Congress
Why this purple-district Republican broke with Mike Johnson on Obamacare
Brian Fitzpatrick, the five-term House Republican and perennial campaign target for Democrats, has long been viewed by GOP leaders as a team player. Until now.
On Wednesday, his 52nd birthday, the congenial Pennsylvanian led a GOP mutiny against Speaker Mike Johnson over his handling of expiring Obamacare subsidies used by more than 20 million Americans. Fitzpatrick became the first Republican to back a Democratic-led effort to sidestep the speaker and force action on an extension of the tax credits. Three fellow GOP moderates quickly followed, cementing a January vote.
Fitzpatrick, who has consistently won re-election in one of the most competitive districts in the country, said in an interview the rebellion should have come as no surprise to Johnson.
“I’ve made it clear where this was all headed,” he said Wednesday. “This was never a secret.”
But it stunned many who have watched Fitzpatrick maneuver over the past decade, staking out an aisle-crossing persona while also being careful not to impede leadership prerogatives. He voted at several key junctures to advance the GOP’s party-line megabill this year, for instance, while eventually voting against its final passage.
Now he is earning some begrudging praise from Democrats for, they say, finally walking the bipartisan walk instead of just talking the talk.
“It was politically the smart thing for him to do in such a challenging district, but it also is a courageous thing, and I want to acknowledge that,” said Rep. Greg Stanton (D-Ariz.).
Fitzpatrick’s decision to embrace a discharge petition filed by House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries has infuriated allies of Johnson, however, who argue that he is merely scrambling for political cover after moving too late to prevent a Dec. 31 lapse in the subsidies.
Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), a House Rules Committee member, blasted the “horrible” move from Fitzpatrick and allies and said he would try to kill the effort in the panel.
“I’ll do everything I can to block it,” he said.
Wednesday morning’s drama was the culmination of weeks of mostly behind-the-scenes wrangling between a small group of moderate House Republicans and party leaders, who knew that there was a limited appetite in the GOP ranks for any sort of extension for the Obamacare subsidies.
As co-chair of the centrist Problem Solvers Caucus, Fitzpatrick was at the middle of those contentious dealings as he sought to build support for a two-year extension of the subsidies that would also include new eligibility restrictions and anti-fraud guardrails. But the effort was caught between Democratic leaders who wanted their members to unite behind a straight three-year extension and GOP leaders who wanted none at all.
Fitzpatrick last week filed a discharge petition for his two-year proposal, drawing a dozen GOP colleagues but limited buy-in from Democrats. Jeffries wanted his own discharge petition on a three-year bill — which already had 214 Democratic signatures — to remain the most viable option to force a House vote.
At the same time, Johnson was moving to assemble a much more limited response to the expiring subsidies — a bill that would tinker around the edges of the insurance markets but do nothing to extend the subsidies.
When a Blue Light News reporter informed Fitzpatrick last week that his GOP leadership was working on a health care framework that would not include a subsidy extension, he accused GOP leaders of living in a “fantasyland” and suggested Republicans would be hurting their own constituents for ideological reasons.
“These are people that we care about — these are our friends and neighbors that are receiving these subsidies,” Fitzpatrick said. “This is a personal thing for me.”
In the days that followed, a group of moderates that included Fitzpatrick as well as Reps. Jen Kiggans (R-Va.), Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.), Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.) and others sought to cut a deal that would allow some sort of a House vote on a subsidy extension.
GOP leaders, Fitzpatrick said, denied their requests to take one of their compromise measures directly to the floor. They were encouraged to file an amendment to the Johnson-backed health bill with the Rules Committee, but making their measures comply with GOP conference requirements became “unnecessarily complicated,” he said, as they forged ahead.
Johnson’s allies counter that Fitzpatrick and the GOP moderates weren’t completely united and simply couldn’t deliver on the basic criteria Johnson laid out to strike a deal for an amendment. The speaker himself told reporters Tuesday, “I thought there was an agreement on the Fitzpatrick amendment and then they made different decisions.”
Ultimately, late Tuesday night, the Rules Committee voted to send a bill to the floor with no amendments.
“So that’s what led us to today,” Fitzpatrick said Wednesday.
There is one silver lining for Johnson: Fitzpatrick went back to playing team ball soon after signing the Democratic discharge petition and voted to send Johnson’s health bill to the floor. He went on to vote to pass it: “I’m not going to vote against something out of spite.”
Fitzpatrick’s careful political balancing act will get a serious test this year as Democrats redouble their efforts to oust him from his swingy Bucks County district. He won his last race in 2024 by more than a dozen percentage points even as former Vice President Kamala Harris carried his district.
“I think it demonstrates how much danger they’re in politically by siding with the MAGA majority, which was just throwing caution to the winds in terms of people’s health care,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.). ”These are the desperate members of the Republican majority who are trying to hang on to their seats, and good for them that they understand what America wants.”
