Mark Green says he'll retire from House after megabill vote
Rep. Mark Green said Monday he plans to resign from Congress after four terms to accept a private-sector job offer.
The Tennessee Republican and Homeland Security Committee chair said his retirement would begin after the House votes again on the GOP's domestic-policy megabill now under consideration in the Senate.
'I am grateful to Speaker Johnson and House Leadership for placing their trust in me to chair the Committee on Homeland Security, lead the effort to impeach former Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas' and pass border legislation, Green said in a statement. 'However, my time in Congress has come to an end.'
Advertisement
Green announced last year he would retire but then reentered the race. Shortly before the election, his wife went public with allegations of an extramarital affair, which POLITICO corroborated.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
32 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Republicans rediscover the one weird trick that actually cuts spending
Dominic Pino is the Thomas L. Rhodes journalism fellow at National Review Institute and host of the American Institute for Economic Research podcast 'Econception.' Well, this is awkward. After the relationship between President Donald Trump and businessman Elon Musk very publicly soured, Congress is considering action on the primary product of that relationship: spending cuts suggested by the U.S. DOGE Service.
Yahoo
43 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘Big, beautiful bill' spurs Democratic plans for emergency actions to counter cuts
Democratic governors facing potential big budget problems exacerbated by the GOP megabill being fast-tracked in Washington are considering emergency measures to try to soften the blow. Blue state policymakers from Connecticut to California to New York are raising the specter that they will call lawmakers back for special sessions to tackle what could amount to hundreds of millions of dollars in additional costs as a result of President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill.' And even some deep red states — like Florida — are taking steps to address the financial fallout. The preparations signal the depths of concerns about how the Republican package might reverberate in state capitals, even as passage is far from assured, especially given the recent vitriolic attacks on the spending bill from Elon Musk. State officials are scrambling to navigate the likely fiscal challenges in what's already the toughest budget year since before the pandemic in many states. 'The bill is destructive and risks destabilizing the entire network of supporting programs,' said New Mexico Treasurer Laura Montoya, a Democrat whose governor has all but guaranteed a special session will be necessary. The bill, which cleared the House last month and now awaits Senate action, would cut some $300 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, largely by forcing states to pay into the program for the first time. It would also kick 7.6 million people off Medicaid and save $800 billion over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The special session threat could be a way for Democratic governors, some of whom enjoy large legislative majorities, to respond to pressure from constituents angry about cuts to health care and food benefits — even if there's little they can do to combat Trump's agenda. The details of what the governors would even ask the lawmakers to do are scant given the high degree of uncertainty around the final bill. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, referencing potential cuts to education, school meals and Medicaid, warned earlier this year that 'nothing prohibits us from coming back in a special session to deal with anything that comes our way from the federal government.' Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz said last month 'we will definitely be back in a special session to deal with' the reconciliation package if the House-passed version is adopted. There could be immediate substantive reasons for a special session in response to the GOP bill, even though provisions like sharing the costs of the nation's largest food aid program with states wouldn't take effect until 2028. The vast majority of states start their fiscal years on July 1 — meaning that their budgets have been crafted based on current conditions even as officials leave the door open to make changes later and minimize the pain in response to the final federal legislation. 'Bottom line is states will not be able to absorb all the costs, and decisions will have to be made,' said Brian Sigritz, director of state fiscal studies at the nonpartisan National Association of State Budget Officers. 'All states will be impacted.' Some Republicans have also expressed concern at the downstream impacts of the GOP megabill. Alabama Commissioner of Agriculture and Industries Rick Pate, a Republican who recently announced a bid for lieutenant governor, previously told POLITICO that in his state 'there would be very little interest in us generating the dollars it would take to fund something huge as SNAP.' Others are using the special session chatter as a cudgel to hammer Democrats in blue states for being in a precarious fiscal situation to begin with. 'I would say that our priorities have been on the goofy side,' California Assemblymember Tom Lackey, a Republican on the budget committee, said in an interview regarding his state's poor fiscal outlook, pointing specifically to massive spending to attack homelessness that's failed to dent the problem. 'We're trying to offer too much to too many people when we can't even offer basic services.' Still, states would be impacted across the board even if it's only Democrats that have the political incentive to publicly oppose the reconciliation bill. That means states will need to turn to unpopular choices like cutting benefits or raising taxes to fill as much of the gap left by the federal cuts as possible, in addition to other maneuvers like drawing from their rainy day funds, said Sigritz. Some legislators are accepting that they will likely return to their statehouses for special sessions. Connecticut Treasurer Erick Russell, a Democrat, said in an interview that a special session will likely be necessary if the federal budget significantly shifts costs to states to ensure that lawmakers are 'building in some flexibility to try to make whatever adjustments we may need to safeguard residents of our state.' Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont's office told POLITICO that he and legislative leaders are considering declaring a fiscal emergency in order to raise the spending cap, a move that it argues would be necessary to pay for the costs shifted to states under Republicans' megabill. New York state Sen. Gustavo Rivera, a Democrat who chairs the chamber's health committee, said he fully expects to return to Albany in a special session if the reconciliation bill clears Congress — and that he will push to 'raise taxes on the wealthy' to cover some of the Medicaid spending the federal government plans to cut. In California, a spokesperson for Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas said there is 'a scenario where lawmakers come back later this year' to deal with new budget realities brought by federal cuts. 'I'll come back any day,' said California Assemblymember Patrick Ahrens, a Silicon Valley Democrat. 'This is our job. And if we have to come back in the fall, I will gladly come. In fact, if it means protecting some of these programs, then I think we should come back in the morning, noon, weekend, holidays.' And in deep-red West Virginia, Mike Woelfel, minority leader in the state Senate and one of the 11 Democrats in the entire Legislature, said he wants his Republican governor Patrick Morrisey to call a special session if the federal cuts are adopted. 'This is the kind of thing that should trigger special sessions if we get into this hellhole that this legislation would put our most vulnerable citizens in,' Woelfel said. 'But there's political risk in (the governor) doing that.' Eric He and Katelyn Cordero contributed to this report.
