logo
Daniel Cameron struggles to raise money in Kentucky Senate GOP primary

Daniel Cameron struggles to raise money in Kentucky Senate GOP primary

Politico4 days ago
Senate Majority Leader John Thune says he will bring the first procedural vote to the floor Tuesday on the White House's request to claw back $9.4 billion in spending. It's not clear he has even the 51 votes necessary to start debate on the package.
Congress needs to approve the request before it expires Friday, or the administration will have to spend the money as lawmakers originally intended. That deadline is looming large as several GOP senators insist the administration clarify what spending it is actually seeking to rescind. They'll question President Donald Trump's budget director Russ Vought during senators' closed-door lunch Tuesday afternoon.
'We still are lacking the level of detail that is needed to make the right decisions,' Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins told reporters Monday evening. 'It's extremely unusual for any senator to not be able to get that kind of detailed information.'
The Maine Republican is concerned not just over the administration's proposal to scale down the global AIDS-fighting program PEPFAR, but also about broader cutbacks in overseas public health. Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) told POLITICO he's particularly interested in protecting funding for global food aid programs like Food for Peace and the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program.
It's increasingly evident the rescissions package will have to be changed in order to pass the Senate, and Thune told reporters as he left the Capitol on Monday that leadership is working with wary senators to 'see what a path forward on amendments looks like.'
Senate leaders expect a vote-a-rama on amendments to start Wednesday, teeing up a final vote late Wednesday or early Thursday. If senators are able to advance a package with tweaks, House GOP leaders plan to put the package on the floor Thursday; they have already started to clear away procedural hurdles that would prevent them from passing the spending cut proposal ASAP.
Throwing another wrinkle into it all, though, is that House GOP leaders don't want the Senate amending the package at all, knowing their members will be jammed with changes they don't like and be forced to choose between passing a watered-down product or missing the deadline to act.
'I think you got to respect the White House's request, and that's what we did, so I hope that's what we get back,' Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters Monday. 'There are two big categories of rescissions, and I'm not sure either of them should be subject to dispute.'
It's also unclear whether an amended rescissions package would even have the support in the Republican House. Fiscal hawks are already drawing red lines, with Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) going as far as telling POLITICO he won't support a rescissions package that is 'a penny less' than the House-approved version.
MEANWHILE, IN OTHER FUNDING FIGHTS — Senate appropriators remain at a standstill on moving a funding bill forward for the Commerce and Justice departments. They're trying to schedule a briefing with the FBI on the administration's rationale for abandoning the plan to move the bureau to suburban Maryland, according to Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), whose stand against Trump's desire for a site in the District of Columbia derailed a markup of the bill last week.
But Van Hollen insists that even if the FBI assures senators that the Washington location is a secure site, he won't back off his attempt to block the administration from diverting about $1.4 billion that has been set aside for relocating the agency's campus to Maryland.
Across the Capitol: House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole said that House leaders began whipping votes Monday night as the chamber prepares to take its vote on the $831.5 billion defense appropriations bill later this week. While defense appropriations bills have been bipartisan in the past, Republicans are expecting this measure to be a largely party-line affair.
What else we're watching:
— Epstein meltdown: We'll see if Republican leaders' headache from their members over the DOJ's failure to release files related to Jeffrey Epstein continues. Rep. Norman voted Monday in favor of a Democratic amendment in the House Rules Committee that would have forced a floor vote on the DOJ releasing more materials from the federal case.
— Russia sanctions timeline: The bipartisan Russian sanctions bill might stall in the House and Senate after Trump announced secondary tariffs on countries trading with Russia. Thune said Monday he would hold off on advancing the bill for now. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise also said a vote could be delayed to post-August recess.
— Dems' last stand against a controversial Trump pick: Senate Democrats are making a final bid to draw the spotlight to a whistleblower's allegations that Emil Bove, a top Justice Department official and 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals nominee, urged defiance of the same judicial branch he is seeking to join. Democrats want the whistleblower, Erez Reuveni, to testify before senators prior to their confirmation vote on Bove, which is set for Thursday morning.
Jordain Carney, Katherine Tully-McManus, Jennifer Scholtes, Meredith Lee Hill and Cassandra Dumay contributed to this report.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

