The People's Ledger
A Plain-English Look at What Congress is Actually Debating, Passing, and Funding
Week Ending July 25, 2026
Most of us only hear about Congress through screaming cable news segments or social media clips designed to make us mad before we’re informed. The People’s Ledger is different. It’s a quick, clear look at what lawmakers are actually debating, funding, and changing – minus the political theater.
So this past week, Congress spent its final voting period before its regular August recess doing what they always do:
Passing massive bills that shove all kinds of unrelated policies into one take-it-or-leave-it package.
The House approved a $1.15 trillion defense bill with national election rules attached. It passed a congressional stock-trading bill with another voter-identification measure added to the end. It pushed most of the federal budget past Election Day while opening the door to another $95 billion in fast-track spending.
Then they voted to tell the president to end unauthorized military action against Iran. Meanwhile, the Senate rejected a similar effort a little more than an hour later.
After all that, House members left town for the next month.
Here is everything that happened in our name last week.
1. Biggest Story of the Week: The $1.15 Trillion Defense Bill Became an Election Bill
What Happened
The House passed H.R. 8800, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027, by a vote of 216–212.
The vote was almost entirely along party lines. The bill received support from 209 Republicans, six Democrats, and one independent. Seven Republicans joined 205 Democrats in voting against it.
The bill authorizes approximately $1.15 trillion for national defense.
The NDAA doesn’t hand over all that money by itself. It gives Congress’s approval for military programs, troop levels, weapons purchases, construction projects, and other defense policies. Separate appropriations bills are still required before most of that money can actually be spent.
What Changed
House leaders didn’t send the defense bill to the Senate by itself.
The rule governing debate instructed the House clerk to attach the text of the SAVE America Act to the final House version after the defense bill passed.
In D.C. terms, the clerk was told to add it during “engrossment,” which is the process of preparing the official version that leaves the House and goes to the Senate.
The attached election package would create new federal rules involving proof of citizenship, voter identification, and ballots cast outside traditional polling places.
Those election rules weren’t part of the defense bill approved by the Armed Services Committee. They were added through a separate procedural rule shortly before the final House vote.
The NDAA itself includes military pay increases, weapons and equipment purchases, housing and barracks construction, support for operations involving Iran, and expanded defense cooperation with Israel and other foreign partners.
Why It Matters
The National Defense Authorization Act is considered a “must-pass” bill.
Members who vote against it can be accused of opposing military pay, troop readiness, national security, or support for servicemembers.
That makes the NDAA one of the most valuable vehicles in Washington. Leaders can attach policies that might not survive a clean vote and dare members to oppose the entire defense bill.
A member may support proof of citizenship but oppose spending $1.15 trillion.
Another may support the defense bill but believe federal election rules should be debated separately.
Neither member received that choice.
They were given one vote covering both.
Who Wins or Loses
Likely Winners: Military personnel receiving pay and benefit increases would benefit. Defense contractors, weapons manufacturers, construction companies, and research institutions would compete for hundreds of billions of dollars in authorized programs. Supporters of national voter-identification and proof-of-citizenship rules moved those policies one step closer to the Senate without having to pass another clean election bill. House leadership also showed that it can use a must-pass defense package to carry other parts of its agenda.
Likely Losers: Taxpayers would ultimately be responsible for the largest national-defense authorization in American history. States could lose some control over how they administer federal elections if the attached election provisions become law. Rank-and-file lawmakers lost the ability to vote separately on defense spending and election rules. The public also lost a clean record showing where each representative actually stood on each issue.
Publius Project Take
Providing for the common defense is one of the federal government’s clearest constitutional duties. I support a strong military, and I agree that our troops deserve proper pay, safe housing, working equipment, and leaders who don’t send them into combat without a clear mission.
But “supporting the troops” can’t be a magic phrase that ends every discussion about cost, strategy, or constitutional authority.
A $1.15 trillion authorization has to be examined line by line. Congress should have to explain where the increase is going, why it’s necessary, what threats it addresses, and what taxpayers should expect in return.
And obviously, election integrity matters too. I agree that only eligible American citizens should vote in our elections. Proof of citizenship and reasonable identification rules deserve a serious debate.
But they don’t belong inside the defense bill. A defense bill should defend the country. An election bill should govern elections. Combining the two allows lawmakers to support one and hide behind the other.
The standard should be simple:
One subject. One bill. One honest vote.
What to Watch for Next
Watch what the Senate does with the election provisions this week.
The Senate hasn’t yet begun debating its own $1.15 trillion defense bill. An earlier attempt to move forward received 50 votes but needed 60, and Majority Leader John Thune later withdrew his motion to proceed.
