Congress

Secret Service head acknowledges ‘failure’ in House task force hearing

Published

2 years ago

December 5, 2024

Acting Secret Service Director Ronald Rowe Jr. used an hourslong appearance before House lawmakers to outline sweeping changes the agency is making after its “failure” during the attempted assassinations of Donald Trump.

The Thursday hearing is the second, and final, public meeting by a bipartisan House task force that is investigating the attempted assassination at a Pennsylvania rally in July, as well as a second attempt in Florida. In addition to the hearing, the panel also voted on Thursday to release its final report, detailing its findings and recommendations.

“July 13 was a failure of the Secret Service to adequately secure the Butler farm show site and protect President-Elect Trump. That abject failure underscored critical gaps within Secret Service operations, and I recognize that we did not meet the expectations of the American public, Congress and our protectees,” Rowe told the House panel on Thursday.

Rowe detailed several changes that the Secret Service has already made both while speaking to the committee and in a lengthier written statement, including increasing the use of drones and counter-drone technology, making structural changes within the Secret Service and increasing Trump’s detail during the final months of the campaign. Rowe also said that the Secret Service is in the process of increasing its staffing.

While most of the hearing was cordial, there were brief fiery moments between Rowe and, in particular, Republican members of the panel.

Tensions briefly boiled over between Rep. Pat Fallon (R-Texas) and Rowe as Fallon used a photo of a 9/11 remembrance event to ask Rowe about his role at the event. Fallon accused him of putting other Secret Service agents out of their usual positions so he could be more visible at the event — an accusation Rowe denied, saying security wasn’t impacted. He is visible in a photo of the event standing near President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, Donald Trump, JD Vance and congressional leaders.

“Do not invoke 9/11 for political purposes,” Rowe yelled. “You are out of line.”

As Rowe called Fallon “out of order,” the Texas Republican yelled back: “Don’t try to bully me.”

Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.), a member of the task force who also leads the Homeland Security Committee, also questioned Rowe on the culture within the Secret Service.

“Your guys showed up that day and didn’t give a shit. There was apathy and complacency, period, and that is your mission now. … This is a leadership issue, a command-climate issue, a culture issue,” Green said.

After Chair Mike Kelly (R-Pa.) said “hell” toward the tail end of the hearing, he referred back to Green’s swearing, saying, “I know we’re not supposed to use any language like that. Chairman Green, I know it’s a very emotional thing for you too.”

Despite those moments of high drama, members of the task force largely used the hearing to drill down on changes that the Secret Service has made since July 13.

Rowe specifically pointed to the communications and coordination lapses during the July 13 rally and “what is glaring to me is the failure to recognize the significance of the AGR building,” referring to the building rooftop the July 13 shooter was able to access to fire off shots at Trump.

The Secret Service is “supposed to identify hazards, risks, and then mitigate those risks effectively. … We did not do that on the 13th. Post-July 13, there was a renewed focus on that,” Rowe said.

And his decision to acknowledge the “failure” of the Secret Service’s preparation and handling of Trump’s July 13 rally earned praise from members on both sides of the panel.

“I thank you, Director Rowe and all of your talented agents, for seriously looking at what failed. And I appreciate that you used immediately in your testimony that July 13 was a failure,” Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-Pa.) said.

But Congress is still expected to make additional changes to the Secret Service next year, including forthcoming proposals to remove the Secret Service and FEMA from under the Department of Homeland Security.

“I would surmise that the Department of Homeland Security has become too big. It can’t function … I’m going to be filing a bill the first day of next Congress to remove FEMA and Secret Service from Homeland Security and make them direct reports to the White House,” Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) said.

“I think the changes you want to make, I think you’ll be able to make them quicker if you’re not within Homeland,” he added.

Congress

Trump tells Thune to keep Senate in session to pass SAVE America Act

Published

1 hour ago

July 27, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

President Donald Trump ramped up pressure Monday on Majority Leader John Thune, telling him to keep the Senate in session until a GOP election bill passes.

“John Thune should not allow the United States Senate to ‘leave town’ until it passes The Save America Act or, far better still, TERMINATES THE FILIBUSTER, where Republicans can then quickly pass everything they ever dreamed of,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post Monday.

Democrats, he added, will nix the filibuster themselves when they regain power “and can’t believe how lucky they got with this Senate leadership. Remember, stupidity always brings LOSING & DEATH!”

Trump’s Truth Social post comes after he urged supporters last week to call Thune about the SAVE America Act, then said Friday that he wanted Senate Republicans to adopt a blueprint for a $95 billion party-line spending bill, which would include some election-related funding, before they leave town for the August recess as planned on Aug. 6.

Sens. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Rick Scott (R-Fla.) said over the weekend that they believed the Senate should stay in town until the election bill is passed. Lee has previously called for the Senate to stay in session through prior recesses to pass the SAVE America Act but has not forced the issue on the floor.

