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

House Ethics trial for Cherflius-McCormick postponed as lawmaker seeks new lawyer

Published

53 minutes ago

March 3, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The House Ethics Committee has postponed its planned public trial for Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick — the Florida Democrat facing accusations that she stole millions in FEMA funding — to later this month.

A hearing of an adjudicatory subcommittee of the Ethics panel was pushed from this Thursday to March 26 after the lawmaker’s “counsel in the matter withdrew from representing her before the adjudicatory subcommittee,” according to a committee press release.

“Representative Cherfilus-McCormick asked for a brief continuance to allow her to retain new counsel,” the statement continued.

Lawmakers on the Ethics Committee, which adjudicates allegations of misconduct against House members and staff, were poised to meet to determine whether the allegations against Cherfilus-McCormick have been proven by “clear and convincing evidence.” There, the committee’s counsel and Cherfilus-McCormick’s counsel could have made their respective cases.

It’s highly unusual for the panel to operate in the open, let alone convene a trial. The last time House Ethics met in such a capacity was in 2010 to consider the case of late-Rep. Charlie Rangel, a New York Democrat accused of a number of charges, including inappropriately soliciting funds and financial disclosure violations.

Rangel’s situation had parallels to that of Cherfilus-McCormick. At the time, Rangel was irate over the Ethics Committee’s handling of the matter, claiming he was denied due process because he could not hire a lawyer in time for the hearing. At one point, he threatened to exit the room and left.

“I don’t think it’s fair that I participate in any type of proceeding if in fact what you are basically telling me that the political calendar will not allow you enough … time to allow me to get a lawyer at this crucial point in my life,” Rangel said, alluding to the fact that the Ethics Committee was rushing to conclude its business before the end of the legislative session.

The panel nearly unanimously voted to censure Rangel for his conduct, which the House approved shortly afterward.

Cherfilus-McCormick, like Rangel, had previously asked for the proceedings against her to be delayed. Her then-lawyer argued that the Justice Department’s criminal proceedings necessitated a stay in the Ethics Committee’s work. The Florida Democrat cited, among other examples, former Florida GOP Rep. Matt Gaetz, whose own case pending before House Ethics case was paused after a request from DOJ.

Congress

House Democrats introduce alternative war powers resolution

Published

1 hour ago

March 3, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Half a dozen moderate House Democrats have introduced their own war powers resolution as the chamber barrels towards a floor vote later this week on a bipartisan measure to curb President Donald Trump’s use of force in Iran.

It’s a sign of how some Democrats are struggling to reconcile their opposition to the Trump administration’s military action with a desire to appear hawkish on national security — even in a largely symbolic capacity.

The new proposed resolution from the six lawmakers would call for an end to military operations in Iran within 30 days unless Congress provides authorization for use of military force or a declaration of war. In contrast, the resolution that is being forced for consideration Thursday from Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) would require the immediate withdrawal of troops from Iran.

The co-sponsors of the alternative resolution are Democratic Reps. Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey, Greg Landsman of Ohio, Henry Cuellar of Texas and Jared Golden of Maine, alongside Reps. Jim Costa and Jimmy Panetta of California.

The Massie-Khanna resolution has little chance of becoming law, even if it makes it through the House — which is no guarantee. Still, there’s pressure on Democrats to take a unified stance in support of the bipartisan proposal and against the Trump administration’s actions, with Democratic leadership and ranking members of key committees urging a “yes” vote to rein in the president.

Asked about the new war powers resolution from members of his caucus, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries during a Tuesday news conference said he had not yet seen the legislative text.

“Our focus is on the resolution that will be on the floor this week,” the New York Democrat said.

Jeffries also said House Democrats will discuss the matter Wednesday afternoon, following an all-member House briefing scheduled for Tuesday evening with Trump administration officials on the unfolding situation in Iran.

“We’ll continue to make the strongest possible case,” Jeffries said. “There is going to be very strong Democratic support for the War Powers Resolution across the ideological spectrum.”

Bipartisan members of the Problem Solvers Caucus, of which Gottheimer is a co-chair, have discussed the matter during their own meetings in recent days. Many have shared concerns that the Massie-Khanna resolution is overly broad and would hamstring the administration regarding key national security efforts, according to three people with direct knowledge of the matter.

Meredith Lee Hill contributed to this report.

Congress

Mike Rounds seeks Pentagon briefing on Anthropic spat

Published

1 hour ago

March 3, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

A top lawmaker on the Senate Armed Services Committee has requested a briefing from the Pentagon on its escalating feud with AI startup Anthropic, which has prompted the Trump administration to threaten to declare the company a supply chain risk.

“I’ll withhold judgment until I’ve had my briefing,” Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), chair of the panel’s cybersecurity subcommittee, told reporters Tuesday, in response to questions from Blue Light News about the unprecedented move.

A supply chain risk designation would result in Anthropic being blacklisted from government contracts — something typically reserved for firms with ties to U.S. foreign adversaries. The technology company is expected to challenge such a designation in court.

The Defense Department and Anthropic did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Negotiations with the Pentagon over use of Anthropic’s AI systems hit a roadblock last week when the firm refused to lift restrictions on the military’s unfettered access to its technology. The startup had sought to stop its systems from being used in fully autonomous weapons systems or for domestic surveillance.

President Donald Trump, roughly one hour before the deadline to meet the Pentagon’s demands, directed all federal agencies to cease use of Anthropic’s AI and declared a six-month phase-out period in a post on Truth Social. Trump threatened “major civil and criminal consequences,” and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth in an X post accused the company of endangering national security.

Last week, key defense policy lawmakers on Blue Light News urged a ceasefire as tensions between Hegseth and Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei escalated. Top Senate defense appropriators Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Chris Coons (D-Del.), as well as Senate Armed Services Committee leaders Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) and Jack Reed (D-R.I.), sent a letter to the two men expressing “concern over the escalatory direction of negotiations between the Department of Defense and Anthropic.”

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), who is retiring at the end of his term in 2027, also weighed in Tuesday, telling reporters: “They’re telling Anthropic that they should compromise their code of conduct to facilitate whatever it is Hegseth or somebody wants.” He added that this will give other AI upstarts the “green light” to cast aside imposing their own codes of conduct.