Congress

Bill Cassidy offered RFK Jr. an out. He didn’t take it.

Published

2 years ago

January 30, 2025

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s bid to lead the Department of Health and Human Services could come down to one senator. That senator, Bill Cassidy (R-La.), said he was deeply torn about his vote during a hearing of the Senate committee in charge of health policy on Thursday.

Cassidy, the panel’s chair and a gastroenterologist before entering politics, spoke of his own experience with life-saving vaccines and repeatedly asked Kennedy to disavow his past anti-vaccine advocacy.

Kennedy said he’d review the evidence and “apologize for any statement that misled people” if proven wrong, but also indicated he didn’t think he was wrong when he spent years linking vaccines to rising autism and chaired an anti-vaccine advocacy group.

Appearing frustrated, Cassidy said, “I’ve got to figure that out for my vote” and said he might reach out to Kennedy over the weekend to talk about it more.

Cassidy’s vote is critical because he also sits on the Finance Committee, which heard Kennedy’s testimony yesterday and will cast the vote on whether to recommend Kennedy’s confirmation to the Senate. The Republicans have a one-seat edge there, so if all the members of the Democratic caucus oppose Kennedy, Cassidy could deny him the panel’s recommendation.

Cassidy could also allow Kennedy’s nomination to proceed to the Senate floor without the Finance panel’s recommendation, but Majority Leader John Thune told Semafor earlier this week that it wouldn’t be ideal to bring another one of President Donald Trump’s nominees — Tulsi Gabbard, who is also facing confirmation hearings to lead the nation’s intelligence agencies this week — to the floor without a favorable committee vote.

When Cassidy asked for a “yes” or “no” as to whether Kennedy would unequivocally say hepatitis B and measles vaccines do not cause autism, Kennedy qualified his answer: “If the data is there, I will absolutely do that.”

At the end of the hearing, Cassidy returned to the question, reading the title of a study that found no link between vaccines and autism.

Cassidy seemed to plead with Kennedy to renounce his past claims: “Convince me,” Cassidy said.

But Kennedy declined. “You and I can meet about it,” he said — adding that he would bring his own studies, some of which show “the opposite.”

Over the course of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee hearing, Kennedy said he would make declarations on vaccine safety “if the data is there” or if presented with further evidence.

Democrats on Cassidy’s health panel quoted Kennedy statements questioning vaccine safety, arguing that the vociferousness of his anti-vaccine views belied the assurances he was offering Cassidy about studying the data.

“There have been, as I understand, dozens of studies done all over the world that make it very clear that vaccines do not cause autism,” the panel’s ranking member, Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said. “I heard you just say, if the evidence is there. The evidence is there.”

Democrats also raised Kennedy’s shaky responses on Medicare and Medicaid, arguing that he didn’t understand the programs he would be in charge of managing. Cassidy had questioned Kennedy about the programs when the Finance Committee heard from Kennedy yesterday.

But Republicans on the committee made the case that Kennedy’s desire to disrupt the public health establishment and concentrate on finding and combating the root causes of disease — the focus of Kennedy’s “Make America Healthy Again” — movement were refreshing.

Some also argued Kennedy’s skepticism about vaccines was healthy and that the nation’s top health official should be willing to question scientific dogma.

Kentucky Republican Rand Paul turned toward Cassidy and argued that in some cases government guidance on vaccination was debatable, citing the recommendation that all infants receive the hepatitis B vaccine and that children and healthy, young people get Covid shots. “You’re not going to let him have the debate because you’re just going to criticize and say, ‘It is this and admit to it or we’re not going to appoint you.’”

That prompted an exchange with Cassidy over the necessity of infant vaccination for hepatitis B, with Cassidy arguing it was.

Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) later commended Kennedy for questioning the vaccine schedule. “An issue that I have as a father of six is that when my kids come out from getting their vaccines they look like a freakin’ pin cushion,” he said. “When you start looking at the rise of autism, why wouldn’t we be looking at everything?”

Kennedy at times tried to assuage concerns about his anti-vaccine history, saying he would “restore vaccine uptake.” He repeatedly suggested that government leaders aren’t trustworthy and argued that is the reason many people refuse vaccines.

Democrats looked united in their opposition to Kennedy, but it wasn’t clear whether they could hope for any Republican allies beyond Cassidy.

Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Susan Collins (R-Maine), who have both shown a willingness to break from Trump, voting last week against his choice to lead the Pentagon, Pete Hegseth, suggested concern about Kennedy’s anti-vaccine work.

Murkowski was one of few senators to attend the entire hearing, but didn’t ask Kennedy about vaccination, and ended by questioning Kennedy about health care in Alaska. After the hearing, she said she didn’t think there was anything “brand new” from the hearing and declined to elaborate on how she’d vote.

