President-elect Donald Trump’s winter White House is hosting a parade of House Republicans this weekend, all of whom are hoping that getting the incoming commander in chief’s ear will help an ideologically diverse group of lawmakers get on the same page on a massive conservative policy overhaul.
It is also likely to be another test of Trump’s power over Congressional Republicans and whether his influence will be enough to overcome longstanding fractures on fiscal policy.
"The president is hosting multiple factions, right? It’s not just any one. The goal is to level-set the understanding of what we can accomplish," one GOP lawmaker told Fox News Digital. "Nobody disagrees, in broad brushstrokes, on the large goals. But there are very specific issues that are going to create concerns for folks. And we’ve got to work through them."
On Friday, Trump is hosting members of the ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus, several of whom voted against a government funding bill the president-elect explicitly backed last month.
He is also due to meet with senior Republicans and House committee chairs, as well as GOP lawmakers from blue states.
It comes amid disagreements between Congressional Republicans on the path forward for the budget reconciliation process. The mechanism generally has allowed one party in control of the government to advance their own agenda through one massive bill.
More specifically, reconciliation lowers the Senate’s threshold for passage from 60 votes to just a simple majority, putting it on par with the House of Representatives.
Reconciliation only allows for budgetary and other fiscal measures to be passed. However, both parties have traditionally tried to stretch those parameters to advance as much of their agendas as possible. GOP leaders have signaled they want to use reconciliation to deal with border security, energy policy, defense and to extend Trump’s 2017 tax cuts.
However, there is broad disagreement on whether to split those goals in half. Proponents of the two-track approach believe that passing an initial bill on border and energy policies will allow Republicans to score an early victory there while taking more time on tax policy.
However, those who advocate for just one bill argue that two reconciliation bills have not been passed in decades, given the heavy political capital needed for even one. They’ve warned that the strategy could put Trump’s tax cuts in danger of expiring.
The House GOP conference is also at odds on other details, such as whether to use reconciliation to raise the cap on state and local tax (SALT) deductions – a move favored by blue state Republicans who represent the suburbs of New York City and Los Angeles, but which rural representatives are against.
"I think it's gonna be a good discussion. I think this is a great opportunity for us to discuss not just SALT…This was just about, you know, blue state Republicans coming with our priorities," said Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y.
The Big Apple’s new congestion tax, tax reductions for seniors living off social security, and using the tax code to bring pharmaceutical manufacturing back to the U.S. were all agenda items Malliotakis named.
"I have much broader agenda items than just SALT, but SALT is critically important for the New York members in particular," she said.
House Freedom Caucus member Rep. Barry Moore, R-Ala., suggested the border would be at the forefront of his mind for his group’s Trump meeting.
"The main thing is, how do we move forward? It’s going to cost some money to secure our border. It’s going to cost some money to hire more agents. But at the same time, we’ve got to cut spending where we can," Moore told Fox News Digital.
"We need to be on the same sheet of music and I think we’ll have an opportunity for Trump to hear from us, but as well for us to hear from him."
Rep. Russell Fry, R-S.C., a staunch Trump ally who said he would also be at Mar-a-Lago this weekend, dismissed concerns about differences on issues like SALT.
"I think the dialogue is important to have. At the end of the day, we need to deliver for the American people. And so while people feel differently on various issues, it’s important to have that dialogue to figure out how we can put this thing together," he said.
Trump himself has not publicly declared the specifics of what he would want to pass via reconciliation. He has said he favors a one-bill approach, but would also be open to two.
Malliotakis and other Republicans on the tax-focused House Ways & Means Committee favor one bill.
However, a member of the House Freedom Caucus doubted that would happen.
"I think we’ll talk big-picture stuff as far as reconciliation. I’m of the mindset it’ll likely be two bills, not one. But I think that’ll happen organically, you don’t have to force it," they said.
The newly created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is preparing to roll out once the Trump administration is sworn in with the stated goal of slashing government waste and providing increased transparency when it comes to government spending.
DOGE is not a Cabinet-level department but rather a blue-ribbon committee outside of the government that will be tasked with examining issues of government spending, waste, efficiency and operations.
Proponents of DOGE, headed by Tesla and Space X CEO Elon Musk and tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, have suggested that $2 trillion dollars in government waste can be cut from the federal budget through the reduction of spending, eliminating government programs and trimming the federal workforce.
Although the commission does not have formal authority, it has pledged to work closely with the Office of Management and Budget to reform regulatory recissions, administrative reductions and cost savings.
In addition to a working relationship with certain government agencies, DOGE will likely suggest executive actions that may be taken by President Trump.
Several House Committees and caucuses have already expressed the intention and willingness to work with DOGE until it ceases operations on July 4, 2026, the 250th anniversary of 1776’s Independence Day, to accomplish the goal of slashing government waste.
"Our national debt has surpassed a staggering $36 trillion and should be a wakeup call for all Americans," House Delivering Outstanding Government Efficiency Caucus Co-Chair Rep. Aaron Bean (R-Fla.) has explained. "We must take action to avoid diving headfirst off the cliff of fiscal ruin. I’m thrilled with President-elect Trump’s appointment of Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to lead DOGE, but taking on Crazy Town will be no easy task—they will need partners.
"Our DOGE Caucus, will work closely with the Department of Government Efficiency to help rein in reckless spending and stop the abuse of taxpayer dollars."
House Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) intends to establish a new subcommittee next, led by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) that will oversee Delivering on Government Efficiency. The subcommittee will be tasked with coordinating with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) through investigating wasteful spending, looking at how to reorganize federal agencies with an eye to improving efficiency and identifying solutions to eliminate bureaucratic "red tape."
"It is time to cut red tape, hold the unchecked federal workforce accountable, ensure programs are efficient, & work with@DOGE to tackle waste, fraud, & abuse," Comer posted on X in December.
On the Senate side, GOP Sen. Joni Ernst will chair the Senate Delivering Outstanding Government Efficiency Caucus.
"’Iowans elected me with a mandate to cut Washington’s pork!" Ernst said about the DOGE efforts. "From billion-dollar boondoggles to welfare for politicians and trillion-dollar slush funds, my decade-long investigations have exposed levels of abuse that are almost too insane to believe.
"The tables are finally turning, the knives are out, and waste is on the chopping block. As President Trump, Elon Musk, and Vivek Ramaswamy prepare to take action, the Senate DOGE Caucus is ready to carry out critical oversight in Congress and use our legislative force to fight against the entrenched bureaucracy, trim the fat, and get Washington back to work for Americans.’"
Several historical examples exist in American history, with mixed results and less ambitious goals, of government-led efforts to cut back on unnecessary spending and staffing.
President Theodore Roosevelt, in 1905, set up the Keep Commission, which attempted to "place the conduct of the Government on the most economical and effective basis in the light of the best modern business practice" and has been hailed as the "first of the orderly examinations into [Federal] administrative problems."