Despite Trump’s pressure campaign, the elections bill doesn’t have the votes to pass the Senate and there isn’t enough support within the Senate Republican conference for nixing the filibuster, which requires 60 votes for most legislation to advance.

Congress

Capitol agenda: Thune tries to focus as Trump fumes

Published

3 hours ago

July 27, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

John Thune has a long to-do list, a shrinking runway for getting it done and a president in the peanut gallery.

The Senate is back Monday with only two more weeks — more realistically, eight legislative days — in town until the chamber leaves Washington through mid-September.

The majority leader wants to clear a government funding stopgap, a long-stalled Russia sanctions bill and dozens of nominees, but he’s also facing pressure from President Donald Trump and some of his right flank to make progress on the SAVE America Act, a GOP election bill that doesn’t have the votes to pass.

It’s the latter that will be the biggest headache for Thune after Trump told Senate Republicans to adopt the blueprint for a $95 billion spending bill, which would include election-related funding, before leaving for August break.

Most GOP senators, however, don’t expect that to happen — and the budget blueprint doesn’t have the 50 votes it needs right now among Senate Republicans to be adopted despite Trump’s public overture.

Then, over the weekend, Sen. Mike Lee signaled he opposed the Senate leaving for the recess without passing the election bill. Lee could force a vote if he wants to on whether or not to adjourn — though he’s previously tweeted about how the Senate shouldn’t leave and then done nothing about it. Sen. Rick Scott also posted Sunday that he stands with Lee in opposing a recess until SAVE America is passed.

Lee also fired off a warning for Thune, saying the fate of the election bill “could impact” the November Senate GOP leadership elections. Thune is running again for leader and most GOP senators believe he’s secure in his job. But a few, granted anonymity to speak candidly, have questioned if Trump, who is fuming behind the scenes, would target him after the midterms, especially if Republicans lose the majority.

Thune will have to balance those questions this week, while trying to move the agenda he views as actually accomplishable.

On that front, senators will take a vote Monday night on Jay Clayton’s director of national intelligence nomination (more on that below) and they could pass the Russia sanctions bill as soon as this week, if they can get a time agreement. This week is also key for Judiciary senators to decide whether to advance Trump’s attorney general pick Todd Blanche. And senators are working around funeral arrangements for the late Sen. Lindsey Graham.

Likely waiting until next week: A vote on a bill to fund the government into December as bipartisan talks proceed positively, according to two people granted anonymity to discuss private conversations. An initial vote on cryptocurrency legislation, known as the Clarity Act, is also likely to be punted to next week, but Democrats, so far, aren’t on board.

What else we’re watching:

— JEFFRIES MAKES HIS CLOSING MIDTERMS PITCH: Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries spoke at an event in Pennsylvania’s swingy Lehigh Valley with Gov. Josh Shapiro and House candidate Bob Brooks to make his closing argument for why voters should hand his party the gavels 100 days from the midterms. His message? Affordability. Affordability. Affordability. The minority leader’s latest commitment to lowered costs gives a clearer preview of how Democrats would govern in the majority.

— FLOOD SEES FRAUD-BUSTING IN RECON 4.0: The head of a GOP group representing some of the House’s most vulnerable members this fall seems confident the party will tackle a fourth reconciliation bill with fraud-busting provisions. Republican’s Recon 3.0 budget framework is still facing an uncertain future in the Senate after being adopted by House lawmakers last week. But House Main Street Caucus Chair Mike Flood said in an interview he believes House Republicans do another party-line bill after the midterm elections. Read the full Q&A with Flood on PoliticoPro.

Riley Rogerson and Mia McCarthy contributed to this report.

Congress

A bipartisan House duo’s final pitch for pre-midterm AI action

Published

6 hours ago

July 27, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

A bipartisan House duo is racing against the clock to build consensus around a framework for regulating artificial intelligence — and prove Congress is up to the task of setting guardrails around the rapidly-evolving technology.

Reps. Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.) and Lori Trahan (D-Mass.) formally introduced legislation last Thursday with four cosponsors — two from each party — that would give the government more oversight over cutting-edge AI models as new and potentially dangerous technological advances continue to go largely unchecked.

It’s a considerably reworked version of a discussion draft the two lawmakers unveiled weeks earlier. It was highly anticipated as the most serious cross-party attempt at comprehensive AI regulatory legislation to date — and almost immediately panned by Republicans and Democrats alike.

But Trahan and Obernolte both think they’ve now found the sweet spot and are hopeful the Energy and Commerce Committee schedules a hearing or markup on the measure when the House reconvenes in September after the summer recess.

“That is the goal,” Trahan said in an interview Friday. “I think that there is real urgency. There’s earth-shattering news practically every week, and that’s only going to get more frequent and more serious as these models get more powerful.”

Obernolte said in an interview earlier in the week he “absolutely” thought the bill could move out of committee in the fall. “We’re certainly going to try and get it done this year.”

