Congress

Shutdown threatens ‘chaos’ for Trump’s transition and inauguration

Published

1 year ago

December 19, 2024

The collapse of Congress’ spending negotiations is throwing the presidential transition and preparations for President-elect Donald Trump’s second inauguration into chaos as Washington stares down the prospect of a government shutdown just after midnight Friday.

Federal agencies only this week began briefing the Trump transition’s “landing teams,” which began their work more than a month later than their predecessors. Now, if Congress can’t cut a deal in the next couple days, those agencies could be forced to furlough much of the staff doing that work and shut down the government offices where it’s taking place — impeding the incoming officials’ access to documents and further slowing down already-delayed preparations to take over the federal government next month.

Trump and his team are already in the “danger zone” on transition and inauguration planning because they opted to use private emails and devices, rejected federal cybersecurity support, and are working out of Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s Florida club, said Ann O’Leary, who led Hillary Clinton’s 2016 transition preparations.

“At a minimum, a shutdown of the government is going to certainly add to the chaos and the vulnerability to the U.S. government,” she added.

An OMB spokesperson warned Blue Light News that such a lapse “would disrupt a wide range of activities associated with the orderly transition of power,” but declined to specify what programs and personnel would be impacted.

Agency staff are similarly in the dark. Federal staff received guidance from their leadership Thursday on what the shutdown would entail but it did not include information about how it would impact their work with the Trump transition, one State Department official, not authorized to speak on the record, told Blue Light News.

The Trump transition did not respond to a request for comment.

Congress this week appeared poised to avert a shutdown with passage of a bipartisan continuing resolution that extended government funding into next year and reauthorized an array of lapsed health, agriculture and other programs. But Trump’s team, led by Elon Musk, derailed the negotiations in the past 48 hours, announcing their opposition to the bill on social media and pushing GOP leaders to demand more concessions — including a temporary or permanent lifting of the debt ceiling. That has thrown Republican congressional leadership into a tailspin as Friday’s deadline to fund the government draws near.

In the event of a government shutdown, most federal workers would not only be barred from meeting with Trump transition officials in-person but also from communicating with them via phone or email from home. Some workers can avoid such furloughs by being designated “essential” under the Antideficiency Act. But Seth Harris, a former acting Labor Secretary who has worked on three Democratic presidential transitions, told Blue Light News that most transition activities likely wouldn’t qualify, other than some staff who work on national security.

“It creates yet another barrier to a smooth transition,” said Democratic health policy consultant Chris Jennings, who served on transition teams for Presidents Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Joe Biden. “It delays their ability to effectively evaluate the dynamics on the ground, and it probably slows them down, in terms of both policy and personnel reviews, right before they’re trying to make their final high level appointments and develop their first series of executive orders and actions that they wish to take.”

Few expect a shutdown — if it happens — to stretch until Inauguration Day on Jan. 20, but lawmakers and veterans of past transitions say even a short-term disruption could impact prep work that has already begun.

On Capitol Hill on Thursday, Reps. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) and Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) were among those raising concerns that a shutdown would impact the ability of the federal government to adequately staff Trump’s swearing in at the Capitol next month.

“There was money in there for planning the inauguration,” DeLauro said of the derailed bipartisan package that would have extended government funding until March. “Now money may not be there.”

Adrienne Elrod, the head of talent and external relations for Biden’s 2021 Presidential Inaugural Committee, said furloughs could stymie nearly every facet of the massive event.

“Who’s going to hand out the tickets to the inauguration to congressional offices? Who in the congressional offices are going to hand out tickets to the inauguration to constituents?” she asked. “The people escorting individuals who will be on the stage for the swearing in — who will be doing that, who will be facilitating that process? … Are there going to be enough Capitol Police officers there to provide the ample security that will be necessary for the swearing in? Will there be people there to work with their performers, and who’s speaking?”

John Goheen, the spokesperson for the National Guard Association, told Blue Light News that while the “full-time uniformed people” who typically help provide security at the inauguration are usually not impacted by government shutdowns, the staff who work on logistics behind the scenes could be.

“The National Guard is already very involved in putting together plans,” he said. “That includes deciding which units to deploy to secure the inauguration, reaching out to particular states and saying, ‘We need this and this and this’ — that all started weeks ago. You need to give states and individual soldiers and airmen adequate warning.”

Beyond the inauguration, O’Leary said the delays in the transition due to a potential shutdown and lack of cooperation with the federal government could pose grave security risks to the nation. The 9/11 Commission report, she noted, found that delays in the 2000 presidential transition due to the Bush v. Gore Supreme Court case “delayed the national security appointments and national security information being shared in a timely manner.”