As Johnson was swarmed by reporters Wednesday morning asking about Fitzpatrick and the discharge petition, he said, “I have not lost control of the House.”
Fitzpatrick was a close ally of former Speaker Kevin McCarthy and is not seen as being especially close to Johnson. He could engage in additional freelancing in the coming year that would make governing the tiny Republican majority even more difficult for top party leaders.
In addition to the five discharge petitions he’s already signed this year, he is working with Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) to introduce another, on Russian sanctions.
“Every time somebody says that’s a tool of the minority, I correct them — it’s a tool of the rank-and-file,” Fitzpatrick said earlier this month. “To weaken the discharge would be just to empower the [party leaders], and we need more rank-and-file empowerment.”
Congress
GOP hard-liners threaten to tank FISA vote
House GOP hardliners are threatening to tank the FISA rule shortly on the House floor as Speaker Mike Johnson tries to force through a five year extension, according to four people granted anonymity to speak about plans not yet public.
They’re livid over the “inexplicable 5 year extension, the fake warrant requirement, and the walk back of the promise from this afternoon to include CBDC,” according to one of the people, referring negotiations to prohibit a central bank digital currency.
Congress
‘The original sin:’ Hill Republicans blame White House for slow-walking FISA sales pitch
A messy GOP battle over a key government spy authority boiled over in the House this week — but the crisis was months in the making.
White House officials and Republican Hill leaders have tried to pressure GOP hard-liners into approving a clean, 18-month extension of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that President Donald Trump demanded. But amid a GOP rebellion on Capitol Hill, Speaker Mike Johnson Thursday afternoon punted a vote on the measure for the second day in a row.
The program expires Monday night. Senators went home for the weekend as Johnson continued to pursue a compromise with the holdouts for an extension as long as three years with reforms, and raced to hold a vote.
Now, the finger-pointing among Republicans is rampant and temperatures are running high.
A band of House ultraconservatives — who have long been concerned that warrantless government surveillance of foreign individuals could sweep up data on Americans — shot down Trump and GOP leaders’ long-held plans for the 18-month extension with no reforms earlier this week.
“A clean extension ain’t going to move on the floor,” Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, one of the head House GOP holdouts, warned earlier this week.
In interviews with more than two dozen Republican lawmakers and aides on Capitol Hill involved in the talks, many of whom were granted anonymity to speak freely about the contentious policy debate, the consensus is that the White House is largely responsible for the current breakdown as GOP factions snipe and assign blame.
“This is why we shouldn’t wait until the last minute on these things,” one House Republican fumed Thursday. A congressional GOP aide added, “The White House was too late to come to a decision. That was the original sin.”
A senior White House official disputed the characterization from some Hill Republicans that the administration had taken too long to plead their case. They pointed to a briefing in the Situation Room months ago with Republican lawmakers, during which “the president heard arguments on both sides of the issue.”
The official added, “We’ve had multiple briefings from senior officials, both on the House and Senate side, about the desirability of this program. Again, going back months ago.”
Trump told House Intelligence Chair Rick Crawford (R-Ark.) and House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) that he wanted a clean extension, without reforms, in February. The president arrived at this position, a second White House official said, after “the administration completed a policy process through the interagency and advised POTUS that a clean extension was the best course and solicited views on length from Blue Light News.”
There was also coordination between the White House and Capitol Hill, according to three people familiar and the senior White House official: Johnson requested the reauthorization run for 18 months, and Trump agreed.
The administration succeeded in convincing Jordan, who had previously pushed for changes to Section 702, to publicly support a clean extension following a White House meeting on the subject.
But ultraconservatives on Capitol Hill were harder to convince, with some House Republicans correctly predicting two months ago they were going to have issues as the vote drew nearer. Trump has forced those hard-liners to cave in recent months on other fights, but the spy powers legislation was one area where members have not been as willing to relent.
While Trump officials made outreach to members at least two months ago, Hill engagement ramped up in the days leading up to the scheduled vote. That has included appeals to lawmakers from CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Deputy CIA Director Michael Ellis and Joint Chiefs Chair Gen. Dan Caine, according to five people. Ellis has made personal phone calls to members, according to two people familiar with the pressure campaign.
White House deputy chief of staff James Blair, White House Legislative Affairs chief James Braid and other legislative affairs officials have also been calling individual House Republicans and working through negotiation details, according to six other people with direct knowledge of the conversations.
Noticeably absent from this outreach is Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. Her office plays a statutory role in overseeing Section 702 and has historically been a key proponent of the powerful spy powers.
Gabbard in early February expressed concerns to Trump about reauthorizing the statute without additional privacy guardrails, as Blue Light News reported earlier Thursday, though her appeal appears to have been unsuccessful.
And while the administration’s position on Section 702 came into focus in February, there were signs earlier in the month that its position had not fully crystallized. Officials meeting with the Senate Intelligence Committee at that time refused to divulge the White House’s stance on extending the surveillance power and adding reforms, according to five people with knowledge of the meeting. The exchange frustrated Republicans and Democrats on the panel, who are generally supportive of the surveillance program.
