Ron Klain, other former aides scheduled to testify as part of GOP probe on Biden's mental acuity
The Alaska senator has been the subject of an intense whip effort by GOP leaders over the past couple of hours as they try to offer her reassurances on Medicaid and food assistance. Thune, Finance Chair Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) and Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso talked to Murkowski on the floor for roughly an hour overnight. Thune and Murkowski huddled briefly in his office, and they were mum on details when they emerged shortly before 4 a.m.
Just moments ago, the Senate parliamentarian ruled that proposed SNAP carve-outs for an expanded list of states including Alaska are compliant with the Byrd rule. But the parliamentarian ruled a provision that would have boosted federal payments for Medicaid in Alaska and four other states is noncompliant, according to a person granted anonymity to share the decision.
Murkowski is also among the Republicans who have been pushing an amendment to undo the rollback of clean-energy credits under the Biden-era climate law.
Thune insisted to reporters moments ago that senators were closing in on the end of their vote-a-rama.
'We're close,' he said, adding that they have a few more amendments from senators and a final so-called wraparound amendment to come.
In a potential sign of just how dire Thune's whip count was looking in the wee hours, the majority leader huddled in his office with Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who's long said he would be a 'no' on the bill over its debt-ceiling hike.
Another big unknown right now is where Sen. Susan Collins will fall. The Maine senator reminded us less than two hours ago that she's 'said all along that I have concerns with the bill' and also reiterated, when prompted by reporters, that she would have preferred breaking out the tax portion of the policy package on a separate track. Certainly not helping win Collins over: Her bid to boost money for rural hospitals went up in flames.
And major policy fights remain unresolved, including Sen. Rick Scott's (R-Fla.) divisive amendment to scale back federal payments under the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion. Scott has leadership's support on this one and said he expects it to pass. But several GOP senators have openly raised concerns with it.
What else we're watching:
— Megabill goes to House Rules: Assuming the Senate passes the bill, the House is expected to bring the bill to the Rules Committee at noon Tuesday, though two people with direct knowledge of the plans say it could get pushed amid delays with the Senate vote-a-rama.
— The next funding battle begins: Senate appropriators plan to move forward with marking up fiscal 2026 government funding bills starting next week. House Appropriations is scheduled to vote July 10 on the Commerce, Justice, Science bill and the Energy and Water Development bill. House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) wants to finish marking up all 12 funding bills by the end of July.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
15 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Musk vows to start a third party. Funding's no issue, but there are others.
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Even some of Musk's own supporters have expressed doubts about the direction he now plans to take, preferring that he stay focused on the business ideas that fueled his net worth of roughly $400 billion. Advertisement But as his improbable bid to buy Twitter and front-and-center role in the 2024 election showed, Musk has defied expectations before. If nothing else, he could make life difficult for lawmakers he says have reneged on their promise to cut spending. Advertisement 'Every member of Congress who campaigned on reducing government spending and then immediately voted for the biggest debt increase in history should hang their head in shame!' Musk wrote on X, the social media platform he bought when it was still named Twitter, this week. 'And they will lose their primary next year if it is the last thing I do on this Earth.' Musk, who didn't respond to a request for comment, has already identified his next target: the reelection campaign of Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky), who opposes Trump's signature legislative package. Urged to support Massie by former GOP congressman Justin Amash, a Trump foe who declared himself an independent in a 2019 op-ed decrying the two-party system as an 'existential threat,' Musk replied, 'I will.' Representative Thomas Massie speaks to the media following a vote to stop a government shutdown at the Capitol on March 11. Ricky Carioti/The Washington Post Massie did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday about Musk starting a third party, but he posted a Fox News story about the chief executive's plans to donate to his campaign. 'An interesting thing just happened,' Massie wrote on X. With Trump already working to defeat Massie next year, the race in northern Kentucky appears to be the first to pit the two billionaires against each other. On Capitol Hill, where the Senate passed the massive tax and spending bill Tuesday afternoon, there were few signs of alarm about Musk. Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Oklahoma), when asked by reporters Monday evening about Musk's threats to punish Republicans who vote for Trump's plan, said the billionaire is not top of mind at the Capitol. 'Doesn't matter, doesn't matter at all, no. It's not even been a conversation of ours,' he said. 'I mean, if we ran every time someone said something about our election, we'd live in fear the whole time.' Advertisement Senator Markwayne Mullin bounces a rubber ball through the Ohio Clock Corridor on Monday, on Capitol Hill. Tom Brenner/For The Washington Post Unless that someone is Trump. Two Republican lawmakers who have been at odds with Trump both said in rapid succession this week that they would not seek reelection. Rep. Don Bacon (Nebraska), who has taken issue with Trump's tariffs and policy toward Russia, announced his retirement Monday. The day before, Sen. Thom Tillis (North Carolina) said he would not seek a third term after Trump vowed to punish him for opposing his legislative package. That leaves Massie as one of the only points of Republican resistance in Congress to Trump's agenda. Musk's decision to cast himself as a potential third-party leader raises questions about his political vision. It has just been in the last few years that he has evolved from Democratic-leaning Trump critic to staunchly Republican Trump acolyte. Trump allies mocked his latest incarnation. 'I think it's the ketamine talking in the middle of the night,' said Trump pollster Jim McLaughlin, referring to media reports about Musk's drug use that he has denied. 