Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2027
- Sponsor
- Rep. Aderholt, Robert B. [R-AL-4]
- Committees
- Appropriations Committee
- Last action
- Jun 11, 2026
Bottom line
This omnibus appropriations bill funds essential government operations for FY2027 while simultaneously enacting numerous policy changes and restrictions, often unrelated to direct spending, across diverse federal programs.
What it actually does
This bill appropriates funds for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and various related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2027. It allocates significant funding across numerous programs, including workforce development, healthcare services, education grants, and social safety nets. Additionally, the bill includes a substantial number of policy riders that impose new restrictions, modify existing laws, and rescind prior appropriations across a wide range of federal activities.
Proponents argue
Supporters would argue that the bill responsibly funds critical government functions, prioritizes key areas such as national security, economic growth, and public health, and includes necessary policy adjustments to enhance efficiency, reduce wasteful spending, and align federal programs with conservative principles and values. They would highlight the rescissions as a commitment to fiscal discipline and the policy riders as essential reforms.
Opponents contend
Opponents might contend that the bill is laden with controversial and often partisan policy riders that are unrelated to appropriations, undermining the legislative process and potentially harming vulnerable populations. They may criticize the rescissions as detrimental to vital programs and argue that certain policy prohibitions infringe on individual rights or limit scientific research and public health efforts.
The bill is exceptionally long and detailed, making a thorough review challenging for the public and even legislators within typical legislative timelines for omnibus measures.
Title I, Department of Labor
Department of Labor Appropriations
This title appropriates funds for various programs within the Department of Labor, including workforce development (WIOA, Job Corps), unemployment benefits, veterans' employment services, employee benefits security, wage and hour enforcement, mine safety, and labor statistics. It also includes several general provisions that modify existing labor laws and regulations, such as those related to H-2B and H-2A visa programs, and imposes salary limitations for grant recipients.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue that these appropriations ensure the continued operation of vital workforce and labor protection programs. The H-2B/H-2A provisions are presented as necessary adjustments to meet seasonal labor demands, while salary caps and regulatory restrictions are framed as measures to ensure fiscal responsibility and prevent overreach.
Critics contend
Opponents might argue that some H-2B/H-2A changes could depress wages for American workers or make it easier for employers to exploit foreign labor. They may also criticize the regulatory prohibitions (like the OSHA heat standard ban) as undermining worker safety and health protections.
Tradeoffs
The bill balances the need to fund essential labor services with efforts to reduce federal regulatory burdens and control administrative costs. Tensions exist between supporting domestic workers and facilitating access to foreign temporary labor, and between worker safety regulations and industry flexibility.
Title II, Department of Health and Human Services
Department of Health and Human Services Appropriations
This title provides extensive funding for the Department of Health and Human Services, covering agencies like HRSA, CDC, NIH, SAMHSA, CMS, ACF, ACL, and ASPR. It funds primary healthcare, health workforce development, maternal and child health, HIV/AIDS programs, disease prevention, medical research, mental health and substance abuse services, Medicare and Medicaid, child and family services, and public health preparedness. It also includes numerous policy riders on contentious social and health issues.
Title III, Department of Education
Department of Education Appropriations
This title allocates funds for the Department of Education, including programs for elementary and secondary education (e.g., Title I, Impact Aid, School Improvement), special education (IDEA), rehabilitation services, career and technical education (Perkins Act), adult education, and student financial assistance (Pell Grants, student aid administration). It also contains several policy riders impacting educational institutions and student aid programs.
Title IV, Related Agencies
Related Agencies Appropriations
This title provides funding for several independent agencies related to labor, health, and education. Key agencies include the Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, Corporation for National and Community Service (AmeriCorps, National Service Trust), Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, Institute of Museum and Library Services, National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), Railroad Retirement Board, and Social Security Administration (SSA). It includes specific funding levels and administrative provisions for each.
Title V, General Provisions
General Provisions and Rescissions
This title contains general rules applicable to all funds appropriated in the Act, including transfer authorities, limitations on lobbying and propaganda, and reporting requirements. Crucially, it includes numerous rescissions of unobligated balances from prior acts and trust funds, totaling billions of dollars. It also features a wide array of policy riders, many of which are highly contentious, covering topics from abortion and gender-affirming care to DEI initiatives, foreign research collaborations, and COVID-19 mandates.
Sec. 108, Title I
FLSA Exemption for Disaster Claims Adjusters
This section amends the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to exempt certain employees who adjust or evaluate claims resulting from a major disaster from overtime provisions for a period of two years after the disaster. The exemption applies to employees of non-insurance underwriting companies who meet specific compensation and duty requirements, including interviewing, inspecting, evaluating, negotiating, or making recommendations regarding claims.
Sec. 109, 110, 111, Title I
H-2B Nonimmigrant Worker Program Modifications
These sections introduce several changes to the H-2B nonimmigrant worker program. Section 109 allows seafood industry employers to bring H-2B workers into the U.S. at any time during a 120-day period, with new labor market assessment requirements after 90 days. Section 110 mandates that the prevailing wage for H-2B workers be the greater of the actual wage or the prevailing wage, and requires the Secretary to accept private wage surveys unless statistically unsupported. Section 111 prohibits enforcing specific regulatory definitions of 'corresponding employment' and the 'three-fourths guarantee rule,' and defines 'temporary need' as per 8 CFR 214.2(h)(6)(ii)(B).
