Congress

Obamacare subsidy negotiations are heating up. But trust is breaking down.

Published

8 months ago

November 7, 2025

A deal to extend Affordable Care Act subsidies is looking more uncertain as Senate Republicans push to make headway Friday on ending the longest-ever government shutdown.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune has promised Democrats a floor vote to prevent the enhanced subsidies from expiring at the end of the year. But Senate Democrats are splintered over how much stock to put into Thune’s commitment, given the South Dakota Republican has also said he cannot guarantee an outcome of any such vote.

Some lawmakers argue they should hold out for a concrete deal on an extension before voting to reopen the government. Others believe they could make real progress on a bipartisan framework after the government reopens, building on negotiations this fall.

Democrats are now wrestling with their options as Thune plans to force a vote Friday afternoon that would tee up consideration of a new government funding package to allow federal operations to resume. This vote is likely to fail but it presents an opportunity for some Democrats to break rank as the shutdown pain grows more severe.

At stake is a policy that Democrats argue will help millions of Americans who are set to get hit by skyrocketing premiums in 2026. It’s also putting to the test Democrats’ trust that a massively complex and politically loaded issue can be solved through old-fashioned bipartisan negotiations, with many Democrats skeptical that Republicans will ever follow through on the issue once the shutdown ends.

“This is the old days of making sure you write it into black letter law. That’s what we do when we write bills. We haven’t seen that yet,” Senate Finance Committee ranking member Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), whose panel has jurisdiction over the ACA premium tax credits, told reporters Thursday.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) has also been urging his colleagues to not vote to reopen the government without clear signs the subsidies would be extended, arguing that the party’s victories in elections across the country earlier this week sent a signal that voters want Democrats to keep up the fight.

“I have obviously expressed my reservations about agreeing to only a vote without a certainty of outcome,” said Murphy in an interview Thursday. “I don’t think that we should proceed without knowing that these health care premiums are not going to go up by 200 percent.”

“We’ve been talking all day today inside the caucus about what a path forward is, whether it’s negotiations that some of our colleagues have been having, or is it a different path?” Murphy added.

Those negotiations are largely being spearheaded by Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Angus King (I-Maine) and Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), opposite rank-and-file Senate Republicans. According to two people granted anonymity to share details of ongoing conversations, Senate Democratic negotiators have been exchanging details of proposals and white papers with their Republican counterparts.

One person pointed to these discussions as evidence of “willingness from Senate Republicans to come to the table if the government is reopened,” though the other person noted that the exchange of white paper is not necessarily a strong signal of progress being made.

A third person added that this paper-trading was paused a couple weeks ago, anyway, when Republican leaders made it known they wouldn’t seriously negotiate the terms of a framework until after the government reopens.

“We’ve made it very clear that you open up government, and then we can work on a solution that will actually stand the test of time — including one that our president could perhaps consider supporting and convincing the House to support but nothing is going to happen until we open up government,” said Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.).

Internal differences on the policy are not Democrats’ only problem. Even if Democrats get a vote on an extension of the Obamacare subsidies in the Senate, House Speaker Mike Johnson won’t commit to putting such a bill on the House floor, saying Thursday morning that he’s not “promising anybody anything.” Johnson is facing heavy resistance from his right flank on the issue, with members of the House Freedom Caucus promising to revolt if the subsidies are extended.

Democrats also have to figure out which modifications to the credits they are willing to accept. Some proposals pushed by Republicans, like those that would put an income cap on the credits, appear palatable, while other ideas like restricting the subsidies from plans that cover abortion promise to be non-starters.

“I would call that exceedingly frustrating. There’s several unanswered questions, and that’s one of them,” said Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), when asked about Johnson’s refusal to commit to a vote, in an interview Thursday. “I understand the position that the speaker’s in politically, but that’s why President [Donald] Trump could get all this done. Because he could, if he got involved and pushed a negotiation, he could give Speaker Johnson the cover he needs to give it a vote in the House.”

The White House has, however, given congressional Republicans little to work with. Trump has so far been silent on the issue publicly, while people inside his administration are reportedly divided on whether to let the subsidies expire or extend them for the purposes of political preservation in next year’s midterms.

