Congress

Inside Jim Jordan’s quiet preparations for a GOP leadership void

Published

3 months ago

April 6, 2026

Jim Jordan has spent much of the past year out of the House GOP spotlight. Don’t expect that to last.

The Ohio Republican rose to prominence as a headline-grabbing conservative firebrand, then saw that reputation work against him when he made a failed bid for the speakership in 2023. Since then he has been supporting President Donald Trump as chair of the House Judiciary Committee and otherwise staying out of Speaker Mike Johnson’s way.

But now as frustrations with Johnson’s leadership rise inside the House GOP, and expectations grow that the Republican majority’s days might be numbered, speculation is brewing that the 62-year-old former wrestling star is preparing another push for the top leadership ranks.

“I’ve seen a concerted effort now for him to work with everybody and to travel the country,” said Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-N.J.), a fellow Judiciary member. Should Jordan make another run, he said, “I think his base of appeal will be stronger and bigger.”

The open chatter that has erupted around Jordan and other possible contenders for the top House GOP spot — including current No. 2 leader Steve Scalise and No. 3 leader Tom Emmer — has been conspicuous, especially considering there is no vacancy to fill. Johnson insists he will retain the House majority in the November midterms and continue as speaker.

But other House Republicans believe that is growing more unlikely given the political headwinds they face and the general belief Johnson would step down from leadership rather than continue as minority leader. So they have been taking notice of the quiet moves already being made by possible candidates to build support among the rank-and-file.

And while Jordan has remained on the sidelines of recent high-profile intra-GOP feuds, he’s spent plenty of time helping vulnerable members on the campaign trail and, more recently, helping Trump wrangle potential conservative defectors on a key upcoming spy-powers vote.

Asked about mounting another run should Johnson step down after November, Jordan declined to rule it out in an interview.

“I am totally focused on keeping the majority, which I think we’re going to do,” he said.

McCarthy and Jordan formed an alliance during the first Trump term.

The last time Jordan took a shot at the speakership was after then-Speaker Kevin McCarthy was forced out of the position in 2023. Jordan won a plurality of votes on several secret internal ballots but failed to reach the necessary 218 votes. Dozens of more moderate members opposed his bid, most believing he was simply too combative to govern effectively.

But things could be different in November. For one, in a race for minority leader, Jordan would only need to win over a majority of House Republicans — not a majority of the entire chamber.

And while someone with a reputation as a “legislative terrorist” — as former Speaker John Boehner once called Jordan — might not make for a great speaker in the eyes of some members, leading a House minority can require a more confrontational approach.

One Republican lawmaker granted anonymity to speak candidly noted that a bad midterm showing could actually work to Jordan’s advantage by culling some of his moderate opposition.

“His base is in rock-hard GOP districts,” the member said. “The worse the night the fewer the number of ‘never Jordans’ who come to vote.”

But that member was among several who recognized that Jordan has also taken pains in the two-and-a-half years since he lost to build support in new corners of the House GOP: “He is working every day to lay the groundwork.”

Republicans have asked Jordan to come to their districts and help with both big- and small-dollar donations, one person familiar with the outreach said. Jordan in the interview noted he was about to head to California to campaign with Rep. Vince Fong — a protege of McCarthy’s who is hardly considered a conservative rabble-rouser.

“He’s definitely broadened his circle and his approach and his appeal,” said a swing-district GOP lawmaker, who like the others was granted anonymity to comment on a leadership race that has yet to actually materialize.

Should Johnson step down, the member said, Jordan could be an acceptable successor: “I’m not against it.”

Jordan, seen at a 2023 news conference, is most comfortable leading hard-nosed investigations of Democrats.

Among Jordan’s admirers is McCarthy himself, who soundly beat Jordan in the last House GOP election for a minority leader in 2018. The two men then formed an alliance that persisted even after a small group of conservative hard-liners tried to block McCarthy from the speakership. When the group rallied behind Jordan as an alternative, Jordan rejected the idea and instead gave a nominating speech for McCarthy.