Sec. 117, Title I
Prohibition on OSHA Heat Injury and Illness Prevention Standard
This section prohibits the use of any funds made available by this Act to finalize, implement, or enforce the proposed standard titled 'Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings' published by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) on August 30, 2024, or any substantially similar standard.
Sec. 240, Title II
Prohibition on Funding for Certain Entities Performing Abortions
This section prohibits funds from being made available, directly or indirectly, to a 'prohibited entity.' A prohibited entity is defined as a 501(c)(3) organization that is an essential community provider primarily engaged in family planning and reproductive health, performs abortions (except in cases of rape, incest, or life endangerment), and received over $23,000,000 in Title X grants in fiscal year 2016. The prohibition ceases if the entity certifies it will not perform or fund such abortions, but repayment is sought if the certification is violated.
Sec. 243, Title II
Prohibition on Funding for Gender-Affirming Care Interventions
This section prohibits the use of funds made available by this Act for any social, psychological, behavioral, or medical intervention performed for the purpose of intentionally changing an individual's body (including by disrupting development, inhibiting natural functions, or modifying appearance) to no longer correspond to the individual's biological sex.
Sec. 313, Title III
Prohibition on Funding for Educational Institutions Allowing Male Participation in Women's Sports
This section prohibits funds made available by this Act from being used to provide financial assistance to an educational institution that allows an individual whose sex is male to participate in an athletic program or activity designated for women or girls. For this section, 'sex' is defined as the reproductive biology and genetics of an individual as determined solely at birth.
Sec. 314, Title III
Parental Notification and Information Access for Minor Children in Schools
This section prohibits funds from being made available to primary or secondary educational institutions that either (1) lack policies requiring teachers and staff to promptly notify parents about matters related to gender identity or a student's desire to express an identity not corresponding to their biological sex, or (2) withhold or conceal information from parents regarding a minor child's academic performance, extracurricular activities, health, or gender identity expression, unless a court order, law enforcement investigation, or abuse/neglect reporting law requires otherwise.
Sec. 316, Title III
Prohibition on Implementing Certain Department of Education Regulations
This section prohibits the use of funds to implement, administer, or enforce section 685.401 of title 34, Code of Federal Regulations (relating to borrower defense to repayment), as amended by final regulations published November 1, 2022, or any substantially similar action. It also prohibits the implementation, administration, or enforcement of section 668.28 of title 34, Code of Federal Regulations (relating to the 90/10 rule), as added or amended by final regulations published October 28, 2022, or any substantially similar action.
Sec. 319, 320, 321, Title III
Termination of Subsidized Student Loans and Pell Grant Adjustments
Section 319 terminates eligibility for Federal Direct Stafford (subsidized) loans for undergraduate students for any period of instruction beginning on or after July 1, 2027, with an exception for students who meet certain criteria as of June 30, 2027. It also increases the maximum annual amount of unsubsidized Stafford loans for such students. Section 320 amends the Higher Education Act to adjust Pell Grant appropriations for fiscal years 2027 and 2028, including a rescission of $20,000,000 from FY2027 Pell Grant appropriations (Sec. 318). Section 321 provides a scorekeeping exemption for these changes, preventing their budgetary effects from being estimated for certain budget purposes.
Sec. 535, 536, Title V
Prohibition on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) and Critical Race Theory (CRT) Initiatives
Section 535 prohibits funds from being used for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, training, programs, offices, officers, policies, or any program, project, or activity that promotes or advances Critical Race Theory (CRT), or any concept associated with CRT. Section 536 further prohibits funds from being used for any program, project, or activity that teaches or trains ideas that condone discrimination based on race or sex, cause psychological distress based on race or sex, regard one race as inherently superior, or assert that the U.S. or its institutions are systemically racist or sexist, among other related concepts.
Amends the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to exempt certain disaster claims adjusters from overtime pay for two years following a major disaster, provided they meet specific compensation and duty requirements.
Sec. 108, Title I
Why it matters:This is a policy rider, likely included in an appropriations bill to bypass the normal legislative process for amending the FLSA, which might face greater scrutiny or opposition as standalone legislation. It's a common tactic to attach policy changes to must-pass funding bills.
Case for: Proponents argue that this exemption facilitates faster disaster recovery by allowing claims adjusters to work longer hours without increasing labor costs, thereby accelerating the processing of claims for affected individuals and businesses.
Case against: Opponents contend that this provision erodes worker protections, forcing claims adjusters to work extended hours during high-stress periods without appropriate overtime compensation, potentially leading to exploitation and burnout.
Estimated impact: Could affect thousands of claims adjusters and millions of disaster victims by altering the speed and cost of claims processing following major disasters.
