Congress
How best to honor Lindsey Graham’s legacy? Republicans are divided.
The late Sen. Lindsey Graham was known as a champion of American military power, strong global alliances, conservative jurisprudence and more.
Cryptocurrency regulation? Not so much.
So when President Donald Trump suggested in a Truth Social post Monday that the Senate should pass a long-brewing crypto bill in “honor of Senator Lindsey Graham,” it struck a false note to many lawmakers. It also underscored how quickly many in Washington are moving after the Republican senator’s death Saturday to claim his mantle for their own purposes.
Many of Graham’s surviving colleagues instead rallied around a proposal they believe would better honor the four-term South Carolina legend: a bipartisan sanctions bill targeting Russia that Graham had been pushing — and had won White House support for — in the days before he died.
But it remains unclear if that legislation truly has legs, especially with Trump infatuated with other priorities that have little to do with Graham’s signature issues. That has opened up room for the competing attempts to seize on his legacy.
In addition to the crypto bill, Trump stoked a competing suggestion — that the contentious GOP elections bill known as the SAVE America Act could be passed in Graham’s memory — by saying he had spoken to the senator about that legislation just hours before his death.
“He thought we were going to get it passed,” Trump said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press” — sparking other Republicans, including Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri and Mike Lee of Utah, to redouble their calls for a bill that Graham supported but never played a lead role in advocating.
Lee said during an X broadcast Monday night that he had met with Trump at the Oval Office earlier in the day. In that conversation, Lee said, Trump’s final conversation with Graham about the elections bill came up.
“I imagine a number of my colleagues will see that as an emotionally compelling reason, one of many, to get this done,” Lee said. Skeptics, he added, should “reconsider in light of the fact that this was on Lindsey Graham’s mind just moments before he died and we ought to figure out a way to carry forward his legacy by getting this thing passed.”
To many senators, however, the bill slapping sanction on buyers of Russian oil and gas is a no-brainer. Not only was Graham known as one of the chamber’s fiercest Russia hawks, with decades of trans-Atlantic security experience, he had just returned from the NATO summit in Turkey and a visit to Ukraine when he died.
“The most obvious and logical way [to honor Graham] would be the sanctions bill, because it’s his bill,” Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) said in an interview Monday. “You’re not making anything up. He practically died trying to get it passed. … Anything else becomes kind of political trickery in my mind.”
The problem is, the sanctions bill still faces serious doubts among some Republicans. Graham at multiple points over the past year believed he had talked Trump into backing the measure, only for it to be put on ice as Trump tried to negotiate with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Though prior versions of the bill had broad bipartisan support, small pockets of skepticism could still force the Senate to eat up weeks of floor time in order to get it across the finish line.
And then there’s the matter of what Trump will do. While Graham claimed presidential support and a White House official confirmed that Monday, Trump himself was not so direct when asked separately Monday if he would support it.
“We’re talking about that,” he told reporters.
The president was nowhere as indirect in regards to the crypto bill, saying in his social media post that “the U.S. Senate should pass the Clarity Act” in memory of Graham, whom he called “a big supporter” of the legislation.
While Graham had voted for other cryptocurrency bills, he was not considered a major industry ally and in the last Congress had co-introduced a tough bipartisan regulatory bill aimed at combatting money laundering.
As for the SAVE America Act — which has been a key source of tension between Trump and Senate Republicans — Graham had cosponsored it and called for its passage. But he also cast doubt on whether the Senate would eliminate the 60-vote filibuster threshold to pass it.
Instead, Graham before his death was floating trying to get pieces of the bill passed through the filibuster-skirting budget reconciliation process — a process he partly controlled as Senate Budget Committee chair.
Fellow senators agreed that crypto and SAVE America were Trump’s obsessions — not Graham’s.
“There are only two things on the president’s mind. … No. 1, the SAVE Act, and No. 2, based on the tweet I saw this morning, the crypto bill,” said Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.). “I want to do the crypto bill, but Lindsey cared about the sanctions bill.”
Asked if he saw a connection between Graham and the cryptocurrency legislation, Cramer said, “This place is full of circumstances where you get too cute by half.”
Honoring Graham with the sanctions bill, he added, would be “obvious.”
While some senators have floated other fitting ideas, like naming the annual Pentagon policy bill after Graham, advancing the sanctions legislation has the most momentum — especially after the idea was endorsed by top leaders and a bipartisan slew of Graham’s colleagues Monday.
