Congress

The megabill will soon be megalaw

Published

9 months ago

July 3, 2025

House Republicans passed their domestic policy megabill Thursday after nearly 24 hours of nonstop angst, discord and hands-on pressure from President Donald Trump and allies — ultimately uniting to deliver his top legislative priority.

The 218-214 final vote is a major victory for congressional Republicans who pledged to send the bill to Trump’s desk before July 4. Speaker Mike Johnson muscled the bill through in the early-morning hours after a full day of meetings with holdouts, huddles on the House floor and gatherings of different factions at the White House.

One preliminary vote Wednesday was held open for more than nine hours — what Democrats claimed was a new House record — as GOP leaders scrambled to secure the votes. Once they did, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries delayed final action almost another nine hours with a record-breaking floor speech attacking the 887-page bill.

The decisive vote ended up almost entirely along party lines. Only Republican Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania and Thomas Massie of Kentucky joined Democrats in opposition to the bill.

What was not clear upon passage is what precisely a small band of holdouts, most of them members of the House Freedom Caucus, had secured in return for their votes. They were irate about changes that had been made to the bill in the Senate, but GOP leaders were insistent that no further tweaks would be made — which would require another time-consuming trip across Capitol Hill.

The holdouts had been discussing the possibility of executive actions and other promises pertaining to the implementation of the sweeping legislation. But Johnson insisted no deals were cut.

“We find out where the red lines are, and we try to navigate around them and get a product that everybody can buy into,” he told reporters.

Angry Democrats, who had been left in a holding pattern most of the day Wednesday and deep into the night, seethed at the situation.

“I have no idea what in the world the crowd that was holding out got for holding out,” said Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) on the floor. “Does anyone know? It is a complete mystery to me and to the American people.”

To most Republicans, however, final passage came as a relief after more than six months of intensive intraparty debates and negotiations about how the centerpiece of the Republican legislative agenda should be structured and what should be included.

The centerpiece was always set to be an extension of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the signature bill of Trump’s first term. But Republicans quickly sparred over whether those tax cuts — a legislative hornet’s nest — should be packaged together with other, easier-to-pass GOP priorities or lopped off to pass separately.

Trump sided with lawmakers, mainly in the House, who wanted to pass the whole domestic agenda in one piece, and what Trump would deem the “one big, beautiful bill” was born. On top of the tax package, which eventually swelled in excess of $4 trillion, were defense spending boosts, increased immigration enforcement and dramatic changes to some safety-net programs to help offset the costs.

Republicans seized on rosy projections from White House economists while most independent analysts concluded the bill’s economic impacts would be relatively modest.

House Budget Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) touted the “largest tax cut in U.S. history” Thursday morning and promised a flurry of economic benefits, despite the bill mainly continuing tax policies already in place.

“We can expect record job growth, investment, repatriation of capital back to the United States, record-low unemployment, record-high wage growth and the lowest poverty rates in recorded history,” he said.

While the tax cuts were the glue meant to hold GOP support for the bill together, it was not always clear that hard-line fiscal hawks and moderate purple-district Republicans would be able to come to terms on a single piece of legislation.

Those concerns were amplified after the Senate reshaped the bill the House passed in late May, making steeper cuts to Medicaid and speeding up the rollback of wind and solar energy tax credits, while also adding hundreds of billions of dollars more to the deficit than the House-passed bill did.

Key blocs of House Republicans initially blanched at the changes, leading to hours of meetings Wednesday between GOP leadership and holdouts in an effort to quell the rebellion. With further changes to the bill off the table, lawmakers talked up the possibility of future executive actions from Trump. White House Budget Director Russ Vought came to the Capitol to discuss the possibility of future spending cuts with hard-liners and how exactly the administration planned to target key programs.

Meanwhile, among purple-district Republicans nervous about a roughly $1 trillion cut to Medicaid, there were major concerns over how medical providers in their districts might be able to access a limited $50 billion fund for rural hospitals created in the Senate and whether the funding patch would be enough to compensate for cuts elsewhere.

The Congressional Budget Office estimated the Senate-passed megabill would increase the number of people without health insurance by roughly 11.8 million in 2034. That estimate was posted before a slate of last-minute changes were made to the bill before Senate passage earlier this week.

Democrats vowed Republicans would pay a steep political price for passing the megabill, with some comparing it to the health care bill Republicans abandoned in 2017 — preceding a GOP House wipeout in the subsequent midterms. In speeches throughout the day, Democratic leaders name-checked purple-district Republicans whose districts they hope to target in next year’s midterm elections.