The Senate could:
Remove the SAVE America Act entirely;
Rewrite the election provisions;
Reduce or increase the defense authorization;
Add new restrictions involving Iran;
Change foreign-assistance and military-cooperation provisions; or
Refuse to take up the House bill at all.
The House and Senate must eventually pass the same text before the NDAA can reach the president.
That fight is far from over.
2. Quietly Moving Bills: The Congressional Stock-Trading “Ban” That Wasn’t Quite a Ban
What Happened
The House passed H.R. 7008, the Stop Insider Trading Act, by a vote of 232–198.
Every Republican supported it, along with 13 Democrats and one independent. Most Democrats opposed the final version.
The bill would prohibit members of Congress, their spouses, and dependent children from purchasing new individual stocks, options, and similar investments while the member remains in office.
It would take effect 180 days after becoming law.
What Changed
The bill would stop covered members and family members from buying new individual stocks.
It would NOT require them to sell the stocks they already own.
They could continue holding those investments and could sell them after publicly announcing the planned sale at least seven, but no more than 14, days in advance.
Violators could face a penalty of at least $2,000 or 10% of the transaction’s value, whichever is greater. They could also be required to surrender any profit earned from a prohibited investment.
The restrictions would apply to members of Congress, their spouses, and dependent children.
They would not apply to the president, vice president, cabinet members, federal judges, or senior executive-branch officials.
The House also added an unrelated section requiring photo identification in federal elections. It includes rules for both in-person voting and ballots cast by mail or another method.
Why It Matters
Members of Congress receive classified briefings, meet privately with regulators and business leaders, write tax laws, approve government contracts, and make decisions that can move entire industries.
Even when no crime occurs, buying and selling individual stocks under those circumstances creates an obvious conflict of interest.
The public can’t know whether a trade was based on ordinary research or information unavailable to everyone else.
But the bill’s title promises more than the text delivers.
It limits new purchases. It doesn’t force members to get rid of existing investments or place them into blind trusts.
And once again, House leaders tied an unrelated election proposal to a bill that was supposed to address government ethics.
Who Wins or Loses
Likely Winners: The public would gain at least some protection against members buying individual stocks while serving in office. Members who already own large stock portfolios would also benefit because they could keep those investments and sell them later. Supporters of federal voter-identification requirements gained another vehicle for advancing their election agenda.
Likely Losers: Members who actively purchase individual stocks would lose that ability while in office. Lawmakers seeking a clean, bipartisan ethics bill lost the opportunity to vote on the stock restrictions by themselves. Public trust may also lose if citizens conclude that Congress passed a carefully written loophole and called it a ban.
Publius Project Take
Members of Congress shouldn’t be trading individual stocks while receiving information and exercising power that ordinary investors don’t have.
That rule should also apply to senior executive officials, the president, vice president, cabinet secretaries, federal judges, and anyone else with access to market-moving government information.
H.R. 7008 is a step, but it’s not a full ban.
A real reform would require covered officials to sell their individual stocks within a reasonable period or place them into a genuine blind trust they can’t control.
Allowing members to keep everything they already own leaves the underlying conflict in place.
The voter-identification language should also be removed and debated separately.
The fact that I may support a policy doesn’t mean I support hiding it inside an unrelated bill.
Congressional ethics shouldn’t be used as political bait to carry election rules through the House.
What to Watch for Next
Watch whether the Senate takes up the bill at all.
Senators could strengthen it by requiring members to sell existing stocks or use blind trusts.
They could expand it to cover the president, vice president, senior executive officials, and federal judges.
They could also remove the voter-identification language in an effort to rebuild bipartisan support.
The biggest question is whether Congress genuinely wants to eliminate conflicts of interest or simply wants to get credit for passing something called a stock-trading ban before the midterm election.
3. Money and Spending: Congress Put the Budget on Autopilot and Opened Another $95 Billion Door
What Happened
The House made two major spending decisions last week.
First, it passed H.R. 9770, the Continuing Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2027, by a vote of 220–205.
The bill would keep most of the federal government operating under temporary funding through December 4, 2026.
Second, the House approved H. Con. Res. 113 by a vote of 216–214.
That budget resolution starts the process for another reconciliation bill containing as much as $95 billion in new spending and election-related programs.
What Changed
The continuing resolution would carry much of the government’s current funding forward after the fiscal year ends on September 30th and push the deadline to December 4th, well after the midterm election.
It would also temporarily extend programs including SNAP, WIC, TANF, National Flood Insurance, wildfire suppression, disaster relief, and certain small-business and agricultural programs.