In an interview, the former speaker called Jordan one of the party’s “best chairmen” and said he “would have done an excellent job” with the gavel had he been elected in 2023.

“Some people would go and quit if they didn’t win,” McCarthy said. “I watched him go help and elect people who were not good to him, who he had every reason to try to go and defeat then but he didn’t.”

Jordan denied he’s made any change in strategy. “I’ve always helped our colleagues,” he said, when asked if he’d stepped up his campaign trail work in anticipation of a leadership run.

What’s harder to deny is that Jordan has taken a much lower-key approach to internal House politics since Trump — a longtime ally — returned to the White House last year. That change has been on display during the recent fight over Department of Homeland Security funding.

After the Senate passed a bill last month that left out key immigration enforcement agencies, Jordan did not immediately join Johnson and other House leaders in trashing the bill, instead noting the upsides of the plan: Democrats didn’t succeed in hamstringing enforcement tactics, and Republicans would have their own opportunity to pass a party-line bill delivering the funding.

It ended up being a canny approach after Johnson backed down last week and agreed to advance the Senate-passed measure as the only workable alternative. In a nod to the conservative uproar, Jordan conceded the two-track approach set a bad precedent in a Wednesday radio interview. But his comments were only lightly critical at a moment when many members were furious that Johnson had made a U-turn on the bill.

“So the House said no to it,” he said. “All us Republicans voted against what the Senate had sent.”

Jordan's support of a straight Section 702 extension has him at odds with close allies like Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio, seated right).

Jordan is playing an even more crucial role to ease through the quick reauthorization of a key surveillance program ahead of an April 20 deadline at the behest of the White House. That’s a flip from two years ago, when Jordan opposed renewing the program and eyed a push for “real reform” to protect Americans from warrantless spying in 2026.

Inside a closed-door House GOP meeting last month, Jordan stood alongside top Republican leaders and briefed members on why they should support a straight extension. That created friction with some of his traditional hard-liner allies, some of whom stood up and pointed out Jordan’s 180, according to two members granted anonymity to discuss the private meeting.

“The old Jim Jordan wouldn’t have done this,” one of the members said. “It’s clear that he sold out in order to keep chairmanship or to move up in leadership.”

Jordan said in an interview he has not changed his position because the program, known as Section 702, is “fundamentally different because of the reforms we all worked on and got in place” in prior renewals.

“So for a short-term extension, while we’re in the middle of a military conflict in Iran, that the commander in chief thinks makes sense for the short term, I think that’s fine,” he said.

Jordan’s spy-powers stance has surprised even Democrats, including Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the top Judiciary Democrat. Raskin opposes renewing the 702 program without new guardrails, but he credited his counterpart as an “able and effective political actor” inside the GOP who has his pulse on the party agenda.

“I don’t know whether he has traveled more towards the center of the Republican conference or the Republican conference has traveled more towards Jim Jordan,” Raskin said. “But in any event, it feels like he’s pretty close to the center of gravity right now.”

Meredith Lee Hill contributed to this report.

Congress

Turek leads Hinson in Iowa Senate poll of likely general election voters

Published

2 hours ago

June 22, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Iowa Democratic Senate nominee Josh Turek has a narrow lead over GOP rival Ashley Hinson in a new internal poll of likely general-election voters.

Turek leads Hinson 47 percent to 45 percent in the poll, conducted by Global Strategy Group from June 8-11 among 1,000 likely general election voters. The poll shows that Republicans have a 10-point edge in voter registration (42 percent to 32 percent) and an electorate that voted for Trump by 9 points (50 percent for Trump to 41 percent for Kamala Harris).

But the polling also shows President Donald Trump’s favorabilities underwater across the electorate, with 45 percent favorable and 52 percent unfavorable. Among registered independents, Trump is upside down 28 points.

