Congress

Tony Gonzales created a mess for GOP leaders. They’re counting on voters to do the cleanup.

Published

7 months ago

March 2, 2026

Most of the political world will be watching Tuesday’s Texas primaries to see who will match up in a blockbuster Senate race. But many House Republicans are instead keen to find out if Lone Star State voters are going to help them solve a big, messy problem.

That would be Rep. Tony Gonzales, the third-term Republican lawmaker who stands accused of having an affair with his staffer and pressing her for sexually explicit photos. She later died by suicide. Gonzales has denied the allegations, which have been bolstered by the release of text messages and interviews given by the late aide’s husband.

Neither President Donald Trump nor Speaker Mike Johnson have pulled their endorsements of Gonzales, which were made months ago. But a growing number of House Republicans are hoping he simply loses his race and rides off into the Texas sunset, according to interviews with more than a dozen lawmakers and aides, many of whom were granted anonymity to speak candidly about the sensitive situation.

What most don’t want, however, is for Gonzales to resign from Congress in the 10 months before a successor would be sworn in, given that his departure would imperil the ultra-narrow House GOP majority.

“Should he lose the primary, which a lot of us expect him to do, he’ll probably just serve out his term,” Rep. Mike Haridopolos (R-Fla.) said. “People still deserve to have a congressman doing the constituent work, et cetera.”

Haridopolos, like other House Republicans, said the allegations against Gonzales are “very serious, to say the least.” He added, “I think the voters in Texas are going to speak pretty loudly. And I would guess that his days are numbered in Congress.”

Text messages that surfaced last week appear to show Gonzales engaging in explicit exchanges with the staffer, Regina Santos-Aviles, asking her for intimate photos and about sex acts. At one point in the exchanges, which Blue Light News has not independently reviewed, Santos-Aviles told Gonzales the requests were going “too far.” She died in September after setting herself on fire in her backyard.

Gonzales told reporters last week he would not resign from office. “What you’ve seen is not all the facts,” he said.

A spokesperson for Gonzales didn’t respond to questions, including whether the lawmaker would provide the additional facts he referenced.

But what has emerged so far has been enough to cause enormous headaches for Johnson, who has had to contend with numerous crises relating to his barely-there majority.

Cobbling together enough Republicans to advance legislation is a day-to-day struggle for party leaders, who can afford no more than one defection on party-line votes where all members are present. Absences and internal dissent from lawmakers mean controversial votes are a constant tightrope for the GOP.

Asked Tuesday if Gonzales should be running for reelection, Johnson declined to say. “I haven’t met with him yet,” he replied. A day later, Johnson told reporters he still hadn’t met with Gonzales but suggested his fate was in the hands of Texas primary voters.

Trump notably left Gonzales out of a social media blitz Friday morning, where he cheered his endorsements in nearly every other race in the state. When Gonzales attended a Trump event in Texas later that day, the president did recognize his presence — but the White House “didn’t invite him specifically,” according to a person with direct knowledge of the matter. Rather, the “event was just open.”

Gonzales’ Republican challenger, Brandon Herrera, said in an interview he hasn’t talked to any GOP leaders or the NRCC about the race. He has, though, spoken to some hard-line House Republicans who have called for Gonzales to step down or end his reelection bid, including Reps. Chip Roy and Brandon Gill of Texas, as well as Anna Paulina Luna of Florida and Lauren Boebert of Colorado.

“There’s no accountability there, and I think he’s about to find accountability on March 3,” Herrera said of Gonzales.

Like other House Republicans, Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) said the allegations against Gonzales are “disturbing” and that “Tony has to answer a lot of questions.”

But he said it was up to Texas voters “to render a judgment” on the allegations against him.

Even if Gonzales loses his primary Tuesday — a real possibility not only due to the allegations, but also his narrow 354-vote victory over Herrera in 2024 — he would continue serving out his term as House Ethics investigators probe his conduct.