That means Congress could avoid final votes on most of the federal budget until voters have already gone to the polls.
At the same time, the new budget resolution gives congressional committees instructions to begin building another package containing up to:
$60 billion for the Pentagon;
$13 billion for intelligence and other national-security needs;
$12 billion in agricultural assistance; and
$10 billion for election-related programs.
The resolution doesn’t spend that money by itself. It creates the fast-track process Congress would use to write and pass the final package.
The current framework doesn’t include direct spending cuts to cover the proposed $95 billion.
Why It Matters
Congress is doing two seemingly opposite things at the same time.
It’s saying there isn’t enough agreement to finish the regular federal budget before September 30th.
But it’s also creating a special process to move another $95 billion for military operations, intelligence programs, farm assistance, and election rules.
The twelve regular spending bills are supposed to let Congress examine each department separately.
A continuing resolution largely freezes the existing system, including programs Congress might otherwise reduce, reform, or eliminate.
Reconciliation does the opposite. It allows selected priorities to move through a faster process that can avoid a Senate filibuster.
Regular government goes on autopilot.
Leadership’s preferred priorities get the fast lane.
Who Wins or Loses
Likely Winners: Federal agencies would avoid an immediate shutdown and continue receiving money. Recipients of food assistance, disaster aid, flood insurance, and other extended programs would avoid a sudden interruption. Congressional leaders would gain more time to negotiate the final budget behind closed doors. Lawmakers would also avoid many difficult spending votes before facing voters in November. The Pentagon, intelligence agencies, agricultural interests, and states accepting election grants could benefit from the separate $95 billion package if Congress eventually passes it.
Likely Losers: Taxpayers would continue funding programs largely at last year’s levels without a full review. Rank-and-file members would lose much of their ability to debate and amend individual department budgets. The regular appropriations process would be delayed again. Voters would lose the chance to judge many of their representatives’ final spending decisions before the election.
Publius Project Take
Keeping the government open matters. Federal workers, military families, veterans, and ordinary citizens shouldn’t be punished because Congress failed to their job, yet again.
A continuing resolution is an admission of failure; nothing else.
Lawmakers knew the fiscal year ended on September 30th. They knew there were twelve spending bills to pass. They knew the disagreements were coming. The deadline did not sneak up on anyone.
Congress also can’t claim there’s no time to finish the regular budget while finding time to create another $95 billion side package.
That’s not a shortage of time; it’s a choice about priorities.
Congress should stay in session until the appropriations bills are finished.
No extended recess. No pushing the hardest votes beyond Election Day. No giant year-end package dropped on members hours before a shutdown deadline.
Do the work. Put every member on the record. Let the public see the votes.
What to Watch for Next
Watch whether the Senate accepts the December 4th funding deadline.
The Senate could pass the House bill, amend it, shorten the extension, or replace it with a different funding plan.
Also watch the $95 billion reconciliation framework.
The House and Senate must approve the same budget resolution before the special process can move forward. Senate Republicans have already raised concerns about the cost and whether election-policy provisions qualify under reconciliation rules.
Even if the Senate agrees, committees must still write the actual legislation.
The greatest details, including the exact war funding, grant requirements, farm payments, and any spending offsets, haven’t yet been settled.
4. Coming to the House Floor This Week
Nothing. The House Left Town.
Normally, this section previews three bills scheduled for House consideration.
This week, there are none.
The official House calendar lists no legislative days between July 23 and August 31. Members may still hold brief pro forma sessions, committee work, or district events, but no regular House floor votes are scheduled.
That means the House left Washington with several major matters unfinished.
Unfinished Business No. 1: The Federal Budget
The House only passed three of the twelve full-year appropriations bills needed to fund the government.
Instead of finishing the remaining bills, it passed temporary funding through December 4th and took off for its August break.
Publius Project Take
Congress shouldn’t take a month-long break while its most basic constitutional responsibility remains unfinished.
District work is important. Members should spend time with the people they represent.
But they should finish the budget first.
Unfinished Business No. 2: The Iran War
The House voted to oppose unauthorized military action in Iran, but it hasn’t passed a formal authorization approving the conflict or a binding law ending it.
It also opened the door to tens of billions of dollars in additional military funding.
Publius Project Take
Congress can’t fund a war, authorize equipment for a war, and then pretend it has nothing to do with the war.
Members should vote clearly:
Authorize it - or end it.
Anything in between is political cowardice.
Unfinished Business No. 3: The Defense Bill
The House passed its version of the NDAA, but the Senate hasn’t advanced its own version.
The two chambers must still agree on defense spending, election provisions, foreign commitments, Iran policy, and hundreds of other differences.
