Congress

GOP leaders snubbed the hard right on Medicaid. They’re vowing to fight back.

Published

1 year ago

May 13, 2025

House Republican leaders appear to have won support from key moderates by backing off the most controversial proposals to overhaul Medicaid — but it has created new risks for the GOP’s domestic policy megabill.

Fierce pressure is now building from hospitals and clinics to the Medicaid cuts that have survived while conservative hard-liners are threatening to withhold their votes if they don’t get deeper trims to the safety-net program.

It adds up to a bumpy road ahead for the House Energy and Commerce Committee as it prepares for a marathon meeting to advance the legislation Tuesday afternoon.

The proposal unveiled by Chair Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.) would not slash federal reimbursement rates in most cases or impose per-capita caps on payments to states, but it would likely force states to revamp how they finance their programs or cut benefits. A preliminary Congressional Budget Office estimate requested by Democrats found that more than 8.6 million people would go uninsured if the health portions of the GOP’s party-line package become law.

While such significant changes to Medicaid could face significant resistance in the Senate — Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), for example, wrote in a New York Times op-ed Monday that big Medicaid cuts are “morally wrong and politically suicidal” — Guthrie appears to have the votes he needs to make progress this week.

Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-N.Y.), an Energy and Commerce member who had been wary of deep cuts to Medicaid, praised the “bold” proposal in a social media post Monday, saying it “achieves our top priorities: protecting Medicaid for those who genuinely need it.”

So did Rep. Gabe Evans (R-Colo.), another panel member who said the legislation, “follows through on Republicans’ promises to cut waste, fraud, and abuse while protecting coverage for Colorado’s most vulnerable populations.”

“The critics will spread fear about cuts for political purposes, so let me clear: this bill allows Medicaid spending to increase year-over-year for the next ten years,” he added.

Once past the committee, however, the legislation faces a whirlwind of threats on the House floor, where opposition from any three Republican members could sink the entire sweeping package of tax cuts, border security enhancements, defense plus-ups and more.

A key leader of the hard-right bloc, Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), said in social media posts Monday that Guthrie’s proposal doesn’t offer “ANY transformative changes” to Medicaid, “among MANY [other] problems.“

“We will need SIGNIFICANT additional changes to garner my support,” Roy added.

And it remains to be seen if a broader group of swing-district Republicans would be swayed by the proposal. Guthrie has made the case that the legislation would preserve Medicaid for the most vulnerable instead of “capable adults who choose not to work,” but Democrats are prepared to weaponize coverage-loss predictions and potentially major impacts on state budgets to pressure potential GOP holdouts.

“The Republicans are trying to say this is a moderate bill,” ranking member Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) told reporters Monday, referring to the proposals GOP leaders opted not to include. “Nothing could be further from the truth.”

A mounting pressure campaign from health care facilities could be especially influential; many Republicans have cited the potential for hospital and clinic closures in expressing wariness about deeper cuts. While worst-case scenarios did not come to fruition, providers are arguing the proposed policies would still have devastating impacts.

The National Association of Community Health Centers is blanketing Capitol Hill for a fly-in Tuesday, and hospital groups are issuing blistering statements. Hospitals are major employers in many members’ districts and can have significant sway over members’ votes.

“Congressional Republicans and President Trump rightly pledged to protect Medicaid benefits and coverage — this bill fails that test,” said Chip Kahn, president of the Federation for American Hospitals, in a statement. “It is imperative Republicans go back to the drawing board; too many lives depend on it.”

“Congress has a moral obligation to consider the harm that such disastrous cuts would have on America’s health safety net,” added Sister Mary Haddad, the Catholic Health Association CEO.

Some blue state governments also warned about coverage losses and crushing fiscal impacts. Sarah Adelman, commissioner of New Jersey’s Medicaid agency, said the proposal “would cut people off from coverage and take vital funding away from New Jersey” by curtailing provider taxes, a common practice states use to finance their Medicaid programs.

She also said that punishing states for using their own funding to offer coverage regardless of immigration status is “cruel and short-sighted.”

The Greater New York Hospital Association also slammed the bill, arguing in a statement that work requirements could lead to 1.6 million people to lose coverage in the state. The group also projected New York would lose $1.6 billion in federal funds from the cut to expansion funding for coverage of undocumented immigrants. New York is one of 14 states that use state funds to cover undocumented children.

Republicans, meanwhile, are accusing Democrats and their allies of fear-mongering about the impacts. They are feuding, for instance, over one CBO estimate Democrats used to claim the legislation would lead to 13.7 million more people going uninsured — an estimate that included coverage losses attributable to the potential expiration of enhanced subsidies for Affordable Care Act, something Republicans never meant to address in the party-line megabill, even if they are skeptical about extending them.

“Democrats are pedaling incorrect reports that include policies that aren’t even in the bill,” Guthrie said in a statement. “It is reckless that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle claimed an artificially high number in alleged coverage loss just so they can fear monger and score political points.”