Five years later, President William Howard Taft was appropriated $100,000 by Congress to "inquire into the methods of transacting the public business of the government in the several executive departments and other government establishments, with the view of… changing old methods…so as to attain greater efficiency… and recommend to Congress what changes in law may be necessary."
President Bill Clinton’s administration launched the National Partnership for Reinventing Government (NPR), led by Vice President Al Gore, with the goal to make the federal government "work better, cost less, and get results Americans care about."
Gore said, "We are turning some of today’s agencies into smaller, sleeker organizations that won’t look like government at all. They will be like private companies, with a real CEO on contract to cut costs, and a free hand when it comes to the remaining government rules."
President Obama signed an executive order in June 2011 establishing the Campaign to Cut Government Waste that created an 11-member Oversight and Accountability Board with a stated mission to give "taxpayers the same ability to track where their dollars are going and to have the same confidence that the dollars are not being lost to waste, fraud, or abuse, not just for Recovery Act dollars, but more broadly."
Steve Davis, president of Boring Co., Musk’s tunneling operation, and Michael Kratsios, former US chief technology officer, are among those leading interviews of potential DOGE employee candidates, according to people familiar with the effort.
DOGE is believed to have hired roughly 10 individuals so far and is seeking software engineers as well as people with experience in artificial intelligence. Other high-profile names believed to be associated with getting DOGE off the ground include Palantir co-founder and investor Joe Lonsdale, investor Marc Andreessen, hedge fund manager Bill Ackman and former Uber chief executive Travis Kalanick.
For now, DOGE is operating out of glass-walled office space in Washington leased by SpaceX, another Musk-owned company, about four blocks away from the White House.
Some other key areas that DOGE hopes to make progress in, Musk and Ramaswamy have previously outlined, include simplifying the U.S. tax code, auditing the Department of Defense, returning National Institutes of Health money to taxpayers and foreign aid transparency.
"I expect DOGE to operate in ‘founder mode’ — lean, decisive and led by two great people in Vivek and Elon who are obsessed over every detail," said James Fishback, a Ramaswamy confidant, and the co-founder of investment firm Azoria Partners.
The Consumer Technology Association is projecting record consumer tech spending in 2025 without Trump's tariffs.
Kevin Carter/Getty Images
Consumer tech spending could hit $537 billion in 2025, the Consumer Technology Association said.
However proposed tariffs by President-elect Donald Trump could cut into that projected revenue.
The CTA said tariffs could increase tech prices and lower consumer purchasing power by billions.
Consumer spending on tech could hit a record high of $537 billion this year, according to a new report from the Consumer Technology Association.
But those projected retail revenues might not be met if President-elect Donald Trump follows through on promises of sweeping tariffs.
The CTA's report found the proposed tariffs could lead to tens of billions of losses in revenue, if not more. Trump has said he would institute a blanket tariff of 10 to 20% on all imports and an additional 60% or more tariff on goods from China.
"Such sweeping tariffs could have serious consequences on the market for consumer technology, greatly reducing demand for devices that are heavily reliant on Chinese manufacturing," the report said. "Additional tariff costs on tech products could also reduce consumer purchasing power by $90 billion, to $143 billion."
The CTA's current consumer tech spending projection would amount to an increase of 3.2% compared to 2024.
The CTA has previously found that under Trump's tariffs the average price of laptops and tablets could increase by 45% and of smartphones by 25%. Televisions could see a 9% price increase while video games and consoles could cost almost $250 more than their current sale price.
Brian Comiskey, a futurist at the CTA, said at CES 2025 in Las Vegas this week that without the tariffs the industry was headed for a "super cycle" as consumers seek to upgrade their tech hardware to access the latest AI offerings, TechCrunch reported.
Many economists have previously said that Trump's proposed tariffs would raise prices for Americans, and at a time when many are still feeling the impacts of inflation.
It's still unclear how the incoming administration plans to implement tariffs. After a report from The Washington Post said Trump aides were discussing ways to roll out less wide-ranging tariffs, the president-elect denied it.
Trump wrote on Truth Social that the story "incorrectly states that my tariff policy will be pared back. That is wrong."
Online spending rose 3% to a record $1.2 trillion globally over the holiday period, with U.S.-sales, specifically, growing 4% to $282 billion. That’s according to a new report from Salesforce, which aggregated data from across its various cloud services, including Agentforce, Commerce Cloud, Marketing Cloud, and Service Cloud, to garner insights into spending activity spanning […]
Spending on contracting and supplies is the second-biggest major spending group for the federal government, according to usaspending.gov. More than $1.1 trillion was spent on deals negotiated by the government to hire contractors for work. The category has increased by 19% from five years ago.
"We expect massive cuts of all federal contractors and others who are overbilling the federal government," said DOGE co-leader Vivek Ramaswamy on Fox Business’ Sunday Morning Futures.
Contracting commercial companies for government goods and services dates back to the late 1700s. Over the years, laws have streamlined the process and helped make contracts more competitive.
"We're on the side of change. We got started by helping the Navy and then the Army get ready for World War Two to move faster, to do things better," Booz Allen Hamilton CEO Horacio Rozanski said. "Now we're the largest player in AI and cyber in the federal government, and we're very proud of that whole history. But that's a whole history of change. My sense is we're ready for change. The country voted for it, and we need to see it happen."
Booz Allen Hamilton is among the largest government contractors. In 2024, the company had more than $8 billion worth in agreements from agencies like the Defense Department, the General Services Administration and the National Science Foundation.
"One of the things we've been talking about for years is this notion of outcome-based contracting. Instead of trying to figure out what does everything cost and how to do it. Let's define an outcome, something that the government really needs, and let private industry compete for that," Rozanski said.
Federal agencies are responsible for negotiating the best deal for the government, but contractors have a history of overcharging. In 2014, a Defense Department Inspector General report showed that the agency was charged as much as 831% for spare parts. Another more recent audit found a 7,943% markup on a soap dispenser sold to the Air Force.
Military contractors are only required to provide an explanation for prices if the contract is worth more than $2 million. If an item is labeled as "commercial," companies do not have to justify prices.
In 2023, Booz Allen Hamilton agreed to pay $377.45 million to settle allegations that the company improperly billed commercial and international costs to its government contracts.
"I think part of the challenge is the system. This system is built to manage risk and to get things done with the lowest risk possible. It is not built for speed," Rozanski said. "We need DOGE to succeed in shifting towards efficiency, towards effectiveness. It's what our clients want, it's what we want. Will there be winners and losers in that? Of course. I expect I want Booz Allen to be a winner in that. But at the end of the day, we need to compete."
The Department of Defense obligated around $550 billion to government contracts in 2024, more than half of all government spending on contractors. Some analysts estimate the department could save millions by streamlining negotiations.
"They're for reducing some of the bureaucracy, but they're also for understanding that there is a difference. To paint the entire federal government, the giant DMV is not fair," Rozanski said. "There are all these areas where more can be done to do it faster, to do it better or to not do it at all, to get things done."
