Congress

Rick Scott says he’s just trying to help

Published

4 months ago

June 29, 2026

Rick Scott swears he’s not up to something.

Fresh speculation about the Florida Republican’s ambitions erupted again in recent days after he invited President Donald Trump to address the Senate at an especially sensitive moment — and without Majority Leader John Thune’s express approval. Then, he circulated a letter outlining how he thought the Senate GOP should be preparing for the November midterms.

But Scott insists those who see this as a prelude to a leadership challenge have it all wrong. Sitting in his Senate office less than 24 hours after hosting Trump, he told Blue Light News he’s perfectly happy running the conference’s conservative Steering Committee and predicted Thune would easily secure another term as leader.

“There won’t be a vote,” he said, adding that he’s “fine” with Thune continuing in the position.

“Here’s what I don’t get,” Scott continued, expressing exasperation with the palace intrigue. “Other people get to put out their position. If I put out mine, then I want to be leader?”

What has become eminently clear in recent weeks is that Scott — after a long career in business, two terms as governor and nearly eight years as senator — just isn’t a back-bench kind of guy.

He has lots of thoughts on how the Senate should be run and a willingness to express them, even if it puts him at odds with Thune’s vision. The leader, who trounced Scott in a 2024 conference election, has largely avoided holding doomed votes that would split Republicans and, like many GOP senators, would like nothing more than to get past the monthslong intraparty fight over the SAVE America Act, the elections bill pushed by Trump.

“One thing we can do up here is, we can take votes,” Scott said. “Even if they’re not going to pass, we each show people where we are versus the other side. And so, one thing that surprises me is, why don’t we take votes? … Let’s show people.”

Scott hosts a regular Wednesday lunch for senators and invited Trump in that capacity.

Scott’s incarnation as a conservative thought leader is only his latest attempt to stay in the thick of the action in a body where obscurity can be hard to avoid. His stint running the GOP Senate campaign arm ahead of the 2022 midterms was controversial and ended with Democrats beating historical headwinds and slightly expanding their bare majority.

He annoyed colleagues with his policy of not intervening in contested Republican primaries and infuriated some of them by promulgating a policy agenda through his personal political operation that they hadn’t agreed to.

That did not deter Scott from challenging then-Minority Leader Mitch McConnell after the election that year, garnering only 10 votes of 47. He tried again after McConnell stepped down as leader two years later. Scott won 13 votes in a three-way race, but Thune ultimately prevailed.

Thune, unlike McConnell, doesn’t have an openly antagonistic relationship with Scott. He said in an interview that the Florida Republican has done a “great job” as Steering chair. It is in that role that Scott convenes the weekly Wednesday senators’ lunch and invited Trump to attend.

“He brings people in that help inform our conversations and discussions about some of the major policy issues,” Thune said. “I’m very supportive of what he’s doing.”

One Senate Republican who was granted anonymity to speak candidly said that Scott had earned “street cred” within the conference for how he’s run the Steering Committee. He has brought in Trump, Elon Musk and White House chief of staff Susie Wiles, among others, underscoring his connections with key luminaries in the contemporary GOP.

For now, the Steering position and his close ally’s return to the White House have given him renewed influence and a base of support outside of leadership, where multiple Republicans are viewed as potential contenders to succeed Thune if he decides to retire in 2028 or beyond.

Scott isn’t up for reelection until 2030, and he did not guarantee in the interview that he would stick around the Senate indefinitely.

“I’ve done this. I’ve tried different stuff,” he said. “So we’ll see.”

He had been the subject of past speculation about a presidential run but made clear in the interview he’s not interested in a Cabinet position because “I was 25 years old the last time I worked for somebody.” His future, he said, will revolve around the question, “Am I being productive?”

The GOP senator granted anonymity said he doesn’t think Scott will run for leader again in November but acknowledged that Scott is viewed as ambitious and that there’s “not a lot of ways to go up” in the Senate absent running for leader or president.

“Rick, appropriately, properly feels he’s got more to contribute,” the senator added. “I hope he feels a certain sense of satisfaction about his leadership on the Steering Committee because he really has made it great.”

Elon Musk was another of Scott's prominent lunch guests.

For now, Scott’s sense of productivity has certainly been boosted by his dealings with and loyalty to Trump.

“President Trump works great with Senator Scott and has appreciated his efforts to advance the President’s America First agenda in the Senate — including urging a path forward for the SAVE America Act,” White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement.

