Congress

Happy New Year, the debt limit is here. Get ready for an all-out war over it.

Published

2 years ago

December 30, 2024

GOP leaders are staring down two bad options to solve President-elect Donald Trump’s debt-limit problem, after failing to execute his demand to lift the federal borrowing cap in the last government funding bill.

One path requires full buy-in from Republican lawmakers to address the issue via budget reconciliation — a huge challenge thanks to the party’s fierce fiscal hawks. The other entails winning over Democrats, who for the most part rejected Trump’s initial debt-limit gambit last week.

“Whoever advised the president that it was even possible needs to better understand how this place works,” Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said about Trump’s latest push to raise the debt limit.

It’s going to be an urgent issue for Trump as soon as he takes office. The federal government will resume the cap on its borrowing authority on Jan. 1, as the U.S. sits on a national debt of more than $36 trillion, though the Treasury Department can buy time for a number of months with so-called extraordinary measures. The fiscal time bomb illustrates the struggle Trump and Republican leaders face heading into 2025, as they consider whether to court Democrats who will want concessions or their own conservatives who are known for rigidly sticking to their demands to cut funding.

“I’ve told my caucus, if they try to do it under reconciliation, they’ll lose my vote,” Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said on Friday. “I told them: You want to kill reconciliation, put something on that we don’t like.”

It’s going to be a huge challenge for Republicans to raise the debt ceiling on their own. In exchange for increasing it by $1.5 trillion, House GOP leaders have told conservatives they’ll look for $2.5 trillion in cuts to mandatory spending — the bucket of money that controls things like SNAP nutrition assistance, Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare — in an upcoming reconciliation bill. That legislation is also supposed to deal with huge party priorities on border security, energy and taxes, which Republicans also say they’ll find a way to pay for. And, as Paul illustrates, fiscal conservatives are already voicing opposition to handling the debt limit through that party-line process.

Paul said he thinks other Senate conservatives have also told GOP leaders they won’t vote for a reconciliation package that raises the debt limit. With a 53-seat majority in the Senate next year, opposition from just a few Republicans will sink those dreams.

Getting Republicans to agree on $2.5 trillion in cuts to mandatory programs over 10 years would also be a challenge for GOP leaders. Trump has ruled out reductions to Social Security and Medicare, the costliest of the programs. Of the roughly $4 trillion the U.S. government spends on mandatory programs each year, Social Security benefits alone total almost $1.5 trillion.

Democrats say the proposal is a public relations nightmare for the GOP.

“Listen, this is the gift that keeps on giving,” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said. “This is the absolute worst case for the country — a massive tax cut for the richest of the rich, paid for by slashing, to the bone, health care for seniors and poor kids.”

Raising the debt limit by $1.5 trillion, even with corresponding funding cuts, would not keep the nation from hitting the borrowing cap for long. The U.S. budget deficit, the gap between how much comes in from revenue like taxes and how much is spent, was $1.8 trillion in the fiscal year that ended in September. Congress’ nonpartisan budget scorekeeper projects that interest payments on the national debt will total almost $900 billion next year.

And the timing for when Congress will absolutely need to address the debt limit is tricky, adding to the challenge for Republican leaders.

After the debt ceiling is reinstated on Jan. 1, the Treasury Department will immediately deploy the typical “extraordinary measures,” cash-shifting accounting tactics to ensure the country can continue to pay its bills for at least a few months longer. Then a surge of revenue will begin to flow into federal coffers when tax filing season begins at the end of January, keeping the U.S. from hitting its borrowing limit for a few more months.

All the while, the Treasury secretary will keep refining an “X-date” prediction for when the U.S. would default on its loans without action from Congress. Last year, money from taxes came in far lower than predicted, suddenly speeding up the forecast default date to early June, after lawmakers had assumed they had until August or September to pass a fix.

“Extraordinary measures will extend what the actual, true, de-facto deadline is. But we saw just last year that can vary wildly,” noted Pennsylvania Rep. Brendan Boyle, the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee.

Boyle has long pushed for passage of a bill that would let the Treasury Department continue paying the nation’s bills, despite the debt ceiling, similar to the proposal outgoing Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell floated during previous standoffs over raising the U.S. borrowing limit. But many fiscal conservatives are opposed.

“I want to keep the debt limit. I like it,” Sen. Ron Johnson said last week.

The Wisconsin Republican said he is also opposed to raising the debt limit through reconciliation and plans to roll out a “debt ceiling budget” in early 2025 that illustrates how the national debt has “grown grotesquely” above inflation and population growth in recent years.

