Congress
The House is scrambling to avoid a censure death spiral
As he reconvened the House this month after a seven-week recess, Speaker Mike Johnson promised to recommit lawmakers to making laws — adding session days and keeping them voting into the night to catch up on lost time.
His members instead spent much of their first full week back after the shutdown sniping at each other and using the House floor to carry out attacks on colleagues. Lawmakers voted five times on measures to rebuke other members, eating up hours of floor time.
The spasms of personal pique crossed party lines, with Democrats targeting Democrats and Republicans targeting Republicans in some cases. It left at least a few lawmakers fuming about the depths of the House’s dysfunction and looking for ways to address it.
“The only thing we can apparently do is condemn each other,” said Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), slamming the legislative agenda. “I’ve not seen the House hit this low of a point since I’ve been here.”
An effort by a fellow Democrat to rebuke Rep. Jesus “Chuy” Garcia (D-Ill.) over his apparent scheme to install his top aide as his successor succeeded Tuesday. A Republican effort targeting Del. Stacey Plaskett (D-V.I.) over her communications with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein narrowly failed, as did a GOP-led effort to censure Rep. Cory Mills(R-Fla.) over various alleged ethical misdeeds.
The Plaskett and Mills measures failed in part because of a small but vocal group of lawmakers determined to put a stop to the tit-for-tat floor antics before they spiraled into something even more disruptive.
Two of them — Reps. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) and Don Beyer (D-Va.) — introduced legislation Thursday that would change House rules to make it harder for members to target colleagues, warning that the chamber is at risk of devolving into an irreparable cycle of caustic personal brawling.
“The institution needs some protection,” Bacon said in an interview.
The Bacon-Beyer proposal would require 60 percent of the House to approve the censure of a lawmaker, disapprove of their conduct or remove them from their committee assignments — up from the current simple majority threshold.
“The censure process in the House is broken — all of us know it,” the two wrote in a letter to colleagues, saying the back-and-forth battles “impair our ability to work together for the American people, pull our focus away from problems besetting the country, and inflict lasting damage on this institution.”
Johnson called the general suggestion of rules changes “an intriguing idea” this week. He made no commitments to act but said he’d be “open to having that conversation.”
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries also told reporters he was “open-minded about what the possibilities are in terms of getting the Congress out of this repeated effort by Republicans to censure members.”
In addition to the five votes on Garcia, Plaskett and Mills, House leaders also worked to try and fend off an effort to censure or expel Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-Fla.), who was indicted Wednesday on federal fraud charges. She has called the indictment an “unjust, baseless sham.”
Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.), who publicly teased the effort to sideline his indicted colleague, said in an interview Thursday that he would hold off until the House Ethics Committee releases its report on Cherfilus-McCormick.
That’s at least a nod to how things used to be done in the House, where members were given a chance to make their case in court or to an effective jury of their peers on the Ethics panel before being subjected to public discipline.
Steube said he was ready to follow a more recent precedent: the House’s 2023 ouster of then-Rep. George Santos over claims of fraud and campaign finance irregularities.
Efforts to punish the New York Republican erupted soon after revelations of his checkered personal history emerged following his 2022 election. But it was only following the release of a scathing Ethics report that members acted overwhelmingly to expel him.
“If [Cherfilus-McCormick] does not resign by the time the Ethics Committee releases its report detailing their investigation, then I’ll move forward,” Steube said.
Lawmakers now expect that report to be released in a matter of weeks, according to two people granted anonymity to describe internal House conversations.
Extreme cases involving allegations of criminal conduct like Santos and Sherfilus-McCormick are not primarily what Bacon and Beyer are seeking to curtail.
Instead, they are registering more concern about a recent spate of censures that have been doled out across party lines to lawmakers who have engaged in behavior that is crude, distasteful or simply objectionable to their political enemies.
Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), for instance, was censured in 2021 under a Democratic majority for posting an animated video depicting the murder of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.). When Republicans retook the chamber, GOP members targeted Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) for his role in investigating President Donald Trump’s alleged connections to Russia and Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) for comments about Israel, among others.
Once a rare and embarrassing rebuke, censure has now become commonplace — in no small part because it has become a political rallying cry and fundraising boon for the lawmakers who lead the disciplinary efforts as well as those they target.
Without new protections, lawmakers fear the censure wars will continue to escalate.
“It’s an easy way for an individual member to elevate his or her profile, throw a rock at the other side and force your way onto the floor,” said one House Democrat granted anonymity to speak candidly about his colleagues’ motivations. “There doesn’t appear to be any kind of mutually assured destruction kind of deterrence on this. So my guess is, it’ll just keep going and going and going.“
A handful of members have stood against that trend. Bacon was among six House Republicans who saved Plaskett from censure and removal from the House Intelligence Committee this week by voting no or present on the resolution targeting her.
