Congress

Tim Scott keeps quiet as Fed independence comes under threat

Published

2 months ago

January 13, 2026

As Washington erupted over the Justice Department’s subpoena of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, a Republican lawmaker at the center of the dispute is keeping silent.

That would be Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina, who presided over a June hearing of the Senate Banking Committee where he and other Republicans quizzed Powell about the Fed’s pending renovation projects. Powell’s answers from the meeting are now the subject of a perjury investigation, the Fed chair revealed Sunday — the apparent culmination of months of attacks from the president.

Many lawmakers of both parties quickly spoke out in protest of the probe and in favor of Fed independence — including several Republican members of Scott’s own committee — but Scott himself has so far remained mum as he tries to advance major cryptocurrency legislation this week. In addition to serving as Banking chair — where he leads oversight of the Federal Reserve — Scott also chairs the Senate GOP campaign arm, which requires him to work closely with Trump and his orbit.

“I already said no,” he told reporters who repeatedly pressed him for comment as he entered the Capitol Monday.

Scott’s silence is not unusual — he does not respond to questions in the Capital hallways. Still, it was conspicuous as Republican after Republican spoke out against the apparent targeting of the Fed chairman — starting almost immediately Sunday night when Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina not only objected to the move but said he would use his vote on the Banking Committee to block any future Fed nominee until the investigation is resolved.

Also speaking out Monday was Scott’s House counterpart, Financial Services Chair French Hill, who called Powell a “man of integrity” and said the investigation threatened “sound monetary policy decisions.” Senate Majority Leader John Thune, meanwhile, called for the probe to be “resolved quickly.”

“I want to see [the Fed] operate in an independent way free of politics,” he added.

Among the questions left unaddressed by Scott is whether he shares his GOP colleagues’ concerns about Fed independence or feels misled by the June testimony, where Powell sought to rebut allegations that Fed officials had let the costs of an ambitious headquarters renovation spiral out of control.

Pressed by Scott on accusations that the rehab project was needlessly lavish — many of them amplified by Trump and his allies, such as reports of a private elevator and garden terrace — Powell responded that many of the claims were “flatly misleading” and had long since been dropped from the plans.

Scott has generally avoided weighing in on questions about the Fed’s independence as Trump has taken aim at the central bank and its longtime chair. He appeared with Trump last year when the president went to tour the renovation project at the Fed’s Constitution Avenue headquarters. He unsuccessfully ran for president against Trump for the 2024 nomination, but never broke with him personally, was on Trump’s VP shortlist and has won praise from the president after he took office a second time.

Neither the Justice Department nor the Federal Reserve have detailed what information investigators are seeking, but a prior Justice Department perjury referral brought by Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) cited contradictions between Powell’s statements and plans the Fed submitted to a federal review agency. Luna’s letter references answers Powell gave to Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) during the Banking hearing last year after Scott first aired concerns about the renovation.

News of the probe caught some White House aides, GOP lawmakers and Wall Street players off guard — especially after Powell himself recorded a videotaped statement calling it part of a Trump administration intimidation campaign.

That includes members of Scott’s committee. Republicans on the panel met privately Monday evening to discuss the cryptocurrency bill he wants to push through the panel this week — a measure that is backed by the Trump administration and many of the president’s allies in the crypto industry.

During the meeting, Scott did not address how he or how the panel would approach the Powell investigation, according to one attendee, who said the South Carolina Republican has his hands full trying to get an agreement on the cryptocurrency bill.

A bigger headache could be coming down the pike: Scott could find it difficult to move a successor through his committee later this year when Powell’s term as Fed chair expires — with even Thune acknowledging moving a nominee could be a challenge.

Tillis said Sunday night he would not advance a Fed nominee, including filling the upcoming chair vacancy, “until this legal matter is fully resolved.”

Tillis’ opposition alone is enough to block the panel from being able to advance a Trump nominee to the full Senate on party lines given its 13-11 member breakdown.

But he’s far from alone among Banking Committee Republicans who have raised alarm bells over the investigation. While Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) called Powell a “bad” Fed chair, he added, “I do not believe, however, that he is a criminal.”

Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), a Banking Committee member, said if administration officials thought Powell had committed perjury, then they needed to back up the accusations. He added, “I would be stunned if he had done anything wrong.”