Besides exhorting Trump to get involved, some freshmen senators who won their seats after serving in the House are hoping that their relationships with their old GOP colleagues could spur momentum for a bipartisan proposal. Democratic Sens. Andy Kim of New Jersey and Lisa Blunt Rochester of Delaware invited GOP Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania and Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey to huddle Friday morning to see if they can find a way forward.

One possible idea being broached by some Senate Democrats includes having House counterparts pursue a discharge petition, a procedural maneuver allowing rank-and-file members to force a vote on legislation without the blessing of leadership. In this case, though, it’s not clear whether enough Republicans would sign onto a bill to extend the subsidies to clear the necessary 218-signature threshold to get the measure onto the floor.

“A number of us that have come out of the House recently and have relationships in the House want to have a dialogue with our House Republican counterparts to see whether there’s a way to work forward to extend the Affordable Care tax credits and find our way out of this both health crisis and government shutdown,” said Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), one of the first-term lawmakers engaged in talks.

As for Johnson refusing to commit to a vote, Schiff said, “He’ll do whatever Donald Trump tells him to do.”

Jordain Carney and Meredith Lee Hill contributed to this report.

Congress

Capitol agenda: House floor freezes over

Published

9 hours ago

July 1, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Last July 4 recess, House Republicans were triumphantly celebrating the massive victory of clearing the party’s tax and spending bill.

Fast forward a year and Speaker Mike Johnson can’t even get enough votes to open his chamber’s floor for debate.

“Who needs Democrats when you have your own party derailing the Trump agenda,” Rep. Nicole Malliotakis said Tuesday.

A rebellion by a small band of conservatives now jeopardizes members’ top priorities as the legislative calendar ahead of the midterms rapidly shrinks. Progress on the annual Pentagon policy bill, fiscal 2027 government funding bills, Iran war funding measure, third party-line reconciliation bill and more is frozen in the party’s paralysis.

Frustration at the roughly dozen Republicans who refused to support a procedural vote to unlock floor business exploded Tuesday afternoon as members watched their legislation become collateral damage. The hard-liners want Johnson to do more to force the Senate to pass an election security bill.

“We’ve got knuckleheads taking down the rules, that’s frustrating,” Rep. John Rutherford said in an interview. “They think they’re putting some kind of pressure on the Senate, but you don’t put pressure on the Senate by shutting down the House floor.”

Anger from the hard-liners had been simmering for days even as Johnson tried to appease the group by effectively attaching the SAVE America Act to the must-pass defense policy bill.

Several hard-liners who voted against the procedural rule, like Reps. Chip Roy and Andy Harris, also cited what they said was a broken promise from Johnson to hold a vote on an immigration bill before the July 4 recess, among other concerns.

Now lawmakers will return July 13 to a chaotic mess of a to-do list.

They’ll need to use valuable floor time to pass the defense policy bill, including votes on more than 300 amendments. A stack of fiscal 2027 spending bills GOP appropriators wanted to pass before recess awaits them, as does an $88 billion emergency funding request from Trump for the Iran war and farm aid.

And hanging from a thread: the GOP’s hope to clear another party-line bill to help members campaign before the midterms.

A meeting initially set for today between House Budget Republicans and GOP leaders to discuss the next steps on a third reconciliation bill was canceled in light of the schedule change.

Another casualty of the frozen floor: Republicans left town unable to vote on a ceremonial resolution commemorating the one-year anniversary of the tax-cut legislation that remains the GOP’s major legislative victory in Trump’s second term.

To pull off that final vote, Johnson had to muscle near complete unity from his members and plow through months of lawmaker angst and discord to meet Trump’s self-imposed deadline of Independence Day.

Johnson tried to project optimism amid his conference’s meltdown Tuesday.

“We don’t have time to waste because we’re coming up on an election and the end of Congress,” Johnson told reporters. “It’s frustrating, but we’ll get everybody together and then do it again. This is life in a small majority.”

With just eight legislative days on the calendar between now and Congress’ August recess, and 16 days more between then and the November elections, Johnson’s optimism faces the brutal reality of a short timeline.

