Congress
The next megabill Congress needs to worry about
Thursday’s historic vote passing President Donald Trump’s megabill ended a monthslong process of negotiation, infighting and compromise. It also started a countdown until Congress has to do it all over again.
That’s because the super-sized domestic policy legislation includes a sharp cliff for tax cuts and deep safety-net restrictions — teeing them up to be the subject of fierce political battles in the 2026 midterms and the 2028 presidential election.
The most politically explosive cuts to Medicaid and the nation’s largest food program, for instance, are set to take effect in 2028. Meanwhile, Trump’s most popular tax cuts and a key deduction prized by blue-state Republicans are set to sunset in 2028 and 2029, respectively.
It’s not escaping the notice of Democrats. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries spent much of his marathon floor speech before the vote Thursday calling out GOP moderates in battleground seats, many of whom had swallowed their misgivings after expressing deep concern with the safety-net cuts set to be enshrined in law.
“How is it that so many of our Republican colleagues … had principled opposition to Donald Trump’s one big, ugly bill … and now seem prepared to fold on the floor of the House of Representatives?” asked Jeffries.
Jeffries read letters from constituents appealing to their Republican representatives up for re-election in swing districts — including Reps. John McGuire of Virginia, Derrick Van Orden of Wisconsin and Ryan Mackenzie of Pennsylvania — to vote against cuts to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
“All we need is four Republicans to show John McCain levels of courage,” Jeffries said before the vote, referring to the Arizona senator who famously prevented the GOP’s repeal of the Affordable Care Act in 2017.
Only two Republicans targeted by Democrats in 2026 — Maine Sen. Susan Collins and Pennsylvania Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick — voted against the bill. Now the structure of the GOP’s marquee legislation ensures that the most politically perilous provisions in the bill will remain a hot potato — and an opportunity for moderates — for years to come.
For instance, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) — who ultimately voted for the sweeping domestic policy package — pledged to ensure that cuts to state taxes that fund Medicaid would never take effect.
The Senate cut deeply into states’ ability to levy those taxes. But it also delayed those cuts until 2028 after intense lobbying by Hawley and other moderates and after Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) warned that the cuts would prove disastrous in the midterms. Now, the reductions to medical provider taxes used to leverage federal funding begin in three years, with the rates dropping from the current level of 6 percent incrementally down to 3.5 percent.
“Unless changes are made … you’re going to see Medicaid reductions in my state,” Hawley told reporters last week. “I think that is a huge mistake.”
Sixteen House moderates similarly urged Speaker Mike Johnson in a letter in June to revert the Senate’s language. They all ended up voting for the bill, but at least some were also thinking that there was an opportunity to revisit the deep cuts in the future.
“Any of the changes in the provider tax don’t go into effect until ’28, so he’s right, there’s time,” Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.) said about Hawley’s comments, though he added that the system does “have to be reformed” and that “we’re on the right track.”
The benefit cuts could figure as a major issue in the 2028 presidential race, too, with likely candidate Vice President JD Vance emerging as a key salesman for the “big, beautiful bill” and a key defender of the administration’s approach. Democrats are already seeking to yoke to with the bill’s least popular provisions.
Meanwhile, lawmakers in virtually every state will face pressure in 2028 as provisions kick in requiring most states to shoulder part of the costs of federal food aid for the first time. Under the GOP’s sweeping bill, states with SNAP payment error rates above 6 percent would have to start paying 5 to 15 percent of the food benefit costs.
According to an analysis of data going back to 2003 by the left-leaning Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, only one state has ever had an error rate low enough to avoid the new cost-sharing arrangement.
On the flip side, Trump’s signature campaign promises to cut taxes for tipped wages, overtime work and seniors are set to sunset at the end of 2029. And blue-state Republicans who fought viciously for an increase to the state-and-local-tax deduction for their constituents are already eyeing making the boosted SALT break permanent down the road.
