Congress

GOP’s reconciliation hopes are easier dreamt than done

Published

6 months ago

March 25, 2026

Republicans are hitting the gas on a new party-line policy bill. They are fully aware it might end up in the ditch.

The renewed push for budget reconciliation — spawned out of a Monday meeting between President Donald Trump and a group of GOP senators — marks the best shot Republicans have had in months to enact key agenda items without Democratic cooperation. House and Senate conservatives have clamored for a second attempt this Congress, following last summer’s tax-cuts-focused megabill, without much success.

But GOP leaders face a tall order in wrangling their thin margins and the hodgepodge of policy ideas already being pitched by their competing factions — or watching the effort collapse due to infighting.

Underscoring the massive challenge, some Republicans are stressing they aren’t committing to pass another bill under the reconciliation process — which could allow them to avoid a Democratic filibuster in the Senate — they are just promising to give it a try.

“The odds would be like 100 percent,” Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) said in an interview about the chances Republicans will attempt another reconciliation bill. “Now, do we pass it?”

The latest vision for a GOP reconciliation bill would build the legislation around new funding for immigration enforcement that Democrats are refusing to pass, plus parts of the SAVE America Act — the Republican elections overhaul that doesn’t have a path to passing the Senate. GOP lawmakers believe incentives for states to adopt new policies such as voter ID rules could comply with the Senate’s strict rules for reconciliation.

“I would keep it as simple as possible so it could pass,” Johnson said.

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said in an interview that keeping the bill narrow would help raise the odds that Republicans would be able to get something across the finish line.

“If you want to keep all of our members tight … we need to agree to the parameters and not allow scope creep,” Tillis said.

Keeping the scope of the reconciliation bill narrower would have an added political benefit for Senate Republicans — it would limit the slate of issues on which Democrats could force simple-majority votes as they try to squeeze vulnerable GOP incumbents just months before the midterms.

But there is already outright skepticism, and in some cases early signs of opposition, inside the Senate GOP. Republicans can lose up to three senators and still pass a party-line bill.

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who is facing a tough reelection bid, said she thought reconciliation was not a “good approach.” Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), a Budget Committee member who chairs the Republican Steering Committee, predicted it would be “very difficult” to get the votes and compared it to a “pipe dream.”

“You know me, I’m not a big fan of reconciliation,” Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) added when asked if she wanted to pursue a new party-line bill.

It’s not just the Senate where GOP leaders are facing an uphill battle to pass both a budget resolution — a key prerequisite for reconciliation — as well as the bill itself.

A big risk of pursuing a second reconciliation bill is House conservatives seeking to include potentially billions of dollars in cuts to the social safety net and other long-brewing proposals that will “scare the hell out of” vulnerable Republican lawmakers ahead of the midterms, according to one senior House GOP aide granted anonymity to speak candidly about the dynamics.

Even House GOP chatter about trying to add in extra Pentagon funding is sparking warnings from their Senate counterparts. One GOP senator, also granted anonymity to speak candidly, predicted that a heavy injection of defense spending could “kill the whole thing.”

Several House Republicans granted anonymity to speak candidly about the dynamics said they do not believe GOP leaders will be able to muster the multiple near-unanimous GOP votes needed to get another reconciliation bill through the House.

At a leadership meeting Tuesday, senior House Republicans voiced concerns about whether adding the SAVE America Act to a reconciliation bill would be a futile exercise, according to two people in the room.

That’s because of procedural reality: Most of the contentious elections bill won’t pass muster with the Senate parliamentarian, whose guidance on the reconciliation process is typically final.

The House Freedom Caucus called the Senate GOP plan “gaslighting” Tuesday morning. And Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) said Tuesday that it’s “hard to imagine” how it could pass under the budget process.

“And by ‘hard’ I mean ‘essentially impossible,’” Lee added on X.

