Congress

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

Published

7 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

Johnson-backed plan to combine Pentagon and election bills advances to floor

Published

3 hours ago

June 30, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The House Rules Committee advanced a procedural measure aimed at breaking an intra-Republican deadlock Monday night. But GOP leaders are still facing a major battle Tuesday to regain control of the House floor.

The panel approved on party lines a measure to set up Republicans’ $1.1 trillion defense policy bill, a government funding bill and other GOP bills for floor debate. It would then combine the Pentagon bill, once passed, with the contentious elections overhaul known as the SAVE America Act and send it to the Senate as one piece of legislation.

That maneuver, telegraphed by Speaker Mike Johnson earlier Monday, is aimed at appeasing House GOP hard-liners who have blockaded the floor, demanding the Senate pass the elections bill that has languished there for months.

However, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, the Republican leading the blockade, said in an interview Monday before the Rules Committee acted that Johnson’s plan is not sufficient — raising the possibility she and allies could vote down the measure on the floor. Other House GOP hard-liners say there are other outstanding issues to battle over Tuesday.

Rep. James McGovern of Massachusetts, the top Rules Democrat, called the merger move “a big waste of time.” The panel voted down a motion by McGovern to remove the provision to combine the two bills in a party-line vote.

The Senate is set to debate its own version of the defense bill next month, and it is likely that the elections overhaul will be removed in negotiations between the two chambers — as McGovern acknowledged Monday and House GOP leaders privately concede.

“The Senate will just strip the SAVE Act out,” he said at the meeting. “There is a zero percent chance SAVE ends up in the [Pentagon bill] because of this rule today.”

The defense bill faces a tight vote if Republicans can pass the procedural measure. Most Democrats are expected to oppose the measure over its massive price tag, which they contend is wasteful.

The panel is set up debate on 312 amendments to the bill. The slate includes GOP measures to codify a Trump executive order to block transgender people from serving in the military, prohibit coverage of gender-affirming care, block aid to arm Ukraine and strip Democratic-backed protections for collective bargaining for Pentagon civilian workers.

The committee also voted down Democratic proposals to slash $150 billion from the bill’s topline and limit the war against Iran.

Mia McCarthy contributed to this report.

Congress

Pentagon and elections bills could be combined in bid to unfreeze House floor

Published

5 hours ago

June 29, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Speaker Mike Johnson said Monday he plans to deploy an unusual procedural maneuver in a bid to unfreeze the House floor this week, seeking to send the annual Pentagon policy bill and the GOP elections bill known as the SAVE America Act to the Senate in a single package.

That is likely a recipe for a continued standoff between the two chambers over the SAVE America Act, which has stalled in the Senate for months due to internal GOP divides. Under Johnson’s plan, the annual defense policy bill, which typically passes every year with large bipartisan majorities, could become a collateral victim of the impasse.

Asked in brief interview if he had talked to Senate Majority Leader John Thune about his plans, Johnson replied, “I have to do my job in the House, and they’ve got to do their job in the Senate, so we’ll see what happens.”

Johnson is seeking to placate House conservative hard-liners, led by Florida Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, who have threatened to oppose the procedural measures that give Republicans control of the floor unless they agree to tougher tactics meant to force the Senate into passing the elections bill.

House GOP leaders discussed the plan to merge the two bills over the weekend as Luna pushed to amend the defense bill directly.

She did not say in an interview Monday whether Johnson’s gambit would suffice: “We want it baked together, not able to be stripped out,” she said.

But the Senate is free to work its own will, and members of that chamber are likely to reject any defense bill that has the partisan elections bill attached. That would set the stage for GOP leaders to strip it out when the House and Senate hash out the differences between their competing Pentagon bills later this year.

Johnson, meanwhile, is pushing a separate plan to pass a slimmed-down version of the SAVE America Act through the party-line budget reconciliation process — an option hard-liners have all but rejected.

“I don’t think that that can be done,” Luna told reporters Monday.

He’s also facing another complication: The version of the SAVE America Act he is proposing to attach to the Pentagon bill doesn’t include the latest demands for the bill from President Donald Trump — including a near-total ban on mail voting that is opposed by many Republicans.

Jennifer Scholtes contributed to this report.

Congress

Top Trump officials face bipartisan questions in first all-member Iran briefings

Published

6 hours ago

June 29, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Lawmakers of both parties questioned Secretary of State Marco Rubio and top Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff Monday in the first broad congressional briefings on President Donald Trump’s Iran deal.

While Democrats asked some of the sharpest questions, participants in an afternoon conference call with House members said, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) at one point pressed the administration officials on the fate of Iran’s stockpile of near-bomb-grade uranium.

According to two people granted anonymity to disclose the private remarks, Witkoff and Rubio repeated assurances the administration has privately made to select lawmakers in prior briefings — that the goal is to negotiate a final deal that would prohibit Iran from keeping its highly enriched uranium.

The memorandum of understanding Trump signed earlier this month, they said, was meant to launch those negotiations. Witkoff, the people said, added that the technical team involved in that part of the talks was traveling from Switzerland to Qatar, where talks between the U.S. and Iran are set to happen Tuesday.

Democrats, meanwhile, pushed the administration for more details on what financial benefits Iran could reap under the memorandum — including proceeds from previously sanctioned oil sales.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) went back and forth with Rubio and Witkoff over the lifting of the oil sanctions, two other people granted anonymity on the House call said. The officials eventually cut off the conversation and ended the call.

At another point, Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-Pa.) raised concerns about Witkoff’s business interests in the Middle East as he’s negotiating with Iran, prompting a sharp defense from Rubio, those people said.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer asked Rubio and Witkoff about the oil sanctions during a separate all-senators call Monday, saying in a statement afterward that they “confirmed to me that Iran will reap billions in oil revenue while retaining dangerous leverage over the Strait of Hormuz.”

“If this is the administration’s defense behind closed doors, Secretary Rubio should make it under oath, in public, before the Foreign Relations Committee,” Schumer added, calling the briefing “delayed, deficient, and devoid of details.”

An administration official granted anonymity to speak candidly countered on Schumer’s characterization, noting that he had previously gotten a briefing of the deal as part of a group of top leaders engaged on national security matters. Schumer, the official said, had the opportunity to ask multiple follow-up questions on the Senate call.

A separate group of White House officials briefed top congressional leaders and key committee chairs in a classified briefing in the Capitol later Monday.

The administration has faced bipartisan skepticism over multiple provisions of the memorandum of understanding — particularly the lifting of oil sanctions and a $300 billion reconstruction fund that many Senate Republicans fear will help fuel Iran’s military and regional proxies.

Rubio and Witkoff sought to ease concerns about the slow reopening of the Strait of Hormuz — the critical trade route whose closure has sparked higher fuel and fertilizer costs. Both officials said more mine removal is required, and Witkoff indicated that Iran broke the terms of the Trump-signed deal by launching a drone attack on a passing ship over the weekend.

They also sought to assure lawmakers that Iran has received no money under the memorandum — especially not directly from American sources. Administration officials have previously pledged in smaller briefings that the reconstruction fund won’t include U.S. funds.

Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) called the Senate briefing a “productive conversation” but said “much of what I heard today is similar to what I heard last week” during a dinner at Vice President JD Vance’s residence.