Congress

Thom Tillis tells Todd Blanche to meet with Epstein victims — or don’t expect his support

Published

2 hours ago

July 16, 2026

Sen. Thom Tillis said Thursday his vote to confirm attorney general nominee Todd Blanche is contingent on Blanche meeting with victims of the late convicted sex offender Jeffery Epstein.

The North Carolina Republican’s new demand creates yet another hurdle for Blanche’s confirmation, which will fail to advance to the Senate floor if one Republican on the Judiciary Committee defects — assuming all Democrats on the panel oppose him. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) is also undecided.

“I expect that meeting to occur before I’m willing to vote out of this committee and I’m trying to get to ‘yes,’ but this is a very important part of getting to ‘yes,’” Tillis, who is retiring at the end of the Congress, said at the second day of Blanche’s nomination hearings.

Blanche will need to have this meeting before July 30, the likely date that the Senate Judiciary Committee will reconvene to vote on whether to report Blanche’s nomination favorably to the full Senate.

The current acting attorney general was not present at the hearing Thursday, having answered questions from lawmakers for hours the day before. The Thursday hearing was instead an opportunity for outside witnesses to testify for or against Blanche’s character.

One of the witnesses, invited by Democrats, was Dani Bensky, a survivor of Epstein’s abuse whose identity was exposed as part of a botched redaction process during the release of the Epstein files that Blanche, in his capacity as deputy attorney general, oversaw.

A Justice Department spokesperson did not immediately respond to a comment asking if Blanche would agree to meet with the victims in response to Tillis’ ultimatum. Blanche said during his testimony Wednesday that he was barred from meeting with Epstein’s victims due to his job with the Justice Department but that they were welcome to meet with DOJ staff.

The requirement to meet with victims now would likely create an unwelcome dynamic for Blanche that he might try to resist, as it would make it appear as though he is being backed into a corner and can be forced to acquiesce to senators’ demands in exchange for their votes. It would also force Blanche to hold the sensitive meeting on someone else’s terms and with the victims’ knowledge that he is doing it to earn confirmation.

It could, as well, complicate Blanche’s upcoming transcribed interview with the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Bipartisan leaders of the panel reiterated Wednesday they intend to callBlanche to testify in their ongoing Epstein investigation soon after senators vote on his confirmation.

Tillis emerged from Blanche’s confirmation hearing Wednesday appearing almost sold, repeating Thursday he had “a positive predisposition” to vote “yes” — despite having reservations about the fate of a $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization fund.” While Blanche said several times the fund was “dead,” Tillis has continued to clamor for passage of legislation codifying its demise.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune didn’t rule out they might help make that happen to satisfy Tillis — as well as for Cornyn, who made it clear Wednesday he is not convinced a controversial Trump settlement with the IRS providing for the creation of the fund as well as wide audit protections to Trump’s family and business would not one day be revived.

“A lot of it would depend on where our conference is and if the president is going to sign it obviously,” Thune said of legislation to formally terminate the account. “But I think some of those discussions are being held.”

Tillis and Cornyn are both leaving office at the end of this Congress, with Cornyn pushed out by a Trump-backed primary challenger and Tillis deciding to retire after multiple policy breaks with the president.

Cornyn did not say Thursday he needs Blanche to meet with Epstein victims for his vote, but noted he’s “happy to have [Blanche] meet with them.”

Jordain Carney contributed to this report.

Congress

Senate GOP isn’t sold on Mike Johnson’s budget blueprint

Published

2 hours ago

July 16, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Senate Republicans are pouring cold water on the House GOP’s $95 billion blueprint for a new party-line spending package.

Their skepticism is a reality check on Speaker Mike Johnson’s ambitious pledge that the Senate will adopt a budget resolution before leaving in early August.

“That’d be news to me,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Thursday about Johnson’s floated timeline, indicating he had signed on to no such thing.

His comments came as the House Budget Committee debated a resolution that would pave the way for drafting and passing a party-line policy bill with the power to skirt the Senate filibuster.

Thune and Johnson have had a good working relationship. But Johnson’s penchant for speaking for the Senate over the past year, including during last summer’s debate over the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, has been a point of frustration for Thune and his allies — especially because Thune is mindful not to speak for the House.

Some Senate Republicans are also exasperated with the House’s decision to push forward with a third reconciliation attempt — a followup to last year’s tax-cuts-focused megabill and the immigration enforcement package from June. They view it as more of a midterm messaging effort than an actual attempt to legislate, according to two people granted anonymity to disclose private conversations.

It’s not just the timeline though that is an issue in the Senate, though: The House’s blueprint also contains $73 billion for military and intelligence efforts, as well as $12 billion in farm assistance and $10 billion for election-related efforts. Senate GOP defense hawks want a higher number for the military, and agriculture-state Republicans are clamoring for more farm aid.

That means the Senate will need to amend the House budget blueprint to add instructions for its own committees that could involve setting higher spending ceilings for the military and agriculture aid, according to three people granted anonymity to speak candidly.

