Congress

Elise Stefanik is Johnson’s latest challenge as he struggles to keep control of the House

Published

8 months ago

December 3, 2025

Even by the high standards of chaos for the 119th Congress, Speaker Mike Johnson being accused Tuesday by a member of his own leadership team of protecting the “deep state” was a remarkable development.

Rep. Elise Stefanik’s rare move to publicly accuse the speaker of being a liar and then, in a separate provocation, signing on to an effort to force a vote on legislation Johnson has kept bottled up is the latest symptom of a House Republican Conference seemingly on a razor’s edge.

Increasingly, rank-and-file House Republicans are bringing their spats with Johnson into the open, suggesting the speaker is losing further control over his restive members as his already slim majority threatens to narrow further and potentially devastating midterm elections loom.

Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.), who openly challenged Johnson’s decision to keep the House out of session for seven weeks this fall and criticized him for not pushing back on the GOP’s mid-decade redistricting campaign, said in a brief interview Tuesday that he saw Stefanik’s anger as part of broader trend.

“I do think that there’s a lot of frustration right now in the House with the effectiveness or lack thereof of this body in recent months,” he said. “The House has … in some cases ceded its own authority, hasn’t taken the lead on a lot of important policy measures and has even taken steps now to limit the agency of individual members.”

For much of his two-year tenure, Johnson has been able to keep a handle on the infighting thanks to President Donald Trump’s stranglehold on the Republican Party, with the president personally intervening at key points this year to settle internecine disputes.

But many sense that is changing as the speaker suffers public setbacks — such as his recent failure to prevent passage of a bill mandating the release of Justice Department files related to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Things could fray further depending on how the GOP fares in Tuesday’s special election in Tennessee.

“That model only works if no one challenges him and gets away with it,” said one senior House Republican granted anonymity to speak frankly about conference dynamics. “And that’s not what’s happening now. … People are less willing to stay quiet.”

In particular, several high-profile GOP women have clashed with the speaker over various issues in recent months. Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, Nancy Mace of South Carolina and Lauren Boebert of Colorado were instrumental in pushing through the Epstein bill. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida filed her second discharge petition of the year Tuesday, seeking to force a vote on a bill banning member stock trading that the speaker has so far declined to advance. And several women in the House GOP raised concerns about leaders’ handling of Rep. Cory Mills (R-Fla.), who is facing multiple accusations regarding his conduct and ethics.

Stefanik is in another category altogether. A year ago, she was the No. 4 House GOP leader before relinquishing her post in anticipation of her confirmation as ambassador to the United Nations. But Trump withdrew her nomination amid concerns about the thin GOP majority — a move for which Stefanik has privately faulted Johnson.

Johnson granted her an unelected junior leadership role as a consolation prize, but she has decided her political future will not lie in the House, launching a campaign for New York governor instead of seeking re-election. And now she appears to be all-in on a scorched earth campaign against the speaker.

“Elise is running for governor and frankly does not give a fuck anymore about playing nice,” said a second House Republican granted anonymity to speak frankly about the dispute.

The precipitating cause for Stefanik’s public outburst, in her telling, was a leadership-level decision to exclude legislation requiring that Congress be informed of counterintelligence probes into candidates for federal offices from the annual defense policy bill — a must-pass measure to which lawmakers are keen to attach their personal priorities.

After Stefanik posted her displeasure to her X account, Johnson tried to tamp down the furor Tuesday. The speaker, who sometimes jokes he’s more of a mental health counselor, told reporters he couldn’t understand why Stefanik “didn’t just call me” and that the two could have handled the dispute in private.

“Just more lies from the Speaker,” Stefanik retorted, again on X, mocking Johnson’s claims of ignorance. “This is his preferred tactic to tell Members when he gets caught torpedoing the Republican agenda.”

House Republicans close to Stefanik argue there are more GOP members who are upset about the congressional notice provision falling out of the Pentagon bill. Notably, House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) said he had not yet thought about whether he would join Stefanik in withholding his support for the bill over its exclusion.