“It would be a great tribute and legacy for Lindsey,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune told reporters Monday, while acknowledging leaders were still “assessing” if the bill had a path forward.
Minority Leader Chuck Schumer also urged the Senate to quickly pass the sanctions legislation in honor of Graham.
“I know if Senator Graham were here in this chamber today, he would also join me in urging the Senate to support Ukraine and strengthen sanctions on Russia,” Schumer said on the floor, predicting it would “pass overwhelmingly and help our allies in Ukraine” if Thune moved forward with it.
But some Republicans believe Trump will have to publicly bear-hug the bill to get it across the finish line.
“I know some people at the White House have said they support it … but they don’t count,” Kennedy said. “No offense to anybody, but they don’t count. I haven’t yet heard the president stand up and say, ‘We need to sanction the hell out of Russia, and let’s get going.’”
Reps. Kat Cammack and Teresa Leger Fernández are leading a bipartisan effort to fundamentally change how sexual misconduct and other bad behavior in Congress is investigated and eradicated.
But the goal of changing Congress’ workplace culture could hit a wall of longstanding lawmaker resistance to putting the tools in place to better police themselves.
The duo has been working on legislation for months to reform the Ethics Committee and streamline the process for staffers to report violations, aiming to unveil the framework in September as lawmakers return from recess.
It comes after multiple ethics violations and misconduct allegations have roiled Blue Light News this year.
“I am incredibly optimistic that when we get back into session that we will have a set of reforms that we can all agree on,” Leger Fernández said.
But it remains to be seen if lawmakers are prepared to make big changes that could open them up to further scrutiny amid fears the policies could stoke frivolous claims, fingerpointing and partisan witch hunts.
“Enforcement is where the difficult conversations are happening because enforcement is what makes this real. We’re working through those questions with members directly, which is how real reform gets done,” Cammack said.
Cammack added that every provision must pass the test of “does it actually hold people accountable, or does it just look like it does? Anything that can’t clear that bar isn’t reform, and I’m not interested in reform that’s just for show.”
The last major ethics overhaul happened after the #MeToo movement, with the new law holding lawmakers liable for harassment and establishing a voluntary mediation process for staffers.
But the law didn’t clear the convoluted maze of options for staffers to register their complaints, whether through the Ethics Committee, the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights or the Office of Congressional Conduct. Leger Fernández said she wants their bill to establish a “one stop shop” for reporting complaints.
They’re also planning to recommend overhauling the Ethics Committee’s speed in releasing reports, prohibit all House members from having intimate relationships with any congressional staffer, not just those in their offices, and guarantee starker consequences for lawmakers.
Another hurdle: the biggest proposed changes would need buy in from the Senate. Codifying the Office of Congressional Conduct into law is among them, since the OCC currently only has authority over the House. It’s been awash with bipartisan pushback since it was created, with GOP leadership slow-walking some of its board appointments at the start of the 119th Congress.
What else we’re watching:
— PELOSI’S INFLUENCE LIVES ON IN STAFFER DIASPORA: Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi may be leaving Congress, but dozens of her longtime staffers are sticking around in the House’s top jobs. And several Pelosi alumni can be found in the offices of Minority Whip Katherine Clark as well as Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who is likely to become speaker if Democrats take back the majority this November. The diaspora can now be found now running leadership offices, directing committees and helming new teams as chiefs of staff. The continued presence of about 50 former staffers on Capitol Hill means Pelosi’s influence could be felt inside the House Democratic Caucus pulling the levers of power for decades behind the scenes.
— BRAT SPEAKS TRUMP DOWN UNDER — Once an insurgent rabble-rouser in Congress, newly-confirmed Ambassador David Brat is now a Trump world insider sent to Australia as tariffs test the relationship. “He can speak Trump,” James Braid, President Donald Trump’s director of legislative affairs, said in a recent interview. “And I think that will really help him facilitate Aussie-United States relations.” This dynamic could be key as Brat, who represented Virginia’s 7th Congressional District from 2014-2019, gets to work in Canberra, where political leaders have been rattled by Trump’s implementation of a 12.5 percent tariff on Australian goods.
Chris Marquette, Riley Rogerson and Katherine Tully-McManus contributed to this report.