'Trump is the Republican Party right now. He is the conservative movement. There's not a hankering for a third party with Elon Musk.' A Gallup poll last year found that 58 percent of U.S. adults agree that a third party is needed in the U.S. because the Republican and Democratic parties 'do such a poor job' of representing the American people. Support for a third party has averaged 56 percent since 2003, according to Gallup. History shows that third-party candidates are rarely victorious. Ross Perot, one of the most successful independent candidates for president in American history, received about 19 percent of the popular vote and no electoral college votes. Advertisement 'Third parties are traditionally spoilers or wasted votes,' said Lee Drutman, senior fellow at the New America think tank. 'But if Musk's goal is to cause chaos and make a point and disrupt, it gets a lot easier.' Ralph Nader's presidential bid in 2000 was a classic example of a disruptive campaign, Drutman said, contributing to an outcome so close that Republican George W. Bush prevailed over Democrat Al Gore only after the Supreme Court weighed in. Ralph Nader acknowledges his mother at an event at the National Press Club before watching the election night voting unfold. Lucian Perkins/TWP The trend in the U.S. toward increased political polarization also makes it more difficult for third-party candidates, Drutman said. When Perot ran in 1992, Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush were both running as centrists, allowing Perot to argue that there wasn't much daylight between the two major parties. By contrast, the differences between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump in the 2024 election were much more stark. America's political diversity also complicates matters, Drutman said. 'If there clearly was a party in the center that was more popular than the Democrats or the Republicans, then someone would have organized it by now,' he said. 'It's not like we've just been waiting for Elon Musk to show up.' Musk entered politics in earnest during the 2024 presidential election. Beyond his massive financial investment, Musk frequently appeared alongside Trump at rallies and cheered him on over X. But since Trump's win, Musk's experience in politics has been turbulent. Earlier this year, the billionaire and groups affiliated with him donated more than $20 million in a bid to help conservatives take control of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. In the final stretch of the campaign, Musk drew derision for wearing a foam cheesehead at a town hall and for directing his America PAC to pay registered voters for signing petitions. A couple of voters won $1 million prizes. Advertisement But even with the race flooded with Musk's cash, the conservative judicial candidate — whom Trump also endorsed — lost by a wide margin in April. Musk's personal presence in the race did his candidate harm, said Barry Burden, director of the University of Wisconsin's Elections Research Center. Conservative voters appreciated Musk's money, but that wasn't enough to overcome negative perceptions of an ultra-wealthy outsider injecting himself into the state's politics, Burden said, adding that Musk's presence galvanized greater liberal turnout. 'A new party is going to benefit most from Musk if they can draw on his resources but keep him in the background,' Burden said. 'And if he can portray himself as an innovator and a tech entrepreneur — and somebody who is really contributing to the American economy and funding this new operation without being its front person — I think that's probably going to lead to the most success.' Musk floated his idea of a new party nearly one month ago on June 5, after days of criticizing the massive GOP tax bill as a measure that would burden the country with 'crushingly unsustainable debt.' 'Is it time to create a new political party in America that actually represents the 80% in the middle?' Musk wrote, along with a poll. Since then, Musk has regularly posted about starting a new party and going after lawmakers who vote for the spending bill. 'If this insane spending bill passes, the America Party will be formed the next day,' Musk wrote Monday. Advertisement A person who has served as a sounding board for Musk, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter, questioned Musk's ultimate strategy in undermining a party he had hoisted to victory beyond wanting 'to be in the driver's seat.' 'I agree our government is broken, but it's a tougher problem to fix than landing a rocket,' the person said. Paul Kane contributed to this report.
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
House members in mad scramble back to DC to vote on Trump's ‘Big Beautiful Bill' after heading home for July 4
Members of the House of Representatives from both parties were forced to return to Washington, D.C. to vote on President Donald Trump's 'One Big, Beautiful Bill' after the Senate passed it, Politico reported. With Trump exerting great pressure on Speaker Mike Johnson to get the bill to his desk for a signing before the July 4 holiday, the House plans to vote on the bill as soon as possible. That triggered a mad dash back to the nation's capital and comes amid a Republican rift over the amended bill — which would force cuts to Medicaid and makes states shoulder more of the cost for food assistance while extending the 2017 tax cuts Trump signed. Republican Rep. Nancy Mace posted that she and her team would travel back from South Carolina by van. We have secured a van for a DC road trip tonight to make it in time for votes on BBB tomorrow. Hoah! 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 — Nancy Mace (@NancyMace) July 1, 2025 'We have secured a van for a DC road trip tonight to make it in time for votes on BBB tomorrow,' Mace posted. Democratic Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, who is running for Illinois' open Senate seat, hosted a Zoom town hall as he drove 14 hours to Washington after his flight was canceled. We made it. Drove overnight from IL to vote NO on this Large Lousy Law. — Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi (@CongressmanRaja) July 2, 2025 'We made it,' he said. 'Drove overnight from IL to vote NO on this Large Lousy Law.' By coincidence, Rep. Derek Tran of California wound up stranded in the Pittsburgh airport, so he and fellow Democratic Rep. Chris DeLuzio of Pennsylvania drove to Washington and hosted a virtual town hall as well. Democratic Rep. Mark Pocan of Wisconsin posted how his flight was canceled because of thunderstorms, so he would drive to Chicago to make an early flight to Washington. The bill passed the House of Representatives narrowly last month, partially due to the fact that three Democratic members of Congress had died. House Speaker Mike Johnson has scheduled a vote for the morning. The vote comes after the Senate conducted a marathon 27-hour vote-a-rama before passing the bill by a 51-50 margin with Vice President JD Vance breaking a tie in the Senate. Three Republicans--Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky, Susan Collins of Maine and Thom Tillis of North Carolina--opposed the bill. But many House members have criticized the bill. During a House Rules Committee hearing, Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, who criticized the bill last month but nonetheless voted for it, said the Senate 'failed' with the bill. Plenty of Republican members also fear the cuts to Medicaid could disproportionately hurt their constituents.