Whether the public gets a look at the results of the internal investigation remains to be seen. The Office of Congressional Conduct is expected to transmit its report to the Ethics Committee right after the Tuesday primary, but the panel could take weeks — more likely months — before producing a public report.

If Gonzales leaves office first, the report would stay secret under House rules.

Most House Republicans are avoiding weighing in on the allegations facing Gonzales, and on Johnson’s handling of the matter altogether.

“It’s not something I’ve dedicated much thought to,” Rep. Dave Taylor (R-Ohio) said.

But even if Gonzales loses Tuesday, his presence in the House GOP could be a source of heartburn for party leaders.

A small group of House Republicans — most of them women — already want to force action against Gonzales. Luna and others are mulling a censure resolution against the Texas Republican. Luna said she might also try to strip Gonzales of his coveted assignment to the House Appropriations Committee.

“Too much of this has been brushed under the rug lately,” Luna said. “The American people deserve better.”

Luna said she hasn’t talked to Johnson about the moves, which could come up for floor consideration without leadership consent under House rules: “I don’t need to ask for his permission on anything. That is an archaic perspective that is not in line with the Constitution.”

Separately, Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), who has also called for Gonzales to resign, is vowing to force a vote on the House floor this week responding to allegations against the Texas Republican and other men in Congress who have faced misconduct allegations. Her measure would require the Ethics Committee to publicly release information on sexual harassment violations and alleged violations by members on a rolling basis.

While senior Republicans privately believe the effort will fail, Mace and some GOP allies are vowing to keep the spotlight on their colleagues’ alleged bad behavior — pushing for hearings and investigations.

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), who chairs a House Oversight subcommittee, indicated Thursday he was prepared to pick up the baton and pursue the matter through his panel.

“I plan to move on it,” he said.

Jasper Goodman contributed to this report.

Congress

Poll: China fears drive polarization on AI regulations

Published

2 hours ago

September 17, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Americans are divided on whether it’s acceptable to fall behind other countries in the race to develop advanced artificial intelligence. So is Congress.

A new POLITICO Poll finds that Americans broadly recognize serious risks from frontier AI models, but many — particularly President Donald Trump’s voters — also prioritize maintaining a lead over other countries, including China.

Even as 63% of the poll’s respondents said there’s a real possibility that AI could destroy humanity, they’re split on whether it’s acceptable to slow down and potentially fall behind in order to mitigate that risk.

A plurality, 43%, say it is acceptable for the U.S. to fall behind other countries if that means developing AI more responsibly and securely, while 37% take the opposite view, saying the U.S. should not stand down, even if that requires taking risks. Voters who backed Trump in 2024 favor the competition-first position by 50% to 38%.

That split is already playing out on Capitol Hill as AI safety zooms to the center of congressional conversations. With legislation only slowly taking shape, fear of international competition stands to be a major point of tension during any bipartisan negotiations — with most lawmakers’ views divided closely along party lines.

Many Republican lawmakers said in interviews this week that pausing AI development could give China an opening to overtake U.S. capabilities. Democrats are also looking over their shoulders at Chinese advances, but they are cautioning that competition is not a reason for Congress to avoid instituting AI guardrails.

“The AI race is not an arms race that you win,” Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) said during Wednesday’s Blue Light News Decoded Summit. “It’s an arms race that we need to end, and we need to protect the American people.”

Casar, the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, has teamed up with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in calling for a ban on “superintelligence” to stave off the existential threats to humanity — a concern that bubbled to the fore last week when a former Anthropic researcher warned AI could “kill us all.”

Senior Republicans are denigrating proposals like Casar’s, arguing that the U.S. cannot risk Chinese AI dominance. Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.), chair of the powerful House committee overseeing the tech industry, said as much at the summit.

“We absolutely can’t surrender,” he said. “And I think that’s what it would be if we stopped AI development.”