Congress

Top Commerce Committee Democrat releases AI framework

Published

29 minutes ago

October 7, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Sen. Maria Cantwell, the top Democrat on the Commerce Committee with vast jurisdiction over artificial intelligence policy, outlined six AI safety principles Wednesday morning — tenets she believes should underpin any legislation to stave off the greatest threats posed by the rapidly-evolving technology.

“To manage risks from advanced AI systems we need clear safety standards, continuous testing, and reporting of serious failures,” the Washington Democrat said in a statement. “America can lead the world in AI by building systems that are not only more capable, but safer and more secure.”

Cantwell’s framework would encompass six priority areas: enforceable safety standards for frontier models, continuous testing, disclosure and oversight, public-private partnerships, protection for children and workers and adherence to U.S.-led global standards.

To directly address risks posed by the technology, her framework would have federal experts at the National Institute of Standards and Technology and other agencies establish clear federal rules to address harms, with specialized standards for open-source AI models to reduce risks of catastrophic misuse.

The senator is also recommending that the federal government provide developers with guidance on how to accelerate U.S. leadership on AI without sacrificing basic safety protocols.

On testing, Cantwell argues the government and independent experts should provide constant oversight and “continually scrutinize and stress test covered AI models,” particularly when sensitive information or secure facilities are involved.

She also says AI systems must have built-in safeguards to ensure they halt self-modification that could bypass safety controls. And she states that advanced models should not be released until they have undergone an independent, comprehensive audit — similar to outside auditors examining a company’s financial statements.

Cantwell, a former tech executive, has for years pursued similar priorities. But her new framework comes ahead of a midterm election that could return control of the Senate to Democrats, handing Cantwell back of the Commerce Committee gavel.

It also comes as lawmakers are under pressure to regulate the AI industry but are showing few signs that they will be able to reach consensus, across the aisle or even within their own party.

Senators had hoped for hearings, markups and briefings on AI legislation before leaving Washington until after the November elections, but little progress was made. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), the current Commerce Committee chair, has continued to say he intends to hold a markup on AI-related bills but has punted multiple times, saying senators have yet to reach agreement on any bipartisan measure.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) have been trying to cut a deal on legislation to prevent and contain catastrophic risk from runaway AI technology, but bill text has so far failed to materialize.

Cantwell’s approach laid out Wednesday morning would be stricter and more comprehensive than what Thune and Klobuchar are expected to ultimately produce, based on similar legislation they have offered in the past.

Her approach of “constant oversight and vigilance” would also serve as a contrast to that of GOP leaders, who have consistently called for a “light touch” regulatory regime.

Congress

Capitol agenda: GOP braces for SCOTUS fight that may not come

Published

2 hours ago

October 7, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Senate Republicans are privately ready for a post-election Supreme Court nomination fight that may never come.

There aren’t too many signs from the two oldest justices — 78-year-old Clarence Thomas and 76-year-old Samuel Alito — that either plans to retire in the coming months and force Republicans to spring into action to fill a vacancy.

But the two men would face a mountain of pressure to step down in the lame-duck period if Democrats retake the Senate, which could essentially shut down confirmations of President Donald Trump’s favored nominees.

Such a retirement announcement would kick off a chaotic sprint on Capitol Hill, giving Republicans just five scheduled session weeks to cobble together 50 votes for a Trump nominee.

Republicans in a position to act said in recent interviews they would certainly try to rapidly confirm any Trump pick.

“We would proceed quickly with such a vacancy,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune.

Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley said “of course” they would. Sen. Thom Tillis, a frequent Trump critic who could single-handedly bottle up a nominee in Judiciary, said he would “absolutely” support a post-election confirmation.

“You’ve got to use your majority position to take that vote,” Tillis said.

Several senators, including Thune, are skeptical a vacancy even happens. Alito told Bloomberg News in an interview published Tuesday he would “stick around” at least until the court’s current term ends early next summer. Thomas hasn’t publicly addressed his retirement in years and has otherwise given no signs of imminent plans to quit.

“I don’t know why you assume there will be one,” said Sen. Susan Collins, another potentially pivotal vote who left the door open to filling any vacancy, pointing to her longstanding position that “as long as it’s not close to a presidential election that we should proceed.”

Still, some lawmakers on both sides of the aisle with battle scars from prior confirmation fights over Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson aren’t ready to entertain the thought of a lame-duck confirmation sprint.

“Oh, gosh,” said Sen. Lisa Murkowski. “You’re giving me the chills.”

What else we’re watching:

— INSIDE COONS’ ISRAEL TURNABOUT: Sen. Chris Coons is likely to chair Foreign Relations if Democrats win the Senate, and — in what he describes as a “fairly sharp break” in his thinking — he’s not ruling out sanctions on Israel’s prime minister. The Delaware senator’s evolution matches that of other moderate Democrats in the three years since Hamas’ deadly Oct. 7 attack triggered a military response that Israel’s critics have said amounted to genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.