That sparked accusations from some colleagues that they had struck a corrupt bargain to protect Mills. But Bacon said there were larger principles at stake and many more than six who wanted to avoid a doom spiral of retribution.
Several Republicans told Bacon they “were voting yes but hoping I was a no,” he said. “Most of us know this isn’t good for the institution.”
Congress
The DHS shutdown might never end
Washington is locked in a high-stakes game of chicken over Department of Homeland Security funding, raising the possibility that thousands of federal workers could go unpaid for several more weeks — if not longer.
The shutdown is already the longest ever experienced by any part of the federal government, and in recent days the political sparring has gone from being a mostly partisan showdown between Republicans and Democrats into a messy internal battle for the GOP.
Both the House and Senate have adjourned for two weeks, with neither chamber seriously considering returning early despite a wave of online outrage and calls from the White House to return to session. Instead, House Republicans and Senate Republicans have spent the last several days pointing fingers at each other, while Democrats dig in against funding immigration enforcement agencies without implementing guardrails the GOP has resisted.
“The House has their process, we have ours and this happens periodically,” Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) told reporters Monday.
There is no immediate hope the standoff, which has affected tens of thousands of workers since it began Feb. 14, will soon end. An administration official granted anonymity to speak candidly said that “people are thinking this will go into the summer.”
“Morale is low. The TSA getting paid while the rest of us summer is not playing well inside the building,” the official added.
Bipartisan negotiations over immigration enforcement changes have gone almost nowhere, according to several people granted anonymity to candidly describe the talks. House and Senate Republicans are in a public tug-of-war over their competing Plan Bs. And President Donald Trump is doing little to unite his party behind a consensus position — let alone pushing them to cut a deal with Democrats.
Perhaps most worrying for those eager to end the stalemate is that the strongest impetus for a deal — the hourslong security lines at some U.S. airports — is already dissipating.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt defended Trump’s decision to step in and fund TSA paychecks — a move privately encouraged by some Republicans — saying that the president had to do “what’s right to end this crisis that we’ve had at air travel and at airports across the country.”
But a DHS official granted anonymity to speak candidly said Trump’s decision to pay airport screeners, as well as the unanimous passage of a Senate GOP plan to fund the vast majority of the department, stripped Republicans of their main pressure point.
“Remember in the last shutdown, it was airport chaos that forced the seven Democrats to switch sides and fund the government,” the official said.
While about 50,000 airport security officers are now getting paid under Trump’s executive action, thousands more workers remain furloughed or working without pay. Those include more than 2,000 employees of the premier federal cybersecurity agency, more than 4,000 FEMA workers as well as more than 1,000 Coast Guard civilians.
DHS spokesperson Lauren Bis said in a statement that the record-breaking shutdown was affecting department employees tasked with protecting Americans and visitors for the upcoming World Cup soccer tournament and America 250 anniversary celebrations,
“Democrats need to stop holding these hard-working DHS employees’ pay hostage and putting politics above national security,” she said.
But as far as Democrats are concerned, they have struck a shutdown-ending deal — the Senate legislation passed early Friday morning by voice vote that would fund all of DHS except for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and some parts of Customs and Border Protection. House Republicans rejected that bill and passed their own legislation late Friday that would fund all of DHS through May 22.
No senator attempted to pass the House measure in a brief Monday morning session, and in a sign that a consensus deal is nowhere close, some Senate Republicans want to instead try to fund the entire department through the party-line budget reconciliation process. That would bypass Democrats but require time-consuming procedural steps and potentially create messy new divides among Republicans.
Still, Hoeven said Republicans might have no better choice than to enact DHS legislation themselves for the remainder of Trump’s term.
“We’re not going through this again with the Dems,” he told reporters after the Senate session Monday. “We’re taking this off the table.”
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) also argued Republicans need to accept that Democrats will never fund the immigration enforcement agencies that became politically toxic on the left after federal agents killed two people in Minneapolis in January.
“The only thing I know to do is to take the Democrats out of it,” Kennedy said in an interview. “Just do the entire DHS budget under reconciliation.”
The problem for Republicans is they want to do much more than DHS funding in reconciliation, with the House and Senate GOP holding vastly different visions for the effort. Conservatives in both chambers are pushing to offset any new spending with cuts elsewhere — a politically tricky ultimatum.
Under the plan Senate GOP leaders passed last week, the consensus funding bill agreed to by Democrats would be paired with a reconciliation bill narrowly focused on immigration enforcement. Senate Majority Leader John Thune warned that trying to do all of DHS under the party-line process “gets a lot more complicated.”
