The Dictatorship
The House GOP’s biggest hurdle next year may be the House GOP
When President-elect Donald Trump takes the oath of office again on Jan. 20, it will complete a Republican takeover of Washington. The House and the Senate will have been sworn in two weeks earlier, offering the party a do-over for the trifecta it held in 2017 at the beginning of Trump’s first term. But while back then it was typically the White House acting as the biggest stumbling block to the Republican agenda, it seems likely that baton has been handed off to the incoming 119th Congress.
It’s easy to feel a sense of growing dread at what it means to have Republicans in full control again. I was filled with a similar sense ahead of the 2022 midterms — but one should never underestimate Republicans’ willingness to punch one another in the face out of spite. In many ways, a large number of the policies laid out in Project 2025 may not even need an organized resistance: At least in Congress, all Democrats need to do to notch a win is sit back and let the GOP tear itself apart, especially on the looming fight over taxes.
At least in Congress, all Democrats need to do to notch a win is sit back and let the GOP tear itself apart
You see, there’s a beautiful irony at work when it comes to the House Republican caucus. The last two election cycles have seen them capture, then retain, a majority of seats and the speaker’s gavel. When the last Congress was gaveled in, Republicans held 222 seats to the 213 that Democrats had won. The GOP then needed 13 rounds of voting to elect a speaker, only to narrowly avoid defaulting on America’s credit, before dumping said speaker nine months later. Add multiple occasions when a federal shutdown was averted thanks only to Democrats’ swooping in to save the GOP from itself, and it makes for a historically shoddy track record.
Most of that infighting centered on far-right members of the Freedom Caucus who pushed dead-end legislation to slash spending on the social safety net or otherwise to own the libs, be it by attacking transgender health care or yelling about gas stoves. With President Joe Biden in the White House and with Democrats running the Senate, it was an impractical strategy that undercut any leverage Republicans might have used to extract smaller concessions in the face of Democrats’ united opposition. The far right lashed out in anger at any yielding to political reality, even stymieing Republican messaging bills from reaching the House floor in protest as Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., attempted to keep the train on the rails.
This time around, Republicans are on track to hold as few as 220 seatsthe smallest starting majority in more than a century. If all members are present on both sides of the aisle (and assuming the Democrats can maintain party discipline), the GOP can afford to lose only three votes on any given bill before it fails. That margin could shrink even further in the weeks to come as the seats several of Trump’s Cabinet picks will vacate remain pending special elections. Even if the far right is completely placated in every bill Johnson puts forward, swing-seat Republicans still exist. Many of those front-line members barely staved off their opponents in the last election. Two years of backing Trump’s most divisive policies might be too much for their constituents to bear.
For a sense of how much this micro-majority might struggleremember that the only major legislation to emerge from Trump’s first term was the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Most of the tax cuts and other major provisions in that law expire after 2025, making their potential reauthorization one of the biggest fights ahead in this incoming session. When the bill first passed through Congress, it did so with 12 GOP defections in the House. That’s four times as many votes as the GOP can lose before a bill is tanked — with Democrats perfectly happy to let taxes on the middle class spike on Trump’s watch.
Democrats will be well within their rights to point out that the people holding the matches are also the ones stepping on the firehose.
Most of those GOP “no” votes in 2017 came from Republicans from more populous states, like New York and California, who were upset that the legislation capped the State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction people could claim on their taxes. Trump has suggested he would lift that cap this time around, but without even bigger cuts to spending, doing so would blow an equally big hole in the deficit. While it seems likely the White House could unilaterally attempt to eliminate that spendingthe amount of borrowing required may be enough for the GOP’s remaining fiscal hawks to pause before promising their votes.
Fiscal hawks, SALT advocates, the Freedom Caucus — already that’s multiple competing factions, each attempting to get its way, that need to be appeased to get all the Republicans on the same page. Satisfying all of them may prove impossible when you consider that the Senate also must get on board with Republican senators having their own set of priorities. The lack of leverage that House leadership will have to force loyalty will only be compounded if it leaves in place the rule that allows a single member to call a vote on whether to topple the speaker, as we saw in 2023.
And that’s not considering the other basic housekeeping hurdles lined up down the track. The annual spending bills for the current fiscal year still need to be passed, and the debt ceiling will be un-paused in January, setting the stage for a potential crisis later in the year.
The Wall Street Journal editorial board correctly clocked that Republicans have roughly a year to get anything done legislatively before fretting about the midterm elections takes over. “Perhaps Donald Trump can keep them in line behind Speaker Mike Johnson,” their essay warned, while “factionalism will mean the end of a functioning majority and guaranteed defeat in 2026.” And with the whole of Washington in Republican hands, Democrats will be well within their rights to point out that the people holding the matches are also the ones stepping on the firehose.
Hayes Brown is a writer and editor for BLN Daily, where he helps frame the news of the day for readers. He was previously at BuzzFeed News and holds a degree in international relations from Michigan State University.
The Dictatorship
Elon Musk says President Donald Trump has ‘agreed’ USAID should be shut down
WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Agency for International Development is on the cusp of being shuttered, according the Trump administration’s billionaire adviser and Tesla CEO Elon Musk — who has been wrestling for control of the agency in recent days.