A bipartisan House effort is underway to fundamentally change how sexual misconduct and other bad behavior on Capitol Hill is identified, investigated and eradicated.
But the widely-held goal of transforming the workplace culture of Congress could quickly run up against longstanding lawmaker resistance to tools necessary to police themselves, with some worried it will turn into another avenue for partisan mudslinging.
Reps. Kat Cammack (R-Fla.) and Teresa Leger Fernández (D-N.M.), the chairs of their respective party’s women’s caucuses, have been working on legislation to change how the Ethics Committee functions and streamline the various processes by which staffers can report violations, with plans to unveil a framework in September after the summer recess.
“I am incredibly optimistic that when we get back into session that we will have a set of reforms that we can all agree on,” Leger Fernández said in an interview this past week.
“We’ve been hard at work all summer, and we’re on track to unveil our proposal next month,” Cammack said in a statement.
The rash of sexual misconduct allegations over the past year against male members of Congress that resulted in two resignations in the same week — from former Reps. Eric Swalwell of California and Tony Gonzales of Texas — has increased the urgency for action. Cammack and Leger Fernández also have support from Speaker Mike Johnson and Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, giving their effort more legitimacy.
Cammack said in an interview before the break she was in touch with Johnson’s office “every single week” on her collaboration with Leger Fernández, describing the speaker as “very aggressive in trying to get this moved along.”
Ultimately, it remains to be seen whether lawmakers are prepared to make big changes that would open themselves and their aides up to more scrutiny amid fears the policies could stoke frivolous claims, finger-pointing and partisan witch hunts.
The last major push to overhaul the congressional ethics process was in 2018, trailing the #MeToo movement a year earlier. Congress sent legislation to President Donald Trump’s desk — which he signed into law — to hold lawmakers liable for harassment and require them to reimburse the Treasury Department for settlements stemming from misconduct.
That effort also established a voluntary mediation process for congressional staffers, giving employees the option to consult with a confidential adviser from the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights to walk them through the process.
What the new law did not do was eliminate the convoluted maze of options where staffers can go to formally register their complaints: The bipartisan House Ethics Committee, the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights or the Office of Congressional Conduct — the non-partisan investigative body that vets outside referrals and makes recommendations of official action to the Ethics Committee.
Leger Fernández said she wants her bill with Cammack to establish a “one stop shop where somebody can know where to call, they’re talking to somebody who has trauma-informed training who will help them understand what the remedies and avenues are.”
“The current system failed the people it was supposed to protect, and everyone here knows it,” Cammack said. “Coming forward is extraordinarily difficult. Fear of retaliation and institutional pressure silence victims long before justice has a chance to speak.”
They also are likely to recommend overhauling how the House Ethics Committee itself functions, including by addressing the speed at which the panel releases reports.
Sometimes the panel has moved quickly. For instance, members issued a report in early August finding Rep. Chuck Edwards participated in “persistent unprofessional and inappropriate conduct towards two young female staffers” — less than five months after allegations against the North Carolina Republican surfaced.
The report recommended that Edwards be censured. While he has denied improper behavior, he also dropped his bid for reelection.
But other inquiries pending before the Ethics Committee have languished, such as the two-year-old probe into allegations that Rep. Cory Mills (R-Fla.) violated campaign finance laws and omitted information from financial disclosures.
Additional allegations involving Mills surfaced after a 2025 incident in which the Washington, D.C, Metropolitan Police Department responded to a report that Mills assaulted a woman he was in a relationship with that the House Ethics Committee is also investigating. Mills has denied the allegations and said he has confidence in the congressional ethics process.
Providing more resources to increase the number of investigative staff and setting stricter deadlines for producing reports could help speed up pending inquiries. But Cammack and Leger Fernández also want to guarantee there are sufficient consequences for lawmakers when misconduct is determined. They plan to recommend that all members of the House be prohibited from having intimate relationships with any congressional staffer, not just those who work in their offices.
The two women want to ensure punishments are meaningful and consistent across the board, too. In the case of Edwards, Leger Fernández said, “we have an incredibly damning and disturbing Ethics Committee report of years of sexual harassment and all they’re recommending is a censure. That, I do not think, is adequate.”
There is a need, she added, for a “stronger and clearer delineation of what happens when you violate the rules of Ethics.”