What else we’re watching:

— BENNET, DEGETTE LOSE PRIMARIES: Stunning losses for two of Colorado’s most prominent Democrats Tuesday were the latest sign of boiling anti-establishment rage among the electorate. Sen. Michael Bennet will return to the Senate to finish out the last two years of his term after losing the Democratic primary for Colorado governor. And in the 1st District, Democratic socialist Melat Kiros defeated 15-term Rep. Diana DeGette.

— NYC SOCIALIST SWEEP COMPLICATES REDISTRICTING PLAN: It’s no secret Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries is spearheading a mid-decade redistricting drive to win control of the House. But the results of last week’s primaries in New York City add a new wrinkle to that project: How will he handle foes from within his own party?

William Steakin and Joe Anuta contributed to this report.

Congress

The left won big in NYC. Now it has to survive a redistricting effort.

Published

12 hours ago

July 1, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

NEW YORK — It’s no secret Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries is spearheading a mid-decade redistricting drive to win control of the House. But the results of last week’s primaries in New York City add a new wrinkle to that project: How will he handle foes from within his own party?

On June 23, a trio of far-left congressional candidates routed establishment Democrats aligned with the Brooklyn lawmaker. Come 2028, when New York officials hope to redraw those three seats along with the rest of the state’s congressional boundaries, Jeffries would be one of the people influencing the process.

Any changes to districts won by an insurgent wing of the party — making them more moderate or shoring them up as progressive strongholds — will be closely watched by both establishment officials alarmed by the rise of the Democratic Socialists of America and young voters wary of Jeffries and the party machinery.

“You had people yelling ‘you’re next’ at a screen showing Hakeem,” said Basil Smikle Jr., the former head of the state Democratic Party, referring to democratic socialists calling for Jeffries’ defeat at a primary night watch party. “That tells you everything you need to know about the scrutiny that is going to come to anything he does, including his process.”

When it comes to redistricting in the Empire State, much remains undecided and undone. Midterm results in November will provide a clearer view of the electoral landscape, especially in competitive races in the Hudson Valley and on Long Island. Democratic leaders have not even won approval for their redistricting plan from voters — polling so far has been grim. And Jeffries himself has given no indication of his plans beyond a desire for New York to pledge its sword in the national redistricting wars.

But Jeffries, who is aiming to become the first Black speaker of the House, will regardless be buffeted by competing interests should the state move forward — not least the mutual animosity between himself and the democratic socialists winning races in his backyard.

A proposed redistricting map from 2022 provides a peek at how Democrats believed they could maximize gains in Congress throughout the state. In New York City, that meant dramatic changes to two districts won by leftist challengers last week.

The home turf of Brad Lander, a progressive who defeated incumbent Rep. Dan Goldman in Brooklyn and Manhattan, would have been drawn into a district encompassing deep-red Staten Island in a bid to oust GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis.

And the district won in a landslide by Assemblymember Claire Valdez, a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, would have had the northern part of her highly educated, affluent base along the Brooklyn-Queens waterfront lopped off.

Ph.D. candidate Darializa Avila Chevalier, a fellow DSA member, beat incumbent Adriano Espaillat by the narrowest margin last week. Her district, however, currently resembles what was cooked up in Democrat’s 2022 proposal.

That map was ultimately thrown out by the courts, in large part for procedural problems. But Democrats remain focused on Malliotakis’ seat, and flipping it would require some rejiggering of the surrounding areas that could impact freshmen legislators.

“There will be new lines in 2028 and, generally speaking, the newer members are the most at risk,” said Chris Coffey, chief executive of Tusk Strategies. “But it’s hard to predict what will happen or how the new lines will shake out.”

Some political observers expect Jeffries to at least consider ways to protect his delegation while simultaneously weakening Republicans. Prominent members of the left have already expressed a desire to primary Rep. Ritchie Torres, who handily won reelection in the Bronx. And Rep. Grace Meng won her race by a smaller margin than many expected for a ten-year incumbent.

“You have an opportunity to remake the map and change the delegation in smart ways,” said one Democratic strategist. “The question is: how do you do that?”

