The Archive

IN THIS EDITION

House Democrats privately squirm about their leadership and message

Trump, Johnson, Thune have their work cut out for them with the debt limit

Power shifts to Trump administration in tax debate

Thune threatens weekend votes as Dems stall Trump Cabinet picks

THE TOP

House Democrats privately squirm about their leadership and message

Happy Wednesday morning.

Now that former President Joe Biden is gone, Democrats are in desperate search of a winning message — and a leader.

And nowhere is that dilemma more evident than the internal Democratic debate over immigration, which is roiling the party as President Donald Trump launches a wave of immigration-related executive orders that could dramatically reshape the country. The conundrum is especially acute for House Democrats.

During a weekly meeting with House Democratic chiefs of staff on Tuesday, an aide for House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries played a recent clip of the New York Democrat being asked on NBC’s “Meet the Press” whether he’d support funding Trump’s mass deportation plans.

Jeffries responded by saying Democrats want to focus on bringing down the cost of living and hit Republicans for their lack of an agenda on that issue. In a follow-up question about Trump’s deportation plans, Jeffries said, “The administration needs to focus on the removal of violent felons.”

The intent of showing the clip, according to sources close to Jeffries, was to demonstrate how House Democrats should try to work in their economic messaging ahead of the upcoming reconciliation fight with Republicans. But some Democratic aides in the room zeroed in on what Jeffries said — or didn’t say — about immigration.

What then unfolded was an intense discussion about whether House Democratic leaders are delivering a strong enough message about Trump’s immigration crackdown, according to multiple sources. Several chiefs of staff, particularly from the progressive wing of the caucus, expressed frustration that they have immigrants in their districts terrified of Trump’s initiatives and don’t have any clear guidance to give them.

Jeffries’ office vowed to distribute all the materials and resources that offices needed and also kicked off the meeting with a recognition that many communities will be impacted by Trump’s actions.

Other tension points. There was also some anxiety over an upcoming weekly call, led by Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.), with district directors. Some aides were surprised that this week’s agenda is about Black History Month — not immigration or other priorities — during the first week of the Trump administration. Neguse told us he wasn’t aware of any complaints and is planning to hold an immigration-focused meeting as soon as next week.

Meanwhile, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus is also grappling with how to deal with their top issue. Sources close to the caucus said CHC Chair Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.) wants his members to move to the middle on immigration.

The caucus is planning a Thursday news conference where frontline members like Rep. Gabe Vasquez (D-N.M.) will talk about being a border representative and winning in districts that Trump carried.

“We’re looking at the messaging right now,” Espaillat told us. “The birthright citizenship [order] is unconstitutional. The other executive orders, we’re going to be looking at each and every one of them.”

Espaillat added that he’s talked with Jeffries about meeting with the group soon.

Rep. Judy Chu (D-Calif.) said the topic of how to handle immigration and border security will likely dominate the Democratic Caucus’ weekly meeting this morning.

Jeffries’ tough spot. Republicans plan to keep bringing up immigration-related bills even as Trump’s efforts ramp up. Two Blue Dog Democrats have already signed onto a House GOP bill to permanently reinstate Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” policy.

The problem for Democrats is two-fold. Trump’s hardline approach to immigration is popular, including deporting migrants, although Americans are still queasy when it comes to large-scale efforts that involve a heavy-handed government approach.

Secondly, with Biden and Kamala Harris no longer in power, Democrats lack a leader. Members are asking themselves whether it’s former President Barack Obama, a Democratic governor, Jeffries, Harris or someone else.

One thing is clear. Jeffries isn’t former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and this isn’t 2017, when House Democrats and the party base were united in resisting Trump.

House Democratic leaders opted not to whip against the Laken Riley Act, which ended up getting 48 Democratic votes. A revised Senate version will come back up for a final House vote today before it heads to Trump’s desk. Some Democrats wish Jeffries had taken a tougher stance against the bill, which allows ICE to take custody of migrants accused of certain crimes.

But Jeffries likely would have gotten flack from Frontliners if he’d pressured members to vote no. In one of the first Democratic caucus meetings after the bruising November election, Rep. Vicente Gonzalez (D-Texas), who represents a competitive district along the southern border, warned Democratic leaders not to tell him how to vote, according to a source familiar with the interaction.

So far, Jeffries seems to be walking a very careful line. He’s made clear to members that they need to be able to vote their districts. Yet Jeffries is also counseling them not to take the Republican bait.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), who has been very outspoken on this issue, says House Democrats need to take the lead for the party since they have the best chance of winning back power in 2026. That puts Jeffries in the spotlight.

“This is where the action is. This is where the margin is tightest. This is where we’re within striking distance of winning the majority back,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “That would mean our leader and our leadership here.”