Due to a quirk in the law, the administration will still be able to operate the program for nearly a year even if it is not renewed, and privacy advocates have argued that Monday is a false deadline. But without the law on the books, communications providers like Google and AT&T, which the government tasks to surveil foreign messages, could stop complying with those orders.
But White House officials want an extension codified now, all the same. They have been arguing in conversations with lawmakers that the country is at war and national security is paramount amid threats from Iran. Therefore, they say, hardliners should fall in line to back the clean extension without delay, according to five people involved in the conversations.
“The program is critical for the United States military to listen to the conversations of foreign terrorists abroad while we are engaged in a military operation in Iran. That’s what we’ve been telling individuals, as well as the elevated threat levels around the world, as well as the threat from Mexican drug cartels,” the senior White House official said.
Two groups of House GOP hard-liners, after being summoned by Trump Tuesday night, met with officials at the White House. But some of the Republicans declined the invitation.“I’ve heard everything that the executive has to say on FISA,” Freedom Caucus Chair Andy Harris (R-Md.) said in an interview that evening. That meeting, however, marked a shift: Those House Republicans who went to the White House alongside GOP leaders — among them Roy and Reps. Keith Self of Texas, Byron Donalds of Florida, Clay Higgins of Louisiana, Morgan Griffith of Virginia and Warren Davidson of Ohio — took the opportunity to begin negotiations about a framework for a possible agreement around the use of warrants to access certain information.
The discussions included how the White House and GOP leadership needed to make good on a months-old promise to advance legislation that would ban a central bank digital currency. Enough House GOP holdouts late Thursday evening were threatening to still tank the procedural vote to advance the extension if the White House didn’t address the digital currency matter, according to four people with direct knowledge of the matter. “Unless it’s included, there’s enough votes to kill the rule,” Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) said in an interview Thursday afternoon. But other Republicans, White House officials and Senate GOP leadership are warning that attaching the measure directly would tank the FISA bill.
In exchange for making these concessions, GOP leaders and the White House have been pushing for a Section 702 extension that’s longer than 18 months and closer to three years.
The senior White House official also said Thursday the administration has “focused in on potentially having conversations about reforms to the program that we think would strengthen protections for American civil liberties … those conversations are ongoing.”
Jordan, meanwhile, has been helping build support for a clean extension by privately telling some Republicans that, if they can pass this 18-month clean extension now, they could potentially work on warrant reforms later, according to three people with direct knowledge of the discussions. That’s raised some eyebrows internally among House Republicans.
The House delays are leaving barely any time for the Senate to act. Majority Leader John Thune said in an interview Thursday that he’s already started having conversations with his own members about what they would need to clear a FISA extension Monday.
Ultimately, even if GOP leaders strike a deal on changes to the current proposed extension, it could risk support for reauthorization among key Democrats, who Republicans will need to pass the final legislation in a narrowly-divided House. While some House Democrats are expected to help Republicans get the final bill across the finish line — including top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut — Democratic leaders have so far declined to shore up the votes for any fast-tracked process.
“I am deeply skeptical of a straightforward extension,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said Thursday, adding he told Johnson a few days ago there was “great Democratic skepticism” on a clean extension.
One Democratic Hill aide said Johnson and Trump did far too little to coordinate their pitch with Democrats, who carried a razor-thin vote to re-up the law in 2024.
“They never came to us,” the aide said.
Congress
GOP, Democrats blast Vought for holding back cash: ‘You don’t have the authority to impound’
Senators from both parties chided the Trump administration Thursday for continuing to withhold funding Congress has approved, more than a year after the White House first froze billions of dollars for temporary “review.”
During White House budget director Russ Vought’s testimony before the Senate Budget Committee, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) scolded the OMB chief for not sending hundreds of millions of dollars the Trump administration is supposed to give states throughout the year to support community services aimed at reducing poverty.
“Congress has appropriated money, and you don’t have the authority to impound it,” Grassley said about the more than $810 million Congress appropriated this year for the Community Services Block Grant program.
That program helps states fund anti-poverty services such as transportation, education and nutrition assistance that serve more than 9 million people each year.
Grassley told Vought that lawmakers “are not getting any answers” as to why the Trump administration hasn’t sent states their quarterly funding from the program. “I want those quarterly allotments released,” Grassley said.
While Vought did not directly address Grassley’s comments, he said at a different point during the hearing that “we have not impounded a single thing.”
Other senators, including Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), lamented federal dollars being withheld for the fund that provides capital to small banks and credit unions in underserved areas. For months lawmakers from both parties have pushed back against Trump’s plans to eliminate that program, the Treasury Department’s Community Development Financial Institutions Fund.
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
The Dictatorship7 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
Uncategorized1 year ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Josh Fourrier Show1 year agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?