Asked whether she was convinced Kennedy is not a vaccine skeptic, Murkowski said she was ignoring the question. But she went on to say that some questions were “telling,” that he seemed skeptical of the safety of some vaccines but not others.

“When the science has been out there for a long time and been proven, do you need to continue being the skeptic?” she asked after the hearing.

Collins arrived late to the hearing and asked Kennedy whether he’d invest in finding a vaccine for Lyme disease and whether he backed polio vaccination. Kennedy said yes.

Robert King contributed to this report.

Congress

Capitol agenda: Republicans hope Trump won’t dominate Dallas

Published

13 hours ago

September 8, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Republicans are hoping President Donald Trump won’t make this week’s GOP midterm convention all about himself.

The president — with his approval rating at record lows for his time in office amid the conflict in Iran, trade wars and inflation — is slated to be at the center of the two-day spectacle in Dallas beginning Wednesday.

GOP lawmakers, candidates, donors and party officials said in interviews they are counting on Trump to draw a contrast with Democrats rather than prosecute his personal grievances.

Rep. Riley Moore said in an interview the event is a “scene-setter” that should stay laser-focused on “what’s on the line” for voters in the election:

— GOP WINS: Republicans are eager for fresh promotion of the tax cuts in last year’s “One Big Beautiful Bill”, even if some don’t think Trump is the right spokesperson.

Though the first national TV ads funded by the president’s cash-rich political operation place him at the center, one touting provisions in the megabill was more up congressional Republicans’ alley. Several are hoping for that kind of focus at the convention.

“It’s incredibly important that we highlight what we’ve accomplished,” said Rep. Derrick Van Orden. “That’s the perfect venue for that.”

— DINGING DEMS: One consensus message Republicans want the convention oriented around is the choice between their legislative record and a Democratic Party they argue has moved way too far left.

“You’ve got Republicans that are campaigning on commonsense ideas. You’ve got Democrats that are being drawn to the absolute most extreme left of their party,” said Rep. Brian Jack, a deputy chair of the House GOP campaign arm. “So I expect each night to see that on full display.”

“The Democratic Party has taken a turn for the worse recently,” added Rep. Nick LaLota. “America needs to be quite aware of that as they make their decision here in November.”

LaLota is just one of scores of Republican members who are choosing not to travel to the convention — which has a price tag of $25,000 and up for lawmakers attending. Some of those Republicans said they have scheduling conflicts or simply want to campaign back home.

But they still have an interest in how the event goes off and what impression it gives voters.

“I’m going to look forward to listening to it on the radio as I’m driving down the road, going from one spot in my district to another,” Rep. Morgan Griffith said.

What else we’re watching:

— TRAHAN BYPASSES LEADERSHIP BID FOR AI —- Rep. Lori Trahan’s decision last week to forgo a leadership bid and instead focus on developing artificial intelligence policy surprised some of her colleagues. But in an interview Friday, Trahan brushed off the idea that efforts to broker a bipartisan AI deal thwarted her run to serve as Democrats’ vice chair. Instead, she said her work in the complex policy space had drummed up support from many House Democrats, but she ultimately wants to prioritize regulating the issue next year.

— ROUNDS AIDE’S SIDE GIG RAISES EYEBROWS — A senior staffer for Sen. Mike Rounds has quietly worked as a lobbyist for Meta and other high-profile clients. The unusual agreement for Robert Skjonsberg, who has worked for Rounds for over a decade, has raised questions from watchdog groups about ethics and possible conflicts of interest. Rounds spokesperson Dezmond Ward told Blue Light News his office’s general counsel consulted with the Senate’s ethics panel, “which provided guidance to make certain there was and is no conflict of interest.”

Mia McCarthy, Riley Rogerson, Kelsey Brugger and Jacob Wendler contributed to this report.

Congress

Republicans are hoping ‘Trump-a-palooza’ isn’t only about Trump

Published

16 hours ago

September 8, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

President Donald Trump will be at the center of this week’s GOP midterm convention. Many of his fellow Republicans are hoping he doesn’t make it all about him.

The parade of lawmakers, candidates, donors and party officials now headed to Dallas for the two-day spectacle are counting on Trump to make a compelling pitch on the national stage before voters hit the polls.

According to interviews with dozens of Republicans, they are largely hoping for a two-pronged approach aimed at getting the president’s committed supporters off the sidelines: a focus on what they call Democrats’ extreme positions and the accomplishments of the Republican Congress — most of which are now more than a year old.

“Communism vs. common sense,” Rep. Riley Moore (R-W.Va.) said in an interview, calling the event a “scene-setter” that should stay laser-focused on “what’s on the line” for voters in the election.

Republicans have reasons to be wary. Trump’s approval ratings are at record lows for his time in office, and many swing-district GOP lawmakers are torn between running from an unpopular president and alienating his base of committed supporters.