The boost of the deduction from $10,000 to $40,000 was crafted by House Republicans to grow with inflation through 2033 and be permanent after that. But Senate Republicans revised the proposal so the bigger deduction would stay in place for only five years, cutting more than $100 billion from the cost of their tax package.
It will be a central issue for lawmakers in swing districts such as Reps. Young Kim (R-Calif.) and Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.) in their 2026 re-election campaigns — but also for Democrats running for the same seats and in other districts with high property, income and other local taxes.
“I listened to Hakeem Jeffries pontificate about this. He got exactly zero changes when Democrats had complete control. We delivered on a promise that I made when I first ran, and this is a big win,” Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) said after the House vote. “It’s the single biggest tax cut in the bill.”
When asked whether New Yorkers would push to make sure that the SALT cap doesn’t go back to $10,000 after 2029, Lawler responded, “Of course.”
The fact that various Republicans are already looking at punting their spending cuts while extending the temporary tax cuts raises questions about the real cost of the legislation. Senate Republicans scaled down many of Trump’s priorities in order to make room for expensive business tax cuts, and the final bill would add $1.1 trillion more to the debt than the initial House-passed plan, according to the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
“I prefer permanence. I prefer not to create cliffs,” said Senate Finance Chair Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), the architect of the Senate’s tax bill, who has said that he didn’t have the fiscal room to make Trump’s latest tax proposals permanent. “There are terminating provisions, and all I can say is that I prefer not to do that anymore than we have to.”
Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) told reporters Sunday that policy sunsets are “common” with these kinds of sprawling packages. But other lawmakers readily acknowledged that the tax cuts could be extended down the road, potentially adding to the megabill’s costs.
“You can’t limit or change what other legislative bodies in the future see as appropriate at that time,” Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) said in a brief interview. “You’re looking at a 10-year window. They’ll have to look at a 10-year window. They’ll play the same game, and once again, they may have different priorities.”
Congress
Why Kristi Noem’s ouster could mean trouble for Pam Bondi
Attorney General Pam Bondi was already in trouble with congressional Republicans. Now she could be facing an even more existential threat to her political future after President Donald Trump ousted Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, showing his willingness to ax Cabinet members who lose trust within the GOP.
Bondi is under intense scrutiny for her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files. As many as 20 Republicans might be prepared to back an effort to render punishment against the nation’s top prosecutor for slowwalking the materials’ release, according to the Democrat helping lead the charge. And five Republicans joined with Democrats on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Wednesday to subpoena her testimony.
The White House is signaling confidence in Bondi’s leadership. Abigail Jackson, a White House spokesperson, pointed to Trump’s remarks Thursday during an unrelated news event where he called Bondi a “terrific person” who is proving “how tough she is and I think the next three years she’s going to really prove it.”
“Attorney General Pam Bondi has worked tirelessly to successfully implement the President’s law and order agenda,” Jackson said in a statement. “The President has full faith in the Attorney General.”
Justice Department spokesperson Natalie Baldassarre in a statement extolled what the attorney general has done to deliver transparency in the Epstein case and comply with the bill passed by Congress that mandated the files’ release. She said those lawmakers who remain critical of the administration “refuse to accept the truth.”
“These members know we are not hiding anything, and their laughable antics to score cheap political points at the expense of victims will not sway our mission to uphold the rule of law and keep the American people safe,” said Baldassarre, who also provided a bulleted list of “DOJ Wins” and a handful of quotes from Congressional Republicans lauding the attorney general.
And to be sure, Noem’s situation was unique. She oversaw an agency whose federal immigration enforcement agents shot and killed two U.S. citizens in Minnesota, faced questions about whether she spent hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on a self-promotional ad campaign and clashed with border czar Tom Homan.
But Noem’s back-to-back disastrous congressional hearings this past week laid bare the extreme lack of confidence among Republicans in the outgoing secretary’s leadership, and revealed the extent to which Trump can be influenced by the sentiment of lawmakers in his party. For Bondi, the situation is becoming increasingly dire.