Turek is “significantly outperforming the state’s underlying partisan dynamics,” Global Strategy Group’s Matt Canter & Ramzi Ebbini write in a memo first obtained by Blue Light News. “Republicans maintain substantial advantages in voter registration and party identification, yet Turek enters the general election ahead of Republican Ashley Hinson, with stronger personal favorability ratings, overperforming a generic Democrat, and with clear opportunities to expand his coalition as more voters become familiar with him.”

Some Republicans have acknowledged a concern about Iowa.

“There are some issues there that we got to deal with — the biggest one is trade — trade and tariffs,” said a Republican close to the White House, granted anonymity to speak candidly about the obstacles.

In his early general election messaging, Turek has leaned into farmers’ frustrations.

“Josh Turek is winning this race because Iowans are sick and tired of multi-millionaire politicians like Ashley Hinson who sell out working families while they get rich,” Turek for Iowa campaign manager Brendan Koch said in a statement first shared with Blue Light News. “We will spend the next 134 days connecting with Iowans in every corner of the state and across the political spectrum to send a fighter for the working class to the U.S. Senate.”

Congress

Capitol agenda: House GOP races to make Recon 3.0 real

Published

3 hours ago

June 22, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

House Republicans have eight days to prove Reconciliation 3.0 might actually happen.

The House returns Tuesday with only eight legislative days before they break again for the July 4 holiday. If members want a realistic chance at fulfilling their self-imposed timeline for advancing the legislation before the end of July — when they pause work again for another five weeks — they need to move fast.

That means assembling, and then adopting, a budget resolution — the first step in unlocking the filibuster skirting power of the reconciliation process. It took Republicans months to advance such a blueprint during their two earlier reconciliation efforts this Congress.

House GOP leaders are tentatively planning another senior-level reconciliation meeting for Wednesday, according to three people involved in the talks granted anonymity to discuss private plans.

Still, the House is coming back with several other moving items to deal with this week, including promised briefings on the president’s Iran deal and a major housing affordability package GOP leadership wants to clear as soon as Wednesday.

Reconciliation talks also come as President Donald Trump is expected to join the Senate’s GOP lunch Wednesday, where he’ll likely continue pushing the chamber to pass his SAVE America Act or attach pieces of the GOP elections bill to the party-line legislation (an idea one of the bill’s biggest backers, Sen. Mike Lee, spiked Sunday).

Republicans involved with Reconciliation 3.0 discussions also warn they need to reach a final agreement on how to pay for the bill as well as what policy items will be included before GOP leaders can try to advance any budget resolution.

At this point, however, many fiscal hawks and at-risk incumbents are largely unhappy about how the discussions are coming along.

“It’s fake pay-fors for defense spending no one has fully agreed to and no meaningful reforms,” said one House Republican granted anonymity to discuss private talks.

Back on the other side of the Capitol, GOP senators have been in no rush to start working on a third party-line bill, especially as they are consumed with other political fires — like trying to confirm Jay Clayton as director of national intelligence to speed up a FISA reauthorization (more on that below).

Rep. Morgan Griffith said he was confident if the right policies are included in the House plan the Senate would then take it up — although he, too, acknowledged the challenges of a short timeline.

“If we do it right, yeah,” Griffith said. “There’s some interesting things out there that are being discussed that could make it a real possibility.”

What else we’re watching:

— OBAMA’S FEROCIOUS IRAN CRITIC SOFTER ON TRUMP DEAL: Tom Cotton, the No. 3 Senate Republican and chair of the chamber’s Intelligence panel, is not alone among GOP defense hawks in finding himself in an awkward position trying to defend Trump’s Iran deal after lambasting President Barack Obama’s a decade before. But the combination of his prior ferocity toward the Iranian regime and his current leadership responsibilities have put him into an especially tight spot.

— FIRST IN IC: DEMS WANT MORE OF JACK SMITH’S REPORT: Senate Judiciary Democrats are asking a federal court to unseal part of former special counsel Jack Smith’s report about his investigation into Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents after his first term. The request from the Senators comes as the Judiciary Committee is poised to call Smith to testify about his Biden-era cases before the end of this Congress. Republicans in the House and Senate have been investigating Smith’s work, alleging it amounted to a weaponization of the federal government against the then ex-president.