Some small businesses say that DOGE likely won’t have an impact on their work.
"From a sort of an efficiency standpoint, we all of us have to operate at the optimum level of efficiency," Arkisys co-founder Dave Barnhart said. "I'm not quite sure that'll have an effect, because we're essentially already operating as quickly as we possibly can within the U.S. government."
Arkisys has a contract with the Space Development Agency, which is part of the Space Force. The Port would give service providers, making repairs in space, a permanent station to deliver cargo or supplies. The federal government has specific contracts set aside for small businesses that helps level the playing field.
"This particular arena of space and most especially the domain that we are talking about, which is servicing, that is doing something to a spacecraft in space after its launch, hasn't been done before. It's a wide-open research area. All kinds of innovation can happen," Barnhart said.
Other small business owners say they believe DOGE could help make the contracting process move faster.
"One day you come up with the idea quickly. You got to get the funding and you got to develop it," Aspetto co-founder Abbas Haider said. "You put in your white paper, that's phase one funding. Then it's phase two funding, then it's phase three funding. By the time you're on phase two, it's months. Someone else has probably already copied your idea or already done something similar. So, why would I go to the government for those funding?"
Instead of applying for specific contracts the government needs, Aspetto sells its high-tech body army products to various agencies within the U.S. government.
"In our case, we're just going to go ahead and take the risk and fund it ourselves, because it would just move things a lot faster," Haider said.
Aspetto makes bullet-resistant clothing, women’s body armor and K9-bullet-proof vests. The company has contracts with the Defense Department, the State Department and NASA. The FBI is also outfitting U.S. Border Patrol agents with Aspetto products.
"I do believe they're going to focus on innovation. If you're going to compete with countries like China, you have to focus on innovation," Haider said.
NASA contributes most of its funding to contractors to develop innovative products for space travel. In 2024, the agency allocated more than 76% of its budget to contracts.
"With the right incentives, the private industry can also bring existing technologies that have already been proven in the private sector to the government to make that happen faster," Rozanski said. "I really believe that there's a significant opportunity to save money, to do it faster."
In an address in December, Putin acknowledged the country's inflation struggles.
Sefa Karacan/Anadolu via Getty Images
Putin told Russia the nation would be fine in his New Year's address.
He refrained from giving a concrete outlook for the Ukraine war or Russia's economy.
The nation is facing growing costs from its invasion, from rising casualties to soaring inflation.
Vladimir Putin assured Russia he was "certain that everything will be fine" in his New Year's Eve address on Tuesday, as the nation heads toward its fourth year of war in Ukraine in 2025.
In his speech, the Russian president said the nation was overcoming various challenges and would continue to move on. He also referred to 2025 as the "year of the Defender of the Motherland," and gave respect to Russia's "fighters and commanders," The New York Times reported.
Still, Putin refrained from giving a concrete outlook on the war in Ukraine, or the path of the Russian economy going forward. He also did not mention Russia's inflation struggles, one of the nation's key economic problems.
The comments come amid swirling military and economic uncertainty in Russia, which is under increasing strain as its war against Ukraine is set to turn three years old in February.
A report from the Institute for the Study of War said that Russia suffered about 427,000 casualties in 2024 while gaining about 1,600 square miles of territory. Russia's military slowed its advances last month, with forces gaining around seven square miles of land a day in December.
On the economic front, the costs of Russia's invasion continue to mount. The nation has earmarked 13.5 trillion rubles for its defense spending next year, amounting to around a third of Russia's total federal budget.
Private business activity has also been hindered by the flight of capital and younger workers who fled the nation at the start of the war. An analysis from S&P Global showed that private equity or venture capital-backed deals and investments plunged 39% from 2022 to 2023.
Inflation, meanwhile, remains well above the central bank's 4% target, while interest rates have risen to 21%.
Putin has generally brushed off concerns about the Russian economy, but acknowledged the nation's struggle with inflation in a recent address. In December, he acknowledged that Russia's inflation rate was "alarming" and the economy was "overheating."
At the end of 2023, Putin apologized for the soaring price of eggs, adding the rapid price increase was a "failure of the government's work."
Economists expect 2025 to be another difficult year for the country, and some predict that its economy could be headed for a period of stagnation similar to the Soviet Union in the early 1980s.
TsMAKP, a think-tank tied to the Russian government, said the nation was at risk at stagflation, a dire economic scenario that typically involves spiraling inflation, sluggish growth, and rising unemployment.
About a decade ago, I loaded a couple of midsize suitcases, three large Ikea bags, a pair of 10-gallon Rubbermaid totes, a laundry basket, and two heavily sedated cats into a U-Haul and moved from Toronto to New York City. All my belongings fit neatly into my tiny new Brooklyn bedroom, with plenty of square footage to spare. Turns out, my relative lack of stuff was right on trend.
At the time, millennials like me were buying and owning less, purportedly breaking the mold of American consumerism. We Instagrammed our sparsely furnished, overly beige interiors. We eschewed car ownership and suburban McMansions in favor of bikes, car-share memberships, and big-city apartments with roommates. We were spending our money not on things but on experiences — and blogging about it, too.
"If the millennials are not quite a postdriving and postowning generation, they'll almost certainly be a less-driving and less-owning generation," declared a September 2012 article in The Atlantic titled "The Cheapest Generation." Our reputation quickly found a nifty shorthand: Millennials were a generation of minimalists.
As I write this from the same tiny Brooklyn bedroom, I can see my closet doors straining against the weight of a nearly bursting trash bag filled with cast-off clothing I keep meaning to recycle. The three Ikea bags are stacked full of dirty laundry, which my partner or I would probably get around to washing if we didn't have plenty of other stuff to wear. Our dresser top is strewn with impulse buys you'd find in a drugstore checkout line. I can think of a few descriptors for the state of my surroundings, but "minimalist" isn't one of them.
While my fellow 28- to 43-year-olds have yet to shake our association with less-is-more living, that old stereotype doesn't quite stand up to scrutiny anymore. Consumer-spending data suggests we have no trouble dropping our hard-earned cash on goods and services — experiences and things. As we've built careers and started families, our buying habits increasingly resemble those of Gen X and boomers when they were the age we are now.
Millennials haven't been minimalists in years. In fact, we may have never been minimalists at all.
The minimalist-millennial myth began in the early 2010s in the aftermath of the Great Recession. As the "next generation" of leaders, workers, and spenders, my contemporaries' behavior was of keen interest to marketers, business leaders, and economists. So when my generation, rattled by a catastrophic recession, wasn't buying as much as our predecessors, concern spread that our diminished purchasing power — or worse, our somehow radically different priorities and values — might signal the end of the consumer-spending spree that had powered the nation's economy since the end of World War II.
It affirmed the widely held suspicion that we were a generation of coddled Peter Pans who refused to put down the avocado toast; buy some cars, houses, and house-sized volumes of stuff; and just grow up already.
