If last year’s Republican megabill served as Congress’ gateway drug to party-line government funding, the GOP’s latest spending plan makes clear it was habit-forming.

Nine months ago, Republicans used the budget reconciliation process to skirt a Democratic filibuster and enact more than $280 billion for the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security. It shattered conventional wisdom on Capitol Hill that reconciliation’s special power couldn’t — and shouldn’t — be used to circumvent the across-the-aisle work Congress does each year to fund federal agencies.

Now President Donald Trump has given congressional Republicans until June 1 to fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement — an entire government agency — through a partisan process that won’t require a single Democratic vote. Republicans are also mulling whether to fund a war in the Middle East that same way, with the White House considering a $200 billion request for supplemental funding for the Pentagon.

Republicans say this is happening because Democrats refuse to back a full Department of Homeland Security funding measure without adding guardrails on immigration enforcement activities the GOP finds intolerable, leading to the current record-breaking shutdown. Democrats also are unlikely to support giving the Trump administration additional dollars to bolster its military presence in Iran.

“Democrats have put us where we are, and we have to deal with it,” Sen. John Hoeven of North Dakota, a senior Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee, told reporters Monday. “We don’t have a choice.”

But Hoeven also acknowledged it could be a slippery slope. Asked whether he was worried about setting a new precedent, he conceded, “Me, as an appropriator? Yeah.”

Democrats previously used their own party-line bills during the Biden administration to fund programs opposed by Republicans, such as an $80 billion infusion for IRS tax enforcement. But that was in addition to the funding agencies received through regular appropriations, not as a substitute for it.

Democrats are pushing back on the idea they are responsible for the GOP’s go-it-alone approach — and they are warning about dire consequences.

Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), a senior appropriator, said it would be “a tragic mistake” for Republicans to bankroll a war while sidelining their minority party colleagues.

Enacting funding through reconciliation, Coons said, “requires no compromise with the other party. And if that becomes the sole way we fund the core functions of government, that is a bad idea.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune suggested Thursday that the fallout from the current funding fight could have long-term implications, warning that it’s “not good for the country or for the future of the appropriations process or, for that matter, the future of the Senate.”

It’s just the latest blow to bipartisan norms of the congressional appropriations process during Trump’s second term. White House budget director Russ Vought has executed a playbook for undercutting cross-party funding negotiations, and Republican leaders have gone along with those tactics, including the stopgap funding patch that riled Democrats last spring and the enactment of a clawbacks package last summer that canceled billions of dollars Congress previously cleared with bipartisan support.

Many Republicans aren’t happy with how the latest step is unfolding, with top GOP appropriators especially concerned about funding a war effort without Democratic buy-in.

“I would prefer not to,” House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said late last month about clearing an emergency military package through the party-line process. But, he added, “we’ll wait and see. A lot of that depends on what the Democrats want to do.”

Three Hill Republican aides, granted anonymity to speak candidly, privately forecasted that the current funding breakdown will fuel a tit-for-tat future for the appropriations process. The worry is that Republican presidents will routinely be forced to use reconciliation to clear immigration enforcement funding through Congress, and Democratic presidents will have to use it to fund nondefense efforts GOP leaders are less keen on boosting.

Republicans are now exploring enacting immigration enforcement funding for the remainder of Trump’s presidency — not just the current fiscal year.

Rep. Henry Cuellar of Texas, the top Democrat on the Homeland Security funding panel, said a future Congress under Democratic control could follow the GOP’s example and use reconciliation to fund agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency or the Department of Health and Human Services.

“So I certainly have concerns with a bad precedent that they will be setting,” Cuellar said in an interview Thursday.

Matt Glassman, a senior fellow at Georgetown University’s Government Affairs Institute, said “the big deal here” is “shoving the dysfunctional discretionary stuff into reconciliation.”

“Because of the ability to do party-line legislating in the reconciliation bills, it allows a back door to party-line discretionary appropriating,” he said in an interview.

Glassman also sees the creeping use of reconciliation as a way to sidestep mutually negotiated guardrails on spending. Limitations on use of money, and how much time agencies have to spend it, are longtime hallmarks of bipartisan funding negotiations.

“If you throw money into these bills, then you lose sort of the control aspect that they love to put into the appropriations with the limitation provisions,” Glassman said.

Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) said last week that Democrats’ refusal to fund the Border Patrol or ICE without major policy changes “sets a precedent that they may one day come to regret.”

Other senior congressional appropriators contend that the bipartisan agreements Collins helped broker in recent months are proof that the annual funding process is working and that reconciliation is not a workable alternative. Despite the DHS drama, Congress managed to approve more than $1.6 trillion for every other federal department following a 43-day government shutdown last fall.

Connecticut Rep. Rosa DeLauro, the House’s leading Democratic appropriator, said in a statement this week that “reconciliation will never be a substitute for the appropriations process.”

“Republicans must realize our country is safer and stronger when government funding decisions are made by both Democrats and Republicans in the House and in the Senate,” she added.

Riley Rogerson contributed to this report.

Pam Bondi is out as attorney general, but she might still be in the hot seat with Congress.

House Oversight and Government Reform Chair James Comer issued a subpoena for Bondi’s testimony last month following a bipartisan vote to compel her deposition for the panel’s Jeffrey Epstein investigation. Immediately following her firing Thursday by President Donald Trump, members of the committee said they still wanted to hear from her, and Comer did not rule it out.

“Since Pam Bondi is no longer Attorney General, Chairman Comer will speak with Republican members and the Department of Justice about the status of the deposition subpoena and confer on next steps,” a committee spokesperson said in a statement.

The pressure could keep building on Comer to force Bondi’s testimony or hold her in contempt of Congress if she refuses to comply — and it isn’t coming only from Democrats. The vote to subpoena Bondi was shepherded by GOP Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina, who was joined by four other Republican lawmakers and all Oversight Democrats present. After news of the attorney general’s firing, Mace posted a dramatic image of Bondi’s face superimposed on the word “FIRED.”

“Bondi handled the Epstein Files in a terrible manner and seriously undermined President Trump,” Mace said in her social media post. “She has stonewalled every effort to hold the guilty accountable.”

Trump in a Truth Social post Thursday called Bondi a “Great American Patriot and a loyal friend” but did not give a reason for her departure.

The ongoing calls for Bondi’s sworn testimony underscores the extent to which she has become the administration’s fall person for the seemingly endless Epstein saga.

Trump’s own relationship with the financier has prompted a host of questions about whether he knew of Epstein’s illegal conduct. And while the president has maintained the two had a falling out years ago and he hasn’t been charged with any wrongdoing, Democrats allege that his administration is engaging in a cover-up — with Bondi central to that effort.

“She has weaponized the Department of Justice to protect Donald Trump and put survivors in harm’s way by exposing their identities,” said ranking member Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) in a statement Thursday. “She will not escape accountability and remains legally obligated to appear before our Committee under oath.”

Blue Light News reported nearly a month ago that Bondi was in trouble with congressional Republicans over her handling of the federal Epstein inquiry. The Oversight Committee vote to subpoena the attorney general followed a shaky appearance before the House Judiciary Committee. That same week, Trump fired then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem after her fraught back-to-back performances in front of key House and Senate panels.

“I just think it’s time to get some answers,” said Rep. Tim Burchett of Tennessee, who was among the Republicans who voted with Mace to approve a subpoena for Bondi. “She’s in the batter’s box. I’d say … let her hit.”

The exact timing of Bondi’s departure from government service is unclear. In a statement on social media Thursday afternoon, she said she would be working to hand over her duties to Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche over the next month. Blanche has been tapped to serve as acting attorney general until a full-time replacement is confirmed.

In the event that Bondi does appear before the committee in her capacity as a private individual, she would likely have to foot her own legal bills. Those who testify on Blue Light News about previous government service generally have to pay for their representation — including, for example, some of the former federal officials who testified in front of the Democratic-led select committee to investigate the Capitol attacks on Jan. 6, 2021.

A DOJ spokesperson did not respond to an immediate request for comment Thursday afternoon.

Democrats on the Oversight Committee aren’t likely to be sympathetic to Bondi’s plight.

Rep. Dave Min (D-Calif.) said in a statement that Bondi had “repeatedly and flagrantly violated the law and abused her position” and “must comply with the subpoena we issued and appear before our committee.”