Ocasio-Cortez added: “Being a spokesperson for the party and leading the party are different things.”

— Melanie Zanona, Mica Soellner and John Bresnahan

Don’t miss our special edition, The New Congress: Tech. Check your inboxes and our website later this morning for the latest on tech policy in a Republican-controlled Washington.

THE MAJORITY

Trump, Johnson, Thune have their work cut out for them with the debt limit

It shouldn’t be shocking that boosting the debt limit is quickly shaping up to be one of the most difficult issues confronting the Republican trifecta that’s running Washington. And that became clear in the Oval Office Tuesday.

Raising the federal government’s borrowing cap was a central part of the conversation between Speaker Mike Johnson, Senate Majority Leader John Thune and President Donald Trump at the White House.

Here’s the situation: A number of top House and Senate Republicans think it’s clever to attach the debt-limit increase to any disaster aid bill to address the deadly California wildfires. This strategy has drawn Trump’s attention.

House Democrats will oppose this, and it seems unlikely that Thune can get 60 votes for such a bill in the Senate.

Yet Trump, Thune and Johnson have limited options for raising the debt limit. There’s no more politically charged vote for Republicans, as demonstrated in December when 38 House Republicans bucked Trump and Johnson by voting against a government-funding bill that included a debt-limit boost.

Putting the debt-limit provision in reconciliation looks to be off the table because it would cost Republican votes. The margins will already be very tight on this GOP-only package — or packages.

That leaves inserting the debt limit into any broader government funding bill, which needs to pass by March 14. But the downside of this move is that it would shift a massive amount of leverage to Democrats, who will provide the bulk of votes to pass any FY2025 spending measures. And they’re going to want something in return.

We told you in Tuesday’s PM edition that there was some discussion of combining all three issues into one mega-deal — debt limit, government funding and disaster aid. That has its obvious downsides as well.

“There are lots of great theories” about how to address this, Thune acknowledged with a laugh on Tuesday. “But it’s always different to have to translate that into practice.”

Trump and GOP leaders must resolve the debt-limit issue in the coming months, probably by early summer, although there’s no “X date” yet. Right now, the preferred option is clearly attaching it to whatever disaster supplemental Congress crafts to respond to the California fires. It could be a $100 billion or more package, although there’s no cost figure available yet. California officials and residents are still dealing with the possibility of more fires.

House and Senate Republicans argue that the huge cost of the California-centric package — which will be treated as emergency funding — necessitates a boost in the debt limit since it wasn’t projected as part of normal government funding needs.

“We also are going to spend a lot of money [to respond to the California fires] and it probably will not be offset, it’s going to necessitate a raise in the debt ceiling. To me, it’s a perfectly appropriate thing,” said House Appropriations Committee Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.). “I think it’s well within the normal bounds of practice. I don’t think we’re asking [Democrats] to do anything unusual.”

“The fact is even if [Democrats] were in charge, they would not be able to increase the amount of FEMA money we need without fixing the debt limit,” added Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), who serves on the Appropriations Committee.

Democrats flatly reject this argument, saying they will oppose any attempt to “condition” disaster aid by attaching other provisions to the measure.

“We should not condition the relief and recovery of American communities devastated by wildfires or other natural disasters on unrelated issues like the debt ceiling,” said Rep. Rosa DeLauro (Conn.), top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee.

“Disaster aid must be provided whenever and wherever it is needed. Conversations about the debt ceiling must happen separately,” DeLauro added.

— Jake Sherman, John Bresnahan and Andrew Desiderio

TAX WATCH

Power shifts to Trump administration in tax debate

The center of gravity of the tax universe is shifting to Hamilton Place.

The Treasury Department’s hiring of Derek Theurer, Speaker Mike Johnson’s tax adviser and a former Ways and Means Committee chief tax counsel, and Ken Kies, one of the top tax lobbyists in town, is cementing the Trump administration’s central role in extending the 2017 tax cuts.

This is a big shift. In 2017, Capitol Hill drove the tax-cut process, bolstered by then-Speaker Paul Ryan, a decades-long veteran of fiscal wars, then-Senate Finance Committee Chair Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and then-Ways and Means Committee Chair Kevin Brady (R-Texas). These men were bolstered by a very seasoned team of aides, which included Brendan Dunn, Jay Khosla, David Stewart and George Callas.

This time around, the speaker has no top tax aide. The Ways and Means Committee has just elevated a staffer to fill their top tax job. Some worry that neither the speaker nor the committee has the intricate experience needed to craft and pass a tax package.

And on top of that, on Capitol Hill, there has been significant turnover among members and staff since 2017, necessitating a crash course, of sorts, in bringing lawmakers and their aides up to speed on tax policy over recent months.

The dearth of experience at Ways and Means and in the leadership does call into question whether the GOP will be able to wrap up reconciliation by the end of April.