A person familiar with the administration’s thinking, granted anonymity to speak candidly, attested to Scott’s “deep relationships” across the administration, pointing to Wiles and Secretary of State Marco Rubio in addition to the president himself.

“Trump remembers the people who were with him” between his two presidential terms, the person said, adding that Trump “also respects ‘successful’ people and Rick may be the most successful business person in the Senate.”

Last week’s lunch invitation grew out of a conversation between Trump and Scott, though the meeting did not go as Scott had planned. Notes from Scott’s introduction obtained by Blue Light News show he wanted to spark a policy-driven conversation focused on three issues: the future of the Senate filibuster, passage of the SAVE America Act and preventing another government shutdown.

Instead, Trump came into the closed-door meeting “pissed” over a symbolic vote the previous day on the Iran war, Scott said, and quickly got into a back-and-forth with retiring Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) on that issue. Trump proceeded to mostly air his grievances at senators rather than engage in any productive back-and-forth, attendees said.

Still, Scott said, “something positive” came out of the meeting because hours later Republicans defeated a different Iran war powers resolution. And he predicted there would be a “renewed emphasis” on the GOP elections bill that Trump views as his No. 1 priority.

He pointed to three potential paths forward for the SAVE America Act: attempting a “talking filibuster” that would force Democrats to hold the floor in order to block the bill, breaking the voting bill up into pieces or trying to include it in a party-line budget reconciliation bill, which would require precedent-breaking moves many GOP senators oppose.

Only the talking filibuster option, Scott believes, has a possible chance of success, and he urged Thune and his other colleagues to consider it.

“I think the right way is, let’s put it on the floor,” he said. “Maybe we should take all of August and do it. It is the most important thing to Americans, and it actually is important.”

Many of his colleagues don’t share his optimism, and it could be difficult to get enough senators interested in voting to even restart debate on the bill given the high level of frustration within the conference.

Asked about that frustration, Scott cut in: “[Then] don’t do it. Hey, I’m just saying, here’s how I look at life — I’m one senator.”

Alex Gangitano contributed to this report.

Congress

GOP-linked PAC spends over $1M to boost third-party socialist in Ohio Senate race

Published

2 hours ago

October 19, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

A GOP-aligned super PAC has more-than tripled its investment in the Ohio Senate race over the last week as it seeks to boost a socialist candidate — an apparent attempt to sink former Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown’s chances.

Enough Promises Ohio, which was created last month, has spent a combined $1.58 million to promote Greg Levy and oppose Brown, according to recent filings from the Federal Election Commission. Levy, a candidate with the Party for Socialism and Liberation, is also on the ballot in the tight race for Senate between Brown and Ohio GOP Sen. Jon Husted. He’s running a longshot bid, currently polling at 5 percent, but could siphon away more progressive voters from Brown.

It wouldn’t be the first time this cycle that operatives for a major political party attempted to raise a third-party candidate’s profile to meddle with the outcome. Recent public polling shows a dead heat between Brown and Husted in the race.

The super PAC spent a total of $828,359 on mailers supporting Levy or opposing Brown. Spectrum News, The Washington Post and Axios previously reported Enough Promises Ohio spent $400,000 on such mailers, but the expenditure has since grown.

The group also poured an additional $753,000 into ads supporting Levy and opposing Brown over the weekend, including one video ad on Google that knocks Brown as someone who “sold us out” and boosts “real progressive Greg Levy.”

The campaign finance filings show Enough Promises Ohio used a printing company linked to a Republican political firm, Whistletop Strategies. Whistletop has worked with an affiliate of President Donald Trump’s MAGA Inc. super PAC and lists as its “director” Big Dog Strategies, which helped run Republican Sen. Bernie Moreno’s 2024 election campaign and is a consultant for the Ohio GOP.

Enough Promises Ohio did not respond to a request for comment. Neither did Big Dog Strategies.

Amy Natoce, a spokesperson for the Husted campaign, told Blue Light News, “our campaign had no involvement with the group you are referencing. Therefore, we have no comment.”

Levy himself has distanced himself from the PAC, calling its boosting of him an “attempted deception of voters” that’s “a form of digital blackface.” Levy is Black. His spokesperson, Charlie Koenigsmark, also told Blue Light News he and the campaign “completely condemn this attempt to manipulate voters.”

Brown did not respond to a request for comment.