Authorizes the Secretary of Labor to dispose of or divest, by any means deemed appropriate, all or a portion of the real property of the Treasure Island Job Corps Center and the Gary Job Corps Center. This disposition is explicitly exempt from federal laws and regulations relating to the disposition of federal real property or federal procurement. Net proceeds are to be used for Job Corps programs on Treasure Island and in San Marcos, Texas.
Sec. 113, Title I
Why it matters:This is a policy rider designed to expedite the sale or redevelopment of specific federal properties by circumventing potentially lengthy and complex federal disposition and procurement processes. The exemption from standard laws is a tactical maneuver to achieve a specific outcome quickly.
Case for: Proponents argue that this provision allows for efficient modernization or relocation of Job Corps centers, ensuring that facilities better serve current needs and potentially generating funds for program improvements without being bogged down by bureaucratic hurdles.
Case against: Opponents might argue that exempting these dispositions from standard federal laws reduces transparency, limits public oversight, and could lead to less favorable terms for the government or potential conflicts of interest, bypassing safeguards designed to protect public assets.
Estimated impact: Could involve the sale of significant federal real estate assets and impact the long-term operations of two Job Corps centers, with proceeds directed to specific program improvements.
States that, effective November 1, 2015, and ending January 1, 2029, any law referring to current recommendations of the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) for breast cancer screening, mammography, and prevention shall be administered as if it refers to the USPSTF recommendations last issued before 2009. These pre-2009 recommendations apply to any screening mammography modality.
Sec. 222, Title II
Why it matters:This is a policy rider designed to circumvent more recent USPSTF recommendations that changed the age and frequency guidelines for routine mammograms, which were controversial. By reverting to older guidelines, it ensures broader coverage for certain age groups, but also bypasses the standard process for updating clinical guidelines based on new evidence.
Case for: Proponents argue that reverting to pre-2009 guidelines ensures broader access to mammography for women in their 40s and maintains consistency in screening practices, potentially leading to earlier detection of breast cancer for some individuals.
Case against: Opponents contend that overriding current, evidence-based USPSTF recommendations undermines scientific authority and could lead to unnecessary screenings, false positives, and associated anxiety or follow-up procedures, without a clear benefit in overall mortality rates.
Estimated impact: Affects millions of women eligible for breast cancer screening, potentially increasing the number of screenings for certain age groups and impacting healthcare costs for preventive services.
Inserts a new section 245A into the Public Health Service Act, creating a civil action for 'qualified parties' (Attorney General, State Attorney General, or any adversely affected person/entity) to obtain relief for 'designated violations.' Designated violations include actual or threatened violations of section 507(d) of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026 (or similar subsequent provisions) or any funding condition imposed pursuant to it. Section 507(d) prohibits discrimination against healthcare entities that do not provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions. The new civil action allows for injunctive relief, declaratory relief, and compensatory damages, including against governmental entities, and abrogates State immunity.
Sec. 246, Title II
Why it matters:This is a significant policy rider that expands enforcement mechanisms for conscience protections related to abortion. It's buried to strengthen the enforceability of a controversial 'conscience clause' without undergoing the full legislative scrutiny a standalone bill creating a new private right of action and abrogating state immunity would face.
Case for: Proponents argue this provision provides robust legal recourse for healthcare entities that face discrimination for refusing to participate in abortion-related services, ensuring their religious and moral convictions are protected and enforceable.
Case against: Opponents contend that this provision creates a broad and potentially litigious mechanism that could be used to challenge a wide range of healthcare policies, potentially undermining access to care and imposing significant legal burdens on states and other entities. Abrogating state immunity is also a significant federal overreach.
Estimated impact: Could lead to increased litigation against federal and state entities, potentially impacting healthcare policy and access to services related to reproductive health, and imposing financial liabilities on governments.
Section 319 terminates eligibility for Federal Direct Stafford (subsidized) loans for undergraduate students starting July 1, 2027 (with a grandfather clause for existing students) and increases unsubsidized loan limits. Section 320 adjusts Pell Grant appropriations for FY2027 and FY2028. Section 321 includes a scorekeeping exemption, preventing the budgetary effects of these changes from being estimated for purposes of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, allocations to Appropriations Committees, and the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010.
Sec. 319, 320, 321, Title III
Why it matters:The termination of subsidized loans is a major policy shift with significant implications for student debt and college affordability. The scorekeeping exemption is a tactical maneuver to allow these changes to pass without triggering certain budget enforcement rules or requiring an explicit offset, making the bill appear less costly on paper for specific budget purposes.
Case for: Proponents argue that eliminating subsidized loans is a necessary fiscal measure to reduce federal spending and the national debt, and that students still have access to unsubsidized loans. The scorekeeping exemption is presented as a technical necessity to implement these changes within the budget framework.
Case against: Opponents contend that ending subsidized loans will significantly increase the financial burden on undergraduate students, especially those from low-income backgrounds, making higher education less accessible. They criticize the scorekeeping exemption as a lack of transparency, hiding the true cost to students and the long-term fiscal implications.
Estimated impact: Eliminates billions in federal interest subsidies, shifting costs to students. The exact long-term fiscal impact on the federal budget is obscured by the scorekeeping exemption, but it represents a significant change in federal student loan policy.