The Hill
16 minutes ago
- The Hill
White House summons House GOP holdouts threatening Trump megabill
A cross-section of House Republicans — from hardline conservatives to moderates — are headed to the White House on Wednesday to meet with President Trump about the party's 'big, beautiful bill' of tax cut and spending priorities. The meetings come as GOP leaders lean on Republican holdouts who have voiced serious opposition to the bill, threatening leadership's hopes of getting it to the president's desk by July 4. Hardliners are vowing to vote against the procedural rule for the bill, which would bring the House floor to a standstill. Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus who voted against the rule in committee early Wednesday, said he was headed to the White House to meet with Trump, along with other lawmakers in the group. A source familiar with the matter told The Hill that the White House invited Freedom Caucus members to the gathering. Most Republican lawmakers relented on their concerns with the bill when it came up in the House the first time after Trump and the White House deployed a strong pressure campaign, cajoling the members to get on board. This time around, however, some members are demanding changes to the Senate-passed version of the legislation to win their support. Deficit hawks in the House Freedom Caucus and beyond are furious that the Senate version of the bill does not adhere to the House framework hammered out months ago, which called for dollar-for-dollar spending reductions to offset tax cuts. House Freedom Caucus Chair Andy Harris (R-Md.) said that without those changes, a group of members in his caucus and beyond will sink the procedural rule vote to tee up debate on the bill, dealing an embarrassing blow to GOP leaders. 'Hopefully it goes back to Rules [Committee], gets moved closer to the House position, and the Senate gets called back into town,' Harris said. 'Senate never should have left town. The President asked us to stay until this issue was resolved and the Senate left town.' GOP sources, though, say leaders are not interested in making any changes — arguing that the Senate made the bill more conservative in some areas and more moderate in other areas, but it is overwhelmingly similar to what the House passed last month. Asked about the White House wanting the House to pass this version of the bill, Harris said: 'Well, the White House doesn't have a voting card.' Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) met with a group of deficit hawks, including many in the House Freedom Caucus, Wednesday morning. He told The Hill on the way into the gathering that he planned to tell lawmakers 'we gotta get this done.' He departed the meeting more than 40 minutes later, telling The Hill it was 'productive, we're moving forward,' but being non-committal on if the House would vote on the procedural rule Wednesday, as planned. 'We'll see,' he said. Harris said nothing had changed in his stance after that meeting. Norman, meanwhile, said the Freedom Caucus has 'a three-point plan' of demands to win their support for the bill. In some policy debates of the past, GOP leaders have been able to win the support of 11th-hour holdouts by promising future reforms favored by the critics. But Norman said that won't work this time. Instead, he said conservatives will demand changes to the current bill, which would require it to return to the Senate. 'I'm done with promises,' Norman said. 'The best thing is to send the bill back [to the Senate].' 'What we will add is a three-point plan that [indicates]: this is what it will take to get a yes. And it's what the president wants.' It is not just deficit hawks headed across Pennsylvania Avenue: A group of moderate House Republicans — Reps. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), David Valadao (R-Calif.) and Dan Newhouse (R-Calif.) — were spotted entering the West Wing Wednesday morning, according to CNN. Centrists have raised concerns about the Medicaid cuts in the bill and the aggressive rollback of green-energy tax credits, some of which benefit their districts. Valadao staked his opposition to the Senate's bill over the weekend, voicing concerns about Medicaid provisions in the legislation. 'I support the reasonable provisions in H.R. 1 that protect Medicaid's long-term viability and ensure the program continues to serve our most vulnerable, but I will not support a final bill that eliminates vital funding streams our hospitals rely on, including provider taxes and state directed payments, or any provisions that punish expansion states,' Valadao said in a statement on Saturday. 'President Trump was clear when he said to root out our waste, fraud, and abuse without cutting Medicaid and I wholeheartedly agree,' he continued. 'I urge my Senate colleagues to stick to the Medicaid provisions in H.R. 1 — otherwise I will vote no.' Valadao and Newhouse are the two remaining House Republicans who voted to impeach Trump following the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. Mike Lillis contributed.