Throughout the decade, a breadcrumb trail of survey data seemed to back up these concerns. In a 2016 Harris Poll, 78% of millennials said they would rather pay for an experience than material goods, as opposed to 59% of baby boomers. A 2015 Nielsen survey similarly found that millennials went out to eat at nearly twice the rate of their parents — they would rather eat their riches than stockpile them. The 2014 English-language translation of Marie Kondo's "The Life-Changing Magic of Tidying Up" sold over 9 million copies, spawning a cottage industry of aspiring millennial declutterers.
The minimalist trend wasn't entirely bogus from a cultural standpoint. "The recession was a real force for people fetishizing simplicity and turning frugality into a virtue, making the best of what you have rather than prioritizing consuming more or consuming flashier things," said the writer Kyle Chayka, whose 2020 book "The Longing for Less" digs into the perennial appeal of a more pared-down way of living.
The postrecession era also saw the rise of smartphones, which ushered in digital sensory overload. Seemingly overnight, apartments and Instagram grids were awash in the clean lines and open spaces of midcentury-modern design (or, at least, Ikea's approximations of it). "There's so much chaos in our phones," Chayka said. "Why would you want more chaos in your physical surroundings?"
Millennials' minimalism became an economic-anxiety Rorschach test. Depending on the beholder, our perceived underconsumption might have signaled a virtuous departure from the poisoned cycle of production, purchase, and disposal. For others, it affirmed the widely held suspicion that we were a generation of coddled Peter Pans who refused to put down the avocado toast; buy some cars, houses, and house-sized volumes of stuff; and just grow up already. Though it was largely an aesthetic trend, the myth of millennial minimalism was so central to my cohort's cultural identity that it may as well have been real.
But in reality, this theory of arrested economic development was always a bit of a mirage. Throughout the 1950s and '60s, consumer spending accounted for roughly 60% of US GDP; since the early 2000s, despite millennials' purported lack of spending, it's held steady at just under 70%.
Take one of the most talked about large purchases that millennials were eschewing: cars. Automobile ownership has been a central tenet of the American dream since the '50s, when the health of the automobile industry became closely tied to the country's economic growth and prosperity. No longer needed for building tanks and munitions to ship overseas, factory assembly lines "newly renovated with Uncle Sam's dollars" were repurposed to build tens of thousands of new cars, which American consumers eagerly bought up, the Harvard historian Lizabeth Cohen wrote in her 2004 book, "A Consumers' Republic." Even now, demand for cars is looked at as a bellwether for consumer spending and the US economy more broadly.
It's no coincidence then that millennials' apparent resistance to car ownership, in particular, jumped out as evidence of our radically shifting consumer ethos. One widely circulated data point came from a 2010 CNW Group analysis, which reported that 21- to 34-year-olds in the US were responsible for just 27% of new-car purchases, down from a high of 38% in 1985. News outlets cited this data as proof that millennials, as a whole, were less interested in buying cars than their boomer parents or their older Gen X siblings. What they failed to consider was how present circumstances — such as the ripple effects of a then very recent economic crisis, especially among young adults just entering the workforce — might alter how people spent their money, especially on big-ticket items like brand-new cars.
In 2016, the Federal Reserve Board issued a report that sought to set the record straight by pointing out that the anti-car narrative about millennials didn't take the Great Recession into account. The report argued that the economic downturn almost certainly shaped people's spending as much or more than the technological and cultural changes that were happening at the same time. Proving the point, young adults were back to buying cars by the mid-2010s. Nowadays, millennials have fully caught up: Since 2020, we've accounted for almost 30% of the nation's new-vehicle registrations, a rate that's roughly on par with baby boomers and only slightly below that of Gen X, Experian research found. But by the time the Fed report was released, it was already too late. The truism of millennials as minimalists was entrenched.
So if millennials aren't minimalists, what exactly are we? Sociologists would likely tell you that's the wrong question to ask — people's behaviors and lifestyles change over time, as do societal norms and priorities. The question isn't how to best define millennials as consumers but whether millennials' young-adult spending was markedly different from that of prior generations.
For answers, we can turn to consumer-spending records. Since 1984, the Bureau of Labor Statistics has been conducting its Consumer Expenditure Surveys to see how different American age cohorts spend money. Granted, the picture it paints is somewhat incomplete; by 1984, most boomers were well past their early 20s, making a direct comparison with millennials challenging. Still, it offers a useful baseline for comparing different age groups' spending over time. Sure enough, when adjusted for inflation, Americans under 25, between 25 and 34, and 35 to 44 have spent roughly similarly across most major consumer categories for the past four decades, with momentary dips overlaying periods of recession followed by bounce backs. While it's true that millennials are spending more of their budgets on airfare and vacation rentals than older generations did at the same age, the same can be said for Gen Zers, Gen Xers, and baby boomers — everyone is splurging on travel right now.
Because younger adults tend to have fewer family responsibilities and far less wealth than adults in their professional prime, they spend less overall. As their expenses and income accrue over time, they spend more — especially once kids enter the picture, bringing new mouths to feed, bodies to clothe, and hobbies to equip. Now that millennials have families of their own, they're even more overwhelmed by clutter than their boomer parents before them, buried under piles of ever-cheaper toys.
In other words, millennials' style of spending isn't special; it's cyclical.
To further the point, millennials now account for the largest share of homebuyers, making up 38% of the homebuying market, according to a report from the National Association of Realtors. Our tilt toward homeownership isn't new, either. We'd nearly caught up with our boomer parents way back in 2019, according to Freddie Mac; 43% of us owned homes, just shy of the 45% of baby boomers who were able to buy their first homes between 25 and 34. Whatever we weren't buying in our 20s, we are making up for in our 30s and 40s.
"There's the ongoing narrative that millennials can't afford housing or don't own houses, that they're renters, but when you look at the data, 25- to 34-year-olds are just as likely to be homeowners now as they were in 1993," said Bryan Rigg, a BLS economist who oversees Consumer Expenditure Survey microdata for public use. "Really, a lot of the expenditure patterns are similar." One major exception is that today's 20- and 30-somethings are a lot more comfortable taking on debt to buy things — like cars and homes — than in the past.
For better or worse, public memory is short. Many of today's young adults might not even be aware that the current crop of 30-somethings were ever considered minimalists in the first place. There's evidence that the rest of us are starting to forget, too. Maybe you've read about the new TikTok trend sweeping Gen Z: a mindful alternative to the "haul" culture that's grown around ultrafast fashion and ultracheap e-commerce platforms. It's a whole new approach to stuff. Some have said it might even slow down the economy. This time around, we're calling it "underconsumption core."
Kelli María Korducki is a journalist whose work focuses on work, tech, and culture. She's based in New York City.
The author and her father, who is known to give what he calls "go-to gifts" on holidays.
Kathleen Elkins
My dad started a gift-giving tradition years ago that he coined the 'go-to gift.'
He lets the recipient choose, but they have to pitch him on how they'll use the gift.
It encourages conscious spending and prioritizing quality.
