Congress

Mike Johnson’s moment of truth

Published

1 year ago

February 24, 2025

The Senate’s Plan B is in place. Now it’s up to Speaker Mike Johnson to deliver on Plan A — the “one big, beautiful bill” he’s been promising for weeks.

It amounts to a key inflection point for President Donald Trump’s domestic policy agenda, and GOP senators — who muscled through their own two-bill legislative blueprint early Friday morning — are eagerly watching to see if Johnson can finally unify his fractious conference and move forward with his own plan.

“I’m pulling for the House to pull together and get one big, beautiful bill,” said Senate Budget Chair Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). If Johnson can do so, he added, “I will be his biggest fan.”

But Johnson is facing major skepticism as he plows forward this week. The Rules Committee will meet Monday to ready the House GOP budget plan for the floor as a group of holdouts concerned about deep cuts to Medicaid and other safety-net programs raise increasingly sharp concerns.

Rep. Tony Gonzales of Texas, normally an ally of GOP leadership, led a group of GOP lawmakers to warn against steep cuts to Medicaid, food assistance and Pell Grants. Several Republicans who held town hall meetings during their recess last week faced boos and criticism from constituents concerned about potential cuts.

The public dissent came even after Trump publicly called on both chambers to quickly pass the House GOP budget plan, which tees up $2 trillion in spending cuts over 10 years. Republican leaders at this point think they can muscle the effort through with Trump’s support. But just a few Republicans could block those plans, depending on attendance.

One hard-liner, Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, has already told fellow Republicans he won’t support Johnson’s blueprint. Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.), who fellow Republicans have been watching as a likely source of opposition, posted on X Sunday night that she was indeed a “NO.” And New York Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, one of several remaining swing-district holdouts, said she was “still undecided.”

Rep. Nicole Malliotakis' final decision, along with other holdouts, is likely to come down to the wire.

Malliotakis has been talking through her Medicaid concerns with House Energy and Commerce Chair Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.). And her final decision, along with other holdouts, is likely to come down to the wire: She said she plans to talk again with Guthrie Monday and also with GOP leaders as part of a larger group of concerned Republicans. Johnson is planning a Tuesday floor vote.

“We may need to get the president involved,” one House GOP aide said.

The cross-cutting political pressures have some Republican lawmakers on both sides of the Capitol looking across the Rotunda curiously.

As the Senate moved forward on its two-bill plan last week, Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri openly wondered why, given Trump’s stated preference, the chamber wasn’t simply moving forward with the House budget. Meanwhile, there are House members who still prefer the Senate’s two-bill approach, with some arguing it delivers more quickly on Trump’s border security promises — and others happy that it sidesteps the messy fight over Medicaid.

Some House Republicans are pushing for the two chambers to resolve their differences over the competing budget plans now, rather than forcing vulnerable Republicans to take a hard vote this week that could cost them in next year’s midterm elections. But any compromise could inflame conservative hard-liners who are demanding steep spending cuts — and whose votes are crucial to winning approval for any House budget.

Another option some holdouts are discussing is to try to amend the budget plan before the final floor vote this week, including by adding cuts undertaken by Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency and additional energy measures as a way to decrease the Medicaid cuts. Opening the bill up on the floor, however, could quickly spiral out of control for Johnson. Party leaders are opposed to offering any concessions to the holdouts, and senior GOP aides don’t expect any changes to the plans, according to three Republicans familiar with the private talks who were granted anonymity to describe them.

On the flip side, Johnson is still facing skepticism on the right flank — even after agreeing to increase the level of spending cuts in the plans to $2 trillion. The GOP whip team has been making calls about the $4 trillion debt limit increase provided for in the House budget, a deeply controversial vote among conservative lawmakers. Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), who has never voted to lift the debt ceiling, is among those still undecided, according to two Republicans familiar with the matter.

It’s all making Senate Republicans openly skeptical that the House will be able to get its budget across the finish line after weeks of infighting. And it emboldened GOP leaders in that chamber to move forward despite Trump’s endorsement of the “one big, beautiful bill” plan.

“If that [House budget] had already passed this would be a different discussion,” said Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), who noted that Johnson sent his members home for a recess rather than stay in town to finish up.

Complicating the GOP agenda further: Even if the House can advance a budget this week, Senate Republicans are expected to change some key components of the plan, teeing up a grueling fight between the chambers.

Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.), Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and seven other GOP senators sent a letter to Trump — conspicuously sending a copy to Johnson — insisting that they won’t support a final bill that only extends Trump’s 2017 tax cuts temporarily. That group alone would be enough to prevent any party-line bill from passing.