Republicans are discussing how they might induce states to implement some of the SAVE America Act’s voter ID requirements. Senate Budget Committee Republicans met Tuesday for what senators described as a meeting to “touch gloves” as members plotted how to enact ICE funding and parts of the election bill. Senate Republicans also discussed pursuing another reconciliation bill during a closed-door lunch Tuesday.

House Administration Chair Bryan Steil (R-Wis.) separately circulated a list of proposals with key GOP offices on his side of the Capitol that would mandate or financially incentivize states to implement voter ID laws, require proof of citizenship for voter registration, share voter data with federal agencies for verification and conduct post-election audits, among other items, according to a document obtained by POLITICO.

Some of those items appeared unlikely to pass scrutiny with the Senate parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, whose rulings tend to be the final word on the reconciliation process.

GOP senators could overrule her, but Majority Leader John Thune vowed Tuesday that they would comply with her guidance. Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) also batted away a question about overruling her, calling it a “hypothetical.”

But Republican leaders are otherwise being careful not to make any pronouncements about where the latest reconciliation push will end up. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise said only that they are “looking at a lot of different options to see if we’ve got a consensus.”

Thune added that he would need to be “pretty sure” any proposal has the requisite 50 votes before the Senate embarked on the initial and time-consuming step of approving a budget resolution, which unlocks the reconciliation process.

“We’re just trying to make sure we keep our expectations realistic,” he said.

Congress

College sports bill moves forward in Senate with Democratic support

Published

4 hours ago

September 15, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

A group of Senate Democrats on Tuesday voted with most Republicans after months of painstaking negotiations to help advance a sweeping college athletics bill.

An initial procedural vote on the measure led by Commerce Chair Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and ranking member Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) moved forward on a 74-24 vote, despite opposition on both sides of the aisle. The move tees up more floor debate and a final passage vote before lawmakers leave to campaign for the midterms.

Cantwell said that even though the bill wasn’t perfect, it would help ensure the name, image and likeness rights of student athletes, among other protections.

“I will not let the perfect be the enemy of the essential,” Cantwell said on the floor ahead of the vote. “This is the last best chance to save college sports and put HBCUs at the table where the future gets decided,” she said, referring to historically Black colleges and universities.

The chamber is expected to stay for the entirety of its planned three-week session now that senators opened a path to take up the bill, according to four Senate aides granted anonymity to discuss planning. Fast-tracking the legislation would depend on a deal between all 100 senators, which would require overcoming holdouts’ opposition.

Supporters of the bill behind the scenes have been fielding concerns from senators and a coalition of sports, civil rights and labor groups who’ve criticized the measure’s planned regulation of the multibillion-dollar industry.

Democrats like Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) spent weeks trying to convince his colleagues to “step back and oppose” the bill in its current form, saying in a press conference with AFL-CIO this week it would “preserve a system of exploitation that is damaging our athletes.”

Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), who voted “no,” told reporters Tuesday the bill “falls way short.”

“It really jeopardizes college athletes’ health and safety. It gives broad-based antitrust exemption to the NCAA and gets very little back from it,” Booker added, referring to the National Collegiate Athletic Association. “It is a bill that really, unfortunately, as one of the handful of college football players in this place, it does not cure what are some of the biggest things that are really threatening college players.”

Some Democrats who supported the bill, including New Mexico Sen. Ben Ray Luján, cited concerns from student athletes and coaches in their home states as the reason why.

“Student athletes and others wanted to make sure that the conferences that they were playing for were getting treated in a fair way,” he said. “Go talk to athletes from our schools and across the country and see what this means to them, not just athletes from the super conferences around America.”

The legislation has the backing of President Donald Trump, major sports conferences like the Big Ten and Southeastern, student sports organizations and HBCUs.

Several Republicans who were on the fence earlier about the bill, including Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), were convinced to support it after Cruz added language to clarify that it would not preempt state laws on transgender athletes’ participation on women’s sports teams.

Others Republicans like Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) said he couldn’t support advancing the measure because “there’s too much government involvement in it.”