My dad doesn't like spending money — and he wouldn't mind me writing that.
He also doesn't like having excessive things. He keeps his space neat and tidy and buys only what he needs. An early lesson he instilled was the difference between a "want" and a "need," and he taught my brothers and me to spend only on the latter.
Gift-giving presents a challenge to my minimalist, money-conscious father, as it often involves spending money and spending money on things. He could opt not to buy us anything, of course, but he's more of a softie than he lets on.
His solution for his three kids, at least, is what he's coined the "go-to gift."
The concept is this: For any gift-giving event, such as a birthday or Christmas, he'll buy one "go-to gift" only after the receiver has successfully pitched him on why he should buy it.
I can pitch anything, within reason, but I have to convince him that I'll use it or that it'll add value to my life. As he likes to say, "Anything goes … as long as it's utilitarian."
His strategy is useful for him and me: He feels better about how he's spending his money, and I have to spend time thinking about what I value and what items or experiences could have an additive effect.
In 2021, ahead of a particularly busy road racing schedule, including the Boston and New York City marathons, I pitched him on a pair of carbon-plate running shoes. One year, he subsidized my gym membership for six months. This year, he's buying me a case of tennis balls. The activity-focused gifts are a relatively easy sell for my dad, who values health and movement just as much as I do.
He hasn't flat-out turned anything down yet, but when I asked for a pair of high-quality joggers one year, he had a few follow-up questions. That was in 2017, and I like to remind him that I still own and wear them seven years later.
Around the holidays, when his gift-giving tradition is particularly top of mind, it reminds me to spend consciously — to think before I swipe my credit card and ask myself why I'm purchasing what I'm about to purchase. Sometimes, I can justify it; other times, I can't.
The second money lesson folded into his tradition is to buy quality. Rather than trying to "save money" in the moment by buying the cheapest version of an item, I'd rather spend extra on something that will last longer and save me in the long run — something like the joggers that are still kicking after seven years and hundreds of wash cycles.
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., is calling out the Biden administration for spending over a trillion taxpayer dollars on "government waste" this year, including on a bearded lady cabaret show, Arabic Sesame Street, and "girl-centered climate action."
The Kentucky senator released his annual "Festivus" report that details different ways in which the current administration spent taxpayer dollars throughout the year.
The 2024 Festivus Waste Report found that the Biden-Harris administration spent over $1 trillion this year, including giving a $10,000 grant to "Beards on Ice" — an ice skating drag show on climate change put on by the Bearded Ladies Cabaret, a self-described "queer cabaret arts organization."
Additionally, the Agency for International Development (USAID) spent $20 million on a Sesame Street spin-off show in Iraq, titled "Ahlan Simsim," in an effort to promote "inclusion" and "mutual respect."
About $1.5 million was spent experimenting how different species, such as young female kittens, respond to motion sickness.
According to the report, researchers would strap kittens to a table, where they are spun around in several directions and have holes drilled into their skulls to keep them in place — "and it’s all being done with your money," Paul writes in the report. "More than one and a half million dollars of it."
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) reportedly gave New York University (NYU) over $400,000 to study whether lonely rats seek cocaine more than rats who are in positive environments, while the Department of the Interior (DOI) allocated $12 million to fund a pickleball complex in Las Vegas, according to the report.
"Now, did the government really need to spend nearly half a million dollars to verify that social isolation and starvation may lead to increased drug usage? One thing is for sure, we must end this rat-wheel of waste!" Paul wrote in the report.
The State Department spent $3 million on "Girl-Centered Climate Action" in Brazil, a program reportedly designed to "empower young women to become climate leaders by integrating equity and inclusivity into environmental activism," the report writes, citing the grant details.
"As the average American taxpayers struggle to pay rent, their hard-earned dollars are ironically funneled into more real estate," the report read, referring to the Biden struggles spending $10 billion on maintaining and furnishing buildings that were almost entirely empty.
The Department of Energy (DOE) gave automakers $15.5 billion to push the industry into the electric vehicle (EV) sector, while another $388,000 was given to "Magic in the United States," a podcast discussing how magical beliefs and practices have evolved in the U.S.
The senator also mentioned the Biden administration giving $2.1 million to fund Paraguay's border: "Nothing says 'America First' like securing someone else’s border," Paul wrote.
The offers and details on this page may have updated or changed since the time of publication. See our article on Business Insider for current information.
Dave Ramsey is a radio host and personal finance expert.
Anna Webber/Getty Images for SiriusXM
The average American expects to spend over $2,000 on holiday costs this season, one survey found.
Some respondents predicted they would be paying off the debts they accrue into May next year.
Personal finance guru Dave Ramsey advised saving before the holidays and setting a strict budget.
The most wonderful time of the year often comes with a hefty price tag — and many people expect to be paying for it into next summer.
People's debt balloons "because they don't plan for Christmas, like it sneaks up on them, like they move it or something," personal finance guru Dave Ramsey told "Fox & Friends" last week.
Ramsey's comments were in response to a survey showing that the average American will spend over $2,000 on holiday-related expenses this season, including travel, gifts, food, and clothes.
The survey of 2,000 people was conducted in early November by Talker Research and commissioned by Achieve. A fifth of respondents said they likely wouldn't recover financially until May 2025 or later.
The personal finance guru and host of "The Ramsey Show" described the $2,000 figure as "mindblowing," adding that it was a large sum to spend "all in the name of happiness comes from stuff — and it doesn't."
People can stay out of money trouble by socking away funds each month in preparation for the winter splurge, Ramsey said. They can also avoid overspending by drawing up a budget for gifts and other costs and sticking to it, he added.
"The problem with Christmas is not that we enjoy buying gifts for someone else — that's a wonderful thing," the radio personality said.
"The problem is we impulse our butts off, and we double up what we spend," he continued, pointing the finger at retailers who are "great at putting stuff in front of us that we hadn't planned to buy."
The typical US adult expects to spend $1,012 on gifts alone this holiday season, up from an estimated $975 last year, according to a Gallup survey of at least 1,000 people conducted in November.
Pinched by prices
Household budgets could be squeezed this holiday season. Inflation surged to a 40-year high of over 9% in the summer of 2022 as the cost of food, fuel, housing, and other essentials jumped, and remained above the Federal Reserve's target rate of 2% in November.
The central bank rushed to curb price growth by hiking interest rates from nearly zero to north of 5% within 18 months, sending people's monthly payments for their credit cards, car loans, and other debts skyward. Fed officials have cut rates to roughly 4% since September, but recently indicated they only expect to make two further cuts next year.
The upshot is Americans are likely to face a combination of elevated inflation and steeper rates for a while yet, setting the stage for a costly Christmas.
Over 30 House Republicans voted Friday against a bill to avert a partial government shutdown.
Lawmakers scrambled to reach consensus on a spending package ahead of the looming partial government shutdown deadline Friday. An initial 1,547-page bipartisan deal that would have extended the government funding deadline until March 14 was released Tuesday night, but the proposal crumbled after Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy criticized the spending bill.
