Congress

Ballroom, gas-tax fights illustrate GOP’s affordability pickle

Published

4 weeks ago

May 13, 2026

Americans are furious about the rising cost of living, and a series of internal battles on Capitol Hill this week is laying bare why Republicans are struggling to do anything about it.

House and Senate Republicans are facing divisions over a gas-tax holiday being demanded by President Donald Trump, not to mention housing and energy permitting bills that have stalled for months.

Meanwhile, a long-term immigration enforcement bill that could be the last major piece of GOP legislation before the midterms has become engulfed by the inclusion of a billion-dollar Secret Service funding request that has put a spotlight on Trump’s controversial White House ballroom project.

The scale of the political challenges facing Republicans were further underscored Tuesday with the administration’s latest cost estimate for the Iran war surpassing $29 billion and a brutal inflation report showing gas, grocery and housing prices surging last month amid the conflict.

“I don’t know that the Congress is doing a whole lot — that’s the real issue,” said Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.). “My advice to Congress would be, it might be good for us to do something on cost of living. … It seems like voters are making it very clear that they want some relief.”

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) also offered a blunt assessment of the optics the party is facing as they try to approve the Secret Service funding, which can be used for parts of Trump’s ballroom project, as Americans deal with high gas prices

“Not good,” she said.

Secret Service Director Sean Curran met with Senate Republicans Tuesday to make the case for his agency’s staggering request, but several GOP senators said afterward that they aren’t satisfied with the explanations administration officials have so far provided.

Even some senior House Republicans are airing public doubts about the security funding — about $220 million of which could end up being spent as part of the ballroom project, according to a breakdown given to senators and obtained by Blue Light News.

House Budget Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) said in an interview Tuesday he did not doubt the need for additional security for Trump and other Secret Service protectees but would “reserve judgment” on the $1 billion request as he seeks an “itemized” list of what it would fund.

“I hope it’s narrowly tailored to getting [immigration enforcement] funded and restoring the safety and security of the American people,” said Arrington, who initially wanted affordability and other measures added to the party-line bill.

Curran’s visit to Capitol Hill Tuesday was part of a White House lobbying blitz for the security funding, with Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin and White House legislative affairs director James Braid making pitches to other groups of Republicans in closed-door meetings Tuesday and Wednesday.

One member granted anonymity to speak candidly said it could get “ugly” with the White House seemingly determined to get it done despite GOP lawmakers’ protests. Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), a key centrist, said in an interview Tuesday that the $1 billion request was simply “not happening here” in the House.

Republicans believe they’ve already taken some steps to address cost-of-living concerns, including the tax cuts included in last year’s “big, beautiful bill” that they hope Americans are beginning to feel benefits from.

But the ballroom security squabble has handed Democrats something they view as a potent political cudgel heading into November.

“Instead of listening to the American people, Donald Trump and the GOP put forward a reconciliation bill that would force Americans to pay for Trump’s billion-dollar-ballroom and tens of billions of dollars more for Trump’s masked agents while including zero — zero — dollars to bring down Americans’ costs,” Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said on the Senate floor Tuesday.

The issue for congressional Republicans is that many of the ideas currently being batted around to address high prices divide their ranks, giving them an unclear path to Trump’s desk.

Senate Republicans pointed to a long-brewing permitting overhaul Tuesday as a way to potentially reduce energy costs — but the proposal has remained just out of reach for years now. And, according to two attendees, GOP senators urged Speaker Mike Johnson to pass their housing bill without changes, believing it could give the party a quick way to show voters they hear their concerns.

“I think it gets at the core issue, the heart of the matter for most voters, which is affordability,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune said about the need to pass the housing bill.

The closed-door lunch came after a group of GOP senators met with Trump Monday at the White House, where they discussed the fate of a housing bill that passed the Senate on an 89-10 vote in March. Afterward, Trump went on Truth Social and urged Congress to quickly pass the legislation.

But House Republican leaders are signaling they want to make further changes, which would require it to be passed in the Senate a second time — even though White House officials are strongly pushing back on that idea.

“I’d just be happy if they do something,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said Tuesday, blaming “one or two” House Republicans for the impasse: “They’ve been holding it up since God was a baby. Their reasons for holding it up run from substantive to ‘my dog ate my homework.’”

Trump, for his part, has made a series of comments that have only fueled accusations that his party isn’t focused enough on affordability.