“Enforcement is where the difficult conversations are happening because enforcement is what makes this real. We’re working through those questions with members directly, which is how real reform gets done,” Cammack said.
Cammack added that every provision must pass the test of “does it actually hold people accountable, or does it just look like it does? Anything that can’t clear that bar isn’t reform, and I’m not interested in reform that’s just for show.”
Tom Rust, the staff director for the Ethics Committee, declined to comment.
Leger Fernández said much of the legislation she is fine-tuning with Cammack could be integrated into the House rules package, which lawmakers must adopt at the start of every Congress.
She acknowledged, however, that other proposed changes would require buy-in from the Senate. That could include codifying the Office of Congressional Conduct into law. The OCC currently only has the authority to investigate members and staff in the House and needs House lawmakers to reauthorize it every two years.
The OCC receives referrals of alleged staff and member misconduct and can then choose to begin an investigation, which requires sign-off by two board members — one chosen by the speaker and one by the minority leader. Once that investigation is complete, it triggers a countdown in which the House Ethics Committee has to either continue with its own investigation or release the OCC’s findings.
This process has spurred the House Ethics Committee to act on countless occasions, including in the cases of former Reps. Chris Collins in 2017, Duncan Hunter in 2016 and, most recently, Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick. Collins went on to plead guilty to participating in an insider trading scheme and was sentenced to over two years in federal prison, while Hunter also pleaded guilty to stealing campaign funds and was sentenced to just under a year in jail. Trump later pardoned them both.
Cherfilus-McCormick, meanwhile, was indicted on federal fraud charges and has pleaded not guilty, with her trial expected to start next year.
But the OCC has consistently been on the receiving end of bipartisan vitriol since its inception in 2008, with members deeply uncomfortable with the idea of being put under the microscope by a slate of outsiders. In 2010, Democrats were eager to gut the OCC’s authority and Republicans in 2017 moved to bulldoze its power, but reversed course after public blowback.
While it wasn’t politically viable to kill the office at the start of the 119th Congress, either, GOP leadership slow-walked appointing members to the OCC’s board, delaying the start of its work for months.
It’s far from certain the Senate would support giving the OCC the force of law or agree to come under its umbrella, primarily for the same reasons why it makes many members uneasy in the House — though momentum is growing around the idea.
Earlier this summer, the Congressional Progressive Staff Association, which represents more than 1,500 House and Senate employees, sent a letter to the leaders on the House Administration Committee and the Senate Committee on Rules, urging the OCC be expanded to the Senate and given limited subpoena authority.
One person granted anonymity to share details about ongoing negotiations over the Cammack-Leger Fernández package said there has been some outreach to Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.). A spokesperson for Schiff said the senator “has been engaging with other offices about possible reforms to the Senate’s rules surrounding sexual misconduct and workplace rights.”
A spokesperson with the Senate Ethics Committee did not respond to a request for comment.
“Our focus right now is getting it right in the House first,” Cammack said.
“The leaders of both parties support it, and members on both sides are done looking the other way. Everyone who comes to work in the People’s House deserves dignity, respect, and protection from abuse,” she added.
Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi may be leaving Congress, but dozens of her longtime staffers are sticking around in the House’s top jobs.
The aides who worked for the California Democrat throughout her 39-year congressional career are now running leadership offices, directing committees and helming new teams as chiefs of staff.
Their continued presence of about 50 former staffers on Capitol Hill is a sign that Pelosi’s signature brand of hard-nosed, strategic leadership will outlive her tenure.
“I do think that there is a particular ethos of a Pelosi staffer,” Pelosi’s former chief of staff Terri McCullough, who remains an adviser, said in an interview. “So many of us got from her a PhD in leadership and efficacy and public service.”
Pelosi, 86, has long faced criticism for not developing a deeper bench of Democratic leaders as she occupied the top spot in her party’s leadership structure for 20 years. But she was able to mentor and cultivate a vast network of congressional aides.
It means Pelosi’s influence could continue to be felt inside the House Democratic Caucus. While elected officials come and go thanks to a fickle electorate, staffers are forever — often outlasting their bosses and exercising influence behind the scenes as they amass institutional knowledge and learn how to operate the real levers of power.
“As Speaker, I was proud to assemble a team of some of the finest public servants the House has ever known — brilliant, dedicated, collaborative, and patriotic,” Pelosi said in a statement. “I take great comfort in knowing that many of them now serve in leadership positions, bringing that experience and commitment to the benefit of the Congress, the American people, and our nation’s future.”
