Congress

Inside how the Capitol Police has changed since Jan. 6, 2021

Published

1 year ago

December 25, 2024

As Congress prepares to certify another election on Jan. 6, the U.S. Capitol Police looks like a vastly different agency than it was ahead of the attack on the Capitol four years ago.

Security officials on Blue Light News were widely excoriated for the lack of preparedness ahead of the attempted insurrection, prompting multiple high-level resignations in the following weeks. An oft-repeated criticism was that officials should have requested help prior to the attack, given clear signals that there would be a huge protest coming to the area with the potential to turn violent. Those issues coincided with a steep increase in violent threats made against members of Congress.

With that in mind, Capitol Police Chief Tom Manger has sought to shift the agency’s identity as a traditional police force with a focus on Capitol Hill to a “protective force” built on intelligence gathering, threat assessment and flexing its nationwide authority and jurisdiction. It now has an intelligence bureau with dozens of agents, as well as field offices in Florida and California, with more possible in Massachusetts, Wisconsin and Texas.

But those shifts come at a cost. Capitol Police now operates with a $791.5 million budget, up more than 70 percent since the Capitol attack. Even accounting for inflation, that’s more than seven times the 9/11-era budget. Total spending is expected to reach $1 billion in the next few years, with officials requesting another 14 percent increase for next year’s budget.

“If all we had to do was protect the members of Congress on Capitol grounds, our budget would be a fraction of what it is,” Manger said in a recent interview. “We’ve got to protect the members of Congress all over the country.”

That has prompted some lawmaker questions about oversight. While Congress is the one that greenlights that funding, there’s an inescapable conflict given members’ increased fears for their own safety. No lawmakers publicly criticize USCP for its additional efforts to protect members — a difficult and complex task — but some would like to see transparency ramp up as more cash flows to the department, wondering if the increased money has really translated to increased safety.

“I think we need a lot of oversight on the United States Capitol Police processes, and that includes budget,” said Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.), who sits on the House Administration Committee. “We need to be more active. And we need more transparency coming from leadership.”

In addition to the intelligence gathering operations, the new money has also gone toward addressing staffing shortages and attrition, with mixed results. Capitol Police leaders were already trying to grow the department before Jan. 6, as many of the officers were approaching retirement eligibility. Then hundreds more officers left en masse after the attack, too. Capitol Police officials now say that the first responder’s unit, expanded bicycle team, crowd management and civil disturbance units are “now appropriately trained and equipped.” While the department is still recruiting aggressively, staff has grown by between 300 and 400 employees since the riot, not counting hundreds of others hired to backfill retirements and attrition.

Back in December 2021, the FBI and multiple law enforcement agencies from NYPD to Washington State had raised concerns about the possibility that Donald Trump’s supporters would turn violent on Jan. 6. Capitol Police’s own intelligence unit saw social media posts about a plot to breach the complex — complete with maps of the building’s tunnels and explicit threats of violence against members of Congress.

But on Jan. 5 2021, guidance circulated within Capitol Police that “at this time there are no specific known threats related to the Joint Session of Congress Electoral College Vote Certification.” It couldn’t have been further from the truth or more disconnected from various intelligence, including the department’s own.

Capitol Police’s own intelligence unit saw social media posts about a plot to breach the complex — complete with maps of the building’s tunnels and explicit threats of violence against members of Congress.

After years of expansion and training, Manger now describes the capabilities of the intelligence bureau of USCP as “world class.” He said it includes social media, emails, telephone calls and every other avenue for threats that are made against members and the Capitol. Manger told senators last week that the department has implemented all of the official recommendations for changes to USCP made by lawmakers in the wake of the attack.

One key area they’re still trying to expand is threat assessment teams that handle the growing threats against lawmakers. Manger estimated that, in 2024, threats will eclipse previous years to “well over 8,000” against members and the Capitol complex, compared to just 1,000 to 2,000 a decade ago. He said that despite increased staffing, caseloads for the special agents investigating the threats are still too high. There’s also significant turnover in these high-pressure roles that are outside the protection of the Capitol Police union.

“This has been a really, really difficult cycle for a number of members whose families have been threatened,” Rep. Annie Kuster (D-N.H.) said. “They have death threats out for them, they have to have special security.”

Capitol Police also monitors residential security for members of leadership — changes were made to that process after the attack on Paul Pelosi in former Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s San Francisco home last year. There has been a drumbeat of demand from lawmakers for more protection when they are outside the heavily protected Capitol grounds, whether in their districts, in transit and especially at events where many members gather together and could be targeted.

“We’re concerned about the safety of our family members, ourselves and our staff both here locally and in our district offices and our homes,” said Legislative Branch Appropriations Subcommittee ranking member Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.). “This is escalating … it’s nasty out there.”