Guthrie further argued AI legislation is too complex to rush and that the Energy and Commerce Committee he leads might not take up AI legislation before next year. That sentiment is in line with Speaker Mike Johnson, who said this week that the U.S. must “maintain our edge over China.” Meanwhile, Trump has called the AI panic a “HOAX” and said that federal regulations would allow China to leapfrog the U.S.

Some Republicans have been almost flippant about the dilemma policymakers face in reconciling a potentially dangerous technology with their fear of Chinese competition.

“If there are going to be killer robots, I’d rather they be American killer robots,” Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas said in a recent POLITICO interview. Like Guthrie, Cruz chairs a committee overseeing tech matters.

Among the bipartisan group of lawmakers who have locked arms in warning about the Chinese threat on other fronts, the familiar partisan divide is still emerging on AI regulation.

“We can lead in innovation and lead in safety,” said Rep. Greg Stanton (D-Ariz.), who sits on the bipartisan Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party. “So if Trump or anyone else comes at it that we can only do one but not the other, he’s not looking at the history of the United States of America.”

Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska, a moderate Republican China hawk, said he is “very reluctant to hinder AI” via regulation.

“They’re going to have to make the good case why we need it,” he said. “We don’t want to hinder our AI research. We can’t afford to fall behind China.”

Some, however, are being careful to strike a balanced tone as the AI safety conversation kicks into high gear.

Rep. John Moolenaar (R-Mich.), chair of the House China panel, acknowledged lawmakers “do have a responsibility for public safety” while saying it was also important to “beat China when it comes to the AI race.”

“There’s economic benefits to that,” he said. “There’s national security issues, but we want to have common sense and a deliberative process.”

Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.), an Intelligence Committee member and a co-chair of House Democrats’ AI commission, said China is “not waiting for anyone else.”

“So you can’t just leave the race, but you need to make sure you do it in the right way,” he added.

Opinions are sharper when it comes to Trump’s upcoming meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping next week and whether he should even broach some type of cooperation on AI safety.

“I don’t trust him,” Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.), a senior member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said when asked if Trump should engage with Xi on AI. “I trust Trump.”

But many Democrats say it’s a mistake to engage in an AI arms race, with some explicitly reaching for analogies with the nuclear arms race that ended in Cold War treaties with a former global rival — the Soviet Union — limiting bomb tests and missile deployments.

Rep. Ted Lieu of California, another co-chair of the Democratic AI commission, said Trump could start small by asking Xi to “commit that they’re never going to let AI launch a nuclear weapon by itself.”

“There are things that we can do to get other countries to follow the lead the U.S. has taken in AI,” he said.

Congress

Democrats keep pressure on Hakeem Jeffries to punish rogue members

Published

10 hours ago

September 17, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

House Democrats aren’t letting rogue members off the hook for bucking their party. They hope Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries won’t either.

“Obviously, there’s got to be” punishment for the two Democrats who twice this month bucked their party to advance a slate of Republican priorities, Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) said in an interview.

“Otherwise, then,” he said, “it’s open season.”

Democrats are watching closely how — and if — Jeffries doles out consequences for Reps. Jared Golden of Maine and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington who have twice provided the decisive votes for GOP procedural measures this month. Jeffries and his leadership team condemned the two members when they first defected two weeks ago, slamming a “breach of trust” warranting a “serious response” but have yet to inflict any public consequences.

On Tuesday, they defied leadership a second time, infuriating House Democrats and resurrecting questions about how leadership plans to keep its caucus in line — especially if they have a slim majority next term.

“We have to all be united, and I think it’s pretty simple,” said one House Democrat who was granted anonymity to speak candidly. “If there’s not [a punishment], I find it hard to see a path forward in the majority, which we’re all pushing for.”

Asked if leadership should punish the two aisle-crossers, Rep. Troy Carter pointed to his time as minority leader of the Louisiana state Senate: “When I had members that did not work within the confines of the philosophical views of our party, I took them off our caucus.”