Among some in the GOP, Bondi bears the blame for the fallout of the Epstein drama that has consumed Washington for over a year now.

In February 2025, Bondi promised to usher in a new era of transparency in the Epstein matter, but unveiled no new information. Five months later, the Justice Department in an unsigned memo announced it would not be releasing any further materials in the federal government’s investigation into the convicted sex offender. That decision drew outrage from Trump’s base, which has for years been clamoring for an Epstein “client list” that could include a vast web of powerful, wealthy men.

It launched a lengthy campaign to force the DOJ to fully release materials in the Epstein case, culminating in passage of a bill led by Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) to make materials in the department’s possession publicly available.

As Republicans were locked in an impasse over whether to advance the bill, House Oversight absorbed the desire from members in both parties to keep demanding accountability over the stalled federal Epstein case. An Oversight subcommittee voted during an unrelated hearing to subpoena the DOJ’s Epstein files, which opened the floodgates for even more subpoenas — of everyone from the executors of Epstein’s estate to individuals in Epstein’s or his associate Ghislaine Maxwell’s orbit.

This has continued even after Congress finally passed the Massie-Khanna legislation which, in turn, led to the committee’s direct targeting of Bondi. She has been scrutinized anew in recent months for overseeing a delayed and haphazard release of the Epstein files, with critics saying the DOJ has been in flagrant noncompliance with that very bill.

In an apparent effort to neutralize the bipartisan push to compel her sworn testimony, Bondi voluntarily came to Capitol Hill last month to brief Oversight Committee members on her Department’s work around the Epstein case. She did not indicate during that closed-door meeting whether she would cooperate with the subpoena, according to Democrats in attendance.

Democrats at one point stormed out of the private briefing, saying it appeared to be an effort by Bondi to avoid testifying under oath. In wake of her termination, Khanna said in a statement she still had to answer for the lack of additional prosecutions in the Epstein case.

Only one person has been convicted on federal charges so far as part of Epstein’s sex trafficking scheme: Maxwell, his former girlfriend and associate. Under Bondi’s leadership, Maxwell was moved to a lower security prison camp in Texas after she sat for an interview with Blanche — a decision that drew questions around why she was moved to a facility perceived as less harsh. Maxwell has said she would cooperate in the congressional Epstein probes if she is granted clemency by Trump.

Lawmakers will almost certainly ask Bondi about this dynamic, if given the chance.

“Firing her does not end this,” said Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-Va.), a member of Oversight, in a statement. “Her removal only increases the urgency for the Oversight Committee to fulfill its oversight obligations.”

TALLAHASSEE, Florida — The state’s Republican-controlled Legislature is considering whether to steer taxpayer money to a nonprofit organization — with a politically connected leader — whose name surfaced in the House probe against Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick.

The South Florida Democrat last week was found guilty of numerous ethics violations by a bipartisan subcommittee of the House Ethics panel, a move that could lead to her potential expulsion. She has denied all wrongdoing.

The main allegations centered on whether Cherfilus-McCormick improperly funneled millions to her congressional campaign. But a January report from the Office of Congressional Conduct showed that the review also looked at federal funding that went to a foundation led by Freddie Figgers, a telecommunications executive from Broward County with ties to Gov. Ron DeSantis.

The office was reviewing in part whether Cherfilus-McCormick requested money for a community project that went to a for-profit entity in a possible violation of House rules; the final list of violations adopted by the subcommittee did not cite this.

A January report from that office highlighted $2.2 million that went in 2022 to the Figgers Foundation to purchase tablets that would be provided to senior citizens and children with disabilities in Cherfilus-McCormick’s district.

During the recently concluded regular legislative session in Tallahassee, Republican lawmakers in the House and Senate requested money for the Figgers Foundation for a tablet program. The Senate budget included $350,000 for the program, while the House budget had a $1 million appropriation. Two years ago, the tablet program got a $500,000 appropriation from the Legislature.

The report from the Office of Congressional Conduct looked at whether the tablets and the software were products of for-profit companies run by Figgers and whether the program was designed to create future customers for his telecommunications network. The January report also questioned campaign donations to Cherfilus-McCormick from Figgers and his family members, as well money her congressional office spent on constituent messaging services with Figgers Enterprises. The report states that a witness told investigators that shortly after Cherfilus-McCormick assumed office in 2022, she asked a staffer to reach out to Figgers about funding for community projects and that she wanted him to submit a request.

