Congress

Trump’s Capitol Hill dreams are at odds with GOP reality

Published

4 months ago

November 19, 2025

The White House’s dream of clinching major new Republican victories on Capitol Hill before the midterms is crashing into the reality of a bitterly divided Congress.

Tackling major GOP priorities on the economy and health care was already going to be a heavy lift: There are deep divisions among Republicans about their strategy ahead of the end-of-year expiration of some Affordable Care Act subsidies, and President Donald Trump is showing little appetite to cut a deal with Democrats.

Trump’s top political aide raised the possibility Tuesday of pursuing another go-it-alone bill, a sequel to the sweeping tax-focused megabill the GOP passed this summer, but going down that road would require building almost complete unity among congressional Republicans.

And that would have been a tall order even before Trump went to war inside his own party this past week, effectively excommunicating longtime ally Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) over her criticism of his policies, as well as her support for the release of Justice Department records related to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

The rift comes amid other signs that Republicans in and out of Washington are growing less willing to follow Trump’s lead, whether on congressional redistricting or overhauling the Senate’s rules. And, with Trump already sketching out red lines on health care, skepticism is growing inside the GOP about burning months of political capital in an election year without a clear path forward.

Asked this week about the ugly standoff between Greene and Trump, Speaker Mike Johnson acknowledged a fact of political life that Trump has often struggled to grasp: Today’s enemy could be tomorrow’s indispensable ally.

“I work on unity in the party, and my encouragement of everybody is to get together,” Johnson said. “We’ve got to do all that in order to deliver for the people.”

Johnson’s peacemaker stance comes as House Republicans privately plot a health care overhaul, with GOP leaders pitching their members on policy options during a closed-door conference meeting Tuesday. One slide shared by House Majority Leader Steve Scalise during the meeting knocked the expiring Obamacare subsidies, calling them part of the “Unaffordable Care Act.”

Around the same time, White House deputy chief of staff James Blair at a Bloomberg News event sketched out a major “affordability” bill that could include $2,000 checks that Trump has pitched as tariff “dividends” as well as health care legislation along the lines of what House Republicans are discussing.

Those ideas are not likely to get Democratic buy-in — especially with less than a year before the midterms. That means the GOP would have to explore party-line approaches to passing any policy agenda. But Senate Republicans have spurned Trump’s demands that they eliminate the filibuster that requires bipartisan buy-in for most legislation, leaving the convoluted reconciliation process, which was used to pass this summer’s megabill, as their only viable choice.

Talk of another reconciliation bill has been hanging around Hill GOP circles for months, ever since House leaders dangled the promise of a second bite at party-line legislation to conservative hard-liners earlier this year in exchange for their votes to pass the “big, beautiful bill.”

But that push appeared to fizzle earlier this fall. And just two weeks ago, during a meeting with Senate Republicans, Trump himself expressed skepticism about how much another reconciliation bill could accomplish. Some Republicans still want to try and revive the idea for the spring, but they are facing a hard sell with many members who remember the political trauma their party suffered amid attempts to repeal and replace Obamacare in 2017.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said in an interview that she did not want to pursue a GOP-only health care bill, arguing that it would undermine efforts to work with Democrats on other issues like funding the government

“I don’t want another one-sided, partisan reconciliation bill right now — I want us to legislate,” Murkowski said. “Let’s be legislators here. Reconciliation is, yes, it’s a tool for us, but it’s a partisan tool and look at how divided we are right now. … That’s not the way to go.”

Republicans have barely any room for error if they are going to launch another party-line policy bill. Murkowski, notably, was a decisive vote in getting the first GOP megabill through the Senate over the summer — after helping to sink the 2017 partisan health care bill.

To get another reconciliation bill passed now, Republicans would need to lean on their most vulnerable members during a time in the election cycle when party leaders typically become shy about making their front-liners take politically tough votes that could negatively ricochet in swing districts.

Retiring Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), who voted against the reconciliation bill in July, left the door open to pursuing a new party-line bill. But underscoring the headache waiting for GOP leaders and the administration, he floated using it to at least partially address some of what he called the “problematic” policies from the first Republican megabill.

He also voiced a concern that has taken root with many of his House and GOP Senate colleagues — that if they are going to make a second run at reconciliation, they need to be unified at the outset about the nature of the end product rather than figuring it out along the way.

“It could go sideways real quick if the scope changes much, so we’d have to have a lot of agreement up front to make sure it was going to be successful,” he said in an interview.

Inside the closed-door conference meeting across the Capitol Tuesday morning, GOP leaders got pushback to their ambitious health care agenda from Rep. Nathaniel Moran (R-Texas), who asked why they had waited until just weeks before the expiration deadline for the Obamacare subsidies.

House Republicans, Moran countered in the meeting, should have been working on alternatives months ago, according to four people granted anonymity to share the private exchange.

GOP leadership aides and senior Republicans on Capitol Hill say they have been waiting for months for Trump to outline what he wants on health care. But the president only started weighing in publicly on policy options in recent days.

The president on Tuesday warned that the only thing he would support would be a bill that sends “THE MONEY DIRECTLY BACK TO THE PEOPLE,” adding that Congress should “not waste your time and energy on anything else” and “GET IT DONE, NOW.”

Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) added that Trump’s proposal — to essentially restructure the subsidies to give them directly to Americans — was a “welcome discussion … but we’re not going to get that done before Dec. 31. That’s unlikely.”

Asked about Trump’s comments, Senate Majority Leader John Thune didn’t close the door Tuesday night to the chances lawmakers could reach a bipartisan health care deal, but he said that would be up to what Democrats would be willing to accept. They have been cool to the health savings account ideas favored by the GOP.

“We’ve got members who are very interested in addressing the affordability of health care,” Thune added. “The question is, what’s the best way to do it.”

Senate Budget Committee Republicans are keen to advance a budget resolution that would unlock the filibuster-skirting power of a second reconciliation bill, but they are tentatively looking at early next year to do that. And they are getting pushback from their colleagues behind the scenes.

When Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana pitched fellow Senate Republicans during a caucus lunch about using the fast-track procedure to pass a health care plan, a colleague pointed out that many of the GOP’s favorite policies wouldn’t comply with the strict rules governing the budget reconciliation process, according to an attendee who was granted anonymity to describe the private discussion.

Kennedy acknowledged in an interview he can’t guarantee a bill will ever make it to the floor, but he suggested there was a pent-up feeling among some Republicans that Congress, despite being in GOP hands, has little to show for their majority.

“That’s the problem — nothing’s happened. We’re not doing anything. I think some of that was reflected in the [off-year] elections” earlier this month, Kennedy said.

“Everybody says, what about the One Big Beautiful Bill? That was yesterday — I mean what have we done since then?” he continued. “We haven’t done anything for months, and a lot of people — you are talking to one — are sick of it.”

Calen Razor contributed to this report.

Congress

Tony Gonzales admits sexual relationship with former staff member who killed herself

Published

57 minutes ago

March 5, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Texas Rep. Tony Gonzales has admitted for the first time that he had a sexual relationship with his former staff member who killed herself last year.

Gonzales, who faces a May runoff in the Republican primary to hold his seat, insisted in a radio interview that he is not responsible for her death.

“I made a mistake, and I had a lapse in judgment, and there was a lack of faith, and I take full responsibility for those actions,” Gonzales told radio host Joe Pagliarulo.

Gonzales, who is married, made the comments hours after congressional investigators recommended the House Ethics committee probe the lawmaker for the relationship, which would be a violation of House rules. The Texas lawmaker said he plans to cooperate with the committee’s investigation.

The acknowledgment comes a day after Gonzales was forced into a runoff election in his west Texas congressional seat against Brandon Herrera, a media personality who owns a gun business and calls himself “the AK Guy.”

Several of his Republican colleagues have called for Gonzales to step down after new details about the relationship came to light in the weeks before Tuesday’s election. Gonzales had previously denied the affair and refused to resign.

Gonzales is alleged to have tried to coerce Regina Santos-Aviles into sending explicit photos, according to text messages published by the San Antonio Express-News and other publications. Blue Light News has not independently reviewed the messages.

An attorney for Gonzales declined to comment.

In the interview, Gonzales spoke about Santos-Aviles’ time working in his office before her death, which he said came as “a shock to everyone.” She died by suicide after setting herself on fire at her home in 2025 – about a year after the exchange of messages with the lawmaker.

“Some of the reports are saying that she was not thriving at work. It’s exact opposite. She was thriving at work,” he said.

Gonzales said that Santos-Aviles’ suicide had “absolutely nothing to do with” their relationship.

Congress

‘We’re in it’: Democrats won’t rule out giving Trump more money for Middle East war

Published

2 hours ago

March 5, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Some Democrats aren’t ruling out voting for a multibillion-dollar military infusion, setting up a potential internal clash in the weeks ahead for a party whose political base is aghast at President Donald Trump’s aggression against Iran.

The Trump administration’s top defense and intelligence officials told lawmakers this week that the Pentagon could soon send an emergency supplemental funding request to Capitol Hill. They didn’t offer a timeline or dollar value, but the White House is reportedly mulling a $50 billion ask.

That’s a massive sum on top of the more than $990 billion Congress has shelled out for defense capabilities in recent months between the GOP’s “big, beautiful bill” and the latest government funding package.

To pass any new military funding measure through the Senate, the support of at least seven Democrats will be needed to overcome the filibuster. It’s far from certain the votes are there.

“Good luck. What Democrat is going to vote to fund an illegal war?” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said Wednesday. “I don’t think — with the exception of one Democrat — there will be any votes for it.”

He appeared to be referring to Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman, who was the only Democrat to oppose a separate Iran war powers resolution and has routinely broken with his colleagues on government funding votes.

Democrats also want to stay disciplined around their campaign message heading into the midterms, arguing that Trump has abandoned his central campaign promises to keep the country out of prolonged wars and bring down costs for Americans.

“I mean, you lie to us, don’t consult us and then expect us to send more taxpayer money to a war that we shouldn’t have started with no plan and no answers,” said Rep. Pat Ryan (D-N.Y.), a combat veteran of the Iraq War, in an interview. He called reports of the $50 billion request “outrageous.”