Congress

Capitol agenda: AI experts to school Congress wanted

Published

10 hours ago

October 19, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Artificial intelligence is challenging some lawmakers’ confidence that they have the capacity to regulate it.

The slow pace of Congress and a challenging political environment are already working against lawmakers under pressure to address AI threats. There’s also a significant gap in tech policy expertise.

“We need to dramatically increase the base knowledge of Congress if we’re going to legislate meaningfully,” Rep. Sam Liccardo said in a recent interview.

One big concern is at the staffing level: getting people with a deep understanding of the technology around rank-and-file members. Aides who specialize in tech policy often get lured to private companies with huge salaries that can be hard to resist.

Some lawmakers, like Rep. Mark Takano, are advocating for an in-house hub — something like the long-defunct Office of Technology Assessment, which helped Congress understand emerging technology and its social and policy implications from 1972 until it was scrapped in 1995. A Takano aide said he’ll introduce a bipartisan bill to restore such an office in the coming weeks.

Members have also been leaning on fellows from TechCongress — a nonprofit founded by former congressional aide Travis Moore that places technology experts in member and committee offices.

Moore said in an interview that there are plenty of people who want to work on Capitol Hill, but it’s a matter of “Congress’s will and capacity to absorb that talent.”

Not everybody buys into the theory that staffing will solve the problem. Some conservatives, in particular, have seized on the lack of member expertise to argue for a hands-off regulatory approach.

“We don’t understand it well enough,” Sen. Cynthia Lummis, who has repeatedly brought in technology experts through the TechCongress fellowship, told reporters this month. “We don’t have the expertise to do it.”

“Do you really trust the members of Congress, who barely understand AI, to write the regulations around something?” added Rep. Eric Burlison in an interview last month.

There are a few members who consider themselves fluent in AI policy, including several who have joined working groups on it. They’ve taken educating their colleagues into their own hands but have not always seen great enthusiasm.

Liccardo, for example, recounted how he has brought in experts to brief lawmakers — including huge AI industry figures like Sam Altman of OpenAI and Dario Amodei of Anthropic— only to struggle to convince members to attend.

“We have had challenges in the past trying to get folks’ attention to the issues,” he said.

What else we’re watching:

— WRIGHT: LAWMAKERS ARE ‘WRONG’ ON RUSSIA: Energy Secretary Chris Wright on Sunday dismissed bipartisan criticism when asked about lawmakers warning that President Donald Trump’s diesel deal would help finance Russia. “In fact, they are all wrong. They don’t understand what President Trump’s doing,” Wright said on ABC News. Wright also defended Trump’s decision Friday exempting Russia from key sanctions outlined in the late Sen. Lindsey Graham sanctions law, which was enacted just last month and set to take effect Sunday. The moves have drawn bipartisan outcry.

— PILOT BILLS GET COMEDIAN’S HELP — Lawmakers are targeting year-end enactment of a pair of bipartisan bills aimed at helping pilots deal with mental health issues and hazy medication regulations, thanks in part to a comedian with an HBO show. Lawmakers and others credit Nathan Fielder, star of the docu-comedy “The Rehearsal” for raising awareness on the stresses pilots face in the hit show last year. They say Fielder wasn’t actively involved in lobbying despite pleas from some for help. “Frankly, I’m glad he elevated the story,” Rep. Sean Casten, one of the lawmakers leading the mental health legislation, told Safa. After passing the Senate late last month, the two bills are awaiting House action.

Katherine Tully-McManus, Jalen Beckford and Safa Wahidi contributed to this report.

Congress

Wanted: Tech experts to help Congress regulate AI

Published

14 hours ago

October 19, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Lawmakers are under pressure to pass legislation to address the threats from advanced artificial intelligence, but many have serious doubts they have the capacity to regulate the technology’s explosive growth.

Few are expecting lawmakers themselves — some of whom still proudly use flip phones — to become AI experts overnight. But while even congressional Luddites acknowledge there is urgency for Capitol Hill to quickly expand its expertise in tech policy to help with legislating, regulating and conducting effective oversight, there’s no consensus yet on how to achieve it.

“We need to dramatically increase the base knowledge of Congress if we’re going to legislate meaningfully,” Rep. Sam Liccardo (D-Calif.) said in a recent interview.

Congress already has a long track record of lagging behind as technological innovations transform the world beyond Washington: It has adopted a largely hands-off approach to regulating the Internet as it integrated into everyday life in the past 40 years, relying instead on existing laws that govern other industries and taking smaller piecemeal bites.

