House GOP channels ‘Nighthawks' as they try to pass Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill'
Hopper is known for "Nighthawks," one of the most iconic paintings in American history. The 1942 painting depicts four people in a diner in the middle of the night. A deserted streetscape commands the foreground. Two men – heads festooned with fedoras – sit separately at the counter, nursing coffee. One of the men has a cigarette tucked between his index and middle fingers. He's positioned next to a woman with scarlet hair and a red dress. She appears to holding a bite of a doughnut or sandwich, studying it as though it were a rare artifact. She seems to debate whether she should eat it. A young counterman – attired in white with a crisp envelope hat – leans downward in search of glassware or dishes hidden underneath.
It's the dead of night. Everyone is distant and detached. Even the couple – even though they sit side-by-side – don't look at each other.
In Nighthawks, everyone appears as though they're just trying to make it through the night to dawn.
It's kind of what House Republicans are going through this week.
'Dead Of Night': Dems Accuse Gop Of Cowardice Over Late-night Votes On Trump's 'Big, Beautiful' Budget Bill
Read On The Fox News App
The House Budget Committee convened at 10:26 p.m. ET Sunday night to advance the tax cut and spending reduction package after a hiccup stalled the measure Friday afternoon. At 10:39 p.m. ET, the committee approved the bill 17-16 – with four House Republicans voting "present."
The next stop is the House Rules Committee, the final parliamentary way station before depositing a piece of legislation on the floor.
At 12:31 a.m. ET Monday, the Rules Committee announced it would prep the bill for the floor – with a meeting at 1 a.m. Wednesday morning. That session could last all day Wednesday. Literally. The Energy and Commerce panel met for 26 consecutive hours last week to prepare its section of the budget reconciliation measure. The Ways and Means Committee huddled all night long.
The group of House Republicans pushing to state and local tax for high-tax states (known as SALT) scheduled a meeting with House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., for 9 p.m. ET Monday. And it's entirely possible that the House could be debating or even voting on the measure late Thursday, the wee hours of Friday morning or even Friday night.
This is how Capitol Hill rolls when there's a big piece of legislation on the clock. The hours are late. The meetings are long. Lawmakers convene different sessions whenever they need to – just to get the measure across the finish line.
Hitchhiker's Guide To Where The 'Big, Beautiful Bill' Stands, And What Happens Sunday In The Budget Committee
The only difference between the halls of Congress now and "Nighthawks" is that the coffee fueled the figures in the painting until dawn. It was 1942. But this is 2025. Edward Hopper would know nothing of Celsius or Red Bull.
There's an actual parliamentary reason as to why the Budget Committee met so late on Sunday night after its stumble on Friday afternoon. And there's a method to the Rules Committee's 1 a.m. madness on Wednesday.
Let's rewind.
The Budget Committee tried to blend the various provisions from nearly a dozen House committees into one unified legislative product midday Friday. That effort came up short. A total of five Budget Committee Republicans voted nay. They groused about spending cuts, green energy tax credits and the timeframe of work requirements for those on Medicaid.
Four of the five GOP noes were truly opposed. Rep. Lloyd Smucker, R-Penn., voted nay so he could order a re-vote. Rules allow a member on the winning side of an issue (in this case, the nays), to ask for another vote later. Smucker supported the plan. But he then switched his vote to nay to be on the winning side. That teed up a possible re-vote.
Republicans Ready Late-night Session On Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' After Gop Mutiny
"Calling a vote moves the process forward. I think it's a catalyst," said Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington, R-Tex., after the failed vote Friday.
The Budget Committee then announced it would convene at 10 p.m. ET Sunday.
This is where things get interesting:
The key here was for the Budget Committee to finish its work before midnight Friday. Once it got rolling, the process would only consume 15 or 20 minutes. The Budget Committee approved the plan 17-16 with four Republicans voting "present."
"We're excited about what we did," said Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., who was one of the GOPers who voted nay Friday.
But Norman still wasn't excited enough to vote yes on Sunday night. He voted present.
"There's so much more that we have to do to rein in government and rein in the costs and the deficits," said Norman on FOX Business Monday.
But regardless, the measure was out of the Budget Committee before the witching hour on Sunday. And then came the Rules Committee announcement – just after midnight on Monday – about a session at 1 a.m. Wednesday to ready the "big, beautiful bill" for the House floor.
There are several reasons House Rules Committee Republicans decided to huddle at 1 a.m. et Wednesday. Let's begin with the parliamentary one.
House Republicans Face Down Dem Attacks, Protests To Pull All-nighter On Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill'
The Budget Committee wrapped up just before midnight Sunday. The rules allow Democrats two full days to file their paperwork and viewpoints after that meeting. So, they had all day Monday and all day Tuesday. The Rules Committee needs an "hour" to announce its formally meeting. So, the "official" announcement of the Rules Committee meeting on Wednesday will go out just after 12:01:01 a.m. ET Wednesday. That triggers a 1 a.m. ET meeting on Wednesday.