Raising the risk of a debt-limit crisis is less advantageous for Republicans as the GOP takes control of the White House and both chambers of Congress, especially as Trump so adamantly insists on swift action and has even called on lawmakers to “terminate” the nation’s borrowing cap altogether. But Democrats warn that slim GOP majorities and demands from fiscal conservatives keep alive the specter of economic catastrophe.

“When they have the trifecta, there’s really no point — other than old bad habits — to threatening the economy with the debt limit,” said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), outgoing chair of the Senate Budget Committee.

“It’s the bear trap in the bedroom Republicans love to leave around for negotiating purposes,” Whitehouse added. “Now that they’ve got the trifecta, it loses some of its negotiating appeal and remains extremely, extremely dangerous.”

Congress

Former MLB star Mark Teixeira to hit campaign trail with GOP leaders

Published

3 hours ago

July 31, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

House GOP leaders are planning to bring former MLB star Mark Teixeira, one of their top candidate recruits this cycle, out on the trail in battleground districts over the summer recess sprint.

Majority Leader Steve Scalise will host a fundraiser with Teixeira in New York City on Aug. 20 with Speaker Mike Johnson as a special guest, according to three people with direct knowledge of the event, granted anonymity to discuss plans that have not yet been made public.

It’s part of a New York swing where Teixeira and Johnson will also hit nearby stops in GOP Rep. Mike Lawler’s 17th Congressional District and for Mike LiPetri, who is trying to unseat Democratic Rep. Tom Suozzi in New York’s 3rd Congressional District.

Teixeira is running to replace GOP Rep. Chip Roy in Texas’ 21st Congressional District. He won a World Series title with the Yankees in 2009 and also played for the Texas Rangers, Atlanta Braves and Los Angeles Angels before retiring from professional baseball in 2016 after 14 seasons.

Because Teixeira has little chance of losing in the deep-red seat, Republican leaders are hoping to harness his star power to boost their candidates in the most competitive races. They’re planning for Teixeira to help campaign in a wider swath of battleground districts in August and through November, including likely stops in Pennsylvania and Georgia.

Congress

Faced with Blanche dilemma, Trump chooses revenge

Published

3 hours ago

July 31, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

President Donald Trump has a choice: allow changes to a controversial court settlement and secure the confirmation of his former personal lawyer as attorney general, or thumb his nose at a pair of his few remaining Republican critics in Congress.

True to form, he is giving no ground — so far.

Trump’s decision Thursday to signal he would rather pull the nomination of Todd Blanche, his pick to lead the Justice Department, rather than give in to the demands of Sens. John Cornyn and Thom Tillis demonstrated that the president’s desire to thwart his enemies does not end with the demise of their political careers.

Both Republican senators will leave Congress at the end of the year after running afoul of Trump, and both have found a degree of independence since becoming untethered from needing to keep in his good graces.

But their efforts to exert leverage and seek to curtail a controversial settlement agreement reached in May between Trump and the IRS only prompted the president to double down. He announced in a Truth Social post that Blanche would remain as acting attorney general “in any event” and that he would potentially withdraw and resubmit the nomination “after Cornyn and Tillis are out of office” in January.

Tillis, who announced he would not seek reelection last year after clashing with Trump over Medicaid cuts in his home state of North Carolina, betrayed little surprise when asked about Trump’s reticence to bargain over the IRS settlement.

“Look up the definition of recalcitrant,” he said.

Cornyn, who lost his bid for renomination to a fifth term representing Texas in May after Trump endorsed a scandal-prone opponent, brushed off the accusation that he was simply seeking revenge by blocking Blanche.

He called Trump’s claim “a convenient excuse, but it’s certainly not true.” And he warned the president that trying to wait him out would be a “gamble.”

“After the midterms, who knows who’s going to be the next United States senator from North Carolina or Texas?” he said.

The subtext of Cornyn’s remark was that Republicans might have a smaller majority if they have one at all — raising the question that if Trump can’t strike a deal with members of his own party to advance his prized nominee, what will governing with Democrats possibly look like?

One of Trump’s frequent Democratic sparring partners from his first term in office — Sen. Adam Schiff of California — said the pressure from Cornyn and Tillis is only a hint of what is to come and that the president should get used to “a restoration of checks and balances.”