“We need this like we need a hole to the head,” Kennedy said, warning of a possible spike in interest rates as markets lose faith in Fed independence.

Powell also reached out to at least two Republicans who do not serve on the Banking Committee, with Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska describing calls from the Fed chair to reporters. Thune said in a brief interview that Powell had not called him, but that he’s spoken to other GOP senators who had contact.

“I believe strongly in the independence of the Federal Reserve, and I know Jay Powell to be a person of integrity,” Collins told reporters Monday, cautioning that she had not yet reviewed his comments at the hearing.

But she added that “one can’t help but wonder if it has more to do with the chairman’s resistance to pressure from the White House when it comes to interest rates than it does his testimony at the hearing.”

Jennifer Scholtes and Jasper Goodman contributed to this report.

Congress

Lutnick agrees to testify in House Oversight’s Epstein probe

Published

27 minutes ago

March 3, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has “proactively agreed to appear voluntarily” before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee as part of the panel’s investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, Chair James Comer announced Tuesday.

“I commend his demonstrated commitment to transparency and appreciate his willingness to engage with the Committee,” Comer, a Kentucky Republican, said in a statement. “I look forward to his testimony.”

A date for Lutnick’s deposition is not yet known.

Lutnick has not been accused of wrongdoing in connection with Epstein’s crimes, and he continues to have the White House’s support. But he has faced calls for his resignation from Democrats after the Epstein files released by the Justice Department revealed the full extent of his relationship with the disgraced financier. Lutnick had previously suggested that he cut ties prior to Epstein’s 2008 conviction for soliciting a prostitute. The Commerce secretary later conceded the two men had lunch together following those charges.

Shortly before Comer’s announcement Tuesday afternoon that Lutnick would cooperate with the panel, Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) shared her intention to force a vote to subpoena Lutnick during a House Oversight hearing scheduled for Wednesday on an unrelated topic. While committee Republicans have also expressed a desire to hear from Lutnick, his agreement to testify suggests that most GOP members would prefer to avoid having to take a politically uncomfortable vote to compel testimony from a high ranking Trump administration official — plus hand Democrats victory.

On Monday, the Oversight Committee released footage of a deposition with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, where Mace accused Lutnick of operating as a “go-between between [Hillary Clinton] and Jeffrey Epstein raising money for [her].” Clinton has said her work with Lutnick was around the response to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in New York, in which Lutnick’s company lost many employees.

Clinton said she never recalled meeting Epstein and has not been accused of wrongdoing.

Congress

Republicans dismiss energy cost concerns after Iran strikes

Published

5 hours ago

March 3, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

When the U.S. and Israel launched a wave of strikes on Iran over the weekend, some Democrats warned about the impact on energy costs. Now that those predictions have come to pass with an uptick in global prices for natural gas and crude oil, Democrats are pouncing — and Republicans are pushing back.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) started to set the tone for the GOP’s messaging Monday afternoon, saying he expected prices to return to prewar levels soon.

“I think that there will be, hopefully, a cessation of this in the not-too-distant future, at which time my assumption is that that’ll stabilize a bit,” Thune said. “Anything that happens in the Middle East seems to set off an increase in oil prices.”

Other Senate Republicans are also giving the administration some breathing room for the time being. Sen. John Curtis (R-Utah) said that while fluctuating energy prices is worth watching, “it seems to be second-tier right now.” Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) agreed it was “a little soon to be saying that this is going to be a major issue.”

Like a number of energy industry analysts, some Republicans are pointing to policies boosting domestic energy production as a potential cushion that could soften the impact of the price volatility. Indeed, other recent instability in the Middle East has not translated in major price spikes.

“We’ve worked hard to be more self-sustaining so that we don’t have this,” said Senate Environment and Public Works Chair Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.). “We have the means to make our own supply. So I’m really not too worried about that.”

But Capito also conceded that voters could get frustrated if the war continues and their wallets start to feel the pinch.

“When they feel prices at the pump,” Capito said, “they don’t like it.”

It could become a difficult balancing act for the GOP in an election year that’s becoming all about affordability — especially as President Donald Trump warns of a conflict that could take weeks to resolve.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), during a floor speech Monday, said Americans “don’t want a war that raises the price of gas at the pump.”

“Trump is raising prices at home while razing countries abroad,” Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) posted on X. “In addition to untold casualties, Trump’s illegal war with Iran will lead to skyrocketing oil prices, and we know the Big Oil vultures are already circulating.”