There is little evidence Trump is content to let rank-and-file Republicans run away from him. The first pair of national midterm ads funded by his cash-rich political operation put Trump at the very center.

One ad begins with businessman Dana White extolling Trump as “the toughest, most resilient person that I’ve ever met.”

The other is more up congressional Republicans’ alley, with a Trump voiceover running through a litany of tax cuts included in last year’s “One Big Beautiful Bill.”

Even if not all agree Trump is the party’s best spokesperson at this point, they are eager to see a new effort to promote the tax cuts, which were enacted in July 2025, and want to see them touted anew in Dallas.

“It’s incredibly important that we highlight what we’ve accomplished,” Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R-Wis.) said in an interview. “That’s the perfect venue for that.”

“It’s a great opportunity for us to brag about what the Republican Party has done the last year and a half,” added Rep. Craig Goldman (R-Texas). “So certainly talking about the One Big Beautiful Bill.”

While Van Orden and Goldman are attending the convention, which kicks off Wednesday and ends Thursday, many other lawmakers and candidates are staying back in their districts. Some of those Republicans said they have scheduling conflicts or simply want to campaign back home.

But there are also qualms about Trump’s obsession with priorities that many of them consider off-message ahead of the midterms — such as pressuring Congress to take up the GOP elections bill known as the SAVE America Act.

As GOP lawmakers begged Trump to get serious about tackling the high cost of living, the president has instead openly scoffed at “affordability” as an issue concocted by Democrats to hurt Republicans.

He refused for months to help pass a major legislative package over the summer designed to help lower housing costs, and his trade wars and ongoing conflict with Iran have contributed to persistent inflation. A recent import deal designed to address rising beef prices came at the cost of upsetting American cattlemen.

Speaker Mike Johnson brushed off a question last week about the risk of having candidates show up at a Trump-focused event given his disapproval ratings.

“It was the president’s idea, which is why he’s getting credit for it, and it’s rightfully so,” Johnson said. “I think it’s going to be an extraordinary opportunity for us to get a couple of nights on national television to talk about our extraordinary record of achievement.”

Other Republicans said the president was well positioned to send a message of “promises made, promises kept.”

“Politics 101 is just telling folks what you’re going to do, and then come to Washington and do it, and then go back and tell them what you did,” said Rep. Mark Harris (R-N.C.). “When you look at President Trump’s agenda, securing the border, we’ve done that. That he wanted to make the tax cuts permanent, we’ve done that.”

“Peace through strength — and I think we have moved in that direction,” he added. “Obviously, we got detoured to this journey over in Iran.”

If there is one consensus message Republicans want the convention oriented around, it’s the choice between the legislative record Trump will be touting and a Democratic Party that they argue has moved way too far to the left — especially as progressive candidates, some of them democratic socialists, continue to win key primaries.

Rep. Brian Jack (R-Ga.), a deputy chair of the House GOP campaign arm, said “you’re going to see on full display each night a contrast that we’ve never seen before in politics.”

“You’ve got Republicans that are campaigning on commonsense ideas. You’ve got Democrats that are being drawn to the absolute most extreme left of their party,” he said. “So I expect each night to see that on full display.”

RNC national press secretary Natalie Baldassarre also said in a statement that the event would “put front and center Democrats’ desire to abolish police and prisons, raise costs, and strip away our freedoms,” while also promoting “Republicans’ historic achievements.”

“The Democratic Party has taken a turn for the worse recently,” added Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.), who is in a competitive race and not attending the convention. “America needs to be quite aware of that as they make their decision here in November.”

LaLota is just one of scores of Republican members who are choosing not to travel to the convention — which has a price tag of $25,000 and up for lawmakers attending — but who have an interest in how the event goes off and what impression it gives voters.

Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.) called the midterm convention — the first held since Democrats did them in the late 1970s and early 1980s — “an interesting concept” and said he would be paying close attention to the size of the television audience. But he said he would be back in his safe red district campaigning.

“I’m going to look forward to listening to it on the radio as I’m driving down the road, going from one spot in my district to another,” he said.

Jordain Carney and Meredith Lee Hill contributed to this report.

Congress

The House Democrat who’s making AI regulation her No. 1 priority

Published

16 hours ago

September 8, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Rep. Lori Trahan’s decision last week to forgo a leadership bid to instead focus on developing artificial intelligence policy surprised some of her colleagues. It also left some of them wondering whether her thwarted attempt to work across the aisle on the subject was what doomed her prospects.

In an interview Friday, the Massachusetts Democrat brushed off the idea that efforts to broker an AI deal with a Republican backfired. She said the opposite was true: Many House Democrats told her she should run for caucus vice chair because of her work in this complex policy space.

“Look, I spent August really thinking it through, and it came down to a simple question that I think a lot of people don’t ask themselves enough, and that’s just: What I’m most passionate about?” Trahan recalled.