“I don’t want to second-guess anybody’s timing, but I will tell you that these things cannot allow to fester,” he added. “We have to have a strict message: Either you’re with the team on those fundamental issues of governance or you aren’t.”

Multiple members, including Carter, said that removing Gluesenkamp Perez from the Appropriations Committee should be considered. (While members are just as angry at Golden, they acknowledge he’s beyond punishment given he is retiring at the end of this term.)

“I suspect that there are a number of appropriate consequences that [leaders] could implement,” Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Calif.) said in an interview. “And, ultimately, it’s their decision. I certainly don’t want that to be a caucus decision. That should be a leadership decision.”

One leader, Whip Katherine Clark of Massachusetts, suggested she is open to removing Gluesenkamp Perez from Appropriations, telling reporters Wednesday morning that “team players get to sit on exclusive committees.”

After the first instance where the two Democrats defected on Sept. 1, Jeffries kicked the matter to a caucus rules panel, saying afterward he wanted to pursue action against the two members “sooner rather than later.” The panel continues to deliberate on what should happen if members vote with Republicans on procedural measures.

Jeffries said that week that he’d had a “productive” and “forward-looking” conversation with Gluesenkamp Perez, but he has said much less after Tuesday’s floor drama.

“I’ll have more to say about the issue when I have more to say about the issue,” he told Blue Light News shortly after the vote.

Congress

House passes Russia sanctions bill, handing Trump more leverage against Moscow

Published

12 hours ago

September 16, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The House passed the sweeping Russia sanctions bill long championed by the late Sen. Lindsey Graham on Wednesday, sending the legislation to the White House for President Donald Trump’s signature after more than a year of congressional maneuvering.

The 262 to 159 vote ends a nearly two-year lull in Ukraine assistance from Congress, which had not passed any major Ukraine efforts since a 2024 emergency aid package. The bill faced a number of obstacles on the path to the Resolute Desk, including significant opposition from some House Democrats who argued that the bill would give the White House too much tariff power.

After weathering a number of storms to make it out of Capitol Hill, the legislation is all but guaranteed to get Trump’s signature.

The long-anticipated legislation issues mandatory sanctions on Russia’s leadership and energy sector — as well as new sanctions on collaborators in Moscow’s defense industry and its so-called shadow fleet. Advocates of the bill, including Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, have argued it would give the White House necessary tools to squeeze Russia economically, curbing the flow of funds to Moscow’s war machine.

But, to many Democrats’ dismay, the legislation also includes a 100% tariff on top buyers of Russian energy. Opponents of the bill have cautioned that the tariff provision would hand another cudgel for Trump to use against not only U.S. foes but also global allies — an action the White House has repeatedly taken since Trump returned to office.

“We cannot grant more tariff power that we know he will abuse,” Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) said in comments on the House floor Wednesday.

Meeks, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, argued that the tariffs would worsen the economic pain already felt by everyday Americans and that without a security assistance package or more air defense, they would not do enough to concretely help Ukraine.

In comments on the House floor earlier Wednesday, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries outlined why he planned to withhold support for the measure.

“The manner in which this bill has been written doesn’t require the president of the United States to impose sanctions on Russia,” Jeffries said. “In fact, there are so many loopholes written into the bill, I believe, that it’s very unlikely that the sanctions relief contemplated in the legislation will ever see the light of day.”

That disagreement has caused a growing rift among Democrats in recent days. Fifty-eight House Democrats broke with Jeffries to vote yes on the measure.

In a letter addressed to House Democrats, Senate Foreign Relations ranking member Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) urged her colleagues to pass the legislation, warning that failing to do so would send a dangerous message to both Russian leader Vladimir Putin and other international foes.

“Congress’s failure to impose additional costs would send a dangerous signal,” Shaheen wrote. “The Kremlin is watching. Kyiv is watching. Our NATO allies are watching. So are Beijing, Tehran and Pyongyang.”