Asked Tuesday as he left the White House for his overseas trip to China whether Americans’ finances figured into his approach to the Iran conflict, he gave an answer Democrats immediately pounced on.

“I don’t think about America’s financial situation,” he said. “I don’t think about anybody. I think about one thing: We cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon.”

Trump did, however, throw his support behind a modest cost-of-living measure Monday, saying he wanted to suspend the 18.4-cent-per-gallon federal gas tax to alleviate Iran-related price hikes.

House GOP leaders, however, are not thrilled with the idea. They are hoping the White House finds a way for Trump to take some steps to lower gas prices through executive actions and leave Congress out of it, according to five people granted anonymity to describe internal conversations.

There are also scores of Republicans, for instance, who publicly admonished then-President Joe Biden for floating the same idea amid in 2022 after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and, in the words of one of the people, would have to “eat shit” if they go back on that position now.

Thune didn’t rule out an eventual vote on a gas-tax holiday, but he characterized proposals from Hawley and others as “trial balloons.” He suggested the move could impact highway projects without meaningfully lowering gas prices.“The question is, would it get passed on to the consumer … or would it get absorbed in the supply chain somehow?” he said.

Johnson told reporters Tuesday suspending the federal gas tax was an “intriguing” idea but added that Republicans have to work through any “unintended consequences” of such a move and will continue to discuss it.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise was also noncommittal: “Obviously we all want to see gas prices come back down, and when the Iran conflict is resolved, they will, and they’ll come down quickly. I don’t think anybody disputes that.”

“You’re seeing the president work really hard to try to get this resolved,” he added. “Hopefully it’s soon.”

But the top Republicans may be forced into action as rank-and-file backers of a gas-tax holiday, such as Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.), arguing Congress needs to act quickly to pass a bill before the Memorial Day recess starts in just over a week.

That sense of urgency is not shared by other GOP lawmakers who view a gas-tax holiday as an ineffective Band-Aid — including Sen. Jim Justice (R-W.Va.), who compared it to “taking aspirin for cancer,” and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who identified a more consequential driver of high prices.

“I think instead of suspending the tax, we should suspend the war,” he said.

Mia McCarthy, Riley Rogerson and Jennifer Scholtes contributed to this report.

Congress

Rick Scott lifts holds on Coast Guard promotions

Published

6 hours ago

June 11, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Sen. Rick Scott said Thursday he had lifted his hold on Coast Guard promotions as he works to resolve a dispute between the service branch and a shipbuilder in his state.

The Florida Republican said in a statement that he cares “deeply about these Coast Guard promotions” and that “though we’re still not done, I’m lifting these holds as all parties have been working together in good faith and are moving towards an amenable agreement that gets ships built and is fair to US taxpayers.”

Scott added that “the process still needs to be better” and that he would “fight to ensure there is more oversight and accountability of the Coast Guard and that we fix the Coast Guard procurement process going forward.”

Scott initially placed the hold in April on the elevation of officers within the service, preventing the Senate from approving promotions via unanimous consent.

Former Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem in 2025 scrapped plans for two advanced cutters being manufactured at Panama City-based Eastern Shipbuilding Group. The shipyard announced in November it would stop work on the two remaining boats “due to significant financial strain caused by the program’s structure and conditions.”

Scott had been a longtime booster of the partnership between Eastern and the Coast Guard and said in April he had been working with the administration to resolve the dispute but was struggling to get traction.

While the Senate could have held roll-call votes to sidestep Scott’s blockage, service officer promotions are usually noncontroversial and leaders rarely choose to expend valuable and finite floor time to advance them if there is not unanimous consent.

Congress

Senate panel approves Department of War name change

Published

7 hours ago

June 11, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The Senate Armed Services Committee voted this week to formally change the Pentagon’s name to the Department of War, moving a significant step closer to solidifying President Donald Trump’s rebrand of the Defense Department as permanent.

The move came during the committee’s closed-door deliberations over its defense policy bill, according to Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), who announced the name change in explaining his vote against the legislation.

“It’s a juvenile move that sadly describes the reality of a president who has abandoned meaningful diplomacy in favor of starting doubtful wars in multiple locations and threatening even more,” he said in a statement.

Trump authorized the War Department moniker last year as part of a broader effort to present a more aggressive military to the world. The Pentagon has used it since, as have many Republicans on Capitol Hill.

But Congress must sign off for the name change to stick — and votes on both sides of the Capitol make it closer than ever to becoming a reality.

