Congress

The likely next Congressional Black Caucus chair has big plans for the shrinking powerhouse

Published

3 months ago

July 7, 2026

The Congressional Black Caucus is, for now, at the pinnacle of its power, with record-high membership, deep influence on the House Democratic agenda and one of its own members in line to claim the speaker’s gavel.

But major threats have shaken the nearly 60-year-old group in recent months. A recent Supreme Court decision threatens to decimate its membership and an influx of hard-left Democrats could undermine its brand of pragmatic, civil-rights-focused liberalism.

It will likely be Rep. Troy Carter’s job to plot a path forward. The three-term Louisiana Democrat is positioned to take over as chair from Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.) next year, and in an extensive interview said he was determined to defend the CBC’s privileged place in House Democratic politics.

“If those who are out there banking on us being quieted, going away, not fighting for the rights of individuals, and providing resources to those that have been historically left behind, they are sadly mistaken,” he said.

Carter, 62, is now serving as caucus vice chair and a self-proclaimed “close ally” of Hakeem Jeffries, the minority leader and likely speaker if Democrats can win a majority in November. He would not commit to seeking the chair but spoke about his “passion for the caucus,” and five other CBC members, including Clarke, said in recent interviews that he is a strong — and perhaps the only — contender.

“I don’t know if there’s anyone who would even think about running against him,” Rep. Cleo Fields (D-La.) said. “He’s set in a perfect position to be the chairman of our caucus, and he has my unyielding support.”

Fields, however, probably won’t be eligible to vote for Carter — underscoring the larger challenges the caucus faces.

The Supreme Court’s April ruling in Louisiana v. Callais allowed the Republican-controlled state legislature to redraw congressional lines — effectively drawing out Fields and leaving Carter as the delegation’s sole Democrat. The ruling’s effects went far beyond the Louisiana state lines, however, allowing GOP-dominated states to eliminate majority-minority districts and threaten the reelections of as many as 19 CBC members.

Carter cast the moment as an opportunity for evolution rather than reinvention for the CBC as he fielded questions about how aggressively Democrats should respond to Republican gerrymandering, the caucus’s longstanding commitment to preserving seniority rights and how it will respond to a new crop of ultraprogressives intent on tugging the party leftward.

“It’s always been revered as the conscience of the Congress, and we will still be the conscience of the Congress if we lose one, two, three or 10 members,” he said.

But some CBC consensus positions that have served to amplify its influence inside the larger Democratic Caucus are already coming into conflict with some members’ demands that their party get more serious about fighting President Donald Trump and Republicans.

For instance, some Democrats believe the most effective way to combat the GOP redistricting spree is to carve up majority-minority districts in blue states as well as red ones. That could create more Democratic seats at the price of diluting Black power in Congress.

Though some prominent CBC members, such as New York Rep. Greg Meeks, are open to the idea, Carter said he was not inclined to join them.

“We want a party that is reflective of all the voices of all the people,” he said. “And if we just start painting a picture, all we want is Democrats, then we lose the value and the flavor and the diversity of what our party represents, and that is a seat at the table for everyone.”

Carter struck a softer note on seniority rights, which has long been seen as the foundation of minority power in the House and a red-line issue for the CBC. The system, he acknowledged, helps minority members “ascend to roles of leadership in a system that even within the party hasn’t always been fair.”

But, he added, “I have never believed that a person that comes in with superior expertise in a subject matter, should be told to wait.”

That attitude has served Carter himself well, putting him in position to assume the CBC chair in only his fourth congressional term after a long career in New Orleans politics. His words, however, are a far cry from suggesting that longtime committee leaders such as Meeks on Foreign Relations, Mississippi Rep. Bennie Thompson on Homeland Security or California Rep. Maxine Waters on Financial Services ought to step aside.

The real threat could come from a slew of young progressives who have signaled they aren’t interested in waiting their turn next term or otherwise playing nice with the traditional Democratic powers-that-be. Some of those future lawmakers, such as Darializa Avila Chevalier of New York and Chris Rabb of Philadelphia, could be joining the CBC.

Carter brushed off the potential for conflict. He said that while the CBC “still plays a role” in moderating House Democrats, he would not endorse the suggestion from centrist lawmakers such as Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J) and Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.) that self-avowed democratic socialists like Avila Chevalier and Rabb don’t belong in the Democratic Party.

“We’re not going to let people pit us against each other,” Carter said. “A Democrat’s a Democrat’s a Democrat. We have different ideas, we have different philosophies, we have different views, different approaches on how to get there, but our missions aren’t different.”

But members of the caucus have shown a taste for intraparty warfare recently, and several of the new progressive members have so far refused to commit to backing as speaker should Democrats prevail in November.

Just weeks ago, Clarke and two former CBC chairs, Reps. Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio) and Steven Horsford (D-Nev.), publicly lambasted Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) for merely suggesting there should be “new leadership” in the Democratic Party, without naming Jeffries directly.

