Congress

Republicans get antsy about confirmations as the Senate hangs in the balance

Published

4 months ago

June 29, 2026

President Donald Trump is showing little urgency in sending nominations to the Senate even as the GOP’s control of the chamber beyond 2026 is increasingly in doubt.

There are more than two dozen federal court vacancies. Labor secretary, FDA commissioner and scores of other open positions do not have nominees, and a senior White House official said Trump is in no rush to fill them.

“Ultimately, we need to have the right people in those positions,” said the official, who was granted anonymity to describe internal thinking. “So if it’s acting for now, so be it. If [it] takes a little while to find that perfect person, then it takes a little while.”

That’s unsettling some Republican senators who are anxious to fill spots ahead of the midterms, a daunting task given the legislative calendar and host of competing GOP priorities.

“We’re running short on time,” said Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), a member of the Senate HELP Committee, which oversees health, labor and other issues. “We’d love to get at least one or two of them and get it in the next tranche.”

As far as judges, Tuberville said he wants to see “as many as we can get” nominated, adding, “I don’t know why we don’t have more.”

Trump’s apparent nonchalance — particularly over judges — is a marked departure from his first term, when he opined that appointing people to the bench might be the “single most important thing you do” as president. But as the Senate left for a two-week recess Thursday, there were only 10 nominees pending for 29 judicial vacancies.

The vacancies come amid ongoing tensions between the Senate and Trump, who has put pressure on the chamber to pass the GOP elections bill known as the SAVE America Act, going so far as to cancel a planned Wednesday signing of a bipartisan housing bill.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), a member of the Judiciary Committee, said he “absolutely” wants to see the president nominate more judges before the end of the year. Texas has three court vacancies with zero nominees.

“And that’s one of his greatest legacies, both first term and second,” Cruz said of Trump.

Trump is on pace with his first term in total confirmations in part because Republicans changed the Senate rules last year to confirm slates of civilian posts at once by a simple majority vote.

One tranche confirmed in Mayincluded 49 nominees, from ambassadors to midlevel posts at various federal agencies. So far, 502 of Trump’s second-term nominees have been confirmed, compared to 509 at this point during his first term and 601 at the same point during former President Joe Biden’s term.

Federal judges and members of the Cabinet still have to be confirmed individually, despite the rule change for other posts.

Trump inherited only about 40 judicial vacancies for his current term, fewer than any president since Ronald Reagan. Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) previously complained that the White House hasn’t nominated more judges. More recently, though, he’s blaming his committee for not acting more quickly on the already pending nominees.

“Right now it’s hard for me to blame the White House when in the last three executive weeks, we were supposed to have meetings to vote judges out, we couldn’t have enough members present,” Grassley said in an interview.

A White House official said “Trump plans to nominate well qualified individuals to fill these vacancies.”

Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said he’s had “a couple good discussions” with the White House about a circuit court vacancy, which he expects the administration to fill. As a Judiciary Committee member, he can block any nominee that doesn’t get support from Democrats.

“If it’s somebody I support, I’ll vote for them. If it’s somebody I don’t support, I’ll vote no,” Kennedy said. “It’s an important spot. They know I’m on Judiciary, and they know I’ll vote no if I don’t agree.”

The Labor secretary and FDA commissioner picks, meanwhile, go through the HELP committee — chaired by Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), who lost his primary last month after Trump endorsed a challenger.

Republicans have been left in the dark about those nominees, some on the panel say.

Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) said he’s heard “nothing at all” and “radio silence” from administration. Another GOP senator, granted anonymity to speak candidly, said they’ve heard nothing from the administration about its thinking or plans for a Labor secretary nominee specifically.

The HELP Committee membership poses challenges for the administration. Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) previously expressed concerns about Casey Means’ nomination as surgeon general before Trump pulled her, for example. And the dynamic between the president and the chair could be a hurdle, three people granted anonymity to comment on the process said.

“Why give Cassidy a platform to get back at DJT?” one of them said.

Another, a GOP senator, predicted Cassidy would “play games” with nominees who have to go through his committee.

“I really don’t think a lot of senators are in any mood to give the president any wins because they’re frustrated with him,” said the third person, who is close to the White House.