The challenging political environment won’t help speed things along now: Democrats are split over whether the answer is to put guardrails on the AI industry or ban “superintelligence” entirely, while many Republicans — including President Donald Trump — warn that any regulation would stifle innovation and cede ground to China.

Some members consider themselves fluent in AI policy, including several who have joined working groups on AI policy. Reps. Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.) and Don Beyer (D-Va.) have pursued masters degrees in AI and machine learning, in addition to many others who are self-taught.

The “overwhelming number” of lawmakers have some idea of what AI is and what it is capable of, Rep. Valerie Foushee (D-N.C.), co-chair of a House Democratic commission on AI policy, said in a recent interview. But, she added, “None of us can say that we understand where it’s going.”

The larger concern is at the staff level — putting people with real expertise around the rank-and-file members who don’t have the bandwidth or interest in educating themselves on the frontier of the industry. Aides who do specialize in tech policy often get lured to the industry with huge salaries that can be hard to resist.

That’s where Travis Moore, a former congressional staffer, has spent more than a decade trying to help.

In 2015, Moore left his post as legislative director for Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and founded TechCongress, a nonprofit that places technology experts in member and committee offices. The hope is that those offices will be convinced to hire those fellows full-time — or at least recognize the need to secure in-house tech policy expertise.

“You should have a technologist at the table to at least mitigate the unknown unknowns,” Moore said, regardless of what members themselves know about technology.

As AI has boomed, so has demand for TechCongress’ fellows: In the last two years, Moore has fielded more than 1,200 applications for about 36 fellowship slots through the program, which does not accept funding from corporations or tech companies.

Of nearly 130 fellows selected through the program since its founding, Moore said 32 were later hired full-time. Two-thirds of all the fellows have pursued careers in public service, either on Capitol Hill or other government roles.

Rep. Lori Trahan (D-Mass.), one of the leaders on AI policy on Capitol Hill, is among the offices that currently employs a TechCongress fellow. The House Judiciary Committee, the House Foreign Affairs Committee and Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) also host fellows.

Moore says his initiative has shown there are plenty of people who want to work on Capitol Hill to help inform some of the most pressing issues of the moment — even when more lucrative salaries in the private sector beckon.

“The constraint is not talent supply,” Moore said in an interview. Rather, he said, it’s a matter of “Congress’s will and capacity to absorb that talent.”

Some on Capitol Hill are advocating for an in-house hub — something like the long-defunct Office of Technology Assessment, which helped Congress understand emerging technology and its social and policy implications from 1972 until it was scrapped in 1995.

Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.) has long championed efforts to revive the OTA for years and expects to reintroduce his legislation restoring the office in the coming weeks with bipartisan backing, spokesperson Austin Clark said.

Not everybody buys into the theory that staffing will solve the problem. Some conservatives, in particular, have seized on the lack of member expertise to argue for a hands-off approach to regulation.

“We don’t understand it well enough,” Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), who has repeatedly brought in technology experts through the TechCongress fellowship, told reporters this month. “You can’t address it based on what policymakers know about it on a one-size-fits-all universal basis. … We don’t have the expertise to do it.”

“Do you really trust the members of Congress, who barely understand AI, to write the regulations around something?” added Rep. Eric Burlison (R-Mo.) in an interview last month.

Others don’t see a hopeless cause, but a convenient excuse.

“I understand it’s hard, but lots of things we do here are hard,” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said in an interview, noting that lawmakers have had to bone up quickly on everything from nuclear energy policy to complex weapons systems and advances in health care, like biologic drugs.

“I just think the industry wants us to believe that there’s seven people who understand this, and that’s just not true,” Murphy said, accusing some of his colleagues of “just throwing shit up against the wall to try to figure out how to justify doing nothing.”

A few members on both sides of the aisle have taken educating their colleagues into their own hands. Obernotle says he helped tutor more than two dozen House members through the bipartisan AI working group he chaired in the previous Congress.

Liccardo, who represents parts of Silicon Valley, recounted how he has brought in experts to brief lawmakers — including huge AI industry figures like Sam Altman of OpenAI, Dario Amodei of Anthropic and Jensen Huang of Nvidia — only to struggle to convince members to attend.

“We have had challenges in the past trying to get folks’ attention to the issues,” he said. “We have a lot of work to do, I’ll just say, to get everybody up to speed.”

Riley Rogerson, Jordain Carney and Mia McCarthy contributed to this report.