“We want this protection in there,” he told reporters. “I think it makes sense.”

Just hours after Stefanik’s comments, Johnson faced down a brief revolt over a procedural measure on the House floor led by hard-line Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) and other incensed Republicans that would have derailed GOP leaders’ floor plans for the week.

As that crisis was still unfolding, Luna launched her discharge petition to force a vote on a congressional stock trading ban — and Stefanik quickly announced she was signing on to the move undermining the speaker’s authority.

Members of Johnson’s leadership circle and other senior Republicans were privately shocked by Stefanik’s sharp public criticism of the speaker — and that she didn’t later decide to delete them — according to three people granted anonymity to describe conversations that unfolded Tuesday.

Johnson’s staff have reached out to Stefanik’s team and are seeking to resolve the spat privately, according to two other people with direct knowledge of the matter.

The speaker’s allies argue the disgruntled Republicans are just that — people with axes to grind against Johnson.

But Stefanik is getting backup from other malcontents inside the House GOP, including Greene, who was once seen as being on the opposite pole of the Republican conference. Both women were kept in close consultation by the previous speaker, Kevin McCarthy, and have since fallen out with Johnson.

After helping to engineer the successful Epstein files vote, Greene announced her imminent resignation — itself a slap at Johnson, given the tight GOP majority — and publicly railed against the House’s diminished power and Johnson’s speakership. She weighed in again Tuesday after Stefanik aired her accusations about the Pentagon bill.

“No surprises here,” Greene said in her own X post. “As usual from the Speaker, promises made promises broken. We all know it.”

Congress

Capitol agenda: Thune tries to focus as Trump fumes

Published

5 minutes ago

July 27, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

John Thune has a long to-do list, a shrinking runway for getting it done and a president in the peanut gallery.

The Senate is back Monday with only two more weeks — more realistically, eight legislative days — in town until the chamber leaves Washington through mid-September.

The majority leader wants to clear a government funding stopgap, a long-stalled Russia sanctions bill and dozens of nominees, but he’s also facing pressure from President Donald Trump and some of his right flank to make progress on the SAVE America Act, a GOP election bill that doesn’t have the votes to pass.

It’s the latter that will be the biggest headache for Thune after Trump told Senate Republicans to adopt the blueprint for a $95 billion spending bill, which would include election-related funding, before leaving for August break.

Most GOP senators, however, don’t expect that to happen — and the budget blueprint doesn’t have the 50 votes it needs right now among Senate Republicans to be adopted despite Trump’s public overture.

Then, over the weekend, Sen. Mike Lee signaled he opposed the Senate leaving for the recess without passing the election bill. Lee could force a vote if he wants to on whether or not to adjourn — though he’s previously tweeted about how the Senate shouldn’t leave and then done nothing about it. Sen. Rick Scott also posted Sunday that he stands with Lee in opposing a recess until SAVE America is passed.

Lee also fired off a warning for Thune, saying the fate of the election bill “could impact” the November Senate GOP leadership elections. Thune is running again for leader and most GOP senators believe he’s secure in his job. But a few, granted anonymity to speak candidly, have questioned if Trump, who is fuming behind the scenes, would target him after the midterms, especially if Republicans lose the majority.

Thune will have to balance those questions this week, while trying to move the agenda he views as actually accomplishable.

On that front, senators will take a vote Monday night on Jay Clayton’s director of national intelligence nomination (more on that below) and they could pass the Russia sanctions bill as soon as this week, if they can get a time agreement. This week is also key for Judiciary senators to decide whether to advance Trump’s attorney general pick Todd Blanche. And senators are working around funeral arrangements for the late Sen. Lindsey Graham.

Likely waiting until next week: A vote on a bill to fund the government into December as bipartisan talks proceed positively, according to two people granted anonymity to discuss private conversations. An initial vote on cryptocurrency legislation, known as the Clarity Act, is also likely to be punted to next week, but Democrats, so far, aren’t on board.