Congress

Rebel Democrats again help House GOP advance floor agenda

Published

4 hours ago

September 15, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

A pair of House Democrats voted to advance a slate of GOP bills in a procedural vote that was otherwise on track to fail — the second time they have crossed party lines to help out House GOP leaders in recent weeks.

Reps. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington and Jared Golden of Maine previously aided Speaker Mike Johnson earlier this month when they voted to advance a “rule” resolution that teed up a Golden-authored measure aiding lobstermen. The move sparked outrage among many of their Democratic colleagues and created a touchy situation for Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.

But the dustup does not appear to have fazed Golden and Gluesenkamp Perez, who again joined with Republicans Tuesday to set up votes on bills that would hand President Donald Trump new authorities to sanction Russia’s trading partners as well as measures rolling back some EPA regulations.

The vote was 214-211, with two Republicans voting “no” — Reps. Andy Harris of Maryland and Ralph Norman of South Carolina. Several other Republicans, including Rep. Tim Burchett of Tennessee, Andrew Clyde of Georgia and Scott Perry of Pennsylvania voted “yes” only after extended talks with House GOP leaders.

The last time House Republicans adopted a rule without help from Democrats was in July.

Speaker Mike Johnson, when asked about Democrats helping him adopt a rule twice this month, said he “would have gotten the votes.”

“You saw me work it there at the end,” Johnson said. “We would have had the votes necessary, but we had some discussion about other measures that people want to consider, so just worked through the process.”

After Gluesenkamp Perez and Golden voted with the GOP earlier this month, Jeffries promised a “serious response,” but he later indicted that there would be no public consequences following private conversations with the lawmakers. Golden is retiring after his term ends, and Gluesenkamp Perez is seeking reelection in a district won by Trump in 2024.

Harris announced before the vote that he was introducing a bill to tackle affordability by suspending the federal gas tax, suggesting he may have withheld his vote in a bid to secure floor consideration.

“Let’s put my bill on the floor and PASS IT,” Harris said in a post on X.

Congress

House panel recommends Leon Black be held in contempt for stonewalling Epstein investigation

Published

5 hours ago

September 15, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The House Oversight Committee voted unanimously 41-0 Tuesday to recommend billionaire investor Leon Black be held in contempt of Congress for not fully cooperating with the panel’s Jeffrey Epstein investigation.

It marks an escalation in an already contentious standoff, where Black defied two congressional subpoenas, refused to appear for a transcribed interview and then sued the committee for allegedly “overstep[ing] its authority.”

“Subpoenas are not suggestions. They carry the force of law and require full compliance,” said Chair James Comer (R-Ky.), later noting that Black gave the committee “no choice but to hold him in contempt” after ignoring the subpoenas.

Black has been a target of the committee’s Epstein probe for the personal and financial relationship he maintained with the late convicted sex trafficker, which included a $158 million payment not long after Epstein first became a registered sex offender.

He met with the committee in May for a transcribed interview but declined to speak at length about non-disclosure agreements he entered into with women tied to Epstein. As a result, the panel subpoenaed him to turn over those documents, to which Black responded by refusing to submit all those in his possession and then skipping a scheduled appearance before the panel slated for Sept. 3 — suing the committee instead.

Black’s lawyers, Susan Estrich and Aaron Cutler, in a statement before the votecalled for the House Oversight contempt vote to be postponed.

“This entire charade is about politics and ambition. Given our litigation against Chairman Comer and the Committee, the possible ethics violations by Chairman Comer, the false and potentially libelous and defamatory statements by Ranking Member Garcia, there are more than enough reasons to postpone this mark-up and contempt resolution,” the attorneys said.

The contempt resolution now heads to the full House, which also must vote on whether to refer the matter to the U.S. Attorney’s office for the District of Columbia for possible indictment.

Comer said it was now up to GOP leadership whether it would schedule the resolution for consideration before the House leaves at the end of the week for recess until after the midterms. A spokesperson for Speaker Mike Johnson did not immediately return a request for comment.