But confirming nominees before he leaves the Senate could be a priority for Cassidy, one of the few Republican doctors to push the administration toward public health nominees who align with established science on issues like vaccines.

A potential successor — Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky — is a critic of the vaccine and masking standards set during the pandemic and would likely set the committee on a different path.

Recent appointees such as Nicole Saphier for surgeon general and Erica Schwartz for Centers for Disease Control and Prevention director are more mainstream than some past HHS appointees like Means and Dave Weldon, who was nominated for CDC director before the administration determined he didn’t have the votes.

Those nominees have been moving through the regular process, including meeting with Cassidy and other senators ahead of confirmation hearings.

Cassidy told reporters after he lost his primary that he would “vote for the good of my country and the good of my state.”

“There’s some nominees that have not gotten through committee for whatever reason, so that’s not anything new,” he added. “That’ll just be part of the process.”

A HELP Committee spokesperson added Thursday that Cassidy has voted for every Trump nominee and that the panel will “do its job to confirm qualified nominees and serve the American people.”

“Anyone who says otherwise doesn’t know what they’re talking about,” the spokesperson added.

The White House official said “Trump remains committed to nominating highly qualified individuals for a variety of posts that are aligned with the agenda the American people elected him to enact” and will continue to send nominees to the Senate, including to the HELP Committee.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune said in an interview he had not spoken to the White House about their plans for some of the major picks under HELP jurisdiction but he encouraged the administration to send nominees.

“I think it’s always better to have people in permanent positions rather than temporary,” Thune added.

Megan Messerly contributed to this report.

Congress

GOP-linked PAC spends over $1M to boost third-party socialist in Ohio Senate race

Published

2 hours ago

October 19, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

A GOP-aligned super PAC has more-than tripled its investment in the Ohio Senate race over the last week as it seeks to boost a socialist candidate — an apparent attempt to sink former Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown’s chances.

Enough Promises Ohio, which was created last month, has spent a combined $1.58 million to promote Greg Levy and oppose Brown, according to recent filings from the Federal Election Commission. Levy, a candidate with the Party for Socialism and Liberation, is also on the ballot in the tight race for Senate between Brown and Ohio GOP Sen. Jon Husted. He’s running a longshot bid, currently polling at 5 percent, but could siphon away more progressive voters from Brown.

It wouldn’t be the first time this cycle that operatives for a major political party attempted to raise a third-party candidate’s profile to meddle with the outcome. Recent public polling shows a dead heat between Brown and Husted in the race.

The super PAC spent a total of $828,359 on mailers supporting Levy or opposing Brown. Spectrum News, The Washington Post and Axios previously reported Enough Promises Ohio spent $400,000 on such mailers, but the expenditure has since grown.

The group also poured an additional $753,000 into ads supporting Levy and opposing Brown over the weekend, including one video ad on Google that knocks Brown as someone who “sold us out” and boosts “real progressive Greg Levy.”

The campaign finance filings show Enough Promises Ohio used a printing company linked to a Republican political firm, Whistletop Strategies. Whistletop has worked with an affiliate of President Donald Trump’s MAGA Inc. super PAC and lists as its “director” Big Dog Strategies, which helped run Republican Sen. Bernie Moreno’s 2024 election campaign and is a consultant for the Ohio GOP.

Enough Promises Ohio did not respond to a request for comment. Neither did Big Dog Strategies.

Amy Natoce, a spokesperson for the Husted campaign, told Blue Light News, “our campaign had no involvement with the group you are referencing. Therefore, we have no comment.”

Levy himself has distanced himself from the PAC, calling its boosting of him an “attempted deception of voters” that’s “a form of digital blackface.” Levy is Black. His spokesperson, Charlie Koenigsmark, also told Blue Light News he and the campaign “completely condemn this attempt to manipulate voters.”

Brown did not respond to a request for comment.

Congress

Capitol agenda: AI experts to school Congress wanted

Published

10 hours ago

October 19, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Artificial intelligence is challenging some lawmakers’ confidence that they have the capacity to regulate it.

The slow pace of Congress and a challenging political environment are already working against lawmakers under pressure to address AI threats. There’s also a significant gap in tech policy expertise.

“We need to dramatically increase the base knowledge of Congress if we’re going to legislate meaningfully,” Rep. Sam Liccardo said in a recent interview.