Several Pelosi alumni can be found in the office of House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York, who is likely to become speaker if Democrats take back the majority this November.
Senior Jeffries advisers Emily Berret and George Kundanis both served as Pelosi’s deputy chiefs of staff. Wyndee Parker, Jeffries’ policy adviser, was a national security adviser for Pelosi. Jamie Fleet — who serves in dual roles as a senior adviser to Jeffries and staff director of the House Administration Committee Democrats — is a former Pelosi senior adviser.
In the office of House Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.), chief speechwriter John Weber previously served as Pelosi’s deputy speechwriting director, while communications director Joy Lee was Pelosi’s national press secretary.
Pelosi’s longtime former chief of staff in her personal office, Robert Edmonson, is now working for Rep. Robert Garcia of California as staff director for Democrats on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee; Garcia, the current ranking member, will likely become the chair if Democrats win back the majority.
Several former Pelosi staffers are also now running congressional offices, including Amy Soenksen, Pelosi’s former director of intergovernmental affairs and member services senior adviser who is now chief of staff to Rep. Morgan McGarvey (D-Ky.).
Yuri Beckelman, once a Pelosi staff assistant, is now chief to Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.). Ben Burnett, previously chief of staff to disgraced ex-Rep. Eric Swalwell, continues to run the California Democrat’s vacant office that has yet to be filled in a special election; he was once a Pelosi intern in the cloakroom.
First-term Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.) is a former Pelosi intern.
Meanwhile, dozens of Pelosi staffers not currently working in the House remain part of the broader Hill ecosystem — in the Senate and as lobbyists, lawyers, consultants and campaign officials. Pelosi’s communications director Ian Krager, for one, is currently on leave to work as a campaign spokesperson for San Francisco supervisor Connie Chan, the former speaker’s preferred successor.
Pelosi’s former political director, Mike Smith, is now the president of House Majority PAC, a Jeffries-aligned super PAC.
The Pelosi alumni network continues to meet for happy hours and communicate on text chains and share common experiences that inform how they do their jobs.
In interviews with seven former staffers, all described their time working with the lawmaker as formative to building their operational and leadership skills they say they will bring with them to run the next generation of congressional offices.
They repeatedly quoted Pelosi’s mantra — “proper preparation prevents poor performance” — and her frequent refrain that her political decisions were guided by what was best “for the children.” They recited the importance of handwritten thank you notes, a meticulous attention to detail, shrugging off haters and, of course, accurately counting votes.
They described Pelosi’s stamina for phone calls interrupted only for a brief nap — or, as Lee recalled, a stop for chocolate ice cream — before returning to the grind of wielding the gavel.
Those lessons, these staffers say, will help keep the House Democratic Caucus aligned, efficient and committed to strategically advancing priority legislation.
“What a Pelosi staffer could do better than anything is process,” former Pelosi deputy chief of staff Drew Hammill, now a consultant, said in an interview. “In terms of running an office, we have been trained on how to move the ball forward. Deadlines are deadlines.”
Edmondson, Pelosi’s former chief who now works for Garcia, recalled a “strong office culture where we had long days and difficult challenges, but really supported each other, and there was a whole lot of mentorship within the staff and support from her. Because of that, people loved the service and loved the work. … We all learned so much from her about the skills that are needed to be successful on Blue Light News.”
As chief of staff for McGarvey, said Soenksen, she often thinks of another one of Pelosi’s go-to slogans — “know your why” — as an important reminder for aides and members alike.
“It’s actually really helpful to think about that too, to know sort of what is my boss’s why, what is my team’s why, what are my colleagues’ and my staff’s why?” she said in an interview. “Because when you know your why, you can be focused and you can help motivate your team.”
Smith, the former Pelosi political director who now runs House Majority PAC, said this saying has had a similarly profound effect on his work, too.
“Every time we met with a candidate, she asked the same exact question, and the question was like, ‘What is your why?’ Like, why are you doing this? What motivates you to get out of bed and fight every day? And in part because running for Congress or any elected office, it’s just brutal.”
“It got to the point where, the second she asked it — depending on the answer — you knew whether someone was going to be successful or not,” Smith continued, adding: “Having that as your north star, I think, was a really important lesson for me.”
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship11 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words