More than 1,110 officers at the Transportation Security Administration have quit since the ongoing DHS shutdown began Feb. 14, a spokesperson told Blue Light News on Monday.

That’s a sizable jump compared with a week ago, when DHS on April 20 said that over 830 TSA personnel had departed the agency due to the record-breaking lapse in appropriations.

The latest figure, first reported by Blue Light News, could have implications for this summer’s FIFA World Cup, which kicks off in June. The TSA spokesperson in a statement Monday said replacements need four to six months of training to “perform regular airport duties.” As of late March, there were about 50,000 TSA officers total, according to the White House.

In a statement, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin added that President Donald Trump via executive action has allowed DHS to “grab emergency funding” from last year’s GOP megalaw to pay department employees, but that money will be exhausted if the shutdown continues into the first week of May.

Should that occur, airport security lines could become snarled again, like they were earlier during the spending stalemate — which waylaid travelers across the country.

Speaker Mike Johnson said Monday that a Senate-passed bill to fund most of DHS, including TSA, will have to change to get the House’s OK. That suggests there will be a further delay in reopening a large swath of the department.

During last fall’s 43-day federal shutdown, around 1,110 TSA officers left the agency, a 25 percent increase in separations compared with the same time frame in 2024.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries signaled Monday that shielding consumers from rising electricity costs associated with the data center boom would be a priority on Democrats’ artificial intelligence agenda should they win back a majority.

The New York Democrat said at a press conference that Democrats want to ensure that “our homegrown companies can continue to lead the world in this transformative technology” but that “we’ve got to make sure we protect the American consumer.”

“We have to protect the American homeowner,” Jeffries said when asked by Blue Light News about how he is advising Democrats to talk about AI and what his related legislative priorities would be. “We have to protect the American rate payer from some of the downsides of the explosion of what has been taking place across the country, particularly in connection with data centers.”

Jeffries’ comment comes as House Democratic leadership’s AI priorities are beginning to crystallize. Earlier Monday, Republican Rep. Jay Obernolte and Democratic Rep. Ted Lieu — both members of leadership from California — introduced legislation to boost federal research on AI.

“We’ve maintained from the very beginning as House Democrats that we want to support innovation excellence, while at the same time making sure there are guardrails to protect the American people,” Jeffries said.

Speaker Mike Johnson said Monday that language in a Homeland Security funding bill the Senate passed unanimously near three weeks ago is “problematic” and will have to be changed to pass the House.

The bill as written, Johnson said, would “orphan” funding for key immigration enforcement agencies including Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Passage of that measure is part of a two-track DHS funding approach that won President Donald Trump’s endorsement but has faced skepticism from some conservative hard-liners.

The failure of the House and Senate GOP to align on a plan threatens to further delay the passage of DHS funding, even after Saturday’s attempted assassination at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner.

“It has some problematic language because it was haphazardly drafted,” Johnson told reporters of the Senate-passed bill. “We have a modified version that I think is going to be much better for both chambers.”

The language in question explicitly zeroes out funding for ICE and Customs and Border Protection, which are set to be funded in a second measure to be passed under the party-line budget reconciliation process.

Stripping it out as the conservative are demanding would force the Senate to approve the bill a third time — and could potentially create objections from Democrats who have insisted on putting new restrictions on immigration enforcement.