Capitol Police insist these changes have made them better equipped to deal with threats. Manger called their responsibility to protect lawmakers a “24/7 no-fail mission” and said that has required more officers, training and administrative staff — all of which takes more money.

But concerns about oversight remain. After the 2021 attack, both lawmakers and outside groups urged an overhaul of the oversight apparatus for the USCP, which largely falls to the Capitol Police board. The halting and uncoordinated response of the board while Blue Light News was overrun drew calls for restructuring.

Capitol Police officials now say that the first responder’s unit, expanded bicycle team, crowd management and civil disturbance units are “now appropriately trained and equipped.”

The 141-year-old board — which is made up of the House and Senate sergeants at arms and the architect of the Capitol, with a nonvoting presence by the Capitol Police chief — was built to encourage a deliberative decision-making process, not for responding quickly to a violent crisis on the Capitol’s doorstep. Resignations and firings led to a wholesale replacement of the board after the attack, but the structure remains unchanged.

“Do I think that there’s tweaks that could be made to make the whole sort of oversight system a little better? Absolutely,” Manger said. But “I’m trying to work within that structure.”

Not everyone is so sure those changes have helped matters. Griffiths said that USCP still has issues with being transparent with lawmakers who are explicitly tasked with overseeing the department, saying “my assessment is that it is not improving.”

“Congress propelled Capitol Police funding and manpower into the stratosphere but failed to launch the accountability mechanisms that would keep the police on mission,” longtime transparency advocate Daniel Schuman from the American Governance Institute said in a recent interview.

Meanwhile, Capitol Police funding has been on a steady upward climb since 1998, when a gunman bypassed a security checkpoint and killed two USCP officers in his attempt to enter the Capitol office suite of then-Majority Whip Tom DeLay. The Capitol Police began seeking — and receiving — a reliable series of budgetary increases which have not slowed.

The Capitol Police are requesting $906 million, a 14 percent increase over current funding levels for fiscal 2025. The department’s funding will be finalized as lawmakers negotiate a spending deal in the new year.

Jordain Carney and Nicholas Wu contributed to this report.

Congress

Senate to confirm Jay Clayton as soon as Thursday

Published

18 minutes ago

June 15, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The Senate could vote as soon as Thursday on Jay Clayton’s nomination to serve as director of national intelligence — a lightning speed pace that will necessitate buy-in from all 100 senators.

Confirming Clayton could help shore up enough votes from Democrats to extend a government surveillance program that expired last Friday over opposition to Trump’s pick for acting director, Bill Pulte.

“He will come out of the committee Thursday, at least hopefully, and then if we get consent, we can move,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune said in an interview Monday about Clayton, who Trump only nominated for the job late last week.

Democrats “ought to be happy with Clayton,” said Thune, adding that he’s a “good” and “solid” pick.

Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, floated Sunday to CBS News that Clayton could be confirmed this week if every senator cooperates.

Senate Intelligence will hold a hearing Wednesday on Clayton’s nomination. If every member of the panel agrees, he could then get a committee vote Thursday. Confirming Clayton on the Senate floor hours later would require getting agreement from every senator to speed up the process. Opposition from a single member will punt Clayton’s confirmation to next week.

Confirming Clayton Thursday would, crucially, limit — and potentially circumvent — Pulte from becoming acting director of national intelligence, which Trump has slated to take place Friday, June 19.

The president’s decision to put Pulte in charge after Tulsi Gabbard’s departure at the helm of the Office of National Intelligence sparked bipartisan pushback, with Democrats saying they will withhold support for extending Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act while Pulte is in the acting role. Congress allowed the key government spy authority lapse last Friday without a deal.

Trump threw another curveball into a FISA extension over the weekend when he posted on social media that he was against reauthorizing Section 702 unless a GOP elections bill is attached. That bill, known as the SAVE America Act, does not have the votes to get through Congress.

Thune threw cold water Monday on tying the two issues together.

“Yeah, he’s, as you know, passionate about getting that done and wants to use every opportunity to take a shot at it,” Thune said of Trump and his desire to enact the elections bill.

But, Thune said, “we can’t get FISA done” if the policies are linked.

Congress

Senate eyes vote on updated housing affordability legislation

Published

2 hours ago

June 15, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Senate Majority Leader John Thune is planning to put an updated version of a bipartisan housing affordability bill on the Senate floor for a vote this week, according to two people familiar with the bill dynamics and two Senate Democratic aides granted anonymity to discuss ongoing plans.

The version of the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act that the Senate will vote on will include most of the House-passed language, including a provision restricting large institutional investors from buying single-family homes. The legislation would also add back Senate bills that were dropped from the House package that passed last month, the two people and the two aides said.

