawmakers want that outcome. Therefore, most hope for quick fixes. Yet the stealth provision fight could resurface in months. It may become part of larger budget battles this spring.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the main concern about the stealth provision?

The worry is that it lets certain senators sue for up to $500,000 each. The process could quickly turn into direct payouts from taxpayer money.

Why won’t House Republicans remove the stealth provision now?

They want to end the shutdown fast. Removing it now could prolong budget fights. So they plan a later bill to repeal it.

What benefits does the funding deal include?

It extends food aid for nearly a year, restores federal jobs, and guarantees a vote on health subsidy extensions. It also keeps agency funding at current levels.

How likely is the repeal of the stealth provision?

Repeal faces an uncertain path. Leaders must schedule another vote and win support. If they fail, the provision stays in law, allowing payouts to affected senators.