“I would hope what it will mean both for the remainder of this Congress and the next is that Congress will once again assume the role of being a counterbalance to the power of the executive,” said Schiff, who led Democrats’ first Trump impeachment attempt. “We largely reneged on that.”

The battle of Blanche has been especially pitched given Trump’s personal interests. Not only did Blanche represent Trump in multiple cases brought in the years before the president’s reelection, Cornyn and Tillis were seeking to curtail a deal that personally benefited him.

Both men sought to ensure a $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization fund” set out in the agreement text could not be revived and to restrict the terms of an audit immunity agreement applying to Trump, his family and business.

It’s possible a deal could still be reached. Cornyn and Tillis met with Blanche Thursday afternoon after Trump issued his ultimatum. One person granted anonymity to describe the private meeting said the two sides were “working collaboratively now” and that it was good “they were finally all face to face.”

Ahead of the meeting, both senators insinuated that the White House — not Blanche — was the obstacle to revising the settlement and moving forward with the confirmation. Cornyn explicitly blamed Trump, while Tillis said the presidents’ advisers could be to blame.

“They’re making this a lot harder than it needs to be,” Cornyn said Wednesday. “We’ve tried to make it easy for them, and they simply refuse to take our help.”

Both said they believed there was a desire in Trump’s orbit to resurrect the payout fund at some point to direct federal settlements to the president’s political allies.

GOP colleagues also chalked up Thursday’s drama to the White House not wanting to give in — whether to protect the original settlement agreement or to deny Trump’s critics a victory.“Clearly, the White House does not want to do what Senator Cornyn and Senator Tillis were asking,” said Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska said she shared Cornyn and Tillis’ qualms about the settlement and asked Blanche in her own private meeting to put his oral commitments in writing.

“I have expressed the same concerns, and I am waiting for the same answers,” said Murkowski, an occasional Trump critic who is up for reelection in 2028.

Jennifer Scholtes contributed to this report.

Congress

Trump-aligned parents rally behind kids’ online safety rules

Published

13 hours ago

July 30, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Parents’ rights groups aligned with the MAGA movement and other socially conservative groups are imploring congressional leaders to enact strict rules that aim to prevent online dangers for kids.

They join a chorus of more progressive parent and survivor groups urging lawmakers ahead of an upcoming Senate Commerce online kids’ safety markup to enact robust and clear “duty of care” requirements that would legally compel technology companies to prevent harm to children.

In a July 30 letter to Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), shared first with Blue Light News, the groups demanded specific standards that would require technology companies to “truly stand with, not against parents.”

So-called duty of care requirements have emerged as a central battleground in negotiations over kids’ online safety legislation. The provision would mandate tech companies to take reasonable steps to prevent and mitigate specific harms to minors on their platforms and would give regulators a legal basis to hold companies accountable if they fail to do so.

“[W]e write as parents, pro-family leaders, survivors, and child advocates to implore you to act in a way that truly empowers parents to protect our children, and to resist the rather loud voices who say that immunity for Big Tech and evisceration of state efforts in this space is somehow pro-parent,” the groups wrote. “It is not.”

They also urged lawmakers to expand on state laws rather than override them. Preemption provisions have become much more broadly unpopular in the year since Cruz tried — and failed — to attach a 10-year moratorium on the ability of states to set their own artificial intelligence laws in the GOP’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

“States are standing with parents and children,” the letter reads. “Your committee must build on that work, not tear it down.”

The groups signing the letter, led by Institute for Families and Technology, include MAGA-aligned Moms for Liberty, Louisiana Family Forum, South Dakota Family Voice and the Family Policy Alliance, a conservative Christian group influencing state policies.

Cruz this week postponed a broader artificial intelligence markup tentatively planned for next week until September. Instead, next week, he’s going to take up several measures on kids’ safety and chatbots.

Cruz, in an interview Wednesday, did not rule out preemption provisions in next week’s markup, telling Blue Light News, “Those are all active topics under negotiation.”

Spokespeople for Cruz and Cantwell did not return requests for comment.

The letter comes as right-leaning and family organizations have a heightened awareness of kids’ safety around technology. In fact, the issue was a big topic at last week’s SoCon Con, where there were multiple panels and speakers on kids and tech, including one on keeping kids safe and how to “beat Big Tech.”

“This is new substantive engagement that didn’t really exist before,” said a social conservative advocate granted anonymity to discuss private coalition discussions. “There’s this tipping point that is happening where these groups represent large populations at the state level and saying this is an issue that’s important to us and we’re going to engage as family groups.”