What else we’re watching:

— JEFFRIES MAKES HIS CLOSING MIDTERMS PITCH: Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries spoke at an event in Pennsylvania’s swingy Lehigh Valley with Gov. Josh Shapiro and House candidate Bob Brooks to make his closing argument for why voters should hand his party the gavels 100 days from the midterms. His message? Affordability. Affordability. Affordability. The minority leader’s latest commitment to lowered costs gives a clearer preview of how Democrats would govern in the majority.

— FLOOD SEES FRAUD-BUSTING IN RECON 4.0: The head of a GOP group representing some of the House’s most vulnerable members this fall seems confident the party will tackle a fourth reconciliation bill with fraud-busting provisions. Republican’s Recon 3.0 budget framework is still facing an uncertain future in the Senate after being adopted by House lawmakers last week. But House Main Street Caucus Chair Mike Flood said in an interview he believes House Republicans do another party-line bill after the midterm elections. Read the full Q&A with Flood on PoliticoPro.

Riley Rogerson and Mia McCarthy contributed to this report.

Congress

A bipartisan House duo’s final pitch for pre-midterm AI action

Published

3 hours ago

July 27, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

A bipartisan House duo is racing against the clock to build consensus around a framework for regulating artificial intelligence — and prove Congress is up to the task of setting guardrails around the rapidly-evolving technology.

Reps. Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.) and Lori Trahan (D-Mass.) formally introduced legislation last Thursday with four cosponsors — two from each party — that would give the government more oversight over cutting-edge AI models as new and potentially dangerous technological advances continue to go largely unchecked.

It’s a considerably reworked version of a discussion draft the two lawmakers unveiled weeks earlier. It was highly anticipated as the most serious cross-party attempt at comprehensive AI regulatory legislation to date — and almost immediately panned by Republicans and Democrats alike.

But Trahan and Obernolte both think they’ve now found the sweet spot and are hopeful the Energy and Commerce Committee schedules a hearing or markup on the measure when the House reconvenes in September after the summer recess.

“That is the goal,” Trahan said in an interview Friday. “I think that there is real urgency. There’s earth-shattering news practically every week, and that’s only going to get more frequent and more serious as these models get more powerful.”

Obernolte said in an interview earlier in the week he “absolutely” thought the bill could move out of committee in the fall. “We’re certainly going to try and get it done this year.”

Yet when asked last week about whether he would bring up that bill — or any comprehensive AI legislation — before the midterms, Energy and Commerce Chair Brett Guthrie was noncommittal: “I’m not sure if we’ll get there before the election,” the Kentucky Republican said.

Congress has ultimately done little to legislate on AI under the Republican governing trifecta, as members remain divided on how to tackle the thorny policy area — particularly the question of how involved the federal government should be in regulating private sector innovation. The Obernolte-Trahan bill is the latest test for whether lawmakers can reach consensus on the issue before the November elections.

In the 119th Congress so far, lawmakers have managed to send to the president’s desk one bill that criminalizes the sharing of AI-generated deepfakes and “revenge porn.” The Energy and Commerce Committee has passed bipartisan bills on data centers and kids online safety but none have advanced onto in the Senate.

Across the Capitol, the Senate Commerce Committee was just forced to delay a highly-anticipated markup of AI legislation at least a week as Chair Ted Cruz (R-Texas) struggles to put together an agenda of bills that stand a chance of passing on the chamber floor.

In the House, Obernolte and Trahan are trying to set their proposal up for success despite the odds. In interviews, they both described how they worked hard to respond to the initially negative feedback they received from colleagues on their discussion draft.

They have seriously scaled down provisions in their latest version relating to preemption of state AI laws, seeking to strike a balance for lawmakers who are split between those who want the ability to replace local regulations with a federal framework governing AI, and those who want to leave regulatory action to the states.

“We all heard the criticism … and we narrowed the preemption [provisions] substantially,” Trahan said. “It now only touches three areas the federal bill actually covers: catastrophic risk transparency, independent verification and incident reporting. That’s it.”