One big concern is at the staffing level: getting people with a deep understanding of the technology around rank-and-file members. Aides who specialize in tech policy often get lured to private companies with huge salaries that can be hard to resist.

Some lawmakers, like Rep. Mark Takano, are advocating for an in-house hub — something like the long-defunct Office of Technology Assessment, which helped Congress understand emerging technology and its social and policy implications from 1972 until it was scrapped in 1995. A Takano aide said he’ll introduce a bipartisan bill to restore such an office in the coming weeks.

Members have also been leaning on fellows from TechCongress — a nonprofit founded by former congressional aide Travis Moore that places technology experts in member and committee offices.

Moore said in an interview that there are plenty of people who want to work on Capitol Hill, but it’s a matter of “Congress’s will and capacity to absorb that talent.”

Not everybody buys into the theory that staffing will solve the problem. Some conservatives, in particular, have seized on the lack of member expertise to argue for a hands-off regulatory approach.

“We don’t understand it well enough,” Sen. Cynthia Lummis, who has repeatedly brought in technology experts through the TechCongress fellowship, told reporters this month. “We don’t have the expertise to do it.”

“Do you really trust the members of Congress, who barely understand AI, to write the regulations around something?” added Rep. Eric Burlison in an interview last month.

There are a few members who consider themselves fluent in AI policy, including several who have joined working groups on it. They’ve taken educating their colleagues into their own hands but have not always seen great enthusiasm.

Liccardo, for example, recounted how he has brought in experts to brief lawmakers — including huge AI industry figures like Sam Altman of OpenAI and Dario Amodei of Anthropic— only to struggle to convince members to attend.

“We have had challenges in the past trying to get folks’ attention to the issues,” he said.

What else we’re watching:

— WRIGHT: LAWMAKERS ARE ‘WRONG’ ON RUSSIA: Energy Secretary Chris Wright on Sunday dismissed bipartisan criticism when asked about lawmakers warning that President Donald Trump’s diesel deal would help finance Russia. “In fact, they are all wrong. They don’t understand what President Trump’s doing,” Wright said on ABC News. Wright also defended Trump’s decision Friday exempting Russia from key sanctions outlined in the late Sen. Lindsey Graham sanctions law, which was enacted just last month and set to take effect Sunday. The moves have drawn bipartisan outcry.

— PILOT BILLS GET COMEDIAN’S HELP — Lawmakers are targeting year-end enactment of a pair of bipartisan bills aimed at helping pilots deal with mental health issues and hazy medication regulations, thanks in part to a comedian with an HBO show. Lawmakers and others credit Nathan Fielder, star of the docu-comedy “The Rehearsal” for raising awareness on the stresses pilots face in the hit show last year. They say Fielder wasn’t actively involved in lobbying despite pleas from some for help. “Frankly, I’m glad he elevated the story,” Rep. Sean Casten, one of the lawmakers leading the mental health legislation, told Safa. After passing the Senate late last month, the two bills are awaiting House action.

Katherine Tully-McManus, Jalen Beckford and Safa Wahidi contributed to this report.

Congress

Wanted: Tech experts to help Congress regulate AI

Published

14 hours ago

October 19, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Lawmakers are under pressure to pass legislation to address the threats from advanced artificial intelligence, but many have serious doubts they have the capacity to regulate the technology’s explosive growth.

Few are expecting lawmakers themselves — some of whom still proudly use flip phones — to become AI experts overnight. But while even congressional Luddites acknowledge there is urgency for Capitol Hill to quickly expand its expertise in tech policy to help with legislating, regulating and conducting effective oversight, there’s no consensus yet on how to achieve it.

“We need to dramatically increase the base knowledge of Congress if we’re going to legislate meaningfully,” Rep. Sam Liccardo (D-Calif.) said in a recent interview.

Congress already has a long track record of lagging behind as technological innovations transform the world beyond Washington: It has adopted a largely hands-off approach to regulating the Internet as it integrated into everyday life in the past 40 years, relying instead on existing laws that govern other industries and taking smaller piecemeal bites.

The challenging political environment won’t help speed things along now: Democrats are split over whether the answer is to put guardrails on the AI industry or ban “superintelligence” entirely, while many Republicans — including President Donald Trump — warn that any regulation would stifle innovation and cede ground to China.