The minority party had few tools to stop the bill’s passage, and their plans to at least slow it down were at first overtaken by the GOP’s own snail-like progress. But then Jeffries used his unlimited speaking time Thursday morning to lash into what he called “one big, ugly bill” that coddled billionaires, undermined clean energy production and slashed the social safety net, delaying passage until Thursday afternoon.

“I ask the question, if Republicans were so proud of this one big ugly bill, why did the debate begin at 3:28 a.m. in the morning?” Jeffries said at the outset of his speech, accusing Republicans of trying to “jam this bill through the House of Representatives under the cover of darkness.”

Jeffries took special aim at the bill’s health care cuts — reading story after story from Americans who rely on Medicaid for their medical needs and calling out the particular Republican lawmakers who represent them. He also mocked Trump’s insistence that he would protect the program.

“He was going to ‘love and cherish’ Medicaid,” he said. “Nothing about this bill ‘loves and cherishes’ Medicaid. It guts Medicaid.”

The bill now heads to Trump’s desk, and he’s expected to sign it on the holiday, Johnson told reporters: “We’ll do that on July 4, potentially, maybe right before the B-2s fly. I mean you just can’t script this any better.”

David Lim and Cassandra Dumay contributed to this report.

Congress

Rand Paul is facing an ICE funding dilemma

Published

14 hours ago

April 9, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Just a few months ago, President Donald Trump denounced Rand Paul as a “sick wacko” who opposes “everything.” Now the Kentucky senator is a key gatekeeper for one of the president’s biggest priorities.

As chair of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Paul faces a stark choice as his fellow Republicans race to pass a party-line immigration enforcement bill by Trump’s June 1 deadline. At the same time, he’s confronting his own political future.

Paul’s colleagues sidelined him last year when he refused to give as big a cash infusion for border security as the White House wanted. Now he must decide whether to go along as GOP leaders discuss potentially funding parts of DHS for as long as a decade.

It would come as little surprise if Paul raised objections. Known in Washington as a perennial leadership gadfly, he’s repeatedly broken with Trump since January 2025 on everything from tariffs to the ongoing Iran war and last year’s deficit-busting megabill, where he was one of three Senate Republicans who voted no.

Paul is also eyeing a possible presidential run in 2028 as he tries to get the GOP to look past Trump’s dramatic expansion of federal power and illustrate there is still room for libertarian-leaning, small government Republicans like him.

Spokespeople for Paul and the committee he chairs did not respond to a request for an interview. They also did not respond to a question on whether they have gotten any guidance yet on what the Kentucky Republican’s role will be in the immigration enforcement funding push.

Under the filibuster-skirting budget reconciliation process GOP leaders are hoping to employ, Paul’s committee is expected to be asked to hand over legislative language as part of a bill that will deliver tens of billions of dollars to ICE and parts of Customs and Border Protection. Paul has criticized those agencies at times, suggesting they should not get a blank check as they face questions about their use of force.

“This isn’t because I want no ICE,” Paul told reporters earlier this year. “I want people to trust ICE. I want people to trust the immigration authorities and I think they do hard work.”

A senior White House official granted anonymity to speak candidly downplayed any concerns about Paul in the upcoming reconciliation bill, noting he recently backed the administration’s plans for a major White House renovation. The official also questioned whether Paul, who has repeatedly voted to advance a House-passed bill that includes immigration enforcement money, would want to be against DHS funding.

“Rand voted for the ballroom, right?” the official said, referring to Paul’s ex-officio vote on a D.C. planning board.

His colleagues are not as convinced.

“Rand generally votes no,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said in an interview.

Paul’s fellow Republicans likely wouldn’t have voluntarily picked the maverick senator to shape an immigration enforcement bill, but he secured the gavel on the Homeland Security panel last year by dint of seniority.

After spending years warning against an overreaching federal government, Paul raised pointed concerns about some of the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement tactics after federal agents shot and killed two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis in January. He was also the only Republican to oppose Markwayne Mullin’s nomination as Homeland Security secretary, arguing in part he did not have the temperament to run the department.

During a recent CBS News interview, Paul argued more broadly that Congress wasn’t doing enough to check the administration and put the odds at “50-50” that he makes another run for the White House in 2028.

“I’m not going to do it just to do it,” Paul said. “It would be … because we need to have a free-market wing, we need to have a free-trade wing of the party who is not eager for war.”

Paul previously ran for president in 2016 but dropped out shortly after the Iowa caucuses. A bill currently moving through the Kentucky state legislature would allow Paul to run simultaneously for president and reelection to the Senate in 2028 — something he unsuccessfully pursued ahead of his 2016 run.