Asked whether he believed Bondi continued to have support among House Republicans, Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), who voted to subpoena Bondi in committee, responded, “I don’t know.”
“I just think it’s time to get some answers,” he added. “She’s in the batter’s box. I’d say … let her hit.”
Democrats are also preparing to train all their attention on Bondi now that Noem is no longer a top political target.
In a news conference Thursday, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said Bondi and White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller — an architect of the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement agenda — have “got to go.”
“We’re going to approach those two toxic individuals with the same intensity that has now led to the termination of Kristi Noem,” Jeffries added.
Bondi is not the only other high ranking administration official who remains under the microscope on Blue Light News. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is also facing calls from Democrats to resign for not previously disclosing the full extent of his ties to Epstein, though he has not been charged with any wrongdoing.
One House Republican, Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina, had plans to formally call for an Oversight Committee vote to subpoena his testimony — an outcome Lutnick preempted by announcing he would sit for a transcribed interview with members of the panel voluntarily.
Bondi, however, has absorbed the brunt of GOP ire. For months, her handling of the case against convicted sex offender Epstein has spurred outrage from a swath of the MAGA base, which clamored for years for the federal government to release the case materials in its possession and begin to hold powerful people to account for their crimes.
The DOJ’s decision last July to withhold further Epstein-related information, even after Bondi at one point boasted about having Epstein’s so-called client list on her desk, prompted an all-out revolt in Congress. It culminated in the passage of legislation, co-sponsored by Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), forcing the department to make all the files public.
Under Bondi’s leadership, the DOJ ultimately blew past the statutory deadline to comply with the new law. Officials later claimed the department had fulfilled all its obligations, despite withholding case files and making redactions that appeared to go beyond the scope of what the bill permitted.
“I’m not impressed with Bondi on the Epstein files, and I’ll make that abundantly clear when I depose her whenever that day comes,” said Mace, who brought the motion in the Oversight hearing Wednesday to subpoena the attorney general. “She’s lost a lot of support among the base [and] up here as well.”
Senior House Republicans have since last summer been perplexed and often alarmed by Bondi’s handling of the Epstein matter, with even some members of Speaker Mike Johnson’s leadership team privately arguing her decisions fueled the House GOP rebellion over the Epstein case, according to four people granted anonymity to share direct knowledge of the situation.
GOP leaders now are aware that Bondi could stir more fallout on Blue Light News if she testifies as expected. One senior Republican, granted anonymity to speak candidly, described her judgement as “not good on Epstein,” adding, “it certainly hasn’t helped us.”
Among the potential political liabilities for Bondi: an ongoing bipartisan effort to try to hold her in inherent contempt. Such a measure, which has not been deployed successfully in decades, would allow the House to impose its own punishment on Bondi — including potentially permitting the chamber’s sergeant-at-arms to take her into custody.
Khanna said he and Massie had discussed that they would have “20 Republicans who may be open to a contempt filing if she doesn’t release more files … I do believe she’s in trouble.”
Under pressure, the Justice Department released more Epstein files late Thursday, including witness interviews with a woman who claimed she was sexually assaulted by Trump when she was young. The president has denied any wrongdoing in connection with Epstein and has not been charged with a crime, and the White House has said the accusations are baseless and lack credibility.
Oversight Democrats had previously announced they were looking into the potential withholding of those specific materials containing the woman’s allegation. None indicated Friday the department’s actions were satisfactory.
“The world is watching as Pam Bondi continues to aid this White House cover-up,” said the panel’s top Democrat, Rep. Robert Garcia of California, in a statement Friday morning. “We look forward to having her testify under oath before the Oversight Committee as soon as possible.”
Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) said his members are “trying to get an update” on where the DOJ stands with the Epstein files. Asked whether Bondi is on shaky ground, he said, “I have no idea. You’ll have to ask the president.”
Still, some House Republicans insist Bondi maintains broad support within their conference and that the Oversight members are outliers who don’t represent the consensus view of the party.
