Congress

House GOP moderates signal they’ll fall in line with Johnson’s health plan

Published

11 months ago

December 16, 2025

It’s a time of choosing for a band of vulnerable House Republicans who have long warned about the expiration of key Obamacare subsidies.

Speaker Mike Johnson is barreling toward a Wednesday vote on a health care bill he and other Republican leaders are presenting as an alternative to the tax credits that are set to expire at the end of the month. They have no plans to allow a vote before then on extending the subsidies.

The early signs are that the group of GOP moderates who have voiced concern about their constituents’ health care costs — not to mention their own political futures — is preparing to fall in line this week.

“I haven’t seen anything objectionable yet,” Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) said Monday. “For me to vote against it, I’d have to find something objectionable. I wouldn’t vote against it in protest.”

While he said it would be “a huge mistake” to not include an extension, Fitzpatrick said he votes “for or against legislation based on the merits of the bill.”

Others in the centrist Republican group said much the same privately — that they are still prepared to vote for the GOP health care bill even with their bid for an amendment vote extending the subsidies apparently doomed.

“We’re not going to cut off our nose to spite our face,” said one who, like others interviewed, was granted anonymity to comment on private discussions among the group.

If that sentiment holds, it would be the latest instance of how the group of moderates has largely followed Johnson’s lead in 2025 — voting in lockstep on the party’s domestic policy bill despite objections over Medicaid cuts, for instance, and keeping their names off discharge petitions meant to circumvent the speaker’s control of the House floor.

But the Obamacare lapse represents a particularly acute test for the group at a sensitive moment — after many of them have spoken out publicly.

Rep. Jen Kiggans, a Republican in a highly competitive Virginia district, warned of the political fallout for House Republicans in a closed-door House GOP conference meeting last week. Fitzpatrick and fellow GOP Reps. Rob Bresnahan of Pennsylvania, Nick LaLota and Mike Lawler of New York and David Valadao of California have been involved in efforts to broker an extension of the subsidies, so far to no avail.

It was already virtually assured the enhanced tax credits enacted and extended by Democrats under former President Joe Biden would lapse on Jan. 1, given the Senate’s failure to act last week on a Democratic proposal for a three-year extension.

Forcing a House vote on the matter this week, however, could put additional pressure on Republican leaders to explore a solution next month that would maintain the subsidies in some form for the 20 million Americans who now use them.

But the GOP moderates, most of whom hail from purple districts and are at serious risk of losing their seats in the midterms, did not find any sympathetic ears among Johnson or his top leadership allies in the final weeks.

“They made their case,” one senior House Republican involved in the talks said of the centrists. Their last-minute push for a floor vote wouldn’t change party leaders’ belief that they didn’t have the votes to actually pass an extension of the subsidies, the senior Republican added — especially given divides within their conference over abortion coverage.

Johnson said in a recent interview he understood the “dilemma” facing some of the moderates who have since launched discharge petitions to try to force a vote on an extension. But privately Johnson’s leadership circle was always skeptical that those petitions would ever garner enough support to force the speaker’s hand.

One big problem for the centrists: They were too late.

By the time Fitzpatrick and Kiggans launched separate discharge petitions aimed at extending the subsidies, there were not enough legislative days left to trigger a vote before the House adjourns for the year and the tax credits lapse. Notably, the Republican moderates mostly kept quiet during the entire 43-day government shutdown — and didn’t publicly pressure Johnson and fellow GOP leaders to negotiate as Democrats made the expiring tax credits the centerpiece of the fight.

Fitzpatrick, a co-chair of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus, vowed last week to keep pushing to extend the subsidies.

“They can just dig themselves into an ideological corner all day long — it’s not fixing the problem,” Fitzpatrick said about party leaders in an interview. “We can agree that the current construct is flawed, but that letting them expire is not acceptable.”

Late last week, he and other moderates pushed Johnson to allow a vote on a floor amendment to the GOP health care bill or another outlet that would allow skeptical members an opportunity to express support for extending the subsidies.