Jordain Carney and Hailey Fuchs contributed to this report.

Congress

A rising populist tide is threatening New York’s powerful incumbents

Published

5 hours ago

June 22, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

NEW YORK — Incumbents beware: The public is angry.

As voters across the country express frustration with the political establishment, congressional hopefuls are seeing a prime opportunity to tap into a movement with the potential to manifest a handful of upsets in New York’s primary elections.

The dynamic is playing out in intraparty electoral brawls across the state, where the outcomes will shape the political future for Democrats and Republicans alike.

In upper Manhattan and the Bronx, Democratic Rep. Adriano Espaillat is trying to fend off a stiff challenge from community organizer Darializa Avila Chevalier, who’s running with the backing of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani — a democratic socialist who channeled populist fervor in his successful bid last year.

Brooklyn Borough President Antonio Reynoso, Rep. Nydia Velazquez’s preferred successor, is squaring off against first-term Assemblymember Claire Valdez, another hopeful backed by Mamdani. Like the mayor, both Valdez and Avila Chevalier are members of the Democratic Socialists of America.

And in the upstate New York fight to replace GOP Rep. Elise Stefanik, Republican Assemblymember Robert Smullen — running with the backing of the state party — is locked in a caustic battle with Anthony Constantino, President Donald Trump’s endorsed candidate.

Candidates with scant political experience are channeling the public’s exasperated mood with the expectation that restive voters will reward them. Populist anger over rising prices and Washington leadership have provided an opening to outsiders promising a new path. And this combination has created one of the most perilous political environments for incumbents since Trump’s first presidential victory a decade ago stoked an anti-establishment fire that’s burning brighter than ever.

“If you’re perceived as being part of the status quo, then you’ve got a problem,” said Republican pollster John McLaughlin. “Regardless of which party, if you’re perceived as bringing about change you’ll win. If you’re inside the beltway you’re not talking to normal people.”

New York’s closed party primary battles are a window into the broader challenges facing incumbents across the country at a time of sustained grievance over affordability and hardening partisanship. At the same time, voters are increasingly willing to be unfazed by a candidate’s baggage — be it Graham Platner in Maine or Avila Chevalier’s tweets criticizing Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. It paints a picture of an electorate that’s willing to embrace flawed candidates, reject a political establishment they believe has failed to deliver on their promises and eager to send a message to their perceived enemies.

“We’re in a negative partisan environment and one of the most negative partisan environments we’ve ever witnessed,” Democratic former Rep. Steve Israel said. “People will overlook blemishes in their party in order to meet the existential goal of beating the other party. That creates openings for outsiders to come in with tattoos and old social media posts.”

The mood is reflected in the polling. A statewide Siena University survey released last month found a plurality of voters, 48 percent, believe New York is heading in the wrong direction. A sizable majority — 65 percent — said the country is on the wrong track.

Cost-of-living concerns, which enabled Trump’s White House return two years ago, continue to be a major factor in global elections. In the UK, affordability woes over housing and utility rates have put the ruling Labour Party on its backfoot and threaten to short-circuit Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s tenure.

Rising gas prices in the U.S. following Trump’s decision to launch a war against Iran have kept inflation stubbornly high, teeing up what’s expected to be a difficult GOP midterm. And while Democrats are feeling bullish about their prospects this November, they’re still dealing with their own, often vast, intraparty differences of opinion.

That’s especially apparent in New York, where both the leaders of the House and Senate could be situated if the Democrats have blowout wins this year. But Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries — both from Brooklyn — are not necessarily being welcomed with open arms. Some leading congressional candidates have declined to commit to supporting Jeffries as speaker if Democrats take back the House, yet another sign of hopefuls attempting to ride an anti-incumbent — and anti-establishment — sentiment.

At a debate earlier this month, the question of backing Jeffries as speaker revealed a stark contrast between Valdez and Reynoso: the former said she’s not committed to voting yes or no, while Reynoso said he would because if one doesn’t, you “become a pariah in Congress” and “won’t get any resources” into the district.