“There are several members of that committee that are perhaps seeking higher office,” said Rep. Lance Gooden (R-Texas). “I don’t know if intentions are always pure.”
Mace is running for governor. The other four who voted to subpoena Bondi — Burchett and Reps. Lauren Boebert of Colorado, Scott Perry of Pennsylvania and Michael Cloud of Texas — are seeking reelection to the House.
Their actions also suggest they are making a broader political calculation — that their voters see the Epstein case as a potent issue that could carry weight heading into election season.
Boebert said Thursday she had no intention to “go after” the attorney general but is eager to find out why the federal Epstein investigation has not yet resulted in further accountability or prosecutions.
Massie, who does not sit on the Oversight panel but questioned Bondi last month at a combative House Judiciary hearing, said he believed the closed-door setting afforded by a sworn deposition would give Bondi the opportunity to provide more substantive testimony.
He suspected that his Republican colleagues would act increasingly independent of the White House in the coming months, as more lawmakers choose to retire and primary season passes. He also pointed to Noem as evidence that Trump’s cabinet members are dispensable.
“I guess it shows it’s possible that he would, you know, replace people,” Massie said.
Meredith Lee Hill, Mia McCarthy, Kyle Cheney and Erica Orden contributed to this report.
Congress
Republicans confront the massive cost of Trump’s Middle East war
Republicans on Capitol Hill are preparing to confront a staggering price tag for the war in the Middle East after closed-door briefings this week detailed the rapid consumption of expensive munitions and the lack of any firm deadline for the end of the military campaign.
Asked how much the Iran offensive would cost, House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) didn’t sugarcoat it.
“A lot,” he replied.
Senior Republicans privately expect President Donald Trump’s administration to request tens of billions of dollars for the Middle East conflict and other military needs from Congress in the coming days, with some GOP lawmakers hearing estimates that the Pentagon is spending as much as $2 billion a day on the war.
Three F-15E jets shot down by friendly fire in Kuwait are estimated to cost $100 million alone. But Trump officials in private briefings have declined to give lawmakers any specific numbers, according to six congressional Republicans granted anonymity to describe the internal discussions.
A White House request for supplemental funding could further balloon once it hits Capitol Hill, according to four other people with direct knowledge of the matter. Farm-state Republicans want an additional $15 billion in tariff relief for farmers, while others float adding tens of billions of dollars in wildfire aid to get enough Democratic support to pass the massive bill.
The prospect of a growing new spending measure has GOP leaders bracing for a messy internal fight, with fiscal hawks who have long decried “forever wars” and bloated Pentagon budgets deeply unsettled by some of the cost estimates flying around on Capitol Hill. At the very least, some are planning to demand offsetting spending cuts.
“I haven’t seen any specifics … but if it’s unpaid-for, I generally have an issue,” Rep. Russ Fulcher (R-Idaho) said.
Another House Republican granted anonymity to describe the conversations among GOP hard-liners said, “It’s not a ‘hell no,’ but it should be offset somehow.”
The topic is now looming over next week’s House Republican policy retreat, which kicks off Monday with a speech from Trump at the president’s resort in Doral, Florida. If the administration sends its formal funding request in the coming days, House GOP leaders will be forced to confront the issue head on.
At least some are expressing unqualified early support for any administration request. House Foreign Affairs Chair Brian Mast (R-Fla.), for instance, said in an interview this week he is ready to support an emergency funding bill spending tens of billions of dollars on the Iran operation alone.
That sentiment could be challenged by the congressional Republicans who are privately wary of the open-ended timeline and shifting rationales for the war. One House Republican recently remarked that Trump’s pledge to do “whatever” it takes, including entertaining boots on the ground, sounded like “President Lyndon Johnson going into Vietnam.”
Rep. Ryan Mackenzie, a vulnerable Pennsylvania Republican, noted that “as much as we need to neutralize their capabilities to continue to attack us, we do also need to make sure that we don’t get dragged into a forever war.”
