Congress
Expect a quieter Jan. 6 this time around — as long as Republicans avert a looming speakership crisis
Donald Trump’s victory has made Jan. 6 boring again.
Four years after a mob of Trump’s supporters stormed the Capitol to prevent Congress from certifying Joe Biden’s victory, Republicans and Democrats seem to agree they’ll give Trump the smooth, drama-free transfer of power he denied Democrats in 2020.
That’s despite the fact that many Democrats see Trump as an insurrectionist, ineligible to hold the presidency because of his role in creating the conditions that led to the attack four years earlier. Instead, top Democrats say they have no plans to stand in the way of Trump’s victory — and they’re not even sure their rank-and-file colleagues will make the token objections they’ve lodged in years past.
They also anticipate that Vice President Kamala Harris will lead the joint session of Congress to count Trump’s presidential electors precisely the way her predecessors have, taking no active role in the proceedings and tallying the results certified by the states. The result: a quick and simple transfer of power that will culminate on Jan. 20 when Trump takes the oath of office.
“I think you’re going to have a pretty sort of normal transfer, and I think we will respect the wishes of the American people … in contrast to what happened January 6, 2021,” said Rep. Joe Morelle (D-N.Y.), the top Democrat on the House committee tasked with overseeing elections. “I do feel like that’s worth saying over and over again.”
There is one potential crisis, attributable to Trump’s own party and the incoming president himself. After a spending fiasco last week, conservatives have expressed doubts that Mike Johnson should still be speaker, and Trump hasn’t weighed in to defend him. That House vote is scheduled to occur on Jan. 3, and a protracted battle could delay the certification of Trump’s win. Congress can’t do anything else until it elects a speaker.
Here’s a look at how the final stages of the presidential transition will play out once the new Congress convenes next month.
Before Jan. 6
Before Congress convenes to count electoral votes there are two crucial questions lawmakers must answer. The first: Who will be speaker of the House?
When the new Congress convenes on Jan. 3, their first job is to select a speaker, who can then swear in the other members and preside over the adoption of rules to govern the chamber. Until last week, Johnson appeared to be a shoo-in to win a full term, consolidating the support of his fractious conference, winning over detractors and lining up votes for what he hopes will be his first full term. But his stewardship of spending negotiations and an initial deal with Democrats led to a conservative revolt, with several openly calling for a new speaker. Trump also openly issued veiled threats about Johnson’s future as speaker.
If Democrats, as expected, unanimously back Leader Hakeem Jeffries, and former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) holds to his promise not to return to Congress, Johnson can only afford to have one Republican vote against him. That’s a suddenly realistic possibility — Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) has already vowed to oppose him, and several more are noncommittal.

A battle for the speakership could take days, creating uncertainty about the House’s ability to count Electoral College votes. And there’s no road map for what to do if a protracted battle eclipses Jan. 6.
That leads to the second question: Could Congress change the date of the joint session? Lawmakers have the authority to pass a law changing the date from Jan. 6 — and there’s precedent for doing so in modern history. The branches could, of course, push the session back a few days to give the House breathing room to resolve a speaker fight.
Presuming the speakership is resolved, the House and Senate must agree on the procedures governing the joint session of Congress. For more than 100 years, this has been uncontroversial and Congress has approved rules governing the legislative branch, including the Electoral Count Act, a statute that has governed the joint session since 1887. Even in 2020, when Trump was contesting the results of the election, Congress adopted this resolution unanimously.
However, the fight that emerged in 2020 revealed that some Republican lawmakers do have doubts about the laws that govern the transfer of power. And Johnson himself has yet to clarify his own views on the Electoral Count Act — particularly since Biden signed significant amendments to it in 2022.
Though Republicans are unlikely to want to stoke uncertainty, given that their guy is about to take the oath of office, a fight over the Electoral Count Act could still emerge on Jan. 3.
Democratic objections
Republicans are fond of pointing out that Democrats have lodged objections to presidential electors in every race Republicans have won since 2000. However, Democrats have seen those objections as largely symbolic, without any endorsement from national leaders or party organizations.