Trump, for his part, has repeatedly criticized Paul as a frequent roadblock in public remarks and on his Truth Social account — including the November “sick wacko” reference. He took notice this month when Paul agreed to green-light the White House ballroom in a vote of the National Capital Planning Commission. (Paul’s chief of staff attended the meeting and cast the vote on his behalf.)

“I am pleased to announce that even Board Member Senator Rand Paul, known as an extraordinarily difficult vote, voted a strong YES,” Trump said in a Truth Social post.

But it was Paul’s spending-hawk tendencies that got him sidelined by the White House and his GOP colleagues last year as they sought to wrap up the party’s tax-cuts-focused megabill. Senate Budget Chair Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), in coordination with party leaders, effectively discarded Paul’s border security proposal and inserted his own language into the bill.

Paul and Graham had released substantially different proposals for funding under the Homeland Security panel’s jurisdiction. Paul proposed $6.5 billion for building the border wall, while Graham pitched $46.5 billion. Graham proposed $45 billion for ICE detention facilities, roughly twice what Paul proposed.

Graham at the time dismissed Paul’s pitch for a lower funding level as “shallow,” and members of the Homeland Security panel said Paul hadn’t consulted with them.

Paul has said little about how he is thinking about the upcoming GOP immigration enforcement push. He has separately warned that he does not support including funding for the Iran war in a reconciliation bill.

If the bill stays narrowly focused, Paul could have less sway as the bill is tightly negotiated by House and Senate Republican leaders, as well as the White House. The Judiciary Committee, not the committee Paul chairs, drafted a significant swath of the immigration language in last year’s megabill.

GOP colleagues aren’t vowing yet that they will sidestep him as they scramble to meet Trump’s deadline. But they are making clear that the DHS provisions will ultimately be decided by what can get the votes needed to clear the Senate — even if that does not comport with what the libertarian-leaning Kentuckian wants.

A GOP senator granted anonymity to speak candidly predicted Paul would have “influence” as the committee chair, but not a final say.

“Ultimately what it’ll come down to is where there’s 51 votes,” the senator added.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune added in an interview that Paul and other committee chairs tasked with writing the bill would have “input.”

Eli Stokols contributed to this report.

Congress

Pam Bondi still on the hook for Epstein testimony, Oversight panel says

Published

1 day ago

April 8, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

House Republicans indicated Wednesday they will continue to seek sworn testimony from Pam Bondi on the Justice Department’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case, even after her ousting as attorney general.

The House Oversight Committee subpoenaed Bondi for an April 14 deposition, but that date was never confirmed by Bondi, and the panel said in a statement that it will continue to seek a date for her testimony.

“The Department of Justice has stated Pam Bondi will not appear on April 14 for a deposition since she is no longer Attorney General and was subpoenaed in her capacity as Attorney General,” a spokeswoman for Oversight Republicans said in a statement. “The Committee will contact Pam Bondi’s personal counsel to discuss next steps regarding scheduling her deposition.”

Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) issued a subpoena to Bondi last month after five Republican lawmakers on the panel joined with Democrats to compel her testimony. The campaign to force Bondi to sit for questioning was championed by Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), who brought the motion during a hearing.

The top Oversight Democrat, Rep. Robert Garcia of California, accused Bondi of “trying to get out of her legal obligation to testify” in a statement Wednesday.

“She must come in to testify immediately, and if she defies the subpoena, we will begin contempt charges in the Congress,” Garcia said. “The survivors deserve justice.”

The subpoena cover letter from Comer stated the then-attorney general was to appear on April 14. Customarily, subpoenas include a placeholder date and then attorneys negotiate a mutually agreeable schedule.

Todd Blanche, Bondi’s onetime deputy, is now acting attorney general. Blanche has also played an integral role in the Justice Department’s response to the Epstein case and interviewed his only convicted co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell, in Tallahassee, Florida, in July.

In a statement on X last week, Bondi said she would work over the next month to transition her role to Blanche and then move “to an important private sector role I am thrilled about, and where I will continue fighting for President Trump and this Administration.”

Oversight Democrats argue that despite her departure from the Justice Department, Bondi must still answer lawmakers’ questions. A committee spokesperson said last week that Comer would confer with his Republican members and the Justice Department about next steps.

The committee has transcribed interviews scheduled for the coming months with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, tech mogul Bill Gates and other figures who interacted with Epstein.

Congress

Congress is absent as Trump threatens Iranians ‘will die’

Published

2 days ago

April 7, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

As President Donald Trump threatened death to the “whole civilization” of Iran in a social media post early Tuesday, Rep. Eli Crane was outraged.