A more condensed, Trump-backed version was brought to the floor Thursday night but failed to pass.
In a last-minute vote Friday, the House succeeded in passing a funding bill with 34 Republicans voting against the legislation and zero Democrats voting against it. One Democrat, Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas, voted present.
Among those who voted against the bill was Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., who told Fox News Digital, "I don't know why we're giving Joe Biden $100 billion to play with in 30 days.
"Oddly enough, it didn't have what Trump wanted most of all."
GOP lawmakers indicated that the House could vote on another CR proposal Friday to avert the looming partial government shutdown, but the timing still remains unclear.
Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., speaking to reporters outside Speaker Mike Johnson's office, said that lawmakers are "very close to a deal" and suggested that a vote could be held that morning.
"I do not believe the government is going to be shutting down. You guys will see some great stuff, very similar to President Trump's plan yesterday," the congresswoman said.
Luna added that "there will be no deals with the Democrats."
"I don't have any reason to believe there will be a vote at 10 o'clock," Johnson said. "I know some people would like to get something on the floor this morning."
Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas, leaving a Democratic caucus meeting on Friday, also told reporters that Democrats had no update on the timing for a potential vote.
Democratic members told reporters that Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., was in talks with Johnson to try and reach a deal ahead of the partial government shutdown deadline, but suggested that the GOP put the original bipartisan deal on the floor.
House Republican negotiators have tentatively reached an agreement on averting a partial government shutdown at the end of Friday, sources told Fox News Digital.
Two people familiar with discussions told Fox News Digital late Frisy morning that House Republican negotiators had tentatively reached an agreement that would include a short-term extension of this year's federal funding levels, disaster aid funding, and agricultural support for farmers – but under three separate bills.
The speaker originally put forward a 1,547-page bipartisan deal that would have extended the government funding deadline until March 14, but the proposal crumbled after Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy criticized the spending bill.
A new proposal, backed by Trump, was hastily negotiated on Thursday, but failed to pass the House of Representatives on Thursday night.
The bill needed two-thirds of the House chamber to pass, but failed to even net a majority, with two Democrats voting with the majority of Republicans to pass the bill, and 38 GOP lawmakers against.
The national debt has climbed to over $36 trillion, and the national deficit is over $1.8 trillion.
The House is planning to vote on another CR proposal Friday morning to avert the looming partial government shutdown, a GOP lawmaker told reporters on Capitol Hill.
Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., speaking to reporters outside Speaker Mike Johnson's office, said lawmakers are "very close to a deal" and that a vote could be held at 10 a.m. Friday.
"I do not believe the government is going to be shutting down. You guys will see some great stuff, very similar to President Trump's plan yesterday," the congresswoman said.
Luna also added that "there will be no deals with the Democrats."
Legislation to avoid a partial government shutdown that was backed by Trump failed to pass the House of Representatives on Thursday night. The bill needed two-thirds of the House chamber to pass but failed to even net a majority, with two Democrats voting with the majority of Republicans to pass the bill and 38 GOP lawmakers against.
The Biden administration announced another $4.28 billion in student loan handouts as President Biden and Vice President Harris prepare to leave the White House.
The massive loan handout will give 54,900 public workers loan forgiveness.
"Four years ago, the Biden-Harris Administration made a pledge to America’s teachers, service members, nurses, first responders, and other public servants that we would fix the broken Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program, and I’m proud to say that we delivered," Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona said in a release on Friday.
The action brings the total loan forgiveness approved by Biden to nearly $180 billion for nearly 5 million borrowers.
"With the approval of another $4.28 billion in loan forgiveness for nearly 55,000 public servants, the Administration has secured nearly $180 billion in life-changing student debt relief for nearly five million borrowers," Cardona said. "The U.S. Department of Education’s successful transformation of the PSLF Program is a testament to what’s possible when you have leaders, like President Biden and Vice President Harris, who are relentlessly and unapologetically focused on making government deliver for everyday working people."
The Biden-Harris administration touted the program for creating an "incentive" for public servants to "pursue and remain" in their careers by forgiving borrowers' remaining balance after they made the 120 qualifying monthly payments.
"The relief announced today includes both borrowers who have benefitted from the Administration’s limited PSLF waiver, a temporary opportunity that ended in October 2022, as well as from regulatory improvements made to the program during this Administration," the release said.
During his 2020 presidential campaign, Biden pledged to forgive student loans for millions of Americans if elected, but the president has faced continuous legal roadblocks in his attempt to eliminate hundreds of billions of dollars in debt.
After the Supreme Court blocked the Biden administration's first attempt at providing broad-based student loan forgiveness, ruling it was an overreach of the executive branch's authority under the Constitution, the president and his team began to work on other options to provide handouts.
President-elect Trump has not said specifically how he will approach the Biden administration's student loan handout plans, but he has said he plans to rework the entire education system during his term.
Fox News Digital's Audrie Spady contributed to this report.
When the federal government shuts its doors, Americans get a glimpse at a long-debated question in Washington: How much government is too much? Here's what happens during a partial government shutdown, which typically happens when Congress has failed to pass new bills authorizing spending.
Federal agencies and services deemed "nonessential" can expect to halt their operations, while "essential" services continue to function. Examples of "essential" agencies include national security, Border Patrol, law enforcement, disaster response and more.
What's more, funding for certain programs, like Social Security, and some agencies such as the Postal Service, operate separately from the yearly appropriations process.
A shutdown lasting less than two weeks would likely have minimal impact, as federal employees would still receive their paychecks on schedule. Longer shutdowns, meanwhile, are usually accompanied by retroactive pay for government workers and congressional staff. As a result, the actual effects of a shutdown tend to be far less severe than how it's typically described.
Partial government shutdowns can also be seen as an opportunity by some lawmakers to address unsustainable federal spending. The U.S. national debt exceeds $35 trillion, and many argue that allowing the government to function indefinitely without addressing wasteful spending is irresponsible. Shutdowns can thus force Congress to make decisions about funding priorities and eliminate bloated programs.
The federal government’s fiscal year runs from Oct. 1 to Sept. 30, requiring Congress to pass a set of appropriations bills by the end of September to fund operations. If Congress fails to act, legal safeguards prevent executive agencies from spending money without legislative approval, effectively limiting government functions.
The annual congressional budget process begins in early February, when the president submits a budget proposal to Congress, offering recommendations for federal spending across all areas of government.
By mid-April, Congress is expected to adopt a budget resolution that establishes overall spending limits and guidelines. Throughout late spring and summer, House and Senate Appropriations Committees work on drafting 12 bills to allocate funding for specific federal agencies and programs. These bills must be passed by Congress by Sept. 30 to prevent a partial government shutdown.
The deadline to pass a continuing resolution (CR), which is a temporary funding patch, is 11:59:59 pm ET on Friday. Without one, the federal government enters a partial shutdown on Saturday, Dec. 21.