The national security risk is “not just speculation,” O’Leary said. “It is documented that this has happened in the past and we need to make sure it doesn’t happen again.”

Myah Ward, Adam Cancryn and Nick Niedzwiadek contributed to this report.

Congress

Capitol agenda: Trump leaves Congress in dark on Iran deal

Published

45 minutes ago

June 16, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Senate Republicans want a say on a deal President Donald Trump is touting to end the monthslong war in Iran.

The absence of publicly released text for the “memorandum of understanding” Vice President JD Vance reportedly signed with Iranian officials Sunday sparked bipartisan scrutiny on Capitol Hill about what the deal might entail.

Senators in both parties agreed: More information needs to come to Congress soon, and any agreement touching on the future of the Iranian nuclear program would have to eventually be subject to a congressional vote.

“If you want a deal to last, it can’t be an executive agreement,” said Sen. James Lankford. “We’ve got to have a vote of Congress to be able to solidify [it] long term.”

The Trump administration said it expects release of the memorandum of understanding no later than Friday.

The agreement reportedly includes reopening the Strait of Hormuz to commercial shipping, but it’s not clear to what degree Iran will be required to abandon its nuclear program. The White House circulated talking points to Hill Republicans Monday touting the deal, including that “Iran will never have a nuclear weapon” and “energy prices … are coming down,” according to a copy of the document reviewed by Blue Light News.

“If it’s a secret deal, then how can I take it seriously?” Sen. Thom Tillis told reporters.

Weighing heavily on several lawmakers is the possibility of an agreement landed by the administration looking very similar to the last Iran nuclear deal, consummated more than a decade ago by then-President Barack Obama amid a bipartisan uproar over trading sanctions relief and cash concessions to the Iranian regime in return for curbs on its nuclear ambitions.

Democrats believe Trump should’ve never abandoned that deal — known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action — in his first term, while GOP defense hawks despised it from the start.

“If [the Iranians] can enrich [uranium] anywhere at all, then it’s the same as JCPOA,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham of the Trump administration’s forthcoming deal. “If they can’t enrich, then that makes it a good deal.”

One legacy of that 2015 controversy: the GOP-controlled Congress at the time passed legislation allowing for congressional review of any agreement dealing with the Iranian nuclear program. That law gives members the ability to kill a deal via a disapproval resolution that could be subject to presidential veto.

In the absence of further details, senators mainly agreed that they wanted a chance to formally review and vote on Trump’s deal — even as some Republicans predicted the administration would find a way to avoid that happening.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Monday there is “probably some expectation” that his chamber would ultimately vote on the agreement while declining to weigh in on the particulars.

“I just don’t know enough about it yet, and I don’t think even the people who follow this stuff closely up here know that much about it,” he said, adding that he expected Vance or other administration officials to brief members on the deal at some point.

What else we’re watching:

— DEMS NONCOMMITTAL ON SPEEDY CLAYTON CONFIRMATION: It’s unclear if Senate Republicans will be able to move at the lightning speed they’d hoped to in confirming Jay Clayton to serve as director of national intelligence by the end of the week. If every Senate Intelligence member agrees, Clayton could get a committee vote Thursday following his Wednesday hearing. Confirming Clayton on the Senate floor hours later would require getting agreement from every senator to speed up the process. Opposition from a single member would punt a vote to next week.

— THUNE AIMS FOR HOUSING BILL PASSAGE THIS WEEK: Thune is hoping his chamber can pass an updated version of a bipartisan housing affordability bill by the end of the week. The legislation comes after talks between Thune, Senate Banking Chair Tim Scott and ranking member Elizabeth Warren. Two Senate Democratic aides granted anonymity to discuss ongoing plans said the bill was also discussed with the House and the White House.

Katherine Hapgood contributed to this report.

Congress

Senate Republicans want a say on Trump’s Iran deal

Published

12 hours ago

June 16, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

President Donald Trump is touting a deal that would end the monthslong war with Iran — and potentially ease some of the political headwinds bearing down on Republicans.

GOP lawmakers still have lots of questions.

The absence of publicly released text for the “memorandum of understanding” Vice President JD Vance reportedly signed with Iranian officials Sunday left an information vacuum on Capitol Hill, where senators of both parties were left airing concerns about what the deal might entail.

Even most Republicans agreed: More information needs to come to Congress soon, and any agreement touching on the future of the Iranian nuclear program would have to eventually be subject to a congressional vote.

“If you want a deal to last, it can’t be an executive agreement,” said Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.). “We’ve got to have a vote of Congress to be able to solidify [it] long term.”