Yet when asked last week about whether he would bring up that bill — or any comprehensive AI legislation — before the midterms, Energy and Commerce Chair Brett Guthrie was noncommittal: “I’m not sure if we’ll get there before the election,” the Kentucky Republican said.

Congress has ultimately done little to legislate on AI under the Republican governing trifecta, as members remain divided on how to tackle the thorny policy area — particularly the question of how involved the federal government should be in regulating private sector innovation. The Obernolte-Trahan bill is the latest test for whether lawmakers can reach consensus on the issue before the November elections.

In the 119th Congress so far, lawmakers have managed to send to the president’s desk one bill that criminalizes the sharing of AI-generated deepfakes and “revenge porn.” The Energy and Commerce Committee has passed bipartisan bills on data centers and kids online safety but none have advanced onto in the Senate.

Across the Capitol, the Senate Commerce Committee was just forced to delay a highly-anticipated markup of AI legislation at least a week as Chair Ted Cruz (R-Texas) struggles to put together an agenda of bills that stand a chance of passing on the chamber floor.

In the House, Obernolte and Trahan are trying to set their proposal up for success despite the odds. In interviews, they both described how they worked hard to respond to the initially negative feedback they received from colleagues on their discussion draft.

They have seriously scaled down provisions in their latest version relating to preemption of state AI laws, seeking to strike a balance for lawmakers who are split between those who want the ability to replace local regulations with a federal framework governing AI, and those who want to leave regulatory action to the states.

“We all heard the criticism … and we narrowed the preemption [provisions] substantially,” Trahan said. “It now only touches three areas the federal bill actually covers: catastrophic risk transparency, independent verification and incident reporting. That’s it.”

“So, child safety laws are explicitly protected,” she continued. “So is the consumer protection, privacy and state procurement. All of that stays with the states.”

Obernolte acknowledged the topic of preemption makes people “emotional” but the new legislative language more precisely describes exactly “what we meant on what we were preempting … and I think that that’s giving everyone more comfort.”

Their bill would propose robust emergency shutdown authorities for AI models determined to be major national security risks, replacing the more haphazard nature of the Trump administration’s response in recent months to concerning technological developments.

It also would require large developers to publish safety reports, report safety incidents and participate in independent safety audits. Those auditors would have to then report any models to the government that pose “imminent catastrophic risk” and the Secretary of Commerce could choose to restrict their deployment.

Last week’s first documented case of an autonomous AI breach helped bolster their case that this kind of legislation is necessary, both lawmakers said, with Trahan pointing out, “we only know about these incidents because OpenAI chose to tell us — there’s no law that requires it.”

Trahan, a member of House Democratic leadership, has been working outside the structure of the three-member AI commission overseen by Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries but was optimistic when asked if the proposal might eventually get their backing.

“The feedback has been overwhelmingly positive,” she said, adding she plans to spend recess talking with party leaders and the top Democrats on key committees “whether there’s a path to make this bill even better and to move it before we break for the midterms.”

Obernolte said he’s talking to GOP leaders “constantly” to “make sure that everyone knew what was going on and what we were doing.”

But he also added that he hasn’t yet asked Republican leaders for their endorsement, arguing it would be “inappropriate” for them to give the bill their blessing “at this point.”

In the hours before Obernolte and Trahan released their formal bill text, Majority Leader Steve Scalise said in an interview that while he had not spoken to Obernolte about what the two lawmakers intended to introduce, Republican leaders were interested in advancing a regulatory framework that they deemed not overly burdensome.

“We’re trying to get AI preemption … but we also want to make sure that we don’t impede innovation with heavy regulation from the government,” said Scalise.

A Scalise spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment about what the Louisiana Republican thought of the latest proposal.

House Speaker Mike Johnson has also not taken a position on the bill. His last comments about the Obernolte-Trahan effort were in June, when he said he was planning to discuss the then-forthcoming regulatory framework with OpenAI CEO Sam Altman during the tech giant’s visit to Blue Light News.

Obernolte is confident his bill with Trahan represents the emerging consensus view about where lawmakers need to go next on AI policy, even within the Republican Party that has long championed limited government regulation.

“I think that everyone would agree we need food safety inspectors, right? So sometimes the two parties disagree on just how onerous to make those regulations. … I don’t think anyone’s saying that we shouldn’t have any regulation of AI,” he said.

He also suggested perspectives may be shifting.

“I think everyone’s thoughts on this topic have evolved as the technology itself has evolved, and because AI is such a fast-moving technology, I think that Congress is going to have to stay very engaged on this,” Obernolte said. “So, even if we succeed in passing [the bill] this year and getting it signed into law, immediately in the next Congress, we’re going to have to dive into the things that have changed.”

In a sign Obernolte may still have people to convince inside his party, though, Scalise last week rejected the idea that Republican views on the subject have evolved.

“No,” Scalise said. “I mean — our Republicans, by and large, are against heavy regulation that impedes innovation in any industry.”