Thune tipped his hand Thursday morning to the hurdles he’ll face among Senate Republicans, repeatedly asking, “Is the juice worth the squeeze?”

He also noted that while defense hawks would want a larger military number, fiscal hawks are going to want to pay for the bill. And giving the Agriculture Committee buy-in to provide funding for farm assistance could end up giving Democrats an opening to force votes on a host of politically sensitive issues including cuts to federal food aid.

“Then the question on the floor of … can we get 50 [votes] on anything? And even if we can get 50 to pass it, can we defeat all the poison-pill amendments?” Thune said. “‘I’m not pooh-poohing it, I’m just saying people need to think long and hard. … It’s a much easier proposition in the House.”

Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming, the No. 2 GOP leader, is also keeping his powder dry but predicted that Johnson will need to help sell Senate Republicans on any budget resolution that can get through the House.

“I expect that [Johnson is] going to be part of the whip team once he gets that passed. So we’re going to wait and see what he can get over here,” he said.

On one side of the Senate GOP, leaders are likely to face skepticism from some members of the Appropriations Committee. Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine), for instance, said she hadn’t yet looked at the House framework but “in general my view is that we should not be using reconciliation, we should work through the normal appropriations process.”

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), another senior appropriator, also voted against the second reconciliation bill, which funded immigration enforcement for the rest of Trump’s term over concerns about its impact on the government funding process.

Thune also has deficit hawks, including incoming Budget Chair Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), who are likely to want to include offsets for at least part of the spending. The House’s plan currently includes no offsets.

Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), a member of the Budget Committee, said in a statement that Congress should “pass a reconciliation package which is paid for” — and, if a short-term government funding bill can’t pass, “the reconciliation package needs to fund important government services.”

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) added on X Thursday: “Our national debt is a runaway train. The next reconciliation bill should be fully paid for.”

Congress

Gillibrand and Boozman roll out new bipartisan paid leave bill

Published

3 hours ago

July 16, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

A bipartisan Senate duo is introducing a new paid leave bill this week — another step in a years-long effort to draft compromise legislation guaranteeing people won’t lose paychecks if they need to take an extended absence from work.

The measure from Democratic Sen. Kristen Gillibrand of New York and Republican Sen. John Boozman of Arkansas — shared first with Blue Light News — would establish a pilot grant program allowing states to provide at least six weeks of leave for family, medical or caregiving reasons. It also would also set up an interstate working group to coordinate and harmonize benefits across participating states.

A similar bipartisan effort is underway in the House from Reps. Stephanie Bice (R-Okla.) and Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.), though the Senate proposal would in some areas go farther. For instance, the Gillibrand-Boozman bill would extend paid leave opportunities to foster parents and remove requirements in the House bill that might limit the pilot program’s reach.

It would also direct the labor secretary to prioritize states for pilot program grants that do not have existing paid leave programs.

“No American should have to choose between earning a paycheck and caring for a new baby, a sick parent, or their own health,” Gillibrand said in a statement, describing her bill as “a commonsense, bipartisan step toward solving a challenge facing millions of hardworking families.”

She added the “robust” programs would “help protect Americans’ financial security and allow them the flexibility to deal with life’s emergencies without sacrificing their income.”

Congress

Johnson preps to punt government funding through midterms

Published

4 hours ago

July 16, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Speaker Mike Johnson said Thursday he plans to hold a House vote next on a stopgap spending measure, one that would likely fund the government through the November midterm elections.

The move is an opening bid in what could become a contentious partisan fight ahead of the end of the federal fiscal year on Sept. 30. Johnson has been privately trying to convince President Donald Trump to back the stopgap in a bid to provoke a confrontation with Democrats, according to three people granted anonymity to discuss private conversations.

Democrats spurred a record-long governmentwide shutdown last fall and an even longer shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security this spring. Republican believe another shutdown fight could work to their benefit ahead of the midterms, the people said.

But Republicans face internal complications passing any funding bill. Many GOP lawmakers are demanding any must-pass bill that emerges from the House needs to also include the SAVE America Act, the Republican elections bill that has languished in the Senate for months, and leaders have yet to decide what to do.

Johnson declined to comment on whether the elections measure would be attached to the spending punt, which would complicate its path in the Senate.

“Well, we haven’t decided all that yet,” Johnson said in an interview. “The SAVE America Act is the No. 1 priority for us, and we’re going to attach it to everything that makes sense. So we’ll have to see.”

While Democrats have refused to support previous GOP-written stopgap bills during President Donald Trump’s second term, it’s not obvious the party would roundly reject a clean extension of current funding.

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), a senior appropriator who is expected to become the No. 2 party leader next Congress, said it made sense to punt funding till after the election.

“This is around the time of year where everyone realizes we’re not going to get our appropriations bill by the end of the federal fiscal year end, so I think we should do the adult thing, which is to punt into the lame duck,” he said. “That is very standard, and we should just get it done in a businesslike fashion.”

Kelsey Brugger contributed to this report.