This time, there may not even be a symbolic objection to Trump’s victory. Blue Light News spoke to the group of Democrats who challenged some of Trump’s electors in 2017, and none of them said they planned to mount a similar effort this time. They acknowledged that their 2017 votes were token statements that they did not expect to succeed, and said the events of the last four years underscored the need to show confidence in the transfer of power.
“I’m not intending to do that again, because I think that people don’t differentiate,” said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.). She added: “I think there was a clear difference between what we did and what he does.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), who also lodged an objection in 2017, said he hadn’t heard of a single Democrat who planned to object this time and predicted that Democrats would be “constitutional patriots.”
“I have not actually heard of anybody who intends to vote no,” added Morelle, “and I would certainly discourage it.”
And if Democrats did mount challenges to Trump’s electoral votes, the updated Electoral Count Act made it significantly harder to force their colleagues to consider them.
In every previous joint session, it took objections from just one House member and one senator to trigger a lengthy debate and vote. But the revised law now requires 20 percent of each chamber — 87 House members and 20 senators — to sign challenges before they trigger further proceedings. It’s hard to imagine any potential challenge coming close to that threshold in 2025.
Kamala Harris presides
Harris will be presiding over the certification of her own defeat — a moment that is simultaneously uncomfortable and an ode to the peaceful transfer of power. She’s the third losing candidate to do so in recent history.
The vice president, who serves as president of the Senate, is constitutionally required to fulfill this role, with limited exceptions. In 2000, Al Gore brushed aside Democrats’ protests to certify George W. Bush as the victor. In 2016, Biden told a handful objecting Democrats that it “is over” and ushered in the first Trump presidency. And in 2020, Mike Pence resisted a crushing pressure campaign from Trump — and a violent riot — and followed in his predecessors’ footsteps.
Trump and a group of fringe attorneys argued that Pence could buck history and take control of the joint session, deciding which electoral votes to count or postponing the session altogether to give states a chance to reverse their certified results. Pence rejected this approach as unconstitutional, contending that the vice president’s role in the joint session is meant to be largely ceremonial.
Though some Trump allies still say the vice president has this authority, no one expects Harris to remotely entertain the idea — and Democrats have roundly dismissed it as a possibility.
Harris aides have said she intends to carry out her duties as all vice presidents have before her, in part because it is right and also because it’s the law. Indeed, lawmakers seem so certain that Jan. 6, 2025 will lack intrigue that they’ve largely treated it as an afterthought. Gone are the intensive strategy sessions and convoluted legal analyses aimed at pressuring the vice president to take an active role in the proceedings in order to reverse the outcome.
Security concerns
In 2021, the expectation of challenges to the election were high while the anticipation of violence at the Capitol was low. Those dynamics are reversed this time.
Despite the lack of drama, security agencies — the Secret Service, the Capitol Police, the D.C. police and others — are treating the event on par with the security needs of the Super Bowl. Already, there are signs around the Capitol of enhanced security measures, including surveillance towers set up in the vicinity.
And while protests are possible, there’s been no call by any national leaders to converge on Washington for the joint session or to challenge the outcome. That lack of organizing energy suggests the fervor of Trump supporters in 2021 simply won’t be replicated by Trump’s detractors.
Congress
‘I’m glad I’m not on the ballot’: Senate GOP worries about its midterm edge
Senate Republicans are growing anxious about the midterms.
They once felt like they had a glidepath to keep or even grow their majority in November, unlike in the House, where GOP control is razor-thin and members have become increasingly on edge about Democrats returning to power.
But the mood is shifting, according to interviews with 10 GOP senators and aides, as the U.S. engages in open-ended war in the Middle East, rising oil prices threaten to slow the economy and President Donald Trump stokes intra-party divisions over an elections overhaul bill known as the SAVE America Act.
Some GOP senators are now openly predicting a tough battle to hold onto control as their party struggles to keep the focus on affordability policies that lawmakers want to make the centerpiece of their midterm campaign. The Senate passed a major housing bill this week but it faces an uncertain future in the House. Trump himself told Republican lawmakers Monday that housing is not a top concern for voters.
“I’m glad I’m not on the ballot,” Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), a close Trump ally, said in an interview when asked how he was feeling about the November elections.
Republican senators are warning that the party writ large needs to hammer home cost-of-living measures — despite apparent disinterest and distractions from Trump, who they hope will lean into the housing bill fight. Recent polls have shown the Iran conflict and the resulting rise in prices are major worries for voters, even as the president downplays affordability concerns.