The Senate legislation comes after talks between Thune, Senate Banking Chair Tim Scott (R-S.C.) and ranking member Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). The updated Senate package was also discussed with the House and the White House, the aides said.

Still, it’s unclear if House leadership and the White House have signed off on the legislation.

The Senate and House have gone back and forth for months on language for a housing affordability bill as lawmakers on both sides look for a win to tout during a midterm election season dominated by cost-of-living issues.

Both chambers overwhelmingly passed their own versions of the housing bill — the Senate 89-10 in March, and the House 396-13 in May. The White House supported the Senate-passed bill and then backed the House-passed bill after it retained most of the Senate’s language on reining in private equity and other large Wall Street investors in the housing market — a top priority for President Donald Trump.

The Senate’s updated legislation would remove two of the House’s community banking deregulation bills due to budget scoring concerns, said two of the people familiar: two bills that would modify the Federal Deposit Insurance Act around failed insured depository institutions. The Senate bill also added back a provision to authorize the Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery program for seven years, as opposed to a permanent reauthorization in the Senate’s March legislation.

The Senate additionally re-inserted several upper-chamber priorities, including the BUILD NOW Act, which would incentivize communities to build more housing through the Community Development Block Grant program; the Rental Assistance Demonstration bill, which would raise the cap on housing authorities to convert voucher-based assistance; the Moving to Work bill, which would aim to add a new cohort of MTW public housing agencies; and the VALID Act, which would require Federal Housing Administration mortgage disclosures to include cost comparison information for veterans.

The package retains core wins for the leaders of both the Senate Banking and House Financial Services committees and their members and reflects input from all four leaders of those panels, one of the people familiar said.

Congress

Capitol Agenda: The new faces of the Freedom Caucus

Published

6 hours ago

June 15, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The House Freedom Caucus is suddenly confronting an unsettled future after more than a decade at the center of GOP politics on Capitol Hill.

Some of its most prominent members are leaving Congress next year after seeking higher office, including former chair Rep. Andy Biggs and several media-friendly voices like Reps. Chip Roy, Byron Donalds and Ralph Norman.

Meanwhile, the group’s current chair, Rep. Andy Harris, is term-limited.

Who will step in to fill the shuffling ranks and maintain the caucus’ role as a hard-right vanguard is very much in question — especially as the group faces a potential shift to a Democratic House majority, which has historically made them less pivotal, and the looming transition to a Republican Party without a President Donald Trump.

The group — which is no stranger to reinventing itself — has a number of relatively unknown members ready to become the new faces of the hard right in the House.

— ERIC BURLISON: The second-term Missouri congressman and current HFC board member said he is considering running to be the next chair.

Last summer he was a vocal member demanding the full release of the Jeffrey Epstein files and has become a leading Republican pushing for more information on UFOs.

— ANDREW CLYDE: Another board member, Clyde has amassed significant power by Freedom Caucus standards by winning seats on the Appropriations and Budget panels.

He said in an interview he had not yet thought about running for chair but noted that “you don’t have to be the chairman to have outsized influence.”

— BRANDON GILL: This Texas freshman, the youngest sitting House Republican, is already seen as a rising star in the House GOP.

He’s made a name for himself through provocative social media posts and splashy legislative moves, such as seeking to impeach James Boasberg, the federal judge who ruled against some of Trump’s deportations last year.

Gill has said he wants to emulate Rep. Jim Jordan, the only founding member of the caucus still serving in the chamber.

— CLAY HIGGINS: Another board member and a more senior member of the group, Higgins said he has not ruled out seeking the chair post but is also “not interested in campaigning” for the job.

Higgins was the only lawmaker to oppose the release of the Epstein files. He said in an interview he’s hoping the group focuses more on policymaking in its next iteration rather than obstructing leadership prerogatives.

— ANDY OGLES: Inside the HFC, Ogles has emerged as a serious force over two terms, with his name floated for chair even before the end of his first term.

He also did not rule out running for chair or another caucus leadership position in a recent interview.

What else we’re watching:

— THUNE RACES TO BREAK SPY POWERS LOGJAM: Senate Majority Leader John Thune is racing to try to confirm the next director of national intelligence and end a stand off over extending a key surveillance power before members break for two weeks. The Senate Intelligence Committee will hold a hearing for Jay Clayton Wednesday — less than a week after the chamber formally received the nomination from the White House. Getting Clayton confirmed is a crucial step to unlocking Congress’ willingness to renew Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

— ANTI-FRAUD OPTIONS FOR RECONCILIATION 3.0: Republican leaders say proposals to crack down on fraud in federal safety net programs could be included in another reconciliation package this year. Turns out, a menu of options is developing in plain sight: Just look at the stack of about a dozen bills the House has passed in recent weeks to prevent waste and abuse.

Jordain Carney and Jennifer Scholtes contributed to this report.