But hammering out that amendment has proven intractable, with Johnson indicating directly to the group that he was trying to make something work while others in the leadership ranks remained skeptical they could.

Fitzpatrick indicated Monday he plans to propose an amendment in the Rules Committee that would be modeled off his bipartisan bill that proposed a two-year subsidy extension with an income cap and other eligibility restrictions. But as of Monday there was no agreement to allow it to come to a vote, Majority Leader Steve Scalise said.

“I don’t think the final decision’s been made” on the amendment, he told reporters.

The group of moderates planned to huddle on the House floor Monday night to finalize their strategy for the Tuesday Rules meeting, according to two people granted anonymity to describe the private plans.

Separately, Fitzpatrick will meet Wednesday with the Problem Solvers to discuss their next steps on health care, two other people said, and he’s invited a bipartisan group of rank-and-file senators who have also been exploring a bipartisan deal.

Valadao, a senior appropriator who heads the centrist-leaning Republican Governance Group caucus, was among dozens of Republicans who lost their seats in 2018 after Republicans tried to repeal Obamacare. He declined to say in an interview Monday how he would vote on the leadership-backed health bill.

“We’ll see how the amendment plays out,” he said.

Rep. Richard Hudson of North Carolina, who heads the House GOP campaign arm, said in an interview Monday he hasn’t given vulnerable members any advice about how they should be talking about the expiring Obamacare subsidies in their districts.

“What I’ve been saying to my colleagues is that we’ve all got to do a better job of talking about what we’re for,” Hudson said. “Because we have actual policies that would bring down premiums and make health care more affordable — we just need to be more vocal about it.”

Asked if he was worried about the expiring subsidies costing House Republicans the majority next year, he said, “No.”

“Premiums are high — we told them they would be high if Obamacare passed,” Hudson said.

Congress

Capitol agenda: Democrats face reckoning on trans issues

Published

40 minutes ago

October 27, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

A potential Democratic majority on Capitol Hill would face a serious split over whether to use its newfound power to protect transgender Americans.

Progressive lawmakers are pushing Democratic leaders to undo President Donald Trump’s attacks on trans people’s health care, participation in athletics and protections against discrimination.

But affordability, not culture war fights, has been the overriding theme of Democrats’ push to retake control of Congress. Many centrists fear any pivot away from that pledge would splinter the party, especially with many Democratic candidates openly rejecting some trans rights initiatives during their campaigns.

“You have to focus on what people care about,” Rep. Tom Suozzi (R-N.Y.) said in an interview. “Right now that’s affordability, and they want some relief. That’s what we should talk about.”

One senior House Democrat serving on House Appropriations, who was granted anonymity to discuss a private conversation, recalled personally asking Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries not to focus on trans issues or other flashpoints if the party wins the House.

Nearly a dozen lawmakers and advocates, however, argued for a two-pronged approach to protecting trans people: passing legislation to codify certain rights for trans individuals and using committee gavels to probe the Trump administration’s actions.

“We need to have an affirmative platform that protects and expands rights for LGBTQ people,” Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) said in an interview, while the Human Rights Campaign’s Ramiro Sarmiento said Congress “needs to use every tool it has to push back” on Trump.

Jeffries did not respond to a request for comment, but other top Democrats are responding to the conflict between affordability and civil rights by asking: Why not both?

“If we are telling people that we no longer value equality in this country, it’s really hard to build a fair economy,” House Minority Whip Katherine Clark said in an interview. “You can’t silo these issues out.”

What else we’re watching:

— THE GOP’S SMALL DONOR PROBLEM: The GOP’s cash advantage over Democrats this cycle has been thanks to a small group of megadonors like Elon Musk. But when it comes to the grassroots donor base, there’s a stark contrast between the parties. Small donations through major online platforms have dipped for Republicans since 2022 while they’re up for Democrats by about a third. That’s left vulnerable Republican candidates more reliant on Trump’s campaign war chest and super PACs.