Gustavo Gordillo, co-chair of DSA’s New York City chapter, said the organization generally supports using mid-decade redistricting to gain Democratic representation in Congress, but that tinkering with the districts freshly won by Lander and Valdez in particular would likely have unintended consequences.

“Claire Valdez is already basically a packed DSA district, so if they change that district very much, it suddenly makes any neighboring district easier terrain for us,” he said. “I think that also goes for NY-10 [where Lander is the Democratic nominee] as well. I’m curious to see how they navigate that.”

Jeffries’ office offered no indication that he’s thinking about anything beyond giving Democrats an edge nationally. The minority leader has mounted an aggressive push to redraw congressional maps in blue states to counteract Republican partisan gerrymandering elsewhere. And the results of that war will help decide control of Congress for years to come.

“Leader Jeffries is focused on passing the constitutional amendment to ensure New York has a fair and competitive congressional map that can help stop the nationwide MAGA power grab in places like Florida and Texas, and create additional opportunities to elect House Democrats in 2028 and beyond,” spokesperson Justin Chermol said in a statement.

There have also been overtures toward intra-party peace as of late.

The minority leader congratulated all of the Democratic contenders on their primary wins. Lander has embraced Jeffries’ speakership run — as has Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who was a driving force in getting all three progressives through the primary. (Valdez and Avila Chevalier have remained mum on who should lead the House.)

Additionally, the mere specter of shifting lines could create more comity between ideologically disparate officials who would want to stay on mapmakers’ good side. And laws governing the redistricting process also prevent the state from diluting minority representation in certain districts.

Jeffries will be joined in the redistricting effort by the New York State Democratic Party and the state Legislature, which must approve the maps. Both the state Senate and Assembly saw a leftward shift last week, meaning lawmakers would be sensitive to any changes that appear to negatively impact their political bedfellows.

“I don’t know about anyone else, but the Senate is not interested in using redistricting to take sides in a civil war,” said state Sen. Michael Gianaris, who spearheaded past redistricting efforts and will step down from his seat at the end of the year.

Redistricting is a fraught process in any year. Republicans and good-government groups will cry foul at any hint of gerrymandering. Various neighborhoods will balk at being shifted to a new representative. And the results can be unpredictable. In 2024, leftist Rep. Jamaal Bowman emerged a winner from the redistricting process only to go on to lose reelection.

But Tuesday’s primaries have upped the stakes for Jeffries and state Democrats even further, even as they try to focus on the national picture.

“A lot of people are going to be watching who weren’t watching before,” Smikle Jr. said.

Congress

Tom Kean Jr. kept his depression a secret. Colleagues are questioning that decision.

Published

12 hours ago

July 1, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

When Rep. Tom Kean Jr. revealed Tuesday his extended absence from the House was due to inpatient treatment for depression, he ended months of speculation but also fueled a delicate conversation: Just how much privacy are elected officials entitled to?

The New Jersey Republican offered only scant details about his condition during the four months he went missing. And while colleagues of both parties expressed sympathy for his mental health challenges and gratitude that he has now returned, many hedged their comments by saying Kean could and perhaps should have said something earlier.

“Certainly everyone has a right to privacy and to health care and to the mental health care that they need,” said Rep. Maxine Dexter, an Oregon Democrat and physician, while adding that members are obligated to be “transparent and forthcoming.”

“You give up the right to privacy in a certain respect when you run for office and represent that many people,” she said. “And so I do challenge our colleagues to be more transparent when these things happen.”

Even Speaker Mike Johnson suggested Kean should have said more sooner at a news conference Tuesday: “If it were me, I would have been more specific about that, and I encouraged him to be.”

Kean appeared to anticipate that he might be criticized for saying so little as he missed more than 100 votes — no matter how sensitive his diagnosis might be. In the floor speech he gave upon returning Tuesday, he described himself as a “private person by nature” and said he “was still trying to understand what was happening” when his office first attributed his absence to a “medical issue.”

“When I said I hoped to return in a matter of weeks, I believed it,” Kean said. “Those were the best estimates the doctors could provide.”

Other parts of his approach, however, raised eyebrows. His social media accounts continued as if he was still at the Capitol, fueling more questions about his malady. Reports of an empty house back in New Jersey and an aide’s offhand comment that there were “no cameras” where Kean was only added to the speculation.

