Congress

Capitol agenda: Big, beautiful budget on life support

Published

1 year ago

February 25, 2025

Mike Johnson has about 12 hours to get his conference behind his plan for enacting the president’s sweeping agenda. It’s not looking good.

The speaker insists he’s not changing the budget resolution, which would set parameters for a sweeping bill to address border security, energy and tax policy. If House Democrats are at full attendance, just two GOP “no” votes would sink the resolution.

He and other GOP leaders held meetings late into the night Monday to try and flip holdouts, who fall into two camps with diametrically opposed demands: centrists who don’t want significant reductions to Medicaid and other safety-net programs, and conservatives who want steeper spending cuts.

There was some progress from those meetings. Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, previously undecided, said she was leaning yes after she left Johnson’s office. But a handful of other centrists, including Reps. Tony Gonzales and Juan Ciscomani, remain undecided.

Many of them met Monday night with Energy and Commerce Chair Brett Guthrie, as Republican leaders are scrambling to find cuts to other programs to soften the blow to Medicaid, according to three people granted anonymity to speak frankly. The existing budget framework would have Guthrie’s committee cut $880 billion from initiatives under the panel’s purview — with Medicaid poised to feature prominently on the chopping block.

“I don’t know how you do it without cutting Medicaid seriously,” Rep. Jeff Van Drew said. “And so that’s my concern, and that’s why, at this point, I’m a lean no.”

But some conservatives might be a problem, too. Reps. Tim Burchett and Victoria Spartz say they are currently opposed, though they still plan to talk with GOP leadership prior to the vote. Rep. Thomas Massie has told fellow Republicans he’s a no. Rep. Andy Ogles and other hard-liners are still furious there aren’t deeper spending cuts in the plans and are threatening to tank the resolution on the floor Tuesday night. And still others are signaling they want answers about a government funding deal before they vote to adopt a budget resolution.

Johnson likely hoped he would get some backup from Trump in the leadup to the big vote, but that hasn’t materialized yet. Van Drew said he spoke to Trump and that they’re “aligned” on not wanting to cut people’s health care, but the New Jersey Republican said Trump didn’t ask him to support the budget resolution. And Elon Musk wrote “that sounds bad” in response to a Massie X post that said the budget plan would add to the deficit.

Johnson said Monday night that he still planned to hold the vote today, adding: “I think we’re on track.”

What else we’re watching:

Dems call out GOP cuts: Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries is leading his caucus to the Capitol steps to skewer cuts Republicans are likely to put in their budget plan. It’s part of Democrats’ stepped-up pushback to potential reductions to Medicaid, food assistance and other safety-net programs. At the same time, GOP representatives who faced blowback in their districts over the sweep and speed of the cuts being driven by Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency returned to Washington still largely supporting them.
Trump freeze delays spending deal: The fight over curbing Trump’s ability to freeze federal funding has delayed lawmakers from reaching a deal to avert a government shutdown after March 14. House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole said negotiators are “very close” to a deal, but Democrats’ insistence on adding a condition to stop Trump from withholding money Congress has already appropriated has become the final sticking point.
Lawmakers weigh more judges: A House Judiciary subcommittee will meet today to discuss the need for additional judgeships. As federal judges halt Trump administration executive actions, House Republicans have been mulling drastic intervention in the federal judiciary, including impeaching those judges who block Trump’s agenda. But any legislative solution likely won’t go over well with Senate Democrats.

Meredith Lee Hill, Ben Leonard, Jennifer Scholtes and Hailey Fuchs contributed to this report.

Want this in your inbox before 5 a.m.? Subscribe to the Inside Congress newsletter here.

Congress

Pence-backed think tank joins push to keep kids’ safety bills out of AI package

Published

3 hours ago

June 17, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

More than a dozen groups including former Vice President Mike Pence’s Advancing American Freedom are urging Senate Commerce Committee leaders to reject efforts to attach kids’ online safety measures to a national artificial intelligence framework, according to a letter shared exclusively with Blue Light News.

The groups argue that the proposed measures could undermine users’ free speech rights while creating new risk to privacy and data security. Their push comes as lawmakers weigh broader AI legislation, and follows reports last week that Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) is working with the White House to shore up support for a kids’ safety package that could ultimately preempt some state laws on AI.

The Blackburn-led measure is expected to include the Senate version of the Kids Online Safety Act, which includes a “duty of care” requiring companies to design their products with an eye toward preventing harm to children, the NO FAKES Act and the App Store Accountability Act. It’s not yet clear how aggressively it would preempt state action on narrow issues such as verifying users’ ages on social media.

Think tanks including the libertarian R Street Institute, the Taxpayers Protection Alliance, and industry group NetChoice, are among the 13 total signatories. They take issue primarily with ASAA, which would require app store platforms such as Google and Apple to verify users’ ages, and KOSA.

The coalition is alarmed by age verification requirements that could require users to submit personal information to digital databases vulnerable to data breaches and hacks. It also takes issue with parental consent provisions, which would “inevitably require even more intrusive data gathering to prove both the identity of the parent and his or her status as the child’s legal guardian,” the letter reads.

KOSA is also problematic, according to the coalition, because of its duty of care provision. It argues this would infringe on users’ First Amendment speech rights by “requiring online platforms to suppress certain kinds of content.”

Meta helped kill KOSA two years ago after raising similar free speech concerns with the bill to Speaker Mike Johnson, though it has since dropped its opposition because Blackburn’s package is expected to include language preempting state AI laws, as POLITICO exclusively reported Tuesday.

