Congress

One month later, the DHS shutdown shows no signs of ending

Published

6 months ago

March 13, 2026

Top Democrats and White House officials are nowhere near close to a breakthrough in negotiations to end the Homeland Security shutdown as the funding lapse is due to hit its one-month mark Saturday and real pain begins.

It’s been more than two weeks since the White House laid out its latest proposal for restoring full Department of Homeland Security operations alongside changes to the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement tactics, and Democrats have yet to send a formal counteroffer in the negotiations spurred by the fatal shootings by federal agents in January of two U.S. citizens in Minnesota.

TSA screeners are now missing their first full paychecks of the shutdown, which could lead to more agents skipping work or quitting — and exacerbate already-lengthy wait times at airport security checkpoints throughout the country. Republicans think this could be the breaking point where Democrats relent.

“I’m hopeful that as you see these problems at the airports, that the public will start talking to Democrats,” said Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.).

But Democrats have a legislative rebuttal: Bills that would fully fund TSA and other parts of DHS that are casualties of the larger immigration standoff. Republicans have repeatedly objected over the last two weeks when Democrats asked for votes on those bills on the Senate floor.

“Who’s standing in the way? America, look at it,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a floor speech Thursday. “We’re not putting any preconditions on funding TSA; the Republicans are.”

The Trump administration remains in “frequent” communication with senior Democratic lawmakers, according to one senior White House official granted anonymity to discuss private conversations. Another White House official said the president’s team “remains interested in continuing conversations with Democrats about ways to end this shutdown” but that “Democrats, regrettably, have chosen to punish the American people.”

Yet since the DHS shutdown began Feb. 14, Democrats on Capitol Hill say the administration has been unwilling to make any significant changes to its immigration enforcement tactics, while Republicans insist that the White House has in fact offered Democrats a deal they would be foolish not to take. Amid finger-pointing and deep distrust, there’s no sign the impasse will anytime soon.

On both sides, negotiators have been careful not to divulge the details of the offers each party is representing very differently. Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) said in an interview this week that she “would like to see the Democrats actually read what the White House sent. It is an eminently reasonable proposal.”

The Senate’s top Democratic appropriator, Washington Sen. Patty Murray, suggested Thursday this wasn’t the case. She also said that while people outside the negotiations are “guessing” at the contents of the recent White House framework, ultimately “words matter.”

“You can have money for body cameras, but not require them — two very different things,” she said of GOP claims about what has been proposed. “I don’t want to characterize anything.”

Democrats are demanding new policies that would prohibit federal immigration agents from wearing masks, require officers to display identification and ensure that agents would be barred from detaining people in certain places, such as churches and schools. Democrats also aren’t budging on the demand that ICE obtain judicial warrants for making arrests.

Growing impatient as the shutdown stretches on, several Republican senators have tried to start up negotiations with their Democratic counterparts, despite GOP leaders initially deferring to the White House to handle dealmaking with the minority party.

Democrats have largely rebuffed those entreaties, however, arguing such talks could result in giving ground to congressional Republicans only to then see the White House renege on commitments. Democrats are especially worried about being railroaded by Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff for policy and the architect of President Donald Trump’s hard-line immigration agenda.

“Things go back to the White House, and Stephen Miller, who’s an extremist, says ‘no,’” Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) said in an interview.

Shaheen and other lawmakers have suggested it could be helpful for the White House to deputize a lead negotiator — but not Miller.

“Stephen Miller has a view that is outside of the American mainstream, and so it’s gonna be hard,” said Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) in an interview. “If Susie Wiles were in charge of the discussion, that would be a different conversation.”

Wiles, who has served as White House chief of staff for more than a year, is involved in the talks, according to one senior White House official. But that official said talks toward a DHS funding deal are also led by Trump himself and a team headed by James Blair, White House deputy chief of staff for legislative, political and public affairs.

“There’s no blueprint to this,” the official said of the ongoing talks. “There’s multiple people working on it.”

In the days following the U.S.-Israel strikes on Iran, Republicans cited an increased risk of terrorist attacks in calling on Democrats to vote for restoring full DHS operations. But the argument did not shake loose any additional Democratic support, including on Thursday when Senate Majority Leader John Thune forced a procedural vote on the House-passed DHS funding bill.

A more tangible pressure point than a theoretical attack on U.S. soil could be further disruption to civilian air travel. The longer a shutdown goes on, the more disgruntled TSA agents will become, since they are forced to work without pay. TSA divulged this week that about 300 security screeners have quit since funding lapsed last month — and the workforce is poised to miss a full paycheck for the first time this shutdown.

In Denver, airport officials asked the public this week to donate $10 and $20 gift cards to help TSA agents pay for groceries and gas.