“So, child safety laws are explicitly protected,” she continued. “So is the consumer protection, privacy and state procurement. All of that stays with the states.”

Obernolte acknowledged the topic of preemption makes people “emotional” but the new legislative language more precisely describes exactly “what we meant on what we were preempting … and I think that that’s giving everyone more comfort.”

Their bill would propose robust emergency shutdown authorities for AI models determined to be major national security risks, replacing the more haphazard nature of the Trump administration’s response in recent months to concerning technological developments.

It also would require large developers to publish safety reports, report safety incidents and participate in independent safety audits. Those auditors would have to then report any models to the government that pose “imminent catastrophic risk” and the Secretary of Commerce could choose to restrict their deployment.

Last week’s first documented case of an autonomous AI breach helped bolster their case that this kind of legislation is necessary, both lawmakers said, with Trahan pointing out, “we only know about these incidents because OpenAI chose to tell us — there’s no law that requires it.”

Trahan, a member of House Democratic leadership, has been working outside the structure of the three-member AI commission overseen by Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries but was optimistic when asked if the proposal might eventually get their backing.

“The feedback has been overwhelmingly positive,” she said, adding she plans to spend recess talking with party leaders and the top Democrats on key committees “whether there’s a path to make this bill even better and to move it before we break for the midterms.”

Obernolte said he’s talking to GOP leaders “constantly” to “make sure that everyone knew what was going on and what we were doing.”

But he also added that he hasn’t yet asked Republican leaders for their endorsement, arguing it would be “inappropriate” for them to give the bill their blessing “at this point.”

In the hours before Obernolte and Trahan released their formal bill text, Majority Leader Steve Scalise said in an interview that while he had not spoken to Obernolte about what the two lawmakers intended to introduce, Republican leaders were interested in advancing a regulatory framework that they deemed not overly burdensome.

“We’re trying to get AI preemption … but we also want to make sure that we don’t impede innovation with heavy regulation from the government,” said Scalise.

A Scalise spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment about what the Louisiana Republican thought of the latest proposal.

House Speaker Mike Johnson has also not taken a position on the bill. His last comments about the Obernolte-Trahan effort were in June, when he said he was planning to discuss the then-forthcoming regulatory framework with OpenAI CEO Sam Altman during the tech giant’s visit to Blue Light News.

Obernolte is confident his bill with Trahan represents the emerging consensus view about where lawmakers need to go next on AI policy, even within the Republican Party that has long championed limited government regulation.

“I think that everyone would agree we need food safety inspectors, right? So sometimes the two parties disagree on just how onerous to make those regulations. … I don’t think anyone’s saying that we shouldn’t have any regulation of AI,” he said.

He also suggested perspectives may be shifting.

“I think everyone’s thoughts on this topic have evolved as the technology itself has evolved, and because AI is such a fast-moving technology, I think that Congress is going to have to stay very engaged on this,” Obernolte said. “So, even if we succeed in passing [the bill] this year and getting it signed into law, immediately in the next Congress, we’re going to have to dive into the things that have changed.”

In a sign Obernolte may still have people to convince inside his party, though, Scalise last week rejected the idea that Republican views on the subject have evolved.

“No,” Scalise said. “I mean — our Republicans, by and large, are against heavy regulation that impedes innovation in any industry.”

Congress

‘Fighting for an affordable America’: Hakeem Jeffries unveils closing midterm pitch

Published

15 hours ago

July 26, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

BETHLEHEM, Pennsylvania — Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries’ closing midterm pitch can be boiled down to a single word: “Affordability.”

“When you work hard and play by the rules, you should be able to live a middle-class life, a comfortable life, an affordable life, live a good life,” Jeffries said at a Sunday speech. “You know what that looks like: a good-paying job, good housing, good health care, a good education for your children, and when it’s all said and done, a good retirement.”

“That’s the American dream,” he said.