Publius Project Take
A $1.15 trillion defense bill shouldn’t be settled behind closed doors by a handful of negotiators while most members are home campaigning.
The final agreement should be released publicly with enough time for citizens and lawmakers to read it.
What to Watch for Next
Watch the committees.
Even while the House floor is quiet, committee staff can continue drafting the reconciliation package, negotiating appropriations, and preparing changes to the defense bill.
Also watch whether House leaders call members back early if the Senate changes the temporary funding bill or another crisis develops.
For now, however, the people’s House has stopped voting.
5. Civil Liberties and Constitutional Power: The House Said End the Iran War. The Senate Said No.
What Happened
The House passed H. Con. Res. 89 by a vote of 214–208.
The resolution directed the president to remove American forces from hostilities against Iran that Congress hadn’t authorized.
All voting Democrats supported it. Four Republicans joined them.
A little more than an hour later, the Senate rejected an effort to bring up a similar joint resolution.
The Senate vote was 47–49, meaning the resolution remained stuck in the Foreign Relations Committee.
What Changed
Politically, the House put a majority on record saying the Iran conflict shouldn’t continue without congressional authorization.
Legally, the vote didn’t end the war.
H. Con. Res. 89 was a concurrent resolution, which isn’t sent to the president and doesn’t have the ordinary force of law. The White House described the measure as legally unenforceable, while its supporters treated it as an assertion of Congress’s constitutional war powers.
The Senate resolution would have followed a different path as a joint resolution, but senators didn’t allow it to move out of committee.
The result is a divided Congress:
The House voted to end unauthorized hostilities.
The Senate refused to advance the same demand.
Why It Matters
The Constitution divides war powers between Congress and the president.
The president commands the armed forces and may respond to immediate threats.
Congress decides whether the country goes to war, provides the money, establishes military rules, and has the power to end funding.
That division is supposed to prevent one person from taking the country into a prolonged conflict without public debate or legislative approval.
When Congress refuses to vote, the balance breaks down.
Presidents continue military operations.
Lawmakers continue approving the money.
And everyone avoids taking full responsibility for the war itself.
Who Wins or Loses
Likely Winners: The executive branch retains broad freedom to continue military operations because Congress failed to send the president a binding measure. House members opposing the war gained a recorded vote they can point to. Members who support the conflict without wanting to authorize it also benefited because no final authorization vote was required.
Likely Losers: Congress’s institutional power weakened again. American servicemembers remain involved in a conflict without a clear congressional authorization defining the mission, limits, or desired end state. Taxpayers continue paying for military operations without a separate vote approving the war. The public remains unable to see whether Congress actually supports the conflict or merely lacks the courage to stop it.
Publius Project Take
They’re making this too damn complicated.
If Congress believes the war with Iran is necessary, it should pass an authorization stating:
Why the United States is fighting;
What military force may be used;
Where that force may be used;
What the mission is;
How long the authorization lasts; and
What conditions would end it.
If Congress doesn’t believe the war is necessary, then it should cut off the authority and funding.
What Congress can’t do is complain about presidential power while continuing to pay for the military campaign.
I do not support this war.
But even lawmakers who do support it should demand a formal vote.
War is the most serious decision a government can make. It should never run on implication, inertia, or political fear.
What to Watch for Next
Watch whether lawmakers introduce another binding joint resolution.
Also watch the defense and spending bills.
Congress may avoid passing a formal war authorization while quietly placing the money, weapons, and operational authorities needed for the conflict into larger legislation.
The real test won’t be what members say during interviews.
It will be whether they vote to authorize the war, vote to end it, or continue funding it without doing either.
6. What to Watch Next Week
1. The Senate Returns. The House Doesn’t.
The Senate returns Monday afternoon, while the House remains away.
The Senate’s first scheduled vote concerns the nomination of Walter Clayton to serve as director of national intelligence. Majority Leader Thune has withdrawn his attempt to begin the defense bill and shifted the immediate schedule toward nominations and other legislation.
2. The Defense Bill Stays Stuck
Watch for negotiations over the $1.15 trillion NDAA.
The Senate must decide whether to revive its own bill, take up the House version, or wait until members return from the August break.
The SAVE America Act rider will be one of the largest obstacles.
3. Temporary Government Funding
Watch whether the Senate begins acting on the House bill funding the government through December 4th.
Any Senate change would require another House vote, which could force members to return to Washington before August 31st.
4. The $95 Billion Reconciliation Plan
Watch whether Senate Republicans agree to the House budget resolution.
Without Senate approval, the fast-track process can’t move forward.