“Energy prices are high. Everything’s high,” said Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), another Trump ally. He added that Republicans should “take some votes to lower the costs.”
Democrats have to net four seats to win back control of the Senate — a tall order that still gives Republicans an inherent edge. But Republicans are playing defense in Maine and North Carolina, the two races widely viewed as the most likely flips, and they’re facing a messy Trump-fueled primary in Texas. Republicans view Michigan and Georgia as potential pick-ups, though Democrats think they’ve also been able to put states like Ohio and Alaska in play through strong candidate recruitment.
Asked about Trump’s claim that the party will be in trouble if it doesn’t pass the SAVE America Act, Senate Majority Leader John Thune told reporters this week that he believed the election is instead “going to be about the economy, and that’s why I think we’re focused on that.”
He also said that midterms are “always a little dicey” during the second term of a presidential administration.
But under pressure from Trump and a fervent base, Thune is teeing up what will likely be a multi-week debate on what the president calls his “No. 1 priority” — the SAVE America Act legislation that would institute tough new citizenship and photo ID requirements in order to cast a ballot. Trump wants to expand this legislation even further to prohibit gender-affirming surgery for children and restrict mail-in voting.
The bill lacks the votes for Senate passage, yet Thune and his conference are being lobbied hard by the right flank to revamp or eliminate the filibuster as a means of jamming the legislation through — a strategy that also doesn’t have the votes.
This intra-party tension is on full display in Texas, where Sen. John Cornyn is facing a May runoff against Texas Attorney General and MAGA favorite Ken Paxton. The elections bill has taken centerstage as Cornyn and Paxton vie for Trump’s endorsement, with Cornyn this week throwing his support behind scrapping the filibuster to pass the legislation.
Trump’s pressure campaign over the bill, including his decision to use the Texas race to make a play for its passage, has privately infuriated a broad swath of Senate Republicans, according to two people granted anonymity to speak candidly.
Republicans have privately conveyed to Trump that the voting measure can’t pass, while Thune has also publicly warned against linking a possible Cornyn endorsement to the bill.
Trump, however, told Fox News Radio Friday that he still intends to endorse in the race, but the “main thing I have to do is find out who’s going to get the SAVE America Act approved.” Senate Republicans are fearful that if Cornyn fails to win his runoff, the best-case scenario will cost the party hundreds of millions of dollars to defend against Democratic nominee James Talarico.
The election bill fight has spilled beyond Texas, as GOP senators are being flooded with public warnings from high-profile figures on the right that voters won’t turn out in the midterms or donate money unless the legislation passes. Trump has said passing the bill will “guarantee the midterms.”
White House spokesperson Olivia Wales said in a statement Friday that Trump “is the unequivocal leader of the Republican party, and he is committed to maintaining Republicans’ majority in Congress to continue delivering wins for the American people.”
“It’s clear that he has delivered for Americans with a secure border, cooling inflation, working-class tax cuts, new trade deals, new drug pricing deals and trillions in investments,” Wales added. “The White House is keen to tout these victories in the months ahead as we continue to work to Make America Great Again.”
In the meantime, recent polls show that it’s the unfolding Iran conflict and cost-of-living issues that voters care most about.
Just over half of voters oppose military action against Iran, compared to 40 percent who support it, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released this week. Nearly three-fourths said they were either very or somewhat concerned the war in the Middle East will lead to higher oil and gas prices.
In contrast, a Marist Poll also released this week found that 59 percent of Americans, when asked to consider November’s elections, said they wanted to ensure that everyone who wants to vote can do so — compared to 41 percent, who said their priority was making sure that no one who is ineligible can vote.
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) said in an interview that he gives the president credit for making a “tough decision” on Iran but that “it’s not going to be necessarily good for the midterms.”
“Do I feel confident? I never feel confident,” he said. “It’s going to be a tough midterm.”
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) when speaking to reporters this week urged patience on rising gasoline prices but acknowledged if they persist into the summer, “that’s always bad.”
