Congress

Inside John Thune’s strategy for ending the shutdown

Published

12 months ago

October 2, 2025

Senate Majority Leader John Thune laid out a path to end the government shutdown in an exclusive interview Wednesday, saying he is willing to discuss the shape of future health care negotiations if a “critical mass” of Democrats say they are willing to support a House-passed funding bill in return.

The comments, made in his Capitol office less than 18 hours into the first shutdown since 2019, are in keeping with the South Dakota Republican’s current strategy — which is to let pressure build on Democrats to back the GOP-led House stopgap as the only solution.

But Thune acknowledged that he has had back-channel conversations with Democrats and said he’s willing to discuss how to structure a negotiation on Obamacare insurance subsidies that are set to lapse at the end of the year.

“I keep telling them: When they have eight or 10 — preferably 10, or more — when they have a critical mass, let me know if there’s a conversation they want to have,” Thune said.

He insisted he would not negotiate on the substance of an extension while the government is closed. But pressed on whether he was open to discussions with Democrats about how the health care negotiations might work post-shutdown or how to advance full-year appropriations bills, Thune said, “We are.”

“Some of those conversations are happening,” he added. “With our members and their members there’s a lot of back-and-forth going on right now about some of the things they would like to see happen.”

Those bipartisan conversations spilled into public view Wednesday when a large group of senators talked on the Senate floor about how the government might be reopened. The talks, according to several lawmakers involved, are in their early phases. But they are a sign that, less than 24 hours into the shutdown, lawmakers are already looking for the way out of it.

Republicans involved in the bipartisan talks say that a framework for negotiations on the health insurance subsidies has come up, as well as a timeline for wrapping them up. Some Democrats want a deal by Nov. 1, when open enrollment starts for plans offered on Affordable Care Act exchanges. Linking it to the passage of a larger appropriations package after the shutdown fight has also been discussed.

But GOP senators said they are largely offering reassurances to Democrats that dozens of their members, and Thune, are willing to have a negotiation on the subsidies once the government is reopened under the House-passed continuing resolution.

Thune backed up that message Wednesday, reiterating in the interview that the GOP funding patch through Nov. 21 remains the only viable option: “Everybody wants a solution, wants a way out. But I don’t know how you do that absent opening up the government.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer continued Wednesday to push for a substantive negotiation on health care as 44 of the 47 members of the Democratic caucus remained behind him in a third vote against the House CR. Another five would have to break ranks to pass the bill.

Thune said in the interview that he believed Schumer is in a “tough spot” but that he hoped he would give rank-and-file Democrats “latitude” in their current discussions with Republicans.

Schumer, for his part, offered public support for the bipartisan Senate talks Wednesday, noting that he and other Democrats have been saying for weeks that Republicans need to talk to them.

While some Democratic lawmakers have warned they won’t vote for the stopgap bill unless a deal on extending the insurance subsidies is written into it, others have left the door open to an off-ramp that would fall short of that red line.

“One of the reasons probably why there are some of us in this camp is that there are Republicans telling us, ‘We agree with you. For our own interest, we have to fix this,’” Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), who is involved in the talks, said Wednesday.

Thune, however, said he could not guarantee that a deal on extending the premium tax credits would be ready to be passed by Nov. 21, when the House stopgap would expire.

“I don’t know we can have a deal that could pass by then but I think there are … definitely discussions around things that could lead” to one, he said.

What to do about the soon-to-expire subsidies badly divides Republicans. Conservatives want to let them lapse at the end of the year. But a swath of House and Senate Republicans are open to extending them later this year with changes, such as new income limits, language aimed at preventing potential fraud and new minimum out-of-pocket premiums.

“What I can’t guarantee, of course, is an outcome and, in particular, one that would clear in the House, too,” Thune added. “The White House is another factor here. But I think everybody realizes we want solutions.”

Congress

Centrist Dem’s Supreme Court plan boosts momentum for revamp

Published

2 hours ago

October 1, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Democratic efforts to revamp the Supreme Court gained momentum Thursday as an influential center-left think tank released a plan to limit justices’ terms and misconduct.

Third Way’s proposal, shared first with Blue Light News, highlights growing unity across the ideological spectrum in the Democratic Party for significant changes to the high court as Americans’ trust in the institution hovers at historic lows.

The group says it also wants to inject ideas to overhaul the court — including legislation to set an 18-year term limit and an enforceable ethics code — into the party’s conversations leading up to the 2028 presidential race.

“This is one of those things that we think can and should be a part of the 2028 discussion, and those folks who are running should be asked about whether they would champion Supreme Court reform,” Lanae Erickson, a senior vice president at Third Way, said in an interview.

Key Democratic groups have increasingly been coalescing around ideas to overhaul the court’s structure and policing in light of accusations of growing partisanship and corruption among justices. In June, a number of key Democratic House caucus leaders, including the Congressional Progressive Caucus, released their own resolution calling for term limits for justices and a code of ethics.

“We think that the center left has been remiss in not being forward enough on reform proposals that would make our system work better for people, which is why some folks have gone to the further left,” Erickson said.

Third Way cited public opinion polling from both the Brennan Center for Justice and FOX News indicating more than 70 percent of respondents favored term limits for justices. An 18-year cycle would ensure the appointment of two justices every presidential term.

The group also wants legislation to hold justices accountable for ethics violations. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said last month he supports “dramatic reform” on the Supreme Court starting with an ethics code so justices don’t act “above the law.”

The court in 2023 adopted its own formal ethics code for the first time in history, but that policy largely lacks some of the teeth that advocates have proposed.

One idea supported by some Democrats that Third Way is not endorsing: upping the number of justices on the bench. Erickson said that idea seems more like “a mutually assured destruction path,” as parties could go back and forth adding more justices.