Many fellow House members spoke carefully Tuesday about Kean’s condition while also making clear that it should not excuse him from accountability for how his absence was handled.

“I think many of us have a tremendous degree of empathy and understanding for a mental health diagnosis,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said in an interview. “There’s a valid discussion here about when it comes to the volume of an absence, what is our responsibility to our constituents in communicating around that?”

Attitudes and practices surrounding mental health care in big-time politics have been transformed since 1972, when Sen. Thomas Eagleton of Missouri lost his No. 2 spot on the Democratic presidential ticket after his bouts with depression were publicized.

While the subject remains taboo among some, more lawmakers have talked openly about their mental health struggles as the disease has grown in prevalence among the general public.

When Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) was hospitalized for clinical depression three years ago, he almost immediately explained his health issues and offered routine public updates.

Fetterman’s transparency was met with plaudits and empathy from his congressional colleagues at the time, but he later said in an interview that he had regrets about opening up.

He blamed “people in the media” for having “weaponized” his illness, he told the New York Times a year ago: “It shook me that people are willing to weaponize that I got help.”

Others have been similarly candid. Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) opened up in 2023 about overcoming a debilitating mix of anxiety, depression and the side effects of drugs used to treat them. Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.) and Reps. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.) and Becca Balint (D-Vt.) have spoken about their struggles, too.

Torres quickly responded to Kean’s announcement in a social media post, noting that while he sympathized, those in elected positions also have “a duty of transparency.”

Balint in an interview questioned whether staying silent on the issue for months served to “perpetuate the stigma” around mental health challenges.

“I’m glad that he is being open in public about it,” she said, while adding, “I wish that he had done that months ago, to even just make just a general statement.”

Rep. Lauren Boebert, who had questioned Kean’s whereabouts before his announcement, was among the small number of members who were not so understanding and called his long absence “ridiculous.”

“I think there’s this dose of depression that comes with every congressional pin that’s issued,” the Colorado Republican said. “Life is depressing. Life is hard. Get to work.”

While few Americans can afford to miss months of work for mental health treatment like Kean, depression-related work absences have become a major issue as the prevalence of the disease in the U.S. has only grown. Depressed workers are many times more likely to miss work because of the condition but are also less likely to self-disclose depression issues.

Several Democrats and Republicans were supportive of Kean immediately after his announcement and applauded him for coming forward with the diagnosis.

“It’s helpful to the American people and to others with depression to be able to acknowledge that this is what’s happening and it’s not a sin, he’s not a bad person, he’s not a weak person,” Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.), a co-chair of the Congressional Mental Health Caucus, said in an interview. “It’s a brain disease, and I want him to be well.”

Beyer also said he was “disappointed” that Kean “felt he couldn’t disclose it,” though said he does not know the fellow congressman well and did not wish to criticize him.

Beyer, who has been open about his son’s schizophrenia diagnosis, said mental health issues should not be a “secret thing tucked away in the closet.”

Kean, for his part, let very few fellow politicians into his confidence. The two other Republicans in the New Jersey delegation, Reps. Jeff Van Drew and Chris Smith, said they had not heard from Kean in months despite calling and texting him out of concern.

Despite what Van Drew described as “radio silence,” the two other New Jersey Republicans defended Kean’s decision to not reveal his diagnosis.

“I was just concerned for him,” Van Drew said. “When you go through something like that, you … choose how you’re going to reveal it. So he decided to do it this way, and that’s fine. It’s his decision.”

Smith said he was optimistic Kean’s public disclosure even now could help reduce the stigma surrounding mental health issues. Asked about how much privacy members of Congress are entitled to on personal matters, he said, “There’s a balance.”

“He thought this is probably the best way to do it, and so I respected it,” Smith said.

Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R-Wis.), a Navy veteran who has been open about having post-traumatic stress disorder, said in an interview he was among a select few who knew months in advance about Kean’s diagnosis. He defended Kean’s decision to keep mum.

“If you’ve got a medical condition, that’s up to you to disclose,” he said. “Anybody that’s saying they should have done this or that — really, they need to get a life.”