Cherfilus-McCormick’s office did not respond to questions about the tablet program. When asked for comments, the Figgers Foundation responded with a statement from Lee Bentley, a Tampa attorney who serves as legal counsel for the organization.

He said that “Mr. Figgers did not profit from Congressional funding, and he certainly did not make political donations to secure federal monies.” Blue Light News previously reported that individuals or political action committees with Figgers Communications donated $19,800 to Cherfilus-McCormick’s campaign during the 2024 cycle, according to OpenSecrets.

Bentley said “the House Ethics Committee report is replete with factual errors; furthermore, language in the report stating that Mr. and Mrs. Figgers were uncooperative is categorically false. Mr. and Mrs. Figgers agreed to be interviewed, answered all questions posed to them, and produced all subpoenaed documents within their possession.”

Bentley also said that “the charitable program at issue was woefully underfunded, and Mr. Figgers made a significant personal donation to complete its work. The program ultimately served 5,000 families in need of tablets to meet their healthcare needs.”

The chief of staff and chief counsel for the House Ethics Committee had no comment on Bentley’s statement.

Figgers, whose mother abandoned him when he was a baby and who grew up in the north Florida town of Quincy, has long-running ties to DeSantis and accompanied him on an economic development trip to Japan shortly before the governor mounted his unsuccessful run for president. DeSantis appointed him in 2023 to the state Commission on Ethics, but Figgers was forced to step down from that position after the Florida Senate refused to confirm him.

DeSantis’ office did not respond to a request for comment.

Senate Republicans at the time did not discuss why they declined to confirm Figgers. But a background document on Figgers requested by a state Senate committee, obtained by Blue Light News through a public records request, included information from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement about several arrests — although Figgers was never convicted. There was also information from FDLE that was redacted when the report was made available.

When asked about the arrests, Meredith Ivey, a spokesperson for Figgers, said that “the real story here is that Freddie Figgers is a hero who was protecting his elderly 81-year-old father, who was suffering from Alzheimer’s at the time, from physical abuse at the hands of another family member struggling with substance abuse. The charges in these cases were dismissed and it’s unfortunate that anyone would assume harmful motives when, in fact, Freddie put himself in harm’s way to protect his beloved late father.”

The Senate has twice confirmed Natlie Figgers, who is married to Freddie Figgers, to the Florida A&M University Board of Trustees.

The January report from the Office of Congressional Conduct said that both Freddie and Natlie Figgers “refused to cooperate” with the initial review and because of that the office could not determine whether the tablet program benefited his for-profit companies.

The final statement of violations against Cherfilus-McCormick touches briefly on whether she provided special favors in connection to community funding projects but does not go into detail. Figgers is not named directly in that document, but instead an “individual” matching his description is quoted as testifying to an investigative subcommittee. That person told the committee he did not remember anyone from the congressional office reaching out to him. He also told the committee he was “not too confident” the funding would go through and he never received any “promises” from Cherfilus-McCormick that the foundation request would be accepted.

It’s not clear if the program run by the Figgers Foundation will ultimately receive money this year from legislators since there is currently a budget stalemate between the Florida House and Senate. Lawmakers ended their regular session without passing a new budget but need to pass a new state budget by the end of June.

State Rep. Jennifer Kincart Jonsson, a Lakeland Republican who requested money for the program, said in an email, “I was not aware the Figgers Foundation or Mr. Figgers were a part of any congressional inquiry.”

State Sen. Tom Leek, an Ormond Republican who put in a funding request for the tablet program in his chamber, said in a text message that “as you know, final funding decisions have not been made.” But Leek also said he was “completely unaware” of the questions about federal funding to Figgers Foundation. He added: “Nor am I aware of any instance outside of this one where the legitimacy of the Figgers foundation or any other Figgers entity has been in question.”

The House Ethics panel is expected to consider what penalties to impose on Cherfilus-McCormick when the chamber returns from recess, which could include her possible removal from office. Cherfilus-McCormick was also indicted last year on charges that she allegedly stole federal disaster relief funds and used some of the proceeds on her congressional campaign. She has pleaded not guilty.