16 Red States Where Energy Costs Could Go Up the Most Under Trump's ‘One Big Beautiful Bill'
16 Red States Where Energy Costs Could Go Up the Most Under Trump's ‘One Big Beautiful Bill'

Yahoo

time16 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

16 Red States Where Energy Costs Could Go Up the Most Under Trump's ‘One Big Beautiful Bill'

President Donald Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill' (OBBB) was signed into law on July 4. The final legislation has significant repercussions for energy. It includes policies that will increase oil and gas leasing and repeal clean energy tax credits. Wholesale electricity prices are expected to increase 25% by 2030 and 74% by 2035. Electricity rates paid by consumers are expected to increase between 9% and 18% and household energy costs are anticipated to go up $170 annually by 2035. Find Out: Read Next: Red states could be hit harder by rising energy costs than blue states chiefly because Republican-led states generally don't have their own policies to develop renewable energy in the way that Democrat-led states do. A new analysis by the Energy Innovation Policy & Technology, LLC found the 16 red states that will see the biggest annual increases to household energy costs by 2035 as a result of the OBBB. 16. Wisconsin Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$300 Learn More: 12. Utah Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$320 12. Nevada Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$320 12. Michigan Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$320 12. Indiana Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$340 11. Iowa Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$350 10. Kansas Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$380 8. Florida Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$430 8. Arkansas Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$430 7. Louisiana Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$440 6. Texas Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$480 5. North Carolina Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$490 4. Oklahoma Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$540 2. South Carolina Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$630 2. Kentucky Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$630 1. Missouri Annual energy cost increase per household by 2035: +$640 More From GOBankingRates 3 Luxury SUVs That Will Have Massive Price Drops in Summer 2025 The 10 Most Reliable SUVs of 2025 6 Popular SUVs That Aren't Worth the Cost -- and 6 Affordable Alternatives This article originally appeared on 16 Red States Where Energy Costs Could Go Up the Most Under Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill'

Trump's party-splitting Epstein dilemma: Letters to the Editor — July 21, 2025
Trump's party-splitting Epstein dilemma: Letters to the Editor — July 21, 2025