The bipartisan scrutiny of the long-brewing agreement is a legacy of the last Iran nuclear deal, consummated more than a decade ago by then-President Barack Obama amid a bipartisan uproar over trading sanctions relief and cash concessions to the Iranian regime in return for curbs on its nuclear ambitions.

Trump withdrew from the deal in his first term, and now he is back with an agreement that — pending release of the text and final negotiations yet to come — could end up looking like Obama’s deal. That has raised the hackles of both defense hawks who despised the original agreement, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), and Democrats who believe Trump never should have left it in the first place.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), one of those defense hawks, told reporters that he was “pulling for a deal,” while also making note of serious discrepancies in the terms that have emerged thus far.

“The MOU being described by us sounds really very good; the MOU being described by Iran sounds awful,” Graham said.

“If they can enrich [uranium] anywhere at all, then it’s the same as JCPOA. If they can’t enrich, then that makes it a good deal,” he continued, adding in a separate conversation that he was “skeptical that Iran will ever go there” to cease enrichment.

The Trump administration said it expects release of the memorandum of understanding no later than Friday.

The possibility that Congress would take any kind of vote on the agreement is also a legacy of the 2015 deal. Amid bipartisan concern about the Obama administration’s pursuit of nuclear talks, the GOP-controlled House and Senate that year passed legislation allowing for congressional review of any agreement dealing with the Iranian nuclear program.

That law, however, does not require Congress to approve a deal — it rather gives it the ability to kill a deal via a disapproval resolution that could be subject to presidential veto. That means each chamber would have to effectively muster a two-thirds majority to block Trump, something it did not come close to doing in 2015.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Monday there is “probably some expectation” that his chamber would ultimately vote on the agreement while declining to weigh in on the particulars.

The lack of specificity was par for the course on Capitol Hill Monday, with many senators expressing exasperation that text of the signed agreement has not yet been released.

“If it’s a secret deal, then how can I take it seriously?” Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) told reporters.

The agreement reportedly includes reopening the Strait of Hormuz to commercial shipping, but it’s not clear to what degree Iran will be required to abandon its nuclear program. Vance indicated in a series of interviews that the administration will attempt to ensure Iran does not develop or obtain a nuclear weapon but left details regarding civilian nuclear facilities and potential uranium enrichment unaddressed.

The White House circulated talking points to Hill Republicans Monday touting the deal including that “Iran will never have a nuclear weapon” and “energy prices … are coming down,” according to a copy of the document reviewed by Blue Light News. The administration also argued in the memo that the agreement “beats” the Obama-era agreement.

In the absence of further details, senators mainly agreed that they wanted a chance to formally review and vote on the deal — even as some Republicans predicted the administration would find a way to avoid that happening.

“I don’t expect that to happen,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said about a vote. “They’ll try to write it around the treaty requirements, so I don’t expect we’ll vote on it.”

Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) said the administration should send the deal to Congress “if they want it to be something other than a political agreement, like the JCPOA was.”

Most congressional Republicans have been eager for Trump to find a way out of the nearly four-month war, which has driven up energy prices ahead of the November elections. Thune predicted Monday that a deal would “have a very positive impact on the economic situation in the country and that obviously will translate into the political situation in the country.”

Some of Trump’s most vocal allies on Capitol Hill praised the agreement Monday.

Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) said has had conversations with senior White House officials and he was “very hopeful.” Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio), who is likely the next Senate GOP campaign chair, added on X: “President Trump deserves our trust and support as he works to bring peace to the Middle East.”

Democrats were largely keeping their powder dry Monday on how they would handle a vote on the agreement. Some could find it hard to oppose a deal that ends hostilities on negotiated terms roughly similar to what was secured under a Democratic president in 2015.

But plenty of Democrats questioned what was gained by the conflict.

“We still don’t know the details,” Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said on the Senate floor. “The American people need to know exactly what’s in the deal. … We know this for certain: We are worse off than before Trump began his foolish war of choice.”

Meredith Lee Hill contributed to this report.

Congress

Thune is ‘hopeful’ Mitch McConnell will return this week

Published

17 hours ago

June 15, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Monday he hopes his predecessor as top Republican, Mitch McConnell, returns this week from a hospitalization.

Thune said he had not yet spoken directly with the 84-year-old Kentuckian but is getting “readouts from his staff.”

Asked about McConnell’s condition or if he knew if he would be back this week, Thune told reporters, “I’m hopeful that he’ll be back this week.”

A McConnell spokesperson said Sunday that he had been admitted to the hospital but did not provide details on his condition or why he was hospitalized — a break from recent prior instances where the seven-term senator was hospitalized.

A former McConnell staffer who spoke on the condition of anonymity was told the senator was doing much better Monday without any further details on what put him in the hospital.

Daniel Desrochers contributed to this report.