Congress

Capitol agenda: Johnson’s next battles

Published

1 year ago

February 14, 2025

Speaker Mike Johnson muscled his budget blueprint through committee. That will likely be the easy part.

Late Thursday the House Budget Committee approved a resolution in a party-line vote that will allow Republicans in the chamber to move forward on their one-bill strategy to pass President Donald Trump’s agenda on the border, energy and tax cuts. Conservatives had threatened a potential revolt over demands for more spending cuts but came around after leaders offered an amendment that would shrink the amount of tax cuts Republicans can pursue if they don’t cut $2 trillion in spending.

While that change appeased hard-liners for now, other serious fault lines remain. The most politically vulnerable Republicans are concerned the cuts will have to come out of Medicaid, food assistance and other programs for low-income Americans — a prospect they fear could cost them their seats. And other GOP members from high-tax blue states are worried there’s no room to adjust the SALT deduction.

Johnson’s razor-thin majority means he has almost no margin for error when he plans to bring the budget outlining broad parameters on President Donald Trump’s agenda to the floor later this month. Senate Republicans are throwing the speaker a lifeline by waiting to confirm Rep. Elise Stefanik as UN ambassador. But they’re still squeezing him by moving forward on their two-bill plan versus Johnson’s one.

The Senate could take a first procedural step on its budget blueprint as soon as Tuesday night — a timeline Majority Leader John Thune hasn’t set in stone but hasn’t ruled out, either.

Meanwhile, Johnson and Hakeem Jeffries are fanning the flames of the looming government funding fight. Johnson has accused Democrats of sending counter-offers they know are “not deliverable.” Jeffries, the minority leader, fired back in a Thursday press conference that Democrats are “engaging in good faith” and “House Republicans have chosen to walk away.”

The people actually at the negotiating table see it differently. Top Senate appropriator Susan Collins told reporters Thursday “that’s not true,” adding that “there are definitely talks going on.” Rep. Rosa DeLauro, House Democrats’ top appropriator, said Thursday that “we are close on a number of things.”

But time is running short. It’s a month before the shutdown deadline, and it typically takes lawmakers that long to close out negotiations on the dozen appropriations bills once they agree on “topline” spending levels.

GOP leaders are now privately considering a continuing resolution to fund the government at current levels through the end of the fiscal year, along with wildfire aid and other provisions, according to a person familiar with the matter who was granted anonymity to speak candidly. House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole said Thursday morning he’d yet to talk to the speaker about a stopgap bill, and Collins told reporters that she was “hopeful” it wouldn’t come to that.

House Republicans would likely need some Democratic support if it does, given conservatives’ disdain for short-term spending measures. But DeLauro doesn’t seem keen to help there: “They’ll have to pass it,” DeLauro said of Republicans. “That’s the job of the majority.”

What else we’re watching next week:

Nominations: The Senate will continue churning through Trump’s nominees, planning votes to confirm Howard Lutnick as Commerce secretary and advance Kash Patel as FBI director on Tuesday night. The Senate is also expected to vote to confirm Kelly Loeffler as SBA administrator next week, while Linda McMahon is set to get a committee vote on Thursday.
Chavez-DeRemer: Former Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer’s committee hearing is scheduled for Wednesday after it was postponed this week. The Labor secretary nominee will likely need some Democratic votes to make it through the HELP Committee. But Democrats who initially supported her for her pro-labor positions may be less inclined as they continue to vote against most of Trump’s nominees in protest of federal spending cuts.
Tax talks: Senate Republican leaders told Trump in a letter that they will oppose a short-term extension of tax cuts on Thursday, as the House discusses that option as a way to drive down costs. The senators said any extension of the tax cuts that lapse at the end of the year “must” be permanent — a potential headache as the two chambers battle over their one- vs. two-track plans.

Congress

Jack Smith invited to testify before Senate next month

Published

3 hours ago

August 3, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Jack Smith, the former special counsel who brought criminal charges against President Donald Trump, has been invited to testify Sept. 22 before the Senate Judiciary Committee, according to an invitation from Chair Chuck Grassley reviewed by Blue Light News.

Smith previously testified before the House Judiciary Committee in January, but Grassley (R-Iowa) and his team have been probing Smith and his investigations for months.

Grassley recently revealed that Smith obtained text messages that 44 members of Congress sent to White House officials during the waning months of Trump’s first term leading up to and around the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack.

Grassley’s texts were among those accessed by Smith’s team, along with Sens. Mike Lee (R-Utah), Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Tom Cotton (R-Ark.).

“In the process of a deeply flawed, weaponized investigation, Jack Smith subpoenaed phone toll records from a dozen senators, scooped up text messages from over 40 members of Congress, and subpoenaed the private communications and financial records of hundreds of other Republican entities and individuals,” Grassley said in a statement.

“He needs to answer directly to Congress for his actions,” Grassley added. “Smith has requested to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee, and our committee looks forward to hearing from him as part of Congress’ investigation into Arctic Frost and his time as Special Counsel. Smith must be honest and forthcoming in his answers, because the American people deserve nothing less than full transparency and accountability.”