Carter said he was not involved in drafting the statement but did not distance himself from its sentiment — especially as a friend and fraternity brother of Jeffries.

“For Senator Slotkin to suggest there needs to be new leadership, I’m not sure what barometer she’s using to measure that,” he said. “If anyone cared to be honest and fair, and they evaluated the task at hand and the ultimate challenges … Hakeem Jeffries has demonstrated exquisite leadership.”

Carter and Jeffries aren’t out of step on much, but the likely new chair said he had a different view on what the signature bill of a new Democratic majority ought to be. Jeffries has said he wants a focus on “affordability.” Carter is instead advocating for a voting rights bill that could help restore Black political power.

But the two have been in lockstep on using the bully pulpit to pressure corporate America and other institutions outside government to preserve American democracy from the threats they see.

When the caucus announced unanimous opposition in May to a bipartisan college athletics reform bill, Jeffries spoke at a news conference announcing a boycott of the Southeastern Conference over its limp opposition to Republican redistricting in the South.

Expect more of that, Carter said.

“If you call yourselves our friends, if you recognize and appreciate our economy, our entertainment, our sports, then you have to also recognize and stand with us at this great time of peril, when our rights are being taken away,” Carter said. “Stand with us if you want us to stand with you.”

Congress

Capitol agenda: AI experts to school Congress wanted

Published

5 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

9 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.

Congress

Retiring GOP congressmember will ‘absolutely not’ vote for successor in at-risk seat

Published

2 days ago

October 17, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Retiring Nevada Republican Rep. Mark Amodei said he won’t vote for the Trump-endorsed GOP candidate vying to replace him amid a string of stolen valor and other accusations — and warned that the once-safe Republican seat President Donald Trump won by 14 points is at risk of flipping blue on Election Day.

Amodei said in an interview Saturday he would “absolutely not” vote for businessperson David Flippo in Nevada’s 2nd District. “I think the seat’s at risk,” he added, citing a string of stolen valor and financial allegations against Flippo.

“You say, well, the president endorsed him,” Amodei added. “It’s like, well whoever was advising the president on, ‘Hey, this would be a good place for you to go ahead and weigh in,’ gave him awful advice. The vetting process — quote unquote — must have been nearly non-existent.”

Amodei specifically cited a series of allegations against Flippo as disqualifying, for reportedly lying about his military service and also failing to file financial disclosures on time.

“It’s just one thing after another. The stolen valor accusations — all that. But you’re just sitting here going, ‘What the heck?’” Amodei said. Flippo has said apparent exaggerations about his military service on campaign materials were mistakes by his staff and others. Still, GOP officials have been weighing whether Trump should campaign in the region to help boost Flippo before Election Day, according to two people with knowledge of the matter. The district has never been represented by a Democrat.

Amodei said he plans to vote early in the coming days and “is looking seriously” at casting his ballot for the independent candidate.

Amid the deteriorating landscape, national Republicans are increasingly wary about Republicans like Flippo holding onto seats in once-safe red districts. Trump won the Northern Nevada seat that encompasses Reno and nearby rural counties by double digits in 2024 and Amodei has held it for 15 years.

On paper, Democrats should have no business playing there. And, national Republicans are still bullish on their chances of holding onto the seat, arguing it’s safer than other red districts they’re more worried about. But Republicans have watched Democrat Teresa Benitez-Thompson, a former Nevada Assembly majority leader, make the race much tighter than comfortable.

Limited general election polls have Flippo either up or trailing by several points. The Trump-aligned MAGA Inc. super PAC just dropped its first spending into the district in recent days, looking to boost Flippo who has self-funded a large part of his campaign.

Nevada Republicans — once bullish about flipping the Las Vegas-area 1st and 3rd Districts — are now paying increasing attention to Amodei’s Northern Nevada district. The economic headwinds that have hit farm states across the country have slammed Nevada’s so-called cattle counties, and demographic change in Reno has favored Democrats in recent years.

Amodei, who has refused to endorse Flippo, views him as entirely the wrong candidate for the district. Flippo is “somebody who air drops into the district,” Amodei said, “announces their intent, pulls out of another district in Las Vegas, within hours of when I said, ‘Hey, I think the time is right for me to retire.’” Amodei also questioned Flippo’s delays in filing his financial disclosures.

“It’s the cynical attitude towards the process to me that has just been staggering in terms of the end justifies the means,” Amodei added.

Amodei said he believes Republicans still have a shot at holding onto their House majority, and he’s told Speaker Mike Johnson he “sincerely” wants the Louisiana Republican to stay on as speaker next Congress.

But Amodei warned the larger landscape for House Republicans has turned darker, compared to a year ago when Republicans “were feeling pretty good, and the winds were at our back.”

“It’s gone,” he said, adding “the mood of the country right now does not feel warm.”

“There’s absolutely no, ‘Yeah, I’d rather be us than them,’” Amodei said. “It’s like everybody better button up their chin strap and be ready to play through the fourth quarter.”

Samuel Benson contributed to this report.