“When the pain goes from the poor TSA agents — who deserve to be paid, and whose families deserve to have them paid — when that pain gets translated to travelers, it gets worse,” Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) said in an interview. “And that’s what we sure hope we can avoid in the next few days or week or two.”

While security lines grow longer at U.S. airports, news coverage of ICE and CBP agents detaining people in the interior of the country has declined.

“The further and further that we get away from January and the events that occurred in January, then the less and less leverage Democrats are going to have — and the more you may have issues at airports,” said a person close to the White House. “That’s going to put pressure on Democrats.”

At the same time, the Trump administration has stemmed the impact of the shutdown on most of the DHS workforce by bankrolling paychecks with money from the party-line tax and spending package Republicans enacted last summer. That includes pay for law enforcement officers at the Secret Service and active duty members of the Coast Guard.

DHS can also sustain work at ICE and CBP with the more than $100 billion Republicans delivered for those agencies within the party-line legislation last year.

“Democrats aren’t even shutting down what they have a problem with,” said another person close to the White House. “For the defenders of government workers and minorities, I think it’s wild that Democrats are withholding paychecks from TSA.”

Furthermore, Trump administration officials contend that the law does not allow funding from the GOP megabill to be used for TSA paychecks.

“Only way to get TSA paid is for Democrats to vote to reopen the government and not hold this key funding hostage,” said a senior administration official not authorized to speak publicly about interpretation of the law.

Stewart Verdery, who served as a DHS assistant secretary under former President George W. Bush, said he would be surprised if the Trump administration tried to find a way to pay TSA agents as the lapse drags on.

“TSA agents not getting paid is a very visible signal of the situation Democrats are creating,” Verdery said. “And I’m not sure why you’d want to solve it yourself.”

Beyond the Trump administration, congressional Republicans have also been unwilling to alleviate that pressure point by funding TSA and other DHS operations while leaving ICE and Customs and Border Protection hanging. Increasingly, Democrats are continuing to showcase that GOP resistance.

“If we can’t move forward funding the entire department, sitting down and negotiating in good faith — which you’ve had plenty of time to do already — we should be able to come together to pay the hardworking staff of one of its most essential components: TSA,” Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) said on the floor this week.

“Talk is easy,” she continued, questioning whether GOP senators would “back up what they say with their vote.” Republicans objected.

Eli Stokols contributed to this report.

Congress

Democrats keep pressure on Hakeem Jeffries to punish rogue members

Published

3 hours ago

September 17, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

House Democrats aren’t letting rogue members off the hook for bucking their party. They hope Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries won’t either.

“Obviously, there’s got to be” punishment for the two Democrats who twice this month bucked their party to advance a slate of Republican priorities, Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) said in an interview.

“Otherwise, then,” he said, “it’s open season.”

Democrats are watching closely how — and if — Jeffries doles out consequences for Reps. Jared Golden of Maine and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington who have twice provided the decisive votes for GOP procedural measures this month. Jeffries and his leadership team condemned the two members when they first defected two weeks ago, slamming a “breach of trust” warranting a “serious response” but have yet to inflict any public consequences.

On Tuesday, they defied leadership a second time, infuriating House Democrats and resurrecting questions about how leadership plans to keep its caucus in line — especially if they have a slim majority next term.

“We have to all be united, and I think it’s pretty simple,” said one House Democrat who was granted anonymity to speak candidly. “If there’s not [a punishment], I find it hard to see a path forward in the majority, which we’re all pushing for.”

Asked if leadership should punish the two aisle-crossers, Rep. Troy Carter pointed to his time as minority leader of the Louisiana state Senate: “When I had members that did not work within the confines of the philosophical views of our party, I took them off our caucus.”

“I don’t want to second-guess anybody’s timing, but I will tell you that these things cannot allow to fester,” he added. “We have to have a strict message: Either you’re with the team on those fundamental issues of governance or you aren’t.”

Multiple members, including Carter, said that removing Gluesenkamp Perez from the Appropriations Committee should be considered. (While members are just as angry at Golden, they acknowledge he’s beyond punishment given he is retiring at the end of this term.)

“I suspect that there are a number of appropriate consequences that [leaders] could implement,” Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Calif.) said in an interview. “And, ultimately, it’s their decision. I certainly don’t want that to be a caucus decision. That should be a leadership decision.”

One leader, Whip Katherine Clark of Massachusetts, suggested she is open to removing Gluesenkamp Perez from Appropriations, telling reporters Wednesday morning that “team players get to sit on exclusive committees.”