Early Monday, Musk held a live session on X Spaces, previously known as Twitter Spaces, and said that he spoke in detail about USAID with the president. “He agreed we should shut it down,” Musk said.
“It became apparent that its not an apple with a worm it in,” Musk said. “What we have is just a ball of worms. You’ve got to basically get rid of the whole thing. It’s beyond repair.” “We’re shutting it down.”
His comments come after the administration placed two top security chiefs at USAID on leave after they refused to turn over classified material in restricted areas to Musk’s government-inspection teams, a current and a former U.S. official told The Associated Press on Sunday.
Members of Musk’s Department of Government Efficiencyknown as DOGE, eventually did gain access Saturday to the aid agency’s classified information, which includes intelligence reports, the former official said.
Musk’s DOGE crew lacked high enough security clearance to access that information, so the two USAID security officials — John Voorhees and deputy Brian McGill — believed themselves legally obligated to deny access.
The current and former U.S. officials had knowledge of the incident and spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to share the information.
Musk on Sunday responded to an X post about the news by saying, “USAID is a criminal organization. Time for it to die.” He followed with additional posts on X about the aid agency.
Kate Miller, who serves on an advisory board for DOGE, said in a separate post that no classified material was accessed “without proper security clearances.”
It comes a day after DOGE carried out a similar operation at the Treasury Departmentgaining access to sensitive information including the Social Security and Medicare customer payment systems. The Washington Post reported that a senior Treasury official had resigned over Musk’s team accessing sensitive information.
Musk formed DOGE in cooperation with the Trump administration with the stated goal of finding ways to fire federal workerscut programs and slash federal regulations.
USAID, whose website vanished Saturday without explanation, has been one of the federal agencies most targeted by the Trump administration in an escalating crackdown on the federal government and many of its programs.
“It’s been run by a bunch of radical lunatics. And we’re getting them out,” Trump said to reporters about USAID on Sunday night.
The Trump administration and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have imposed an unprecedented freeze on foreign assistance that has shut down much of USAID’s humanitarian, development and security programs worldwide — compelling thousands of layoffs by aid organizations — and ordered furloughs and leaves that have gutted the agency’s leadership and staff in Washington.
The U.S. is by far the world’s largest donor of humanitarian aid, with USAID administering billions of dollars in humanitarian, development and security assistance in more than 100 countries.
Peter Marocco, a returning political appointee from Trump’s first term, was a leader in enforcing the shutdown. USAID staffers say they believe that agency outsiders with visitors badges asking questions of employees inside the Washington headquarters are members of Musk’s DOGE team.
Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren said in a post on Sunday that Trump was allowing Musk to access people’s personal information and shut down government funding.
“We must do everything in our power to push back and protect people from harm,” the Massachusetts senator said, without giving details.
___
Associated Press writers Michelle L. Price in New York, Matthew Lee in Panama City and Fatima Hussein in Washington contributed to this report.
___ This story has been updated to correct the surname name of one of the USAID security officials. He is John Voorhees, not John Vorhees.
The Dictatorship
‘Serial disappointer’ Sen. Collins indicates she’ll vote for Tulsi Gabbard
-
Trump pauses tariffs on Canada and Mexico; China hits back at U.S. tariffs
14:25
-
‘One of the coolest gigs a comedian can get’: Amber Ruffin tapped for WHCA dinner
05:30
-
Julia Stiles makes directorial debut with ‘Wish You Were Here’
07:19
-
Steve Rattner: Trump’s tariffs disrupt the markets
03:12
-
Trump, Netanyahu set to discuss ongoing ceasefire today at White House
05:49
-
Not confident Trump will prevail: Scholar on his attempts to take Congress’ power of the purse
11:47
-
Now Playing
-
UP NEXT
Rahm Emanuel on fears of FBI purge: This will not play out well
11:43
-
‘This makes America less safe’: Growing fears of Trump WH FBI purge
11:01
-
‘The whole thing is nuts’: Writer reacts to defrocked priest imitating Musk’s salute
06:26
-
USAID staffers told to stay out of D.C. headquarters after Musk said Trump agreed to close it
10:52
-
Crews to remove wreckage from Potomac today
08:13
-
Joe: When you gut USAID, the big winners are those that wish the U.S. harm
14:06
-
‘Utter madness’: Canadian PM candidate slams Trump’s tariffs
08:17
-
Dow futures drop more than 650 points after Trump hits U.S. trading partners with tariffs
03:26
-
Gabbard ‘stumbled through her hearing’ Thursday, says Rep. Himes
04:41
-
Trump tariffs could take effect tomorrow
04:30
-
‘Anti-safety agenda’: Trump went race-baiting route because of cuts, senator suggests
11:28
-
Families mourn 67 victims after midair collision
03:27
-
Tom Costello: Army helicopter’s black box will be critical in investigation
08:47
-
UP NEXT
Trump pauses tariffs on Canada and Mexico; China hits back at U.S. tariffs
14:25
-
‘One of the coolest gigs a comedian can get’: Amber Ruffin tapped for WHCA dinner
05:30
-
Julia Stiles makes directorial debut with ‘Wish You Were Here’
07:19
-
Steve Rattner: Trump’s tariffs disrupt the markets
03:12
-
Trump, Netanyahu set to discuss ongoing ceasefire today at White House
05:49
-
Not confident Trump will prevail: Scholar on his attempts to take Congress’ power of the purse
11:47
The Dictatorship
There’s a lot of craziness in D.C. right now. But you can safely ignore these stunts.
