Congress

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

Published

3 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

Republicans take first step to move $95B party-line package

Published

44 minutes ago

July 16, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Reconciliation 3.0 is on the move in the House.

House Republicans advanced their budget plan out of committee Thursday afternoon — the initial legislative step toward clearing their third party-line budget reconciliation package ahead of the impending August recess.

The House Budget Committee voted to approve a budget resolution along party lines, 20-14. The measure would unlock $95 billion for a GOP-only package to deliver funding President Donald Trump has demanded for the Pentagon, farmers and other priorities.

What the budget blueprint doesn’t contain is instructions to committees to find the vast savings that fiscal hawks were looking for to pay for the new spending. House Budget Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) tried to quell concerns from within his party about a lack of offsets required within the budget resolution by pointing to executive branch action.

“He declared war on fraud,” Arrington told the panel, referring to Trump. “He has a whole of government attack on that $500-plus billion a year in fraud.”

On Wednesday, Vice President JD Vance also tried to respond to hard-liners’ concerns by telling a gathering of House Republicans that his White House-based task force on fraud is already finding savings from social programs to offset spending. Fiscal hawks were not sold.

Some budget hawks including Reps. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) and Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.) voted to advance the resolution in committee. Rep. Chip Roy (R) of Texas did not vote in committee. On Wednesday he told reporters “the stupidest thing to do would be to try to jam it through committee when you’ve got bigger problem[s] on the House floor.”

The budget resolution prescribes up to $73 billion for military and intelligence programs and $12 billion for farm assistance. It also opens the door for Republicans to put another $10 billion toward election-related matters including grants to states to incentivize strict voter-ID laws. That portion of the effort is an attempt to enact some of the controversial election security bill that Trump is demanding be passed before he signs any other legislation.

“Not one word on bringing down costs for the American people. Not one word,” ranking member Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) said of the nearly 50-page budget resolution. “Instead, we have tens of billions of dollars for the most unpopular war in American history.”

The $73 billion allowed for military and intelligence is about the amount the White House sought in another emergency funding request last month. But the defense total is far below Trump’s demand of $350 billion in new party-line Pentagon funding this year. Of the $60 billion in defense funding, some would go to the ongoing war in Iran and another portion to service member pay, which Pentagon officials have warned will run short in August.

The panel defeated all 14 amendments Democrats offered, including proposals to roll back a bevy of policies from Republicans’ earlier party-line policy bills. Those measures targeted cuts to nutrition assistance programs, energy programs, student loan limitations and changes to Affordable Care Act policies.

Other rejected proposals include language to bar any taxpayer dollars from going to participants in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, barring funding for Trump’s White House ballroom and striking down Trump’s tariffs impacting agriculture producers. Multiple Democratic amendments focused on the conduct of federal immigration officers after several fatal shootings in recent days.

A floor vote on the fiscal blueprint is House GOP leaders’ next challenge in the arduous process of unlocking the filibuster-skirting power of reconciliation. Speaker Mike Johnson is trying to put the resolution on the floor next week, but that will require a serious whip operation to persuade deficit hawks to support the resolution.

On Wednesday ahead of the markup, House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) brushed off colleagues who are looking for the package to be fully paid for, including the defense portion.

“When did you ever pay for a war? A lot of this is military expenses aimed at that war,” he said. “The point is that play’s been called. It’s time to put up or shut up.”

Meredith Lee Hill contributed to this report.

Congress

Crypto regulatory text expected to be released Thursday does not have Senate Democrat support

Published

44 minutes ago

July 16, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Senators are planning to release the updated text of a cryptocurrency regulatory bill shortly after a meeting with President Donald Trump on Thursday afternoon, Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) told reporters.

Democratic senators are not expected to attend the meeting. Several Democrats said they wouldn’t support the version of the bill that could be released Thursday, suggesting it faces steep odds for passage.

Negotiations on the Clarity Act have gone back and forth for the better part of the past year. A major unresolved issue involves an ethics provision seeking to address Trump’s business ties to the crypto industry. The measure is a requirement for Senate Democrats, whose support is necessary to pass the bill through the chamber.

“We’ll do that right after the meeting,” Moreno said. “You guys have a lot of reading to do.”

Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), who is also expected to attend the meeting, said in an interview Thursday she “certainly hopes” draft text is released after speaking with the president but didn’t confirm.

Moreno pointed to the time spent meeting with Democrats on the bill over the past year, and said “it’s time for a vote now, but the president asked for a briefing.”

The Ohio Republican said one of his main goals of the meeting with Trump is to get a vote on the bill before August recess.

Several Democrats said they wouldn’t support the version of the bill set for release Thursday because it lacks strong ethics provisions.

“They’re taking a version of the text to the president with their ethics provisions, not with anything that we agree to as Democrats,” Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), a key negotiator of the legislation, said in an interview Thursday. “At the end of the day, we don’t have strong ethics. I don’t care what the president says. You’re not going to have the Democratic votes.”

Gallego said the version of ethics language he’s seen so far is “very weak” and gives “a lot of latitude to the president to continue doing his grift, and also it’s not very consumer protection friendly.”

Moreno has been adamant that the crypto bill “has the strongest ethics provision of any piece of legislation ever passed by any Congress.”

A Democratic Senate aide granted anonymity to discuss the unreleased draft said “the Republican plan being presented to the president is weaker than what Democrats will accept” and that “Democrats have not seen nor agreed to what is being presented to the White House.”

Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), who has been working on the CFTC portion of the bill, said in an interview he’s still in active negotiations on the bill, which aren’t expected to be finished Thursday.

“I hope they’re not going to drop something before we finish our negotiation,” Booker said. “The only way to get this done is a bipartisan pathway.”

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this report misstated Democratic Sen. Ruben Gallego’s party affiliation.

Congress

Senators bullish on chances for a July vote on college sports bill

Published

44 minutes ago

July 16, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Senate Commerce Chair Ted Cruz is hopeful the Senate will be able to vote this month on his bipartisan college athletics legislation as he makes “minor modifications” to win support.

The Texas Republican said Wednesday he has been meeting throughout this week with “several dozen” commissioners and university presidents to solicit feedback on the bill he introduced last month with the Commerce Committee’s top Democrat, Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington.

“We continue to make significant progress,” he said, declining to get into the “active discussions” around negotiations.

“I believe we will vote on it this month,” Cruz added.

The so-called Protect College Sports Act would establish a federal rule book for college athletics by enacting new policies for student-athlete transfers, banning coaches from moving schools mid-season and enshrining certain “name, image and likeness” protections in law.

Time is running out to schedule a floor vote in July, however, and it remains unclear how much work needs to be done to build consensus in the next two weeks.

A person granted anonymity to share private discussions said Senate Majority Leader John Thune has expressed interest in moving the bill to the floor once it can get 60 votes. But members in both parties have misgivings — including Democrats concerned about student athlete labor protections as well as some Republicans attuned to concerns from major college athletic conferences.

Cantwell, in an interview Thursday, said there’s a “possibility for sure” the bill could land on the Senate floor by the end of the month, while acknowledging there was still some work to do.

“I think right now we have a bill that’s like really in the middle and then there’s people on both sides trying to make change,” she said. “And I think we’ll have to see what we can do that still preserves that agreement but grows the votes.”

Two lobbyists actively engaged in talks around the bill, who were granted anonymity to comment on private conversations, said the legislation is far from ready for a floor vote, adding that the Commerce Committee has not made substantial progress on winning over key players in college sports.

Several universities and conferences — including Louisiana State University, the University of Alabama and Auburn University — have reiterated in recent days that they believe the Cruz-Cantwell bill still requires substantial changes like clarifying liability protections for schools and closing potential loopholes around non-NIL payments for student-athletes.

The bill has also faced strong headwinds as the Big Ten and the Southeastern Conference — the two largest college athletics conferences in the country — have pushed back on a provision aimed at allowing conferences to pool their media rights, insisting the bill clarify that any such provision is entirely voluntary.

Several major conferences were at one time more enthusiastic about the rival proposal in the House known as the SCORE Act, which would offer strong antitrust protections and preempt state NIL laws. But that bill stalled amid opposition from GOP hard-liners and others, emboldening Cruz and Cantwell to forge ahead with their own plan.

Both measures, however, have faced pushback from the Congressional Black Caucus, which has continued to vow to boycott any college sports legislation amid efforts by GOP-led states to redraw congressional maps across the South.