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), one of the GOP conference’s louder Trump critics, was more blunt during a Fox News interview this week, saying it could be a “disastrous election” for the party if the war drags on. Trump announced Friday evening that the U.S. military had carried out a major bombing operation in an apparent attempt to pressure Iran into reopening the Strait of Hormuz, a waterway which carries roughly 20 percent of the world’s oil.
Retiring Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), whose state is very much in play with his exit, said he’s seeing parallels to 2018, when Democrats won the House amid deep dissatisfaction with Republican leaders on Capitol Hill and in the Trump White House.
Tillis, who frequently vocalizes the concerns many of his colleagues express privately, said some Republicans have asked him, “‘why are you saying this out loud?’”
“Democrats are going to … take advantage of the increase in energy and drive the affordability message and we’ve got to have an answer for affordability,” he explained.
“We’ve just got to be realistic about it,” Tillis added. “We’ve got a voter enthusiasm gap that we need to address.”
Congress
One month later, the DHS shutdown shows no signs of ending
Top Democrats and White House officials are nowhere near close to a breakthrough in negotiations to end the Homeland Security shutdown as the funding lapse is due to hit its one-month mark Saturday and real pain begins.
It’s been more than two weeks since the White House laid out its latest proposal for restoring full Department of Homeland Security operations alongside changes to the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement tactics, and Democrats have yet to send a formal counteroffer in the negotiations spurred by the fatal shootings by federal agents in January of two U.S. citizens in Minnesota.
TSA screeners are now missing their first full paychecks of the shutdown, which could lead to more agents skipping work or quitting — and exacerbate already-lengthy wait times at airport security checkpoints throughout the country. Republicans think this could be the breaking point where Democrats relent.
“I’m hopeful that as you see these problems at the airports, that the public will start talking to Democrats,” said Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.).
But Democrats have a legislative rebuttal: Bills that would fully fund TSA and other parts of DHS that are casualties of the larger immigration standoff. Republicans have repeatedly objected over the last two weeks when Democrats asked for votes on those bills on the Senate floor.
“Who’s standing in the way? America, look at it,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a floor speech Thursday. “We’re not putting any preconditions on funding TSA; the Republicans are.”
The Trump administration remains in “frequent” communication with senior Democratic lawmakers, according to one senior White House official granted anonymity to discuss private conversations. Another White House official said the president’s team “remains interested in continuing conversations with Democrats about ways to end this shutdown” but that “Democrats, regrettably, have chosen to punish the American people.”
Yet since the DHS shutdown began Feb. 14, Democrats on Capitol Hill say the administration has been unwilling to make any significant changes to its immigration enforcement tactics, while Republicans insist that the White House has in fact offered Democrats a deal they would be foolish not to take. Amid finger-pointing and deep distrust, there’s no sign the impasse will anytime soon.
On both sides, negotiators have been careful not to divulge the details of the offers each party is representing very differently. Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) said in an interview this week that she “would like to see the Democrats actually read what the White House sent. It is an eminently reasonable proposal.”
The Senate’s top Democratic appropriator, Washington Sen. Patty Murray, suggested Thursday this wasn’t the case. She also said that while people outside the negotiations are “guessing” at the contents of the recent White House framework, ultimately “words matter.”
“You can have money for body cameras, but not require them — two very different things,” she said of GOP claims about what has been proposed. “I don’t want to characterize anything.”
Democrats are demanding new policies that would prohibit federal immigration agents from wearing masks, require officers to display identification and ensure that agents would be barred from detaining people in certain places, such as churches and schools. Democrats also aren’t budging on the demand that ICE obtain judicial warrants for making arrests.
Growing impatient as the shutdown stretches on, several Republican senators have tried to start up negotiations with their Democratic counterparts, despite GOP leaders initially deferring to the White House to handle dealmaking with the minority party.
Democrats have largely rebuffed those entreaties, however, arguing such talks could result in giving ground to congressional Republicans only to then see the White House renege on commitments. Democrats are especially worried about being railroaded by Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff for policy and the architect of President Donald Trump’s hard-line immigration agenda.
“Things go back to the White House, and Stephen Miller, who’s an extremist, says ‘no,’” Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) said in an interview.
Shaheen and other lawmakers have suggested it could be helpful for the White House to deputize a lead negotiator — but not Miller.
“Stephen Miller has a view that is outside of the American mainstream, and so it’s gonna be hard,” said Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) in an interview. “If Susie Wiles were in charge of the discussion, that would be a different conversation.”