The path forward for any court-focused legislation in Congress in the near future, however, is very slim without majorities in both chambers and control of the White House — something Third Way acknowledged.

Still, the group’s recommendations are meant “to show that the center left can also be bold and be addressing systemic problems to appeal to voters and their level of anxiety and anger about what’s happening right now,” Erickson said.

Congress

Capitol agenda: Dems skip DC with wind in their sails

Published

2 hours ago

October 1, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The Senate wrapped up its work late Wednesday night, and lawmakers in both chambers won’t be back until after midterm voters pass judgment.

And Chuck Schumer is growing increasingly confident they’ll hand the Senate to Democrats

“Here’s how I’d sum up the election: Can enormous amounts of Republican money beat a Democratic enormous advantage in much better candidates and a much better political climate?” the minority leader said in an interview in his office Wednesday.

“I think we win,” he added.

Schumer’s optimism — saying Democrats’ have the “wind in their sails” — reflects his members’ growing bullishness as they head home for a final sprint to convince voters to give them back the majority. The Senate recessed Wednesday night after confirming President Donald Trump’s Labor secretary, but Democrats stayed united in a string of politically tricky votes before leaving.

“It certainly feels like it’s going to be a wave election, and not for good reasons,” Sen. Chris Murphy said. “This president’s domestic and foreign policy has gone off the rails.”

There’s division among Democratic party strategists on whether to spend these final weeks focusing on the states viewed as most likely to flip — like Alaska, Ohio or Iowa — or put resources into so-called reach states like Mississippi, South Carolina or Florida.

Schumer declined to weigh in, but said that Democrats would do “whatever it takes to win” and that he expects to spend the next five weeks fundraising.

“We have lots of different paths to victory, and we’re not going to turn any of them down,” he said.

Also hanging over the midterm elections are questions about Schumer’s future — but the New York Democrat said that he is “running for re-election for leader. Period.”

Republicans, meanwhile, are still hopeful that they can hold onto their majority even if it’s narrower. Much of the midterms map runs through states that Trump won previously.

“Of course we are,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune said about keeping control of the chamber as he left the building Wednesday. “Thank you for asking.”

What else we’re watching:

— PERMITTING DEAL FACES HOUSE BUZZSAW — The Senate’s newly announced bipartisan permitting reform package is set to hit a wall in the House, where key lawmakers aren’t rushing to endorse it. House Natural Resources ranking member Jared Huffman warned Wednesday most House Democrats will not support the Senate’s permitting legislation as written, urging lawmakers to resume negotiations after the midterm elections when they are “likely to have a far better negotiating position.” And House Energy and Commerce Chair Brett Guthrie, a key GOP negotiator, has yet to take a position on the Senate deal.

—RASKIN WANTS TRUMP AD PROBE — House Judiciary’s top Democrat is demanding federal inquiries into the amount of taxpayer money that was used by the Trump administration for a TV ad blitz endorsing the president ahead of the midterms. Rep. Jamie Raskin, who is poised to lead the panel if Democrats flip the chamber, and Rep. George Whitesides, wrote to the Government Accountability Office Wednesday asking them to investigate the “source, accounts and total amount of taxpayer funds used” to produce and distribute the ads. The pair of lawmakers also asked the Office of Special Counsel to investigate whether the ads “constitute a violation of the Hatch Act” and to “determine who should be held accountable.”

Nico Portuondo and Chris Marquette contributed to this report.

Congress

Raskin leads calls for federal investigation into Trump PSA’s

Published

2 hours ago

October 1, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee is demanding federal inquiries into the amount of taxpayer money used to furnish a television ad blitz propping up President Donald Trump ahead of the midterms.

Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, who is poised to lead the panel if Democrats win the majority in November, joined California Democratic Rep. George Whitesides in sending a letter to the Government Accountability Office and the Office of Special Counsel. It asks the GAO to investigate the “source, accounts, and total amount of taxpayer funds used by the Executive Office of the President to produce and distribute this advertisement across major television markets and official White House social media channels.”

The lawmakers also ask the Office of Special Counsel to investigate whether the ads “paid for by millions of dollars of taxpayer funds, constitute a violation of the Hatch Act, and determine who should be held accountable.”

The ads, which so far have run during NFL games and flagship Sunday news shows, depict Trump in a powerful and effective light, with glimpses of him posing for the camera, denigrating the free press and denouncing communism. Each includes the phrase, “paid for by the U.S. government.”

“These ads constitute an illegal use of taxpayer funds, perhaps best demonstrated by the fact that they are virtually identical to the ones Donald Trump used during his 2024 presidential campaign, and in fact use the same footage and the same inept ideological messaging,” Raskin and Whitesides contend.

Other congressional Democrats have also reached out to the administration in recent days to express outrage and ask basic questions about how the ads were derived and funded.

Sens. Patty Murray of Washington and Chris Murphy of Connecticut — the top Democrats on the Senate Appropriations Committee and the appropriations subcommittee on Homeland Security, respectively — have written to Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin regarding reports that the agency has redirected $20 million in funding originally intended for Customs and Border Protection to “bankroll the obscene political ads.”

A White House spokesperson called the TV spots “public service announcements” and said they are designed to remind “Americans to love their country and understand what makes it worth defending, at home, at our borders, and abroad. The ad is educational and unapologetically patriotic. We should be proud of our country.”

A spokesperson for DHS said the agency “follows all applicable rules for contracting decisions and keeps all decision makers informed” and that “all contracting decisions are made in accordance with applicable law.”

The Office of the Special Counsel confirmed it received the letter and declined comment.

A spokesperson for GAO did not respond to a request for comment.