Schumer is on even shakier ground. In debates over recent weeks, when asked if they’re in favor of the 75-year-old running for reelection in 2028, many candidates in competitive races said outright that they’re not, or dodge the question. The Siena University poll released in May found Schumer’s favorable rating with New York voters statewide at only 33 percent. A majority of voters, 52 percent, hold an unfavorable view of the longtime senator — including 40 percent of Democrats.

Former city Comptroller Brad Lander, who’s waging a formidable challenge against Democratic Rep. Dan Goldman, often argues that his campaign is to enact “bold new leadership” (despite a long career in city politics). In response to a question about Schumer running for reelection, he said, “It’s time for a new leadership in the Democratic Party.” Goldman, for his part, said: “We’ll deal with that when the time comes.”

Gustavo Gordillo, co-chair of the city chapter of the DSA, said that “a key factor is seeing the failures of the Democratic Party to stop Donald Trump two elections now.” In previous cycles, he added, it felt like “a lot of people were not in the fight.”

“The national political situation has changed that for so many people, and that’s what created this hunger,” Gordillo said.

Voters’ willingness to buck incumbents has been long-simmering — and reached a boiling point in last year’s mayoral election after Mamdani, then a member of the Assembly, ran as an outsider to topple both embattled then-Mayor Eric Adams and former Gov. Andrew Cuomo.

“Coming off of a year when so many Democratic voters felt so cynical and disaffected by the Democratic Party, there were glimmers of hope in New York when someone like Zohran was elevated, to show, ‘Okay, we can transform this party by transforming leadership,’” said Usamah Andrabi, communications director for Justice Democrats, the progressive group that helped boost the Squad. “Our job is to take that momentum from Zohran’s victory and show voters you don’t have to stop here.”

The group is backing Valdez and recruited Avila Chevalier, who seemed like a gamble just weeks ago as the race was still flying under the radar. And while that campaign is still expected to be a tough battle, the suddenly high-profile nature of the race — sparked by Mamdani’s endorsement of Avila Chevalier and millions of dollars in spending from pro-Espaillat entities — is evidence that it was at least worth a shot for Justice Democrats, which had a brutal 2024 cycle when Reps. Jamaal Bowman of New York and Cori Bush of Missouri were both defeated in primaries.

The power of incumbency has for years made knocking out officeholders an uphill battle. And for retiring incumbents, that power would almost guarantee their hand-picked successor would follow them. But even that’s not enough this cycle, as evidenced in the crowded primary for outgoing Democratic Rep. Jerry Nadler’s seat, which has been anything but a glide path for his heir apparent, state Assemblymember Micah Lasher. His opponents have sought to frame themselves as “outsiders” — even if many of them do have political ties — from fellow Assemblymember Alex Bores’ assertion that he’s a victim of Big Tech’s ire to Kennedy scion Jack Schlossberg’s argument that he’s not beholden to any super PACs.

Still, some contend that experience is needed in this political climate. A super PAC backing Reynoso recently put out advertisements positioning him as someone “ready to fight back” — compared to Valdez, who has “barely a year in office.” Goldman has repeatedly made the argument that his seniority in Congress is too much to give up, arguing that Lander would be a “rookie” on Blue Light News, where legislating is more difficult given the partisan divides. And in a recent debate, Espaillat charged that Avila Chevalier “doesn’t know legislation.”

”This is a critical time in America,” Espaillat said. ”We need a fighter, somebody that really knows government.”

In New York and across the country, the playing field has been leveled significantly between incumbents and political newcomers — thanks in large part to social media turbocharging fundraising and widespread voter dissatisfaction.

Further complicating matters is partisan redistricting creating fewer swing seats, but increasingly deep blue or ruby red districts where the more competitive race is often the primary.

“You just have to care about not pissing off Trump if you’re a Republican,” former GOP Rep. John Katko said. “If you’re a Democrat you have to worry about not upsetting the far left. The cards are so stacked because of gerrymandering.”