Some members consider themselves fluent in AI policy, including several who have joined working groups on AI policy. Reps. Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.) and Don Beyer (D-Va.) have pursued masters degrees in AI and machine learning, in addition to many others who are self-taught.

The “overwhelming number” of lawmakers have some idea of what AI is and what it is capable of, Rep. Valerie Foushee (D-N.C.), co-chair of a House Democratic commission on AI policy, said in a recent interview. But, she added, “None of us can say that we understand where it’s going.”

The larger concern is at the staff level — putting people with real expertise around the rank-and-file members who don’t have the bandwidth or interest in educating themselves on the frontier of the industry. Aides who do specialize in tech policy often get lured to the industry with huge salaries that can be hard to resist.

That’s where Travis Moore, a former congressional staffer, has spent more than a decade trying to help.

In 2015, Moore left his post as legislative director for Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and founded TechCongress, a nonprofit that places technology experts in member and committee offices. The hope is that those offices will be convinced to hire those fellows full-time — or at least recognize the need to secure in-house tech policy expertise.

“You should have a technologist at the table to at least mitigate the unknown unknowns,” Moore said, regardless of what members themselves know about technology.

As AI has boomed, so has demand for TechCongress’ fellows: In the last two years, Moore has fielded more than 1,200 applications for about 36 fellowship slots through the program, which does not accept funding from corporations or tech companies.

Of nearly 130 fellows selected through the program since its founding, Moore said 32 were later hired full-time. Two-thirds of all the fellows have pursued careers in public service, either on Capitol Hill or other government roles.

Rep. Lori Trahan (D-Mass.), one of the leaders on AI policy on Capitol Hill, is among the offices that currently employs a TechCongress fellow. The House Judiciary Committee, the House Foreign Affairs Committee and Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) also host fellows.

Moore says his initiative has shown there are plenty of people who want to work on Capitol Hill to help inform some of the most pressing issues of the moment — even when more lucrative salaries in the private sector beckon.

“The constraint is not talent supply,” Moore said in an interview. Rather, he said, it’s a matter of “Congress’s will and capacity to absorb that talent.”

Some on Capitol Hill are advocating for an in-house hub — something like the long-defunct Office of Technology Assessment, which helped Congress understand emerging technology and its social and policy implications from 1972 until it was scrapped in 1995.

Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.) has long championed efforts to revive the OTA for years and expects to reintroduce his legislation restoring the office in the coming weeks with bipartisan backing, spokesperson Austin Clark said.

Not everybody buys into the theory that staffing will solve the problem. Some conservatives, in particular, have seized on the lack of member expertise to argue for a hands-off approach to regulation.

“We don’t understand it well enough,” Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), who has repeatedly brought in technology experts through the TechCongress fellowship, told reporters this month. “You can’t address it based on what policymakers know about it on a one-size-fits-all universal basis. … We don’t have the expertise to do it.”

“Do you really trust the members of Congress, who barely understand AI, to write the regulations around something?” added Rep. Eric Burlison (R-Mo.) in an interview last month.

Others don’t see a hopeless cause, but a convenient excuse.

“I understand it’s hard, but lots of things we do here are hard,” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said in an interview, noting that lawmakers have had to bone up quickly on everything from nuclear energy policy to complex weapons systems and advances in health care, like biologic drugs.

“I just think the industry wants us to believe that there’s seven people who understand this, and that’s just not true,” Murphy said, accusing some of his colleagues of “just throwing shit up against the wall to try to figure out how to justify doing nothing.”

A few members on both sides of the aisle have taken educating their colleagues into their own hands. Obernotle says he helped tutor more than two dozen House members through the bipartisan AI working group he chaired in the previous Congress.

Liccardo, who represents parts of Silicon Valley, recounted how he has brought in experts to brief lawmakers — including huge AI industry figures like Sam Altman of OpenAI, Dario Amodei of Anthropic and Jensen Huang of Nvidia — only to struggle to convince members to attend.

“We have had challenges in the past trying to get folks’ attention to the issues,” he said. “We have a lot of work to do, I’ll just say, to get everybody up to speed.”

Riley Rogerson, Jordain Carney and Mia McCarthy contributed to this report.