Congress

‘Un-American’: Democrats attack Trump’s uneven disaster response

Published

4 hours ago

June 17, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Democratic senators Wednesday attacked President Donald Trump’s approach to disseminating disaster aid as “unconscionable,” “shameful” and “un-American.”

At a confirmation hearing for Trump’s nominee to run the Federal Emergency Management Agency, three Democrats cited an article by POLITICO showing that the president had approved 89 percent of disaster requests from Republican-led states compared to 23 percent of requests from states led by Democrats. No president has distributed disaster aid at such uneven levels going back to at least 1981, when Ronald Reagan took office.

“Denying over 75 percent of requests from states that are led by representatives of another party is unconscionable,” said Sen. Gary Peters of Michigan, the top Democrat on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, displaying a large poster of a chart included in the news article.

“Given this stark data, what other conclusions can one draw other than that the president is using federal disaster assistance to punish states that elect Democrats?” Peters asked Cameron Hamilton, who would be the first permanent FEMA administrator in Trump’s current term. The committee did not vote Wednesday on Hamilton’s nomination.

“The idea that Americans who need help in the wake of a tornado or a flood or a hurricane should be treated differently based upon politics is shameful. It is un-American,” Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.) told Hamilton.

Hamilton avoided answering questions about the discrepancy as he tried to assure senators.

“If confirmed, my focus will be to ensure that FEMA is objective, is fair and reasonable, follows the law, and is consistent in the approach to how we adjudicate claims and requests for disasters,” Hamilton told Peters.

“You still can’t answer questions about what happened while you were there,” Peters shot back, noting that Hamilton was FEMA’s acting administrator for part of 2025. “I don’t trust that that’s what you’re going to do because it didn’t seem like you did it when you were there before.”

The sharp comments came the day after 16 Democratic senators along with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) sent a letter to White House budget director Russ Vought citing the Blue Light News article to ask for details about every disaster request Trump has handled, including internal FEMA documents.

“There is no politicization to the President’s decisions on disaster relief,” White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement to Blue Light News’s E&E News.

Hamilton ran FEMA from the start of Trump’s term until he was fired on May 9, 2025, after contradicting the administration by testifying that FEMA provides essential services to the country. Trump and then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem had said they were considering eliminating the agency.

During Hamilton’s 15 weeks at FEMA last year, Trump denied a disaster request for Washington state that had been submitted by Gov. Jay Inslee (D) in late 2024, shortly before he left office.

FEMA’s own analysis of Inslee’s request found that storms and flooding had caused $34 million in damage, which is more than double the agency’s financial threshold to qualify for disaster aid. Trump and Inslee had harshly criticized each other during Trump’s first term.

Hassan asked Hamilton what he would do if Trump rejected a request for disaster aid to punish Democrats.

“Well, that’s a very odd hypothetical. I don’t believe the president would do that. But I will tell you that my oath of office requires that I follow and obey the law,” Hamilton replied.

“You all are going to have to think about what you will do when he reverses your decision, completely based on politics, which as I said would be immoral and un-American,” Hassan replied.

Federal law gives presidents exclusive authority to approve or deny requests for disaster aid. FEMA recommends whether aid should be approved or denied based on an estimated cost of repairs.

Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D) recalled what she described as an unusual action by Trump after Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) sought disaster aid last year following an ice storm that demolished electricity infrastructure in northern Michigan. Trump approved some disaster aid but denied Whitmer’s request for aid to repair the damaged equipment. Trump eventually reversed his denial and approved the infrastructure aid after heavy lobbying from Michigan officials.

“It’s just hard to rationalize how many disasters have been approved for aid in Republican states versus Democratic states,” Slotkin said. “Republicans would be screaming bloody murder if the stats were reversed.”

Congress

OMB nominee touts plan to give Trump appointees power to kill grants

Published

6 hours ago

June 17, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

President Donald Trump’s nominee for the No. 2 post at the White House budget office told lawmakers Wednesday that the administration will stop federal cash from flowing to “divisive ideologies” under new grant rules in the works.

Hal Duncan, who is seeking Senate confirmation to serve as deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget, said during his confirmation hearing that the White House will ensure federal grants are aligned with Trump’s priorities by changing the way more than $1 trillion is approved each year.

“The ultimate deciders of these grants will be the political employees at the agencies,” Duncan noted in testimony before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

The White House proposed changes last month that would put political appointees in charge of blessing or nixing awards to state and local governments, community groups, education institutions and nonprofit organizations. The result, Duncan said, will be that the administration will more easily head off fraud and no federal dollars will go to “divisive DEI ideologies, woke gender ideologies, illegal immigration.”

The administration is expected to finalize these plans as soon as this summer.

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) touted the proposal as a way to ensure federal money goes to “things that President Trump actually ran on — his causes.”

But Democrats are raising concern that the Trump administration will use the new approval process to deny federal support for groups or governments that don’t boost Trump.

“That really sounds to me like you all are trying to turn the entire federal government into this one big slush fund to reward those aligned with the administration and punish everyone else,” Washington Sen. Patty Murray, the Senate’s top Democratic appropriator, told Duncan on Tuesday, during his first confirmation hearing before the Budget Committee.

Both committees must vote in the coming weeks to advance Duncan’s nomination to the Senate floor for a confirmation vote by the full chamber. He is already serving in the role as acting deputy director.