The slogan “fighting for an affordable American” was plastered throughout a steelworkers’ union hall in Pennsylvania’s swingy Lehigh Valley where Jeffries kicked off the final 100 days until the midterms. He was joined by Pennsylvania’s popular governor, Josh Shapiro, who will appear on the ballot this November along with 7th District House candidate Bob Brooks, a firefighter union leader.

That Jeffries would double down on an affordability message is not a surprise. Democratic leaders have long heralded affordability and accountability as pillars of their midterm strategy. Senior Democrats have been meeting for months about how to sell an affirmative vision to voters.

Yet Jeffries’ latest commitment to a platform centered on lowering costs gives a clearer preview of how Democrats would govern in the majority and the type of legislation he would attempt to shepherd through his chamber as speaker.

“America cannot afford two more years of a MAGA Republican Congress,” Jeffries said. “As House Democrats, we will build an economy that works for everyday Americans and drive down the high cost of living in every possible area because life is too expensive.”

Speaking to reporters after the speech, Jeffries offered some more specifics about how he would seek to lower costs as speaker. He listed ending the Trump administration’s tariffs, extending Affordable Care Act tax credits, repealing the Republican’s co-called “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” and ending the war in Iran.

Of course, House Democrats still have to hammer out the policies behind their promises to cut costs. Centrist and progressive caucuses have already pitched their own visions that seek to tackle the same goals via different legislative means. And Jeffries’ boldest ambitions would be curbed if Democrats can’t take back the Senate.

Brooks also shared his own vision to — as he said it in his speech — put “out the dumpster fire that we’re seeing in D.C. right now.” He named banning corporate PAC money, blocking congressional stock trading, raising the minimum wage, passing the union friendly PRO Act, setting term limits for lawmakers, cutting health care costs and ending overseas wars.

The Lehigh Valley venue was located in precisely the type of divided district that Democrats are banking on painting blue this cycle, one that will test both Shapiro and Jeffries’ political clout. Both are directing significant campaign resources to boost Brooks as Democrats try to take back control of the House.

Republican Rep. Ryan MacKenzie won the seat in 2024 by a single percentage point and the stakes of his victory loomed especially large with his predecessor Rep. Susan Wild in the room Sunday.

“It shows exactly how important PA-07 is, right?” Brooks said in an interview after the event. “They chose us out of all the races, and … to have now the support of Leader Jeffries coming in and getting behind me, like it just shows the emphasis on the race itself and what Pennsylvania can do for the national agenda.”

Brooks, Shapiro and Jeffries often framed their criticism of the Trump administration through the lens of rising costs brought on by alleged corruption, the war in Iran and Republicans’ 2025 party-line megabill that cut over $1 trillion in health spending.

But Jeffries also wants to ban stock trading for the president, vice president and Congress, release the Jeffrey Epstein files, “clean up” the Supreme Court and pass a sweeping voting protection bill.

“So the day the American people put Democrats back in charge of Congress, here is our promise to you: We are going to hold the crooks accountable,” Jeffries said. “Anyone who is stealing from the American people, screwing over the American people, or shortchanging the American people is going to be held accountable.”

If Jeffries has his druthers, the next 100 days will be almost all about affordability, how President Donald Trump and House Republicans are upping costs and how he and House Democrats would lower them for health care, groceries, child care, gas, utilities and more.

It might not be so simple, as insurgent left wing candidates attempt to commandeer that message with far less unifying issues for the Democratic party — U.S. support for Israel chief among them. In August, Democrat-on-Democrat infighting is taking place in primary contests involving Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz in Florida, Ed Case in Hawaii, Shri Thanedar in Michigan and John Larson in Connecticut.

But on Sunday, Jeffries wasn’t concerned with litigating intraparty bickering. He was laser focused on championing a message he believes every Democrat can run on and win.

“The Democratic party is not a cult of personality. We’re a coalition of public servants,” Jeffries said. “Our diversity of thought, perspective and life experience, like what Bob brings to the table, is a strength, not a weakness. We are one big tent united by a shared commitment to fighting for an affordable America.”