Lawyers for Smith did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

During the January hearing, Republicans focused on technicalities of how Smith investigated the probe into Trump’s election interference, such as whether he properly signed his oath of office and whether he was sufficiently versed on the Constitution’s “speech or debate” clause that protects members of Congress from criminal investigation for their lawmaking actions.

Congress

Chuck Edwards recommended for censure by House Ethics Committee

Published

3 hours ago

August 3, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The House Ethics Committee recommended Monday that lawmakers censure Rep. Chuck Edwards for engaging in “persistent unprofessional and inappropriate conduct towards two young female staffers” — cataloguing multiple episodes of sexual harassment by the married lawmaker.

Censure is the most severe punishment the panel can recommend short of expulsion, requiring targeted members to submit to a public shaming on the floor. The bipartisan panel said it plans to bring a privileged resolution to a vote once the House returns to session later this month.

A spokesperson for Edwards, 65, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In a 15-page rebuttal, lawyers for Edwards said that the Ethics Committee “failed to demonstrate that either of the two staffers expressed discomfort to Representative Edwards regarding his conduct with them.” They also rejected the need for censure, noting that it has been used “sparingly in this context and directed only at matters of severe sexual misconduct.”

The panel itself released a trove of evidence including emails, text messages and photographs showing how Edwards had insinuated himself into intimate aspects of their lives.

Edwards, the committee found, made comments on the appearance of two young female staffers in his congressional office, telling them they looked “pretty” or “breathtaking” and made a comment on one staffer’s weight. He also lavished the young women with gifts, including purses valued at more than $1,000, as well as guns, shoes, flowers and one-on-one dinners.

Text messages from one of the women showed Edwards at one point sent her more than 20 containers of ice cream because, he said, she needed “a lot of cheering up!”

Sexual harassment is prohibited by House rules and federal law, and the committee found that Edwards violated “the spirit of the House’s prohibitions on sexual harassment and unwanted advances, as well as the requirement to act in a manner that reflects credibly upon the House.”

The report found Edwards brought one of the staffers to a holiday event at the White House, gave her flowers and texted her how he was “so excited about tonight” and that he pressured her to continue the night with him after the event. Edwards told the committee he accompanied that staffer to her home in Virginia because he “felt uncomfortable dumping a young lady on the street.”

Edwards also talked to that staffer and others about going to strip clubs in Washington, the report says.

The panel concluded that Edwards did not engage in sexual activity with either of the women, nor did he explicitly proposition them or other staff members for sex. Edwards, who is facing a competitive race for reelection in his western North Carolina district, cooperated with the probe, the committee said.

In one instance, the panel found, Edwards skipped House votes one night to decorate the second staffer’s Christmas tree. He also went out drinking and gambling with her. On another occasion, he recited a poem at her going-away party in his office and cried during that incident, making his staff noticeably uncomfortable.

When the second staffer left his office, Edwards helped her move back to North Carolina and sent her a handwritten letter in which he described her as “the most amazing woman” and that she had “written a complex chapter in my heart that I will never stop reading.”

Edwards told the committee that letter was not romantic.

“It was only to imply that we had a relationship on so many different levels — on a congressional level, on a professional level, on a friendship level, on a helping-one-another-out-with-our-chores-and-responsibility level,” he said.

Congress

Cornyn, Tillis confirm they will vote for Blanche

Published

7 hours ago

August 3, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has a clear path to the Senate Judiciary Committee advancing his nomination to the permanent job after two GOP holdouts confirmed Monday they would vote for him.

The statement from Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) comes after the late-night announcement Sunday of a Justice Department agreement to clarify a controversial May settlement agreement between President Donald Trump and the IRS.

A successful Judiciary vote Tuesday would set Blanche up for confirmation on the Senate floor later this week, before the chamber breaks for August recess.

“We want to express our gratitude to Mr. Blanche and his staff for working with us on this, and we look forward to voting to advance his nomination out of the Senate Judiciary Committee soon,” Cornyn and Tillis said in a joint statement.

The senators suggested their agreement with Blanche also satisfies the concerns of several other Republican senators off the Judiciary Committee who have raised concerns about the “Anti-Weaponization Fund” created in the original settlement, as well as provisions immunizing Trump and his family from some tax audits.

“We are pleased that the Department of Justice has issued a formal order terminating the anti-weaponization fund. Additionally, the Department has acknowledged in a binding written order that the audit settlement is limited to the plaintiffs and the scope does not extend beyond the defendants in the lawsuit, the IRS and the Treasury, addressing concerns that multiple of our Republican colleagues share,” Cornyn and Tillis said.

Sens. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Susan Collins of Maine, John Curtis of Utah and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska are among the other Republicans who have expressed concerns about the payout fund. Blanche recently visited Alaska and announced a flurry of settlements benefiting Alaska as he courts Murkowski’s vote.