Congressional leadership unveiled legislation Wednesday to punt the government funding deadline down the road, but that bill was pronounced dead only hours after it was revealed.
It led to the intervention of Trump-allied conservatives like Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, with Musk threatening to support a primary challenge to any Republican member of Congress who voted for the bill.
It even prompted President-elect Trump to say he is "totally against" the legislation and insist any spending deal raise the debt ceiling before he gets into office, saving his administration the headache of doing so.
The continuing resolution, or CR, was meant to kick the government funding deadline down the road by continuing spending at 2024 levels until March and buy more time for Congress to hash out a longer-term budget plan for fiscal year 2025. But it included 1,500 pages worth of policy and funding riders.
With a national debt of $36 trillion and a deficit of $1.8 trillion, conservatives are leery of CRs that don't cut government spending to begin with, but they've argued only a "clean" CR without any riders attached could earn their vote. Others — Democrats and some Republicans — wanted policy and funding riders attached to get something done beyond the status quo.
Here’s a look at all the provisions that prompted Musk and Ramaswamy to step in and insist Republicans kill the CR:
A nearly 4% pay raise would line the pockets of lawmakers if the legislation were to pass: $6,600 extra per year on top of their $174,000 salary.
That salary hasn’t been increased since 2009, but Congress created a program in 2022 allowing members of Congress to expense their food and lodging in Washington, D.C., while conducting official business.
Some members have been pushing for a pay raise for years, arguing that if members aren’t paid more it means that only independently wealthy people will run for Congress. Others are worried about the optics of a pay raise with voters.
Still, others just don’t think lawmakers deserve it.
"The worst part of the CR was the pay raise for members. That money should be earned and right now it is just being taken," said Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., on X.
The legislation also includes a provision stipulating that members of Congress do not have to participate in the health care system they wrote into law — the Affordable Care Act, also known as ObamaCare.
It would allow members to opt out of the program and instead participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. The lawmaker mandate was a contentious debate during the passage of ObamaCare in 2009 and 2010, and for years Republicans tried to overturn the health care bill entirely.
While the CR would exempt members from having to buy health care on the ObamaCare exchange, it would still require their staff to participate in it.
House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., whose job has come under renewed threat due to anger over the CR, has said he started with a "clean" CR plan but needed to add disaster relief for victims of Hurricanes Helene and Milton in the southeastern part of the country.
Some $100 billion for disaster relief was included, but some conservatives argue it should be paid for by cutting funding in other areas.
The CR includes $8 billion for rebuilding the Baltimore area bridge, which collapsed earlier this year. Some conservatives don’t believe the federal government should be on the hook entirely for the bridge.
"Guess what, folks? Even though the Francis Scott Key Bridge is privately owned, insured, and collects tolls, you still have the honor of footing 100% of the bill to have it repaired. Oh, and it will continue to collect tolls once it’s fixed," Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., wrote on X.
The plan would allow year-round sales of gasoline with ethanol up to 15%, a major win for the corn and ethanol lobbies. Currently, sales of E15 are blocked from June through September due to the high level of emissions it produces.
Opposition to the E15 mandate is seemingly a more regional debate than ideological — Southern Republicans from oil-producing states want to protect pure gasoline. Agricultural states want to protect farmers and their subsidies.
A State Department agency that Republicans accuse of adding Americans and news outlets to a blacklist for things like speculating the COVID-19 virus was a Chinese-engineered bioweapon would get a reauthorization under the bill.
Musk previously described the Global Engagement Center (GEC) as being the "worst offender in US government censorship & media manipulation."
"They are a threat to our democracy," Musk wrote in a subsequent post.
Although the bill doesn’t specify its budget allocation, a previous Inspector General report showed the agency’s FY 2020 budget totaled $74.26 million, of which $60 million was appropriated by Congress.
The legislation reauthorizes the farm bill for a year, offering $21 billion in disaster relief to farmers and another $10 billion in economic aid. Most conservatives say they aren't necessarily against this, but think it should get a standalone vote and not be attached to the CR.
Other seemingly unrelated riders are sprinkled throughout, such as a bill to establish data collection and reporting requirements concerning composting and recycling programs, and a bill related to transparency of hotel fees.
House Democrats on Thursday fumed over the spending bill drama and what they characterized as the outsize influence of Elon Musk and others in President-elect Trump’s orbit, after a bipartisan plan brokered by House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., collapsed just hours earlier.
Speaking to reporters outside a leadership meeting on Thursday, House Democrats expressed disappointment in Republicans for walking away from the negotiated argument, and many accused them of appearing to take cues from Musk.
Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., labeled the billionaire X owner "President Musk" while speaking to reporters Thursday.
"For the Republicans, for President Musk to come in at the last moment and blow up the deal is just intolerable," Nadler said. "You have to negotiate, and you have to be able to enforce what you're negotiating, and what was negotiated was a very good deal for the American people."
Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., said their caucus is "disappointed" in House Speaker Johnson, saying it appeared as though Musk is "president" and Trump "vice president."
This was echoed by Rep. Greg Casar, D-Texas. "My main question is just if Elon Musk is kind of cosplaying co-president here, I don't know why Trump doesn't just hand him the Oval Office."
"Speaker Johnson should maybe just hand Elon Musk the gavel if they just want that billionaire to run the country," Casar told reporters outside a House Democrat leadership meeting.
House Democratic Whip Katherine Clark, D-Mass., was emotional as she expressed her frustration with the protracted negotiation and a changed debt ceiling agreement, saying that in her view, Republicans "need to do the right thing for once."
She noted that she has "thousands of neighbors" and others in her district who are waiting for disaster aid or for a Small Business Administration loan. "Those are the loans that help people repair their homes. Those are the loans that help small businesses get back on their feet," Clark said.
She noted that Republicans did not replenish those funds when they passed the last spending bill, so in the meantime, these people "have been left out in the lurch."
"I just wanted to point out that this kind of chaos and dysfunction has real world impacts on hardworking people, and it's irresponsible and wrong," Clark said.
Musk's team did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital's request for a response to the comments on his role in the spending bill negotiations.
Meanwhile, Trump has endorsed getting rid of the debt ceiling as part of the spending package in an interview with NBC News.
The U.S. national debt currently stands at over $36 trillion.
Trump reportedly said abolishing the debt ceiling would be the "smartest thing [Congress] could do. I would support that entirely."
President-elect Trump on Wednesday said he is "totally against" the continuing resolution (CR) being debated by the House to keep the government from shutting down through March.
Trump spoke with "FOX & Friends" co-host Lawrence Jones on Wednesday, telling him the "fight starts now."
"I just spoke with President-elect [Trump], and he is ‘totally against’ the proposed CR," Jones wrote in a post on X.
In another post, the morning show co-host wrote, "The President-elect [Trump] believes that the ‘fight starts now,’ rather than waiting until he is sworn in.
Jones later wrote, "The President-elect [Trump] acknowledged [House Speaker Mike Johnson’s] challenging situation but emphasized that this approach is not the appropriate course of action."