After the first instance where the two Democrats defected on Sept. 1, Jeffries kicked the matter to a caucus rules panel, saying afterward he wanted to pursue action against the two members “sooner rather than later.” The panel continues to deliberate on what should happen if members vote with Republicans on procedural measures.

Jeffries said that week that he’d had a “productive” and “forward-looking” conversation with Gluesenkamp Perez, but he has said much less after Tuesday’s floor drama.

“I’ll have more to say about the issue when I have more to say about the issue,” he told Blue Light News shortly after the vote.

Congress

House passes Russia sanctions bill, handing Trump more leverage against Moscow

Published

5 hours ago

September 16, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The House passed the sweeping Russia sanctions bill long championed by the late Sen. Lindsey Graham on Wednesday, sending the legislation to the White House for President Donald Trump’s signature after more than a year of congressional maneuvering.

The 262 to 159 vote ends a nearly two-year lull in Ukraine assistance from Congress, which had not passed any major Ukraine efforts since a 2024 emergency aid package. The bill faced a number of obstacles on the path to the Resolute Desk, including significant opposition from some House Democrats who argued that the bill would give the White House too much tariff power.

After weathering a number of storms to make it out of Capitol Hill, the legislation is all but guaranteed to get Trump’s signature.

The long-anticipated legislation issues mandatory sanctions on Russia’s leadership and energy sector — as well as new sanctions on collaborators in Moscow’s defense industry and its so-called shadow fleet. Advocates of the bill, including Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, have argued it would give the White House necessary tools to squeeze Russia economically, curbing the flow of funds to Moscow’s war machine.

But, to many Democrats’ dismay, the legislation also includes a 100% tariff on top buyers of Russian energy. Opponents of the bill have cautioned that the tariff provision would hand another cudgel for Trump to use against not only U.S. foes but also global allies — an action the White House has repeatedly taken since Trump returned to office.

“We cannot grant more tariff power that we know he will abuse,” Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) said in comments on the House floor Wednesday.

Meeks, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, argued that the tariffs would worsen the economic pain already felt by everyday Americans and that without a security assistance package or more air defense, they would not do enough to concretely help Ukraine.

In comments on the House floor earlier Wednesday, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries outlined why he planned to withhold support for the measure.

“The manner in which this bill has been written doesn’t require the president of the United States to impose sanctions on Russia,” Jeffries said. “In fact, there are so many loopholes written into the bill, I believe, that it’s very unlikely that the sanctions relief contemplated in the legislation will ever see the light of day.”

That disagreement has caused a growing rift among Democrats in recent days. Fifty-eight House Democrats broke with Jeffries to vote yes on the measure.

In a letter addressed to House Democrats, Senate Foreign Relations ranking member Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) urged her colleagues to pass the legislation, warning that failing to do so would send a dangerous message to both Russian leader Vladimir Putin and other international foes.

“Congress’s failure to impose additional costs would send a dangerous signal,” Shaheen wrote. “The Kremlin is watching. Kyiv is watching. Our NATO allies are watching. So are Beijing, Tehran and Pyongyang.”

Congress

Rand Paul kills Kennedy’s AI ‘kill switch’ bill

Published

6 hours ago

September 16, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Sen. Rand Paul blocked an attempt by fellow Republican Sen. John Kennedy to quickly pass legislation that would require companies to build a “kill switch” into their artificial intelligence model.

Kennedy, of Louisiana, went to the Senate floor Wednesday to try to pass his bill without holding a formal vote — a step that can be prevented by any one of his 99 colleagues. He argued that the measure was effectively a short-term step, with Congress unlikely to pass more sweeping AI legislation in the immediate future even amid fears that technological advancements could spiral out of human control.

“We are not going to get up off our ice-cold lazy butts and address this anytime soon,” Kennedy said about Congress’ inability to pass a more comprehensive bill. “But still we’ve got this risk out there that we know is real of one of these models becoming the Terminator.”

Paul, however, blocked Kennedy’s request to pass the bill through a unanimous consent agreement, saying from the Senate floor, “I think we should have as many facts as possible before we dictate rules for the whole economy.”

“I don’t oppose the spirit of this bill but I do ask that we make sure that we have all the information,” the Kentucky lawmaker added.

Paul tried to amend Kennedy’s bill to establish a group that could make recommendations on AI guardrail policies to the Senate Commerce Committee. Kennedy rejected that suggestion.

“My mama didn’t raise a fool,” he said, adding, “a committee is a way to kill this.”

Kennedy’s push for a vote comes after he told reporters Monday that he intended to roll out legislation and attempt to pass it this week, even while he acknowledged that he didn’t yet have any formal buy-in from his colleagues. He also appeared to know by earlier in the day Wednesday that he was running into a roadblock, saying in an interview that he expected Paul to offer a counterproposal.