Here are the other, more practical reasons.
Republicans need all the time they can get. There is talk of trying to vote on the floor late in the day on Wednesday. We'll see about that. But the early Rules Committee meeting time makes that a possibility.
Second of all, it's possible the Rules Committee meeting could consume the entire calendar day of Wednesday. Streams of lawmakers from both sides will file into the Rules Committee to propose various amendments. This is a protracted process.
But by the same token, meeting at 1 a.m. ET could diminish attendance. After all, who wants to show up at 1 a.m. ET for a meeting and maybe discuss your amendment at 6:30 a.m. ET? You get the idea.
And once the bill gets out of the Rules Committee, expect late night meetings among Republicans as they try to close the deal. It's possible the House could vote at virtually any time of day Wednesday, Thursday or Friday to pass the bill. That could be late in the evening. Or even overnight. They will vote when the bill is ready, regardless of the time on the clock.
Such is the lot drawn this week by House Republicans for the "big, beautiful bill." Maybe they'll have the votes. Maybe they won't. Maybe they'll pass more spending cuts. Maybe there'll be a deal on SALT for state and local taxes. Maybe not. Maybe the vote comes at 3 in the afternoon. But more likely, sometime late at night.
Just like in Nighthawks, everyone on Capitol Hill is just trying to make it through the night and to the dawn.Original article source: House GOP channels 'Nighthawks' as they try to pass Trump's 'big, beautiful bill'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
21 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Bay Area garbage collection resumes after tentative agreement ends lengthy strike
Garbage haulers in many Bay Area cities are back on the job from a weeks-long strike after union officials from Teamsters Local 439 announced they'd negotiated a new contract with waste-hauling giant Republic Services. 'We're feeling great,' Local 439 President Rick Buzo said Saturday. 'We got our members exactly what they deserved.' Republic Services, in an emailed statement, confirmed it had reached a tentative agreement with union officials for its Forward Landfill employees, who they said would be returning to work Saturday. 'We appreciate the community's patience throughout this situation, and we will work hard to catch up with needed recycling and waste collection as quickly as we can,' the statement read. The strike originated in the Boston area, where more than 400 Republic Service workers represented by Teamsters Local 25 have been on strike since July 1. Since then, Republic Service workers across the country have joined the strike out of solidarity, with more than 2,000 Republic workers honoring picket lines, the Teamsters said this week, adding that picket lines had extended to Los Angeles and Youngstown, Ohio. 'Our members are everyday Americans performing essential services across our communities, but Republic is unwilling to offer workers good wages, decent benefits, or a fair contract,' Teamsters General President Sean M. O'Brien said in a statement Tuesday. 'The American public needs to understand that Republic Services and its overpaid, corrupt executives own this strike. Their greed is forcing trash collectors and waste haulers across the country out into the street. We don't want this garbage piling up. We want to return to work. But we refuse to be exploited.' The company initially offered a 1.7% raise, which amounted to 30 cents per hour for employees making $20 an hour — and no relief on health care, which was costing some employees $1,200 per month. 'We don't do 30-cent raises,' Buzo said. After waiting about a month to see whether Republic Services would provide a better deal, the landfill workers voted overwhelmingly to strike. The union started the strike at the company's landfill in Manteca, then asked its commercial and residential waste haulers — whom it already represented and who already had negotiated contracts — to join the picket line. Odorous bags of waste began piling up in residential areas across Northern California, causing officials in many cities to ask residents to take their garbage to specified drop-off sites. The strike impacted areas across Northern California, as far south as Half Moon Bay, in communities such as San Jose, Richmond, Suisun City, and all the way to Stockton. The pressure tactics led mayors in many local cities to call on Republic Services to come to an agreement and threaten to cut ties with the company if it did not. Earlier this week, Stockton Mayor Christina Fugazi wrote on social media that the city was experiencing 'a health and safety crisis' because Republic Services was not fulfilling its contract, warning the company that if it did not come to an agreement with the union and provide a rate cut to customers 'you will no longer have a contract with the City of Stockton.' On Friday, Contra Costa County Supervisor John Gioia touted the agreement on social media, telling residents that as of Monday, 'your garbage will be picked up on the regularly scheduled day.' 'The County is moving forward with demanding rate relief for residents,' he added. Buzo said the tentative agreement — to be voted on Sunday morning — provides a five-year contract for members, with better wages and significantly lower health care costs. 'They work dangerous jobs,' he said. 'We're glad they can go to get medical treatment without hesitation.'