— GOP CLIMATE BLOC FACES WIPEOUT: A midterm blue wave could decimate the cohort of Republicans who advocate for addressing climate change and pursuing clean-energy policies. The Conservative Climate Caucus, a House GOP group that pushes for those policies, could lose up to a third of its members in the midterms, with 11 of 66 membersin tight races and another 15 more retiring. That would shrink the pool of negotiating partners for Democrats as they plan on a renewed push for climate legislation.

Congress

Democrats’ affordability message collides with calls to defend transgender rights

Published

4 hours ago

October 27, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Some Democrats are fired up to use their potential majorities in Congress next year and undo President Donald Trump’s attacks on transgender Americans. Others just want to focus on the cost of gas.

Ahead of the midterms, progressive lawmakers and congressional candidates are clashing with moderates in office and on the campaign trail over whether to pursue a legislative agenda that includes protecting trans people — whose health care, participation in athletics and protections against discrimination have been targeted by the administration.

“We need to have an affirmative platform that protects and expands rights for LGBTQ people,” said Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Ed Markey in an interview.

He is among nearly a dozen lawmakers and advocates who said they want Democrats to pursue a two-pronged approach: pass legislation to codify certain rights for trans individuals, and use committee gavels to compel public testimony from Trump officials on their efforts to undermine protections for trans and nonbinary people.

But the need to tackle affordability, not culture war fights, has been the overriding theme of the Democrats’ push to retake control of Congress. Many Democrats believe that their promise to lower the cost of living will be the reason they win back majorities in the House or the Senate.

Many centrists fear any pivot away from that pledge would splinter a new Democratic majority on Capitol Hill, especially with some candidates openly rejecting some trans rights initiatives during their campaigns.

“You have to focus on what people care about,” Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.) said in an interview. “Right now that’s affordability, and they want some relief. That’s what we should talk about.”

Rep. Marc Veasey, a moderate Texas Democrat who is retiring this year, said “cultural issues” including transgender rights are “something we should dive into once [Trump] is gone.”

“The American public is going to want to see our caucus focus on costs as long as he continues to affect the markets negatively with his tariffs and wars,” he said.

Progressive advocacy groups and their Hill allies say they can’t wait. Democrats, they argue, should hold hearings on the DOJ’s decision last summer to subpoena more than 20 doctors and clinics who’ve provided gender-affirming care to obtain potentially patient-identifying information, advocates say, leading some hospitals to stop providing youth gender affirming care.

They also want Democrats to challenge the Education Department’s move last month to officially rescind anti-discrimination protections for transgender students instituted under former President Joe Biden. They’re pushing, too, for an investigation of the Justice Department’s restrictions on gender-affirming care for incarcerated people and policy against placing prisoners in populations consistent with their gender identity — a move which has faced legal challenges.

In terms of legislation, Democrats are sure to encounter limitations so long as long as Trump is in office. The president is opposed to the cornerstone piece of LGBTQ+ advocates’ agenda, the Equality Act, which would amend civil rights laws to explicitly prohibit gender identity discrimination. It might not even have the votes to overcome a Senate filibuster and get to Trump’s desk.

Democrats likewise are sure to run into resistance in trying to attach pro-transgender policies to must-pass legislative vehicles, such as government spending bills or the annual defense policy package. The same goes for any attempts to overrule or modify the administration’s suggested changes to the 2030 Census, which include a proposal to remove questions about sexual orientation.

That reality should not be a deterrent, argued Ramiro Sarmiento, national press secretary at the Human Rights Campaign, a pro-LGBTQ+ civil rights advocacy group.

“Congress needs to use every tool it has to push back against the dismantling of protections at the federal level,” said Sarmiento.

He, along with Ian Thompson, senior legislative advocate at the ACLU, and Tyler Hack, founder and executive director of the Christopher Street Project — a hybrid PAC and nonprofit focused on building support for transgender rights in Congress — said their organizations have already begun preliminary conversations with several Democrats about the moves they could make to reverse or combat anti-trans-rights initiatives by Trump administration.