Who to watch on the Hill: At the leadership level, it’s unclear if Johnson will bring in a new tax hand to replace Theurer. The speaker doesn’t always have someone with as extensive of a tax background on staff.

On the committee level, Ways and Means appears to be elevating one of its own. After Theurer left Ways and Means Chair Jason Smith’s (R-Mo.) staff last spring, a lot of tax watchers in Congress and downtown were closely watching to see who would replace him. They’ve been waiting a while.

Sean Clerget, chief oversight counsel on Ways and Means since 2021, stepped in and has assumed the work of the chief tax counsel role, according to several sources. Clerget was the oversight counsel – not a tax expert, but he worked on IRS oversight and on the Smith-Wyden tax deal.

There’s a case to be made that institutional knowledge isn’t everything. Republicans know the gist of what they want to do in this tax bill with far more certainty than in 2017. The paper-thin House majority won’t make it easy.

The coming months will be about figuring out the technical details of the tax bill and Trump’s must-haves, but also walking a tightrope to get through the House.

And over on the Senate Finance Committee, Chair Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) has several tax and budget-focused aides who were on the Hill in 2017. Both Randy Herndon, deputy chief tax counsel, and Becky Cole, chief economist, were aides at the time. The other key tax staffer for Crapo is Chief Tax Counsel Courtney Connell, who joined Finance in 2020.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune also brings a strong tax background to the leadership level. Thune remains a Finance member and was once a tax aide himself in the 1980s.

Staff moves: Jack Rosemond, a senior adviser on Smith’s Ways and Means staff, is joining the White House legislative affairs team, according to multiple sources.

— Jake Sherman and Laura Weiss

THE SENATE

Thune threatens weekend votes as Dems stall Trump Cabinet picks

Senate Majority Leader John Thune is promising to keep the Senate in session through the weekend after Democrats blocked a quick vote on John Ratcliffe’s CIA director nomination and threw up new procedural hurdles for Pentagon nominee Pete Hegseth.

Thune has long promised to play hardball if Democrats try to slow-walk President Donald Trump’s Cabinet picks. But the usually mild-mannered South Dakota Republican was visibly angry on Tuesday after Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) blocked a quick vote on Ratcliffe, noting that the Intelligence Committee approved his nomination 14-3.

“Do we want to vote on these folks on Tuesday or vote on them on Friday, Saturday and Sunday? Because that’s what we’re going to do. This can be easy or this can be hard,” Thune said. “Everything we’re doing right now is just stalling. I don’t know what that accomplishes for you.”

Long slog: Tuesday’s proceedings were a preview of how difficult it will be for GOP leaders to expeditiously confirm the rest of Trump’s national security nominees.

Democrats are looking to make it as painful as possible for Republicans to confirm Hegseth, especially after reviewing an affidavit from Hegseth’s former sister-in-law detailing allegations of alcohol abuse and intimidation. Hegseth and his ex-wife deny the claims.

On Tuesday, Democrats forced roll-call votes on procedural motions that are normally voice-voted to allow the majority leader to tee up a nomination. Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) said he wasn’t surprised since Republicans used a similar tactic last month when Democrats were still in the majority.

“We did this to them… and stopped them from getting judges. And this is their retribution for that,” Rounds told us. “We knew it would cost us some time in the new year… We’ve just got to hammer it out.”

Democrats’ delay tactics could prompt Trump to push more aggressively for recess appointments, something the president mentioned during his Tuesday meeting with Thune and Speaker Mike Johnson.

“I think we’re going to find out here fairly quickly whether or not the Democrats want to help us get through some of these nominations,” Thune said when asked about recess appointments.

Senate GOP leaders tried to clinch an agreement to vote on Ratcliffe Tuesday and then tried for a Wednesday vote. But Murphy’s objection means Ratcliffe won’t get an initial vote until Thursday. And it means the Senate won’t begin voting on Hegseth until the end of the week. If Thune follows through on his threat and Democrats don’t relent, the Senate will be in session and voting this weekend.

— Andrew Desiderio

AND THERE’S MORE

Senate Judiciary Committee latest: Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the top Democrat on the panel, told reporters on Tuesday he will oppose Kash Patel’s bid to lead the FBI. After meeting with Patel, Durbin concluded that “there’s nothing in his background to suggest that he can supervise 30,000 agents and professionals and 400 field offices at a time of national emergency.”

Durbin suggested Patel’s confirmation hearing could happen on Jan. 29. But committee Republicans told us the date wasn’t set yet.

As for Pam Bondi, President Donald Trump’s pick to lead the Justice Department, her committee vote will take place on Jan. 29. It was scheduled for today, but committee rules allow the minority party to request a seven-day holdover.

— Max Cohen

MOMENTS

CLIPS