Wiles, who has served as White House chief of staff for more than a year, is involved in the talks, according to one senior White House official. But that official said talks toward a DHS funding deal are also led by Trump himself and a team headed by James Blair, White House deputy chief of staff for legislative, political and public affairs.
“There’s no blueprint to this,” the official said of the ongoing talks. “There’s multiple people working on it.”
In the days following the U.S.-Israel strikes on Iran, Republicans cited an increased risk of terrorist attacks in calling on Democrats to vote for restoring full DHS operations. But the argument did not shake loose any additional Democratic support, including on Thursday when Senate Majority Leader John Thune forced a procedural vote on the House-passed DHS funding bill.
A more tangible pressure point than a theoretical attack on U.S. soil could be further disruption to civilian air travel. The longer a shutdown goes on, the more disgruntled TSA agents will become, since they are forced to work without pay. TSA divulged this week that about 300 security screeners have quit since funding lapsed last month — and the workforce is poised to miss a full paycheck for the first time this shutdown.
In Denver, airport officials asked the public this week to donate $10 and $20 gift cards to help TSA agents pay for groceries and gas.
“When the pain goes from the poor TSA agents — who deserve to be paid, and whose families deserve to have them paid — when that pain gets translated to travelers, it gets worse,” Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) said in an interview. “And that’s what we sure hope we can avoid in the next few days or week or two.”
While security lines grow longer at U.S. airports, news coverage of ICE and CBP agents detaining people in the interior of the country has declined.
“The further and further that we get away from January and the events that occurred in January, then the less and less leverage Democrats are going to have — and the more you may have issues at airports,” said a person close to the White House. “That’s going to put pressure on Democrats.”
At the same time, the Trump administration has stemmed the impact of the shutdown on most of the DHS workforce by bankrolling paychecks with money from the party-line tax and spending package Republicans enacted last summer. That includes pay for law enforcement officers at the Secret Service and active duty members of the Coast Guard.
DHS can also sustain work at ICE and CBP with the more than $100 billion Republicans delivered for those agencies within the party-line legislation last year.
“Democrats aren’t even shutting down what they have a problem with,” said another person close to the White House. “For the defenders of government workers and minorities, I think it’s wild that Democrats are withholding paychecks from TSA.”
Furthermore, Trump administration officials contend that the law does not allow funding from the GOP megabill to be used for TSA paychecks.
“Only way to get TSA paid is for Democrats to vote to reopen the government and not hold this key funding hostage,” said a senior administration official not authorized to speak publicly about interpretation of the law.
Stewart Verdery, who served as a DHS assistant secretary under former President George W. Bush, said he would be surprised if the Trump administration tried to find a way to pay TSA agents as the lapse drags on.
“TSA agents not getting paid is a very visible signal of the situation Democrats are creating,” Verdery said. “And I’m not sure why you’d want to solve it yourself.”
Beyond the Trump administration, congressional Republicans have also been unwilling to alleviate that pressure point by funding TSA and other DHS operations while leaving ICE and Customs and Border Protection hanging. Increasingly, Democrats are continuing to showcase that GOP resistance.
“If we can’t move forward funding the entire department, sitting down and negotiating in good faith — which you’ve had plenty of time to do already — we should be able to come together to pay the hardworking staff of one of its most essential components: TSA,” Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) said on the floor this week.
“Talk is easy,” she continued, questioning whether GOP senators would “back up what they say with their vote.” Republicans objected.
Eli Stokols contributed to this report.
Congress
Who’s on the Gonzales probe
The House Ethics Committee named members to the investigative subcommittee that will probe allegations against embattled Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas), who allegedly had an affair with a staffer who later died by suicide.
The panel will be chaired by Rep. Michael Guest (R-Miss.) and include Reps. Deborah Ross (D-N.C.), Ashley Hinson (R-Iowa) and Greg Stanton (D-Ariz.).
Gonzales recently announced he would not seek reelection, after House GOP leadership urged him to abandon his bid.
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship6 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics11 months agoDemocrat challenging Joni Ernst: I want to ‘tear down’ party, ‘build it back up’
-
Uncategorized1 year ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week