New York Post

time17 minutes ago

  • New York Post

Trump's party-splitting Epstein dilemma: Letters to the Editor — July 21, 2025

The Issue: President Trump's response to criticism of the Justice Department's Jeffrey Epstein findings. Take a breath, and consider these facts: The Biden administration had access to whatever Jeffrey Epstein documents existed for the entire time that it was in office (''Epstein hoax' not welcome in MAGA,' July 17). Don't you think that the team that invented 'lawfare' would have exposed anything reflecting negatively on President Trump or any Republicans? Epstein had a successful, high-level career in finance before anyone was aware of his sick perversion. He interacted with many well-known and well-heeled individuals in legitimate interactions. Given these facts, how could you release any names in Epstein's notes without context? If you met him with a group of people at a function, and he made a note of it, you'd be smeared by association. Thomas Smith Sarasota, Fla. Although I'm a lifelong Republican, I'm switching my voter registration, and I'll be supporting Democrats in the midterms; we all should. There's no excuse for not prosecuting pedophiles in the Epstein case, and there's even less excuse for attacking one's own supporters for thinking so. Harry Knopp Ripley, WV I honestly believe there is a major coverup. A high-profile inmate conveniently committed suicide and how convenient that all of a sudden there is no list. Prince Andrew was caught and booted out. Clinton was on the plane with Jeffrey Epstein several times and his prior actions speak volumes. Why don't they ask his partner, Ghislaine Maxwell? You're trying to say she doesn't know anything about who else was involved? I am just surprised Maxwell hasn't committed suicide while in jail. She has to have knowledge of this. Bring her before the Department of Justice. Robert Caprio Nutley, NJ The current controversy about releasing the Epstein files fails to consider the difficult choices related to First Amendment protections. While transparency is the current catchword, there are many instances where the public's right to know is secondary to a person's right to privacy and freedom from governmental interference. I want to assure your readers that I have many doubts about Epstein's death, and great curiosity about the alleged client list. But, at the same time, the fact that someone traveled with Epstein or stayed at his resort is not, in itself, a criminal act. On balance, I opt for not releasing any alleged list that may be in the possession of the DOJ. Sidney Baumgarten North Brunswick, NJ Usually, the easiest way to stop a rumor is to provide the public with access to the available information, unless there are issues with the information or names in it that could bias an audience or suggest guilt. Unfortunately, our president believes that the only truth is what he tells us, not what is factual. Alan Swartz Verona, NJ I bleed MAGA red, so I'm not sure who Miranda Devine is referring to when she writes that Trump's base wants the truth about Epstein ('MAGA base wants truth on Epstein,' July 17). I couldn't care less. Sure, I feel terrible for Epstein's victims and there are plenty of sick, depraved individuals out there who need to be arrested and thrown in jail. But Republicans have far greater things to worry about than a dead creep who hung out with Bill Clinton. If the Epstein scandal was so important to the Dems, why weren't they more transparent when they had the chance? Republicans need to stick together, support Trump and make sure as few Democrats as possible get elected to prevent them from wrecking our country. That's what the president's base wants. Michael D'Auria Bronxville The extremely wealthy have had privileges from the beginning of time. Kings, past presidents and dictators have mistresses without censure or open complaint; yet when a group of wealthy people cavort within their group it becomes a cause célèbre. Paul Alexander Ontario, Canada Want to weigh in on today's stories? Send your thoughts (along with your full name and city of residence) to letters@ Letters are subject to editing for clarity, length, accuracy, and style.

Exit polls show Japan's ruling coalition likely to lose key election
Exit polls show Japan's ruling coalition likely to lose key election

Politico

time17 minutes ago

  • Politico

Exit polls show Japan's ruling coalition likely to lose key election

That is a big retreat from the 141 seats they had pre-election, but media surveys predict big setbacks for Ishiba. Exit poll results released seconds after the ballots closed Sunday night mostly showed a major setback for Ishiba's coalition. Japan's NHK television projected a range of 32-51 seats for the prime minister's coalition, while other networks projected it would win just over 40 seats. A poor performance in the election would not immediately trigger a change of government because the upper house lacks the power to file a no-confidence motion against a leader, but it would certainly deepen uncertainty over his fate and Japan's political stability. Ishiba would face calls from within the LDP party to step down or find another coalition partner. Soaring prices, lagging incomes and burdensome social security payments are the top issues for frustrated, cash-strapped voters. Stricter measures targeting foreign residents and visitors have also emerged as a key issue, with a surging right-wing populist party leading the campaign. Sunday's vote comes after Ishiba's coalition lost a majority in the October lower house election, stung by past corruption scandals, and his unpopular government has since been forced into making concessions to the opposition to get legislation through parliament. It has been unable to quickly deliver effective measures to mitigate rising prices, including Japan's traditional staple of rice, and dwindling wages. President Donald Trump has added to the pressure, complaining about a lack of progress in trade negotiations and the lack of sales of U.S. autos and American-grown rice to Japan despite a shortfall in domestic stocks of the grain. A 25% tariff due to take effect Aug. 1 has been another blow for Ishiba. Ishiba has resisted any compromise before the election, but the prospect for a breakthrough after the election is just as unclear because the minority government would have difficulty forming a consensus with the opposition. Frustrated voters are rapidly turning to emerging populist parties. The eight main opposition groups, however, are too fractured to forge a common platform as a united front and gain voter support as a viable alternative. The emerging populist party Sanseito stands out with the toughest anti-foreigner stance, with its 'Japanese First' platform that proposes a new agency to handle policies related to foreigners. The party's populist platform also includes anti-vaccine, anti-globalism and favors traditional gender roles.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store