Yahoo
43 minutes ago
- Yahoo
When politics trump merit: The undoing of Florida's academic integrity
Gov. Ron DeSantis's tenure in Florida is destined to be remembered for a seismic shift in the landscape of higher education marked by an erosion of academic independence and intellectual diversity. Under his leadership, politics trumped merit, and loyalty replaced qualifications. The state's colleges and universities are no longer centers of independent thought — they've become landing pads for Republican allies, rewarded through sham 'searches' and backroom deals. The list of appointees reveals a troubling consistency. In Sarasota, New College was handed to former House Speaker Richard Corcoran. At Florida Atlantic University, former state House Majority Leader Adam Hasner was tapped to lead. Fred Hawkins, another former legislator with no academic credentials, was installed as president of South Florida State College in Avon Park. Former Lt. Gov. Jeanette Nuñez now leads Florida International University. And soon, Education Commissioner Manny Diaz — a former Republican legislator from Hialeah, a loyalist with no higher education leadership experience — will take the helm as interim president at the University of West Florida. Florida A&M University trustees selected telecommunications lobbyist Marva Johnson to be the new president; she has no experience working in higher education but has long-standing ties to DeSantis. Which leads me to Gainesville. Home of the University of Florida, our state's flagship university and my alma mater. After a prior Republican political appointee with no academic gravitas flamed out spectacularly as UF's president, the school (and the state) had a chance to chart a new course. Santa Ono, Ph.D., a nationally respected university leader and former president of the University of Michigan, was unanimously approved by UF's Board of Trustees. His hiring should have been a slam dunk, and a return to academic excellence. But this is the so-called 'Free State of Florida,' where freedom is reserved for those who pass an ideological litmus test. Ono didn't. And now UF will pay the price. In what was described as a 'stunning move,' the Florida Board of Governors—stacked with political appointees—rejected Ono's confirmation. It was the first time in state history that the board overruled a university's chosen president. But this rejection of a qualified candidate was not 'stunning' to those paying attention to the politics of Tallahassee. More: Santa Ono barred from UF presidency amid mounting pressure from GOP officials Credentials, experience, and vision weren't enough to shield him from partisan inquisition. In a deeply embarrassing 10–6 vote, the Board of Governors rejected a leader who could have elevated UF's already elite national standing, and it delivered a blow not just to one university, but to Florida's academic reputation as a whole. The damage is done. This decision will haunt UF for years to come. Qualified candidates won't apply, and top-tier leaders won't want to work in a system where political purity matters more than academic leadership. Florida's current and future students will pay the price for a governor and a governing board more interested in a political gamesmanship than excellence. This wasn't just a rejection of Ono. It was a rejection of everything a great university should stand for. Michael Napoleone is an attorney and the mayor of Wellington. He wrote this for the USA Today Network-Florida. JOIN THE CONVERSATION Send letters to the editor (up to 200 words) or Your Turn columns (about 500 words) to letters@ Please include your address for verification purposes only, and if you send a Your Turn, also include a photo and 1-2 line bio of yourself. You can also submit anonymous Zing!s at Submissions are published on a space-available basis. All submissions may be edited for content, clarity and length, and may also be published by any part of the USA TODAY NETWORK. This article originally appeared on Tallahassee Democrat: DeSantis overseeing undoing of Florida's academic integrity | Opinion