Instead, Thune approached Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer after the House rejected the Senate-passed bill to try to find another path to funding as much of DHS as possible. But expectations for a deal are low, given Democrats’ repeated rejections of stopgap funding bills. Still, Thune is expected to spend most of the two-week break trying to find a bipartisan path out of the funding impasse, according to a Senate GOP aide granted anonymity to disclose private scheduling.
A bipartisan group in the House has pitched its own plan to pair DHS funding with immigration enforcement changes. But the Senate conversations aren’t headed in that direction, absent a shift from the White House, with Thune saying the “ship has sailed” after Democrats rejected multiple GOP offers on enforcement restrictions.
Thune is dealing with pressure from the White House, online activists, House Republicans and even some of his own members to bring the Senate back into session before its scheduled April 13 return date.
In a head-scratching subplot, a few Senate Republicans have publicly suggested they did not agree with the deal they could have derailed in advance, while others have privately questioned Thune’s strategy given how quickly it unraveled in the House.
The bill was approved at 2:19 a.m. Friday after Senate GOP staffers ran a “hotline” — an established process for clearing measures slated for passage by voice vote or unanimous consent.
In addition to checking with Senate offices in the hours before the vote, Thune also briefed his conference Thursday evening on a developing plan to try to pass a bill funding as much of DHS as possible, leaving ICE and parts of CBP for reconciliation.
But Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) said later that morning he opposed the deal. Asked why he didn’t object to the hotline or on the floor — or if he would try to pass the House bill in the Senate — a spokesperson pointed back Monday to his social media posts.
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) similarly expressed regrets online after his social media followers aired outrage about the overnight vote. He explained on X that he “had every reason to believe President Trump and House Republicans were on board” with the play and thus “declined to call in an objection.” Spokespeople for Lee didn’t respond to questions Monday.
Hoeven, a close Thune ally, defended the majority leader Monday saying he “absolutely” believed leadership was handling the DHS funding fight well. He brushed off some of the intraparty grumbling as sour feelings about the long-running standoff.
“I think there’s some real frustration because the Democrats want to go back to open borders, and they’re blocking funding,” Hoeven said. “So I think you’re hearing some of that from senators.”
Eric Bazail-Eimil, Katherine Tully McManus, Calen Razor and Riley Rogerson contributed to this report.
Congress
DHS stopgap set for quick House action after Rules Committee vote
The House Rules Committee advanced a measure Friday evening that would fund the entirety of the Homeland Security Department through May 22 — without setting up debate or a separate vote on the funding bill itself.
The panel, after a raucous meeting that devolved into shouting at multiple points, voted 8-4 on party lines to advance the measure to the floor.
The rule includes a “deem and pass” provision, a tactic that allows legislation to be passed by the House automatically once the rule itself is adopted. While there will be one hour of floor debate and a vote on the rule, there will not be a standalone House vote on the DHS spending bill.
Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) described himself as needing “a neck brace” from the whiplash of hearing Republicans argue for hours that the Senate’s early-morning voice vote on a different DHS funding measure was “shameful” for lack of transparency and accountability.
House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) accused the Senate of moving their bill “in the middle of the night, with the smell of jet fumes in the air,” lamenting that the House was left “to take it or leave it.”
House leaders, McGovern suggested, have chosen a similar path by fast-tracking the eight-week DHS stopgap.
“You’re in charge,” he told Rules Chair Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.). “You can do whatever the hell you want to do.”
Congress
Rand Paul weighs a 2028 presidential bid
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is considering a bid for president in 2028, as Republicans jockey for the future of the GOP post-Trump.
In a “CBS Sunday Morning” interview airing Sunday, a reporter asked Paul about an article that implied he would be running for president.
“We’re thinking about it,” Paul said. “I would say fifty-fifty,” adding that he would make a final decision after the midterm elections.
Paul ran for the Republican nomination for president in 2016 with a libertarianism-focused campaign but ultimately dropped out after a poor performance in the Iowa caucuses and a shortage of cash. He instead ran for reelection to the Senate.
Paul has had a complex relationship with his own party and with President Donald Trump, often finding himself the lone Republican on certain issues. More recently, he was the only Republican to support a joint resolution that would limit Trump’s war powers in Iran.
His father, former Rep. Ron Paul, also ran for president three times: first as a Libertarian in 1988, and twice as a Republican in 2008 and 2012.
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship7 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Uncategorized1 year ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
Politics11 months agoDemocrat challenging Joni Ernst: I want to ‘tear down’ party, ‘build it back up’