The topic came up Monday during Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s briefing of congressional leadership on Capitol Hill, where he acknowledged that the administration knew energy prices would be affected as a result of the strikes. Rubio also said Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent would manage a response to be announced Tuesday, but did not specify what the response would be.

The impact of the overseas turmoil on energy prices is likely to come up again Tuesday afternoon, when Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and other administration officials return to Blue Light News to brief members of the House and Senate.

Sen. Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, the top Democrat on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said the administration needs to do a lot more explaining.

“Is there a strategy? Is there a goal? Because right now, all of that seems missing, and in the meantime, we’re going to have American consumers paying very real costs with respect to energy,” Heinrich said.

Amelia Davidson, Nico Portuondo and Pavan Acharya contributed to this report.

Congress

Capitol agenda: Marco Rubio works to stave off a revolt on Iran

Published

8 hours ago

March 3, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The White House is trying to stave off a revolt on Capitol Hill against its military actions in Iran, as both chambers are set to vote on resolutions this week that would put guardrails on President Donald Trump’s unilateral use of military force.

Their first order of business: Bring administration heavies to Capitol Hill to discuss the rationale for strikes. Secretary of State Marco Rubio was on Blue Light News Monday to brief congressional leaders. He’ll be back Tuesday with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine and CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and they plan to meet first with members of the Senate, then the House.

At this point, lawmakers on both sides are decrying a lack of details from the administration — including evidence that Iran posed an imminent threat to the U.S. that would necessitate military action. But so far, it’s looking like Republican leaders will be able to avoid mass GOP defections on the war power votes being forced in both chambers.

When the Senate votes Wednesday on Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Rand Paul’s (R-Ky.) bipartisan resolution that would prevent further attacks without congressional buy-in, Democrats will need to pick up at least five Republicans to secure adoption — given Democratic Sen. John Fetterman’s (D-Pa.) expected opposition. Watch GOP Sens. Todd Young (Ind.), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Susan Collins (Maine), who helped advance a Venezuela war powers effort last month and were noncommittal Monday when asked how they’d vote on Iran.

Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters Monday he believes he has the votes to block Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna’s (D-Calif.) Iran war powers resolution in the House, which will hit the floor Thursday.

“The idea that we would take the ability of our commander in chief … to finish this job, is a frightening prospect to me,” he said.

— Pressure on DHS funding: Republicans have another job this week — build pressure on Democrats to reopen the Department of Homeland Security, citing a need to fully fund the agency amid heightened security risks following the strikes in Iran.

The House Rules Committee convenes at 4 p.m. Tuesday afternoon to tee up another vote Thursday on a DHS funding bill similar to what the chamber passed last month, with Republicans daring Democrats to vote against defending the homeland.

But there are no signs of Democratic surrender as the DHS shutdown enters Day 18 amid a stalemate over the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement agenda. Democratic leaders in the House are whipping against the vote, telling members there is “no new language to end the chaos caused by ICE in communities across the country.”

Expect more debate when Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem testifies in front of members of the Senate and House Judiciary Committees Tuesday and Wednesday, respectively. These will be her first congressional hearings since the fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by federal agents, which sparked the DHS impasse in Congress.

What else we’re watching:

— Texas primary day: Leaders in both parties will be closely watching a slew of House and Senate races in Texas Tuesday night that could determine control of Congress next year. The biggest contests across the Lone Star State will be the Senate primaries. James Talarico and Rep. Jasmine Crockett are vying for the Democratic nomination, while Sen. John Cornyn, Attorney General Ken Paxton and Rep. Wesley Hunt are competing for the Republican nomination.

— Farm bill markup: House Agriculture will Tuesday evening begin marking up a farm bill years in the making — and some of the amendments under consideration will be more viable than others.

In the DOA category: Proposals from Democrats, including Reps. Shontel Brown (D-Ohio) and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.), that would reverse GOP cuts to food aid spending that were enacted in last summer’s megabill. In the more likely category: Rep. Jim Baird (R-Ind.) plans to offer an amendment that would postpone new restrictions on hemp products by two years, which would be a win for the hemp industry resistant to further regulation.

Katherine Tully-McManus, Jordain Carney, Andrew Howard, Rachel Shin and Grace Yarrow contributed to this report.