“The president has called for making the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act permanent. And I am committed to ensuring that any tax bill we consider does exactly that,” Thune said on the Senate floor Thursday.

The Senate GOP budget resolution also doesn’t touch Medicaid — and there are already signs of unease there with the kinds of cuts Johnson is staking out. During the Senate’s overnight voting slog last week, Republicans rejected a budget amendment from Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) to mirror the House GOP’s $1.5 trillion floor for spending cuts — suggesting a potential fight to come.

And though no final decision has been made, Senate Republican leaders continue to signal that a debt ceiling increase should be handled on a bipartisan basis — not as part of GOP’s party-line agenda.

“My assumption has always been that the debt ceiling will have to be handled the way it traditionally is,” Thune told reporters last week.

Trump, as always, has been an unpredictable player in the process. After he publicly called on both chambers to approve the House’s budget resolution last week, he and members of his administration continued to raise other options — which the Senate took as a green light to move forward with their competing plan. Trump even thanked Thune in a Truth Social post just before the Senate started voting on its budget — a tacit sign that he was OK with the “optionality” the South Dakota Republican has vowed to provide for Republicans.

How the two sides ultimately work out their disagreements remains to be seen: Leadership and key factions in both chambers could informally work out an agreement, with the Senate adopting those changes when they take up a House-passed budget resolution. Though, some Budget Committee members are floating a formal conference committee to work out the differences.

“What I see happening is the Senate is working toward an objective. The House is working toward the same objective,” said Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.). “We’ll go to a conference committee, and we’ll all have a cup of hot cocoa and hug each other.”

Katherine Tully-McManus contributed to this report.

Congress

Pence-backed think tank joins push to keep kids’ safety bills out of AI package

Published

14 minutes ago

June 17, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

More than a dozen groups including former Vice President Mike Pence’s Advancing American Freedom are urging Senate Commerce Committee leaders to reject efforts to attach kids’ online safety measures to a national artificial intelligence framework, according to a letter shared exclusively with Blue Light News.

The groups argue that the proposed measures could undermine users’ free speech rights while creating new risk to privacy and data security. Their push comes as lawmakers weigh broader AI legislation, and follows reports last week that Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) is working with the White House to shore up support for a kids’ safety package that could ultimately preempt some state laws on AI.

The Blackburn-led measure is expected to include the Senate version of the Kids Online Safety Act, which includes a “duty of care” requiring companies to design their products with an eye toward preventing harm to children, the NO FAKES Act and the App Store Accountability Act. It’s not yet clear how aggressively it would preempt state action on narrow issues such as verifying users’ ages on social media.

Think tanks including the libertarian R Street Institute, the Taxpayers Protection Alliance, and industry group NetChoice, are among the 13 total signatories. They take issue primarily with ASAA, which would require app store platforms such as Google and Apple to verify users’ ages, and KOSA.

The coalition is alarmed by age verification requirements that could require users to submit personal information to digital databases vulnerable to data breaches and hacks. It also takes issue with parental consent provisions, which would “inevitably require even more intrusive data gathering to prove both the identity of the parent and his or her status as the child’s legal guardian,” the letter reads.

KOSA is also problematic, according to the coalition, because of its duty of care provision. It argues this would infringe on users’ First Amendment speech rights by “requiring online platforms to suppress certain kinds of content.”

Meta helped kill KOSA two years ago after raising similar free speech concerns with the bill to Speaker Mike Johnson, though it has since dropped its opposition because Blackburn’s package is expected to include language preempting state AI laws, as POLITICO exclusively reported Tuesday.

Congress

‘Un-American’: Democrats attack Trump’s uneven disaster response

Published

2 hours ago

June 17, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Democratic senators Wednesday attacked President Donald Trump’s approach to disseminating disaster aid as “unconscionable,” “shameful” and “un-American.”

At a confirmation hearing for Trump’s nominee to run the Federal Emergency Management Agency, three Democrats cited an article by POLITICO showing that the president had approved 89 percent of disaster requests from Republican-led states compared to 23 percent of requests from states led by Democrats. No president has distributed disaster aid at such uneven levels going back to at least 1981, when Ronald Reagan took office.

“Denying over 75 percent of requests from states that are led by representatives of another party is unconscionable,” said Sen. Gary Peters of Michigan, the top Democrat on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, displaying a large poster of a chart included in the news article.