Even with approval, election provisions could be removed if the Senate parliamentarian (rules referee) determines they don’t have enough connection to federal spending or revenue.
5. The Congressional Stock-Trading Bill
Watch whether senators try to turn the House proposal into a genuine ban.
The biggest questions are whether existing stock holdings must be sold, whether blind trusts will be required, and whether senior officials outside Congress will be covered.
6. Iran War Funding
Watch the money.
Even if Congress doesn’t vote on a formal authorization, the cost of military operations will appear in the defense bill, the reconciliation package, emergency requests, or the final federal budget.
That is where members may quietly vote to continue the war.
7. The Ledger’s Bottom Line
Congress spent its final week before the August break showing us exactly why so many Americans no longer trust any of them.
Election rules were attached to a $1.15 trillion defense bill; because why not, right?
More election rules were attached to a congressional stock-trading bill; because nobody’s watching anyway, right?
Most of the federal budget was pushed beyond Election Day. Can’t imagine why.
Another $95 billion spending process was opened without direct cuts to pay for it.
The House voted to oppose an unauthorized war while Congress continued preparing to fund that same war.
Then members left Washington.
Every one of these subjects deserved its own debate.
National defense deserved a defense vote.
Election integrity deserved an election vote.
Congressional stock trading deserved an ethics vote.
War deserved a war vote.
The budget deserved twelve separate spending votes.
Instead, citizens received enormous packages, unrelated riders, temporary patches, and procedural shortcuts.
That’s not just messy government.
It’s a protected political class system built to hide responsibility.
For every bill, every dollar, and every new claim of government power, citizens should keep asking:
What does this bill actually do beyond its title?
What unrelated policies were added to it?
How much will it cost?
Where does the Constitution grant the authority?
Who will be held responsible when it fails?
Those aren’t Republican or Democrat questions.
They are the questions we, as free citizens, should ask anyone exercising power in our name.
Salus Populi Suprema Lex.
The welfare of the people shall be the supreme law.
8. Sources and Further Reading
National Defense Authorization Act
Office of the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives, “Roll Call 278: Passage of H.R. 8800.”
H.R. 8800, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027.
House Committee on Rules, “H.R. 8800—National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027.”
Congressional Research Service, “FY2027 NDAA: Summary of Funding Authorizations.”
Congressional Budget Office, “H.R. 8800, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027.”
Reuters, “U.S. House Passes $1.15 Trillion Defense Bill Despite Iran and Israel Concerns.”
Associated Press, “House Votes for Department of War Renaming as Part of Annual Defense Bill.”
Congressional Stock Trading
Office of the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives, “Roll Call 280: Passage of H.R. 7008.”
H.R. 7008, Stop Insider Trading Act, engrossed House text.
House Committee on Administration, “House Passes Chairman Steil’s Stop Insider Trading Act.”
House Committee on Rules, “H.R. 7008—Stop Insider Trading Act.”
Associated Press, “House Votes to Limit Stock Trading by Members of Congress.”
Federal Spending and Reconciliation
Office of the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives, “Roll Call 272: Passage of H.R. 9770.”
H.R. 9770, Continuing Appropriations Act, 2027.
House Committee on Appropriations, “House Passes H.R. 9770.”
Office of the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives, “Roll Call 281: H. Con. Res. 113.”
H. Con. Res. 113, Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2027.
House Budget Committee, “House Advances Reconciliation to Support Our Troops and Secure Our Elections.”
Associated Press, “House Republicans Adopt $95 Billion Package for the Iran War and Trump’s Priorities.”
House Schedule
Office of the House Majority Leader, 2026 House Legislative Calendar.
Office of the House Majority Leader, “Weekly Schedule for the Week of July 20, 2026.”
Iran and Congressional War Powers
Office of the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives, “Roll Call 282: H. Con. Res. 89.”
H. Con. Res. 89, Directing the Removal of U.S. Forces From Unauthorized Hostilities With Iran.
U.S. Senate, “Roll Call Vote 207: Motion to Discharge S.J. Res. 180.”
S.J. Res. 180, Joint Resolution Concerning Unauthorized Hostilities Against Iran.
Associated Press, “House Again Passes a Resolution Seeking to Halt Military Action in Iran.”
Reuters, “U.S. Senate Blocks Resolution Curbing Trump’s Iran War Powers.”
White House, “Statement of Administration Policy on H. Con. Res. 89.”
Senate Schedule
U.S. Senate Daily Press, “Senate Proceedings and Schedule, July 23–27, 2026.”
U.S. Senate, “Roll Call Vote 195: Motion to Proceed to S. 4784.”