“No sane person can think this is okay,” the Arizona Republican wrote on X, an hour after Trump’s message.

But Crane wasn’t talking about the possible eradication of an entire people by a U.S. president. He was talking about a report that women from Turkey flew to Long Island to give birth and sign up for Medicaid.

Crane was among dozens of lawmakers, Republican and Democrat, who published business-as-usual social media updates throughout the day Tuesday. Without acknowledging Trump’s stunning ultimatum, they shared partisan talking points, highlighted constituent meetings or celebrated local sports teams.

Because neither chamber has convened for a full session since March 27, Trump has been free to further push the bounds of GOP loyalty without fear of concentrated pushback — or at least the risk of Republican lawmakers getting asked uncomfortable questions in the Capitol halls.

While many have become practiced at deflecting queries about Trump’s jaw-dropping utterances, most appeared to conclude that the wisest reaction to the presidential threat to eradicate 90 million Iranians was to ignore it altogether.

Instead, it was just another Tuesday as Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kansas) celebrated the Artemis II mission and a home-state visit from NASA’s administrator, Rep, Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.) touted a $5 million federal law enforcement grant, Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) posted about his day at the annual White House Easter egg roll, and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) took note of the frosty April weather back home.

A spokesperson for Speaker Mike Johnson declined to comment — though the Louisiana Republican posted about an Uber Eats driver whose “accountant was shocked by how much more money he is keeping thanks to No Tax on Tips.”

The speaker has given no indication he plans to call members back early from recess, which is due to end April 14.

A spokesperson for Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso also declined to comment, and spokespeople for Senate Majority Leader John Thune, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise and House Majority Whip Tom Emmer did not respond to requests for comment.

While many Democrats kept posting as though it was just another Tuesday — Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz paid tribute to “the amazing women of Red Hat Society of South Florida” and Rep. Frank Pallone posted in praise of the Jersey Shore — top party leaders erupted in outrage.

“This is an extremely sick person,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer quickly posted, while House Democratic leaders called in a joint statement for the House to return “immediately and vote to end this reckless war of choice in the Middle East before Donald Trump plunges our country into World War III.”

“It’s time for House Republicans to put patriotic duty over party loyalty and join Democrats in stopping this madness,” they continued.

In a separate joint statement with Schumer, the ranking members of the Senate Armed Services and Foreign Relations committees called Trump’s threats a “war crime.”

“We speak today with one voice and one purpose: to condemn President Trump’s threat to extinguish an entire civilization,” they added.

Some rank-and-file congressional Democrats went even further, with Rep. Lateefah Simon of California announcing articles of impeachment against Trump.

Democratic Reps. Sarah McBride of Delaware and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan — as well as former Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, once one of Trump’s staunchest allies — were among those calling for the president to be deemed unfit for office and temporarily removed from his post under the 25th Amendment.

One House Republican aired misgivings about Trump’s ultimatum Tuesday afternoon.

“I do not support the destruction of a ‘whole civilization,’” Rep. Nathaniel Moran (R-Texas) wrote on X. “That is not who we are, and it is not consistent with the principles that have long guided America.”

But most Republicans are instead betting — or fervently hoping — that there will be some breakthrough before Trump’s 8 p.m. deadline, offering an off-ramp short of military annihilation. The threat several Democrats called “unhinged,” these Republicans believe, is just another unorthodox bargaining method.

“It is him negotiating Trump style,” Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) said in a text. “It is reckless words. But, I do want to see the regime buckle and make a true peace. I want to see the Persian civilization flourish but it cannot under the Ayatollahs’ yoke.”

Speaking Tuesday morning, Trump gave no indication he would be backing down. Fox News host Bret Baier, quoting a private conversation with Trump, said, “8 p.m. is happening.”

“If we get to that point,” Trump told Baier. “There is going to be an attack like they have not seen.”

At least one Republican said he is interpreting Trump literally.

“Thank God we have a commander-in-chief that is not full of empty rhetoric because we’ve delayed this inevitability for 50 years,” Rep. Jodey Arrington of Texas said on Fox News Tuesday morning.

The No. 3 Senate Republican, Tom Cotton of Arkansas, mentioned Iran in an X post celebrating the rescue of a downed Air Force officer but did not mention Trump’s dire threat.

“This weekend, the United States military once again showed the world what it is capable of,” Cotton said. “I commend our brave troops for completing this dangerous and heroic rescue mission.”

But a Senate GOP account run by Cotton’s team responded more directly: “Iran would be wise to take President Trump at his word.”

“They can choose the easy way or the hard way,” the account said.

Jordain Carney, Cheyanne Daniels and Mia McCarthy contributed to this report.