But this is not the universal position inside the party. Several Democrats on the Senate Armed Services Committee aren’t ruling out supporting more Pentagon funding. That includes the panel’s top Democrat, Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, as well as Sens. Gary Peters of Michigan, Tim Kaine of Virginia and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan.

A White House emergency funding request could force Democrats to choose between rebuffing the president and turning their backs on legislation the administration deems necessary for replenishing key defensive munition stocks designed to keep U.S. troops and civilians safe.

There’s awareness among many Democrats that Trump has thrust the country into a conflict, and now Congress has no choice but to help keep things on track.

“I need to know the goals and the plan. … I don’t rule anything out,” said Slotkin. “I mean, we’re in it.”

Lawmakers in both parties are also concerned that the bombing campaign and effort to defend U.S. personnel in the Middle East could quickly deplete stockpiles of precision-guided missiles and air defense interceptors that are critical for national security priorities elsewhere around the globe. The Pentagon and defense industry have struggled to speed up production of the expensive munitions, which are in high demand in the Middle East, Ukraine and in the Pacific.

“We have to look at what they need,” said Reed, the ranking member on the Senate Armed Services Committee. “Some of it might be to fill in critical issues and other theaters of war they’ve taken things from.”

There’s a possibility a spending package for the Iran conflict could be tied to other priorities, which could make it more palatable to some Democrats. Lawmakers were talking Wednesday about attaching Ukraine aid. Others are eyeing relief for farmers — a key priority for Republicans in agriculture-heavy states — as well as wildfire disaster aid Democrats have long sought.

“I think it comes down to, you’re going to have to have a number of things in there to get a critical mass,” Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) said Wednesday.

That doesn’t mean all Democrats are prepared to give Trump a blank check for military action in Iran. Many who left the door open to voting for a supplemental funding package said the administration would first have to provide Congress with more information about the offensive. That includes the rationale for striking Iran, a commitment to avoid putting boots on the ground and a plan for ending the conflict.

“Clearly, there’s going to be a cost to this war that we haven’t budgeted for. So there is going to be a need for funding, and we need some answers before we provide it,” Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said in an interview.

Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), the top Democrat on the appropriations panel overseeing Pentagon spending, is also keeping open the option of supporting an emergency military funding package but said like Shaheen that administration officials need to testify publicly about “the failures in planning” in the conflict so far.

Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska cautioned Wednesday that Democrats could decide to take a stand on funding — a vote where they have real leverage. That is in contrast to the doomed efforts on Blue Light News this week to put guardrails on the president’s ability to take unilateral military action, which Trump would certainly veto in any case.

“There’s a lot of people who have said, ‘Well, if you want to express your position on the war, the way to do it is … through appropriations,” she said in an interview. “We get that. So the administration should not be taking anything for granted.”

Across the Capitol, California Rep. Pete Aguilar, the No. 3 Democrat in the House and a member of the Defense appropriations funding panel, told reporters Wednesday that he’s “incredibly skeptical” of any emergency military funding request from Trump — but also that he has “a duty and a responsibility to help protect this country.”

At the same time, said Aguilar, “It’s going to be pretty hard to move me off of a ‘no.’”

Mia McCarthy, Jordain Carney, Connor O’Brien and Calen Razor contributed to this report.

Congress

Utah Republican Burgess Owens announces he’ll retire at the end of this term

Published

2 hours ago

March 5, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Rep. Burgess Owens (R-Utah) announced Wednesday he will retire from Congress at the end of his current term after the state redrew its congressional maps ahead of the midterms.

Owens announced on social media he will not seek reelection and will instead take on “the next chapter of my mission … outside of elected office” while committing to serving out the remainder of his term.

“I will finish this term fully committed and fully accountable. My final political sprint will be here in Utah and across the country, helping my colleagues expand our Republican majority,” Owens said. “Though this chapter closes, my commitment to advancing opportunity, advocating for our children, and strengthening families will continue in new ways.”

Owens’ retirement helps Utah Republicans avoid a possible member-on-member primary after a Utah judge implemented a new congressional map that created a new Democratic-leaning seat and drew Rep. Mike Kennedy (R-Utah) and Rep. Celeste Maloy (R-Utah) into the same district. Utah’s 4th congressional district, which Owens represents, will remain a strongly Republican seat under the new map.

Owens’ decision to serve out the remainder of his term helps House Republican leadership preserve their narrow majority for the remainder of the cycle. Republicans’ four-seat House majority means they can only afford to lose one Republican on a party-line vote.

In addition to Owens leaving Congress, Reps. John James (R-Mich.) and Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) are running for governor, and Rep. Wesley Hunt (R-Tex.) launched a failed bid for Texas’ Senate seat, meaning there will likely be no Black members of the House Republican conference next year.

Owens is the latest in a wave of House Republicans looking to leave the lower chamber this cycle. Since the beginning of 2025, 35 other House Republicans have resigned, announced their retirements or launched campaigns seeking other elected positions.

Before entering politics, the former NFL player won a Super Bowl with the Oakland Raiders in 1981.