“Given this stark data, what other conclusions can one draw other than that the president is using federal disaster assistance to punish states that elect Democrats?” Peters asked Cameron Hamilton, who would be the first permanent FEMA administrator in Trump’s current term. The committee did not vote Wednesday on Hamilton’s nomination.

“The idea that Americans who need help in the wake of a tornado or a flood or a hurricane should be treated differently based upon politics is shameful. It is un-American,” Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.) told Hamilton.

Hamilton avoided answering questions about the discrepancy as he tried to assure senators.

“If confirmed, my focus will be to ensure that FEMA is objective, is fair and reasonable, follows the law, and is consistent in the approach to how we adjudicate claims and requests for disasters,” Hamilton told Peters.

“You still can’t answer questions about what happened while you were there,” Peters shot back, noting that Hamilton was FEMA’s acting administrator for part of 2025. “I don’t trust that that’s what you’re going to do because it didn’t seem like you did it when you were there before.”

The sharp comments came the day after 16 Democratic senators along with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) sent a letter to White House budget director Russ Vought citing the Blue Light News article to ask for details about every disaster request Trump has handled, including internal FEMA documents.

“There is no politicization to the President’s decisions on disaster relief,” White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement to Blue Light News’s E&E News.

Hamilton ran FEMA from the start of Trump’s term until he was fired on May 9, 2025, after contradicting the administration by testifying that FEMA provides essential services to the country. Trump and then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem had said they were considering eliminating the agency.

During Hamilton’s 15 weeks at FEMA last year, Trump denied a disaster request for Washington state that had been submitted by Gov. Jay Inslee (D) in late 2024, shortly before he left office.

FEMA’s own analysis of Inslee’s request found that storms and flooding had caused $34 million in damage, which is more than double the agency’s financial threshold to qualify for disaster aid. Trump and Inslee had harshly criticized each other during Trump’s first term.

Hassan asked Hamilton what he would do if Trump rejected a request for disaster aid to punish Democrats.

“Well, that’s a very odd hypothetical. I don’t believe the president would do that. But I will tell you that my oath of office requires that I follow and obey the law,” Hamilton replied.

“You all are going to have to think about what you will do when he reverses your decision, completely based on politics, which as I said would be immoral and un-American,” Hassan replied.

Federal law gives presidents exclusive authority to approve or deny requests for disaster aid. FEMA recommends whether aid should be approved or denied based on an estimated cost of repairs.

Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D) recalled what she described as an unusual action by Trump after Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) sought disaster aid last year following an ice storm that demolished electricity infrastructure in northern Michigan. Trump approved some disaster aid but denied Whitmer’s request for aid to repair the damaged equipment. Trump eventually reversed his denial and approved the infrastructure aid after heavy lobbying from Michigan officials.

“It’s just hard to rationalize how many disasters have been approved for aid in Republican states versus Democratic states,” Slotkin said. “Republicans would be screaming bloody murder if the stats were reversed.”

Congress

OMB nominee touts plan to give Trump appointees power to kill grants

Published

4 hours ago

June 17, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

President Donald Trump’s nominee for the No. 2 post at the White House budget office told lawmakers Wednesday that the administration will stop federal cash from flowing to “divisive ideologies” under new grant rules in the works.

Hal Duncan, who is seeking Senate confirmation to serve as deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget, said during his confirmation hearing that the White House will ensure federal grants are aligned with Trump’s priorities by changing the way more than $1 trillion is approved each year.

“The ultimate deciders of these grants will be the political employees at the agencies,” Duncan noted in testimony before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

The White House proposed changes last month that would put political appointees in charge of blessing or nixing awards to state and local governments, community groups, education institutions and nonprofit organizations. The result, Duncan said, will be that the administration will more easily head off fraud and no federal dollars will go to “divisive DEI ideologies, woke gender ideologies, illegal immigration.”

The administration is expected to finalize these plans as soon as this summer.

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) touted the proposal as a way to ensure federal money goes to “things that President Trump actually ran on — his causes.”

But Democrats are raising concern that the Trump administration will use the new approval process to deny federal support for groups or governments that don’t boost Trump.

“That really sounds to me like you all are trying to turn the entire federal government into this one big slush fund to reward those aligned with the administration and punish everyone else,” Washington Sen. Patty Murray, the Senate’s top Democratic appropriator, told Duncan on Tuesday, during his first confirmation hearing before the Budget Committee.

Both committees must vote in the coming weeks to advance Duncan’s nomination to the Senate floor for a confirmation vote by the full chamber. He is already serving in the role as acting deputy director.