When I took a job years ago managing a website about Congress, I was shocked to discover that the most-searched bill was an obscure piece of legislation called the Blair Holt Act.
The bill, which would require gun licenses and background checks, was going nowhere. It had two sponsors in the House — one of whom was a nonvoting member representing the Virgin Islands. It didn’t have a companion bill in the Senate. It was what people in Washington call a “messaging bill” designed to signal to voters that the lawmaker takes a particular issue seriously. But every month, it was at the top of our Google Analytics.
In this case, the bill had inadvertently provoked another group of voters — gun owners who believed the Blair Holt Act was the first sign that the government was coming for their firearms. They were sharing the legislation on message boards and in conspiracy theory-minded emails, panicking over a bill that was never going to be signed into law.
As the president has signed executive orders right and left, some lawmakers seem to feel left out.
Now this dynamic is playing out in a novel fashion in President Donald Trump’s chaotic first two weeks in office. Normally members of Congress reserve messaging bills for closer to the next election. But as the president has signed executive orders right and left, some lawmakers seem to feel left out. They’re turning to messaging bills earlier to draw attention and getting more extreme than we’ve seen in the past. The worst of these aren’t so much messaging bills as the legislative equivalent of what people euphemistically call “trashposting” on the internet. And some of the president’s critics are falling for it.
In January, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., filed a bill to direct the interior secretary to “arrange for the carving of the figure of President Donald J. Trump on Mount Rushmore.” The bill, which has no co-sponsors, was dutifully referred to a House committee, where it will die a quiet death. But in the meantime, Trump might hear about it and think nicely of Luna, or she can tout it on social media posts about triggering the libs.
That same month, Rep. Andy Ogles, R-Tenn., proposed a constitutional amendment to allow presidents to serve third terms — as long as their other two terms weren’t consecutive, a loophole that appears designed to give Trump a pass while keeping, say, Barack Obama, on the sidelines.
The bill, which also has zero co-sponsors, is about as serious as the Mount Rushmore proposal. If anything, it’s an even heavier lift than carving into the side of a mountain in South Dakota. A constitutional amendment requires approval by two-thirds of both chambers and ratification by three-fourths of states. That’s just not going to happen, much less in time for an 82-year-old Trump to run again in 2028.
In Ogles’ case, he might have another motive for trying to score points with Trump. A week after he filed his bill, federal prosecutors in Nashville withdrew from a criminal investigation into why Ogles misrepresented how much money he lent his campaign on federal forms. That case will now be handled entirely from the Justice Department’s Washington headquarters, which Trump has vowed to exert more control over.
Other lawmakers seem emboldened by Trump’s dramatic proposals to remake the federal government, and, to be honest, it’s understandable if the average voter can’t tell if they are serious or not. Here are a few more examples:
Rep. Andy Biggs of Arizona proposed a bill to abolish the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which handles workplace safety (no co-sponsors).
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia proposed two bills to “expunge” Trump’s first-term impeachments (10 co-sponsors each).
And Rep. Earl “Buddy” Carter of Georgia proposed a bill to abolish the IRS and enact a national sales tax (11 co-sponsors).
These bills aren’t going to pass. They’re interesting as a sign of the current thinking among the outer reaches of today’s Republican Party, but you don’t need to ever think about them again.
Amid the uncertainty of Trump’s second term, it’s important to take a breath, check the sources and make sure we’re not getting riled up over a messaging bill going nowhere. First, is it dramatic and easy to explain? Second, does it have almost no co-sponsors? If the answer to both questions is yes, then it’s a trashposting bill.
There are a lot of unnerving things going on in Washington these days. It’s important to save your attention — and your outrage — for the ones that are real.
Ryan Teague Beckwith is a newsletter editor for BLN. He has previously worked for such outlets as Time magazine, Bloomberg News and CQ Roll Call. He teaches journalism at Georgetown University’s School of Continuing Studies.
-
The Josh Fourrier Show3 months ago
DOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
Economy3 months ago
Fed moves to protect weakening job market with bold rate cut
-
Economy3 months ago
It’s still the economy: What TV ads tell us about each campaign’s closing message
-
Economy3 months ago
Harris dismisses Trump as ‘not serious’ on the economy in BLN interview
-
Politics3 months ago
Donald Trump wants Americans to hate Kamala Harris — but he’s failing
-
Economy3 months ago
Biden touts economic gains, acknowledges a long way to go
-
Politics3 months ago
RFK Jr.’s bid to take himself off swing state ballots may scramble mail-in voting
-
Politics3 months ago
Democrats express concern over Gaetz pick