It turned out that the chance to help Democrats formulate a vision for how to regulate a rapidly evolving industry was what she couldn’t pass up.

“When I commit to something,” she said, “I go all in.”

There’s no guarantee Trahan will be successful, with members of both parties reluctant to work together and slamming each other over the issue on the campaign trail. But Trahan isn’t retreating or shying away from her work with Rep. Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.).

She spoke with Blue Light News about how she sees the AI landscape from a political and policy perspective, capping off a week of major developments in Washington — including the introduction of an aggressive plan to pause development of superintelligence models, an escalation in Democratic attacks on Republicans for the rise of data centers, President Donald Trump’s vow to “Let Data Reign,” and new reporting about a tech industry giant’s attempts to talk Trump out of onerous regulations.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries came out swinging this past week in trying to pin the proliferation of data centers on Republicans. What do you think of Democratic messaging on this?

I do think that the Republicans are having trouble reconciling what the president is saying with what their constituents are demanding, and that, I’ll just say, people aren’t imagining this. They’re already feeling it … in their electric bill. They see it when a new data center gets proposed down the road.

They’re obviously reading headlines about AI models that break out of their own labs, and I think those worries are legitimate. So I don’t think the folks are necessarily antitechnology, but they want to know that somebody’s watching this — that the most powerful technology in human history isn’t running on the honor system, and right now, it basically is.

Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar has made a huge push for Democrats to be, as he put it, “AI populists.” What do you think of progressives trying to carve out a lane for themselves on AI, and what has your work with them on this issue been like?

I think for a long time, the hardest part of this job was convincing people that this is an issue that couldn’t wait. I think that part is largely over, right? AI is advancing at a staggering pace, and the risks are scaling right alongside the capabilities. So I think after a summer of breaches … members on both sides, they’re just done waiting, and I think you’re seeing a wave of proposals … I think that just reflects a new sense of urgency in Congress that I couldn’t be happier to see.

Casar and Sen. Bernie Sanders announced a plan to ban the development of AI “superintelligence” and pause work on cutting-edge models until an agency is stood up to monitor risk. What is your reaction to the proposal?

My team and I are still reviewing the bill, obviously gathering feedback from the safety community, so I’m not going to prejudge the details. Of course, I share the concern driving it. I mean, these companies are losing control of their own models, and they’ve said so themselves.

I’m always a little cautious about outright bans, moratoriums, or blanket pauses because you really only get one shot at something like that, and if you time it wrong, you can end up worse off. … You trigger a backlash that chokes off the chance to put sensible, durable guardrails in place in the future.

A permanent ban with no path to passage, that doesn’t protect anyone. … But right now I get most nervous that we’re not passing the bill that can pass, that matches sort of where we are right now, which is, models escaping their environment and us relying on the honor system from these companies.

You are referring to your bill with Obernolte, which would establish a national framework for regulating advanced AI models. What’s happening with it? You were pushing for committee action before the midterms. That seems all but impossible now.

The calendar isn’t on our side before the midterms … so I have shifted my focus to before the end of the year. I think that’s the realistic window to get this done this year. Jay and I are working our respective sides of the aisle. … I talked to a lot of rank-and-file members on both sides of the aisle, and they’re all scratching their heads, wondering why we’re not taking this up.

So why do you think it hasn’t moved?

I don’t sit in the minds or the rooms of Republican leadership. … I am worried that they are comfortable with the president sort of managing this through executive fiat rather than putting something in place that is durable and predictable.

I’m hoping that with internal pressure and with external pressure, that the leadership, Speaker [Mike] Johnson and Leader [Steve] Scalise, will take this up and debate it at a minimum.

What is your reaction to the phone call our colleagues reported on, where Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg urged Trump to scrap a plan to stand up a federal AI regulator?

I think that there are a lot of members of Congress who have ideas in terms of how this gets regulated.

Reasonable people can disagree on what regulatory construct we come up with. What I don’t think the American people agree with is that Mark Zuckerberg and President Trump are going to figure that out on a phone call.

Democrats have been fairly scattered on AI policy this Congress, and that could make it difficult for the party to unify around a policy platform while still negotiating with Republicans. How are you thinking about the next Congress?

I’m excited about next Congress just because I know when Democrats are in the majority, we’re going to get to work. … I think the fact that Democrats are talking about it a ton and we’re not under the thumb of the leader of our party, so that we can’t say or reflect any of the concerns that we hear back at home, it’s how it should be.

The fact that we’re able to have those conversations and we’re all coming from diverse places is a good thing. I think that’s what the American people want to see. They want to see us engage in every corner of the country in terms of concerns around AI and have a debate about it.

That’s not happening right now. Right now, we’re mostly just hearing from the president having a phone call with a rich tech executive or using export controls at his discretion.