Details of the Armed Services vote, including who pushed for the change, were not immediately public. The committee voted 18-9 to advance the bill Wednesday evening and released initial details of the legislation Thursday.

The House Armed Services Committee approved the rebranding last week in its draft of the annual authorization legislation. The measure was adopted there in a narrow, party-line vote.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth quickly praised the decision. “The Department of War will officially be restored soon,” he wrote in a social media post after the House panel’s vote.

The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that a full renaming of the department could cost as much as $125 million. But supporters have argued changing the name would more accurately reflect the focus and strength of the department, sending a message to potential adversaries.

The name change’s inclusion in both the House and Senate panel’s drafts of the authorization bill — which has passed Congress annually for the last six decades — signals that the rebrand has a strong chance of becoming law.

Congress

Judge finds Lander not guilty in 26 Federal Plaza obstruction case

Published

7 hours ago

June 11, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

NEW YORK — A federal judge ruled Thursday that former New York City Comptroller Brad Lander is not guilty of misdemeanor obstruction for blocking an elevator while protesting outside an immigrant holding area.

Lander was hit with the obstruction charge last September while demonstrating in support of detained immigrants at 26 Federal Plaza in lower Manhattan. He was offered a deal to drop the charge but opted instead for a trial to bring attention to the federal government’s immigration policies.

Lander said he was there with state legislators to view the facility’s conditions, not to purposefully block an elevator — and that he would have moved if asked. In reading his findings, Judge Henry Ricardo described Lander’s testimony as consistent with video evidence, noting that his movements didn’t suggest he was purposefully trying to block the elevator and that Lander appeared “tired and a bit resigned.”

“No offense to Mr. Lander,” the judge said.

Lander — who entered the courtroom in good spirits and holding a Knicks hat — told reporters after the verdict: “I didn’t feel tired.”

“I felt an urgency to show up that day and try to fight what ICE is doing,” he said.

After a month’s delay, Lander finally had his first day in court Wednesday — less than two weeks before the primary election — bringing immigration even more to the forefront in the waning days of his campaign against Democratic Rep. Dan Goldman.

During the six-hour trial, Assistant U.S. Attorney Ariel Cohen framed it as a straightforward case — that it was well-documented Lander was sitting in front of an elevator and didn’t move after being told to do so multiple times.

Cohen pointed to Lander singing “We Shall Not Be Moved,” a well-known protest song popularized during the Civil Rights movement, while sitting in front of the elevator. But Ricardo was not swayed by that argument, reasoning that it was a chaotic moment and Lander was, in fact, moved, despite the song he was singing.

“Actions speak louder than words,” he said.

Ricardo said the government failed to prove Lander purposefully obstructed an elevator. He also said he didn’t weigh what was being protested or whether the protest was just — a stated goal for Lander in deciding to take the case to trial. Instead, Wednesday’s proceedings focused largely on elevator logistics and signage at 26 Federal Plaza, not the Trump administration’s immigration efforts.

“Do I wish that they had granted our discovery motions, sought harder to prove the case and given us the ability to hold ICE accountable? Yes, I wish that,” Lander said after the verdict.

Immigration policy has emerged as a flashpoint between Lander and Goldman, who is seeking a third term, especially as the Trump administration threatens to ramp up enforcement in the state.

Goldman, who often highlights his oversight visits at immigrant detention centers and his “triage center” to support detainees near 26 Federal Plaza, has repeatedly criticized Lander for his approach to immigration. On Wednesday, he referred to Lander’s case as “performative” and “self-promoting.” At a debate last week, Goldman chided him for the rhetorical refrain that he puts his “body on the line” for immigrants and for fundraising off of it.

“While Brad never did get the information he sought from ICE, I have all of that information from my weekly oversight visits and would be happy to brief him,” Goldman said in a statement.

Lander, who frequently conducts court watching shifts, was also arrested at 26 Federal Plaza while escorting migrants from immigration hearings last June, ahead of the mayoral primary. No charges were filed then. Lander on Thursday said he thinks the arrests are an effort “to intimidate people into not participating as part of that court watching, ICE watching movement.”

In response to a question about Goldman’s suggestion his actions are political theater, Lander claimed he wasn’t running for anything in September when he was arrested: “We were there to show up for our neighbors and the rule of law. This is much bigger than we are.”

When asked if the legal proceedings have been a distraction from his campaign, he said some of the most “meaningful work of the last year” has been “being part of a movement of Americans who are fighting back against the fascist White House and rogue ICE agents.”