— TRUMP COLLEGE TAX RULES WORRY DEMS: Democratic lawmakers are worried proposed Trump administration rules targeting diversity initiatives on college campuses could threaten universities’ finances over commonplace activities. “What if a university has Black History Month?” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, who sits on the tax-writing Finance Committee, said in a recent interview. “Is that going to cause them to lose their tax-exempt status?” The IRS regulations proposed Sept. 3 are slated to go into effect next June. Supporters say the rules should be used to prevent schools from considering race in decisions over who they admit, hire and promote, for example.

Jordain Carney, Daniella Cheslow and Brian Faler contributed to this report.

Congress

‘Use your majority’: In the unlikely event of a Supreme Court vacancy, Republicans are ready to act

Published

5 hours ago

October 7, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Senate Republicans are unlikely to get a Supreme Court vacancy this year. They’re privately prepared for one, just in case.

A Democratic midterm triumph would carry massive implications for the final years of President Donald Trump’s presidency, including the prospect that the Senate could essentially shut down confirmations of his favored nominees. That’s a nightmare scenario for Republicans, who have viewed their reshaping of the federal judiciary as a crown jewel of Trump’s legacy.

The two oldest Supreme Court justices — 78-year-old Clarence Thomas and 76-year-old Samuel Alito — are both Republican appointees and reliable Trump allies, and key Senate Republicans said in recent interviews with Blue Light News they would support filling a high-court slot this year if one opens up.

“We would proceed quickly with such a vacancy,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune.

Signs that Republicans will need to spring into action are scarce. Alito told Bloomberg News in an interview published Tuesday that he would “stick around” at least until the court’s current term ends early next summer. Thomas, meanwhile, hasn’t publicly addressed his retirement plans in years and has otherwise given no signs of imminent plans to quit.

But if the GOP loses control of the Senate in the midterms, both men would face a mountain of pressure to consider stepping down, given the stakes. Democrats remain bitter over the Republican blockade of President Barack Obama’s final Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland, and could block a fourth Trump justice.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said in an interview over the summer that part of his pitch to recruit candidates was “two words that make a huge difference: Supreme Court.” Speaking to reporters last week, Schumer indicated that Democrats would use their majority to block judicial nominees they view as too extreme.

“One of the reasons we need to make sure that we do everything we can to take back the Senate is [to] not let Trump put such horrible justices, MAGA justices, on the Supreme Court and the lower courts,” he said.

A post-Nov. 3 announcement would be the first time since the 1922 retirement of Mahlon Pitney that a Supreme Court justice announced his or her departure in the lame-duck period after a midterm election, according to the Congressional Research Service.

Such an announcement would kick off a chaotic sprint on Capitol Hill, giving Republicans just five scheduled session weeks to cobble together 50 votes for a Trump nominee.

Those in a position to act said recently they would certainly try — and there is recent precedent for doing it quickly: Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed just 38 days after Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg’s September 2020 death.

Like Thune, Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said “of course” Senate Republicans would try to fill a post-election vacancy.

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), a frequent Trump critic who could single-handedly bottle up a nominee in the Judiciary Committee, said he would “absolutely” support filling an end-of-year vacancy.

“You’ve got to use your majority position to take that vote,” he said.

But Tillis was among many in the GOP who doubt senators will have a slot to fill. “I can’t think of anything other than health,” he said, that would cause a justice to quickly step down.

Thune said that if a justice had plans to retire, “They would have done it already.”

Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, another potentially pivotal vote, also left the door open to a post-election confirmation. The only Senate Republican running this year in a state won by Kamala Harris, Collins pointed to her longstanding position that “as long as it’s not close to a presidential election that we should proceed to consider nominees.”

“I don’t know why you assume there will be one,” she added. “I haven’t heard that will happen.”

Collins knows as well as anyone the perils of taking up high-court nominations in an election year. She cited the too-close-to–Election Day rule in voting against Barrett’s nomination as she stood for reelection in 2020.

But Democrats are still hammering her decision to vote for Brett Kavanaugh a month before the 2018 midterms — even after his nomination was thrown into turmoil by allegations of sexual misconduct and assault which he denied.

Troy Jackson, Collins’ Democratic opponent, posted on X this week that Collins “cannot be trusted with voting on our next Supreme Court Justice.”

The campaign-trail sparring reflects just how partisan and contentious high-court nomination battles have grown, and plenty of senators are hoping to avoid a knock-down-drag-out fight on the heels of a similarly nasty midterm campaign.

In a sign of the battle scars left from the fights over Kavanaugh, Barrett and the most recent Supreme Court confirmee — Ketanji Brown Jackson — some lawmakers said they weren’t ready to even entertain the thought of a lame-duck confirmation sprint.

“Not a hypothetical I’m ready to talk about,” said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, who is expected to lead Democrats on the Judiciary Committee next year.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), who would be a closely watched vote, made a quick escape when she was asked about the scenario.

“Oh, gosh,” she said. “You’re giving me the chills.”

Chris Marquette contributed to this report.