After the bill's passage, House Appropriations Committee Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said in a statement that the bill "reinforces base posture by investing in military construction, improving barracks and ensuring our installations are equipped to uphold readiness." 

But other hearings and markups have been much more contentious, with the GOP largely supporting administration priorities and Democrats challenging them. At an April 29 Environment and Public Works Committee hearing on the $4.2-billion fiscal 2027 budget for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which slashes spending by 52% over fiscal 2026 levels, Chair Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.)  praised agency administrator Lee Zeldin for steering EPA in a new direction. "The [Biden] EPA buried the economy in red tape and killed economic growth," she said. "EPA is now working hard to undo, point by point, the Biden administration's war on coal and other matters." 

But a day earlier, at a House appropriations subcommittee hearing, ranking member of the full committee Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) clashed with Zeldin, describing EPA's proposed budget as "a climate denier's manifesto." 

Zeldin argued that the U.S. Supreme Court's Loper Bright ruling in 2024 does not give the agency latitude to make policy decision that don't hew directly to established law, such as the federal Clean Air Act. 

Zeldin also contended that the drinking and clean water state revolving fund (SRF) loan programs have been "raided" by lawmakers, using the funds for their own discretionary spending preferences. The Environmental Policy Innovation Center, a center-left learning nonprofit, says these earmarks reduce resources for state agencies. The group projects that over the next 20 years, earmarks could result in a net loss of $19.4 billion in water infrastructure funding -- enough to finance about 5,700 projects. Thirty-nine states are expected to lose an average of $550 million apiece. 

Steve Hall, executive vice president of the American Council of Engineering Cos., says lawmakers will likely restore some funding cuts requested in the White House budget. He said lawmakers are ramping up discussions related to the next Water Resources Development Act bill, which could include added funds for drinking and clean water projects, and that Congress often bumps up state revolving fund money in the final versions of the spending bills. 

“The administration for two years running has proposed pretty steep cuts to water and wastewater funding,” says Hall, but Congress ultimately rejected those cuts in the fiscal 2026 bill. “That’s a good sign,” Hall says, but he adds it won’t be easy. “We’ve got our work cut out for us.”

Among the bills the National Association of Counties (NACo) is watching are the yet-to-be-introduced fiscal 2027 appropriations bill for the U.S. Dept. of Transportation, and the next surface transportation reauthorization, says Eryn Hurley, the group’s chief government affairs officer. According to the Congressional Research Service, the $113.9-billion DOT budget request for fiscal 2027 is 23% lower than the $148.5 billion enacted in fiscal 2026. 

Hurly says her group will be watching to see whether the bills allocate more funding to localities, which frequently receive less funding than states. With the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, for example, state transportation departments received 90% of highway and bridge funding, with only 10% going to localities. “That’s significantly lower than what the counties were receiving, despite the fact that we own and maintain almost 45% of public road miles, and also almost 40% of bridges," says Hurly. NACo will push lawmakers to increase local access to formula funding within the federal aid highway program, she said.  

Funding DHS 

Beyond the yearly appropriations process, lawmakers are working in tandem to consider a $72- billion reconciliation measure that would fund the Dept. of Homeland Security, and its agencies -- including the Federal Emergency Management Agency --  through 2029. 

Reconciliation is a tool used by the majority party in Congress to circumvent debate on spending and other bills pertaining to the budget. They require only a simple majority – rather than a two-thirds majority-- to advance to the president for signature.  

Republicans say reconciliation is needed to avoid another extended DHS shutdown that GOP leaders claim was caused by Democrat opposition to the tactics used by the agency’s Immigration and Enforcement (ICE) division. 

The House passed a budget resolution, the first step in the reconciliation process, April 29 by a party-line 215-211 vote. The bill, known as Reconciliation 2.0, is now under consideration by the Senate. 

On May 19, the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs advanced the measure by an 8-5 vote, with all Democrats in opposition. The Judiciary Committee will also vote on the package before it moves to the Budget Committee, which will combine the Senate and House versions into an omnibus that will then require approval from both chambers. 

 ACEC’s Hall says it’s unclear that the reconciliation bill has enough support to move past the finish line. “It’s still an open question whether House and Senate Republicans have the votes,” he said.