Congress
Capitol agenda: Trump confirmations split Senate Dems
Senate Majority Leader John Thune is staring down a confirmation backlog of more than 130 nominees — with President Donald Trump pressing hard for progress this week. Democrats could theoretically help expedite a pre-recess flurry of confirmations, but without more details from Republicans, they are so far holding out.
“There are some that are bipartisan — like, Tim Kaine and I have a great Eastern District of Virginia [U.S.] attorney nominee,” Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) told Blue Light News Monday evening. “But [Republicans] also should go and release some of the funds that have already been appropriated that they and [Russ] Vought are holding on to. There has to be some exchange.”
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) managed to get her own deal during a committee vote last week. The Trump administration committed to distributing $75 million in “lifesaving” global assistance in exchange for the Foreign Relations ranking member’s vote to advance Mike Waltz’s UN ambassador nomination.
Thune’s hoping to strike a deal to fast-track dozens of confirmations through a mix of roll call votes, voice votes and/or unanimous consent requests. But Democrats could force him to file cloture on each nominee, which would in turn force Thune to keep the Senate in session into the weekend — and potentially beyond.
Democratic leaders are keeping all options on the table as they await a proposal from Republicans, one person granted anonymity to discuss private deliberations told Blue Light News. Some Democratic senators like Brian Schatz of Hawaii and Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin aren’t ruling out confirming a tranche of Trump nominees — though they say it depends who they are.
Other Democrats are opposed to any dealmaking at all: “Just to try to help them advance getting more people in office?” Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) told Blue Light News. “Why would we do that?”
The unspoken truth: Many Democratic senators want to start their summer break just as badly as their Republican colleagues do.
What else we’re watching:
— Appropriations status: The wheels could be coming off Thune’s plans to assemble an initial “minibus” of fiscal 2026 spending bills. Thune acknowledged to Blue Light News that he is still “trying to work off some holds” from senators objecting to bundling the various bills. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) became the latest headache, citing language in the agriculture bill that he said would “destroy” the hemp industry.
— Guardrails on TSA facial recognition: Industry lobbying is threatening the smooth advancement of a bill that would put guardrails on the Transportation Security Administration’s use of facial recognition technology as Senate Commerce prepares to take up the bill Wednesday. It’s causing some consternation among Republicans, who had planned for a straightforward markup of the strongly bipartisan bill sponsored by Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) and several committee Republicans.
— Bove’s confirmation vote: A third whistleblower met with the staff for Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley on Monday to testify against Emil Bove, Trump’s contentious nominee for the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals. Republicans are expected to confirm Bove this week despite the new allegations but haven’t officially locked in a time for the final vote.
Jordain Carney and Hailey Fuchs contributed to this report.
Trump administration officials have told key Hill Republicans they should expect a request for an Iran war supplemental funding package by the end of this week.
The request is expected to be about $80 billion, according to five people familiar with the matter who were granted anonymity to discuss sensitive negotiations.
But House GOP appropriators believe the Senate will likely add additional non-military items, such as disaster relief or farm aid. House GOP leaders are worried the push for a supplemental bill will undercut their effort to pass another party-line reconciliation bill with GOP priorities and extra defense funding.
Congress has long awaited President Donald Trump’s request to cover the cost of the military campaign in the Middle East. But the measure, which would need at least some bipartisan support to pass the Senate, will face an uphill fight to become law.
Many Democrats who oppose the war are almost certain to object to funding a conflict they disagree with and regard as illegal because Trump didn’t seek congressional approval.
The roughly $80 billion price tag, though, is significantly less than the approximately $200 billion the Trump administration was reportedly weighing in recent months.
The supplemental request would likely be dedicated to replenishing stocks of missiles fired off in the early stages of the war and cover other costs of military operations in the Middle East in recent months.
The leaders of several prominent House Democratic caucuses are proposing a Supreme Court overhaul as well as the Senate filibuster in response to the justices’ decision to narrow the 1965 Voting Rights Act earlier this year.
Their resolution obtained by POLITICO calls for the expansion of the Supreme Court and to establish term limits and a code of ethics for justices. It also calls for the elimination of the 60-vote filibuster in the Senate.
While the resolution stands virtually no chance of adoption, it is the latest indicator of how the Congressional Black Caucus and other key Democrats want to respond to the April decision that cleared the way for Republican states to redraw their congressional maps and eliminate majority-minority districts. The measure also lays down a marker for progressives — who will be emboldened next Congress after defeating several incumbents in New York City Tuesday — as they seek to influence the Democratic agenda.
“The Court’s far-right supermajority poses a serious threat to any future attempts by Congress to realize the promise of a multiracial democracy, rein in executive power, champion worker’s rights, protect voting rights, and restore and strengthen the Federal protections against racial discrimination in the Voting Rights Act,” the resolution reads.
The measure is led by Democratic Reps. Greg Casar of Texas, who leads the Congressional Progressive Caucus; Rep. Yvette Clarke of New York, who leads the CBC, Rep. Grace Meng of New York, who leads the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus; and Rep. Hank Johnson of Georgia. Rep. Adriano Espaillat of New York, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus chair who lost his bid for renomination Tuesday to a hard-left challenger, is also a lead sponsor.
The leaders of the resolution will speak at a news conference Wednesday afternoon.
House Republicans have advanced a bill that would prohibit members of Congress and their family members from trading on certain Washington-focused prediction markets.
The House Administration Committee’s GOP members on Wednesday voted along party lines in favor of the legislation, which proposes to bar lawmakers, their spouses and their dependent children from participating on prediction markets that are based on the outcome of elections or government actions.
It marks the latest in Capitol Hill’s efforts to curb the threat of insider trading on the prediction markets — a risk that has burst into the spotlight in recent months after a series of well-timed trades around the capture of then-Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, Google’s search results and the Iran war. Earlier this year, the Senate banned its members and their staffs from trading on the prediction markets altogether, effective immediately.
And yet, the House Administration Committee vote also revealed a fracture within the House over how far to go in clamping down on lawmakers’ use of the prediction markets. Democrats opposed the bill, saying it didn’t go far enough, while Republicans supported it.
Rep. Joe Morelle of New York, who is the committee’s top Democrat, argued that the legislation is “so filled with loopholes that it looks more like a sieve than a bill.” Instead of passing such a bill, he said the House should follow the Senate’s lead and approve a new and broader resolution aimed at prediction market use among members and their staffs.
“The Senate did it in a matter of minutes — no six-month grace period, no procedurally laborious process,” Morelle said. “They just went to the floor with a two-page resolution and banned it all unanimously. We should do the same.”
House Administration Chair Bryan Steil, who introduced the bill, hit back at his Democratic counterpart’s concerns by questioning why members’ families shouldn’t be allowed to bet on sports through the prediction markets — but can through sportsbooks or casinos.
The Wisconsin Republican pointed to a hypothetical scenario where a member’s child is at college and bets on a sporting event through a prediction market platform. That situation, he said, could be covered by a broader prohibition.
Steil, rather, said his bill is aimed at addressing public policy- and election-focused markets.
“Lawmakers elect to serve the American people, not to enrich themselves by wagering on outcomes from the decisions they make,” he said. “We have a real opportunity to restore trust in Congress by taking necessary steps to eliminate even the appearance of impropriety.”
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship10 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words