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump administration imposes limits on Mexican flights and threatens Delta alliance in trade dispute
The Trump administration imposed new restrictions Saturday on flights from Mexico and threatened to end a longstanding partnership between Delta Air Lines and Aeromexico in response to limits the Mexican government placed on passenger and cargo flights into Mexico City several years ago. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said Mexico's actions to force airlines to move out of the main Benito Juarez International Airport to the newer Felipe Angeles International Airport more than 30 miles away violated a trade agreement between the two countries and gave domestic airlines an unfair advantage. Mexico is the top foreign destination for Americans with more than 40 million passengers flying there last year. "Joe Biden and Pete Buttigieg deliberately allowed Mexico to break our bilateral aviation agreement,' Duffy said of the previous administration. 'That ends today. Let these actions serve as a warning to any country who thinks it can take advantage of the U.S., our carriers, and our market. America First means fighting for the fundamental principle of fairness.' All Mexican passenger, cargo and charter airlines will now be required to submit their schedules to the Transportation Department and seek government approval of their flights until Duffy is satisfied with the way Mexico is treating U.S. airlines. It's not immediately clear how Duffy's actions might affect the broader trade war with Mexico and negotiations over tariffs. A spokesperson for Mexico's President Claudia Sheinbaum didn't reply immediately to a request for a comment, and she didn't mention the restrictions at an event Saturday. Delta and Aeromexico have been fighting the Transportation Department's efforts to end their partnership that began in 2016 since early last year. The airlines have argued that it's not fair to punish them for the Mexican government's actions, and they said ending their agreement would jeopardize nearly two dozen routes and $800 million in benefits to both countries' economies that come from tourism spending and jobs. 'The U.S. Department of Transportation's tentative proposal to terminate its approval of the strategic and pro-competitive partnership between Delta and Aeromexico would cause significant harm to consumers traveling between the U.S. and Mexico, as well as U.S. jobs, communities, and transborder competition," Delta said in a statement. Aeromexico's press office said it was reviewing the order and intended to present a joint response with Delta in the coming days. But the order terminating approval of the agreement between the airlines wouldn't take effect until October, and the airlines are likely to continue fighting that decision. The airlines said in a previous filing fighting the order that it believes the loss of direct flights would prompt over 140,000 American tourists and nearly 90,000 Mexican tourists not to visit the other country and hurt the economies of both countries with the loss of their spending. ___ Associated Press writer Amaranta Marentes in Mexico City contributed to this report. Josh Funk, The Associated Press
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump administration could deport immigrants to 58 other countries after Supreme Court opened door for swift removals
The Trump administration could soon deport immigrants to 58 countries that are not their place of origin, after a Supreme Court ruling earlier this week granted an emergency request to overturn a federal judge's restrictions on such removals. Human rights advocates warn that sending 'third-country' nationals to these countries could expose them to abuse and violence, and strand them in places where they have no ties and often can't speak the language. Throughout this year, as the White House pushes to rapidly deport millions of immigrants, diplomats have been lobbying at least 58 countries to accept these deportees, The New York Times reports, citing interviews with officials and diplomatic cables. So far, Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, Panama, Costa Rica, Rwanda, and Kosovo have agreed to such flights in varying degrees, while the State Department has already approached or plans to approach numerous other countries to reach similar agreements. Many of the potential nations are in Africa, and the list includes regimes plagued with violence, political strife, and human rights abuses, including Libya and South Sudan. An emergency ruling from the Supreme Court on Monday cleared the way for such removals. In a 6-3 decision, the court's conservative majority granted an emergency request from the administration to overturn a nationwide injunction from April on removals to third countries without adequate notice but did not explain its reasoning. The court's liberal minority dissented, claiming the ruling was 'rewarding lawlessness.' A Massachusetts federal judge has accused the administration of violating the injunction when it notified a group of eight immigrants last month they would be deported in a manner of hours to South Sudan, a nation the State Department reports is plagued by slavery, kidnapping, sexual abuse, torture and extrajudicial killings. Those deportees remain at a U.S. base in Djibouti while a lawsuit over their removals plays out. States that have agreed to take third-country deportees have received financial incentives, such as a reported $100,000 payment to Rwanda to accept an Iraqi man, or a controversial multi-million dollar deal with El Salvador to house Venezuelan deportees in CECOT, a maximum security prison human rights observers have compared to a gulag. Many of the nations being considered to accept U.S. flights were named this month in the Trump administration's renewed travel ban, and the administration has reportedly offered nations on the banned list, or under consideration to be added to it, relief if they accept deportees, the Times reports. The State Department told the paper it doesn't comment on diplomatic conversations. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has enthusiastically embraced the idea of sending deported immigrants to third countries as a form of deterrence. 'I say this unapologetically, we are actively searching for other countries to take people from third countries,' he said at an April cabinet meeting. 'We are working with other countries to say, 'We want to send you some of the most despicable human beings to your countries — will you do that as a favor to us?' And the further away from America, the better, so they can't come back across the border,' he said. Once they are sent to third countries, immigrants could face a range of potential conditions, from detention in prison, to housing in migrant shelters, to offers of asylum or trips back to their home countries. Immigrant advocates warned that allowing such third-country removals would open these immigrants to abuse. 'The Supreme Court's ruling leaves thousands of people vulnerable to deportation to third countries where they face torture or death, even if the deportations are clearly unlawful,' Leila Kang of Northwest Immigrant Rights Project said in a statement after the decision. Solve the daily Crossword