Those Democrats include longstanding LGBTQ+ rights champions like Markey and Reps. Jamie Raskin of Maryland and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, plus progressive candidates like Minnesota’s Peggy Flanagan and New York’s Claire Valdez and Brad Lander.

Hack conceded that trans protection issues are not what “most Americans are thinking about” but added, “Unfortunately, they are the issues that the White House is thinking about, and it’s the responsibility of Congress to be a check on their powers.”

The advocates say Trump’s executive orders and the GOP agenda have had drastic impacts on transgender Americans and their families, including by limiting their access to health care and identification documents that reflect their gender identity. It’s led some families with trans children to make plans to leave the country.

“I believe our role in Congress is to stand up for the little guys who are being picked on by bullies like Donald Trump and the Republicans,” Markey said about Democrats’ obligations.

They’re going up against Democrats who want nothing to do with any transgender-related fight as Republicans pummel their party for being out of touch and “woke.” GOP ads in nearly every battleground race have targeted their Democratic opponents over their party’s support for trans rights.

That has prompted numerous Democrats to run rebuttal ads, such as veteran Ohio Rep. Marcy Kaptur’s recent spot stating “boys should not play in girls’ sports.”

Alaska Democratic Senate nominee Mary Peltola told voters at a recent campaign event her “hope is that we don’t have to spend one second on a conversation about trans anything” in the next Congress, according to a Washington Sun report.

One senior House Democrat, who was granted anonymity to discuss a private conversation, recalled personally asking Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries not to focus on trans issues or other culture war flashpoints if the party wins the House.

Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer did not respond to requests for comment on their plans for tackling trans-related issues in the coming Congress.

Advocates argue that issues of gender identity and equality are, in fact, pocketbook issues and cannot be simply shunted aside.

“When you are putting in place, for example, policies that say that you can’t get a driver’s license that accurately reflects who you are, or that you can’t use a public restroom, what you are telling people is they can’t work, they can’t hold a job or participate in the public life of our country,” the ACLU’s Thompson said. “Those have very significant economic consequences.”

Several senior House Democrats — Minority Whip Katherine Clark, the No. 2 leader, Rep. Ted Lieu of California, the No. 4 leader, and Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts, the top Rules Committee Democrat — said much the same in interviews.

“If we are telling people that we no longer value equality in this country, it’s really hard to build a fair economy,” Clark said. “You can’t silo these issues out.”

Riley Rogerson and Meredith Lee Hill contributed to this report.

Congress

Ralph Norman under pressure from fellow South Carolina Republicans to campaign for Darline Graham

Published

14 hours ago

October 26, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Rep. Russell Fry says fellow South Carolina Republican Rep. Ralph Norman should be doing more to help GOP Sen. Darline Graham win election to a full term in the Senate.

“As somebody who carried the conservative banner as long as he has, he should step into the arena,” Fry told reporters at a Monday campaign event in Myrtle Beach. “He didn’t win. I didn’t win either.”

Fry and Norman both competed against Graham in the Republican primary to be on the November ballot. Norman advanced to a runoff with Graham, who was appointed by Gov. Henry McMaster to fill out the remainder her late brother’s term and ultimately endorsed by President Donald Trump.

Now Graham is locked in a closer-than-expected race against Democratic nominee Annie Andrews, prompting national Republicans to flock to defend what is typically considered a safely red seat. Norman, who enjoys deep popularity among conservatives, said he plans to vote for Graham but not campaign with her.

Fry, appearing at an event Monday alongside House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), described Andrews as “a far more dangerous result for the future of this country” and urged Norman to be “more vocal” in the last week before the midterms.

“I hope that he does, in the final eight days, step into the sunlight a little bit and help his Republican nominee,” Fry said.

Trump is expected to hold a rally in Norman’s district Thursday. A spokesperson for Norman did not immediately respond to a request for comment.