Asked in an interview if Congress is ready to approve a $50 billion Pentagon funding package, Speaker Mike Johnson replied that he didn’t know the specific number yet but Congress would pass the bill “when it’s appropriate and get it right.”
“We’re waiting on the White House and [the Pentagon] to let us know, but we have an open dialogue about it,” Johnson said.
House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, who is attuned to the spending concerns among the fiscal hawks inside the GOP ranks, demurred when asked about the potential for a $50 billion package.
“We’re still just in the first few days of this conflict, and there’s no ask yet from the Department of War for a supplemental,” Scalise said in an interview Wednesday.
He referenced the laborious talks ahead: “When that time comes, we’ll obviously have very serious conversations, because it’s important that the Department of War have the tools they need to keep America safe.”
A bigger potential headache is brewing for Johnson as members of his conference debate whether additional military funding should go in a much-discussed but long-shot budget reconciliation bill. That could move to Trump’s desk along party lines without Democratic support, but only if Republicans are almost completely unified.
House Budget Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) said in an interview this week he expected the chamber to move forward on an initial emergency funding bill but that a second filibuster-skirting megabill could contain additional Pentagon spending, along with some possible offsetting cuts.
“It’s not just for the current conflict,” Arrington said. “There are things that need to be retooled fundamentally at the Defense Department, and the president’s team is making a really good case for that.”
Rep. Ralph Norman, one GOP hard-liner who has objected in the past to big Pentagon budgets, now says he would “absolutely” support a $50 billion bill without offsets.
“I don’t like it, but with what this president’s doing with income — the GDP is increasing, the money he’s bringing in for other investments — to handicap him on that, that’s a problem,” said Norman, who is running for South Carolina governor and seeking Trump’s support.
In the Senate, some GOP appropriators are cautioning that any war funding bill will be a big lift — and warning the administration to get specific, and fast.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), a senior member of the Defense Appropriations subcommittee, said the “administration should not be taking anything for granted.”
“If they come to us at the end of the month and say, ‘This is what we want, and basically, deliver the votes’ … it’s not a winning strategy, in my view,” she said. “You’ve got to start making the case.”
Katherine Tully-McManus and Jennifer Scholtes contributed to this report.
Congress
GOP fundraiser with Hegseth scrapped amid Iran War buildup
Rep. Zach Nunn has postponed a planned “Top Gun” themed fundraiser with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that had drawn criticism over its timing — at the start of a war that has already resulted in U.S. casualties.
The Iowa Republican announced the postponement Thursday on social media.
Nunn had said Hegseth would appear at the fundraiser on Saturday, hours after the initial U.S.-Israeli airstrikes in Iran. The event, called “Top Nunn” and billed as a “salute to the troops,” was scheduled for later this month in a Des Moines suburb.
On Tuesday, the Pentagon publicly identified the first U.S. deaths in the war, troops who were killed by an Iranian drone strike in Kuwait. The six soldiers were assigned to an Army Reserve command based in Nunn’s district, and two of them were from Iowa.
The announcement of the fundraiser drew strong condemnation from Democrats, who accused Hegseth of leveraging the war for political purposes. Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spokesperson Katie Smith attacked Nunn’s event as “callous and disqualifying” in a statement on Wednesday.
Nunn, a former intelligence officer for the Air Force, explained the postponement in a social media post while offering condolences to the families of the troops who were killed.
“Operation TOP NUNN is postponed. We will have more to share about the event soon, and all ticket holders will be notified of the new date,” Nunn said. “Our prayers are with the families and our action is with our troops on the frontlines.”
Nunn said he plans to attend the arrival of the remains of the six soldiers at Dover Air Force Base on Saturday along with President Donald Trump.
Nunn paid his respects to the six soldiers in a speech on the House floor Thursday and led a moment of silence.
-
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 agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship6 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
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’