Congressional leaders in Washington, D.C., released the text of their 1,547-page CR on Tuesday evening after last-minute negotiations delayed its original planned release on Sunday. A source familiar with discussions told Fox News Digital more specifically that the deal was largely struck between the top two Democrats and Republicans in each chamber.
Since its release, the CR has seen strong opposition from conservatives and House GOP hardliners, many of whom are frustrated with unrelenting policy riders attached to the legislation, rather than a "clean" extension of government funding.
While the bill would avert a partial government shutdown through March 14 if passed, it also includes provisions on health care and ethanol fuel, along with $100 billion in disaster aid funding and measures to fund the reconstruction of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore. The bill also includes the first pay raise for lawmakers since 2009.
Republican congressional leaders have defended their plan for a stopgap spending bill, arguing it would allow Trump to have a greater influence on spending when the question comes up again in the spring.
Trump and Vice President-elect JD Vance released a statement on the spending bill on Wednesday.
"The most foolish and inept thing ever done by Congressional Republicans was allowing our country to hit the debt ceiling in 2025. It was a mistake and is now something that must be addressed," they wrote. "Increasing the debt ceiling is not great but we’d rather do it on Biden’s watch.
"If Democrats won’t cooperate on the debt ceiling now, what makes anyone think they would do it in June during our administration? Let’s have this debate now. And we should pass a streamlined spending bill that doesn’t give Chuck Schumer and the Democrats everything they want.
"Republicans want to support farmers and pay for disaster relief while setting the country up for success in 2025."
"The only way to do that is with a temporary funding bill WITHOUT DEMOCRAT GIVEAWAYS combined with an increase in the debt ceiling. Anything else is a betrayal of our country," they said. "Republicans must GET SMART and TOUGH.
"If Democrats threaten to shut down the government unless we give them everything they want, then CALL THEIR BLUFF. It is Schumer and Biden who are holding up aid to our farmers and disaster relief. THIS CHAOS WOULD NOT BE HAPPENING IF WE HAD A REAL PRESIDENT. WE WILL IN 32 DAYS!"
Billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk, who was appointed co-chair of Trump’s newly established Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), also came out in opposition to Johnson’s proposed bill to keep the government funded on Wednesday.
Musk turned to his social media platform X to argue that the 1,547-page document is full of "pork."
The other co-chair of DOGE, Vivek Ramaswamy, expressed skepticism of the bill on Tuesday, though he did not outright oppose Johnson’s solution.
"Currently reading the 1,547-page bill to fund the government through mid-March. Expecting every U.S. Congressman & Senator to do the same," Ramaswamy wrote on X.
The GOP holds a one-seat majority in the House, meaning Johnson will likely have to rely on Democratic votes to pass the bill. The legislation must also pass the Senate by the Friday deadline to avoid a shutdown.
Fox News Digital’s Anders Hagstrom and Elizabeth Elkind contributed to this report.
Some lawmakers in the new Congressional DOGE Caucus are eyeing a crackdown on federal agencies work-from-home policies when Republicans take over the levers of power in Washington DC next year.
The group’s name is an acronym for Delivering Outstanding Government Efficiency, coinciding with the Department of Government Efficiency – also DOGE for short – a new advisory panel commissioned by President-elect Trump and led by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy.
The caucus held its first meeting on Tuesday, which lawmakers described to Fox News Digital as largely "organizational."
DOGE Caucus co-chair Rep. Aaron Bean, R-Fla., told Fox News Digital the room was full of interested lawmakers.
"We had 29 sign up to come, so we met in a small conference room. But it was packed – we had over 60 members attend," Bean said.
That included three Democrats – Reps. Steven Horsford, D-Nev., Val Hoyle, D-Ore., and the first Democrat to join the DOGE Caucus, Rep. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla.
Documents given to attendees and shared with Fox News Digital encouraged lawmakers to think of what kind of DOGE goals would be "worthwhile lifts," "quick wins," "lower priority," and "low-hanging fruit" and other ways to organize and prioritize initiatives.
Asked about what some "low-hanging fruit" for the panel would be, Bean said, "People going back to work."
"We have a problem," Bean said. "[Federal workers] do a large amount of work from home. Which, that’s a debate – whether or not they’re productive working from home. But if they are working from home, we have between a 6 and 15% occupancy of billions of square foot of commercial buildings that we are spending billions on to upkeep and whatnot. Do we still need that much space if people aren’t using their offices?"
That was echoed by Rep. Beth Van Duyne, R-Texas, who also attended the meeting.
"You know, when you take out security, you’ve got one percent of the federal government workers who are going in to work on a regular basis, and we’re paying for 100% of them all to have office space," Van Duyne said. "There’s lots of low hanging fruit. I just hope we can identify what those are."
Bean also dismissed accusations from critics of Musk and Ramamswamy’s DOGE push that it was a way for Republicans to cut Social Security and Medicare benefits
"That is not the intent," Bean emphasized. "It is not the intent [to be] cutting benefits, of either health or [veterans] or Social Security. But those benefits…have limited shelf life, unless we make reductions elsewhere. So the purpose is not to cut those things, but to safeguard them."
"It was a good introductory meeting of the caucus, kind of challenging us all to think about our expectations and how we can help, you know, take ideas and move them in to bill form and work through the normal committee process to do that," Rep. Nick Langworthy, R-N.Y., said.
"I’ve even gotten a lot of ideas from constituents…I think this is a really great grassroots effort."
House GOP Conference Vice Chair Blake Moore, R-Utah, another DOGE Caucus co-chair alongside Bean and Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Texas, said "there’s a billion and a half ideas, and we need to make it so it’s actually actionable for Vivek and Elon."
Both Bean and Moore indicated that the next steps for the caucus would be to split up into working groups targeting various aspects of DOGE’s mission.
The next caucus meeting is expected in January, Bean said.
A Republican lawmaker is declaring that she will forgo many of the traditional day-to-day obligations of the House GOP Conference, suggesting she will dedicate more of her time to aiding the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
Rep. Victoria Spartz, R-Ind., said she plans to reject any House committee assignments she is given and will refuse to attend the House GOP’s weekly conference meetings.
"I will stay as a registered Republican but will not sit on committees or participate in the caucus until I see that Republican leadership in Congress is governing," Rep. Victoria Spartz, R-Ind., wrote on X on Monday evening.
"I do not need to be involved in circuses. I would rather spend more of my time helping [DOGE]… to save our Republic, as was mandated by the American people."
Spartz did not elaborate on how she would focus her efforts on DOGE.
She has bucked House GOP leadership several times during the 118th Congress, chiefly on issues of government spending and the national debt. She is currently a member of the House Judiciary Committee.
DOGE is a nonbinding advisory panel commissioned by President-elect Donald Trump to recommend areas for cutting spending and improving the efficiency of the federal government.
He tapped Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to lead it, and the push has been met with enthusiasm among House Republicans.
